ML20151W872
| ML20151W872 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 02/10/1986 |
| From: | Churchill B SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE |
| To: | Linenberger G, Margulies M, Paris O Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#186-046, CON-#186-46 OL, NUDOCS 8602120196 | |
| Download: ML20151W872 (74) | |
Text
r -
.. - og/c (NM.ED CORPISPONDCNQg - --
SHAw, PlTTMAN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE A .A rm...~ ' cLuo~. t co o.a,.om.
o.. 70 M E T E D isoo**sv.tcr.N J%PC w.sweseG10w. O C. 20036
..-.a. o. .ove., . c .a= N e22 aooo ,,,,,,M, ,,v Au o, ,,L ,,,, ,,,,,
- g. .. t. . e -
o S..o.f.a.."'r',*."*E.bES < .c . .,.' .
- YE,*oI.
u s oe,z,om.o o ..c
. a.a. me a..t
.. sc
.LI - .,,.. ...w..
!.".h"E . 5g i i g.g.c
'I ' '.".[~' 't . .
. v :s
.'. .t e E."m.ch.T 8re.: .w n,=...~
a.
"~~
?a...
- gg v c'.
n 1,
?!?;t ,~,, ps r. v...:..: &, Moi e M!R*:'d Uia"'
o g 'J.gos.n...
~
e "w. ,.pp".%
. amT"*"
f."u"?."c:'u'h^y 5"d'sa
- c 'U '.!?4'#.EE'. . c r,o 0; .h t . : 2'M "ck't".'*c-vo.
- L'.hs.^o" 1" ' ? 2 s" ' ' Td:{F'o'i.Mc?ct
"..i.D ** *.B.*.8,,t . e, '.u=
XLIIMBRANC4
& s' Eie cYg.11".';082.'".""'f.,i;1.....-*
1% o.. o e u 't "
%;".5.!;h*'","'",:
get:t'.r:grn."
- rI' fea." *.c=.'."% "* ' *'
t'f,.fa.',.L'.n.!.?.,h'"e".,'
<o s E
e s.h.'*~:?./. l" " .s.O..f"'*i " *****2(****'.'6..?")
c ... .-* "O+"" # .. " .a t c*!82 . s. ,l", ~!.J,,".'.,I',J"*t. .& "
t
.vo ~. .c e so-~ t 2..u.o j~ I -
-- -a==~.
os.....a.m o.
1..;.o;;M.'.# *e t.'.^,.a.t.; :~oM"
.g- ~"r f.J'd7.,y'S oce vi.o-. orrica .
t' "L."wt !"..*u of. c.'". 'o.* f"&o"ct."k %'"sruo, p,"It'c".*"
P!hT2t.J/.'*fs.,/c'
- o' = c ". o ca. "#.Wofu*# "t'",*.
s ~o- . u -* 6,4 " . . c. B
$. af#.*O a
' ' git 5;2 JI""'" -c u = =. v..o ".. : 'on *!'t,; 't.?^.".o 0*.".yg;a o a a,.s .. gy;;
!!!!?s h"'c'I'!"c: " *- **-t" nom >.o7.oo barf!,"on.c, !'.i.~'$ff.~.%t:agi,,
e=a.::*.s.t.1 .e . tiivut.9 gat. ...,: a -r s. - -
- .':a eo,.g.: s,w w m .
c, ,"2.!.!.".'/ .*P."J..
u
.e
. c. s'c t ro".. o
... " co 'a vo33 .,,','2. , C..,.".',.'d v ..
- gg,. am...,
m e,u. .*".? ;',,c.;'..
k.?.v'. . o.c.o..... o. . < .o. . .., .
. . . .o .- u. . . c. . c.. .o.. o. u .m . .. . . ...
- o u ,....., .to .. . .c .. f...
.u
. .c.. 6o .. ...
...o o...... . . . .
so-.e r.D. 4,* **.=*d'..*.**.a.a
.*C-..o . ..A ,,v d.o.. ., . . COhm Cow . 6
..........c, . ...
February 10, 1986 822-1051 Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr.
Atomic Safety and Licensing Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 In the Matter of Georgia Power Company, et al.
(Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-424 and 50-4256L Gentlemen:
Enclosed for the information of the Board and parties is a report of the results of Applicants' current ground-water moni-toring program. This report was submitted under separate cover 8602120196 060210 PDR ADOCK 05000424 0 UDR t S c)3
i 3
.tg a
SHAw, PITTM AN, PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE A pamveegasnap #NCLucema enOFE SSC44L Compo#AT*o=3 Messrs..Margulies, Linenberger and' Paris February 10, 1986 Page 2 ,
to the'NRC Staff on February 6. Also enclosed for the Board's and parties' information is a report of recent in-situ permeabil-ity, tests that were performed in the power-block area..
Sincerely, 8
y ce 1. urchill cc w/ encl:
Service List 0
. _ . . _. _ , . ,._.m_ .,_, - .ry _ , , _ y , .7,y . ., ....,,___.,,_..c.,,.=_, .r-__,,,,
-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the Atomic Safety and Licensino Board In the Matter of )
)
GEORGIA POWER COMPANY, et al. ) Docket No. 50-424
) 50-425 (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, )
Units 1 and 2) )
SERVICE LIST Morton B. Margulies, Chairman Douglas C. Teper Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 1253 Lenox Circle U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta, GA 30306 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Gustave A. Linenberger Laurie Fowler Atomic Safety and Licensing Board 218 Flora Avenue, N.E.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atlanta, GA 30307 Washington, D.C. 20555 Dr. Oscar H. Paris Tim Johnson Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Campaign for a Prosperous U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Georgia Washington, D.C. 20555 1083 Austin Avenue, N.E.
Atlanta, GA 30307 Bernard M. Bordenick, Esq.
Office of Executive Legal Director Docketing and Service Section U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of the Secretary Washington, D.C. 20555 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Atomic Safety and Licensing Washington, D.C. 20555 Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Bradley. Jones, Esquire Washington, D.C. 20555 Regional Counsel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Atomic Safety and Licensing' Commission Appeal Board Panel Suite 3100 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 101 Marietta Street Washington, D.C. 20555 Atlanta, GA 30303
4
.o . . ,
.t
{ EOconaES$3 ~-
DOCMETED USNRC 1M FEB 11 41 :15 4 VOCTLE ENERGY GENERATING PLANT' 0FFICE Oe Si(.ct ,; -
00CMETfhG A at gj^
caouvD-WATER MONITORING PROCEAM BRANCH July-December 1985 4
4 1
( .
1 t
8 Bechtel Inc.
February 1986 l
, ee-w-w=.-, ,+w-w --an.v,--. .., ,-..,..-...n-,,,,-~r-nn-n,,--,-,,,_, . , . . , ,n,,,,,, se --.--w,., ,- - - - - - - , , , , , , - - , ge
e
- TA8t.E OF COWTMfTS Page Monitoring System 1 Water-Level Measurements 2 Water-Table Aquifer 3 Water-table / Precipitation S Confined Aquifers 7 Blue Bluff Marl Piezometers 7 Future Monitoring of Wells 9 TABLES 1 - Observation We'.ls 2 - Piezometers in Blue Bluff Marl FIGURES
(
- 1. Observation wells and rain gauges
- 2. Water-table hydrographs July-December 1985
- 3. Water-table hydrographs July-December 1985
- 4. Water-table hydrographs (backfill) July-December 1985
- 5. Water-table hydrographs 1985
- 6. Water-table hydrographs 1985
- 7. Hydrographs/ precipitation - WF gauge
- 9. Tertiary aquifer hydrographs
- 10. Cretaceous aquifer hydrographs
- 11. Blue Bluff mac1 hydrographs 12.. Blue Bluff mael hydrographs
- 13. Precipitation records APPENDICES A. Assessment of precipitation records B .' Examples of continuous record graphs, 808 and LT-13
A program cf frequent me surement cf water-tchic welic wa3 Laplemented in
. July 1985. The purpose is to provide more detailed information to support the basis for the hydrostatic loading design. This is in response to the NRC utaff concerns that the previous water-level records were short as a basis to ". . . confidently project a probable maximum design-basis ground water level..." (section 2.4.12.6, SER, 7/85), and that wells should be installed in the Blue Bluff marl to determine the pressure distribution throughout the full depth of the marl (Section 2.4.12.2.2, SER, 7/85). The staff requested that upon completion of 6 months of monitoring, a report should be submitted for review of the data collected. The first 6 months of monitoring was completed December 1985, and the results are presented in this report. The report includes an evaluation of the frequency of measurements to be maintained.
Monitoring System Locations of all monitor wells are shown on figure 1. Well and piezometer construction details are summarized in tables 1 and 2. There 4
are 17 wells monitoring the water-table aquifer. Four of these wells (LT-1B, LT-7A, LT-12, and LT-13) are within the foundation area of the b power-block structures in which all materials above the Blue Bluff mael (the Barnwell sands and Utley limestone) were removed. They were replaced with densely compacted selected material. This excavated and backfill area is shown on figure 1. The water-table in this area is within the backfill material. Elsewhere, considerable excavation and backfilling has been done for site grading, but none of those excavations extend below the water table. Water-table observation wells outside the principal excavation monitor the aquifer within undisturbed Barnwell sands and Utley timestone.
A series of 6 Casagrande-type piezometers have been set in the Blue Bluff marl. They are in two clusters (A & B on figure 1) of 3 piezometers each. The piezometers in sach cluster monitor pore pressure in the upper, middle and lower portions of the marl. In addition, 10 wells are open to the Tertiary aquifer immediately below the Blue, Bluff mael. Two observation wells in the Cretaceous aquifer are also being maintained.
(
s-(1411g) 1 L
i e-
- 1
)
1 l
Two of the wells in the water-table aquifer, 808 and LT-13, are being-monitored on a continuous basis. Stevens Type-F recorders have been installed at each ww11. The recorders are geared for a direct scale (1:1 ratio) reading. Eight-day charts are used. The objective is to determine the cate and degree of fluctuation in response to rainfall, which is the source of recharge to the aquifer.
The balance of the water-table aquifer wells (15) are measured on a weekly interval. With each water-level measurement, depth to the base of each well is also measured to determine if silting is occurring. Early detection of silting will prevent plugging and questionable data. The wells in the confined aquifers (Tertiary and Cretaceous) are monitored on a monthly basis concurrently with measurements in the water-table aquifer.
The six piezometers open to the Blue Bluff marl are also being monitored weekly. These piezometers are measured the same day each week as the wells in the water-table aquifer.
(
Precipitation is being recorded at the meteorological tower (the "NT" gauge) using a climatronics Model 10097-1 (continuously recording, tip-bucket type) rain gauge. Precipitation is also being collected on a daily basis with a Taylor Clear-Vu, 4-inch diameter gauge at the sewage waste discharge facility; (the "WF" gauge). Locations of these gauges are shown on figure 1.
Water-level measurements The actual monitoring of water levels has been conducted by on-site personnel of the Vogtle EGP Environmental Group under the supervision of N.D. Dennis. Technical direction and review has been the responsibility of C. R. Farrell and L. R. West, hydrogeologists with Bechtel Inc. A monitoring procedure has been established, and data are reported on a weekly basis.
Ci (1411g) 2
When a water level is taken, the well is also sounded for indication of silting. Immediately following completion of the weekly round of monitoring, the measurements are compared to the prior data of each well by the on-site personnel. Any measurement that appears anomalous is checked by remmasurement the following day. The checked weekly water levels are then submitted to Bechtel for technical review.
The results of the monitoring have been used to prepare hydrographs for each well or piezameter. Because emphasis in the program is with fluctuation of the water table, hydrographs of those wells are presentsd.
in three different modes. Hydrographs of weekly measurements of all 17
~
wells for the 6 months commencing July 1985 are in figures 2 through 4.
Hydrographs for the full year, 1985, are presented in figures 5 and 6 of the 12 monitoring wells in the current program that were installed prior to July 1985. Prior to July, monitoring of wells was only done quarterly. Figures 7 and 8 correlate daily water levels measured at observation wells 808 and LT-13 with rainfall; figure 7 provides daily rainfall recorded for the year at the WF gauge, and figure 8 provides daily rainfall recorded for July through December 1985 at the NT gauge.
(
Hydrographs of observation wells open to the Tertiary (confined) aquifer are shown on figure 9. These wells are monitored once each month, prior to July they were monitored quarterly. Hydrographs of the two monitored wells open to the Cretaceous (confined) aquifer are shown on figure 10.
Monitoring of these wells commenced in August 1985. Finally, hydrographs of the 6 piezometers monitoring pore pressure in the Blue Bluff mael are shown on figures 11 and 12. Observations concerning these hydrographs follows.
Water-table aquifer. The amount and rate of fluctuation in the water table during the 6 months varied from place to place. The largest rapid changes in levels were recorded at wells 808 and 807A in the rwitchyard area north of the power block (figure 3), and at LT-12, located adjacent to the auxiliary building (figure 4). These hydrographs indicate a rise (1411g) 3
O of 1.4 feet in 73 days at well 808, 2.2 feet in 43 days at well 807A, and 1.9 feet at LT-12 in 114 days. A contributing factor to the rate of these rises are the temporary construction conditions that concentrated ponded water and, thus, concentrated sources of recharge in the areas of the wells.
Wells 808 and 807A were in an area that was undergoing site grading f' rom June into September. Well 808 was in the center of a large depression, and well 807A was on the south edge of it. The depression was a catchment of runoff from the site, and during June through August ponded water was continually present. Well LT-12 is located in a small enclosed area between the auxiliary building and adjacent structures that, until recently, had also been a low area (only partially backfilled). Drainage from the auxiliary building and the other structures was directed to this depression. Until late October, when backfilling was continued, there was no attempt to drain the depression. The resulting ponded water was a source of concentrated recharge.
The largest total fluctuation measured appears to be 2.6 feet at well 807A (figure 3). However, there is some question about this record.
During the week ending September 10, 1985, approximately 4 feet of the PVC riser pipe of well 807A was replaced (it had been broken, and apparently allowed silt to enter the well). The top of the riser pipe (reference point) was resurveyed. The abrupt dif ference in water levels measured before and after the repair suggests an error in reference point elevation. Prior to the repair, sections of riser pipe were periodically added as backfilling around the well progressed. It is possible that an error was introduced to the reference elevation when one of the sections l
was added (e.g. the temporary top of riser was not surveyed). Correcting for an assumed error of one-foot in elevation of the measured levels prior to September 10, the configuration of the hydrograph for well 807A has a much smoother transition; this is illustrated by the dashed curve on figure 3. The reduced rise in water level would be 1.6 feet, similar to that recorded at well 808.
l (1411g) 4 l
~
Wells 800 and 801 have steadily risen 1.8 and 1.4 feet, respectively, over the 6 months of monitoring. Similar to 808 and 807A, these two wells are in areas that have been undergoing grading and backfilling.
Grading was completed in these areas by the first of November. Although the rate was reduced slightly, the level at these wells was continuing to rise in December.
The balance of observation wells in the water table aquifer (12) have all shown a relatively steady rise in water level during the 6 months, except wells 804 and 179. Although the level of water in these latter two wells has fluctuated somewhat from week to week, the trend has been flat. The July levels in well 179 are a reflection of cleaning and repair. It was found to be filled with fines, and several flushings were required to rehabilitate the well. The levels prior to July are also affected by the plugging. Wells south and west of the main facilities (i.e., wells 802A, 803A, 805A, 809) are in areas of limited excavation and backfilling.
Wells 179 and 804 are in areas in which significant excavation was accomplished, and no backfilling.
(
Except for well 807A the largest change in water level that occurred in a 4 week interval (1 month), is 1.1 feet at well 808. The maximum 4-week else in wells adjacent to critical structures in the backfill (figure 4) is 0.95 foot at well LT-12. Both of these rises are believed to be significantly affected by construction excavation and drainage as discussed above.
Each of three hydrographs (801, 806B, 807A) have a single measurement that deviates significantly from the general trend and fluctuations of the graphs (anomalous). Although it is believed these measurements are in error, they were overlooked at the time of monitoring, and not checked within 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />, as they should have been.
Water-table / precipitation. The daily high-water levels from the continuous records at wells 808 and LT-13 are plotted for comparison with daily rainfall recorded at the two on site rain gauges (figures 7 and 8)s The NT (meteorological tower) gauge was installed by Pickard, Lowe
{
(1411g) 5
and Garrick .Inc., who are responsible for the maintenance, technical reviser, and reporting of the data. They have also reviewed the data collected at the second gauge, the W gauge, located at the sewage weste disposal facility, and have concluded it is a valid record (see appendix A). Graphs of both rain gauge records, July-December 1985, are shown in figure 13 for comparison. The continuous water-level records collected at wells 808 and LT-13 are on standard graph sheets, replaced weekly.'
Copies of selected graphs sheets from the wells are included in Appendix B..
The record of LT-13 for the week ending September 30 (Appendix B) illustrates the largest daily (0.5 inches) and weekly (0.66 inches) fluctuations recorded. The cause of the. larger daily fluctuations at LT-13 than at 808 (figure 7) are not fully understood. It may be related to differences in permeability. The Utley limestone at the base of the aquifer at 808 is markedly more permeable than the overlying Barnwell sands, or the backfill at LT-13. The limestone may act partially as a drain at 808 that dampens fluctuations in the overlying Barnwell sands.
(
Inspection of figures 7 and 8 indicates that there is no detectable response of the water table to individual rain storms. The only possible response suggested is from the intense stem of November 21/22 (4.17 inches at the W gauge and 3.58 inches at the NT gauge). An apparent rise of about 0.2 foot at well 808 followed that storm. At well LT-13, the fluctuation was within the normal daily fluctuation. The " rise" at well 808 is suspect because the continuous recorder was down during that
-week because of construction conditions. The daily measurements were taken with an electric measuring probe. The change in measuring methods
& could account in large part for the rise.
I l
The rise in water levels in late July and August are believed to be in response to the series of storms in June and July, and the rise in levels commencing in mid to late November appear to be in response to the series of storms beginning in late October and continuing into December. The f
I
!C (14113) 6
magnitude of the rise recorded at well 808 in July and August, as discussed previously, is a result of temporary construction conditions that are no longer present. A series of storms in the future, similar to that which occurred in June and July, cannot be expected to cause the same magnitude rise in water level at well 808 in the future.
1 Within the backfill, adjacent to critical structures, the magnitude of fluctuations at LT-13 are believed to be larger than should be expected in the future, under similar rainfall conditions. Upon completion of construction less than 30% of the surface area of the principal excavation backfill will be exposed (available to infiltration). The balance of area will be either paved or covered by buildings. All areas l will be provided with a drainage system to maximize runoff. Reviewing the record of rainfall during the year (figure 7) and the hydrographs of wells for the full year (figures 5 and 6) suggests the general rise in levels during the period July to December is a seasonal trend. The ,
- magnitude of the rise and local variations is probably influenced by construction activities.
Confined souifers. The hydrographs of the observation wells open to the Tertiary aquifer (figure 9) indicate a downward not trend during the ,
year, although from July through December the trend was upward, slightly, i
in most wells. The fluctuation in levels ranged from 1.7 feet to 4.1 feet. The water levels in the two Cretaceous aquifer observation wells declined 5.0 and 7.5 feet from August to December (figure 10). This is in marked contrast to the trend of levels in Tertiary aquifer wells, suggesting that hydrologic connection between these aquifers below the i plant site may be less than has been estimated. In sum, the water-level f fluctuations of the confined aquifer observation wells are within the I range to be expected, and the trends are different from that of the water table aquifer.
Rige Bluff earl olesometers. The two clusters of pierometers (A and B) within the earl are located at opposite corners of the power block as shown on figure 1. These piezometers provide a direct measurement of the i
4 L
(14113) 7
-m we~_,.-.+.-,..,_.,---,,.._._~_7%,y,,,___,._ m,_ - _,,,_,._r.-_v-.,__.,m_ - ,. ~.,,- ... , ,,- - , ,
hydraulic heed distribution within the mari. . Details of the installation and testing of piesometers are described in "Geotechnical Verification Work Report of Resulta" Bechtel, August 1985.
The USC staff had requested that the clusters be installed to provide additional detail on the pore pressure distribution within the mari, previous information was limited to the 42 series well cluster that was installed in 1971 and removed in 1974. The 42 series included two observation wells within the earl; one near the top of the mari and one near the bottom. The two new clusters each include three piezometers within the earl which provide data within the central part of the mari, as well as near the top and bottom. Hydrographs of the measured levels from these piesometers are shown in figures 11 and 12.
The water level data obtained from the plesometers in clusters A and B are consistent with the data obtained from the 42 series wells, showing a decreasing head with depth within the meri. The differences in hydraulle head decline between individual piesometers within a cluster are most probably the result of variations in the vertical permeability of the mari.
The hydrographs of the piezometers of cluster A (figure 11) show steadily decreasing rates of water level decline that are approaching a slightly fluctuating, relatively constant level. The initisi water level decay is the adjustment to in-situ conditions, draining the residual water remaining from the drilling and cleaning of the hole during construction of the wells. The long period (about 4 months) to reach equilibrium with the pore pressure in the earl is a reflection of the low permeability.
The piesometers in cluster B took considerably less time to reach equilibrium; most of the residual cleaning water had drained before the first weekly measurement (figure 12).
The water level in piezometer 9048 is at the bottom of the porous stone, indicating that the materials monitored by this piezometer are b
(14113) 8
~
unsaturated. This suggests that within the earl above the zone monitored
/ are layers of such low permeability, as to restrict downward migration of water sufficiently that the material at 9045 remains unsatucated.
M ure monitorina of wells The frequent monitoring initiated in July 1985 has established that there is no immediate response to individual rain storms. However, a series of stores, le; a persistently wet period of a month or longer can result in a detectable general rise in water levels. A general rise in the water table throughout the site area of as much as 0.5 foot in a period as short.as one month has not occurred although localized fluctuations of 0.5 foot have occurred in as short a time as one day. However, these short-term rises do not persist. They may be influenced by construction activities.
It seems apparent that a general rise of the water table of 1 foot or more requires at least a seasonal period (le; 3 to 6 months) of markedly wet weather. Such a trend would be readily identified by monthly
(
monitoring of the observation wells. Thus, it appears that monitoring frequency of most wells can be reduced to monthly. Once construction (backfilling) is completed, and site grading is completed the daily fluctuations in the backfill adjacent to critical structures may subside.
Until grading around the structures is complete, it is recommended that the two continuous recorders be maintained (808 and LT-13) and the other 3 wells in the backfill adjacent to the structures (LT-18, LT-7A, and LT-12) continued to be monitored weekly. Frequency of monitoring the balance of wells in the water-table aquifer can be reduced to once each month. This monitoring should coincide with monitoring of the confined aquifer observation wells.
Monitoring of the piezometers in the mari should continue to be monitored weekly through March 1986. This will confirm the trend and fluctuation
(.
(14113) 9
characteristics of the pore pressure in the earl, as indicated by the first 6 months of record. Once the trend at equilibrium is established, continued monitoring can be reduced to monthly.
A full year of monitoring will be completed July 1986. A second 6-month review of data, collected to that time will be made. It is expected that further reductions in monitoring frequency will be proposed at that time.
'(
(14113) to
TABLE 1 - OBSERVATION wet.LS Ground Depth Depth of Surface Top of tecnitored Well Installed coordinates Elev.(1) Marl (2) Interval (2)
Egu_ (Yr.) M E (ft.) (ft.) (ft.)
Water-table seuifer 129 1971 8856 9576 215.9 77 35 - 100 142 1971 8283 8262 231.2 92 52 - 101 179 1971 9059 7779 274.8 130 90 - 131 800 1979 8850 11011 213.7 83 59 - 94 801 1979 7656 10733 212.8 82 49 - 87.5 802A 1985 7196 10194 216.9 87.5 72 - 90 803A 1979 7085 8898 218.3 82 42 - 87 804 1979 6597 8227 224.1 87 49 - 102 805A 1979 6612 10403 232.7 124 69.5-127 8063 1980 8821 9726 214.8 77 23 - 70 807A 1980 9047 9835 213.6 17 36 - 80 808 1985 9625 9300 207.0 66.3 45.5- 68 809 1985 8320 7860 222.8 49 69.4- 90
, LT-18 1985 8388 9304 213.2 83.3 65.2- 84.7 LT-7A 1985 8151 9317 215.9 87 65 - 87 LT-12 1985 7775 9600 209.0 79 58.2- 78.6 LT-13 1985 8135 10110 219.0 89 68.1- 89.1 Tertiary seulfer 27 1971 8622 13931 210.0 148 146 - 190 29 1971 9975 12392 193.0 126 124 - 210 34 1971 12180 10846 86.0 N.A. 47 - 115 850A 1984 11723 10494 225.9 135 147 - 200 851A 1984 8868 7066 262.7 195 235.7-300 852 1984 5993 13380 200.7 153.5 159.1-220 853 1984 11020 9204 227.6 145 176.3-217 854 1984 9899 7917 236.8 153 174 - 220 855 1984 7159 13951 218.0 173 192 - 240 856 1984 4927 12558 186.1 155 156 - 197 Cretaceous aquifer l TW-1 1972 1738 9984 218.5 140 506 - 850 l
NU-2 1977 9500 9135 214.5 150 450 - 820 NOTES (1) Determined at time of drL111ng.
(2) Below Ground surface at time of drLiting.
TABLE 2 - PIE 20NETERS IN 8LUE BLUFF MARL Ground Depth of surface Depth of Monitored Well Installed coordinates Elev.(1) Mart (2) Interval (2)
Egt. (Yr.) N I (ft.) (ft.) (ft.)
900 1985 7538 10119.5 216.3 92.6-148 133.8-140.7 901 1985 7538 10104.5 215.58 91.6-148 122.0-120.0 902 1985 7543.5 10110.5 215.97 91.0-148 101.5-108.0 903 1985 8480 8900 215.75 70.0-148 127.0-133.0 9045 1985 8464 8885 215.75 78.8-148 90.0- 96.7 905 1985 8450 8900 215.75 77.3-148 109.8-116.0 WOTES:
(1) Determined at time of drilling.
(2) Below ground surface at time of drilling. Sottom depth of earl is interpolated from figure 2.5.1-31, FSAR.
/
)
_ ..a f $$reagB&'@iWisS%- y;).
$3;kW .
,Q ,,- ~-Q~.&... .
E w 's t s6' y sx,,n,{n MgM A b d &c h s s
7 'TM
, ~L
-,h Q, .. l/s fiMM5lh
_ )\
.- ' ' 'f,/ShRW e 'SSWY N _
-] } l!'
?, w' ' gn 7
y -
, , ~ - - w. .
q I
(( N f h
'ax M g ~i 3 )\w. c2 h \ Y
[d4e;J ,y.V) . ~ Nt - y, - '- -m=6a
. ~
t3 ){[
9D'Jhdf(fj% /$M @+sy?
, wa m... _ -g yT y N;,
an c.w,
.g,; m f ,
g m%
1,. 7_ . -
7[h_
.. . f . ..*:'
n %
"*f ?l~
n, vg[
~
g g -
- s. w
,,.- g*, .oya "
]g-M I T.t. Al w
s ,-
? -
e m f., .... n.a ._o s.v
, t 4.L - C, '_7s'Xyi a/ ., *_ _7. %',8 I
( .m c..o.
we aN 7 m
!."#./ m ,,
A.,_ ,J em a a.
$g/Nr*Q, &fif 3 m/;fr ...
&, , _; a
. =
,.m. se -a-v seyy,
~'
q
.s i .
, L :*
% h (()y .lv i '
O , g? , ..f LA-
'A ~
)k)'N; ~
Q+ Qg .h hf(K .-
3
( \^ _v i '
w%p\pp :/
c g ,
p M- . m/ ((, v g\ '\
a
~ :w J
./,, /JM-
{ R&'[' 3,-
.L>. ,).
~
v- , -
.c - '
- a
/
r
- e .
)
,/% Q .}
s k $ h ,I 3 .! 'd
% % L M b %i'u n m Y \[-
G vn ?
~.
~~
I l 9o3 N 90S yj g- **
, W : c 1x- ; .*, ; , a C , mw -
I
[J [ [ i,hh T[ 54 h8 Q}$[hh' 2 6T*'> M TURBINE BUILDING f W A x
\,\
r.
MFw b UNIT 2 wmpm%Q.[g[#[E UNIT
,e!
t Gs ryl MC /Q O K WL3 5%'. N * . spggYON m.m yif (t F;y;r
\
{, .\ 4 L Is N ;'
- BACKFILL'f 1 % -
W;hl
~^
^
Ateo 'g.giable O n ~
$t;'*) fx , # a A- -
r ^ W%
g~g \* ..
Agierture cora ,r.
+
y h_g;,
~ ,
- g ;g ,' -
j902;
- *M If 0F E CANTS
[ -s 4 Q 2
'/q A[jp h'v'A & ;N N 4 e ?
Ib
%g a j, Cy g\\/N\v45
- a C
e yh s ,,%'%Ns. 'N ,\
A ,,,9 DETAll _. PLANT SITE
- 'm- e'M M,\.
3 \
..=
l ,
V _ , --. ,.
'N- N y '\\
N '
u.__
SCALE IN FEET f .
)g _ (I[gd -~~
g
- \ EXPLANATION l
,: }r N~
m--- p n%n
,**- 'N 8004 WATER TABLE AOUlFER g
\ mN N a
M "*"'
wW j
D -
~
.- w,y vesA
, , /N' MU.23 u- -
CRETACEOUS AOUlFER
- s. ' I h.gq M ; .' WTW RAIN GAUGE w., .- / r 4,; l
., 4
- . !, ,g [ '[ T E WELLS SHOWN AME USED FOR THE SY , ?
y-
.=); '
a-J. ,% %
~ " . " * $V
*~
) R sa ' = -
\, GnoOND WATER MONITOMING PMOGRAM
'"'** ***'"* '"U""'" O***
N ,
S) J'z N ,s
- a. ) ,.
' 8 -
SITE GRADING GENERAll2ED FMOM N M' , [6 f j 7 ..
,=*
"* h OWG. NO. Cx2044v003 WITHIN GRADED ARE A, APPROXIMATE ELEVATIONS
.C-' ' s '4 N)
'N~
'k' ~"
a 54 ' ,.,' q'\\ \ O ; t ( , " j p
REFERENCE:
=~Q>
'.' / I J -V i /((. . _] __.
>i ,'s i( ,
~ HANCOCK LANDING PROJECT
/
, g \' s V C .,, '.\
,r
/
tj
\
is Q( s si N ' ,,, .y'~
.._ J
}yM
( 't ' ' N TOPfY4MAPHIC M AP PMEF AMED SY CLYDE N.ELDRIDGE AERI AL K, f e y% - - ,
~ -~ -
v
/,
3
\'k s
SURVE YS, F E S. 26/71.
\,N .' - ~ k N j ,.- /
i 1 E 'l -
\
$4 -
* '/
s, ..% x . : ,e SCALE IN FEET g-. . M4N j'Q.'(, n-
. Ny.,, .f f f /,e,'f,~h, contout latervols 5f tend 2S f t.
%.,,j,'hg &
t u . Q, . y.- , V -' y\ -['N, s
~_ w .
r ) / , '. , P ,e, ;, e ; \ g r 800212 O l ' D U 'OI OBSERVATION WELLS AND T" RAIN GAUGES {h . FIGURE 1
-~ _ .
J N A 5
/
w
/ .-
wi
/- --
/
8 p
/ ~
800 M 8 , p
/
e C h-
,~'
u
/ -
8 ,f b c r *w / 4 W e 4 N >
. W 2
O o ' o
~
h .;'*', '* M
- N / adg ~
~
N p
. m
=J
?
W i N' g A ~80_5A '
~
n_/M
~ J 8
V 8 8_ C. . ^ .
- m. .
~
WELL 802 REPLACED WITH 802A, NOVEMBER 1985 iut '~ aus sip ' osp ,- 4 , g-- g1985
l . 4 i 8 A 804 . , 5 WNG / \/.. //- 8 E 14 2 h-b ~ H' E 8 0 2 A i 8 s 2 0- I S E 17 9 71 j~~"~
~
APEETURE
~
se > x, .
,m cAnD 1985 A1.o Available On Aperture Cani WATER TABLE HYDROGRAPHS
'OO'OM WELLS 142,179,800,801,802A,803A,804,805 AND 809 JULY-DECEMBER,1985 FIGURE 2 h' . - - - - - - - - - - . . . - - - . . . . . . . . . . . .. ...d
8 -
, e
$ .m A s
f
~
Nj V
*t / 806B N
~
j
=
8 8 i
- a w
3
/ -/ % w g
808
~
z o ( - t.
- b
~
A g
/ 807 A l
m '
*e
$ ,s,s r e.. , i g t ,7 ~ ~' POSSIBLE ELEVATION ERROR OF 1. FOOT
* , "~ I
, j E
i
?
E JUL i AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC 1985 [ u ._.. WATER TABLE HYDROGRAPHS WELLS 129,8068,807A AND 808 i JULY DECEMBER,1985 FIGURE 3 I i._
o r LT 7A O
- s a y
y
~ .
o i .N ^ _, /
,_ A [\ LT 1B W
W o N E O r ' Qy o O u
< s
> g e #
W . m V V o Y . 3 g LT 12
=
- n.v S
~' ' ' '
JUL AUG $EP oct ev Otc 1985 b.
~
WATER TABLE HYDROGRAPHS (BACKFILL) WELLS LT 1B, LT 7A, LT 12, AND LT 13 JULY DECEMBER 1985 FIGURE 4
l !e E - AA /(( 5 R% 129 U (' , a v - / n 8068 N
$ N q
=
c 8 I i 8
- 3 WELL LTI A REPLACED WITH LT 18 JULY.1985 m ,% %d ULT 1B g
/
/ LT 1A \ x
' N i E ww O
_ .g .
- i~
(
> o w 1 a
a
- A b w e
\1 8
e ! o b
^
o /
/\ \
/ x
\
8
- /
/ \
- i
/ \
2
~
c
/
/ \
\ [,
# \ 807A '
\
8 s '
\f res ' wan ' arn ' way ' a us ' a ut ' auc ' sce ocr ' mv ' oce Jan
(
~ ' 1985 i
WATER TABLE HYDROGRAPHS WELLS LT 18,129,806 8 AND 807A FIGURE 5 1985
s I O I 8 1 Pi 8_ x / O o % o N_ 8 01
-- -s a
N w 805A s s 8 E S e , w / N W /p N w O \ N N I42 3_, V o
- 8
*t N
> b W o e A.
.J
- e w
" / N
$ / %
' N , 803A
/
S 2 t O 3 A o / \ a / \
' N ?~
/ \
\
8 \
- N
~ \
s 800 2
, , ' APR ' WAy I 3 JUL ' Aug 8
$g p 8
OCT ' eg)v 3
~l JAN FEB WAR JUN O(c 1985 *~ y
h 8 a 3 3 [ 8 3
~ '
'/
,/
3 /
/
./
O / I
/
e
- w /
~
w / 17 9 z ! o 2
- i at
> p 's
; / % 804 A , x
_, Y 3_ N O
\
h
~
\
\
O \ n N N WELL 802 REPLACED WITH 802A, N 80 t 8 NOVEMBER 1985 N N
- 802 + '
W ri amu rce ' uu 'm ' war suw aua sce oct ' wov ' ote sut
, ,WE r, AllD Also Availabic On Aperture Caril 8 6 0 f21 <? o 1 9 6 - 03 WATER TABLE HYDROGRAPHS WELLS 142,179,800,801,802A,803A,804 AND 805A 1985 FIGURE 6
O 9 4 G 5
~
O A O e.= e O Q
/j O
& r
>= e W
W O a k I y e e
- 4 7
o O
'I O
4R
> 2
- W =
W O O e 1_ e.o d o P [ [TlM r ,
< r; ,j; O
I O es e.n 1985 S ad l a k ww
'd Z
U Z 4
)
C u. Z E9N C J O 9, .. 9 I I l al
....,,,,.....,,,,,....,,,,,,,,,,I,,,,,,J.,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,...,,,,,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,_,,,,,,,,,.,,,,,,,,L,,,,,L ,,
,,, , 6 ,,,,
a Je vte mn een ur n 1985 4
/
k
-A .
- ggg N.w g P MM)\y
.b f u is ppl [uN(,,/1-!hrf/ '
t py}JY t
.O
' ??
A if M T1 3 $ APERTURE l
= CARD E
r
; 2 Also Available on Aperture C9-'I e l[ , ,,,,, ,7, g,, ,-ln, ,,,,,j .
,,,,,,,3, j
. inig.o ui . .m ,7. . o o , o , . , o ,,,,,,, ,, , ,n ,,,,, , , n 8 6 0 212 01'O 6 -Ot/ HYDROGRAPHS/ PRECIPITATION WELLS 808 AND LT 13 FIGURE 7 WASTE DISCHARGE GAUGE N
8 as eWh, & ried ~ e
- l
/ N*, %ano.ie608 =
" /
g C s
,*y
" 3 1
}
s c f x .
' 24*%
o *
~
e o
.A n,i > c w 2 -
a IJ ji
* . I a '. V$1<,.-v fl )p,> f 8e /4r
, /W" 4 i' 'l AA y LT 13 /v ' j]s['[V 5 ,f AA*.9 I/ . . [
'l t) a Ui I W
G E
~*
_a C u. E < c* C" d
$= i-
. . IL i i.I . i n.
I il I i .. o g......u i. . go ....u ...,3. u u . ,,u .gui.u.......p auu..... , j,,ui....u,,.....ui...g.p. ..o u u. 3 ... ;na .gi. ...uuu.y u.. uni..g;n 1985 METEOROLOGICAL TOWER GAUGE f~ V HYDROGRAPHS/ PRECIPITATION WELLS 808 AND L T 13 RGURE 8 METEOROLOGICAL TOWER GAUGE
1 g
. =. -m, N
o N . N N 5 # l/ 852 / o / \ o
" '/ \ A N 851 A /
9 \ 0~ N { 8 e E e 8
- I W
W E D
/s \ N E \ 856 N
o 8 N _ ~ N o-8
~
y - o o j 87.56 a + . W l
\
s \
\
s.
\
o 2 \ h
\
\
e \. N
\_ , ,
E o l JAN FCB ' WAR ' Apg
- WA f JUN JUL AUG ' SCP ' OCT ' NOV ' OCC 1985 N
1 8 n
~
E
$ /,- 's N.
o N.N 854 -
"-r% N
\- 8 -
8 N E x e \ N o
\
g v /
/[
850A t
\
\
~ \
(
\
l :
\
[ . \ N's 855 t ; x ~/ s yf - o [ ? s (
- \
o o
\
\
N
\
\
N T1 APERTUBE
'A's N CAnD i
N s x-s v gy a 8 6 rgg ' wag APR i ygy JUN ' JUL AW
,;,3 8602120l'96'06 TERTIARY AQUlFER HYDROGRAPHS WELLS 27,29, 850A,851 A,852,853,854,855 AND 856 FIGURE 9 1985
/*
F
. 8 -
i - ( 8 4 TW 1 8 5 r W o W 4 I \ w
. o MU2 O
b 8 4 o. W 8 4 W 2 8 4 2 8 a 2 8 n '
~
g -r j i 3g, - ocr e occ 1985 CRETACEOUS AQUlFER HYDROGRAPHS - WELLS TW 1 AND MU 2 AUGUST DECEMBER,1985 FIGURE 10 L
- U
~
8 N. 8 4 8 d-8 4 o 902
- h. / ~
^ n w 8
w l ELEVATION ATPIEZOMETER 8 2 : 902 901 900
" ~
POROUS STONE: 110.47 TO 112.0 89.58 TO 91.5 78.5 TO 80.5 -
.. r o MONITOR INTERVAL: 107.97 TO 114.0 87.58 TO 93.5 75.6 TO 102.5 4 ,
MARL: 67.97 TO 124.97 67.58 TO 123.98 68.3 TO 123.7 w J 2 W N i 8 s.
,e w
8 I
~
8
\900
'JUL AUG SEP QCT NOV DEC 1985
[ L BLUE BLUFF MARL HYDROGRAPHS PIEZOMETERS 900,901, AND 902 JULY DECEMBER,1985 FIGURE 11
e 8 -
. A I'
8 , 9048 8
> .~-
W W $ ta. S. - S - _ i ' 905 / S W o W 8 903 s a 3 8 o jgp' ' 4 oct NOV OEO 1985 ELEVATION ATPIEZOMETER 9048 905 903 POROUS STONE: 121.29 TO 123.29 101.9 TO W RW M MONITOR INTERVAL: 119.75 TO 125.75 . 99.75 TO 105.95 82.75 TO 88.7 MARL. 67.75 TO 136.95 67.75 TO 138.45 67.75 TO 137.75 (_ _ BLUE BLUFF MARL HYDROGRAPHS PIEZOMETERS 903,904B AND 905 JULY. DECEMBER 1985 - FIGURE 12 i
e o I r u,. 9-W o z O e d J J e
. u. .
=
E= c~ J a E-O
- E e . IL . in 61 m iL s il ll . ..
ei l .i....u..... JLA. u.a u. .u 4....g. .ii.....iinu u. .u.. AUG
.. i...ju u.i .uau nin i. u uuui I ..u..i......u n.uin u...i.I...uin u u uni....uiu.. gin. .u u..u u nin uu .uu SEP CCT Nov - CEC 1985 METECROLOGICAL TOWER GAUGE c
I 9 w a U1 W A U Z 9 C n J J G u. Z 9N C e J W
- e G A <J.
O , e o 1. i JUI.
. 1..
AUG
......uui...isu a. . u. . .g..u.a...ininuouu.uu.. j.inunuu unu nununig.auiu..uuununin....
SEP IL OCT
. . J g.. :uun.iu NOV ni....uunng I
su.uun..uinuouuan DEC i I 1985
) WASTE DISCHARGE FACILITY GAUGE
. 8 t
a PRECIPITATION RECORDS JULY-DECEMBER,1985 FIGURE 13
m G A Appendix A Assessment of Precipitation Records I e m 5
_ _ .- -~ _ . A. ,
. PicKARD LOWE AND GARRICK,INC.
4Amess.eiCaAas 1200 IF" STREET, N. W., SulTE 612 wetua m Leine WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 WA$NINGTON. D. C.
' ' ' JO""
, fILIPMONS 101 296-4643 fee 0saAs E. e0egume8 ALPete 70ese Osant L. ACIT Seasseslaecuftyt AssOOAfl NEWPORT Rf ACH. CALIFORNIA agifes wootAa8 BALPee taktsef wetfitLom acesef 3 mesette tEttPMONS 714 650-e000 asAAE AAAAsse se0000sm o. maangteses wsLLAa0 C. 04ataa TELEX 37109$3 meCesaaL N. SCMwAeft anneST906 aA1AEIAast weLMAas 8. FULLIG A3300Afg3
' anaefwe 4. 3AfTt90ef Me*=a' ** C. 00ese Geesel M. LOWOGAT sfAse EAPLAss geouses C. SLOT Au an00LOee IDw&asC. Assoff Og0ece ApostoLAsas tannet w. steLLwgLL Ja pagt M aAAes TucanAs B.sasAe8 asCMaat v. CALAtatst pavne at wesettaa $seceseA S. SAO AAants L Laanwee viaar E. Duae penset R. osaamaana a JACEst L8uel 00 SEALS & wAsafeGLS CAa0 Lyes 0. perseno 20.e.e . meu. .Aa L A. sf .Arosa.se c. .Aa.,
4Aa e.u. T. i.wA .. m ACee reso.aAs t Cest Davie et Jonassecas PetteesCE A 20089L CmAstes t. asCMae060se 007s,'li'""'*-- J0 sOO. ".^0r0 o I s"ree a o e. m ,,Co . 1.ano... an rm January 29, 1986 Mr. N.D.' Dennis Plant Vogtle Construction P.O. Box 282 i Waynesboro, GA 30830
Dear Mr. Dennis:
This letter completes our work reporting precipitation data from the Vogtle meteorological tower for' the period of July 1,1985 through December 31, 1985. This data was processed from continuous strip chart recordings using a Climatronics Model 10097-1 rain gauge. The percentage
' of good data for the time period of interest (July-December) was 98.2%.
After a review of all data for the period, a few changes were made to correct digitizing errors. These corrected tables should be considered final. Except where indicated, the rain gauge and recorder functioned properly. It was calibrated 2 times during the data collection period with no discrepencies found. The rain gauge used in this study was installed in January 1985. This type of gauge will operate with +1% efficiency up to 3 inches per hour. The model 100747 translator card used to convert the signal to 0-5 voles has an accuracy of +.05% full scale (0-1"). During periods of very heavy rain such as a thun3erstorm, the rain collected may be less than actually
-fell due to the instrument's efficiency. High winds making the rain fall-somewhat horizontally may also slightly affect the total amount of rain collected.
The other instrument used to collect c'i-site data was a 3 inch Taylor rain gauge. This should be quite adequate to identify and collect data for all rain events except when the rain falls in conjunction with high ' wind speeds. Due to the smaller cylinder opening (3 to 6 inches) this gauge may collect less rain than the one at the meteorological tower. In addition, the Taylor gauge would not be nearly as efficient during { ENGINEER $ . APFtJfD $CIENTISTS = MANAGEMEN1 CONSULTANTS w
Mr. N.D. Dennis January 29, 1986 Plant Vogtle Construction Page 2 periods of snow, but none occurred during the period. During the summer months, the localized effects of showers and thunderstorms may cause the data at the two sites to be different due to the 7,000 ft between the locations. This completes all rainfall data collection for the ground water study. If you have any questions, please call. Very truly yours,
'$ h TA Mark J. Abrams Enclosure Clifford Farrell I
N, e e
-
- e,--m-< , as ,-w-em-w, ,. - , , - , m,-,,--,,+--r----- , ,,m,-,--,,,,+-y- --w,-----ge--, ,-, ,-., ,-- ,-- , - - ~ ., - - , -m . r
.r Appendix B Examples of Continuous Record Graphs Wells 808 and LT-13 P f
-u,.
1
- - _ _ _ _ __ - . . . ~ -
D t e I L I 'd-- ..ud mm. 7 JP'] 'sp r s 4I N <N- . . . . A i I E AIE JFP" 5'"LEJp'] aE"'FI._]- Iam 4 r "T V d' ' FJ aF1 5i.s a i ! I v"- ' - - I I a . .P ir' f I r w' J"2,';..d3mr-aF-
-- -dEF di 'J sl Jim dp_ m ,am. 5 "
sal aM IJF, LL f'P E J'W. #r .sFpr Lf.' dA.-' E"F JF 4E3 d f#8 pr GF # aHed2m C'4E .1] J' 2on.as> CC7 d .Fimi' esp aF E.mi ; 1s' F'12" dwB'F
' F
[,r- s 4# d 1 I !
'I k2 sh i I 159.5 f ? r {
1 , i !r I , { [
' ! I i [
r r I ! l ! ! I t Ii I ' i I a i T I - lda i i i ! I r i i I _
! I ._J".Ai am ! t i I l T I . I r I
#F f8l 8 . 39 2' ' BET' i i i i i [ f , i
" " ' " ~ ' ~ '
15 9.6 f .1 . 1 . I _m a i m a am: C I aug ; ,j p r , T ; ; y 5y
' ' !I 'IIT t !I _. .
1 1
' ; i 1 i .
f ~ 1 HM: k.2 da ."T%# ~ M /rn- mi mm.ier . . . . . . . .
' [ ] I IIIi : { : ; y I II' ! . : . . . I . i . t .
' ' I i aem T I _i!a' r ' IM .: E3 4 % _ Tl 3 I I I I~ rem a 1 da n/ "lP" r , :(FT 7-,-' . .. . ._
- I~i 1 I I . .! i [ l ! I i !'
' ~
i ' Ii 1 . . . . I l' _ . ! i f ' T i I . I : I mus" s' M i ! .I
- b. A I F T r I 1 - {
T I I T I 1 F l _ !I i r !I 1 y , T 3 r i . t1 i T i r 1
,m f ' f. r r erir r , i 159.8 " 5,.,s .u," ..
1 . ,
- 11 ! . .
- I~!
N*T ~4 : P - t i ! 1 T 'Ii i i iii[ ! I I I J y i , , , g j j
'n. O ,Vm i t T
Y ~ l' i i I ! h 5 W mm' i 3 # ET ' _i. !!!,! ,;,. .
-h.' 'i' iI N mm -m I i
, I iI i
". 159.9 : 1:
- 1 1
2r > > ,
' i ' ' '
i I i I C.3 !i .
, f, i .=. - i; i 1 _ 1 i I:
( I 1
- 1 I . .
- f I 1 if .,
y an
. m i >
. l i i ,
t
, !c
, u !i y i i i ; i ! 1 ! - rL J>r. !I g w ..7r i. m , . ; _ _ _ _
w l6O0 . 1,,
- r>
- ,. . 4 i
, 1-.
..r- w -m :
. .. a r- . <,c ' rs > w, wr.
, : i
! i - t 'MW fr - . : . ;
- I '. ? M . ' J4 1 ' I i IW' X! F'RIi 1: * : M' I !
r "
?I
' _r I (
FM'
/. 1 i
! . I il F: .k I e a'T #"J r ' Ffi r
.1'
. D . !
I r ir !
- N' I T I. L: I: .
_. , - ,lk1a' , , , : ,1 .1- i
-o, m_ , x I60.1 .
s sr . , 1: 4- . .! . .
! I' ! I'. I r i 1 1r i i .X- !
f l i";7 . N I i T : !: i i i
.s 3
ry i , , ; '7' , 1 !1 Lr"TL !I 'EE ! . i . I I E't :1 ! _1_W l ' i l . ! ' 1 ' r i L II '!!I I . "J - 1g g- i w1 : l i i r s .g 5
I ~ I. I7 . m i i < i i 11
** J ' A ! I i !I r r i :713- I: i !
~ '
160.2 ' ' ' I I ' TF~ I t ' ,7 N:
. ill i 1. i. !
' - . . T:7T i: luii.l~
I. : I A! . . . .!I
!' I; !ii 3 I 3 I .1 'E' "%.I ! :T ? . . _ . . II !'I!
'J '
!Y# ' I : Iln : F '~l t . !. ' .W t f i T . 1 ; :.mi" .
- , i; I ' ~ I '
,i
, , 1 ! ,
'"I T
, .= ! i1 a- ' ' ,f ' 1
~ b_f ' .. . 1Ii a;, ..i l i! !i.,Mr !,
" ' ' : i : i II I e : F ' r , ITi , L4;
-.l ,
i 60.3 I i i il i ;rr . . 3 1., . I I T ! i3 I ' ! 1 : - I ^ 4 II I 1 7 i I : { i I ] ! ! ;; i] ! r . l I ' i i i[ . i a i1 II ! . r . ! , i 1
! IE I i iii i I r 1 ic i i t i
! !I ! ! ! ! 7 I r i : I r r I I
# 'I ! ! !I! r i .
s j ia j ij! 1 , i j g , i; j , 5 ;
' I 5 I ; i , , ,
, j j4 ; 7y I I I ; 1 j , ,
I ! 6 i , 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 AUGUST 1985 i i l WATER LEVEL RECORDER CHART ,
; AUGUST 512,1985 WELL 808 FIGURE B1
'\
e -
% e I t a w .-m.=
gY PEOY
^
r .v' 1 "U : K'A F) or'/ F) , =g*2] Fv ~1V 1 l' YF'21 A n .
, , BifP M i i 2 9= %
159.8 "2.. r' te. -s _ - __ mw _-
- a. > . m .n.., e. - u . v -,s_ <
fr--G-6-:' G r. :gs .i a,- /-;' r: l I 1 ! l . I a I
.. e' ! t I I . E g gg 3"' I ! .8IM s J. J IT mX 1
'al*F '
F .1&1 aWF _ s
.m , %
= A 7 'u S. . . N
" ..' # . X
- a. n 1 1% 1 7w= .mE k 16 0.0 NT i i
> +
1 L 1
/ 1
/ a _ . . 1
-" s a 2" ( , ~'s Y
./ * . An i k _J k ii 1 - T:
> 1_ _ T A I i I' 1 I 1. - I-
. .me R 1 - ' I, / \ J "
! f L F 'l f v "J
' m. - !. I ! 'J \ n - m i 1 I g
eCg O-al '.% I 1 I T . t 1 1 1- - V i . m B ' J 1 i 6 k E L / I / - M if 1 I I L F 1 I 1 I 1 6 t A \l n E 1 / t 1 L s" I I W i . # r K ! V W
- u. -
I 2* - - 9 r 160.2 w
.J W - . .
sw1 16 0.3 , 1 I
- s 16 0.4 .
1 I i T T f A t' 16 0.5 r i I ! i f U 16 0.6 ,i i I 1 r 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 NOVEMBER 1985 w WATER LEVEL RECORDER CHART NOVEMBER 4-11,1985 WELL 808 FIGURE 82
O s e S w .n li 1 iIII 1
" P'8# 4'l.YA@ t i i i t i WLUPF 3 '3"_ ! 3 I 1 II J
([' 7 t i l .
-j ]%b gf.ggI,fL l lgj ghp[' a h h)gfj
]" ><=) % M .u
[ <> i g .j f's I T I
. [ i .
I I I I i I i i f
! r '.s .1 i i i.
"."1 i
15 8.01
.i. i
'Iii . ! I i . . I I !.1 . Y l!.. f I 1 I1 1 II !1 I! e
,Ii ' i I i i ' I i /' i A J! <" !
IA: ! IJ" I emf II !1 I fII i i i I u 13 ' [ 3 . ! 1 J. . T _ __ J I .I { i q
]
i I i . "hJ'Fdir in _y wgg _ as yym(g pp1 : i i
,/
I i
;"i ' 'tM i . if i
! : I ! g , I[ I j 1ri Ir i j i .. , 1 i , ; _ i!! 1 ; - i [ _ _
; i 1 i JFr/'.] 4.ML I I1! I! .
75Ia"1 . i i t i M.~!X_/' "WI I '
" "' T
('?... .aFF
- i :/ 1 . . .
157.91 I I ( , T !' 4.' n i JE ' jrr i iI. ' i : I ! 1! I I! 1
' ! !1 !7 L i ' 1 1 i T i i i ! ] n i F5 'Lf'J1r
- 1 i i .M V i 3i '. !
! II i II i! ii! Ii i t i T T ii J i Ii i
,, [ g1 i r l _
k i i ll ! . 1 Iil l II . . t 5 I e i : I i I!
.! T . . : L i . : I: ! 1 I: 1i i .
r s
; [ ; j
! I i t Ii 74A ! t! i
~" . . ..
- 1 157.81
. #L. 4: 1 A - !! I I . 2 i i . - ' i i : - 1 ' i ' I F% : 1F i A .Iih . 1. L' N I
'1 i F: 1 ! ! I .T . i i
! I I. 1 :I : 1. i L
. f I I ; ed : : % IIi 1 .
i : I i1 'r I 'A: : I': h . _ 2.
- 1 mL .1 .I I
,g : : T .pt'
1 1F .\ ? r 3 w- 1 ; [- ,
in I I
'll i a . ! ..ifI 1 .1 i 1: Fil J . - i I" i . . ' l L I i : II EI a . i'3II . I
.u
.a i I
. W<tK e A e4 ' t '
1 t
. k'. > ".'.- .f.
L. 157*71 = _h k. '. m _ f
!# i .J~ ' l' !I i ' A'Ii.'
I "A 'as T m' I: .VI ! ! Ii e i r v . i 1. 'm./ : ' l't i1 I t < v i y 1 . - ' s 1; i i il I' . I i E I II a
. :t i:n * "'It i . i iI.1 J r
i T JT t T ., _ T:__1 f N NY Y = 1,m b
.#..N.
tA ! 'R[' M. .' I a' T 1 'J . .T,'_L t i L i 'i ' 1 T I V ' :I'* .h Fi 1 t I 2=
"{ i T ' he h :
. T 'bl :a ; '1 :1_J ! I I I i i r j i i I i
's= #I : . .. i F .1 . 2 i i T 1~
~
Q= E DKJ ~ AL_a 'I 1 : . : i .I N *W < . . 1. _1 I. I F 3 I! ' i i ll d I : J. J ! 1 F F"' t 1 i T i 1 1 1 i [ .
!I:
p TI: i iI7 I i i i li'Il 1 9 gj ' , . . i a l t d :r'k'i t i lI y u !i I i 1 i i i i i 2 .
. t I "
!! : I 4 I 1[ li I 1 34 R f
~ -
( 157.51
- I . . .
- I ' f ' !.II -
. Ii
.I' i 1 .
i . . !l: I 1 !I j, ' i i 12:1 i I t 1 'I i . Ii 1- i Ii i
' I1
! ! ! Ii l r - 2 . _..
. i I . ! I 1 [ I I i [ [
I i .. ! I Ii
' i i .
i It
'l9 l i1: !
~
15741 . . i r ! I i : ,
' I i i i i 1 -]
' 1 ! . .! !
, i r ?
; I : I . <I - r! . .
i I 1?i 1 : I T i . . _ i I _i ! 1 _, . 1 . : 1 - il! i i] ; I T I I . 1 .II 7 II!I I: . i r j j 1
!'II i . . i 1
, , , i
- t 1 i I, y
!! i i 3 ii i 1 I l im' a I i - i f 1
- 1:
~
157.31 ,!'Ii I ' ' i ! i , . 1
' r 1
[ yi 5; . [ f I I i 2 4 2 ; III
~
I i i i i I: . i i : ! [ i 1
' ' ' l ' .. 1 Ii ! ! !! 1 Ir ^ 1 1 i
{, ,
' y
) i Ii 1 ' i s i
157.21 5'LI i i y; r i
, 7 7
ll ; I 1 1 2 1 1 . t
! '3 f f i ! ii iiii-,
,f ' [ v
^
i
' i .1 i i I ; i i ' ' <f I I . . .
i ! I 1
'. t I i y
. . 1 ~
II I: i . 7,r . 11 .. i lI
!I ' ! ! . i i t 1 . . .
III IIII r [ 1. ;;yr j : yi;g
-- - 1 . . I1 1 1 11 Ii : 1 .! i l l . . .
,,;[ [
7I !7 ' il !!' !Ili t ' !I lII li! I il 7 3 ' i l! . i i ; y :
' T I ! i : J f
' 1 I 5 6 7 8 9 10 ll 12 1
AUGUST 1985 WATER LEVEL RECORDER CHART - AUGUST 512,1985 WELL LT 13 FIGURE B3
a o
+h; + ,, ;; idii7 eais:-" is; ;^ w-r ^;-; er -f-3trrr-i - . . _
I - u.,
,t J T, _, / ,7
,,: ~ - - -. n.
158.51 scn, n a n 7 -- - v i s;c.
"E a A A .. _. n ___s W [_,~ U/* df k~ &~ S~fA M T "M -3 i
I I 1584l , -
! I I I I \
Y \ f 7 I 1 I i 15a31 I 1
,I i . 9 1 l 1 1 '
158.21 . J '. .I I I
. I I 1 Tk .
IV \ A, .. % , a . .r, ,1 , T, - 1 A w v "" - 2% ? L Y y ML / = i 1 L, = /t h-
- M i 4 7ft i Fa K V E \ ['% I k~ #
Ap vre ! g, m - ,I &-' F ' 1 i A
%J \
s i ( l i - _ .c ,
\
~
'a RhM YE a t T ll Wh I J% -
u .r w ee i 1 p ,/ ,I - _ , , u v s.v . 4 I L .V
' I x
w
,7 t
i r m -- . u. -- i i x t a If / s
. I W P k _ s I i 1\ /
1 <
/
.. .-- #. ,,- t i
" ' ' ~ ',r' -
15801 , . i 1 1 1 1 1, I, I I i 157.91 . i L 1 I [ i 1 . i1 I i T I J l .
" T % 1 J %T 1 I . T q r -
~~ ,
158.81 I I 1 i f I i I
\ T 1 I
i i 1 I i '. / 158.71 I i 1 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 SEPTEMBER 1985 WATER LEVEL RECORDER CHART SEPTEMBER 23 30,1985 WELL LT 13 FIGURE B4
0 3 U g ggacP0"* UuYac 86 FEB 11 ml :15 IlocEhfll RESULTS OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TESTING POWER BLOCK AREA VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 l S. S. PAPADOPULOS & ASSOCIATES, INC. CONSULTING GROUND-WATER HYDROLOGISTS
o o RESUL'S T
. OF HYDROGEOLOGIC TESTING
. POWER BLOCK AREA VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT UNITS 1 AND 2 PREPARED FOR BECHTEL CIVL & MNERALS, NC.
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA GD
', S. S. PAPADOPULOS & ASSOCIATES. INC.
CONSULTING GROUND WATER MYOROLOGISTS 12250 RocaviLLs Pius. Suits 290 RocaviLLE. ManyLANo 20s52 Tst.(301) des s7eO FEBRUARY ,1986
g o. o. parAccrutso o Acccc ATsc. INC. TABLE OF CONTENTS. Page REPORT Introduction 1 Method of Testing 2 Method of Analysis 2 Results of Analyses 2 References 3 FIGURES TABLES 9 4 f i' 1 r 1. I l l t i L
@ c. c. PAPArceui.ca o Acesc ATsc. INC.
LIST OF FIGURES
. 1. Location of The Tested Wells
- 2. Analysis of Test Data from Well LT-1B -- Insertion Cycle
- 3. Analysis of Test Data from.Well LT-1B -- Extraction Cycle
- 4. Analysis of Test Data from Well LT-7A -- Insertion Cycle
- 5. Analysis of Test Data from Well LT-7A -- Extraction Cycle
- 6. Analysis of Test Data from Well LT-12 -- Insertion Cycle
- 7. Analysis of Test Data from Well LT-12 -- Extraction Cycle
- 8. Analysis of Test Data from Well LT-13 -- Insertion Cycle
- 9. Analysis of Test Data from Well LT-13 -- Extraction Cycle
- 10. Analysis of Test Data from Well 805A -- First Test Insertion Cycle
- 11. Analysis of Test Data from Well 805A -- First Test Extraction Cycle
, 12. Analysis of Test Data from Well 805A -- Second Test Insertion Cycle
- 13. Analysis of Test Data from Well 805A -- Second Test Extraction Cycle S
'I O-11
- v. ..
g c. c. parAccrui.co o' Acccciarsc. iNC. LIST OF TABLES I - Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-1B II - Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-7A . ! III - Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-12
.IV - Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-13 V - Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well 805A (First Test)
VI - Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well 805A (Second Test) s 1 J t J 0 e I 9 i $. 1 l l t iii
t S 3 m T O 2 H l 1 l REPORT
g O. O. PAPASCPULCO Q AOOSCIATEO. INC. t w. l_ 7.. Introduction Single-well hydrogeologic tests (slug tests) were conducted in four mnnitoring wells, LT-18, LT-7A, LT-12 and LT-13, located within the power block area of the Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, to determine the in-situ hydraulic properties of materials backfilled into the area excavated during plant construction. In addition, well 805A, located outside and to the southeast of the power block area was also tested. This well is open to about 16 feet of the Barnwell Sand and to about four feet of the Utley Limestone. The location of the tested wells is shown on Figure 1. The tests were conducted during January 23-24, 1986 by Mr. Clifford R. Farrell of Bechtel Civil & Minerals, Inc. (Bechtel) and Mr. 0hannes Sivasli of S. S. Papadopulos & Associates, Inc. (SSP &A). Dr. Charles B. Andreas of SSP &A made preliminary field analyses of the test data and participated in the test of well LT-13 and a repeat test of well 805A. This report presents the results of the analyses of the test data. The analyses were performed by Dr. Stavros S. Papadopulos and checked by Mr. Steven P. Larson of SSP &A. Method of Testing The slug tests were conducted by lowering a cylindrical slug (6 feet in
. length and 1.25 inches in diameter) to below the water level in 'each of the wells tested,- and by then removing the slug after the water level in the well-had fully, or nearly, recovered to its pre-test position. Water levels were measured during the-insertion cycle and the extraction cycle with a 10 psi I
F
@ c. c. PAPAccrut.ca o AcccciArca me.
b= pressure transducer connected to an In-Situ HERMIT Environmental Data Logger, Model SE1000B. The slug was lowered manually in each well to just above the water level prior to the insertion cycle. At the start of the insertion cycle, the slug was instantaneously allowed to drop 10 feet into the water. At the beginning of the extraction cycle, the slug was manually raised as fast as possible to just above the pre-test water level in the well. To assess the repeatability of test results, well 805A was tested two times. The water-level response data collected from the slug tests are presented on Tables I through VI. Method of Analysis The water-level response data collected from the slug tests were analyzed using the type-curve method of Cooper, Bredehoeft and Papadopulos (1967). Figures 2 through 13 show plots of H/Ho (the ratio of the water-level change H
, at any time t after the beginning of the test to the initial water-level . change H o caused by the insertion or extraction of the slug) against the logarithm of time t that were prepared from the data obtained during the insertion and extraction cycle of the tested wells. Also shown on these figures are the trace of the type-curve matched to the data, the match line coordinates and the calculation of transmissivity.
Results of Analyses The transmissivity values determined from data collected during the insertion and extraction cycle of each test, and from both tests for well
~
2
@ c. c. PAPAscrutec o Acccc ATrc. me.
1 [i i 805A, were averaged to obtain the transmissivity in the vicinity of each tested well. The hydraulic conductivity cf the backfill was determined from the average transmissivity and the open interval of each of the four wells located within the power block area. These results are summarized below: j' Transmissivity, ft /d 2 Hydraulic
- 1. --------------------- Open Conductivity Well Test from Interval ------------
7 Number Cycle Test Cycle Average ft ft/d ft/yr LT-1B Insertion 59 (" 65 19.5 3.3 1220 L Extraction 71 LT-7A Insertion 48 45 22 2.1 750 Extraction 42 '[~ LT-12 Insertion 29 i-28 21 1.3 480 Extraction 26 LT-13 Insertion 67 71 22 3.2 1180 Extraction 75 The average transmissivity of the 20-foot open interval of well 805A was determined to be 260 ft2 /d. However, since this well is open both to the Barnwell Sand and the Utley Limestone, which may have different hydraulic properties, the hydraulic conductivity was not calculated. ' l. l"j References J Cooper, H. H., Jr., J. D. Bredehoeft and I. S. Papadopulos, 1967, Response of a finite-diameter well to an instantaneous charge of water: Water Resources Research, vol. 3, no. 1, pp. 263-269. .L 3
e 6 Q C "D m M FIGURES
f!!!!!!:i6C
':*LT-18 *;*:;.
O! Q*.!i.:*d ..} Yi' .'!*..* *.. *GWp . n. ... . . =8E ::::::::: :.%
.' *?!*
*': 3.$
i . * . ' . . .;' h* V.::: - 3.: . v.. :.* :f T.UR..B.W..E. .SUILDWG
.i** i:n .
. . '.....*f.'.*/.,
. .v. *
..............................'..,,/.y:l<
,l
*:/.1 * ::.. *.:.,LT 13.:.
,,:.::: 9.....:I . LT-7 AUNIT . .. *
- UNIT 2
,............ '.:2. .*.*: ,.
' .w. :.:&. .
1...*.
- .. .:.y
... . . ..*::....f v:
- . BACKFILL,h{:i:;i:V *. ..*:ew/;*:.,*;*.:l::::.
. *.y l'l5ll5!*II*{*li.i . . 4 :i;*:Y:
~
- 11. * .... : =. *:
*/..* =*..*:.'?.7.:/. L.T-12 :.*
- . :::iN* ;*}}v;.*.U,.*O?
..*. .. . ,y. .:.,... ..... .. ; e.:.:.:.:. .*.y,. . . . .. *.:l.:::.:: : .... :..,
; V.*.*:.,, .:.
.t y;. ... .
..... ... EXCAVATIONj
~ . ...... .Lun. OF d
; O So5A lr t
i l. see . seaa.c se rect i i l l l FIGURE 1 - Location of the Tested Wells O S. S. P AP ADOPULOS & ASSOCI ATES, INC, conewse.=e e.ov=o ..es e ..o.osomes,s
1 i g 5 5 5 WW55g 3 W W E yyyWg I W W W W WWW g 5 5 W W W W W 5
. 2 2
, (Tt/cc ) x cc Transmissivity T =
O.8 - 1.0 x 1 in x 1440 min /d 0.17 min. x 144 in -2
/ft 2 0.6 -
* =
59 ft2fo - i I s 1
- Type Curve a= 10-3 0.4 -
0.2 - Match Line - Tt/r2c = 1.0 t = 0.17 min. l-O - - - - = = - - ' = - - - - - - ' - - - - * - -
^^ ^^
e-= 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Time since beginning of test, in minutes FIGURE 2 - Analysis of test data from well LT-1B -- Insertion Cycle @ S. S. PAPADOPULOS & ASSOCIATES. INC.
<..u.........,....,
. . - - . .- . - - - ~ '
I 1.0 . . . . . . -
..i . . .
2 (Tt/c ) x rc Transmissivity T = 0.8 - l 1.0 x 1 in x 1440 min /d 0.14 min. x 144 --2 in /ft 2 l j 0.6 -
=
71 ft2/d - I s 1
- l Type Curve n = 10-3 j O.4 -
1 l j O.2 - Match Line - Tt/r2C = 1.0 i i t = 0.14 min. O - - - 'a ' - - ' ' I - - >' - - - - - l 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Time since beginning of test,in minutes FIGURE 3 - Analysis of test data from well LT-18 -- Extraction Cycle S. S. P APADOPULOS & AS SOCI ATE S. INC.
, . ~ , . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , . . .
2 . i 1.0 -
...... . .= .
2 2
, Transmissivity T =
(Tt/rc ) * "c 0.8 - t 2 2 1.0 x 1 in x 1440 min /d
. 0.21 min. x 144 in2 /ft2
*** 2
= 48 ft /d 0.6 -
I s
- I
- i .
Type Curve a = 10-3 O.4 -
- O.2 - Hatch Line -
l l Tt/r2c = 1.0 I t = 0.21 min. O - - - ' - - ' I - ' - *= - - - - - - 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Time since beginning of test,in minutes FIGURE 4 - Analysis of test data from well LT-7A -- Insertion Cycle b S. S. .PAPADOPULOS
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
- - - - - - "' ' ~~ ' '
i l 1.0 . . . . . . . . . . . t i ! 2 2
, (Tt/rc) * #c Transmissivity T =
t j O.8 - *
* ~
2 2
, 1.0 x 1 in x 1440 min /d
. 0.24 min. x 144.in2 /ft 2 l .
* =
42 ft 2/d j O.6 - 1 I N i' I Type Curve a= 10-3 l 0.4 - i
- CL2 i
Match Line - Tt/r2c = 1.0 j t = 0.24 min. O - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' * !' ' ' - ' ' ^* - " O.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Time since beginning of test,in minutes FIGURE S - Analysis of test data from well LT-7A -- Extraction Cycle @ S. S PAPADOPULOS
& ASSOCIATES. INC.
. ~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
C N G S ., E. T Am I C~ 0 O S. .
, d "
1 S
/ A i
n '
^ &.
^
m 2 ^ S 0 4 4 1 2 f j t n,
@U O L
P. O ,. i
,' D x A ..
4 2 P ,. 4 - A~ n 1 0 P, 2c i 1 ' . r x *% S
= .
S x 1 n o a
) 1 i f 2c m 2 e .
, c x t v n ' 1
, / 2 f r i '
, t 0 4 u m '
T 9 C ( 1 0 2 2 ' s
, e p e o, 4 ' e t
, = . = y n i 0 ' u
, T T i L , =
i n y h 20 m t c r e i t / ' n l v a t i c i M T t t
, y s C s ' s i e n m ,. t i
o .
- s . f t
n o r a
- e r '
1 g s T n
* ' 0 n n
i I i n - -
, ' g -
e 2 b 1 e T c L i n l s l e
- w e m i
m o r T f 1 a
. , ' 0 t
, a 0 d
' t
. , s e t
- f o
s i s y l
" a n ,
1 A 0 - 0 6 O E 0 8 6 4 2 0 R 1 0 U 0 0 O G I F
.IsI
.i;i?i!
i . . ,- -. . - , . . , . .. . I - 1 4 l l 1.0 .
,. ...r - - -
i - - i - - - - 1 I 2 2 i .. (Tt/cc ) x rc , Transmissivity T = l 0.8 - t
- 2 2
.l . 1.0 x 1.1 in x 1440 min /d i . 2 2 0.47 min. x 144 in /ft 0.6 -
= 26 ft 2/d _
1,. 1 .
- I s
i Type Curve a = 10-2 0.4 - O.2 - Match Line - Tt/r2c = 1.0 t = 0.47 min. O - ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' ' = = '!' ' - - - ' * = = = 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Time since beginning of test,in minutes FIGURE 7 - Analysis of test data from wel1 LT-12 -- Extraction Cycle
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,y,,,,,
u,-,...,.........m.,,,
~
1 1.0 - 2 (Tt/r ) x cc. i ransmSsivity T =
- t l
*
- 2 2 0.8 -
* ** 1.0 x 2 in x 1440 min /d ,
B 0.60 min. x 144 in2 /ft 2
= 67 ft 2/d 0.6 - .
I Type Curve n = 10-4 I O.4 - O.2 - Match Line - Tt/r2c = 1.0
- i t = 0.60 min. .
Q n a a a a a aa I e a a a a a a al a a a a a a a f a a a a a a a aa ) 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 Time since beginning of test,in minutes ! FIGtRE 8 - Analysis of test data from well LT-13 -- Insertion Cycle O
.. . ,,,4oorutos a associaves. inc.
j
,....<.n..........r...u..s.,
i I
;- - l
.l )
. m .
- e w
i s, s r a i c 0 o 1 s
, ' s a,
d 4
/ 2 - a
&o,,
n t 0 s
, f 1 i
m 2
/
=
g u n
' r 0
4 i a o n
, 4 '
a
, 1 4 e
- 4 v w x 1 r e, u -
,2 c 2 x C s r n e .
i . p s x n y . 2 i d
) t 2 m / T i n
,2 rc 2 x 3 t m ' 1 5 f '
/ 3
, t 0 5 T 0 5 0
( 1 7 e - s
. n 1 0 -
e i t
= . = . L = =! ' u
. h 2c n
, T t
c
/
r ' a r e y ,* a t l i t . M T t i n c v . y i t C
, s
- s n s e i
m .. t i o t s f c _ n a
- o a
_ r 1 g r
, * ' t
' 0 n i E
x _ , ' n
- n -
, - ig -
. ' e 3 b 1 e T
- c L i
n l s l e w e m
- m o i
r T f 1 a
. ' 0 t 0 a
, ' d t
, ' s e
. ' t f
o s i s y l a n
. 1 A 0 -
0
- - 9 O
E
.- 0 8 6 4 2 O R 1
0 0 O O U G I F
*zsI
4 4 l 1 I 1.0 2 2 (Tt/cc ) x cc Transmissivity T = 2 -2 d 1.0 x 1 in x 1440 min /d 0.040 min. x 144 in 2jft 2 O.6 - I s I l
- Type Curve a = 10-4 j 0.4 -
'1 1 I j O.2 - Match Line - l Tt/r2c = 1.0 i l . t = 0.040 min. . 0 - *- ' = - I' - - - ****- --------==^^^***' 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 4 Time since beginning of test,in minutes FIGURE 10 - Analysis of test data from well 805A -- First Test insertion Cycle h '
- 5. 5 PAPADOPULOS & ASSOCIATES. INC.
e...<...<..........<,.x.s,,
i . i - i I 1.0 i - .. i . . 2 2
. (Tt/cc ) x rc
] Transmissivity T = t 0.8 f
*. 2 2 j
- 1.0 x 1 in x 1440 min /d l 0.037 min. x 144 in2 fft 2 i
! = 270 ft2/d l 0.6 - - I s I
- I Type Curve a= 10-4
- 0.4 -
i l j O.2 - Match Line - l l Tt/r2C = 1.0 { t = 0.037 min. ! O - - - ' - - !i - - - - m ---- - - ----- l 0.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 i Time since beginning of test,in minutes FIGURE 11 - An sis of test data from well 805A -- First Test Extraction Cycle b S. S. P APADOPULOS & ASSOCIATES. 4MC.
l i I i 1.0 . . . . . . . . . f 2 2 j (Tt/cc ) * "c Transmissivity T = i O.8 - t l * ' 2 -2 4 1.0 x 1 in x 1440 min /d j . 0.038 min. x 144 in2 /ft 2 0.6 -
= 260 ft2/d -
1 i s 1 I N 1 l Type Curve a= 10-3 0.4 - i O.2 - Match Line ~ Tt/ *2 C
= 1.0 l !. t = 0.038 min.
j o . . . ...... . . L ...... . . .....1------e- - - " " *. __ o.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 i Time since beginning of test,in minutes
]
, FIGURE 12 - Analysis of test data from well 805A -- Second Test Insertion Cycle h i S. S. PAPADOPULOS & ASSOCIATES. INC.
<.,...,.........,,...s.,
1 i, .
- f i
1.0 q , , . i s i 2 2 (Tt/re) x cc l . Transmissivity T = 0.8 - t ' 1.0 x 1 in x 1440 min /d
=
1
, 0.038 min. x 144 in2 /ft 2 0.6 -
=
260 ft2/d - I .
- s Type Curve n = 10-3 0.4 -
i O.2 - Match Line - 1 ) Tt/r2c = 1.0 1 t = 0.038 min. O - - - ' ' ' ' ' - l ' ' - - - **-- - - O.001 0.01 0.1 1 10 l Time since beginning of test,in minutes l I i i FIGURE 13 - Analysis of test data from 'well 805A -- Second Test Extraction Cycle h l S. S. PAPADOPULOS & ASSOCIATES. INC.
..s-......~.......,..._,,
4
e 6 , M E S TABLES
@ c. c. ParAncrui.co o AcccciAvc1 me.
TABLE I Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-1B Effective Casing Radius : 1 inch Initial Water-Level Change: 2.34 feet
.....................o H/H Time ~ Insertion Extraction (minutes) Cycle Cycle 0.003 0.59 0.47-0.007 0.68 0.79 0.010 0.79 1.01 0.013 0.89 1.00 0.017 0.91 0.92 0.020 0.88 0.88 0.023 0.86 0.88 0.027 0.86 0.86 0.030 0.86 0.85 0.033 0.87 0.83.
. 0.050 0.91 0.78 0.067 0.80 0.73 0.083 .0.71 0.69
, 0.100 0.73 0.65 O.117 0.63 0.62 0.133 0.59 0.59
- i. 0.150 0.58 0.56
. 0.167 0.56 0.53 0.183 0.53 0.50 ! 0.200 0.51 0.48 , 0.217 0.49 0.46 0.233 0.47 0.44 0.250 0.45 0.42-0.26' O.43 0.40 O.283 0.41 0.38 0.300 0.40 0.37 l 0.317 0.38 0.35 ! 0.333 0.37 0.34 0.417 0.31 0.28 4 0.500 0.26 0.23 0.583 0.22 0.19 O.667 0.19 0.16 0.750 0.17 0.14 0.833 0.15 0.12
@ 0. O. PAPASCPUt.CO Q ACCOCIATCO. INC.
TABLE I (continued) Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-1B Effective Casing Radius : 1 inch Initial Water-Level Change: 2.34 feet H/H o Time Insertion Extraction (minutes) Cycle Cycle 0.917 0.13 0.10 1.000 0.12 0.09 1.083 0.10 0.08 1.167 0.09 0.07 1.250 0.09 0.06 1.333 0.08 0.06 1.417 0.07 0.05 1.500 0.06 0.04 1.583 0.06 0.04 1.667 0.06 0.04 1.750 0.05 0.03 1.833 0.05 0.03 1.917 0.05 0.03 2.000 0.04 0.03 2.500 0.03 0.01
, 3.000 0.03 0.00
. 3.500 0.02 0.00
- 4.000 0.02 0.00 4.500 0.02 0.00 5.000 0.01 0.00
, 5.500 0.01 0.00 6.000 0.01 0.00 6.500 0.01 0.00 7.000 0.01 0.00 7.500 0.01 0.00 8.000 0.01 0.00 8.500 0.01 0.00
. 9.000 0.01 0.00 9.500 0.01 0.00 10.000 0.01 0.00 4
S
! @ C. C. PAPACOPUL.CO Q AOCOCIATOO. INC. TABLE II i Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-7A l Effective Casing Radius : 1 inch Initial Water-Level Change: 2.34 feet H/H o Time Insertion Extraction (minutes) Cycle Cycle 1' i 0.003 0.68 0.18 0.007 0.85 0.39 0.010 0.97 0.42 0.013 1.01 0.60 i O.017 1.00 0.34 0.020 1.06 0.41 0.023 0.96 0.55 0.027 0.96 -0.43 0.030 1.01 0.30 0.033 1.03 0.63 ,. 0.050 0.96 0.82 0.067 C.71 0.77 ,t 0.083 0.58 0.89 0.100 0.64 0.84 O.117 0.65 0.79
, 0.133 0.64 0.76 0.150 0.60 0.73 1 0.167 0.58 0.70 0.163 0.56 0.67 f
0.200 0.54 0.65
; 0.217 0.52 0.62 0.233 0.50 0.C0 , 0.250 0.48 0.58 l, 0.267 0.47 0.56 0.283 0.45 0.54 0.300 0.44 0.52 ! 0.117 0.42 0.50 . 0.333 0.41 0.49 0.417 0.35 0.41 .
0.500 0.30 0.36 0.583 0.26 0.32 O.667 0.23 0.28 0.750 0.20 0.24 0.833 0.18 0.22
g s s. PAeAporut.03 O AOCOCIATEO INC. l- TABLE II 1 (continued) Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-7A i Effective Casing Radius : 1 inch Initial Water-Level Change: 2.34 feet H/H o l Time Insertion Extraction l, (minutes) Cycle Cycle 0.917 0.16 0.20 l.000 0.14 0,18 1.083 0.13 0.16 l 1.167 0.12 0.15 l 1.250 0.10 0.13 l.333 0.09 0.12 1.417 0.09 0.I1 , 1.500 0.08 0.10 l 1.583 0.07 0.10
- 1.667 0.06 0.09 l 1.750 0.06 0.09
,, 1.833 0.05 0.08 l'. 1.917 0.05 0.08
- 2.000 0.04 0.07 2.500 0.03 0.05 3.000 0.02 0.04 ii 3.500 0.01 0.03 l 4.000 0.00 0.03 4.500 0.00 0.02 i*
5.000 0.00 0.02 5.500 0.00 0.02 6.000 0.00 0.02
. 6.500 -0.00 0.01 l1 7.000 -0.00 0.01 7.500 -0.00 0.01 8.000 0.00 0.01 8.500 -0.00 0.01 i 9.000 -0.00 0.01
- 9.500 -0.00 0.01 l, 10.000 0.00 0.01 i
l
@ c. c. Paracoeutro o AccociAT c. me.
TA8LE III Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-12 Effective Casing Radius : 1.1 inches Initial Water-Level Change: 1.95 feet t Insertion Cycle Extraction Cycle f Time Time (minutes) H/H (minutes) H/H
......... ...o
. ......... ...o.
l 0.001 0.44 ! 0.004 0.56 0.003 0.98 0.021 1.05 0.007 0.96 0.038 0.84 0.010 0.94 0.054 0.53 0.013 0.93 0.071 0.64 0.017 0.92 0.088 0.64 0.020 0.91 0.104 0.61 0.023 0.90 0.121 0.59 0.027 0.89 0.138 0.57 0.030 0.87
, 0.154 0.56 0.033 0.87 0.171 0.54 0.050 0.83 . 0.188 0.53 0.067 0.80 0.204 0.52 0.083 0.77 0.221 0.50 0.100 0.75 , 0.238 0.49 0.117 0.73 0.254 0.47 0.133 0.71 ! 0.271 0.47 0.150 0.69 0.288 0.46 0.167 0.68
- 0.304 0.44 0.183 0.66 0.388 0.40 0.200 0.64 0.471 0.35 0.217 0.63 0.554 0.32 0.233 0.61 0.638 0.29 0.250 0.60 0.721 0.26 0.267 0.58 0.804 0.25 0.283 0.57
. O.888 0.22 0.300 0.56 .. 1.054 0.18 0.333 0.53 1.138 0.17 0.417 0.48 l.221 0.16 0.500 0.44 l.304 0.15 0.583 0.39 l.388 0.13 0.667 0.36 1.471 0.13 0.750 0.33 1.554 0.13 0.833 0.30
@ c. c. PAraccrui.ca o Accoc Arso. me.
TABLE III (continued) Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-12 Effective Casing Radius : 1.1 inches Initial Water-Level Change: 1.95 feet Insertion Cycle Extraction Cycle Time Time (minutes) H/H, (minutes) H/Ho 1.638 0.10 0.917 0.28 1.721 0.10 1.000 0.26 1.804 0.09 1.083 0.24 1.888 0.08 1.167 0.22 1.971 0.07 1.250 0.20 2.471 0.06 1.333 0.18 2.971 0.03 1.500 0.16 3.471 0.01 1.583 0.15 4.471 0.00 1.667 0.14 4.971 0.00 1.750 0.13
. 5.471 0.00 1.833 0.13 5.971 0.00 1.917 0.12-
[ 6.471 0.00 2.000 0.11
. 6.971 0.00 2.500 0.08 7.471 -0.00 3.000 0.06 7.971 -0.01 3.500 0.04 8.471 -0.00 4.000 0.04 8.971 0.00 4.500 0.03 9.471 0.00 5.000 0.03 9.971 0.00 5.500 0.02 6.000 0.02 6.500 0.02 7.000 0.02 7.500 0.01 8.000 0.01 8.500 0.01 ! 9,000 0.01 9.500 0.01 10.000 0.01
g o. c. papaccrutto o accoc Anc. me. TA8LE IV Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well LT-13
, Effective Casing Radius : 2 inches Initial Water-Level Change: 0.56 feet H/H o Time Insertion Extraction
.(minutes) Cycle Cycle 0.003 -0.02 1.21 0.007 -0.04 -0.04 0.010 -0.02 0.32 0.013 9.23 1.20 0.017 2.05 0.89 0.020 0.93 0.95 0.023 2.29 0.95 0.027 0.54 0.95 0.030 1.25 0.93 0.033 0.66 0.93
, 0.050 0.70 0.91 t 0.067 0.89 0.87 0.083 0.84 0.87
. 0.100 0.82 0.86 0.117 0.89 0.84 0.133 0.89 0.82 i
O.150 0.84 0.80
- , 0.167 0.82 0.80 0.183 0.66 0.79 0.200 0.82 0.77 0.217 0.84 0.77 O.233 0.82 0.75 0.250 0.82 0.75 0.267 0.82 0.73 0.283 0.80 0.73 0.300 0.80 0.73 ,
0.317 0.79 0.71
, 0.333 0.77 0.70 0.417 0.73 0.66 O.500 0.70 0.63 0.583 0.66 0.59 0.667 0.62 0.55 0.750 0.59 0.54 0.833 0.57 0.50 l.
C. O. PAPAoOPULO3 0 ACsOCIATOC IN3. t TABLE IV (continued) Hydrogeologic Test Data Well LT-13 Effective Casing Radius : 2 inches Initial Water-Level Change: 0.56 feet
- H/H, Time Insertion Extraction (minutes) Cycle Cycle 0.917 0.54 0.48 1.000 0.52 0.46 l.083 0.48 0.43 1.167 0.46 0.41 l 1.250 0.45 0.39 1.333 0.41 0.37 1.417 0.39 0.36 1.500 0.39 0.34 l.583 0.37 0.34 i l.667 0.36 0.32
- . 1.750 0.34 0.30
- 1.833 0.32 0.29 t
- 1.917 0.30 0.29 1
2.000 0.30 0.27 2.500 0.23 0.21
, 3.000 0.18 0.16 3.500 0.12 0.13
' 4.000 0.11 0.11 4.500 0.09 0.07 5.000 0.07 0.05 i
, 5.500 0.05 0.05 ,
.6.000 0.04 0.04
,. 6.500 0.04 0.04 7.000 0.04 0.02 7.500 0.02 0.02 8.000 0.02 0.02 8.500 0.02 0.02 .
- . 9.000 0.02 0.00 L 9.500 0.00 0.00 10.000 0.00 0.00 I
@ c. c. PAPADOPULOO O ACSOCI ATCO. INC.
TABLE V . Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well 805A (First Test)
- Effective Casing Radius : 1 inch Initial Water-Level Change: 2.34 feet t
H/H o
. Time- Insertion Extraction (minutes) Cycle Cycle O.003 0.01 0.78 0.007 0.04 0.58 0.010 0.54 0.45 0.013 0.78 0.34 0.017 0.69 0.35 O.020 0.85 0.52 0.023 0.83 0.72 I '0.027 0.91 0.79 . 0.030 0.94 0.80 0.033 0.99 0.77 r 0.050 0.86 0.56 0.067 0.54 0.49 O.083 0.36 0.43 . 0.100 0.46 0.37 0.117 0.36 0.32 0.133 0.33 0.28 0.150 0.28 0.25 ! 0.167 0.25 0.22 , 0.133 0.22 0.19 0.200 0.20 0.17 0.217 0.17 0.15 0.233 0.16 0.13 0.250 0.14 0.12 0.267 0.13 0.11 0.283 0.11 0.10 0.300 0.10 0.09 0.317 '
0.09 0.08 0.333 O.08 0.08 0.417 0.05 0.05 0.500 0.03 0.03 0.583 0.02 0.02 0.667 0.01 0.02
@ c. c. PAPA 2ceui.co o A soe:Arca ma.
TABLE V (continued) Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well 805A l (First Test) Effective Casing Radius : 1 inch Initial Water-Level Change: 2.34 feet H/H, Time Insertion Extraction
, (minutes) Cycle Cycle 0.750 0.01 0.01 0.833 0.01 0.02 0.917 0.01 0.01 1.000 0.00 0.01 1.083 0.00 0.00 1.167 0.00 0.00 1.250 0.00 0.00 .
1.333 0.00 0.00 l.417 0.00 0.00
; 1.500 0.00 0.00 1.583 -0.00 0.00 1.667 0.00 0.00 1.750 0.00 0.00 l.833 0.00 0.00 1.917 0.00 0.00 2.000 0.00 0.00 ; 2.500 0.00 -0.00 3.000 0.00 -0.00
' 3.500 0.00 -0.00 4.000 0.00 -0.00 4.500 0.01 -0.00 . 5.000 0.01 -0.00 5.500 0.01 -0.00 6.000 0.01 -0.01 6.500 0.01 -0.01 7.000 0.01 -0.01 . 7.500 0.01 -0.01 8.000 0.01 -0.01 8.500 0.01 -0.01 9.000 0.01 -0.01 9.500 0.01 -0.01 10.000 0.01 -0.01 4
y._.. ,
@ c. c. PApAoorucco o A:sociAT 0, IM O.
TABLE VI Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well 805A (Second Test) i I Effective Casing Radius : 1 inch , Initial Water-Level Change: 2.34 feet 4 H/Ho Time Insertion Extraction (minutes) Cycle Cycle 0.003 1.30 0.84 0.007 1.46 0.64 0.010 1.38 0.51 0.013 1.31 0.52 0.017 1.06 0.62 0.020 0.78 0.68 O.023 0.42 0.68 0.027 0.19 0.65
, 0.030 0.14 0.62 i
0.033 0.21 0.58 0.050 0.47 0.48 O.067 0.34 0.40 [ 0.083 0.31 0.35 0.100 0.27 0.30 0.117 0.24 0.26 O.133 0.21 0.23 0.150 0.18 0.20 0.167 0.17 . 0.18 0.183 0.15 0.16 0.200 0.14 0.14 0.217 0.12 0.12 0.233 0.11 0.11 0.250 0.10 0.10 0.267 0.09 0.09 0.283 0.08 0.08
, 0.300 0.07 0.07 0.317 0.07 0.06
. 0.333 0.06 0.06 l 0.417 0.04 0.03 i 0.500 0.03 0.02 0.583 0.03 0.01 0.667 0.02 0.01 0.750 0.02 0.00
6.., C. C. PAPA 3;puLOO O AOCOCIATCO. INC. TABLE VI (continued) f' Hydrogeologic Test Data, Well 805A \. (Second Test)
, Effective Casing Radius : 1 inch Initial Water-Level Change:
'. 2.34 feet H/H o Time Insertion Extraction (minutes) Cycle Cycle 0.833 0.02 0.00 0.917 0.02 0.00 l.000 0.02 -0.00 1.083 0.01 -0.00 1.167 0.01 -0.00 1.250 0.01 -0.01 1.333 0.01 -0.01
! 1.417 0.01 -0.01 1.500 0.01 -0.01 1.583 0.01 -0.01 1.667 0.01 -0.01 1.750 0.01 -0.01 1.833 0.02 -0.01 1.917 0.01 -0.01 2.000 0.01 -0.01 2.500 0.02 -0.01 3.000 0.02 -0.02 3.500 0.02 -0.02 4.000 0.02 -0.02 , 4.500 0.03 -0.02 i 5.000 0.03 -0.02 4
5.500 0.03 -0.02 6.000 0.03
- ! 6.500 0.03
-0.03 0.03
'! 7.000 0.04 -0.03 7.500 0.04 -0.03
, 8.000 0.04 -0.03 8.500 0.04 0.03 9.000 0.05 0.03 9.500 0.05 -0.03 10.000 0.05 -0.03 .
c- - _ - - _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .}}