ML22325A129

4 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Main Page

ML22325A129
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi, 07200071
Issue date:	11/17/2022
From:	DTE Electric Company
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML22325A160	List: ML22325A124 ML22325A125 ML22325A126 ML22325A127 ML22325A129 ML22325A130 ML22325A131 ML22325A132 ML22325A133 ML22325A134 ML22325A135 ML22325A136 ML22325A138 ML22325A139 ML22325A142 ML22325A143 ML22325A144 ML22325A145 ML22325A146 ML22325A147 ML22325A154 NRC-22-0052, Replacement Files for Submittal of Revision 24 to the Fermi 2 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) Through EIE on November 9, 2022
References
NRC-22-0052
Download: ML22325A129 (1)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:FERMI 2 UFSAR Revision 24 DTE Electric Company November 2022

FERMI 2 UFSAR CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF PLANT 1.1. INTRODUCTION The original Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) was submitted in support of the Detroit Edison Company's (Edison) application for a license to operate a 3293-MWt (rated) nuclear power plant at the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant site on the western shore of Lake Erie, at Lagoona Beach, Monroe County, Michigan. This Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR) was prepared in response to 10 CFR 50.71(e). The power plant is designated as Fermi 2. The Fermi 2 PSAR (CP Application) was filed in April 1969 and a construction permit CPPR-87 was issued in September 1972. The original FSAR was filed in April 1975. The plant received its license for fuel loading and low-power testing (5 percent power) on March 20, 1985, and its full-power operating license on July 15, 1985. Fermi 2 uses a General Electric Company (GE) single-cycle, forced-circulation BWR of the BWR 4 Class, with a pressure-suppression Mark I containment. Fermi 2 is similar in design to these nuclear power plants: Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Units 1, 2, and 3; Cooper Nuclear Station; Edwin I. Hatch Unit No. 1; and Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Units 1 and 2. The design power rating (emergency core cooling system [ECCS] design basis) for Fermi 2 is 3486 MWt, with a turbine-generator design gross electrical output at the generator terminals of 1235 MWe and a net electrical output of 1170 MWe. On September 9, 1992, the NRC issued Amendment 87 to the Fermi 2 operating license authorizing a change in the thermal power limit from 3293 MWt to 3430 MWt, a 4.2 percent increase in the thermal power and a 5 percent increase in steam flow. This changed the net electrical capacity from 1093 MWe to 1139 MWe, or an increase of 46 MWe. During RF05 the LP Steam Path was replaced by a GE designed LP Steam Path with a higher efficiency. This changed the designed net electrical capacity from 1139 MWe to 1150 MWe, or an increase of 11 MWe. During RF07 the HP Steam Path was replaced by a GE designed HP Steam Path with a higher efficiency. However, the gross generator output will not exceed the present 1217 MWe. During RF11, the Moisture Separator Reheaters (MSRs) were replaced. The gross generator output will not exceed MWe noted above. The Fermi Power Uprate Program followed the GE Nuclear Energy generic guidelines and evaluations for BWR power plants. 1,2 1 GE Nuclear Energy, "Generic Guidelines for General Electric Boiling Water Reactor Power Uprate," Licensing Topical Report NEDC-31897P-1, Class III, (Proprietary), June 1991 2 GE Nuclear Energy, "Generic Evaluations of General Electric Boiling Water Reactor Power Uprate," Licensing Topical Report NEDC-31984P, Volumes I and II, Class III, (Proprietary), July 1991. 1.1-1 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR On February 10, 2014, the NRC issued Amendment 196 to the Fermi 2 operating license authorizing a change in the thermal power limit from 3430 MWt to 3486 MWt, a 1.64 percent increase in thermal power and a 1.88 percent increase in steam flow. This changed the net electrical capacity from 1150 MWe to approximately 1170 MWe. This power uprate was performed in accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix K and reflects the improvement in feedwater flow measurement. The Fermi 2 Measurement Uncertainty Recapture (MUR) power uprate followed the GE generic guidelines and evaluations for BWR plants provided in GEH Topical Report NEDC-32938P-A, Generic Guidelines and Evaluations for General Electric Boiling Water Reactor Thermal Power Optimization, Revision 2, May 2003. Fermi 2 specific analyses and evaluations were performed, consistent with the generic guidelines, for systems and components that might be affected to ensure their capability to support the increase in power output and steam flow. Since data is described in detail in the UFSAR, revisions were made to this data to reflect the power uprates, as appropriate. The analyses and evaluations resulted in determinations that the systems and components were either not affected by power uprate or had sufficient design capacity to accommodate uprate conditions. In addition to the above, the effect of the uprates on the environment was assessed to verify that operation of Fermi 2 at uprated power was environmentally acceptable with established NRC requirements and that consistency was maintained with Federal, State, and local regulations. As a result, no changes to the Environmental Protection Plan or to any of the non-NRC permits are required. The Detroit Edison Company changed its name to DTE Electric Company as of January 1, 2013. The name change to DTE Electric Company was purely administrative in nature; the legal entity remained the same and the name change did not involve a transfer of control or of an interest in the license for Fermi 2. DTE Electric Company continues to be a wholly owned subsidiary of DTE Energy Company. For the purposes of the Fermi 2 UFSAR, except for UFSAR sections of historical context, all DTE Energy Company designations referenced throughout the UFSAR (e.g. DTE Electric, Edison, Detroit Edison, DECo, etc.) are synonymous. DTE Electric submitted an application for renewal of the operating license for an additional 20 years on April 24, 2014 by letter NRC-14-0028. The application documented the technical and environmental reviews performed to support extension of the license to March 20, 2045. The NRC performed an in-depth review, including audits, an inspection, and multiple requests for additional information. The NRC issued the final Safety Evaluation Report on the License Renewal of Fermi 2 on July 12, 2016. The Safety Evaluation Report was re-issued as NUREG-2210 in October 2016. NUREG-1437, Supplement 56, the Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of Nuclear Plants Regarding Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant, was published in September 2016. Appendix A of the License Renewal Application (LRA) included a supplement to be inserted into the UFSAR following approval of the renewed license. That appendix, including changes submitted in response to NRC requests for additional information, is added to the UFSAR as Appendix B. The appendix addresses the aging management programs that will be implemented per the commitments in the License Renewal Application, a summary of how time limited aging analyses were addressed, and a list of commitments made in the 1.1-2 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR LRA. Changes to Appendix B may be made per the process for UFSAR revisions under the auspices of 10 CFR 50.59. The renewed license was issued December 15, 2016. 1.1-3 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2 GENERAL PLANT DESCRIPTION 1.2.1 General Design Criteria The general architectural and engineering criteria for the design, construction, and operation of Fermi 2 are summarized in this subsection. For specific NRC General Design Criteria (GDC) conformance description, see Section 3.1. The discussion of the GDC that follows is divided into three sections. First, the overall requirements criteria are presented for the plant and for the nuclear safety systems and engineered safety features (ESFs). Then the GDC are presented in two ways. First, the criteria are considered in a classification-by-classification approach. Second, the criteria are considered in a system-by-system or system group approach. 1.2.1.1 Overall Requirements Criteria 1.2.1.1.1 Plant Criteria The plant is designed, fabricated, erected, and operated to generate electricity in a safe and reliable manner. Plant design conforms with applicable codes and regulations and complies with regulatory guides to the extent described in Appendix A. The plant is also designed, fabricated, erected, and operated in such a way that the release of radioactive materials to the environment is less than the limits of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50, pertaining to the release of radioactive materials, during normal operation and abnormal events. Components and structures are provided with appropriate safety factors and adequate strength and stiffness so that a hazardous release of radioactive material will not occur. Careful consideration is given to all known environmental conditions associated with maintenance, testing, and postulated accidents, including LOCAs, that could result in unplanned releases of radioactive material from the plant. Pollution control equipment and specific design provisions are incorporated in the plant for the specific purpose of protecting public health and safety from the release of radioactive material under both normal and abnormal conditions. 1.2.1.1.2 Nuclear Safety Systems and Engineered Safety Features Criteria Design margins for the nuclear safety systems and ESFs are conservative. Nuclear safety systems are designed to respond to abnormal operational transients to limit fuel damage so that, should the freed fission products be released to the environs via the normal discharge paths for radioactive material, the limits of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50 will not be exceeded. Nuclear safety systems and ESFs act to preclude damage to the nuclear system process barrier as a result of internal pressures caused by abnormal operational transients or accidents. 1.2-1 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR When positive and precise action is immediately required in response to accidents, such action is automatic, requiring no decision or manipulation of controls by plant operations personnel. The reactor core and reactivity control systems are designed so that the control rod action is capable of making the core subcritical and maintaining it so, even when the rod of highest worth is fully withdrawn and unavailable for reinsertion. Essential safety actions are carried out by equipment in sufficient redundance and independence so that a single failure of active components will not prevent the required actions. Provision has been made for control of active components of nuclear safety systems and ESFs from the main control room. Nuclear safety systems and ESFs are designed to permit demonstration of their compliance with functional performance requirements. Nuclear safety systems and ESFs are designed to maintain operability under all plant-related and site-related events (e.g., earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, fires, etc.). Features of the plant essential to the mitigation of accident consequences are designed for fabrication and erection to quality standards that reflect the importance of the safety function to be performed. A quality assurance program has been established and implemented. 1.2.1.2 Classification-by-Classification Approach In this approach, three classifications are considered: (1) power generation; (2) safety; and (3) plant radiation zones. The corresponding GDC are discussed below. 1.2.1.2.1 Power Generation Classification Criteria The GDC for the power generation classification are further subdivided into criteria for planned operations and for operational transients. 1.2.1.2.1.1 Planned Operations Power generation design criteria for planned operations are as follows:

a. Fuel cladding is designed to retain integrity as a radioactive material barrier throughout the design power range. The fuel cladding accommodates, without loss of integrity, the pressures generated by fission gases released from fuel material throughout the design life of the fuel

b. Heat removal systems are provided in sufficient capacity and operational adequacy to remove heat generated in the reactor core for the full range of normal operational conditions from plant shutdown to design power. The capacity of such systems is adequate to prevent fuel cladding damage

c. Control equipment is provided to allow the reactor to respond to small load changes

d. Reactor power level is manually controllable 1.2-2 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

e. Control of the nuclear system is possible from a single location

f. Nuclear system process controls, including alarms, are arranged to allow the operator to rapidly assess the condition of the nuclear system and to locate process system malfunctions

g. Fuel handling and storage facilities are designed to maintain adequate subcriticality, shielding, and cooling for spent fuel

h. Interlocks or other automatic equipment are provided as backup to procedural controls to avoid conditions requiring unnecessary functioning of nuclear safety systems or ESFs 1.2.1.2.1.2 Operational Transients Power generation design criteria for operational transients are as follows:

a. The fuel cladding, in conjunction with other plant systems, is designed to retain integrity throughout any abnormal operational transient

b. Heat removal systems are provided in sufficient capacity and operational adequacy to remove heat generated in the reactor core for any abnormal operational transient. The capacity of such systems is adequate to prevent fuel cladding damage

c. Control equipment is provided to allow the reactor to respond automatically to normal operational transients, such as major load changes, and to abnormal operational transients, including bringing the reactor to a hot-shutdown condition when appropriate

d. Backup heat removal systems are provided to remove decay heat generated in the core when the normal operational heat removal systems become inoperative. The capacity of such systems is adequate to prevent fuel cladding damage

e. Onsite standby electrical power sources are provided to allow removal of decay heat when normal offsite auxiliary power is not available.

1.2.1.2.2 Safety Classification Criteria The design criteria for the safety classification are further subdivided into criteria for planned operations, operational transients, and accidents. 1.2.1.2.2.1 Planned Operations Safety design criteria for planned operations are as follows:

a. The plant is designed, fabricated, erected, and operated in such a way that the normal release of radioactive materials to the environment is within the requirements of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50

b. The reactor core is designed so that its nuclear characteristics do not contribute to a divergent power transient 1.2-3 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

c. The nuclear system is designed such that there is no tendency for divergent oscillation of any operating characteristic, considering the interaction of the nuclear system with other appropriate plant systems

d. Gaseous, liquid, and solid waste disposal facilities are designed such that the discharge and offsite shipment of radioactive effluents are in accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations

e. The design provides a means by which plant operators are informed when limits on the release of radioactive material are approached

f. Sufficient indication is provided to allow determination that the reactor is operating within the range of conditions considered in the plant safety analysis

g. Radiation shielding and access control procedures are provided to allow a properly trained operating staff to control radiation doses within the limits of applicable regulations in any mode of normal plant operation

h. Procedures for fuel handling and design of fuel storage facilities prevent inadvertent criticality.

1.2.1.2.2.2 Operational Transients Safety design criteria for operational transients are as follows:

a. The plant is designed, fabricated, erected, and will be operated in such a way that the release of radioactive materials to the environment is within the requirements of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50

b. Those portions of the nuclear system that form part of the nuclear system process barrier are designed to retain integrity as a radioactive-material barrier following abnormal operational transients

c. Nuclear safety systems act to ensure that no damage to the nuclear system process barrier results from internal pressures caused by abnormal operational transients

d. When positive and precise action is immediately required in response to abnormal operational transients, such action is automatic, requiring no decision or manipulation of controls by plant operations personnel

e. Essential safety actions are carried out by equipment of sufficient redundancy and independence that a single failure of any active component cannot prevent the required actions

f. Provision is made for control of the active components of nuclear safety systems from the main control room

g. Nuclear safety systems are designed to demonstrate their functional performance requirements

h. Nuclear safety systems are designed to maintain their function under all plant-related and site-related events (e.g., earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, and fires) 1.2-4 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

i. Standby electrical power sources have sufficient capacity to power all nuclear safety systems requiring electrical power

j. Onsite standby electrical power sources are provided to allow prompt reactor shutdown and removal of decay heat under circumstances where normal offsite auxiliary power is not available.

1.2.1.2.2.3 Accidents Safety design criteria for accidents are as follows: Fermi 2 has reanalyzed the DBA-LOCA, the control rod drop accident, and the fuel handling accidents in accordance with the methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.183. The release of radioactive materials to the environment is evaluated per the criteria of 10 CFR 50.67 for these accidents only. All other existing accidents are evaluated per the criteria in 10 CFR 100.

a. The plant is designed, fabricated, erected, and will be operated in such a way that the release of radioactive materials to the environment is within the requirements of 10 CFR 100 or 10 CFR 50.67, as applicable

b. Those portions of the nuclear system that form part of the nuclear system process barrier are designed to retain integrity as a radioactive material barrier following accidents. For accidents in which one breach in the nuclear system process barrier is postulated, such a breach does not propagate additional failures in the nuclear system process barrier

c. The ESFs act to ensure that no damage to the nuclear system process barrier results from internal pressures caused by an accident

d. When positive, precise action is immediately required in response to accidents, such action is automatic, requiring no decision or manipulation of controls by plant operating personnel

e. Essential safety actions are carried out by equipment of sufficient redundance and independence that a single failure of any active component cannot prevent the required actions

f. Provision is made for control of active components of the ESFs from the main control room

g. The ESFs are designed to permit demonstration of their functional performance requirements

h. The ESFs are designed to maintain their function under all plant-related and site-related events (e.g., earthquakes, floods, tornadoes, fires, etc.)

i. Onsite standby electrical power sources have sufficient capacity to power the nuclear safety systems and ESFs requiring electrical power during accident conditions

j. Features of the plant essential to the mitigation of accident consequences are designed to be fabricated and erected to quality standards that reflect the importance of the safety actions to be performed 1.2-5 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

k. The primary containment is designed to retain integrity as a radioactive material barrier during and following accidents that release radioactive material into the primary containment volume

l. The primary containment is designed to permit integrity and leaktightness testing at periodic intervals

m. A secondary barrier (containment) is provided that completely encloses both the primary containment and the fuel storage areas. The secondary barrier design incorporates systems and equipment for controlling the rate of release of radioactive materials from the barrier, and further includes a capability for filtering radioactive materials within the barrier. In the event of a design-basis tornado, the secondary containment barrier above the refueling floor will be breached. See Section 3.3 for additional discussion regarding tornado design

n. The secondary barrier is designed to act as a radioactive material barrier under the same conditions that require the primary containment to act as a radioactive material barrier

o. The secondary barrier is designed to act as a radioactive material barrier, if required, when the primary containment is open for expected operational purposes

p. The primary containment and secondary containment barrier constitute pollution control facilities which, in conjunction with other ESFs, limit radiological effects of accidents resulting in the release of radioactive material to the containment volumes to within the 10 CFR 100 limits or 10 CFR 50.67 limits, as applicable

q. Provisions are made for removing energy from within the primary containment, as necessary, to maintain the integrity of the containment system following accidents that release energy to the primary containment so as to ensure continuing air pollution control functional capability

r. Piping that penetrates the primary containment structure, and which could serve as a path for the uncontrolled release of radioactive material to the environs, is automatically isolated whenever such uncontrolled radioactive material release is threatened. Such isolation is accomplished in time to limit radiological effects to within the 10 CFR l00 limits or 10 CFR 50.67 limits, as applicable

s. The ECCS is provided to limit fuel cladding temperature to 2200 F as a result of a LOCA

t. The ECCS provides for continuity of core cooling over the complete range of postulated break sizes in the nuclear system process barrier in order to minimize the release of radioactive material and to ensure the continuous functional capability of the containment facilities

u. The ECCS is diverse, reliable, and redundant

v. Operation of the ECCS is initiated automatically when required, regardless of the availability of offsite power supplies and the normal generating system of the plant 1.2-6 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

w. The main control room is shielded against radiation so that occupancy under accident conditions is possible

x. For a special event such as loss of habitability of the main control room, it is possible to bring the reactor from power range operation to a hot-shutdown condition, from outside the main control room, as well as to bring the reactor to a cold-shutdown condition from the hot-shutdown condition

y. For a special event, such as inability to shut down the reactor with control rods, backup reactor shutdown capability is provided, independent of normal reactivity control provisions. This backup system has the capability to shut down the reactor from any normal operating condition and to maintain the shutdown condition.

1.2.1.2.3 Plant Radiation Zone Classification Radiation zones are identified as a means of classifying the occupancy restrictions on various areas within the plant site boundary. The criteria for each zone are described in Section 12.1. 1.2.1.3 System-by-System Approach In this approach, the following systems are considered: (1) nuclear system; (2) power conversion systems; (3) electrical power systems; (4) radwaste systems; (5) auxiliary systems; (6) shielding and access control system; (7) nuclear safety and ESFs; and (8) process control systems. The design criteria are presented below for each one of these systems. 1.2.1.3.1 Nuclear System Criteria Design criteria for the nuclear system are given below, divided in three groups: mechanical, thermal, and nuclear. 1.2.1.3.1.1 Mechanical The fuel cladding is designed to retain integrity as a radioactive-material barrier throughout the design power range. The fuel cladding is designed to accommodate, without loss of integrity, the pressures generated by the fission gases released from the fuel material throughout the design life of the fuel. The fuel cladding, in conjunction with other plant systems, is designed to retain integrity throughout any abnormal operational transient. Those portions of the nuclear system that form part of the nuclear system process barrier are designed to retain integrity as a radioactive material barrier following operational transients and accidents. For accidents in which one breach in the nuclear system process barrier is postulated, such a breach does not cause additional breaches in the nuclear system process barrier. 1.2-7 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.1.3.1.2 Thermal Heat removal systems are provided in sufficient capacity and operational adequacy to remove heat generated in the reactor core for the full range of normal operational conditions, from plant shutdown to design power, and for any abnormal operational transients. The capacity of such systems is adequate to prevent fuel cladding damage. Heat removal systems are provided to remove decay heat generated in the core under circumstances wherein the normal operational heat removal systems become inoperative. The capacity of such systems is adequate to prevent fuel cladding damage. Following loss of operation of the normal heat removal systems, the reactor can be automatically shut down fast enough to permit decay heat removal systems to become effective. 1.2.1.3.1.3 Nuclear The reactor core and the reactivity control system are designed such that the control rod action is capable of bringing the core subcritical, and maintaining it so, even when the rod of highest reactivity worth is fully withdrawn and unavailable for reinsertion. The reactor core is designed so that its nuclear characteristics do not contribute to a divergent power transient. The nuclear system is designed so that there is no tendency for divergent oscillation of any operating characteristic, considering the interaction of the nuclear system with other appropriate plant systems. 1.2.1.3.2 Power Conversion Systems Criteria The power conversion systems are designed to meet the following criteria:

a. Produce electrical power from the steam coming from the reactor, condense the steam into water, and return the water to the reactor as heated feedwater, with the major portion of its gases and particulate impurities removed

b. Ensure that any fission products or radioactivity associated with the steam and condensate during normal operation are safely contained inside the system, or are released under controlled conditions.

1.2.1.3.3 Electrical Power Systems Criteria The electrical power systems are designed to meet the following criteria:

a. Sufficient normal and standby auxiliary sources of electrical power are provided to attain prompt shutdown and continued maintenance of the plant in a safe condition under all credible circumstances

b. The power sources are adequate to accomplish all required ESF functions under postulated design-basis accident (DBA) conditions.

1.2.1.3.4 Radwaste Systems Criteria The radwaste systems are designed to meet the following criteria: 1.2-8 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

a. The radwaste systems are designed to limit release of radioactive materials from the plant during normal operation to within the requirements of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50

b. Gaseous, liquid, and solid waste disposal systems are designed so that discharge of effluents and offsite shipments are in accordance with applicable regulations, including 10 CFR 50, 10 CFR 71, and 49 CFR 171 through 49 CFR 179, as appropriate.

The design provides a means by which plant operations personnel can be informed whenever operational limits on the release of radioactive material are approached. 1.2.1.3.5 Auxiliary Systems Criteria Design criteria for each one of the auxiliary systems are presented below. The auxiliary systems considered are: (1) fuel handling and storage systems; (2) water systems; (3) process auxiliaries systems; (4) heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) systems; and (5) other auxiliary systems. 1.2.1.3.5.1 Fuel Handling and Storage Facilities Fuel handling and storage facilities are designed to prevent criticality and maintain adequate shielding and cooling for spent fuel. 1.2.1.3.5.2 Water Systems The condenser circulating water system is designed to condense the steam discharged from the low-pressure turbines into the condenser. The general service water (GSW) system is designed to remove heat from the reactor and turbine building closed cooling water (TBCCW) loops and selected equipment to maintain proper equipment temperatures during changing ambient conditions and plant operating modes. The turbine building closed cooling water system (TBCCWS) is designed to transfer heat from the auxiliary equipment housed in the turbine building to the GSW system to maintain proper equipment temperatures, considering variations in the service water temperatures and plant operating conditions. The reactor building closed cooling water system (RBCCWS) is designed to transfer heat from reactor auxiliary equipment to the GSW system to maintain proper equipment temperatures, considering variations in service water temperature and plant operating conditions. The emergency equipment cooling water system (EECWS) provides a backup to the RBCCWS to cool essential equipment by transferring heat to the ultimate heat sink through the emergency equipment service water system (EESWS). It is designed to maintain this function in the event of seismic disturbance, loss of offsite power, or other site- or plant-related events. The supplemental cooling chilled water system assists the RBCCW system in the RBCCW supplemental cooling mode of operation. RBCCW supplemental cooling is a loop within 1.2-9 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR RBCCW that provides water cooled by chilled water from SCCW to the EECW loops. The SCCW system and the RBCCW supplemental cooling loops are non-safety-related and are intended to operate during normal plant operation when GSW inlet temperatures are greater than 60°F (nominal). The demineralized water makeup system is designed to provide water of the required purity in quantities sufficient for plant needs. The potable water system is designed to provide drinking-quality water, according to state and local standards, in sufficient quantity for the use of plant personnel. The sanitary wastewater system is designed to dispose of nonradioactive plant sewage liquid waste in accordance with state and local regulations. The ultimate heat sink (residual heat removal [RHR] complex) is designed to provide cooling to the reactor system and essential auxiliaries under emergency conditions when the normal heat sinks are not available. The condensate storage facilities are designed to provide retention of condensate to meet the requirements of plant systems, particularly primary system makeup to the condenser and water supply for selected ECCS. The facilities are designed with due regard for radioactive contamination of the condensate. 1.2.1.3.5.3 Process Auxiliary Systems The compressed air system (instrument and service air) is designed to provide air of required quality at pressures and quantities sufficient to meet plant needs for various operating conditions. The process sampling system is designed to enable the plant personnel to determine the composition and properties of process fluids in a safe and efficient manner. The equipment and floor drain systems are designed to conduct drain fluids from general plant areas and equipment to the appropriate radwaste processing facilities. 1.2.1.3.5.4 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems The HVAC systems are designed to provide the required ambient environment for plant equipment, to provide a comfortable working environment for plant personnel, and to control airborne radioactivity. 1.2.1.3.5.5 Diesel Generator Auxiliaries The onsite standby power system (diesel generator) auxiliaries are designed to provide the services required by the diesel generators. Each diesel generator is provided with its own auxiliaries, independent of all other units. 1.2.1.3.5.6 Other Auxiliary Systems The fire protection system (FPS) is designed to adequately protect the plant from special hazards in accordance with national standards and insurance requirements. 1.2-10 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR The communications system is designed to provide contact between the main control room and various plant areas. Provisions are made for maintaining communications between essential areas in the event of loss of power. The lighting systems are designed to provide adequate illumination for work in all plant areas. Provisions are made for emergency lighting in essential areas in the event of loss of power. 1.2.1.3.6 Shielding and Access Control Systems Criteria The plant radiation shielding is designed to minimize the exposure of plant operating personnel and the general public to radiation due to the reactor, power conversion, auxiliary, and waste processing systems during normal operation, anticipated operational occurrences, postulated accident conditions, and maintenance. Radiation shielding is provided and access control patterns are established to limit radiation doses to the plant staff. The main control room and the technical support center are shielded against radiation so that occupancy is possible under accident conditions. 1.2.1.3.7 Nuclear Safety Systems and Engineered Safety Features Criteria Design criteria for the nuclear safety systems and ESFs, in the system-by-system approach; have already been listed in various other paragraphs. They are as follows:

a. Design margins for the nuclear safety systems and ESFs are conservative

b. Nuclear safety systems are designed to respond to abnormal operational transients to limit fuel damage so that, should the freed fission products be released to the environs via the normal discharge paths for radioactive material, the limits of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50 will not be exceeded

c. Nuclear safety systems and ESFs act to preclude damage to the nuclear system process barrier as a result of internal pressures caused by abnormal operational transients or accidents

d. When positive and precise action is immediately required in response to accidents, such action is automatic, requiring no decision or manipulation of controls by plant operating personnel

e. The reactor core and reactivity control systems are designed so that the control rod action is capable of making the core subcritical and maintaining it so, even when the rod of highest reactivity worth is fully withdrawn and unavailable for reinsertion

f. Essential safety actions are carried out by equipment in sufficient redundancy and independence so that a single failure of active components will not prevent the required actions

g. Provision has been made for control of active components of nuclear safety systems and ESFs from the main control room

h. Nuclear safety systems and ESFs are designed to permit demonstration of their compliance with functional performance requirements 1.2-11 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

i. Nuclear safety systems and ESFs are designed to maintain operability under all plant-related and site-related events (e.g., earthquakes, tornadoes, floods, fires)

j. Features of the plant essential to the mitigation of accident consequences are designed for fabrication and erection to quality standards that reflect the importance of the safety function to be performed. A quality assurance program has been established and implemented

k. Onsite standby electrical power sources are provided to allow prompt reactor shutdown and removal of decay heat under circumstances where normal offsite auxiliary power is not available

l. The plant is designed, fabricated, erected, and will be operated in such a way that under accident conditions the release of radioactive materials to the environment is within the requirements of 10 CFR l00 or 10 CFR 50.67 as applicable

m. Those portions of the nuclear system that form part of the nuclear system process barrier are designed to retain integrity as a radioactive material barrier following accidents. For accidents in which one breach in the nuclear system process barrier is postulated, such a breach does not propagate additional failures in the nuclear system process barrier

n. Onsite standby electrical power sources have sufficient capacity to power the nuclear safety systems and ESFs requiring electrical power during accident conditions

o. The primary containment is designed to retain integrity as a radioactive material barrier during and following accidents that release radioactive material into the primary containment volume

p. The primary containment is designed to permit integrity and leaktightness testing at periodic intervals

q. A secondary barrier (containment) is provided that completely encloses both the primary containment and the fuel storage areas. The secondary barrier design includes a method for controlling the rate of release of radioactive materials from the barrier, and further includes a capability for filtering radioactive materials within the barrier. In the event of a design-basis tornado, the secondary containment barrier above the refueling floor will be breached.

See Section 3.3 for additional discussion regarding tornado design

r. The secondary barrier is designed to act as a radioactive material barrier under the same conditions that require the primary containment to act as a radioactive material barrier

s. For a special event such as loss of habitability of the main control room, it is possible to bring the reactor from power range operation to a hot-shutdown condition from outside the main control room, as well as to bring the reactor to a cold-shutdown condition from the hot- shutdown condition

t. For a special event, such as inability to shut down the reactor with control rods, backup reactor shutdown capability is provided, independent of normal 1.2-12 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR reactivity control provisions. This backup system has the capability to shut down the reactor from any normal operating condition and to maintain the shutdown condition. 1.2.1.3.8 Process Control Systems Criteria Design criteria for the various process control systems are listed below. The systems under consideration are as follows: (l) nuclear systems; (2) power conversion systems; and (3) electrical power systems. 1.2.1.3.8.1 Nuclear System Process Control Design criteria for nuclear system process control are as follows:

a. Control equipment is provided to allow the reactor to respond to load changes

b. It is possible to control the reactor power level manually

c. Control of the nuclear system is possible from a single location

d. Nuclear system process controls and alarms are arranged to allow the operator to assess the condition of the nuclear system rapidly and locate process system malfunctions

e. Interlocks, or other automatic equipment, are provided as a backup to plant procedural controls to avoid conditions requiring the actuation of nuclear safety systems or ESFs.

1.2.1.3.8.2 Power Conversion Systems Process Control Design criteria for power conversion systems process control are as follows:

a. Control equipment is provided to control the reactor pressure throughout its operating range

b. The turbine is able to respond automatically to minor changes in load

c. Control equipment in the feedwater system maintains the water level in the reactor pressure vessel (RPV) at the optimum level required by steam separators

d. Control of the power conversion equipment is possible from one location

e. Interlocks or other automatic equipment are provided, in addition to procedural controls, to avoid conditions requiring unnecessary actuation of nuclear safety systems or ESFs.

1.2.1.3.8.3 Electrical Power System Process Control Design criteria for electrical power system process control are as follows:

a. The electrical power system is designed as a split bus system, with either system being adequate to safely shut down the unit 1.2-13 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

b. Protective relaying is used to detect and isolate faulted equipment from the system with a minimum of disturbance in the event of equipment failure

c. Undervoltage relays are used on the emergency equipment buses to isolate them from the normal electrical system in the event of loss of offsite power, and to initiate starting the onsite standby power system diesel generators

d. The standby emergency power diesel generators are started by automatically initiated control relays. The generators are also loaded by a programmed control system to meet the existing emergency conditions

e. All 4160-V and 480-V electrically operated breakers are controllable from the main control room

f. Metering for essential generators, transformers, and circuits is monitored in the main control room.

1.2.2 Plant Description Fermi 2 contains a GE BWR nuclear steam supply system (NSSS) that delivers at rated flow approximately 14,864,000 lb/hr of 991-psia steam to the turbine generator and auxiliary equipment, which produces (at rated steam flow) 1217 MWe of gross electrical output at the generator terminals. The main condenser circulating water is cooled by two wet-type, natural-draft, hyperbolic cooling towers. The plant is equipped with auxiliary systems for control of radioactive contamination, nuclear safety assurance, and operation of the NSSS and turbine generator. The plant is located southwest of Detroit, Michigan and is intended to supply electrical power to the Edison service area. 1.2.2.1 Location and Size of Site The Fermi 2 site is located on the shore of the western end of Lake Erie, at Lagoona Beach in Frenchtown Township, Monroe County, Michigan. The site is approximately 6 miles northeast of Monroe, Michigan, 30 miles southwest of downtown Detroit, Michigan, and 25 miles northeast of Toledo, Ohio. Reactor centerline coordinates are latitude 41 57'48"N., and longitude 83 15'31"W. The site consists of approximately 1260 acres. On the same site is Fermi 1, originally a fast breeder reactor, and later also a conventional oil-fired power plant. Both are decommissioned. Also on the site are four oil-fired combustion turbine peaking units rated at 62.4-MWe total capacity. In addition, there is the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation for dry storage of Fermi 2 spent fuel. Figures 1.2-1, 1.2-2, and 1.2-3 show the relationship of the site to the surrounding areas. Figure 1.2-4 shows the site boundary and general site location of Fermi 1 and Fermi 2. Figure 1.2-5 is the Fermi site plan. Transportation facilities are readily available. Interstate Highways 75 and 275 are approximately 5 miles west of the site. More immediate access to the site is available from the Dixie Highway, which runs north and south approximately 2 miles west of the site. From the Dixie Highway, Enrico Fermi Drive (a paved private access road) enters the site on the western boundary where it serves as the main entrance. Rail service to the site is furnished by a spur line from the main line which is 4 miles west of the site. 1.2-14 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.2 Description of Plant Environs 1.2.2.2.1 General The site is bounded on the north by Swan Creek, on the east by Lake Erie, on the south by Pointe Aux Peaux Road, and on the west by Toll Road. Entrance to the site is from the west by way of Enrico Fermi Drive, a private road owned by Edison, and from the south via Pointe Aux Peaux Road to Quarry Lake Road, also owned by Edison. The northern and southern areas of the site are dominated by large lagoons. The western areas are dominated by several woodlots and a series of quarry lakes. Site elevation ranges from approximately 25 ft above the lake level on the western edge of the site to lake level on the eastern edge. 1.2.2.2.2 Population The area within a 10-mile radius of the site has an estimated total population of 86,214 (1980 data). The only substantially populated community within this radius is the city of Monroe, Michigan, approximately 6 miles southwest, whose 1980 population was 22,995. Downtown Detroit, Michigan, is located approximately 30 miles northeast of the Fermi site. Downtown Toledo, Ohio, is located about 25 miles southwest. 1.2.2.2.3 Land Use Approximately 70 percent of Monroe County, in which the plant is located, is farmland. Most of the industrial activity in the county is concentrated in the city of Monroe. Within a 50-mile radius of the site are all, or portions of, eight counties in Michigan, nine counties in Ohio, and two counties in Ontario, Canada. A large number and variety of manufacturing industries are found in this area. However, according to 1974 data, more than 50 percent of the land within the 50-mile radius is farmland, except for the area in the six counties located around metropolitan Detroit and Toledo. 1.2.2.3 Design Bases Dependent On the Site Environs 1.2.2.3.1 Offgas System A rooftop plant vent is provided for the discharge of gaseous effluent to the atmosphere. Gaseous releases will be in compliance with 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50. 1.2.2.3.2 Liquid Waste Effluents Liquid waste will be released so that concentrations at the point of discharge will be in compliance with 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50. 1.2.2.3.3 Wind Loading Design The primary containment, reactor systems, and structures that contain equipment necessary for safe shutdown are designed with a wind load consideration for a sustained high wind (90 1.2-15 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR mph) and a transient condition imposed by a postulated tornado (300-mph rotation, 60-mph translation, 3-psi external pressure drop at 1 psi/sec). 1.2.2.3.4 Seismic Design The design of Category I structures is for a maximum horizontal ground acceleration of 0.15g. The maximum vertical ground acceleration is considered to occur simultaneously, and is equal to 0.67 times the horizontal ground acceleration. The combined stresses resulting from functional loadings and a safe-shutdown earthquake (SSE) having a horizontal ground acceleration of 0.15g will be such that a safe shutdown can be achieved. 1.2.2.3.5 Flooding A comprehensive study has established a maximum stillwater elevation of 586.9 ft (New York Mean Tide, 1935) for the plant site, based on the probable maximum meteorological event (PMME). The site grade is 583.0 ft (New York Mean Tide, 1935) along the periphery of the power block (reactor/auxiliary building, RHR complex, turbine house, radwaste building, service building, etc.). From this reference elevation, the site has been graded for proper drainage. Fermi 2 Category I structures and components are conservatively flood protected (waterproofed) to an elevation of 588 ft. The shoreline of that portion of the site occupied by the plant is protected from erosion resulting from wave action through the use of a specially constructed shore barrier. 1.2.2.3.6 Loss of Normal Heat Sink The natural-draft cooling towers provide the normal heat sink for the once-through-type main unit condenser and auxiliary systems. Should this heat sink be lost, the reactor can be safely shut down and maintained using the mechanical-draft cooling towers and the RHR reservoir as a heat sink. 1.2.2.3.7 Environmental Radiation Monitoring Program An environmental monitoring program has been under way at the Fermi site since 1958 when Fermi 1 was being constructed. The present program, which has been specific for Fermi 2 since 1978, is referenced in UFSAR Section 11.6. 1.2.2.4 General Arrangement of Structures and Equipment The principal structures located on the plant site are the following:

a. The reactor building, which houses the drywell, the suppression pool, the NSSS, the ESFs, some auxiliary systems equipment, and the fuel storage and shipping area

b. The turbine building, which houses the power conversion equipment, the offgas system, and the plant auxiliaries 1.2-16 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

c. The auxiliary building, which houses the main control room, the computer facility, electrical equipment, and HVAC equipment

d. The radwaste building, which houses the radioactive waste treatment facilities for liquid and solid waste

e. The switchyard

f. The condensate storage tanks and fuel-oil storage tanks

g. The RHR complex, which houses the emergency diesel generators (EDGs), the RHR cooling towers, the RHR service water (RHRSW) reservoir, and the RHRSW, EESWS, and EDG service water pumps

h. Two natural-draft hyperbolic circulating water cooling towers, and corresponding intake conduits, intake structures, and discharge structures

i. The GSW house, and corresponding intake conduits, intake structures, and discharge structures

j. The circulating water pump house, and corresponding intake conduits, intake structures, and discharge structures

k. A reservoir pond

l. The auxiliary boiler house

m. The meteorological towers

n. The office service building and annex

o. The Fermi 1 plant complex

p. The nuclear operations center

q. Technical assistance center

r. Availability improvement center.

s. Hydrogen/Oxygen supply facility for hydrogen water chemistry

t. Nuclear training center

u. The Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) Equipment Storage Building

v. The Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) Pad

w. ISFSI Fabrication Pad

x. ISFSI Transfer Pad

y. ISFSI Cask Transfer Facility

z. FLEX Storage Facility #1 aa. FLEX Storage Facility #2 The arrangement of these structures on the plant site is shown in Figure 1.2-5. Figures 1.2-6 through 1.2-31 show the equipment arrangement in the principal buildings.

1.2-17 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.5 Nuclear System (Chapter 4) The nuclear system includes a single-cycle, forced-circulation GE BWR that produces steam for direct use in the steam turbine. A heat balance showing the major parameters of the nuclear system for the rated power conditions is shown in Figure 1.2-32. 1.2.2.5.1 Reactor Core and Control Rods (Section 4.5) Fuel for the reactor core consists of enriched uranium dioxide (UO2) pellets sealed in Zircaloy-2 tubes. These tubes (or fuel rods) are assembled into individual fuel assemblies. Gross control of the core reactivity is achieved by cruciform-shaped, movable, bottom-entry control rods dispersed throughout the lattice of fuel assemblies. These rods are controlled by individual hydraulic systems. Each fuel assembly has several fuel rods with gadolinia (Gd2O3) mixed in solid solution with the UO2. Gadolinia is a burnable poison that diminishes the reactivity of the fresh fuel and is depleted as the fuel reaches the end of its first cycle. A conservative limit of plastic strain is used for the design criterion for fuel rod cladding failure. The peak linear heat generation for steady-state operation is well below the damage limit, even late in life. Experience has shown that the control rods are not susceptible to distortion and have an average life expectancy many times greater than the residence time of a fuel loading. 1.2.2.5.2 Reactor Pressure Vessel and Internals (Section 4.5) The RPV contains the following:

a. Core and supporting structures

b. Steam separators and dryers

c. Jet pumps

d. Control rod guide tubes

e. Distribution lines for the feedwater, core sprays, and standby liquid control

f. In-core instrumentation

g. Other components.

The main connections to the RPV include the steam lines, the coolant recirculation lines, feedwater lines, control rod drive (CRD) housings, and ECCS lines. The RPV is designed and fabricated in accordance with applicable codes for a pressure of 1250 psig. The nominal rated operating pressure in the steam space above the separators is 1045 psia. The RPV is fabricated of carbon steel and is clad internally (except for the top head) with stainless steel. The reactor core is cooled by demineralized water that enters the lower portion of the core and boils as it flows upward around the fuel rods. The steam leaving the core is dried by steam separators and dryers located in the upper portion of the RPV. The steam is then directed to the turbine through four 24-in.-diameter main steam lines. Each steam line is 1.2-18 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR provided with three isolation valves in series, one inside the primary containment, and two outside the primary containment. 1.2.2.5.3 Reactor Recirculation System (Subsection 5.5.1) The reactor recirculation system pumps reactor coolant through the core to remove energy generated in the fuel. This is accomplished by two recirculation loops external to the RPV but inside the primary containment. Each external loop has one motor-driven recirculation pump. Recirculation pump speed can be varied to allow control of reactor power level through the effects of coolant flow rate on moderator void content. The internal portion of the loop consists of the jet pumps, which contain no moving parts, but have high-velocity nozzles to provide a continuous internal circulation path for the core coolant flow. The jet pumps are located in the annular region between the core shroud and the vessel inner wall, and any recirculation line break would still allow core flooding to approximately two-thirds of the core height: the level of the top of the jet pumps. 1.2.2.5.4 Residual Heat Removal System (Subsection 5.5.7) The RHR system consists of pumps, heat exchangers, and piping that fulfill the following functions:

a. Remove decay heat during and after plant shutdown

b. Remove heat from the primary containment following a LOCA.

1.2.2.5.5 Reactor Water Cleanup System (Subsection 5.5.8) The reactor water cleanup (RWCU) system recirculates a portion of reactor coolant through a filter-demineralizer to remove particulate and dissolved impurities from the reactor coolant. It also removes excess coolant from the reactor system under controlled conditions. 1.2.2.6 Power Conversion System (Chapter 10) The megawatt output of the generator is a function of the reactor steam power input to the turbine. Turbine control is achieved by an integrated speed and pressure control system. After the turbine has been brought to the synchronous speed of the power grid system and the generator breakers are closed to lock the machine into the system, the turbine is on pressure control. The turbine acts as a pressure-control device, maintaining the reactor pressure at its particular pressure setpoint level by varying control and/or bypass valve opening. The steam admitted to the turbine is controlled by a pressure regulator that senses the pressure just before the turbine inlet, thus controlling RPV pressure. Figure 1.2-33 shows the turbine-generator heat balance at rated flow. Feedwater into the reactor is governed by a three-element control system that senses water level, main stream flow rate, and feedwater flow rate. Each of the signals combines in a three-element controller to control the speed of the two turbine-driven reactor feed pumps, thereby regulating feedwater requirements. 1.2-19 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.7 Electrical Power Systems (Chapter 8) Power output from the unit is from a nominally rated 1350-MVA turbine generator. Generator output voltage is 22 kV. It is stepped up to 345 kV through two parallel main power transformers, then fed to the 345-kV switchyard and then to the system grid. Offsite power available for the plant auxiliary system is from both the 345-kV switchyard, just west of the plant, and the 120-kV switchyard located at Fermi 1. Normal auxiliary power is provided from two system service transformers. One transformer is connected to the Fermi 2 345-kV switchyard, which is arranged in a nominal double breaker-double bus design. The remaining system service transformer is energized from the 120-kV switchyard through the 120/13.2-kV transformer 1 with an alternate through 120/13.8/13.8-kV transformer CTG II at the Fermi 1 site. Onsite standby emergency power is provided from a four-diesel split-bus arrangement that is located in the RHR complex Category I structure near the reactor building. The diesel generators are sized to adequately carry the load necessary to shut down the reactor during a LOCA coincident with a complete loss of offsite power. Battery power is available for loads through two sets of 260/130-V dc Category I station batteries. The batteries furnish power to redundant essential loads. A highly reliable source of 48/24-V dc power is available for neutron monitoring and certain other instrumentation. In addition, a balance-of-plant (BOP) 260/130-V dc battery provides dc power for BOP loads. The batteries are sized to provide adequate power to those loads for a period of not less than 4 hr without battery charger availability. The chargers are full sized and capable of handling the load requirements, while still providing the required float charge for the battery. 1.2.2.8 Radwaste Systems (Chapter 11) The radioactive waste disposal systems and the radiation monitoring systems (RMS) are designed so that liquid, solid, and gaseous effluents are considerably below those specified in 10 CFR 20. 1.2.2.9 Nuclear Safety Systems and Engineered Safety Features 1.2.2.9.1 Reactor Protection System (Section 7.2) The reactor protection system (RPS) initiates a rapid, automatic shutdown (scram) of the reactor. It acts in time to prevent fuel cladding damage and any nuclear system process barrier damage following operational transients. The RPS overrides all operator actions and process controls and is based on a fail-safe design philosophy that allows appropriate protective action even if a single failure occurs. 1.2.2.9.2 Neutron Monitoring System (Subsection 7.6.l) Those portions of the neutron monitoring system (NMS) that provide high neutron flux signals to the RPS qualify as a nuclear safety system. The intermediate range monitors (IRMs) and average power range monitors (APRMs), which monitor neutron flux via in-core 1.2-20 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR detectors, signal the RPS to scram in time to prevent fuel cladding damage as a result of overpower transients. 1.2.2.9.3 Control Rod Drive System (Subsection 4.5.2) When a scram is initiated by the RPS, the CRD system inserts the negative reactivity necessary to shut down the reactor. Each rod is individually controlled by a hydraulic control unit (HCU). When a scram signal is received, high-pressure water, stored in an accumulator in the HCU, forces its control rod into the core. 1.2.2.9.4 Nuclear System Pressure Relief System (Subsection 5.2.2) A pressure relief system, consisting of safety/relief valves mounted on the main steam lines, prevents excessive pressure inside the nuclear system following either abnormal operational transients or accidents. 1.2.2.9.5 Reactor Core Isolation Cooling System (Subsection 5.5.6) The reactor core isolation cooling (RCIC) system provides makeup water to the RPV when the vessel is isolated. The RCIC system uses a steam-driven turbine pump unit and operates automatically, with sufficient coolant flow in time to maintain adequate water levels in the RPV. 1.2.2.9.6 Primary Containment (Section 6.2) The primary containment (Mark I containment) is a steel plate pressure vessel consisting of a light bulb-shaped drywell and a torus-shaped pressure suppression chamber. The primary containment is designed in accordance with the 1968 ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code, Class B Vessel, including the 1969 summer addenda. The basic objective of the primary containment is to provide the capability, in the event of a postulated LOCA, of limiting the release of fission products within the values specified in 10 CFR 50.67 or 10 CFR 100. 1.2.2.9.7 Primary Containment and Reactor Isolation System (Subsection 6.2.4) The containment isolation system consists of the isolation valves and controls required for the timely isolation of the containment in the event of incidents when the free release of containment contents cannot be permitted. The reactor isolation system consists of the isolation valves and controls required for the timely isolation of the RPV in the event of incidents when the fuel must be prevented from failing. 1.2.2.9.8 Secondary Containment (Section 6.2) The reactor building, in conjunction with the reactor building heating and ventilation system and the standby gas treatment system (SGTS), constitutes the secondary containment. The primary purpose of the secondary containment is to minimize the ground-level release of airborne radioactive materials and provide means for a controlled release of the building atmosphere. 1.2-21 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR The reactor building is a cast-in-place reinforced-concrete structure enclosing the primary containment. The superstructure of the reactor building is composed of structural steel and steel siding. 1.2.2.9.9 Main Steam Line Isolation Valves (Subsection 5.5.5) All pipelines that penetrate the primary containment, offering a potential release path for radioactive material, are provided with redundant isolation capabilities. The main steam lines, because of their large size and large mass flow rates, are given special isolation consideration. The automatic isolation valves in each main steam line, immediately inside and outside the primary containment, are powered by both pneumatic pressure and spring force. These valves fulfill the following objectives:

a. Prevent excessive damage to the fuel barrier by limiting the loss of reactor coolant from the RPV as a result of (1) a major leak in the steam piping outside the primary containment, or (2) a malfunction of the pressure control system causing excessive steam flow from the RPV

b. Limit the release of radioactive materials by closing the nuclear system process barrier in the event of a gross release of radioactive materials from the fuel to the reactor cooling water and steam

c. Limit the release of radioactive materials by closing the primary containment barrier in the event of a major leak from the nuclear system inside the primary containment.

A third, motor-operated, main steam isolation valve (MSIV) is provided in each main steam line to limit postulated leakage. See Subsection 6.2.6. 1.2.2.9.10 Main Steam Line Flow Restrictors (Subsection 5.5.4) A venturi-type flow restrictor is installed in each steam line. These devices limit the loss of coolant from the RPV before the MSIVs are closed, in case of a main steam line break outside the primary containment. 1.2.2.9.11 Emergency Core Cooling System (Section 6.3) A number of functions of the ECCS are provided to limit fuel cladding temperatures to minimize the release of radioactive material and to ensure the continued functional capability of the containment facility if a breach in the nuclear system process barrier results in a loss of reactor coolant. The four functions of the ECCS are presented in the following paragraphs. 1.2.2.9.11.1 High Pressure Coolant Injection System The high pressure coolant injection (HPCI) system provides and maintains an adequate coolant inventory inside the RPV. This limits fuel cladding temperature, which may result from postulated small breaks in the nuclear system process barrier. A high-pressure system is needed for small breaks because the RPV depressurizes slowly, preventing low-pressure systems from injecting coolant. Also, the HPCI system reduces RPV pressure rapidly, permitting operation of the low-pressure systems. The HPCI system includes a turbine-1.2-22 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR driven pump powered by reactor steam. The system is designed to accomplish its function on a short-term basis, without reliance on plant auxiliary power supplies other than the dc power supply. 1.2.2.9.11.2 Automatic Depressurization System The automatic depressurization system (ADS) rapidly reduces RPV pressure in a LOCA situation in which the HPCI system fails to maintain the RPV water level. The depressurization provided by the system enables the low-pressure ECCS to deliver cooling water to the RPV. The ADS uses some of the relief valves that are part of the nuclear system pressure relief system. The automatic relief valves are arranged to open on conditions indicating that a break in the nuclear system process barrier has occurred, and that the HPCI system is not delivering sufficient cooling water to the RPV to maintain the water level above a preselected value. The ADS will not be activated unless either the core spray or low pressure coolant injection (LPCI) system pumps are operating. This ensures that adequate cooling will be available so that boiling will not occur at the reduced pressure. 1.2.2.9.11.3 Core Spray System The core spray system consists of two independent pump loops that deliver cooling water to independent spray spargers over the core. The system is actuated by conditions indicating that a breach exists in the nuclear system process barrier. Water is delivered to the core after RPV pressure is reduced. This system provides the capability of cooling the fuel by spraying water onto the core. Either of the core spray loops is capable of limiting fuel cladding temperature to less than 2200°F following a LOCA. 1.2.2.9.11.4 Residual Heat Removal - Low Pressure Coolant Injection Mode The LPCI is an operating mode of the RHR system, but is discussed here because the LPCI mode acts as an ESF in conjunction with the other functions of the ECCS. The LPCI system uses the pump loops of the RHR system to inject cooling water at low pressure into an undamaged reactor recirculation loop. The LPCI is actuated by conditions indicating a breach in the nuclear system process barrier. Water is delivered to the core after RPV pressure is reduced. The LPCI operation, together with the core shroud and jet pump arrangement, provides the capability of core reflooding, following a LOCA, in time to prevent fuel cladding temperature from exceeding 2200°F. 1.2.2.9.12 Residual Heat Removal System - Containment Cooling Mode (Section 6.3) The containment cooling subsystem is placed in operation to limit the temperature of the water in the suppression pool following a design-basis LOCA. In the containment cooling mode of operation, the RHR pumps take suction from the suppression pool and pump the water through the RHR system heat exchangers. Cooling takes place by transferring heat to the RHRSW system. The primary coolant is then discharged back to the suppression pool. Another portion of the RHR system sprays water into the primary containment as an augmented means of removing energy from the containment following a LOCA. This 1.2-23 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR capability is in excess of the required emergency heat removal capability and can be placed in service at the discretion of the operator. 1.2.2.9.13 Control Rod Velocity Limiter (Subsection 4.5.2.1) A control rod velocity limiter is attached to each control rod to limit the velocity at which it can fall out of the core should it become detached from its CRD. This action limits the rate of reactivity insertion resulting from a control rod drop accident. The limiters contain no moving parts. 1.2.2.9.14 Control Rod Drive Housing Supports (Subsection 4.5.3) The CRD housing supports are located underneath the RPV near the control rod housings. The supports limit the travel of a control rod should a control rod housing become ruptured. The supports prevent a nuclear excursion as a result of a housing failure and thus protect the fuel barrier. 1.2.2.9.15 Standby Gas Treatment System (Subsection 6.2.3) The SGTS consists of two identical 100 percent equipment and filter trains for the plant. On detection of radioactivity or conditions that could lead to a release of radioactivity, the SGTS functions to minimize the release-related offsite dose rates by permitting the venting and purging of both the primary and secondary containment atmospheres under accident or abnormal conditions, and at the same time containing any airborne particulate or halogen contamination that might be present. Either train may be considered as an installed spare, with the other train being capable of passing the required amount of air. Either train alone is capable of exchanging the total reactor building air volume once in a 24-hr period. Each equipment train contains an electric heater, a prefilter, a high-efficiency particulate filter (water and fire resistant), an iodine filter (fire resistant), a fan, and associated instrumentation. The primary containment can be purged through the SGTS. 1.2.2.9.16 Onsite AC Power Supply (Subsection 8.3.1) The onsite ac power supply provides sufficient power to those devices necessary to produce a safe shutdown with subsequent reactor decay heat removal should normal offsite power not be available. Power is derived from four EDGs housed in a Category I structure (RHR complex) located near the reactor building. The EDGs are installed in division pairs. Either division pair is capable of completely maintaining itself and the safety loads it supplies for 7 days. The entire standby power supply system is independent of offsite power. 1.2.2.9.17 DC Power Supply (Subsection 8.3.2) The dc power supply provides power to those safety devices receiving their motive and/or control power from the station battery systems. The batteries are redundant and each has a battery charger capable of providing the full load capacity and maintaining the float charge on the battery. 1.2-24 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.9.18 Ultimate Heat Sink (Residual Heat Removal Complex) Section 6.3 and Subsection 9.2.5) The RHR complex provides cooling for the RHR system, EESW, and EDGs. The RHR complex consists of mechanical-draft cooling towers, cooling water reservoirs, RHR, and emergency equipment cooling and EDG cooling service water pumps. The RHR complex also contains the EDGs. (See Figures 1.2-25 through 1.2-31.) 1.2.2.9.19 Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor System (Subsection 11.4.3.8.2.3) The main steam line radiation monitor system consists of four gamma radiation channels located external to the main steam lines just outside the primary containment. The monitors are designed to detect a gross release of fission products from the fuel. On detection of high radiation, the trip signals generated by the monitors are used to isolate the reactor water sample system, trip condenser mechanical vacuum pumps, and trip glad seal exhausters. 1.2.2.9.20 Fuel Pool Ventilation Exhaust Radiation Monitor System (Subsection 11.4.3.8.2.11) The fuel pool ventilation exhaust radiation monitor system consists of four radiation monitors arranged to monitor the activity level of the ventilation exhaust from the fuel pool area. On detection of high radiation, the SGTS is automatically started, the primary containment vent valves are closed, the reactor building vent system is isolated, the control center is isolated, and control center emergency recirculation is initiated. 1.2.2.9.21 Emergency Equipment Cooling Water System (Subsection 9.2.2) Equipment required for a safe shutdown of the reactor is cooled by the EECWS, which is cross connected to the RBCCWS for normal operation. The EECW is isolated and is cooled by the ultimate heat sink (RHR complex) for emergency operation. The EECWS is designed to Category I requirements. 1.2.2.9.22 Combustible Gas Control (Subsections 6.2.5 and 9.3.6) The NRC amended 10 CFR 50.44, Standards for combustible gas control system in light-water-cooled power reactors on October 16, 2003 to eliminate the requirements for hydrogen recombiners. The hydrogen recombiner Technical Specification requirements were subsequently removed by License Amendment 159, dated March 15, 2004. Regulatory Guide 1.7 was revised in March 2007 to reflect the amended 10 CFR 50.44. The Combustible Gas Control System (CGCS) has been retired in place with its electrical circuits de-energized and fluid process piping isolated from primary containment with redundant locked-closed isolation valves. Combustible gas control of the primary containment is provided by inerting the primary containment with nitrogen. 1.2.2.9.23 Instrumentation and Control Power Supply System Subsection 8.3.1) The purpose of the instrumentation and control power supply system is to provide a reliable source of 120-V ac regulated power where necessary, for analog instrumentation, solenoid 1.2-25 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR valves, and logic relaying for certain specific systems. These systems include: core spray, RHR, radwaste control, and NSSS process instrumentation. 1.2.2.9.24 Main Control Room Emergency Ventilation System (Section 6.4) A main control room emergency ventilation system is provided to protect the main control room operators against radiation, smoke, or any noxious chemical release. It consists of an emergency makeup (pressurizing) and a control center recirculation filter train with 100 percent redundant active components. 1.2.2.9.25 Engineered Safety Features Ventilation Cooling System (Subsection 6.2.l.2) All ESF equipment is provided with ventilation fans and/or cooling units to maintain design temperatures if the normal ventilation system is isolated. Redundant divisional ESF equipment is supplied with its own independent ventilation equipment powered by the corresponding division of the ESF bus. 1.2.2.10 Special Safety Systems 1.2.2.10.1 Standby Liquid Control System (Subsection 4.5.2.4) Although not intended to provide prompt reactor shutdown, like the control rods, the standby liquid control system (SLCS) provides a redundant, independent, and different way to bring the nuclear fission reaction to subcriticality and maintain subcriticality as the reactor cools. The system permits an orderly and safe shutdown in the event that control rods cannot be inserted into the reactor core in sufficient number to accomplish shutdown in the normal manner. The system is sized to counteract the positive reactivity effect in decreasing power from rated power to the cold-shutdown condition. The SLCS is also credited for injecting sodium pentaborate into the reactor coolant system after a design basis LOCA in order to control ECCS water pH to prevent iodine re-evolution. The SLCS can be manually initiated to provide this function. 1.2.2.10.2 Plant Equipment Outside the Main Control Room To Effect Reactor Shutdown (Section 7.5) Instrumentation and controls necessary to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix A, Criterion 19, have been provided on a remote shutdown panel located outside the main control room. Details of the instruments and controls provided on the shutdown panels and the procedures required for carrying out a safe and orderly shutdown are described fully in Subsection 7.5.1.5. Additionally, local shutdown panels are provided to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50, Appendix R. These panels are provided in the event a fire causes a loss of control from the main control room. Details on achieving reactor shutdown in this event are provided in Subsection 7.5.2.5. 1.2-26 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.11 Nuclear System Process Control and Instrumentation 1.2.2.11.1 Reactor Manual Control System (Subsection 7.7.1.1) The reactor manual control system (RMCS) provides the means by which control rods are positioned from the main control room for gross power control. The system operates valves in each HCU to change control rod position. Only one control rod can be manipulated at a time. The RMCS includes the logic that restricts control rod movement (rod block), under certain conditions, as a secondary control. 1.2.2.11.2 Recirculation Flow Control System (Subsection 7.7.1.2) The recirculation flow control system (RFCS) controls the speed of the reactor recirculation pumps. Adjusting the pump speed changes the coolant flow rate through the core, thereby changing the core power level. 1.2.2.11.3 Neutron Monitoring System (Subsection 7.6.1.13) The NMS is a system of in-core neutron detectors and out-of-core electronic monitoring equipment. The system provides indication of neutron flux, which can be correlated to thermal power level, for the entire range of flux conditions that can exist in the core. The source range monitors SRMs and the IRMs provide flux level indications during reactor startup and low power operation. The local power range monitors (LPRMs) and APRMs allow assessment of local and overall flux conditions during power range operation. Rod block monitors (RBMs) are provided to prevent rod withdrawal when reactor power should not be increased at the existing reactor coolant flow rate and also function to prevent local fuel damage. The flux mapping and calibration subsystem provides a means to calibrate individual monitors with traveling in-core probes. 1.2.2.11.4 Refueling Interlocks (Section 7.6.1.1 and Subsection 9.1.4) A system of interlocks that restricts movement of refueling equipment and control rods when the reactor is in the refueling mode prevents an inadvertent criticality during refueling operations. The interlocks back up procedural controls that have the same objective. The interlocks affect the refueling bridge, refueling bridge hoists, fuel grapple, and control rods. 1.2.2.11.5 Reactor Pressure Vessel Instrumentation (Section 5.6) In addition to instrumentation for the nuclear safety systems and ESFs, instrumentation is provided to monitor and transmit information that can be used to assess both the condition existing inside the RPV and the physical condition of the vessel itself. This instrumentation monitors RPV parameters such as pressure, water level, surface temperature, internal differential pressures, coolant flow rates, and top head flange leakage. 1.2.2.11.6 Integrated Plant Computer System (Subsection 7.6.1.9) The Integrated Plant Computer System (IPCS) includes the following process monitoring functions: 1.2-27 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR

a. Scan, Log and Alarm (SLA)

b. Man-Machine Interface (MMI)

c. Data Archival

d. Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS)

e. Balance of Plant (BOP)

f. Emergency Response

1. Safety Parameter Display System (SPDS)

2. Emergency Response Data System (ERDS)

g. Meteorological (MET)

h. Transient Recording and Analysis (TRA)

i. External System Interfaces 1.2.2.11.7 Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Leakage Detection System (Subsection 5.2.7)

The nuclear leak detection system consists of temperature, pressure, flow, and fission product sensors with associated instrumentation and alarms. This system detects and annunciates leakage in the following systems:

a. Main steam lines

b. Reactor water cleanup

c. Residual heat removal

d. Reactor core isolation cooling

e. High pressure coolant injection

f. Instrument lines.

Small leaks are generally detected by temperature and pressure changes, fillup rate of drain sumps, and fission product concentration inside the primary containment. Large leaks are also detected by changes in reactor water level and changes in process lines. 1.2.2.11.8 Emergency Core Cooling System Suction Piping Leakage Detection (Subsections 6.3.2.2.7and 7.6.1.8.12) The ECCS leak detection system (LDS) uses the sump level and torus water level monitors to identify any failed line in the reactor building subbasement area and, thereby, prevents a loss of ECCS pump suction head. 1.2.2.11.9 Primary Containment Monitor System (Subsections 6.2.1.5 and 7.6.1.12) The NRC amended 10 CFR 50.44, Standards for combustible gas control system in light-water-cooled power reactors on October 16, 2003 to eliminate the requirements for hydrogen recombiners. The hydrogen recombiner Technical Specification requirements were subsequently removed by License Amendment 159, dated March 15, 2004. Regulatory 1.2-28 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR Guide 1.7 was revised in March 2007 to reflect the amended 10 CFR 50.44. The Combustible Gas Control System (CGCS) has been retired in place with its electrical circuits de-energized and fluid process piping isolated from primary containment with redundant locked-closed isolation valves. The primary containment monitor system (PCMS) is an advisory system only, which consists of measurements of hydrogen and oxygen concentration, particulate and gaseous radiation level, pressure, temperature, and water level in the drywell and suppression chamber. Hydrogen and oxygen monitors provide an operator with necessary information for the effective control of the nitrogen inerting system. The radiation monitor supplies information necessary for effective control of the SGTS as a primary containment atmospheric cleanup system and is a part of a redundant leak detection system, operating in conjunction with the drywell floor drain sump level indicating system. Hydrogen and radiation monitors also yield vital information regarding personnel access to the primary containment. The remaining instruments supply information on the overall conditions of the atmosphere in the drywell and suppression chamber and on water level and temperature in the suppression chamber. 1.2.2.11.10 Rodworth Minimizer Computer (Subsection 7.6.1.20) The rodworth minimizer microcomputer system is a stand alone microcomputer-based system with an RWM operator display and a continuously operating self-test feature that enforces adherence to established startup, shutdown, and low power control rod procedures. The RWM prevents rod motion under low power conditions if the rod being moved is not moved in accordance with a preplanned pattern. The effect of the RWM is to limit the reactivity worth of the control rods by enforcing adherence to the preplanned rod pattern. 1.2.2.12 Power Conversion System Process Control and Instrumentation 1.2.2.12.1 Pressure Regulator and Turbine Generator Control (Subsection 10.4.4) The pressure regulator maintains control of the turbine control and bypass valves to allow proper generator and reactor response to system load demand changes while also maintaining the nuclear system pressure essentially constant. The turbine-generator speed-load controls act to maintain the turbine (generator frequency) at constant speed. 1.2.2.12.2 Feedwater Control System (Subsection 7.7.1.3) A three-element controller is used to regulate the feedwater system so that the proper water level is maintained in the RPV. The control system uses main steam flow rate, RPV water level, and feedwater flow rate signals. The feedwater control signals are used to control the two turbine-driven feedwater pumps. 1.2.2.12.3 Turbine Generator Overspeed Trip System (Subsection 10.2.2) The turbine generator overspeed trip system protects the turbine generator on overspeed. The system has overspeed trip mechanisms (four magnetic speed pickups and two overspeed trip 1.2-29 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR rings), which will shut down the turbine, closing all valves (turbine high-pressure stop valves, control valves, low-pressure intercept valves, and low-pressure stop valves), on detection of the overspeed condition. 1.2.2.13 Electrical Power System Control and Instrumentation (Chapter 8) The electrical power system is monitored by indicating and/or recording devices to account for the power generated at the plant, and to determine the auxiliary power usage required to achieve this level of generation. System requirements will govern the generator excitation level needed for the desired megavar output from the generator at the required terminal voltage. Wattmeters, ammeters, varmeters, etc., will be used to indicate electrical conditions. Selected inputs to the IPCS will record conditions for later comparison or record purposes. 1.2.2.14 Radiation Monitoring and Control (Chapters 11 and 12) 1.2.2.14.1 Process and Effluent Radiological Monitoring System (Section 11.4) Radiation monitors are provided on various lines to monitor for either radioactive materials, released to the environs via process liquids and gases, or process system malfunctions. Subsection 11.4.1 provides the complete listing of all radiation monitoring systems. 1.2.2.14.2 Area Radiation Monitoring (Subsection 12.1.4) The area radiation monitoring system (ARMS) provides indication in the relay room and recording and alarm in the main control room of abnormal radiation levels in plant work areas where radioactive material may be stored, handled, or inadvertently introduced. In addition, selected local areas have local alarm and/or indication, where necessary, to warn personnel of a substantial rapid increase in radiation levels. 1.2.2.14.3 Site Environs Radiation Monitoring (Section 11.6) The site environs radiation monitoring program includes the use of passive dosimeters for direct radiation measurement and the orderly collection of samples for laboratory analyses. These analyses include airborne, aquatic, and terrestrial radiological measurements. The program is designed to document: (1) background levels of direct radiation and concentrations of radionuclides that exist in aquatic and terrestrial ecosystems before and during plant operation; and (2) the concentrations of radionuclides that could be attributable to the operation of Fermi 2. 1.2.2.14.4 Liquid Radwaste Control (Section 11.2) The liquid radwaste system is designed to segregate, collect, and process waste generated throughout the plant. Processing of the waste is normally sufficient to allow recycling of the wastewater. Ties exist among all of the liquid radwaste subsystems to provide backup processing in the event of failure of one subsystem. 1.2-30 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.14.5 Solid Radwaste Control (Section 11.5) The solid radwaste system is designed to handle and package solid waste produced by the plant. The waste, depending on its radioactivity and type, will be packaged for offsite shipment in accordance with applicable regulations. 1.2.2.14.6 Gaseous Radwaste Control (Section 11.3) The gaseous radwaste system processes and controls the release of gaseous radioactive wastes to the site environs so that the total radiation exposure to persons outside the controlled area does not exceed the limits of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50. Continuous radiation monitors provide indications of radioactive release from the reactor by monitoring the offgas equipment trains. The offgas system radiation monitors are used to monitor and alarm on indication of high radioactivity. 1.2.2.15 Auxiliary Systems 1.2.2.15.1 New and Spent-Fuel Storage (Subsections 9.1.1 and 9.1.2) New fuel may be stored in a dry vault in the reactor building subject to the restrictions discussed in Section 9.1.1.2.1. Irradiated (spent) fuel is stored underwater in the reactor building in the spent fuel pool or in dry storage casks at the Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation. 1.2.2.15.2 Fuel Pool Cooling and Cleanup System (Subsection 9.1.3) A fuel pool cooling and cleanup system (FPCCS) removes decay heat from spent fuel stored in the fuel pool and maintains a specified water temperature, purity, clarity, and level. 1.2.2.15.3 Nitrogen Inerting System (Containment) (Subsection 9.3.6) The nitrogen inerting system is provided primarily to maintain a nitrogen atmosphere (inerted) inside the primary containment, and also to supply pressurized nitrogen for pneumatic service inside the primary containment and distribution throughout the plant. 1.2.2.15.4 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning Systems (Sections 6.4 and 9.4) The objective of the plant HVAC systems is to provide a thermal environment and air quality to ensure personnel comfort, health, and safety and efficient equipment operation and integrity. In addition, the HVAC system for the main control room and the RHR ventilation systems and the fan-coil cooling units located in the reactor/auxiliary building have the further objective to operate under postulated accident conditions. The HVAC systems provide individual air supply and exhaust systems as described in Section 9.4 for each system. Normally airflow will be routed from areas of lesser to areas of progressively greater potential contamination prior to being exhausted from the building. The ventilation arrangement will protect personnel and equipment from airborne contaminants and temperature extremes. The ventilation air exhaust from each ventilation system is located in such a manner as to minimize the possibility of the same air as was 1.2-31 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR exhausted being drawn into a fresh air intake. Exhaust of potentially radioactive gases will be monitored. If the radioactivity in the exhaust systems exceeds a predetermined level, the ventilation system is shut down and the system intake and exhaust dampers are closed. 1.2.2.15.5 Normal Auxiliary AC Power (Section 8.3) Normal auxiliary power is provided from two system service transformers. One transformer is connected to the Fermi 2 345-kV switchyard, which is arranged as a highly reliable double breaker-double bus design. The remaining system service transformer is energized from the 120-kV switchyard through the 120/13.2-kV transformer at the Fermi 1 site. 1.2.2.15.6 Reactor Building Closed Cooling Water System (Subsection 9.2.2) The RBCCWS is a closed-loop system that provides parallel flow cooling to auxiliary equipment in the drywell and the reactor building. The closed loop provides a barrier between contaminated systems and the GSW discharged to the circulating water reservoir. Heat is removed from the closed loop by the GSW system. 1.2.2.15.6.1 RBCCW Supplemental Cooling (Subsection 9.2.2) RBCCW is designed with two RBCCW supplemental cooling loops. These loops operate using separate pumps and heat exchangers using chilled water from the supplemental cooling chilled water system to cool the RBCCW supplied to the EECW loops during normal plant operation. RBCCW supplemental cooling operation is optional, intended for use when the GSW supply temperature exceeds approximately 60°F. 1.2.2.15.6.2 Supplemental Cooling Chilled Water (Subsection 9.2.9) The supplemental cooling chilled water (SCCW) system is a chilled water closed loop system designed to cool the water that is supplied to EECW by the RBCCW supplemental cooling loops. The SCCW system transfers the heat it has removed from the RBCCW via the supplemental RBCCW system to the GSW system via mechanical chillers. The chillers are designed to operate using GSW supply water at 60°F or greater. 1.2.2.15.7 Turbine Building Closed Cooling Water System (Subsection 9.2.7) The TBCCWS is designed to cool the auxiliary plant equipment associated with the power conversion systems over the full range of normal plant operation. 1.2.2.15.8 Water Systems 1.2.2.15.8.1 Circulating Water System (Subsection 10.4.5) The circulating water system is a closed-loop system designed to condense steam exhausting into the main condenser from the main turbine. The system consists of five circulating water pumps, two vertical natural-draft cooling towers, piping, and a cooling reservoir. The circulating water pumps are located in a circulating-water pump house adjacent to the reservoir. 1.2-32 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.15.8.2 General Service Water (Subsection 9.2.1) The GSW system is designed to cool various non-safety-related plant auxiliary systems such as the RBCCW and the TBCCW during all normal plant operating modes. The GSW system also provides the source of makeup water for the plant FPS and serves as a source of makeup water for the RHR complex. The once-through GSW discharges into the station's circulating water system where its heat load is rejected in the two natural-draft cooling towers. The GSW thus serves as cooling tower makeup. 1.2.2.15.9 Compressed Air Systems (Subsection 9.3.1) The service and instrument air systems provide a continuous supply of compressed air of suitable quality and pressure for instrument control and general plant use. The service air compressor and the instrument air compressors discharge into their respective air receivers. The air is then distributed throughout the plant. Instrument air is additionally filtered and dried prior to distribution throughout the plant. 1.2.2.15.10 Makeup Demineralized Water System(Subsection 9.2.3) Potable water is demineralized by the makeup demineralizer system and is stored in the demineralized water storage tank. 1.2.2.15.11 Potable Water System (Subsection 9.2.4) The potable water system provides the necessary supply of domestic water for the plant. The potable water is supplied by the Frenchtown Township Water Supply System to meet drinking water standards. 1.2.2.15.12 Plant Equipment and Floor Drainage(Subsection 9.3.3) The equipment and floor drainage system is designed to collect liquid waste throughout the plant and discharge the radioactive waste to the radwaste system for processing. Separate drainage facilities are provided for nonradioactive waste. The drainage system is also used to detect abnormal leakage in the ESF rooms. 1.2.2.15.13 Process Sampling Systems (Subsection 9.3.2) The process sampling system provides process information that is required to monitor plant conditions and equipment performance. Representative liquid and gas samples are taken automatically and/or manually during normal plant operation for laboratory or on-line analyses. 1.2.2.15.14 Plant Communication Systems (Subsection 9.5.2) Plant communications consist of a Hi-Comm system of loudspeakers and hand sets, two-way radio units on a unique wavelength, and main control room phones (hard-wired units) that use local phone jack connections at instrument panels and other selected areas. 1.2-33 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.15.15 Fire Protection System (Subsection 9.5.1 and Appendix 9A) The FPS is designed to provide an adequate supply of water, CO2, Halon, or chemicals to points throughout the plant area where fire protection may be required. Diversified fire alarm and fire suppression types are selected to suit the particular areas or hazards being protected. The water for the system is taken from Lake Erie, and constant pressure is provided by the FPS jockey pump. One electrically driven pump, one diesel-engine-driven pump, and the associated piping, valves, and hydrants are provided. Chemical fire-fighting systems (portable extinguishers) are also provided as additions to, or in lieu of, the water fire-fighting system and the CO2 and Halon flooding systems. The necessary instrumentation and controls are provided for the proper operation of the fire-fighting systems and for fire detection and annunciation. 1.2.2.15.16 Auxiliary Steam Boilers (Subsection 9.4.8) The two auxiliary steam boilers are designed to provide low pressure steam for plant heating and to the radwaste evaporators. The boilers and their associated auxiliary equipment are located in the auxiliary boiler house. The boilers may be operated from the main control room. Each boiler is designed to provide 50,000 lb/hr of l20-psia steam. Combined capacity of the two boilers will provide sufficient heating and radwaste evaporator steam during a shutdown for refueling. 1.2.2.15.17 Condensate Storage and Transfer System (Subsection 9.2.6) The condensate storage and transfer system (CSTS) is designed to store and distribute condensate and demineralized water throughout the plant during normal and shutdown plant conditions. The condensate storage and return tanks are arranged to permit gravity feed to the condensate supply pumps and to the HPCI, RCIC, CRD, standby feedwater (SBFW), and core spray systems. During normal station operation, hotwell level is raised as necessary by vacuum dragging water to the hotwell from the CST or CRT. When the plant is shutdown, or when a greater flow is required, the normal, or if necessary the emergency, hotwell supply pumps will start and stop automatically depending on hotwell level. The makeup demineralized storage tank feeds demineralized water transfer pumps, which supply water to the demineralized water service risers and the condensate storage tank. 1.2.2.15.18 Primary Containment Air Cooling and Handling System (Subsection 9.4.5) The drywell cooling system's primary function is to maintain the temperature of the drywell atmosphere within design conditions. The system uses air-to-water cooling coils with water being supplied by the RBCCW system during normal operating conditions and by the EECW system during abnormal conditions. However, high drywell pressure will automatically close the EECW supply line outboard containment isolation valves. 1.2-34 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.2.2.16 Shielding (Section 12.1) Shielding is designed so that the dose to personnel manning the main control room and the technical support center during the course of a postulated LOCA is less than 5 rem to the whole body, or its equivalent to any part of the body. For those Design Basis Accidents that are reanalyzed in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.183, the shielding is shown to limit dose to the Control Room and TSC personnel to less than 5 rem TEDE. In addition, the shielding ensures that, during normal operation and plant shutdown for refueling and maintenance, the dose to personnel and the dose at the site boundary will be as low as reasonably achievable (ALARA) and within the limits specified in 10 CFR 20. 1.2-35 REV 23 02/21

I MICHIGAN ONTARIO NEW YORK ILLINOIS INDIANA OHIO

                                                 ~       PENNSYLVANIA
                                                .'L                --

I I v-'" (~

         ~                                   ~)

0 INDIANAPOLIS -1 .../'*

                         ~CINCO-TO WEST

( VIRGINIA /' fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FiGURE 1.2-1 PLANT SITE LOCATION REV 22 04/19

5(9 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-3 IMMEDIATE SDTIE AREA REV 22 04/19

a::

   <I(

C . ( z 0 m SITE BOUNDARY Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-4 SITE BOUNDARY REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2102 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-5 SITE PLOT PLAN REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2080 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-6 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING SUBBAS.EMENT, REACTOR BUILDING, AND HIGH-PRESSURE COOLANT INJECTION ROOM ELEVATION 540.0 FT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2080 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-7 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING - BASEMENT REACTOR BUILDING ELEVATION 562.0 FT, TURBINE BUILDING ELEVATION 564.0 FT, AND RADWASTE BUILDING ELEVATION 557.5 FT REV 22 4/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2081 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-8 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWl1NG FIRST FLOOR, REACTOR BUILDING REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2081 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-9 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING FIRST FLOOR, TURBINE BUILDING FLOOR ELEVATION 583.5 FT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2082 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGUR.E 1,2-10 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING SECOND AND MEZZANINE LEVELS REACTOR AND TURBINE BUILDING REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2082 REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2082 Fermf2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-12 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING SECOND FLOOR, MEZZANINES RADWASTE BUILDING REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2083 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-13 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING THIRD FLOOR, REACTOR BUILDING FLOOR ELEVATION 643.5 FT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2083 Ferml2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-44 GENERALARRANGEMENT DRAWING THIRD FLOOR, TURBINE BUILDING REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2084 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-15 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING FOURTH FLOOR, REACTOR BUILDING FLOOR ELEVATION 659.5 FT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2084 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-16 GENERAL ARRANGEl'IAENT DRAWING FOURTH FLOOR, TURBINE BUILDING FLOOR ELEVATION659.5 IFT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2085 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-17 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING FIFTH FLOOR, REACTOR BUILDING ELEVATION &n .5 FT AND 684.5 FT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2085 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2*18 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING FIFTH FLOOR, TURBINE BUILDING ELEVATION 677.5 AND 684.5 FT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2086 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-19 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING ROOF PLANS, TURBINE BUILDING REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2042 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-20 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING TRANSVERSE SECTION REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2043 Ferrni 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-21 GENERJ\l ARFM.NGEMENT DRAWING LONGITUDINAL SECTION REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2035 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-22 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RADWASTE BUILDING, SECTION "A-A" REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2034 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-23 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RADWASTE BUILDING. SECTION "B-B 11 REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2034 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-24 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RADWASTE BUILDING SECTIONS "C--C AND D-D" REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing M-N-2026 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-25 GENERAL ,t\RRANGEMENT DRAWING RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX BASEMENT FLOOR ELEVATION 562.0 FT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing M-N-2027 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-26 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX, GRADE FLOOR PLAN REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing M-N-2028 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-27 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX UPPER FLOOR ROOF ELEVATION 617.0 FT REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing M-N-2029 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-28 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX ROOF PLAN REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing M-N-2030 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-29 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX SECTIONS "A-A" AND "B-B" REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing M-N-2031 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.2-30 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX SECTION "C-C" REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing M-N-2032 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT l FIGURE 1.2-31 GENERAL ARRANGEMENT DRAWING RESIDUA!.. HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX SECTION "0-D" j REV 22 04/19

REV 19 10/14 Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing C1C OUT REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.3 COMPARISON TABLES This section highlights the principal design features of Fermi 2, and provides a comparison of its major features with other BWR facilities for which license applications had been made under 10 CFR 50 at the time of submittal of the original Fermi 2 FSAR. The design of this facility was based on proven technology attained during the development, design, construction, and operation of BWRs of similar types. The data, performance characteristics, and other information presented herein are subject to revisions as the design of the referenced facilities evolves. However, the information presented is adequate for general comparison purposes and thus will not be subsequently revised. 1.3.1. Comparisons With Similar Facilities Designs The similar facilities used for comparison are: (l) Brunswick Steam Electric Plant Units 1 and 2; (2) Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant Units 1, 2, and 3; (3) Cooper Nuclear Station; and (4) Edwin I. Hatch Unit No. 1. Of these facilities, Browns Ferry 1, 2, and 3 received operating permits on June 26, 1973, June 28, 1974, and July 2, 1976, respectively. Cooper received an operating permit on January 18, 1974. Hatch received an operating permit on August 6, 1974. 1.3.2. Nuclear System Design Characteristics Table 1.3-1 summarizes the original design and operating characteristics of Fermi 2, as well as those of the similar facilities discussed in Subsection 1.3.1. 1.3.3. Power Conversion Systems Design Characteristics Table 1.3-2 compares the original power conversion systems design characteristics of Fermi 2 with those of the similar facilities discussed in Subsection 1.3.1. 1.3-1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-1 NUCLEAR PLANTS PRINCIPAL PLANT DESIGN FEATURES COMPARISONa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Site Location Monroe County, Brunswick County, Limestone County, Nemaha County, Appling County, Michigan N. Carolina Alabama Nebraska Georgia Size of site, acres 1120 1200 840 1090 2100 Site ownership Edison CP&L U.S. Government CPPD GPC Plant ownership Edison CP&L TVA CPPD GPC Number of units on site 1 2 3 1 1 Plant-reactor warranted conditions Net electrical output, 1093 821/unit 1075/unit 770 786 MWe Gross electrical output, 1154 847/unit 1098/unit 801 813 MWe Turbine heat rate, (proprietary) 9816 10,231 10,142 10,218 Btu/kWh Gross plant heat rate, 10,296 net 10,120 10,243 10,187 10,227 Btu/kWh Feedwater temperature, °F 420 420 376.1 367 387.4 Reactor pressure vessel Inside diameter, in. 251 218 251 218 218 Overall length inside, ft- 72-0 69-4 72-0 69-4 69-4 in. Design pressure, psig 1250 1250 1250 1250 1250 Wall thickness, in. 6-7/16 5-17/32 6-5/16 5-17/32 5-17/32 (including clad) Reactor coolant recirculation loops Location of recirculation Primary Primary Primary containment Primary Primary containment loops containment containment system drywell containment system drywell structure system drywell system drywell structure system drywell structure structure structure Number of recirculation 2 2 2 2 2 loops Pipe size, in. 28 28 28 28 28 Pump capacity (each), 45,200 45,200 45,000 45,200 45,200 gpm Number of jet pumps 20 20 20 20 20 Location of jet pumps Inside reactor Inside reactor Inside reactor Inside reactor Inside reactor primary vessel primary vessel primary vessel primary vessel primary vessel Reactor Page 1 of 8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-1 NUCLEAR PLANTS PRINCIPAL PLANT DESIGN FEATURES COMPARISONa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Reactor warranted conditions Thermal output, MWt 3292 2436 3293 2381 2436 Reactor operating 1005 1005 1005 1005 1005 pressure, psig (steam dome) Total reactor core flow 100.0 x 106 77 x 106 102.5 x 106 73.5 x 106 78.5 x 106 rate, lbs/hr Main steam flow rate, 14.156 x 106 10.47 x 106 13.36 x 106 9.551 x 106 10.03 x 106 lb/hr (warranted) Reactor core description Lattice 8x8 7x7 7x7 7x7 7x7 Pitch of movable control 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 rods, in. Number of fuel 764 560 764 548 560 assemblies Number of movable 185 137 185 137 137 control rods Effective active fuel 150 144 144 146 144 length, in Equivalent reactor core diameter, in. 187.1 160.2 187.1 158.5 160.2 Circumscribed reactor core diameter, in. 198 169.7 197.8 169.7 169.7 Total weight UO2, lb 348,904 272,850 372,373 267,095 272,850 Reactor fuel description Fuel material UO2 UO2 UO2 UO2 UO2 Fuel density, percent of 95 95 95 95 95 theoretical Fuel pellet diameter, in. 0.410 0.487 0.487 0.487 0.487 Fuel rod cladding Zircaloy-2 Zircaloy-2 Zircaloy-2 Zircaloy-2 Zircaloy-2 material Fuel rod cladding 0.032 0.037 0.032/0.037 0.032/0.037 0.037 thickness, in. Fuel rod cladding Freestanding Freestanding loaded Freestanding loaded Freestanding Freestanding loaded process loaded tubes tubes tubes loaded tubes tubes Fuel rod outside diameter, in. 0.483 0.563 0.563 0.563 0.563 Length of gas plenum, 10.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 16.0 in. Page 2 of 8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-1 NUCLEAR PLANTS PRINCIPAL PLANT DESIGN FEATURES COMPARISONa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Fuel rod pitch, in. 0.640 0.738 0.738 0.738 0.738 Fuel assembly channel Zircaloy-4 Zircaloy-4 Zircaloy-4 Zircaloy-4 Zircaloy-4 material Reactor control Control rods Number 185 137 185 137 137 Shape Cruciform Cruciform Cruciform Cruciform Cruciform Material B4C granules B4C granules B4C granules B4C granules B4C granules compacted in SS compacted in SS compacted in SS compacted in SS compacted in SS tubes tubes tubes tubes tubes Pitch, in. 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Poison length, in. 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 143.0 Blade span, in. 9.75 9.75 9.75 9.75 9.75 Number of control 76 76 76 76 76 material tubes for rod Tube dimensions, in. 0.188 O.D. x 0.188 O.D. x 0.188 O.D. x 0.188 O.D. x 0.188 O.D. x 0.025-wall 0.025-wall 0.025-wall 0.025-wall 0.025-wall Stroke, in. 144.0 144.0 144.0 144.0 144.0 Thermal-hydraulic data Heat transfer area per 97.998 86.513 86.513 86.513 86.513 assembly, ft2 Reactor core heat 74,871 48,447 66,096 47,409 48,447 transfer area, ft2 Maximum heat fluxb 361,590 428,400 428,400 428,400 428,400 Btu/hr ft2 Average heat fluxb 143,700 164,700 163,310 164,470 164,700 Btu/hr ft2 Maximum power per 13.4 18.5 18.5 18.5 18.5 fuel rod unit lengthb, kW/ft Average power per fuel 5.3 7.10 7.04 7.09 7.10 rod unit lengthb, kW/ft Maximum fuel 3435 4380 4380 4380 4380 temperature, °F Total heat generated in 96 96 96 96 96 fuel Core average exit 14.1 13.5 12.9 12.9 12.7 quality Power distribution - peaking factors (peak/average) Page 3 of 8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-1 NUCLEAR PLANTS PRINCIPAL PLANT DESIGN FEATURES COMPARISONa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Axial 1.40 1.50 1.50 1.50 1.50 Radial assembly 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 1.40 Local (within assembly) 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 1.24 Total peaking factor 2.43 2.6 2.6 2.6 2.6 Nuclear design data Average discharge 16,204 19,000 19,000 19,000 19,000 exposure - 1st core, Mwd/ST Moderator to fuel 2.74 2.41 2.45 2.41 2.41 volume ratio at total core H2O/UO2 cold In-core neutron instrumentation Number of in-core 172 124 172 124 124 neutron detectors (LPRM)c Number of in-core 43 31 43 31 31 detector strings (LPRM)c Number of detectors per 4 4 4 4 4 string Number of traversing in-core probe detectors 5 4 5 4 4 Range (and number) of detectors Source range monitor Source to Source to Source to Source to Source to 10-3% power (4) 10-3% power (4) 10-3% power (4) 10-3% power (4) 10-3% power (4) Intermediate range 10-4% to 10% 10-4% to 10% 10-4% to 10% 10-4% to 10% 10-4% to 10% monitor power (8) power (8) power (8) power (8) power (8) Local power range 2.5% to 125% 2.5% to 125% 2.5% to 125% 2.5% to 125% 2.5% to 125% monitor power (172) power (124) power (172) power (124) power (124) Average power range 2.5% to 125% 2.5% to 125% 2.5% to 125% 2.5% to 125% 2.5% to 125% monitor power (6)d power (6)d power (6)d power (6)d power (6)d Number and type of in- 7-Sb-Be 5-Sb-Be 7-Sb-Be 5-Sb-Be 5-Sb-Be core neutron sources Reactivity control Approximate effective reactivity of core with all control rods in (cold) ~0.975k 0.96k 0.96k 0.96k 0.96k Page 4 of 8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-1 NUCLEAR PLANTS PRINCIPAL PLANT DESIGN FEATURES COMPARISONa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Effective reactivity of <0.99k <0.99k <0.99k <0.99k <0.99k core with strongest control rod out (cold) Typical moderator temperature coefficient (k/kºF)e Cold (at 68°F) -5.0 x 10-5 -5.0 x 10-5 -5.0 x 10-5 -5.0 x 10-5 -5.0 x 10-5 Hot (no voids) -39.0 x 10-5 -39.0 x 10-5 -39.0 x 10-5 -39.0 x 10-5 -39.0 x 10-5 Typical moderator void coefficient (k/k% void)

                            -1.0 x 10-3       -1.0 x 10-3         -1.0 x 10-3          -1.0 x 10-3       -1.0 x 10-3 Hot (no voids)

At rated output -1.6 x 10-3 -1.6 x 10-3 -1.6 x 10-3 -1.6 x 10-3 -1.6 x 10-3 Typical fuel temperature (Doppler) coefficient (k/k°F)e Cold (at 68°F) -1.3 x 10-5 -1.3 x 10-5 -1.3 x 10-5 -1.3 x 10-5 -1.3 x 10-5 Hot (no voids) -1.2 x 10-5 -1.2 x 10-5 -1.2 x 10-5 -1.2 x 10-5 -1.2 x 10-5 At rated output -1.3 x 10-5 -1.3 x 10-5 -1.3 x 10-5 -1.3 x 10-5 -1.3 x 10-5 Containment systems Primary containment Type Pressure Pressure Pressure suppression Pressure Pressure suppression suppression suppression suppression Construction Drywell Light bulb/ steel Light bulb/ Light bulb/ steel Light bulb/ steel Light bulb/ steel vessel vessel reinforced concrete vessel vessel with steel liner Pressure Torus/steel Torus/reinforced Torus/steel vessel Torus/steel Torus/steel vessel suppression vessel concrete with steel vessel chamber liner Pressure suppression +56 +62 +56 +56 +56 chamber-internal design pressure, psig Pressure suppression +2 +2 +1 +2 +2 chamber-external design pressure, psig Drywell-internal design +56 +62 +56 +56 +56 pressure, psi Drywell-external +2 +2 +1 +2 +2 design pressure, psig Drywell free 163,730 164,100 159,000 145,430 146,240 volume, ft3 Page 5 of 8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-1 NUCLEAR PLANTS PRINCIPAL PLANT DESIGN FEATURES COMPARISONa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Pressure 127,760 (min) 124,000 119,000 109,810 110,950 suppression chamber free volume, ft3 Pressure 121,080 (min) 87,600 85,000 87,660 87,660 suppression pool water volume, ft3 Submergence of vent 4-0 4-0 4-0 4-0 3-8 pipe below pressure pool surface, ft-in Design temperature of 340 300 281 281 281 drywell, °F Design temperature of 281 220 281 281 281 pressure suppression chamber, °F Downcomer vent 6.21 6.21 6.21 6.21 6.21 pressure loss factor Break area/gross vent 0.019 0.02 0.019 0.019 0.019 area Drywell free 1.25 1.32 1.33 1.4 1.3 volume/pressure suppression chamber free volume Calculated maximum 56.5 49.4 40.0 46.0 46.5 drywell pressure after blowdown with no pre-purge, psig Leakage rate, percent 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.2 free volume per day Secondary containment Type Controlled Controlled leakage, Controlled leakage, Controlled Controlled leakage, leakage, rooftop elevated release elevated release leakage, elevated elevated release release release Construction Lower levels Reinforced Reinforced concrete Reinforced concrete Reinforced Reinforced concrete concrete concrete Upper levels Steel super- Steel super- Steel super- structure Steel super- Steel super- structure structure and structure and siding and siding structure and and siding siding siding Roof Metal decking Metal decking with Steel sheeting Steel sheeting Steel sheeting with built-up built-up roofing roofing Internal design pressure, 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 psig Page 6 of 8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-1 NUCLEAR PLANTS PRINCIPAL PLANT DESIGN FEATURES COMPARISONa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Design in leakage rate, 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 percent free volume/day at 0.25 in. H20 Elevated release point Type Rooftop Stack Stack Stack Stack Construction Steel Reinforced concrete Steel Steel Reinforced concrete Height (above ground), 54.1 100.0 200.0 100.0 150.0 meters Plant auxiliary systems Emergency core cooling systems Reactor core spray 2 loops 2 loops 2 loops 2 loops 2 loops cooling system High pressure coolant 1 pump 1 pump 1 pump 1 pump 1 pump injection system Auto-relief system 1 1 1 1 1 Residual heat removal system Low pressure 4 pumps 4 pumps 4 pumps 4 pumps 4 pumps coolant injection subsystem Primary 2 redundant 2 redundant loops 2 redundant loops 2 redundant 2 redundant loops containment loops loops spray/cooling subsystem Reactor shutdown 1 1 1 1 1 cooling subsystem Reactor auxiliary systems Spent fuel pool cooling 1 1 1 1 1 and demineralizing system Reactor cleanup 1 1 1 1 1 demineralizer system Reactor core isolation 1 1 1 1 1 cooling system Plant electrical power systems Transmission system Outgoing lines 2-345 kV 8-230 kV 4-500 kV 4-345 kV 5-230 kV (number-rating) Auxiliary power systems Page 7 of 8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-1 NUCLEAR PLANTS PRINCIPAL PLANT DESIGN FEATURES COMPARISONa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Incoming lines 3-120 kV 8-230 kV 2-161 kV 1-69 kV 5-230 kV (number-rating) 4-345 kV 1-115 kV Onsite Sources Auxiliary 2 2 3 1 1 transformers Startup transformers 0 2 2 2 2 Shutdown 0 0 0 1 1 transformers Emergency diesel generator system Number of diesel 4 4 4 4 3 generators a Original design information provided for comparison purposes only. Not intended to be updated. For current Fermi 2 information, refer to main body of UFSAR. b Items are shown at design limits rather than design points. c Local power range monitor. d Represents six channels. e Beginning of core life. Page 8 of 8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.3-2 COMPARISON OF POWER CONVERSION SYSTEMS DESIGN CHARACTERISTICSa Brunswick Browns Ferry Edwin I. Hatch Fermi 2 Units 1 & 2 Units 1, 2, & 3 Cooper Unit 1 Turbine generator Rated generator output, 1154 849 1152 836 819 MWe Tandem compound Tandem compound Tandem compound Tandem compound Tandem compound 6-flow/46 4-flow/43 6-flow/43 2-flow/44 2-flow/43 1 high 3 low 1 high 2 low 1 high 3 low 1 high 2 low 1 high 2 low pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure pressure Steam conditions at throttle valve Flow, lb/hr 14.156 x 106 10.46 x 106 13.38 x 106 9.81 x 106 10.03 x 106 Pressure, psia 965 965 965 970 970 Temperature, °F 540.3 540.3 540.3 540.9 540.9 Moisture content, 0.41 0.41 0.28 0.32 0.32 percent Turbine cylinder arrangement Steam reheat stages, no. 1 2 0 0 1 Feedwater heating 6 5 5 5 5 stages, no. Strings of feedwater 2/3 2 2 2 2 heaters, no. Heaters in condenser 2 2 2 2 2 necks, no. Heater drain system Pumped forward Pumped forward Pressure differential Pumped forward Pressure differential Condensate pumps, no. 3 3 3 3 3 Heater feed pumps, no. 3 3 3 3 3 Header drain pumps, no 3 2 0 3 0 Reactor feed pumps, no. 2 2 3 2 2 Main Steam Lines Steam lines, no. 4 4 4 4 4 Design pressure, psig 1250 1146 1146 1146 1146 Design Temperature, °F 575 563 563 563 563 Pipe Diameter, in. 24 24 26 24 24 Pipe material Carbon steel Carbon steel Carbon steel Carbon steel Carbon steel Main steam line bypass 25 25 (unit 1) 25 25 25 capacity, percent 105 (unit 2) Final feedwater 420 420 376.1 367 387.4 temperature, °F Condenser Type Single pressure Single pressure Single pressure Single pressure Single pressure Condenser shells, no. 2 2 3 2 2 Design pressure, 1.5 1.5 2.0 2.0 3.37 in. Hg abs Total condenser duty, 7.547 x 109 5.6 x 109 7.77 x 109 5.6 x 109 5.8 x 109 Btu/hr Circulating water system Type Closed/ND cooling Open Open Open Closed/ND cooling towers (2) Towers (2) Flow, gpm 9 x 105 6.24 x 105 6.3 x 105 5.55 x 105 Circulating water 5 4 3 4 3 pumps, no. a Original design information provided for comparison purposes only. Not intended to be updated. For current Fermi 2 information, refer to main body of UFSAR. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.4 IDENTIFICATION OF AGENTS AND CONTRACTORS 1.4.1 The Detroit Edison Company The Detroit Edison Company changed its name to DTE Electric Company as of January 1, 2013. The name change to DTE Electric Company was purely administrative in nature; the legal entity remained the same and the name change did not involve a transfer of control or of an interest in the license for Fermi 2. DTE Electric Company continues to be a wholly owned subsidiary of DTE Energy Company. For the purposes of the Fermi 2 UFSAR, except for UFSAR sections of historical context, all DTE Energy Company designations referenced throughout the UFSAR (e.g. DTE Electric, Edison, Detroit Edison, DECo, etc.) are synonymous. Edison is the sole owner of Fermi 2 and, as such, is responsible for the design, construction, and operation of the facility. Edison is the architect-engineer for Fermi 2. Edison employed an engineering, design, and construction supervision staff. Many of the key engineering personnel had had previous nuclear experience, primarily on the design, construction, and operation of fast breeder reactor Fermi 1, and, subsequently, in the design and construction of Fermi 2. Edison has extensive power plant design and development experience, having acted as architect-engineer on the majority of its own power generating facilities. To ensure competence in all areas of Fermi 2 design and construction, Edison retained various principal agents and contractors. 1.4.2 Sargent & Lundy Sargent & Lundy (S&L) was retained for the civil, structural, and architectural design of the reactor building and other areas of the plant where that firm's experience was especially appropriate. These include preparation of the specifications for the primary containment vessel, certain electrical design tools, and piping system analyses. By a separate contract, S&L was responsible for the design of the residual heat removal (RHR) complex. Sargent & Lundy had specialized in consulting and design engineering for the generation, transmission, and distribution of electric power for three-quarters of a century. They had provided engineering services for l5 percent of the nation's investor-owned electric generating capacity. More than 650 turbine generator units with a total capacity of more than 70,000 MWe had been put in operation or were on order; of this total more than 21,800 MWe was nuclear generating capacity, the majority of which was of the water reactor type. Sargent & Lundy had been actively engaged in the nuclear power plant field since its inception. 1.4.3 Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation Stone & Webster Michigan, Incorporated (S&W), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Stone & Webster, Incorporated, was retained and assigned responsibility for completion of certain engineering and design tasks commencing in January 1978. Some of the major tasks included design of the plant security system, high density fuel racks, pipe hanger design assistance, nonnuclear steam supply, integrated leak-rate testing, and review of seismic requirements. Stone 1.4-1 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR & Webster also provided assistance in the general areas of licensing requirements, advisory operations, and various electrical, mechanical, and instrument and control activities. Stone & Webster is an engineering and construction firm serving the electric utility industry in the design and construction of all types of power stations. Stone & Webster had provided engineering services related to generating capacity in excess of 70,000,000 kW. Stone & Webster had been actively engaged in engineering and construction of nuclear power plants since 1954. Over 26,000,000 kW of generating capacity had been associated with S&W's nuclear engineering services. 1.4.4 General Electric Company General Electric (GE) was contracted to design, fabricate, and deliver the single-cycle boiling water nuclear steam supply system (NSSS), fabricate the first core of nuclear fuel, and provide technical direction for installation and startup of this equipment. General Electric had been engaged in the development, design, construction, and operation of BWRs since l955. Thus, GE had substantial experience, knowledge, and capability to design, manufacture, and furnish technical advice for the installation and startup of the reactor. GE was later contracted to design, fabricate and deliver a replacement for the LP Turbine Steam Path installed during RF05 and the HP Turbine System Path installed during RF07. 1.4.5 General Electric Company Turbine-Generator, Ltd. General Electric Company (GEC) Turbine-Generator, Ltd. of Rugby, England, was responsible for the design, fabrication, and delivery of the turbine generator as well as for providing technical assistance for installation and startup of this equipment. General Electric Company Turbine-Generator, Ltd. had had a long history of fabrication and application of turbine generators in electrical power production facilities. The LP Turbine Steam Path was replaced during RF05 with GE designed components. The major components replaced were the rotors, diaphragms, associated seals and steam flow guides, including the internal exhaust hood spray piping and nozzles. The HP Turbine Steam Path was replaced during RF07 with GE designed components. The major components replaced were the rotor, diaphragms, associated seals, and coupling spacers. An inlet snout was added to provide the steam flow path into the first stage diaphragm nozzles. 1.4.6 Other Consultants 1.4.6.1 Dames & Moore The independent consulting firm of Dames & Moore (D&M) was retained to do hydrology, geology, and seismology studies for Fermi 2. Having performed environmental studies for approximately 50 nuclear power plant sites, D&M was active in the field of environmental engineering related to nuclear power plant construction. 1.4.6.2 NUS Corporation NUS Corporation was retained to provide software for startup and operation of Fermi 2, and to prepare the environmental report and other environmental and licensing consulting services. 1.4-2 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR Software for Fermi 2 included administrative documents to govern startup, system descriptions, and preoperational test procedures. NUS was also responsible for preparation of the plant operating manual. NUS also provided environmental consulting services in the areas of aquatic ecology, land and water use, thermal and chemical effects, alternatives, radiological effects, and miscellaneous licensing consulting services as required. NUS had provided consulting services throughout the world for a wide range of utilities, industries, and governmental organization. 1.4.6.3 Ralph M. Parsons Company Ralph M. Parsons Company of Michigan (Parsons) was engaged as the general contractor for Fermi 2 with responsibility for overall construction management of the entire facility, and with direct contractual responsibility for field fabrication of small diameter piping, and installation of the plant piping systems and mechanical equipment. Parsons was terminated as general contractor in November 1974. Under a separate contract, Ralph M. Parsons of Los Angeles was engaged to help establish the initial Quality Assurance (QA) and Quality Control (QC) Organization at the site to work in conjunction with Edison to provide work surveillance, inspection, and documentation services which ensure conformance to the codes and standards applicable to nuclear construction and the design specifications. In addition, Ralph M. Parsons of Los Angeles provided support in seismic and pipe structure analyses and specific engineering assignments. Parsons was one of the world's largest architectural, engineering, and construction firms. Its world headquarters were located in Los Angeles, California, with principal offices in several foreign countries. The company had demonstrated its total engineering and construction capability in a variety of foreign and domestic industrial, technical, and scientific projects completed for the petroleum refining, metallurgical processing, power generation, aerospace, chemical processing, shipbuilding, commercial transportation, and nuclear industries. Projects included engineering and construction of rapid transit facilities, transportation systems, water and sewage treatment, desalination plant, petroleum and petrochemical plants, gas processing facilities, marine and port complex, automated shipyard, airports and air terminals, mining and metallurgical facilities, environmental process development, fast breeder nuclear reactor installation, nuclear power plant installation, and many others. 1.4.6.4 Daniel Construction Company Daniel Construction Company was retained and assigned responsibility for site construction management commencing in November 1974. It maintained that responsibility throughout construction until systems and structures nearing completion were transferred to Edison. Commencing in January 1984, Daniel assisted the Fermi 2 Project Management Organization as needed and was responsible for the day-to-day management of Wismer & Becker, API, and Chicago Bridge and Iron Company. Daniel Construction Company, a division of Daniel International Corporation, of Greenville, S.C., had a wide variety of engineering and construction assignments being completed in many parts of the world. A recent survey of the nation's 400 largest contractors rates Daniel fourth in contract awards, twelfth in international contract awards, and thirty-second in design awards. 1.4-3 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR Daniel had acquired extensive construction and project management experience in major industrial complexes for the chemical, paper, rubber, textile, aluminum, and power generation industries. These construction services involved the ability to meet precise tolerances and specifications on erection, fabrication, and equipment installation, and required a thorough knowledge of heavy construction, mechanical, electrical, and instrumentation techniques and methods. This experience and the developed capabilities were applicable to the construction of nuclear power facilities. The Daniel Construction Company Quality Assurance Program for ASME nuclear code construction was evaluated and accepted by an ASME survey team, and the certificate of authorization to perform code construction ("N" stamp) was awarded Daniel following the ASME team audit of field implementation and enforcement. Daniel's experience included construction of nuclear and fossil fueled power plants. Daniel's first project of this nature was construction of the nuclear power Carolina-Virginia Tube Reactor at Parr, South Carolina. This facility operated several years as a prototype plant. Nuclear power plant construction projects included the following:

a. Joseph M. Farley Nuclear Plant, Unit No. 1 and Unit No. 2, 829-MW PWR each, for Alabama Power Company

b. Virgil Summer Nuclear Power Plant, a 920-MW nuclear power generating plant of the Westinghouse pressurized-water type, for South Carolina Electric and Gas Company

c. Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant for Carolina Power & Light Company.

1.4.6.5 EG&G, Inc. EG&G was engaged to provide site meteorological programs. EG&G has performed a variety of marine, meteorological, biological, hydrological, and climatological analyses, instrumentation selection and application, and a full range of services including field installation, maintenance, data gathering and processing, diffusion modeling, and report preparation for many clients. 1.4.6.6 Bechtel Power Corporation Bechtel Power Corporation was the general services contractor for the Fermi 2 power plant. Bechtel provided engineering, construction, maintenance, startup assistance, and plant operational support services as mutually agreed to by Edison and Bechtel. The work was performed on Quality Assurance Level 1 or non-quality-related systems within the plant. The governing quality assurance program, either Edison's or Bechtel's, was adhered to depending on the kind and nature of the work for which the services are rendered. Bechtel had demonstrated its ability in successfully performing construction management, engineering, and other functions in accordance with quality assurance programs under the jurisdiction of the NRC over past years. As such, Bechtel was deemed fully qualified to perform any safety-related work that may be assigned to it by Edison. 1.4.6.7 L. K. Comstock L. K. Comstock was responsible for furnishing labor, tools, equipment, and materials as required to complete the electrical installation at Fermi 2. Comstock's work included electrical 1.4-4 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR installation at Fermi 2. Comstock's work also included receiving, storing, installing, connecting, and readying for service all electrical equipment as well as providing electrical QA/QC services and design engineering services. Comstock had extensive experience in the nuclear power field and understood the QA requirements. It had provided construction services on the BWR units at Dresden and Quad Cities and had completed the electrical erection contracts at the Kewaunee, Prairie Island, Cook, and FitzPatrick nuclear projects. 1.4.6.8 Commonwealth Associates, Inc., of Gilbert Commonwealth Commonwealth Associates, Inc., of Gilbert Commonwealth, was retained in 1981 to provide technical personnel to assist during the construction of Fermi 2 in the Field Engineering, Startup, Nuclear Production, and Quality Assurance Departments. The personnel provided by Commonwealth had the expertise, gained from work at other utilities, required during Fermi 2 construction and the startup operations. 1.4.6.9 NUTECH Engineers NUTECH was retained to provide technical assistance to Edison's Engineering Department, on an as-required basis. Subsequently, it provided services to the Nuclear Production Department as well as other areas. Areas of service provided included (a) In-Service Inspection Program development, (b) In-Service Inspection staff augmentation, (c) Computer Program development, (d) Radiation Emergency Preparedness Program development, and (e) Plant Unique Analysis Program addressing hydrodynamic loads in the containment. 1.4.6.10 Wismer & Becker Wismer & Becker was responsible for furnishing labor, materials, tools, equipment, and technical and professional services as necessary for the installation of piping and mechanical equipment at Fermi 2. Support provided included QA/QC work and pressure testing on piping systems and equipment as required by the applicable codes and specifications. For over 30 years, Wismer & Becker had been involved in all phases of power plant construction. Previous nuclear experience from the Council Bluffs and Diablo Canyon nuclear power plants had proved that Wismer & Becker had a thorough understanding of ASME Code Section III work and QA requirements 1.4-5 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.5 REQUIREMENTS FOR FURTHER TECHNICAL INFORMATION This section is included for historical purposes and will not be further updated. It includes a discussion of Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards (ACRS) and AEC staff concerns regarding BWRs, Fermi 2 in particular. These concerns were expressed prior to and during the Fermi 2 Construction Permit period and were required to be resolved prior to or during construction. 1.5.1 Resolved Concerns The ACRS has voiced various concerns about the development of BWRs. Specific concerns resolved during the development of the BWR, and specific Fermi 2 ACRS concerns and the documents in which each specific concern is resolved, were presented in Appendix B of the original Fermi 2 FSAR. Although some of the concerns expressed by the ACRS did not directly apply to Fermi 2, they were included in Appendix B as evidence of the refinements and degree of analysis included in the design of the Fermi 2 BWR. Specific GE development programs to improve the safety and performance of the BWR, and the status as applicable to Fermi 2, are discussed in Subsection 1.5.2. Additionally, the AEC staff enumerated a number of concerns during the Fermi 2 Construction Permit review that were documented in Appendix D to the original FSAR. Appendix D also included the status of the NRC review and resolution of these Fermi 2 specific items. 1.5.2 General Electric Development Programs 1.5.2.1 Instrumentation for Vibration and Loose Parts Detection System has been abandoned. 1.5.2.2 Core Spray Distribution Because of the slight changes in core dimensions and spray sparger geometry from plant to plant, a series of tests was conducted. The purpose of these tests was to ensure that the core spray flow distribution for the Fermi 2 header design would supply adequate cooling water from the core spray system to each fuel assembly within the reactor core in the event of a LOCA. The tests demonstrated that each fuel assembly receives adequate cooling water flow for required spray flow rates between rated flow and runout flow conditions. Details of this test program were very similar to those described in Amendment 30 (December 1967) to the Oyster Creek FSAR, NRC Docket No. 50-219. 1.5.2.3 Vibration Testing of Reactor Internals The major reactor components within the reactor pressure vessel have been subjected to extensive testing and dynamic analysis to properly describe any flow-induced vibration incurred during normal reactor operation and anticipated operational transients. Extensive prototype testing on BWR 4 plants has been reported in GE Topical Report NEDO-24057. Testing provisions for Fermi 2 invoke this prototype test program as stipulated by Regulatory Guide 1.5-1 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.20, Revision 2. An approved preoperational test was conducted prior to fuel load for flow-induced vibration of reactor internals. Refer to Subsection 3.9.1 for details. 1.5.2.4 Pipe Whip Inside Containment Dynamic restraint tests have been performed on the plastic design restraints to demonstrate the adequacy of the piping restraint concept. The concept provides clearances that allow for normal thermal movements of the pipe but limit motion in the event of a postulated rupture. Edison has extensively analyzed the dynamic effects of pipe ruptures inside containment and has installed design provisions including pipe whip restraints to prevent damage caused by pipe whip. Refer to Section 3.6 for details. 1.5.2.5 Recirculation Pump-Motor Missiles An analysis has been performed on the generation of missiles as a result of a recirculation line break. Based on GE analyses, postulated recirculation pump missiles, which may be generated during a design-basis LOCA overspeed condition, are safely contained within the pump casing. Analyses of pump missiles ejected from the open end of the broken pipe have also been performed. Piping restraints were added to prevent the potential missile exit points in the pipe from developing. Further details and references to GE topical reports are provided in Subsections 3.5.1.2 and 5.5.1.4. 1.5.2.6 Standby Gas Treatment System Filter Efficiency Test A test program to demonstrate the efficiency of the new gasket-less carbon filter was successfully completed by Edison in 1974. NEDC-12431 (Reference 1) concluded that tests on the filter, simulating the Fermi 2 standby gas treatment system (SGTS) carbon filter, successfully demonstrated the ability of the filter to remove greater than 99.99 percent of the iodine processed through the filter. Thus, the Fermi 2 SGTS can be credited (with adequate conservatism) with an iodine removal efficiency of 95 percent. For additional information on this subject, refer to Subsection 6.2.3. 1.5.2.7 Hydrogen Flammability Tests The NRC amended 10 CFR 50.44, Standards for combustible gas control system in light-water-cooled power reactors on October 16, 2003 to eliminate the requirements for hydrogen recombiners. The hydrogen recombiner Technical Specification requirements were subsequently removed by License Amendment 159, dated March 15, 2004. Regulatory Guide 1.7 was revised in March 2007 to reflect the amended 10 CFR 50.44. The Combustible Gas Control System (CGCS) has been retired in place with its electrical circuits de-energized and fluid process piping isolated from primary containment with redundant locked-closed isolation valves. Measures against hydrogen-oxygen combustion are provided by inerting of the primary containment atmosphere during plant operation. Refer to Subsections 6.2.5 and 9.3.6 for details. 1.5.2.8 Water Chemistry Program Edison has participated extensively in water chemistry development programs and in the application of operating BWR water chemistry findings to the Fermi 2 plant. A water chemistry program with applicable Technical Requirements Manual and operating procedures has been 1.5-2 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR developed in conformance with Regulatory Guide 1.56. General Electric Water Quality Document No. 22A2747 has served as a basis for this program. Refer to Subsections 9.3.2 and 10.4.6 for details. 1.5-3 REV 23 02/21

Fermi 2 UFSAR 1.5 REQUIREMENTS FOR FURTHER TECHNICAL INFORMATION REFERENCES

1. NEDC-12431 Class I, January 30, 1974,

Subject:

Detroit Edison Standby Gas Treatment System Gasketless Filter Test Series, D. P. Siegwarth and M. Siegler, General Electric Company. 1.5-4 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.6 MATERIAL INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Table 1.6-1 lists topical reports that are incorporated in whole or in part by reference in this Updated Final Safety Analysis Report (UFSAR); these references are on file with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). UFSAR Figures that are derived from Edison controlled drawings contain a reference to the Edison drawing number. These figures will be regularly updated or have been removed. Drawings that are not expected to require revision fall into one or more of the following classes:

a. Figures that are typical (e.g., generic) sketches not showing design detail

b. Figures that will not change throughout the life of Fermi 2 (e.g., site geology, site geography, population distribution, and design criteria used during construction)

c. The portion of the drawing referenced from the UFSAR text that is not likely to change.

UFSAR Figures that are based on vendor drawings contain a reference to the vendor drawing number. These drawings may or may not be updated regularly or have been removed. The Technical Requirements Manual (TRM) Volume 1 provides a central location for requirements relocated from the Fermi Operating License, Appendix A, Technical Specifications. The TRM Volume 1 (except for the Core Operating Limits Report) is incorporated by reference into the UFSAR. 1.6-1 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.6-1 REFERENCED REPORTS General Electric Company Reports Report UFSAR Sections Number Title Where Referenced APED-555 Impact Testing on Collet Assembly for Control Rod 4.5 Drive Mechanism 7RDB144A (November 1967) APED-5458 Effectiveness of Core Standby Cooling Systems for 5.5 General Electric Boiling Water Reactors (March 1968) APED-5460 Design and Performance of GE BWR Jet Pumps (July 4.5 1968) APED-5652 Stability and Dynamic Performance of the General 4.1 Electric Boiling Water Reactor (April 1969) APED-5696 Tornado Protection for the Spent Fuel Storage Pool 3.3, 3.5 (November 1968) APED-5706 In-Core Neutron Monitoring System for General 7.6 Electric Boiling Water Reactors (November 1968; revised April 1969) APED-5750 Design and Performance of General Electric Boiling 5.5 Water Reactor Main Steam Line Isolation Valves (March 1969) NEDO-10029 An Analytical Study on Brittle Fracture of GE-BWR App. A Vessel Subject to the Design Basis Accident (July 1969) NEDO-10139 Compliance of Protection Systems to Industry Criteria: 3.12, 7.1, 7.2, General Electric BWR Nuclear Steam Supply System 7.3, 7.6 (June 1970) NEDO-10173 Current State of Knowledge, High Performance BWR 11.1 Zircaloy-Clad UO2 Fuel (May 1970) NEDO-10299 Core Flow Distribution in a Modern Boiling Water 4.4 Reactor as Measured in Monticello (January 1971) NEDO-10320 The General Electric Pressure Suppression 6.2 Containment Analytical Model (April 1971), Supplement 1 (May 1971) NEDO-10329 Loss-of-Coolant Accident and Emergency Core 6.2 Cooling Models for General Electric Boiling Water Reactors (April 1971), Supplement 1 (April 1971), Addenda (May 1971) Page 1 of 5 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.6-1 REFERENCED REPORTS General Electric Company Reports Report UFSAR Sections Number Title Where Referenced NEDO-10505 Experience with BWR Fuel Through September 1971 11.1 (May 1972) NEDO-10527 Rod Drop Accident Analysis for Large Boiling Water 4.5, 7.6, 15.4.9 Reactors (March 1972), Supplement 1 (July 1972) and Supplement 2 (January 1973) NEDO-10602 Testing of Improved Jet Pump for the BWR/6 Nuclear 4.5 System (June 1972) NEDO-10677 Analysis of Recirculation Pump Overspeed in a 5.5 Typical GE BWR (October, 1972) NEDO-10678 Seismic Qualification of Class I Electric Equipment 3.10, 7.1, 7.3, (November 1972) 7.4, 7.6 NEDO-10698 Environmental Qualification of Class 1 Control and 3.11, 7.1, 7.2, Instrumentation Equipment (November 1972) 7.3, 7.4, 7.6 NEDO-10722A Core Flow Distribution in a General Electric Boiling 4.4 Water Reactor as Measured in Quad Cities Unit 1 (August 1976) NEDO-10802 Analytical Methods of Plant Transient Evaluations for 4.4 NEDO-10802-1 the General Electric Boiling Water Reactor (February 1973), Supplement 1 (April 1973) NEDE-10811 Pipe Restraint Testing Program Conducted in 3.6 Conjunction with the Design of the Enrico Fermi Power Plant Unit No. 1 (April 1973) NEDO-10812 Hydrogen Flammability and Burning Characteristics in 1.5 BWR Containments (July 1973) NEDE-10813 PDA - Pipe Dynamic Analysis Program for Pipe 3.6 Rupture Movement (March 1973) NEDO-10871 Technical Derivation of BWR 1971 Design Basis 11.1 Radioactive Source Terms (March 1973) NEDO-10899 Chloride Control in BWR Coolants (June 1973) 5.2 Page 2 of 5 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.6-1 REFERENCED REPORTS General Electric Company Reports Report UFSAR Sections Number Title Where Referenced NEDO-10958 General Electric Company BWR Thermal Analysis 4.4, 15.1.2 NEDE-10958 Basis (GETAB): Data, Correlation and Design Application (November 1973) NEDO-10958A GETAB Data, Correlation, and Design Application 4.4 (January 1977) NEDO-12037 Summary of Gamma and Beta Energy and Intensity 15A Data (January 1970) NEDC-12431 Detroit Edison SGTS Gasketless Filter Test (July 1973) 1.5, 6.2 NEDE-13296 Pipe Whip Restraint Dynamic Evaluation (August 3.6 1972) NEDE-13298 Deformation of Piping Due to Combined Bending and 3.6 Lateral Load Under Pipe Whip Loading (August 1972) NEDE-13331 Deformation of Piping Due to Combined Bending and 3.6 Restraint Lateral Load - Additional Tests of Stainless Steel Pipes (March 1973) NEDO-20360 General Electric BWR Generic Reload Application for 15.4.9 8 x8 Fuel NEDO-20566, Analytical Model for Loss-of-Coolant Analysis in 4.2, 6.3 NEDE-20566-P Accordance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix K (December 1975) NEDO-20566A General Electric Company Analytical Model for Loss- 6.3 of-Coolant Analysis in Accordance with 10 CFR 50, Appendix K (September 1986) NEDO-20944, BWR 4 and BWR 5 Fuel Design (October 1976) 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, NEDE-20944-P, Proprietary Version (January 1977) 4.4 NEDE-20944-1P NEDO-20946-A BWR Simulator Methods Verification (July 1976) 4.3 NEDC-20994 Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station Units 2 and 3 4.4, 4.5 Safety Analysis Report for Plant Modifications To Eliminate Significant In-Core Vibration (September 1975) Page 3 of 5 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.6-1 REFERENCED REPORTS General Electric Company Reports Report UFSAR Sections Number Title Where Referenced NEDO-21143 Conservative Radiological Accident Evaluation - The 15.6.7, 15.7.4 CONACO1 Code NEDE-21156 Supplemental Information for Plant Modification To 4.4 Eliminate Significant In-Core Vibration (January 1976) NEDE-21175P-3 BWR Fuel Assembly Evaluation of Combined SSE and 3.9, 4.2, 4.5 LOCA Loadings (July 1982) NEDO-21291 Group Notch Mode of the Rod Sequence Control 4.3, 15.4.1 System for Cooper Nuclear Station (June 1976) NEDO-21506 Stability and Dynamic Performance of the General 4.4 Electric Boiling Water Reactor (January 1977) NEDO-21617 Analog Transmitter/Trip Unit System for Engineered 7.1, 7.2, 7.3, NEDO-21617-A Safeguard Sensor Trip Inputs (December 1978) 7.4 NEDO-21778-A Transient Pressure Rises Affecting Fracture Toughness 5.2 Requirements for Boiling Water Reactors (January 1978) NEDE-21821 Boiling Water Reactor Feedwater Nozzle Sparger 5.2 (March 1978) NEDO-21888-2 Mark I Containment Program Load Definition Report 3.8, 6.2 (November 1981) NEDO-22209 Analysis of Scram Discharge Volume System Piping 3.6 Integrity (August 1982) NEDE-23785-PA The GESTR-LOCA and SAFER Models for the 6.3 Evaluation of the Loss-of-Coolant Accident - SAFER/GESTR Application (October 1984) NEDO-23786-1 Fuel and Rod Prepressurization (May 1978) 4.2 NEDO-23786-P NEDO-24048 Evaluation of Acoustic Pressure Loads on BWR/6 3.9 Internal Components (September 1978) NEDO-24057 Assessment of Reactor Internals Vibration in BWR/4 1.5, 3.9 NEDO-24057-P and BWR/5 Plants (November 1977) Page 4 of 5 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 1.6-1 REFERENCED REPORTS General Electric Company Reports Report UFSAR Sections Number Title Where Referenced NEDO-24154 Qualification of the One-Dimensional Core Transient 5.2, 2.3 Model for Boiling Water Reactors (October 1978) NEDO-24342 GE Evaluation in Response to NRC Request Regarding 3.6 BWR Scram System Pipe Break (April 1981) NEDC-24388-P Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 2 Suppression 6.2 Pool Temperature Response (December 1981) NEDO-24568-3 Mark I Containment Program Plant Unique Load 3.8, 6.2 Definition - Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 2 (April 1982) NEDO-24708-A Additional Information Required for NRC Staff 3.6 Generic Report on Boiling Water Reactors GEAP 13197 Emergency Cooling in BWRs Under Simulated Loss- 6.2 of-Coolant (BWR FLECHT Final Report) (June 1971) NEDE-24011- General Electric Standard Application for Reactor Fuel 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, P-A-10 (March 1991) 4.4, 15.0, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5 NEDE-24011- General Electric Standard Application for Reactor 4.1, 4.2, 4.3, P-A-10-US Fuel, United States Supplement (March 1991) 4.4, 15.0, 15.1, 15.2, 15.4, 15.5 NEDE-31096 Anticipated Transients Without Scram Response to 15.8 NRC ATWS Rule 10 CFR 50.62 (February1987) NEDC-33865P DTE Energy Enrico Fermi 2 SAFER/PRIME-LOCA 6.3 Loss-of-Coolant Accident Analysis (March 2015) Page 5 of 5 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1.7 ABBREVIATIONS AND SYMBOLS USED IN THE UFSAR Abbreviations and symbols used in the UFSAR are contained in this section. Figure 1.7-1 contains the symbols used on Edison and GEC drawings. Figure l.7-2 contains the piping and instrumentation symbols used on GE drawings and figures. Figure 1.7-3 contains the logic symbols used on GE/Edison Functional Control Diagrams. Figure 1.7-4 contains the piping and instrumentation symbols used on Sargent & Lundy drawings and figures. 1.7.1. Abbreviations A Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards ACRS Alternative Source Term AST alternating current ac American Concrete Institute ACI American Institute of Steel Construction AISC American Iron and Steel Institute AISI American National Standards Institute ANSI American Nuclear Society ANS American Petroleum Institute API American Society for Testing and Materials ASTM American Society of Agricultural Engineers ASAE American Society of Civil Engineers ASCE American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers ASHRAE American Society of Mechanical Engineers ASME American Standards Association ASA American Water Works Association AWWA American Welding Society AWS Ampere A as low as reasonably achievable ALARA Atomic Energy Commission (see also NRC) AEC Atomic Safety and Licensing Board ASLB B Battelle Memorial Institute BMI Branch Technical Position BTP 1.7-1 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR C Canadian Standards Association CSA Charpy V-notch CVN Chicago Bridge and Iron (Company) CBI Code of Federal Regulations CFR critical heat flux CHF cubic centimeter cm3 cubic feet per minute cfm cubic feet per second cfs cubic foot ft3 cubic meter m3 cubic meters per second m3/sec cubic yard yd3 curie Ci cycles per second Hz D decibel dB degree (plane angle) --- degree - Centigrade C degree - Fahrenheit F degree Rankine R Department of Transportation DOT Diesel Engine Manufacturers Association DEMA dioctyl phthalate penetration test DOP direct current dc Director, Reactor Licensing DRL The Detroit Edison Company Edison E 2.7l8 ---, base of Naperian log system e Electric Power Research Institute EPRI electron volt eV 1.7-2 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR electronic data processing EDP end of life EOL Environmental Protection Agency EPA erg erg effective neutron multiplication factor of the reactor keff F failure modes and effects analysis FMEA Federal Power Commission FPC Federal Water Pollution Control Act FWPCA feet per hour ft/hr feet per minute fpm feet per second fps foot (feet) ft foot of water (conventional) ft H2O foot-pound ft-lb G gallon gal gallons per minute gpm gallons per second gps General Design Criterion (Criteria) GDC General Electric - Boiling Water Reactor GE-BWR General Electric Company Turbine - Generator, Ltd. GEC Geological Society of America GSA gigacycles per second GHz gigaelectron volt (109) GeV gram g grams per cubic centimeter g/cm3 2 gravitational acceleration factor, (32 ft per sec ) g The General Electric Company GE H Heat Exchange Institute HEI henry H 1.7-3 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR hertz Hz horsepower hp hour hr hydrogen-ion concentration pH I inch in. inch per second in./sec inch-pound in.-lb inches of mercury absolute in. Hg abs inches of water (pressure) in. H2O inservice inspection ISI inside diameter I.D. Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers IEEE Institute of Nuclear Power Operations INPO Instrument Society of America ISA Interim Acceptance Criteria (AEC) IAC Interstate Commerce Commission ICC K kilo k kilocalorie kcal kilocycle per second kHz kiloelectron volt keV kilogram kg kilogram per square centimeter kg/cm2 kilojoule kJ kilometer km kilovolt, l03 kV kilovolt-ampere kVA kilowatt kW kilowatt-hour kWh L least significant bit LSB 1.7-4 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR licensee event report LER linear heat generation rate LHGR liter l low-population zone LPZ M maximum permissible concentration mpc mean low water datum MLD mega (106) M megacycles per second MHz megaelectron volt (106) MeV megahertz MHz megavolt-ampere MVA megawatt MW megawatt electric MWe megawatt thermal MWt megawatt-days per metric ton MWd/t megawatt-days per short ton MWd/ST meter m mho mho micro (10-6) µ microampere µA microcurie µCi microgram µg microhenry µH micrometer µm micromho µmho microsecond µsec microwatt µW mil mil miles per hour mph Military Specification MIL

        -3 milli (l0 )                                      m 1.7-5   REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR milliampere mA millicurie mCi milligram mg millihenry mH millimeter mm millimeter of mercury absolute mm Hg abs million electron volts MeV millirem mrem milliroentgen mR millisecond msec millivolt mV milliwatt mW Mine Safety Appliance MSA minute (time) minute molecular power supply unit MPSU N National Electrical Manufacturers Association NEMA National Fire Protection Association NFPA National Fire Protection Organization NFPO National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health NIOSH National Society of Professional Engineers NSPE National Weather Records Center NWRC neutron density, neutrons per cubic centimeter n neutron flux, neutrons per cubic centimeter per second nv neutron velocity time nvt nil ductility transition temperature NDTT nondestructive examination NDE nondestructive testing NDT Nuclear Energy Property Insurance Association NEPIA Nuclear Regulatory Commission (see also AEC) NRC O Occupational Safety and Health Administration OSHA Operating License OL 1.7-6 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR P parts per billion ppb parts per million ppm percent percent piping and instrumentation drawing P&ID Plant Operations Manual POM pound lb pound mass per second lbm/sec pound-foot lb-ft pounds per cubic foot lb/ft3 pounds per hour lb/hr pounds per second lb/sec pounds per square inch psi pounds per square inch, absolute psia pounds per square inch, differential psid pounds per square inch, gage psig preservice inspection PSI probable maximum flood PMF probable maximum meteorological event PMME probable maximum precipitation PMP Q quality assurance QA quality control QC R rad, unit of absorbed radiation rad radian radian Radiological Emergency Response Preparedness RERP Radiologically Controlled Area RCA revolutions per minute rpm revolutions per second rps Rock Quality Designation RQD 1.7-7 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR Rockwell hardness number RHN roentgen equivalent, man rem roentgen, unit of radiation exposure R root mean square rms S safe-shutdown earthquake SSE Safety Evaluation Report SER second (time) sec Seismic Qualification Review Team SQRT Southeast Michigan Council of Governments SEMCOG square centimeter cm2 square foot ft2 2 square inch in. square root of the sum of the squares SRSS 2 square yard yd standard cubic feet per minute scfm Standard Review Plan SRP T thousand electron volts keV total effective dose equivalent TEDE Transient Reactor Analysis Code (GE) TRACG Tubular Exchanger Manufacturers Association TEMA U United States Bureau of Mines USBM United States Coast and Geodetic Survey USC&GS United States Geological Survey USGS V volt V volt-ampere VA volts, alternating current V ac volts, direct current V dc W 1.7-8 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR watt W watt-hour Wh 1.7.2. System, Component, and Process Abbreviations anticipated transient without scram ATWS area radiation monitoring system ARMS automatic depressurization system ADS automatic gain control AGC average power range monitor APRM balance of plant BOP boiling water reactor BWR cathode ray tube CRT closed cooling water CCW combustible gas control system CGCS combustion turbine generator CTG condensate storage and transfer system CSTS containment and reactor vessel isolation control system CRVICS continuous air monitor CAM control center air conditioning system CCACS control rod drive CRD control rod drive return line CRDRL core cooling and containment system CCCS critical power ratio CPR design-basis accident DBA dosimeter of legal record DLR electro-hydraulic control EHC emergency core cooling system ECCS emergency diesel generator EDG emergency diesel generator service water system EDGSW emergency equipment cooling water system EECWS emergency equipment service water system EESWS emergency response data system ERDS engineered safety feature ESF 1.7-9 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR excess flow check valve EFCV fire protection system FPS fuel pool cooling and cleanup system FPCCS full length emergency cooling heat transfer FLECHT functional control diagram FCD GE type of relay HFA Geiger-Mueller tubes G-M tubes general service water GSW heat affected zone HAZ heating, ventilation, and air conditioning HVAC high pressure coolant injection HPCI high-efficiency particulate air HEPA hydraulic control unit HCU hydrogen water chemistry HWC Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation ISFSI induction heating stress improvement IHSI integrated plant computer system IPCS intergranular stress corrosion cracking IGSCC intermediate range monitor IRM intermediate-break accident IBA leak detection system LDS local power range monitor LPRM loose parts monitoring system LPMS loss-of-coolant accident LOCA low pressure coolant injection LPCI main steam isolation valve MSIV main steam isolation valve leakage control system MSIVLCS maximum average planar linear heat generation rate MAPLHGR maximum linear heat generation rate MLHGR mechanical equipment qualification MEQ minimum critical power ratio MCPR motor control center MCC motor-generator sets M-G sets 1.7-10 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR net positive suction head NPSH neutron monitoring system NMS noninterruptible air supply NIAS nuclear boiler system NBS nuclear pressure relief system NPRS nuclear steam supply system NSSS Onsite Review Organization OSRO operating-basis earthquake OBE oscillation power range monitor OPRM pipe whip restraint support system PWRSS power range monitor PRM pressure control valve PCV primary containment monitoring system PCMS process and effluent radiation monitor system PERMS radiation area protective (clothing) RAP radiation monitoring system RMS reactor building closed cooling water system RBCCW reactor coolant leak detection system RCLDS reactor coolant pressure boundary RCPB reactor core isolation cooling (system) RCIC reactor feed pump RFP reactor manual control system RMCS reactor pressure vessel RPV reactor protection system RPS reactor recirculation system RRS reactor water cleanup RWCU recirculation flow control system RFCS recirculation pump trip RPT residual heat removal RHR residual heat removal service water RHRSW rod block monitor RBM rod sequence control system RSCS rod worth minimizer RWM 1.7-11 REV 21 10/17

FERMI 2 UFSAR safe-shutdown earthquake SSE safety parameter display system SPDS safety/relief valve SRV scram discharge volume SDV small-break accident SBA sequence of events SOE source range monitor SRM standby gas treatment system SGTS standby liquid control system SLCS steam generation system SGS stuck open relief valve SORV supplemental cooling chilled water SCCW torus water management system TWMS traversing in-core probe TIP turbine building closed cooling water system TBCCWS 1.7-12 REV 21 10/17

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing M-2001 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 1.7-1 SYMBOLS APPUCABLE TO EDISON AND GEC F!GL:RES REV 22 04/19

nms IIPEIITIIIS IISTIIIEIITS IIIISCELLIIIEIIIS

                                                 ~                                                    CONVERTER II   HOSE CONNECTION
                                                                                     ~

(CURRENT /PNEUMATIC) TRAP GATE (NORMALLY OPEN) ---{ ~ MOTOR OPERATED USJII'Oit SUIEIIU. EUCTIIIC

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ~RTS 197R567
                                                 ~

e:J"X"P MULTl POINT RECORDER

                                                                                                                                            ~

F GAlE (WORMALLY CLOSED) INSULATING FLANGE I~ !It TITLE jiCONT 0'4 SMUT ... 110. I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ..... ,'-1$lf0fr HYDRAULIC OPERATED B                                                                                                                                                                            1-30-70
                                               ---{ J--                                                                                                                                                                                        Rev .1 PISTON                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      PIPING AND INSTRUMENT SYMBOLS GL08E (NORMALLY CLOSED)

ELECTRONIC TRIP UNIT

                                                                                                                                          --II--                                                                                                                        .,. ..,_
                                               ---.~..--

FIRST -MAO£ FOR

                                                                                                                                          ----il         BLIND FLANGE IIISTIIIIIEIIT                   CIIITIILLIU                                                                                IIIEISMIIIG AIR OPERATED               .&                COMPUTER SIGNAL fiiiTIIIII              !SECOND and T"IRD LETTER)                                                                   tSECONO and THIRD LETTER!

6 GLOBE (NORMALLY OPEN) PISTON

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          "'~                                                                                                     ,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ..                                I I                                                                                                  SPECTACLE FLANGE I                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ....
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          "'i5"'"'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ~

GLOBE, STOP CHECK

                                               ~(___                                  ~                *~~}

HIGH l? >

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .J                                            "'

5;:: § i:5 1-iii l?

USED WHEN SERVICE <(

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          "'z                                          !z                                                        z"'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ~

SOLENOID IIIEASIREI "'z0 0 z

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    "'"'0     \5               "'>               ~~      0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     .."                "~

t'S D'EFtttEO 0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        .J
                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ;::                                                                    <(

0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          <(

0

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   "'                                                            ~~

0 ii! 8"' BASKET STRAINER (DUPLEX) 1-

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    "'0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ~

CHECK

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ~
                                                                                      ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                <           z ALARM YAIIIAIILE                                                                                                       "1i'"'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               <(                                                                                 <(
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     .J
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              "i5 c                                                      ~g:                                              u
                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ";;,i5       :i          !z                                                             E 0

z LOW u

! 8 z

.l  ;; ~

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 "'"'     !z i5 0       "'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 .J
                                               ---tkJ-                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            "'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ~                                                                                                                                                                        <
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     "'                                                                                                  z E9 MANUAL REtiDTE                                                                                                                                                                                                                              0                 ~        1-0                   <(            ~

EXCESS FLOW Ctf ECK TRANSMITTER

                                                                                                                                          --!OI--        BAS~ET    STRAINER SIMPLEX
                                                                                                                                                                                                 !FIRST LETTER!
                                                                                                                                                                                                                      -RC     -IC         -C           -cv          ::t  -1        -R       -1       -G        E     -x         -T     -Q            Am                            IS    -s     -A
                                                ~£ S1n AIR                      A  -       -                         -        -      -                   -                        -                 -             -          ASrn              -      -      -

TEST ABLE CHECK OPEN ~~--- TEMPORARY STRAINER (SEE NOTE 2) c CIC - CCV - - Cl - CE ex CT - - CSm CIS cs CONDUCTIVITY CRC CR CA

                                                                                       ,o, c
                                                                                       '  /  D DIAPHRAGM CLOSED LIGHT DENSITY                  0 DRC     DIC         DC           DCV        -      -         DR       01               -        OX         DT                   -                        DIS       OS     DA PLUG OR BALL I
                                                                                                                                                );'      "Y TYPE STRAINER                                                                                      *-      -'                           -      -        -                 -             -

dP dPIC dPI dPT 8 DIFF, PRESS. dPRC dPC dPCV dPR dPIS dPS dPA NEEDLE

                                                ~~         FLOAT LOCAL                                                                              FLOW                     F FRC    FIC          FC           FCV        F::t Fr FR      Fl       FG FE       FX        FT     FQ
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      -                         FIS FS FA FILTER                           HYDROGEN ION CONC.      pH pHRC   pHIC         pHC         pHCV                         pHR      pHI             pHE      pH X                          pH Am         pHSm B

L LRC LIC LC LCV LR LG LT LIS LS LA LEVEL Ll SQUIB ACTUATED SHEAR PLUG

                                                ~~                                                      REMOTE OR LOCAL PANEL METERING ORIFICE PLATE           MOISTURE                M  MRC    MIC            -           -         -      -         MR       Ml        -     ME        -          -      -                            -           -         -     -

MANUAL TRIP & RESET NEUTRON FLUX N NRC NIC NC - - NR Nl NE NX NT NQ NAm - NA DE ENERGIZED }

                                                --~:r-                                E3 O,R      0,1 OXYGEN                  ~                                                                                        02E E§ MANUAL TRIP & RESET                          MAIN CONTROL ROOM. CR                                                              PRESSURE                p  PRC    PIC          PC           PCV                         PR       PI                       PX          PT                                            PIS       PS     PA THREE WAY NEXT PORT OF CLOSURE            SEE NOTE No. 1                                                                                                             FLOW NOZZLE                      POSITION                Po          -           -                                       PoR      Pol                                 PoT     -                                                PoS    Po A 0

R RR Rl RE RX RAn: RSm RS RA RADIATION i ENERGIZED LOGIC

                                                                                                                                                                                          *sPEED                    s SRC    SIC          sc            -         -      -         SR                       SE        -                               -                                   -      -
                                                --{~~~SE~NT~CONTROL Sl TEMPERATURE              T TRC    TIC          TC           TCV        -      -         TR       Tl        -     TE       TX         TT                    -              -        TIS        TS     TA FOUR WA.Y SIGHT FLOW GLASS TIME                     I  -       -           IC           -         -      -          -        II       -      -                         -                             -         liS        IS     -

LiliES - - - - - - - - - - - - - - gL-VIBRATION Vb VbR Vbl VbS VbA

                                                                                                                                           ~

WEIGHT FACTOR WI WfRC wnc WfV ANGLE -PROCESS LINE MAIN PROCESS LINE AUXILIARY SAMPLE COOLER AND INSTRUMENT LINE ANGLE. STOP CHECK WITH POSITIONER INST OR SERVICE AIR GLAND LEAK*OFF

                                                   ;tL-     QUICK OPENING
                                                                                - --------INSTRUMENT ELECTRICAL LEADS INSTRUMENT CAPILLARY TUBING          @             IN-LINE FLCFN INDICATOR
                                                ~.

ARROWS INDICATE DIRECTION OF FLOW

                                                                                                                                             ~

1111SCElUIEIUS UIIEYIATIDMS: GLAND SEAL WATER SH2-B3 RESTRICTING ORIFICE SAUNDER"S TYPE (WEIR) SHEET AND ZONE NUMBER PIPING SPEC CHANGE

                                                                                                                                           ---41--                                                   (NOT TO BE USED REFERENCE DRAWING
                                                                                                                                           -D-ON EQUIPMENn                     A/S                AIR SUP~LY                                                         RBCCW        REACTOR BUILDING CLOSED COOLING WATER ltiCREA.SEf\ REDUCER REF 2                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    RBEDT        REACTOR BUILDING EQUIPMENT DRAIN TANK
                                                                                                                                                                                                        ~M!--

AW ACID WASTE !CORROSIVE. CAUSTIC! SAFETY DR RELIEF

                                                                                ~                                                          --J             THREADED CAP                                                                en'                CONDUCTIVITY INDICATOR TRANSMITTER                                 RM RMC REMOTE MANUAL REMOTE MANUAL CONTROl CRO                CONTROL ROD DRIVE PIPE                                                 ----{            QUICK DISCONNECT CROHS              CONTROL ROO DRIVE HYDRAULIC SYStEM                                 RMS          REMOrE MANUAL SWITCH CLASSIFICATION CRS                CONDUCTIVITY RECORDING SWITCH                                      RPS         REACTOR PROTECTION SYSTEM
                                                                                                                                           -!)I D DIAPHRAGM OPERATED CONTROL                                                                                                                      WELD CAP CRW                CLEAN RADWASTE                                                     RPV         REACTOR PRESSURE VESSEL OPENS ON AIR FAILURE                                                8"-Sl-A-17-3                                                                RUPTURE OJSC DRW                DIRTY RADWASTE                                                     SS          SELECTOR SWITCH
                                                                                                                                           -101--

I~ PRESS.-TEMP. INDEX <ITS DIFFERENTIAL TEMPERATURE SWITCH SSa SELECTIVE SWITCH AUTOMATIC Y SQUARE ROOT CONVERTOR EXPANSION JOINT DIAPHRAGM OPERATED CONTROL PRESS.-TEMP. RATING No. } E/P CONVERTER !VOLTAGE PNEUMATIC I SQ RT << CLOSES ON AIR FAILURE PRESS.-INTEGRITY CLASS ~i:l29;-trv'f- FLEXIBLE CONNECTION E/S FAI SPECIAL ELECTRIC POWER SUPPLY R~QUtREO FAIL AS IS rSEE NOTE 2t TBCCW tC TURBINE BUILDING CLOSED COOLING WATER CYCLE TIMER GLOBE "'Y., PATTERN MATERIAL TYPE PIPE SIZE

                                                                                                                                          -{l:::=t}-       SPOOL PIECE                                                                 FC                 INDICATES CLOSES ON AIR OR ELECT,_ CAL FArLURE                    tdS TQOS TIME DELAY SWITCH TO ROUE OVERLOAD SWITr'"l FIT                FLOW INDICATOR TRANSMITTER EDUCTOR                                                                    FO                 INDICATES OPENS ON AIR OR ELECTRICAL FAILURE                      TQRS            I"UR(JUt.. td:.~UJ-c[/1:.1"\ :>lrl 1 GH BUTtERFLY                                                                                                                       ~                                                                                           FRCS ltCU FLOW RECORDING CONTROLLER SWJTCH HYDRAULIC CONTROL UNIT TQT TRS I UH(JUE TRANSMITTER TEMPERATURE RECORDER SWITCH
                                                                                                                                           -a::::J-        AIR EJECTOR HS                 HAND SWITCH 1 SEE NOTE 2*

IP CONVERTER iCURRENT PNEUMATIC.

                                                                                                                                               \?

VACUUM BREAKER LC LOCK CLOSED L/DRS LEVEL & DENSITY RECORDER SWITCH PENETRATION LIMSW LIMIT SWITCH DAMPER I LIRS LEVEL I.NOICATOR RECORDING SWITCH I e9 LO LOC':K OPEN SPECIAL. ANGLE LRS LEVEL RECOROING SWITCH SAMPLE TEST POl NT IS11'110Nl MV/l MILLIVOLT TO CURRENT CONVERTER NC NORMALLY CLOSED PIPING RESPONSIBILITY BY OTHERS INDICATE AS SHOWN BELOW NO NORMALLY OE*ENERGIZED Fermi 2 FLOW METER NOTE 1. ALL SOLENOID VALVES SHOWN IN (POSITIVE DISPLACEMENT) NE NORMALLY ENERGIZED DE-ENERGIZED POSITION. s**-BY OTHERS NO NORMALLY OPEN tCRW "NE"-DENOTES SOLENOID IS NW NORMAL WASTE tCONVENTlON"-L* OPEN DRAIN FUNNEL NOR'MALLY ENERGIZED DURING PL.ANT OPERATION. DRAIN SYSTEM UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FURNISHED WITH

2. SV\!B()LS IIIACTI VE FOR ASSOCIATE EQUIPMENT NEW DESIGN

                                                                                                                                           -lif-            DIAPHRAGM                                                                                                                                                                                          fiGURE 1.7-2 PIPING AND INSTRUMENTATION SYMBOlS APPLICABLE TO GE FIGURES

VALVE SYMBOLS OPERATOR SYMBOLS ANNUNCIATOR ALARM COMPUTfR INPUT-OUTPUT (FOR US~ WITH VALY£ 6 DAMPE~ SYM80LS) IDENTIFICATION NUMBER SIG!j'AL NUMBER LO (fATE ~--ALARM DESCRIPTION IN

                                                                                                                                                                         ~                 ACCORDANCE WITH THE                                     krA                    A~ALOG            TYPE INPUT L

INSTRUMENT TYPE CODES IC C~NTACT CLOSURE INPUT

    \__LOCKED OPEN 000 LOCKED CLOSED AC  MOTOR           DC    MOTOR                           MANUAL HANDWHEEL                                                                                                                                 II"       P LSE TYPE INPUT (TYriCAL)                                                                                (NOT SHOWN UNLESS WHEN USED                                             ANNUNCIATOR SYSTEM ALARM MOTOR OPERATOR                                      AS AN EXTIENSION SHAFT THRU SHIELD OA        A      ALOG TYPE OUTPUT GLOBE                                  (WITH MANUAL OVERIOE)                               WALL Oft FOR f"LOONSTAHO)                                                                                                                             oc        CQNTACT CLOSURE OUTPUT OP        P~LSE          TYPE OUTPUT

~ STOP-CHECK ,.051TION£1R (,.) Ol't tiOOSTIEflt PIIELAY (a) NC {SHOWN ONLY ON INSTflt AIR '5UP'PL Y RII:FIIRIU+C-K FYGUfltE NO. OMDUTTU WMiriN PaiD) ON IBAMIIt F'IGUiitE INSTRUMENT lr CONTROL DEVICE SYMBOLS l ~ MAflroiUAL

    \__NOJIMALLY CLOSED OYEII'tiDE                                                                                                                                                                     SIGNAL LINE CONTINUATION ARROWHEAD                                                                                                     l                            l                               EJ                                                                          I (TYPICAL}                /

BUTTERFLY L----lllllF'ERIEN9E DRA\YtNG COORDINATIEJJ MAIN CONTROL IIIIOARD MOUNTED DEVICE

+              BALL                                         UNLOADIED                            LOA DIED                     LOA DIED L - - - - - I U E F I E I I I I N . tDIENTIIII'ICATtON WHII:N RIEctliMIEO D

VALVE-NO VALVI:*NO VALVE-NC

-o-            PLUG                                                                                                                                                           AUXILIARY CONTROL EQUIPMENT CABINET r

DIAPHRAGM OPERATOR FOR CONTROL VALVES MOUNTED .DEVICES IN THE MAIN CONTROL ANGLF. (TYPICAL FOIIt OTHER VALVE

• DAMPEIIt T't'P'£5) l'tOOM AREAS PIPINIG SPECIALTY (lOOT OIAm .CO"TitOL IIIC>ARD OIDUNTI!D)

ANGLE STOP-CHECK rMANUAL pYMBOLS

  ~                                                                  ~
                                                                         ,      llltiESET TYPICAL LOCALLY MOUNTED DEVICE NOT ON AN

~ DIAPHRAGM SEATED TRAP ASSEMBLY LOADED (SAUNDERS) Dll-IIENIEftGIZIED INSTRUMENT PANEL OR ASSEMBLY DII:IBHINATIEil INSTRUr&IIIIENT Ill FURNISHED Y*TYPE STRAINER SOLENOID OPERATOR CYLINDER OPERATOR e ~ CHECK WITH ADIBOCIATI:D IIOUI,.MIENT (USED WITH GATE. 3-WAY 6 £-WAY VALVE STMDOLS) TEMPORARY STRAINER ~ EXCESS FLOW CHECK LOCAL INSTRUMENT PANEL MOUNTED DE.VICE SINGLE BASKET STRAINER

  ~5""-"""'

OlJf'LE)( BASKET STRAINER

  ,..           ANGLE SAFETY OR RELIEF                                                                                                                                        COMPUTER INPUT-DUTI"UT SIGNAL PIPE LINE SYMBOLS                                                                                                                                                                               (wiTH      IN*OUT YALYING)
  ~SEY'                   O'S>G
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            !            RlPTURE DISC

...~ STRAIGHT SAFETY OR RELIEF {P.C. Dlt:NO'TIES PIPING CONTRACTOR) C() MULTIPLE DEVICES IN ONE .ASSEMBLY (1.£. TIUio-ltstATUftll IILIIMIINT IN TMIIftaiOWitLL)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ~SE1'l"l-P~IG
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          --o-           REsTRICTION DEVICE E1
 ~SET~_PSIG                                                                                  PRIMARY SERVICE                                                                                                                                                               (SiNGLE CR t<<<UL TJ.ST AGE)

(I'UftN. a INST. Ill' I' .C.) MODULATING TYPE CONTROL SYSTEM

  ,..           POWER SAFETY OR RELIEF                                                       SECONDARY SERVICE                                                                                                                                              ~               QCPANSION JOINT COMPONENTS MOUNTED IN ASSEMBLIES (1"\J ...... INST. IIY ~.C.)                                    RM. 8T.

TO:.... AND/OR CABINETS (IIO:P'I!II TO TMIE C::ONT .. OL FLEXIBLE HOSE

                                                                    ----                     PRIMARY SERVICE                                                    I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        -!::r BYIJ1'1!M DIAOIIAM8 1"011' FUNCTIONAL DRTAIL*)

I EJECTOR (PUPIM. II lfdT. ll'r OTHERIJ IJNLI:H QUICK-DPENING GATE ( T'f'PtCAL ~ OTHER VALVE TYI"'£5) OTHIER¥4'tSE NOTED) L_AIIIIIIIItYMTIID*Daec:RIP'TION OP' THIE lf\I.IECTOR APPLICAeut COfiiTIIIOL SYI!JTRM

                                                                    -----                    SECONDARY SERVICE

{FU:IItN. a INST. lh' OTHUIS UNL£SS (WMIIN IIIIOUUlltD 1"01111 CLARITY)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            @               f1.AME ARRESTOR Q_

MANUAL FLOW CONTROL OTHJlfWISr:: NOTED) f

       .,...,-- SI[T f A _ PSIG
                                                                      -~                     SLOPING LINE                                                                        ELECTRICAL SIGNAL BETWEEN LOCAL & MAIN CONTROL ROOM AREA FUNCTIONS                                                                ROOF EXHAUST HOOO

~ SELF-CONTAINED REGULATOR CONNECTION TO THE P"OCESS FOA THE 'YAIIIAIILE (TYPICAL) a 0 a 0 HEAT TRACED LINE ~ sPRAY NOZZLES 91 + HOSE GATE VALVE FILTER PNEUMATIC SIGNAL BETWEEN LOCAL & MAIN VACUUM* JACKETED CONTROL ROOM AREA FUNCTIONS

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ~                  SI'ARGER CRYOGENIC LINE OR GUARDED LINE Ji£1            FOUR-WAY                                             ~
                                                                             ~P'tGUftE NU,.._PI PIPE LINE CONTINUATION ARROWHEAD (DW'RMNT ~""'""')

0 MAIN CONTROL ROOM AREA OR LOCAL FUNCTIONS (NOT IIOTH) Q

" l _ _ C L O S ! E D PORTS IN lJIIIIOOf..: 9iOWN I

DRAWING COOIIb NUM8£R

                                                                     ~                    PIPE LINE CONTINUATION ARROWHEAD                  <-        VIGUito:)                                         PLANT COMPUTER FUNCTION Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
                                                                 ' - - - - - - - K Q U D I C E LETT'EIIf ON SAME P'lGUM fiGURE 1.7-4, SHEET 1 SYMBOLS APPLICABlE TO SARGENT & LUNDY FIGURES

INSTRUMENT TYPE CODES PIPE LINE INSTRUMENT HVAC SYMBOLS SYMBOLS DUCTS EQUIPMENT FIRST LETTER SECOND OR SUCCEEDING LETTERS VARIABLE INSTRUMENT FUNCTION DUCTED AIR FLOW (FURN Ill INST BY HVAC CONSTANT VOLUME BOX (MEASURED OR INITIATING) FLOW NOZZLE OR VENTURI THERMOWELL CONTRACTOR) A ALARM A ANALYSIS AC ALARM CLOSED FLOW NOZZLE OR VENTURI NON-DUCTED AIR FLOW TERMINAL REHEAT ATTENUATOR FLOW SWITCH ---~ B BURNER*FLAME AH ALARM HIGH PIPE SECTION C CONDUCTIVITY AL ALARM LOW FLOW ORIFICE DAMPERS MIXING BOX D DENSITY AO ALARM OPEN

                                                                                                                                                                                  <t (ORIFICE FLA."lG£5    BY P  C ..                    SAMPLE ELEMENT E  VOLTAGE                       C   CONTROLLER        (aLIND)                            UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED)                           (ANALYSIS- CELL. PROBE.

ETC) F FLOW CD CONTROL DAMPER H HAND {MANUAL) CK CONTROLLER II< HAND/AUTO UNCLASSIFIED FLOW ELEMENT - {- OPPOSED BLADE CV CONTROL VALVE {MAGNETIC. TARGET, AIR FOIL ABBREVIATIONS CURRENT (ELEC.) LAMINAR, ETC) D DAMPER I J POWER (Kw) TEST CONNECTIONS w:6t________1 NORMALLY OF>EN }-TYPICAL K TIME DC DIFFERENTIAL CONTROLLER SIGHT FLOW INDICP.TOR FO~ FAIL OPEN SA SUPPLY AIR L LEVEL {LIQUID OR SOLID) Dl DIFFERENTIAL INDICATOR RA RETURN AIR

                                                                                                                                                                           -~-

OK DIFFERENTIAL CONTROL STATION PRESSURE EA EXHAUST AIR M MOISTURE (HUNIDrh) ROTAMETER DR DIFFERENTIAL RECORDER PARALLEL BLADE OA OUTSIDE AIR N NEUTRON FLUX P PRESSURE OS DIFFERENTIAL SWITCH GRAB SAMPLE '} MB cv MIXING BOX r r l DT DIFFERENTIAL TRANSMITTER PITOT TUBE CONSTANT VOLUMEBOX R RADIOACTIVITY NC1 NORMALLY CL05EO TYPICAL DY DIFFERENTIAL RELAY f'~ ~AIL CLOSED RH TERMINAL REHEAT ATTENUATOR S SPEED OR FREQUENCY TEMPERATURE TURBINE METER T TEMPERATURE E PRIMARY ELEMENT WHEN THERMOWELL H HOT DUCT U MULTIVARIABLE EW PRIMARY ELEMENT THERMOWELL -::1- FLOW STRAIGHTENING VANES IS NOT USED FAN INLET VANES c COLD DUCT W V VIBRATION WEIGHT G I GLASS INDICATOR AIR FILTER*PRV SET FLOW 1Zl- ~ BUTTERFLY FILTERS X SPECIAL IC INDICATING CONTROLLER HVAC DUCT TEST FOR

                                                                                                                                                                            \             LNORMHLY CLOSED Y  STRAIN                        IR  INDICATING RECORDER                                                                                     PRESSURE. TEMPERATURE PROCESS RADIATION            MONITOR               AND/OR FLOW                    '-*- - - - N O R M A L L " Y     OPEN Z  POSITION                      IS  INDICATING SWITCH PRE-FILTER                       HEPA FILTER IT  INDICATING TRANSMITTER IY  INDICATING RELAY GRAVITY SHUTTER c0 K   CONTROL STATION *VARIABLE TYPE*HAND.                      PIPE LINE COMPONENT SYMBOLS HANO*AUTO MEO       EFF FILTER             CHARCOAL FILTER L   LIGHT    (PILOT)

Q INTEGRATOR ~ END CLOSURE (wELDED CAP) R RECORDER RC RECORDER CONTROLLER --J END CLOSURE FIRE DAMPER WITH (SCREWED CAP) 5 SWITCH FUSIBLE LINK SC SWITCH* CLOSED DEVICE POSITION """'I END CLOSURE SH SWITCH HIGH (BLIND FLANGE) 51 SWITCH* INTERMEDIATE DEVICE POSITION END CLOSURE SL SWITCH LOW (HOSE CONN) INSTRUMENT 8: CONTROL SIGNAL SYMBOLS SO SWITCH *OPEN DEVICE POSITION REDUCER sv SOLENOID VALVE T u TRANSMITTER MULTIFUNCTION OPEN FUNNEL DRAIN ,p ~~# ~< f ""- INSTRUMENT TRANSMITTED PNEUMATIC SIGNAL HOT INIITAUMI:NT All't DUP .. L.Y v VALVE* ON-OFF POWER-OPERATED TYPE ~~;~:t6~~D (f'UAN. A INBT. IV P.c.) CLOSED FUNNEL DRAIN w THERMOWELL LINED CONHR:CTED X SPECIAL Y z RELAY *SIGNAL CONVERTER. COMPUTING. ETC. POWER POSITIONER (EXCIEPT VALVK .. OUNTED) 9 FLOOR DRAIN

                                                                                                                                                                           ~                       INSTRUMENT TRANSMITTED PNEUMATIC SIGNAL
                                                                                                                                                                           ~                                            (FUPtN. 8:   INST. IJY    OTHll"RID I

LINt:G NOT UI'IIL~liS OTHilRWI!iill: NOTED) COHHI:CTilD ATMOSPHERIC VENT (WITH SCREEN) LINIIJ CONNICCTIIO CLARIFYING SYMBOL LIST I I A AVG ANALOG SIGNAL AVERAGE MAX MIN MAXIMUM MINIMUM ~ THERMAL SLEEVE -*t*~*-

                                                                                                                                                                                           ~LINU ELECTRICAL CONTROL & INTERLOCKING SIGNAL NOT 4r D         DIGITAL               Nz         NITROGEN                                                                                                                                        CONNI:CTIID DIFF       SUBTRACT              N 2 H,. HYDRAZINE                                                          RELIEF VALVE VENT PIPE                                                       LINII:5 CONNECTI:D DIR        DIRECT ACTING         Oa         OXYGEN                                                             SLIP    JOINT                                                                                                                                      Fermi 2
                                                                                                        +

FC FAIL CLOSED pH pH ANALYSIS Fl FAIL INTERMEDIATE REV REVERSE ACTING HYDRAULIC SIGNAL UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSiS REPORT PENETRATION OF PRIMARY FL FAIL LOCKED 51 SILICA CONTAINMENT LINEII NOT FO FAIL OPEN SM SMOKE OR IONiZATION CON~IrCTKD HOT-<+ FIGURE 1.7-4, SHEET 2 L.tNilS CONNECTED H,. HYDROGEN SP SET POINT PENETRATION OF OUTER SHIELD HL HIGH LIMIT SQ. RT SQUARE ROOT SIDE WALL HP HIGH PASS TURB TURBIDITY SYMBOLS APPLICABLE TO SARGENT & LUNDY PENETRATION OF INNER SHIELD LL LOW LIMIT )( MULTIPLY WALL FIGURES LP LOW PASS

FERMI 2 UFSAR CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY Section 2.1 was prepared circa 1974 at the time of preparation of the original FSAR. It has not been updated in the area of geography and demography since it represents the area at the time the Construction Permit was issued. Minor changes were made in Subsection 2.1.3.5 in response to questions from the NRC in 1979. 2.1.1 Site Location The Fermi 2 power plant is located at the Fermi site on the western shore of Lake Erie at Lagoona Beach, Frenchtown Township, Monroe County, Michigan (see Figures 2.1-1 through 2.1-3). The plant is approximately 8 miles east-northeast of Monroe, Michigan; 30 miles southwest of downtown Detroit, Michigan; and 25 miles northeast of downtown Toledo, Ohio. The coordinates of the Fermi 2 reactor containment structure are latitude 41°57'48"N, and longitude 83°15'31"W. The Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates are 4,647,950 m north and 312,930 m east, Zone 17T. 2.1.2 Site Description The Fermi site comprises approximately 1260 acres of land solely owned by The Detroit Edison Company (Edison). The site is bounded on the north by Swan Creek, on the east by Lake Erie, on the south by Pointe Aux Peaux Road, and on the west by Toll Road. Entrance to the site is from the west by way of Enrico Fermi Drive, a private road owned by Edison, and from the south via Pointe Aux Peaux Road to another private road also owned by Edison. The northern and southern areas of the site are dominated by large lagoons. The western areas are dominated by several woodlots and quarry lakes. Site elevation ranges from the level of Lake Erie, on the eastern edge of the site, to approximately 25 ft above the lake level, on the western edge of the site. An aerial photograph of the site taken May 5, 1983, is presented in Figure 2.1-4. A plot plan of the Fermi site showing the plant, its natural draft cooling towers, and other major structures is presented in Figure 2.1-5. In accordance with 10 CFR l00, the exclusion area for Fermi 2 has been defined as that area within 915 m of the reactor containment structure. As indicated in Figure 2.1-5, this area encompasses a portion of adjoining Lake Erie. 2.1.2.1 Exclusion Area Control The land portion of the exclusion area for Fermi 2 is entirely within the Fermi site. Consequently, Edison has the authority to determine all activities within the land portion of the exclusion area, including authority for the exclusion of personnel and property. No public roads, waterways, or railroads traverse the land portion of the exclusion area. 2.1-1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR The Lake Erie shoreline of the plant site is unsuitable for beach activities. The limited beach area available is inaccessible to the public from the land side and is posted as private property. Few plant-unrelated activities are expected to take place on Lake Erie adjacent to the plant site. These will be primarily fishing from boats and pleasure craft; however, due to poor fishing and the shallow characteristics of the lake in this area, boating activities are not carried out in proximity to the shoreline. Past experience at the site has indicated the public has made little or no attempt to use the shoreline area or to approach the site from the lake. The emergency plans are described in Section 13.3. 2.1.2.2 Boundaries for Establishing Effluent Release Limits The boundary used to establish Technical Specifications limits for the release of gaseous effluents from Fermi 2, in accordance with 10 CFR 20.106(a) and other related as-low-as-reasonably-achievable provisions, is based on the boundary of the Fermi site. The site boundaries for gaseous effluents and for liquid effluents shall be as shown in Figure 2.1-5. As shown in Figure 2.1-5, the closest on-land boundary line is approximately 915 m from the center line of the reactor building. This closest on-land boundary line corresponds to the maximum site boundary value of the meteorological dispersion parameter (c/Q) calculated for the baseline year 1974-1975. Virtually all of the 1120-acre site is enclosed by a perimeter fence, restricting casual access to the property. Additionally, a fenced-in area surrounds the immediate plant area within the Fermi site, shown in Figure 2.1-5. Access to the plant area will be continually and actively controlled by Edison. Only those persons specifically authorized will have access to this area. In those areas of the southern portion of the Fermi site outside the plant fenced-in area, the public will be permitted to use only those facilities specifically designated by Edison. Normal surveillance of these areas will be maintained by Edison, which, as sole owner of the entire Fermi site, has the authority to exclude personnel and property from the designated areas. 2.1.3 Population and Population Distribution Figure 2.1-3 shows the locations of the municipalities and other cultural features surrounding the plant within 10 miles. Towns and cities in the region surrounding the plant within 50 miles are shown in Figure 2.1-2. These centers of population are listed in Table 2.1-1, along with their 1970 resident populations and their distances and directions from the plant. 2.1.3.1 Population Within 10 Miles Within 10 miles of the plant, the estimated 1970 population was 63,963 persons; within 5 miles, it was 11,135 persons. The following communities, as identified by the 1970 Census of Population, and indicated in Figure 2.1-3, are within 10 miles of the plant: 2.1-2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1973 Distance (miles) and Population Direction from Plant Stony Point 1,370 1 SSW Estral Beach 419 2 NE Woodland Beach 2,249 3 WSW Detroit Beech 2,053 4 WSW Monroe (closest point) 23,894 5.5 SW South Monroe 3,012 6 SW South Rockwood 1,477 8 N Rockwood 3,119 9 N Carleton 1,503 9 NW Patterson Gardens 2,169 9 W The City of Monroe and the villages of Estral Beach, South Rockwood, and Carleton are the only incorporated communities. Estimates of the 1970 resident population within 5 miles of the plant were determined from house counts and 1970 census data. The house counts were determined from June 1970 aerial photographs obtained from the Southeast Michigan Council of Governments (SEMCOG) (Reference 1). House counts were converted to population by applying the ratios of persons to housing units obtained from 1970 census data (Reference 2). For the townships concerned (all in Monroe County), these ratios are Berlin 3.53 Frenchtown 3.62 Ash 3.71 The resultant population data were assumed to be applicable, without adjustments, to April 1970. Beyond the 5-mile radius, population estimates were based on 1970 census data (Reference

3) and the corresponding state map, account being taken of the population estimated to be within 5 miles of the plant. Use was made of data for the smallest applicable census unit (e.g., village, town, city, or township). From this state map, census units within each segment of the population wheel were identified, and their fractions within each segment determined.

It was assumed that the population within each census unit was uniformly distributed. Population projections for areas within 10 miles for the years 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020 were based on corresponding projections for the individual counties concerned. There were no population projections available for census units smaller than counties. It was assumed that each component (or fraction) of a county had the same decennial rate of growth as that for the county as a whole. Monroe and Wayne are the only counties with areas within 10 miles of the plant. Projections by SEMCOG were available for both counties for 1970, 1980, and 1990 (Reference 1). The 2.1-3 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1970-1980 and 1980-1990 decennial rates of growth derived from these projections were applied to the 1970 census data to obtain the projected 1980 and 1990 populations. The projected 2000, 2010, and 2020 populations of the counties were derived by assuming their decennial rate of growth from 1990 to 2020 to be constant and equal to the average of the 1970-1980 and 1980-1990 rates of growth. Figure 2.1-6 shows the estimated 1970 population distribution within 10 miles of the plant. Figures 2.1-7 through 2.1-11 show corresponding projected populations for the years 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020. These projected population data are the unrounded mathematical results of the methods described above. 2.1.3.2 Population Between 10 and 50 Miles The 1970 population and projections between 10 and 50 miles were determined in accordance with the method used for the area between 5 and 10 miles from the plant. For the areas within Canada, use was made of the June 1, 1971, Canadian census data (Reference 4) and corresponding provincial map. Using data from the previous Canadian census of June 1, 1966 (Reference 5), and assuming linearity, the 1971 Canadian census data were adjusted to April 1, 1970, so they would coincide with the 1970 U.S. census data. For population projection purposes, counties between 10 and 50 miles of the plant were divided into four groups:

a. SEMCOG counties

b. Other Michigan counties

c. Ohio counties

d. Canadian counties.

The SEMCOG counties are Monroe, Wayne, Oakland, Macomb, Livingston, and Washtenaw. Wayne County was separated into two parts consisting of Detroit, and Wayne County minus Detroit. Projected populations for these counties for the years 1980-2020 were obtained as explained in Subsection 2.1.3.1 for Monroe and Wayne County projections at 5 to 10 miles. The projected 1980 and 1990 populations for Detroit were similarly derived; however, its population was assumed to remain unchanged (rather than to continue decreasing) from 1990 to 2020. Other Michigan counties consist of Jackson and Lenawee. The projected populations for each of these counties were derived by assuming their decennial rates of growth from 1970 to 2020 to be constant and equal to the average of their 1960-1970 rates of growth, obtained from census data, and their 1970-1980 rates of growth, derived from 1970 census data and their 1978 population estimated by the State of Michigan (Reference 6). The Ohio counties consist of Seneca, Sandusky, Ottawa, Lucas, Huron, Henry, Fulton, Erie, and Wood. The projected populations for each of these counties were derived by assuming their decennial rates of growth from 1970 to 2020 to be constant and equal to the 1970 to 1980 rates of growth obtained from 1970 to 1975 to 1980 to 1985 projections by the State of Ohio (Reference 7). 2.1-4 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR Official projections for Essex and Kent, the two Canadian counties, were not available. Projected 1980-2020 populations of these counties were based on their adjusted April 1, 1970, populations and were derived by assuming their decennial rates of growth from 1970 and 2020 to be constant and equal to their 1961-1971 rates of growth determined from Canadian census data. Figure 2.1-6 shows the estimated 1970 population distribution between 10 and 50 miles from the plant. Figures 2.1-7 through 2.1-11 show corresponding projected populations for the years 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020. These projected population data are the unrounded mathematical results of the methods described above. 2.1.3.3 Low-Population Zone In accordance with criteria specified in 10 CFR 100, the outer boundary of the low-population zone (LPZ) for Fermi 2 will be 3 miles (4827 m) from the containment structure. The estimated resident population distribution within this distance for the years 1970 through 2020 is shown in Table 2.1-2. Population distribution for distances up to 50 miles from the plant is shown in Figures 2.1-6 through 2.1-11; a detailed map of the LPZ is shown in Figure 2.1-12. The area within the LPZ does not contain either agricultural or industrial activities that would create a daily transient population of any magnitude. Therefore, other than the recreational activities that draw daily users, the daily population is relatively stable. As stated in Subsection 2.1.4.2.3, the population in the communities within the LPZ that have beach and boating facilities is predominantly permanent, and the facilities are for resident use. The schools, hospitals, institutions, and recreational areas are shown in Tables 2.1-3 through 2.1-5. Sterling State Park and Point Mouillee State Game Area are approximately 5 miles from the Fermi 2 site and annually attract about 385,000 and 180,000 visitors, respectively, as shown in Table 2.1-5. Approximately 70 percent of use occurs between April and November. 2.1.3.4 Transient Population 2.1.3.4.1 Seasonal Agricultural and Horticultural Labor Needs for seasonal agricultural and horticultural labor (including migrant workers) in Monroe County are listed in Table 2.1-6. Peak requirements, which occur in the month of October, are for a total of about 2335 seasonal workers, 34 percent of whom are expected to be migrant workers. Needs for such seasonal labor are at a minimum during the winter months, down to a total of about 230 workers, 12 percent of whom would be migrant workers. Following are 1972 data on migrant workers within 10 miles of Fermi 2 (Reference 8): Number of Distance (miles) and Employers Migrant Workers Direction From Plant Smith and Son 75 8 NW J. F. Ilgenfritz 30 10 WSW 2.1-5 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR Number of Distance (miles) and Employers Migrant Workers Direction From Plant Tracy Gaynier 12 11 SW Don Wolmer 20 12 WSW Walter Iott 20 12 WSW 2.1.3.4.2 Historical Attractions There are two facilities in the City of Monroe that draw large numbers of visitors each year: the Custer Museum, 8 miles west-southwest of the plant; and the Monroe County Historical Museum, 8 miles west-southwest of the plant. In 1972, the former had approximately 12,000 visitors and the latter about 45,000 (Reference 9). 2.1.3.4.3 Commuters Monroe and Wayne are the only two counties with areas within 10 miles of the plant site. Monroe County has an inflow of 1500 commuters and an outflow of 19,292 commuters, a net loss of 17,792 individuals per day. Wayne County, with an inflow of 139,305 and an outflow of 165,754 commuters, has a net loss of 26,449 individuals per day (Reference 10). 2.1.3.4.4 Seasonal Homes Within 10 miles of the plant, according to the 1970 census data, there were 51 seasonal homes in Monroe County and 26 in Wayne County (Reference 11). Many of the houses that had been used in the past as summer cottages are currently used as permanent homes. 2.1.3.5 Population Center The nearest population center, as defined in 10 CFR 100, is the City of Monroe, which had a 1970 population of 23,894. Its nearest corporate boundary is approximately 5.5 miles southwest of Fermi 2. The residential population distribution of the city and the surrounding jurisdiction (Frenchtown Township) shows this distance to be a valid, conservative figure for use as the population center distance. The concentrated residential section of the city is farther distant from the plant site, with the closest portion of the city along the northeastern boundary being predominantly open for industrial development (Reference 12). Frenchtown Township in 1977 was composed of scattered, small residential clusters and a few small communities along the shore of Lake Erie (Reference 13). The 1975 total population was estimated to be 15,900 over a land area of 27,000 acres an average density of about 0.6 person/acre (Reference 13). Future land use and residential population distribution for the city and township were also examined to determine the potential influence of proposed growth on the population center distance. The Monroe land use plan did not propose further expansion on the northeast edge of the city. Some annexation had taken place on the west, but further annexation was not considered likely in 1979 (Reference 14). 2.1-6 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR The land area within the city boundary was slated to remain predominantly open or industrial. One small tract (approximately 39 acres) was proposed for potential residential development (Reference 12). The future growth of Monroe based on data available in 1979 would not create any densely populated residential land closer than 5.5 miles from Fermi 2. Land use plans for Frenchtown Township indicated that future residential growth will take place in the vicinity of Fermi 2. Land use plans call for development of the corridor between Monroe and Fermi 2 and along the Lake Erie shore (Reference 13). A mixture of land uses was proposed; however, it was mainly recreational and low density (average of one dwelling unit per acre) and medium density (1 to 4 dwelling units per acre) residential. A 450-acre tract on the northeastern corner of the growth area had been rezoned from agricultural to residential use. This land, like most of the area, had severe soil limitations based on high water table, fair-to-poor bearing capacity, and moderate volume change. For this reason, the staff of the Monroe County Planning Commission had reservations about the residential rezoning of the site and suggested rezoning only for low density (Reference 15) (one dwelling unit per acre). Based on the distribution and density of the proposed future land use, Frenchtown Township was not expected to form a contiguous extension of the population center of Monroe or develop into a separate densely populated center. From these facts it was apparent that the 5.5-mile population center distance would remain valid in the future. 2.1.3.6 Public Facilities and Institutions A survey was conducted to locate public facilities and institutions, such as schools, hospitals, prisons, and parks, within 10 miles of the plant. 2.1.3.6.1 Schools Schools within 10 miles of the plant are listed in Table 2.1-3 and indicated in Figure 2.1-13 (References 16 through 20). Closest to the plant is the Brest School at Woodland Beach (2.5 miles west-southwest) with a 1972 enrollment of 163. The Monroe County Community College, a 2-year college, is located 11 miles west-southwest of the plant and had a 1972 enrollment of 1676 students. 2.1.3.6.2 Hospitals Data on hospitals and nursing facilities are contained in Table 2.1-4 (References 21 through 26). The closest facility to the plant is the Frenchtown Convalescent Center, 6 miles west, with 226 beds. 2.1.3.6.3 Prisons The only jail within 10 miles of the plant is the Monroe County Jail, located in the City of Monroe. It has an average of 50 inmates per day (Reference 27). 2.1-7 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.1.3.6.4 Recreational Areas Recreational areas within 10 miles of the plant are listed in Table 2.1-5 and indicated in Figure 2.1-14 (References 9 and 28 through 30). The recreational facilities closest to the plant are Stony Point Beach, about 2 miles south, and Estral Beach, 2 miles northeast. Swimming is reported to take place there. The largest facility in the area is Sterling State Park, 5 miles southwest of the plant. 2.1.4 Uses of Adjacent Lands and Waters 2.1.4.1 Agricultural Activities Approximately 95 percent of the land area within 10 miles of Fermi 2 is within Monroe County, with the remaining 5 percent in Wayne County. About 71 percent of the land in Monroe County was used for farming; however, only 55 percent of the land within 10 miles of the plant consisted of farms. Farmland use within 10 miles of the plant in 1973 was as follows (Reference 31): Crop Percentage of Farmland Soybeans 50 Corn 22 Wheat 7 Miscellaneous (vegetables, hay, oats, and grazing and 7 pastureland) Idle Cropland 14 Total 100 Data on the principal crops grown within 10 miles of the plant site in 1973 (Reference 31) were as follows: Annual Production Crop Acreage (bushels) Value Soybeans 21,000 840,000 $2,940,000 Corn 9,500 902,500 $1,173,250 Wheat 3,150 126,000 $252,000 All soybeans and wheat were sold as cash crops. Approximately 75 percent of the corn was sold as a cash crop; the remaining 25 percent was used for feed. The large livestock, poultry, and crop farms located within the environs of the Fermi site in 1973 are listed below: 2.1-8 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR Distance (miles) and Direction Owner Farm Type and Information From Plant Ronald Welb Poultry - 2,500 laying hens 5 NW Del Chapman Livestock - 1,500 sheep 7 N Smith and Sons Vegetables and greenhouse products 8 NW Butler Farms Livestock - 500 beef cattle 10 W St. Marys Farm Livestock - 200 beef cattle 10 W Clayton Dick Poultry - 15,000 to 20,000 laying hens 16 WSW Lennard and Sons Potato farm - 2,000 acres 16 WSW The Lennard and Sons farm was the largest potato farm in the State of Michigan, with a gross annual income of approximately $1.8 million. The Smith and Sons farm was one of the largest vegetable and greenhouse-product producers in the State of Michigan, with a gross annual income exceeding $500,000. Table 2.1-7 contains data on the 29 dairy farms within l8 miles of the plant in 1971, and Figure 2.1-15 indicates their locations. Ten of these dairy farms were within 10 miles. The closest, owned by John Reiger and containing about 30 milking cows, was approximately 4 miles west of the plant. The only other dairy farm within 5 miles was that of Henry Noel. This dairy farm was approximately 5 miles northwest of the plant and had approximately 25 milking cows in 1973 (References 32, 33, and 34). The productive cows nearest the plant were located 3 miles north-northwest. Milk from these four cows was used for home consumption. Livestock and dairy operations within 10 miles of the plant had been going out of business. Tax increases over the past years (an increase of $40 per acre in 1972) and attractive offers for farmland ($1000 to $1500 per acre) resulted in many farmers selling their grazing and pastureland and accepting employment with local industries (Reference 31). Agricultural statistics for Monroe County indicated that in 1964 there were approximately 3549 dairy cattle. In 1972 there were only 2100 dairy cattle. The County Agricultural Cooperative Extension Service was then discouraging new livestock and dairy operations within the county; however, it was assisting established farms to remain in operation. Crop farmers in the county were able to continue their operations due to the high productivity of the land, which compensated for the large tax increases (Reference 31). In 1967, approximately 10 percent (approximately 37,700 acres) of the county's land was developed. However, agricultural land was being rapidly developed for nonagricultural purposes as the county became more urbanized. The comprehensive development plan of 1967 (Reference 35) for Monroe County called for the retention of agricultural land to serve as buffers between recommended major development corridors. Accordingly, this plan specified that the majority of land located west of U.S. Route 23 and U.S. Route 24, and west of Interstate 75 in the northeast quadrant of the county, be reserved primarily for agricultural use (Figure 2.1-16). 2.1-9 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR Economic projections showed that as the county grew and became more urbanized, some farmlands would be lost to urban development and farm employment would decrease. Farm employees would continue to be attracted to high-paying nonagricultural occupations, and farms would adopt additional labor-saving methods and machinery. It was estimated that by 1980 farm employment in the county would decrease to about 2 percent of the labor force as compared to 5.8 percent in 1960 (Reference 35). The small portion of Wayne County within 10 miles of the plant was predominantly a residential area and had only a limited amount of agricultural activity: small crops of field corn, soybeans, hay, and some fresh market vegetables. There were no dairy farms in this area in 1973 (Reference 36). Agricultural statistics of all counties within 50 miles of the plant site are presented in Tables 2.1-8 through 2.1-11 for the 1969 to 1971 time period (References 37 and 38). 2.1.4.2 Water Uses The most prominent body of water in the environs of the Fermi site is Lake Erie. Rivers and streams entering Lake Erie within 10 miles of the site are shown in Figure 2.1-17. The five drainage basins within a 10-mile radius of the site are as follows (Reference 39): Drainage Area Drainage Basin (square miles) Area between the Huron and 120 Rouge Basins Huron River 923 Stony and Swan Creeks 290 River Raisin 1,043 Southeast Monroe County 189 A detailed description of the hydrology of the region is presented in Section 2.4. 2.1.4.2.1 Potable Water Supplies As shown in Figure 2.1-18, privately owned wells and four municipal water systems served the area within 10 miles of the Fermi site in the 1970 time period. The four municipal systems are those of Detroit, Monroe, Flat Rock, and Toledo (Ohio). The Detroit system served most of Wayne County. In the area within 10 miles of the plant, this water system served portions of Brownstown Township, Rockwood, South Rockwood, the City of Carleton, and Berlin Township. The Flat Rock system served portions of Brownstown Township and Rockwood. The Monroe system, which has its intake on Lake Erie, served most of Frenchtown Township, the City of Monroe, and Monroe Township. The service area of the Toledo system included portions of La Salle and Erie Townships. Although these municipal water systems provided services in these areas, homeowners who had wells prior to the construction of the municipal water services were not obligated to use them. Consequently, about 15 percent of the homeowners in the service areas of these municipal systems were still obtaining their potable water from individually owned wells. 2.1-10 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR Owners of newly constructed dwellings in these service areas, however, were obligated to obtain their potable water from the municipal system. Within 10 miles of the plant, homeowners outside the service areas of the municipal systems obtained their potable water from individually owned wells. These wells ranged in depth from 50 to 120 ft; however, well depths generally do not exceed 70 ft (Subsection 2.4.13.2). Throughout Monroe County there were approximately 6000 active wells in 1972, mostly in the western half of the county. The number of wells drilled from 1964 to 1972 in each of the townships wholly or partially within a 10-mile radius of the Fermi site was reported (Reference 40) to be as follows: Frenchtown 336 Ash 216 Raisinville 324 Berlin 207 Monroe 115 Exeter 132 La Salle 288 Figure 2.1-19 shows the approximate number of wells in use in 1972 and their distribution within 10 miles of the currently unused quarry at the Fermi site (Reference 41). The quality of well-water in Monroe County is generally poor. Efforts were being made for expanded use of municipal water services from the Detroit, Monroe, and Toledo systems. Plans in 1973 showed that Toledo would eventually serve not only La Salle and Erie Townships, but Bedford and Whiteford Townships as well (Reference 40). The Monroe system was planning a new treatment facility in the same region as the 1973 facility to increase the intake capacity to 4.5 billion gal per year, an increase of approximately 125 percent over the 1973 capacity. Future plans called for the servicing of the entire Frenchtown region, Raisinville, Dundee, and parts of London Township. No data on initial construction were available in 1972 (Reference 42). The Monroe water system has its intake on Lake Erie, in the Pointe Aux Peaux region, approximately 1 mile south of the Fermi site. The intake is 5260 ft long and 2.5 ft in diameter (Reference 43). The 1973 plans for the Detroit water system showed that Ash Township was considering the use of Detroit water, while Exeter and London Townships were negotiating for service (Reference 40). At one time, bottled water was being used as potable water by the communities along the Lake Erie shoreline because of the poor quality of the well-water. This condition has since been alleviated as a result of the services provided by the municipal water systems (Reference 40). The following 1973 data on other municipal water systems in Monroe County (Reference 43) are provided for reference: 2.1-11 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR Distance (miles) and Direction Yearly Production System Source From Plant (millions of gallons) Area Served Village of Village of River Raisin 19 W 70.8 Dundee Dundee Village of Village of 2 wells 21 WSW 53.0 Petersburg Petersburg The Flat Rock water intake is located on the Huron River at a point about 10 miles north of the plant. Its average withdrawal is about 750,000 gal per day (Reference 44). Data on municipal water intakes (including those of Toledo and Monroe) from Lake Erie are presented in Table 2.1-12 (1969-1972 data). The locations of the intakes for these municipal water systems are shown in Figure 2.1-20 (References 31, 45, and 46). 2.1.4.2.2 Agricultural Water Supplies Within 10 miles of the plant in 1973, the Smith and Sons farm was the only agricultural user of surface water. The intake of this farm was on Swan Creek, at a point about 8 miles northwest of the plant. Water from this intake was used for irrigation and cattle watering. Within 50 miles of the plant, there were no known withdrawals of water from Lake Erie for agricultural irrigation or livestock watering. Previously existing withdrawals for agricultural purposes had been discontinued in this area. This was primarily a result of the residential development along the lakeshore (Reference 31). 2.1.4.2.3 Recreational Water Uses Along the shoreline of Lake Erie in Monroe County there are numerous communities with beach and boating facilities. Recreational activities at these places include swimming, water-skiing, motorboating, and sportfishing. The following are the principal recreational areas in the environs of the Fermi site: Distance (miles) and Community Direction From Plant Pointe Aux Peaux 1 S Stony Point 1 SSW Estral Beach 2 NE Woodland Beach 3 WSW Detroit Beach 4 WSW Avalon Beach 9 SW Toledo Beach 11 SW Luna Pier 15 SW The majority of the homes in these communities were at one time used as summer cottages; however, most of them were being used as permanent homes in 1973. The water quality along the beaches of these communities was below that required by applicable standards for sports involving body contact with the water. Sterling State Park, located along the Lake 2.1-12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR Erie shoreline 5 miles southwest of the plant site, was closed for swimming because of poor water quality. However, in spite of water quality and water-quality standards, water-sport activities continued to take place on the shoreline area in 1973 (Reference 40). 2.1.4.2.4 Fishing Sportfishing activities in the general environs of the Fermi site are conducted off the shores of Lake Erie and along the shores of the River Raisin, and Stony and Swan Creeks. Lake Erie fish include carp, sheepshead, bullheads, suckers, channel catfish, white bass, yellow perch, and walleye. Fish in the River Raisin and Stony and Swan Creeks include panfish, suckers, catfish, perch, and bass (Reference 47). There were approximately six commercial fishermen in 1973 who used the shores of Lake Erie in the Monroe County area. In 1971, the fish catch was approximately 172,736 lb, representing an estimated value of $24,343 (Reference 47). Commercial fishing in this area slackened over the 2-year period of 1972 and 1973 because of low availability of fish. However, as a result of improving conditions, it was predicted that commercial fishing would increase. A summary of commercial fish landings taken from Lake Erie statistical districts in 1971 is presented in Table 2.1-13 for the Province of Ontario, and Table 2.1-14 for the State of Ohio (References 48 and 49). The respective districts are illustrated in Figure 2.1-21. 2.1.4.2.5 Industrial Water Use Within 10 miles of the plant site, 1974 industrial users of Lake Erie water included the Fermi l Power Plant, the Monroe Power Plant, Union Camp Corporation, and Consolidated Packaging Corporation. The Fermi 1 plant, an oil-fired peaking unit located on the Fermi site, drew both potable and cooling water from Lake Erie. Potable water usage during 1971 and 1972 was 25 million gal per year and 19 million gal per year, respectively. It should be noted that the potable water system for Fermi 1 was the source of demineralized water for the construction of Fermi 2. Cooling water use averaged approximately 72 million gal per day when Fermi 1 was in operation. The Fermi 1 breeder reactor and oil-fired power plant have been permanently decommissioned. Four combustion turbine peakers are still in use on the site. The Monroe Power Plant, which is approximately 6 miles south-southwest of the Fermi site, obtains the major portion of its cooling water from Lake Erie at an intake located about 1300 ft from Lake Erie on the River Raisin. Monroe Unit 1 began operating in 1971, Unit 2 in 1972, Unit 3 in 1973, and Unit 4 in 1974. Each of these four units requires an average of 350,000 gpm for cooling purposes. Discharge is through a canal to Lake Erie. Their potable water supply is obtained from the City of Monroe (Reference 50). The Union Camp Corporation (Reference 51) and the Consolidated Packaging Corporation (Reference 52), both located in the City of Monroe, have their Lake Erie intakes in the Sterling State Park region, which is approximately 5 miles southwest of the Fermi site. The water is piped approximately 3 miles overland to the corporate sites. After usage, it is discharged into the River Raisin at a point approximately 2 miles inland from Lake Erie. Both of these industries share the same pumping and discharging facilities. Their average daily withdrawals are approximately 3 million and 2.6 million gal, respectively. Both facilities obtain their potable water supplies from the Monroe municipal water system. 2.1-13 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR In Monroe, the Ford Motor Company has a large manufacturing plant (2700 employees) that has a water intake on the River Raisin at a point approximately 1.2 miles upriver from Lake Erie. From this intake, the Ford plant draws an average of approximately 12 million gal per day. This water is used for industrial purposes only. The potable water required for the plant is obtained from the City of Monroe at the rate of 200,000 gal per day (Reference 53). 2.1-14 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.1 GEOGRAPHIC AND DEMOGRAPHY REFERENCES

1. Small Area Forecasting System for S. E. Michigan, 1972, Southeast Michigan Council of Governments, Detroit, Michigan, 1972.

2. 1970 Census of Population: General Population Characteristics, Report PC (1)-

B24, Michigan, Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce, August 1971.

3. 1970 Census of Population: Number of Inhabitants, Reports PC (1)-A24, Michigan, July 1971, and PC (1)-A37, Ohio, August 1971, Bureau of the Census, U.S. Department of Commerce.

4. Advance Bulletin: 1971 Census of Canada, Catalogue 92-753 (AP-2), Statistics, Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Commerce; Ottawa, Canada, June 1972.

5. 1966 Census of Canada Population of Counties and Subdivisions of Ontario, Catalogues No. 92-605, Vol. 1, Dominion Bureau of Statistics, Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Commerce, Ottawa, Canada 1967.

6. Michigan Population by County, 1960, 1970-1978, Research Division, Bureau of Programs and Budget, Executive Office, State of Michigan, 1972.

7. Ohio Population Forecasts, by County, Ohio Department of Development, Division of Economic and Community Affairs, State of Ohio, 1970.

8. Edgar C. Kidd, Needs for Seasonal Agricultural and Horticultural Labor in Monroe County, Extension Agricultural Agent, Monroe County, Monroe, Michigan, May 9, 1972.

9. Gerald Edgley, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Switlik, Museum Director, Monroe County Historical Museum, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversations, March 3, 1973.

10. Place of Work, Residents 1970, Southeast Michigan Council of Governments, Detroit, Michigan, February 2, 1972.

11. 1970 Census Data, 1st Count, Southeast Michigan Council of Governments, Detroit, Michigan, February 2, 1972.

12. City of Monroe Land Use Plan, The Department of Community Development, Monroe, Michigan, August 1978.

13. Land Use Plan - Frenchtown Township, Monroe County, Michigan, Frenchtown Township Planning Commission, Parkins, Rogers and Associates, May 1977.

14. Personal conversation, Mr. Eric Anderson, Planner, City of Monroe, Michigan, Office of Community Development, March 20, 1979.

15. Staff Memorandum, Monroe County Planning Commission Staff, February 8, 1979.

2.1-15 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.1 GEOGRAPHIC AND DEMOGRAPHY REFERENCES

16. Louise Moore and Lawrence Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Barbara Needham, Director of Business and Administrative Services, Monroe County Intermediate School District, Monroe, Michigan, Meeting, February 1, 1973.

17. The Wayne County Intermediate School District Directory, 1972-73, The Wayne County Intermediate Office of Education, Wayne County, Michigan, 1972.

18. Gerald Edgley, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Kruse, Business Manager, Wayne County Intermediate School District, Telephone Conversation, February 14, 1973.

19. Gerald Edgley, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Peake, Superintendent of Schools, Monroe County Intermediate School District, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 14, 1973.

20. Louise Moore, NUS Corporation, and Clerk, Registrar's Office, Monroe County Community College, Monroe, Michigan, Meeting, February 1, 1973.

21. Louise Moore, NUS Corporation, and Mrs. Kirkey, Beech Nursing Home, Monroe, Michigan, Conversation, February 1, 1973.

22. Louise Moore, NUS Corporation, and Clerk, Frenchtown Convalescent Center, Monroe, Michigan, Conversation, February 1, 1973.

23. Louise Moore, NUS Corporation, and Mrs. Gittleman, Lutheran Home for the Aged, Monroe, Michigan, Conversation, February 1, 1973.

24. Louise Moore, NUS Corporation, and Clerk, Monroe Convalescent Center, Monroe, Michigan, Conversation, February 1, 1973.

25. Louise Moore, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Joyner, Monroe Care Center, Monroe, Michigan, Conversation, February 1, 1973.

26. Louise Moore, NUS Corporation, and Miss Graizyk, Rockwood Children's Home, Rockwood, Michigan, Conversation, February 21, 1973.

27. Louise Moore, NUS Corporation, and Lieutenant Brown, Monroe County Sheriff's Office, Monroe, Michigan, Meeting, February 1, 1973.

28. Gerald Edgley, NUS Corporation, and Mr. James Akers, Director of Environmental Health, Monroe County, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 17, 1973.

29. Gerald Edgley, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Smith, Park Authority, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 17, 1973.

30. Gerald Edgley, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Scott, Fairgrounds Manager, Monroe County Fairgrounds, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, March 3, 1973.

31. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Edgar C. Kidd, Extension Agricultural Agent, Monroe County, Monroe, Michigan, Meeting, February 2, 1973.

2.1-16 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.1 GEOGRAPHIC AND DEMOGRAPHY REFERENCES

32. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Paul Nevel, Extension Dairy Agent, Monroe County, Monroe, Michigan, Meeting, February 2, 1973.

33. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, from Kenneth Van Pattern, Chief, Dairy Division, Department of Agriculture, Letter.

34. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, from R. N. Baker, D. V. M., Chief, Bureau of Consumer Health Protection, Board of Health, Toledo, Ohio, Letter, January 9, 1973.

35. Complan 2000, Comprehensive Development Plan for Monroe County, Monroe County Regional Planning Commission, Monroe County, Michigan, August 1967.

36. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Juchartz, Extension Agricultural Agent, Wayne County, Detroit, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 21, 1973.

37. 1969 Census of Agriculture - County Data, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, February 1973.

38. 1971 Census of Canada, Advanced Bulletin on Agricultural Statistics: (a) Census Farms by Size, Area, and Use of Farm Land; Catalogue 96-721 (AA-4), August 1972; (b) Areas and Census-Farms Reporting Field Crops; Catalogue 96-718 (AA-1), July 1972; (c) Livestock and Poultry on Census-Farms; Catalogue 96-719 (AA-2), August 1972, Ministry of Industry, Trade, and Commerce, Ottawa, Canada.

39. The Water Resources of Southeastern Michigan, Lansing, Michigan, Michigan Water Resources Commission, Department of Conservation, February 1968.

40. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and James E. Akers, Director, Environmental Health Department, Monroe County Health Department, Monroe, Michigan, Meeting, February 2, 1973.

41. The Detroit Edison Company, Answers to U.S. Atomic Energy Commission's Letter of April 20, 1972, on Quarry Operations, Enrico Fermi Unit 2, Docket 50-341, May 5, 1972.

42. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Mr. J. D. D'Haene, Supervisor of Filtration, Monroe Municipal Water System, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 27, 1973.

43. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Mr. T. L. Vander Velde, Chief, Division of Water Supply, Bureau of Environmental Health, State of Michigan, Lansing, Michigan, Letter, January 12, 1973.

44. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Floyd Bransheau, Operator, Flat Rock Water Company, Flat Rock Township, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 27, 1973.

2.1-17 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.1 GEOGRAPHIC AND DEMOGRAPHY REFERENCES

45. Gerald Edgely, NUS Corporation, and the following officials, Telephone Communications:

Water Systems Name Title Ashtabula Mr. Smith Administrative Assistant Conneaut Mr. Coates Chief Operator Vermilion Mr. Strittrather Superintendant of Water Lorain Mr. Emerick Superintendant of Water Cleveland Mr. Mash Duty Project Engineer Fairport Mr. Killimen Superintendant of Water Erie Mr. Prazer Bureau Chief Senior Administrative Buffalo Mr. Martin Assistant Dunkirk Mr. Smagner Assistant Operator Port Colborne Mr. Farbiak Area Foreman Port Maitland Mr. Sakamopo Project Service Manager Port Stanley Mrs. Taylor Secretary-Treasurer Blenheim Mr. Gawley Secretary-Treasurer Leamington Mr. Sanger Secretary-Treasurer Kingsville Mr. Sanger Secretary-Treasurer Detroit Mr. Janeczko Public Information Monroe Mr. J. D. DHaene Supervisor of Filtration Toledo Mr. Hixson Chief Engineer for Water Port Clinton Mr. Held Chief Operator Sandusky Mr. Showalter Assistant Superintendant Huron Mr. Hetrick Director of Utilities Port Dover Mr. Barry Foreman Wheatly Mr. Thompson Secretary-Treasurer

46. Lake Erie, Ohio, Pennsylvania, New York Intake Water Quality, Summary 1970, Environmental Protection Agency, Region V, August 1971.

47. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Ned Fogie, Great Lakes Fish Specialist, Great Lakes Section, Fishery Division, Lansing, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, January 9, 1973.

48. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and J. W. Rousom, Supervisor, Commercial Fish Section, Ministry of Natural Resources, Province of Ontario, Canada, Information Received, January 23, 1973.

2.1-18 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.1 GEOGRAPHIC AND DEMOGRAPHY REFERENCES

49. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and R. L. Scholl, Fish Management Supervisor, Lake Erie Fisheries Research Unit, Sandusky, Ohio, Information Received, January 11, 1973.

50. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Paul Murphy, Plant Superintendent, Monroe Power Plant, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 27, 1973.

51. Gerald Edgely, NUS Corporation, and L. Mandwehr, Industrial Relations, Union Camp Corporation, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 28, 1973.

52. Gerald Edgely, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Duval, Senior Plant Engineer, Consolidated Packaging Corporation, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 28, 1973.

53. Lawrence R. Kolbicka, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Ash, Supervisor of Water and Waste Treatment, Ford Motor Company, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 27, 1973.

2.1-19 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-1 TOWNS AND CITIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and Town/Citya 1970 Population Direction From Site 0-10 Miles Stony Point 1,370 1 SSW Estral Beach 419 2 NE Woodland Beach 2,249 3 WSW Detroit Beach 2,053 4 WSW Monroe (closest point) 23,894 5.5 SW South Monroe 3,012 6 SW South Rockwood 1,477 8N Patterson Gardens 2,169 9W Rockwood 3,119 9N Carleton 1,503 9 NW 10-20 Miles Flat Rock 5,643 11 N Gibralter 3,325 11 NNE Amherstburg, Ontario (Canada) 5,045 12 NE Luna Pier 1,418 12 SW Woodhaven 3,330 13 N Trenton 24,127 13 NNE Maybee 485 14 WNW Grosse Ile 7,799 15 NNE Riverview 11,342 17 NNE Harrow, Ontario (Canada) 1,964 18 ENE Southgate 33,909 18 N Harbor View, Ohio 238 19 SSW Reno Beach, Ohio 1,049 19 S Wyandotte 41,061 19 NNE 20-30 Miles Dundee 2,472 20 W Taylor 70,020 20 N Belleville 2,406 21 NNW Allen Park 40,747 22 N Ecorse 17,515 22 NNE Page 1 of 5 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-1 TOWNS AND CITIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and Town/Citya 1970 Population Direction From Site Lambertville 5,721 22 SW Lincoln Park 52,984 22 NNE Melvindale 13,862 23 NNE Petersburg 1,227 23 W River Rouge 15,947 23 NNE Milan 4,533 24 WNW

Dearborn 109,

358 25 N Inkster 38,420 25N Norwood 30,420 25 SSW Toledo, Ohio 383,818 25 SW Wayne 21,054 25 NNW Clay Center 370 26 S Essex, Ontario (Canada) 3,941 26 NE Deerfield 834 27 W Detroit 1,511,482 27 NE Garden City 41,864 27 N Kingsville, Ontario (Canada) 3,952 27 ENE Ottawa Hills, Ohio 4,270 27 SW

Dearborn Heights 80,

069 28 N Milbury, Ohio 771 28 SSW Sylvania, Ohio 12,031 28 SW Windsor, Ontario (Canada) 200,790 28 NNE Westland 86,749 28 NNW Ypsilanti 29,538 28 NW Britton 697 29 W Genoa, Ohio 2,139 29 S Rocky Ridge, Ohio 385 29 S Rossford, Ohio 5,302 29 SSW Walbridge, Ohio 3,208 29 SSW 30-40 Miles Highland Park 35,444 31 NNE Oak Harbor, Ohio 2,807 31 SSE Put-In-Bay, Ohio 135 31 SE Saline 4,811 31 WNW Tecumseh, Ontario (Canada) 124 31 NE Blissfield 2,758 32 WSW Page 2 of 5 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-1 TOWNS AND CITIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and Town/Citya 1970 Population Direction From Site Elmore, Ohio 1,316 32 S Holland, Ohio 1,108 32 SW Maumee, Ohio 15,937 32 SW Perrysbury, Ohio 7,693 32 SW Plymouth 11,758 32 NNW St. Clair Beach, Ontario (Canada) 1,931 32 NE Ann Arbor 99,797 33 WSW Berkey, Ohio 294 33 S Woodville, Ohio 1,834 33 S Hamtramck 27,245 34 NNE Hazel Park 23,784 34 NNE Leamington, Ontario (Canada) 10,229 34 E Port Clinton, Ohio 7,202 34 SSE Grosse Pointe Park 15,585 35 NNE Grosse Pointe 6,637 36 NNE Luckey, Ohio 996 36 SSW Oak Park 36,762 36 N Tecumseh 7,120 36 W Farmington 13,337 37 N Belle River, Ontario (Canada) 2,739 37 NE Metamora, Ohio 594 37 WSW Northville 5,400 37 NNW Clinton 1,677 37 WNW Ferndale 30,850 38 NNE Gibsonbury, Ohio 2,585 38 S Grosse Pointe Farms 11,701 38 NNE Huntington Woods 8,536 38 N Lathrup Village 1,429 38 N Novi 9,668 38 NNW Pemberville, Ohio 1,301 38 SSW Quaker Town 837 38 N Pleasant Ridge 3,989 38 N Berkley 22,618 39 N Center Line 10,379 39 NNE Grosse Pointe Shores 3,042 39 NNE Grosse Pointe Woods 21,878 39 NE Harper Woods 20,186 39 N Marblehead, Ohio 726 39 SE Page 3 of 5 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-1 TOWNS AND CITIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and Town/Citya 1970 Population Direction From Site Wood Creek Farms 1,090 39 N 40-50 Miles Adrian 20,382 40 W Franklin 10,075 40 N Haskins, Ohio 549 40 SW Quaker Town North 7,101 40 N Royal Oak 85,499 40 N Bay View 798 41 SE Beverly Hills 13,598 41 N Bingham Farms 566 41 N East Detroit 45,920 41 NNE Helena, Ohio 298 41 S Madison Heights 38,599 41 NNE Southfield 69,285 41 N South Lyon 2,675 41 NNW Warren 179,260 41 NNE Waterville, Ohio 2,940 41 SW Wheatley, Ontario (Canada) 1,631 41 ENE Ballville, Ohio 1,652 42 S Birmingham 26,170 42 N Clawson 17,617 42 N Dexter 1,729 42 NW Fremont, Ohio 18,490 42 SSE Manchester 1,650 42 WNW St. Clair Shores 88,093 42 NNE Stoney Prairie, Ohio 1,913 42 S Witmore Lake 2,763 42 NW Wixom 2,010 42 NNW Bowling Green, Ohio 21,760 43 SSW Bradner, Ohio 1,140 43 S Roseville 60,529 43 NNE Tontogany, Ohio 395 43 SW Walled Lake 3,759 43 NNW Bloomfield Hills 3,672 44 N Castalia, Ohio 1,045 44 SSE Fraser 11,868 44 NNE Page 4 of 5 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-1 TOWNS AND CITIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and Town/Citya 1970 Population Direction From Site Sandusky, Ohio 32,674 45 SE Lyons, Ohio 630 45 WSW Troy 39,419 45 N Wayne, Ohio 921 45 SSW Wolverine Lake 4,301 45 NNW Delta, Ohio 2,544 46 WSW Orchard Lake Village 1,487 46 N Sterling Heights 61,365 46 NNE Burgoon, Ohio 221 47 S Clyde, Ohio 5,503 47 SSE Portage, Ohio 494 47 SSW Chelsea 3,858 48 NW Bettsville, Ohio 833 48 S Brighton 2,457 48 NNW Grand Rapids, Ohio 976 48 SW Keego Harbor 3,092 48 N Milford 4,699 48 NNW Onsted 555 48 W Rising Sun, Ohio 730 48 S Sandusky South, Ohio 8,501 48 SE Sylvan Lake 2,219 48 N Tilbury, Ontario (Canada) 2,572 48 ENE Green Springs, Ohio 1,279 49 SSE Pontiac 85,279 49 N Utica 3,504 49 NNE West Milgrove, Ohio 215 49 SSW Weston, Ohio 1,269 49 SSW Clair Haven West 1,367 50 NNE Clayton 773 50 W Mt. Clemens 20,476 50 NNE Jerry City, Ohio 470 50 SSW Pinckney 921 50 NW a. Towns and cities identified by the 1970 Census of Population. Page 5 of 5 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-2 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION WITHIN THE LOW-POPULATION ZONE Direction 1970 1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 N 387 504 612 771 970 1,021 NNE 267 348 422 532 669 842 NE 428 557 678 863 1,073 1,350 ENE 0 0 0 0 0 0 E 0 0 0 0 0 0 ESE 0 0 0 0 0 0 SE 0 0 0 0 0 0 SSE 0 0 0 0 0 0 S 445 579 705 886 1,116 1,404 SSW 1,682 2,191 2,662 3,349 4,216 5,307 SW 225 293 356 448 564 710 WSW 940 1,224 1,487 1,872 2,356 2,966 W 144 167 128 287 361 455 WNW 91 118 144 182 228 287 NW 184 240 291 367 462 581 NNW 603 785 954 1,201 1,512 1,902 TOTAL 5,396 7,006 8,439 10,748 13,527 16,825 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-3 SCHOOLS WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and a School 1972 Enrollment Direction From Plant Site

1. Brest 163 2.5 WSW

2. Jefferson High 848 2.8 W

3. Jefferson Jr. High 928 2.8 W Jefferson Elementary 155

4. St. Charles Schools 257 3 NNW

5. St. Anne School 205 4 WSW

6. Henry Niedermeir Elementary 230 4 NW

7. Hurd Road Elementary 752 5 WSW

8. Pt. Moulier School 57 5 NNE

9. Airport Elementary 340 6 NW

10. Golden Elementary 166 7W

11. Zion Lutheran School 174 7 WSW

12. Cantrick Jr. High 1,437 7 WSW

13. Hollywood Elementary 455 7 WSW

14. Fred W. Riter Elementary 396 7N

15. Christiancy Elementary 406 7 WSW

16. St. Mary Parish School 357 7 WSW

17. Orchard Elementary 137 8 WSW

18. Lincoln Elementary 700 8 WSW

19. Monroe Catholic Central 454 8 WSW

20. Riverside Elementary 298 8 WSW

21. Trinity Lutheran School 275 8 WSW

22. Monroe High 2,842 8 WSW

23. St. Mary Academy 526 8 WSW

24. Hall of the Divine Child 218 8 WSW

25. St. John School 230 8 WSW

26. St. Michael's School 350 8 WSW

27. Manor Elementary 339 8 WSW

28. Chapman Elementary 378 8N

29. Rockwood Elementary 286 8N

30. Borrow Elementary 170 9N

31. Airport Community High 1,417 9 NW

32. South Monroe Townsite Elementary 357 9 WSW

33. Waterloo Elementary 257 9 WSW

34. Holy Ghost Lutheran School 101 9 WNW

35. Parsons Elementary 748 9 NW

36. Church Street Elementary 345 9 NW

37. St. Mary 345 9 NW

38. Carleton High and Jr. High 1,782 9 NW

39. Raisinville Elementary 654 10 W

40. St. Patrick School 240 10WNW

41. Carleton Elementary 227 10 NW

42. Custer Elementary I 949 10 WSW Page 1 of 2 REV 17 05/11

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-3 SCHOOLS WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and a School 1972 Enrollment Direction From Plant Site

43. Custer Elementary II 428 10 WSW

44. Monroe County Community College 1,676 11 WSW TOTAL (within 10 miles) 23,183 a

Numbers refer to Figure 2.1-13. Page 2 of 2 REV 17 05/11

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-4 HOSPITALS AND NURSING FACILITIES WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and Hospital/Nursing Home Number of Beds Direction From Plant Site Frenchtown Convalescent Center 226 6W Memorial Hospital of Monroe 78 7W Mercy Hospital 126 7 WSW Monroe Convalescent Center 85 7 WSW Rockwood Childrens Home 8 8N Monroe County Shelter 17 8 WSW Beech Nursing Home 123 8 WSW Lutheran Home for the Aged 102 9 WSW Monroe Care Center (a nursing facility) 103 9 WSW TOTAL 868 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-5 RECREATIONAL AREAS WITHIN 10 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Park/Recreational Facility /Museuma Distance (miles) and Direction

1. Estral Beach 2 NNE

2. Stony Point Beach 2S

3. Woodland Beach 3 WSW b

4. Frenchtown Park 4W

5. Willow Beach 4 WSW

6. Detroit Beach 4 WSW b

7. Sterling State Park 5 SW b

8. Point Mouillee State Game Area 5 NE b

9. Point Mouillee State Game Area 6 NE

10. Custer Park 6 WSW

11. Lake Erie Marshes 7 WSW

12. Heck Park 7 WSW

13. Soldiers and Sailors Park 8 WSW b

14. Custer Museum 8 WSW b

15. Monroe County Historical Museum 8 WSW

16. Bolles Harbor Public Boat Ramp 9 SW

17. Plum Creek Park 9 WSW

18. Waterloo Park 9 WSW

19. Avalon Beach 10 SW b

20. Monroe County Fairgrounds 10 W

21. Huron River (canoeing) 12 WNW a

Numbers refer to Figure 2.1-14. b Attendance data were available for the following six facilities: Number of Visitors Annually Sterling State Park 385,394 Custer Museum 12,000 Monroe County Historical Museum 45,000 Monroe County Fairgrounds 110,000 Frenchtown Park 20,000-30,000 (1974 estimates) Point Mouillee State Game Area 180,000 User Days* A User Day is defined as one person using the facility for at least several hours at a time. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-6 NEEDS FOR SEASONAL AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL LABOR IN MONROE COUNTYa Winter Peak Only March April May June July August September October November Nursery and Landscape Number of 300 - 200 300 300 200 175 175 300 300 200 Workers Percent Migrants 15 - 0 5 15 20 20 10 10 10 10 Commercial Fruits Number of 140 10 20 40 40 120 40 40 140 140 60 Workers Percent Migrants 40 0 0 10 10 40 10 10 40 40 20 Greenhouse Produce Number of 120 120 60 60 50 30 10 10 10 20 20 Workers Percent Migrants 20 20 25 25 25 10 10 10 10 10 10 Commercial Vegetables, Tomatoes Number of 1200 30 40 250 300 300 500 1000 1200 1200 150 Workers Percent Migrants 50 0 0 10 10 10 30 45 45 50 10 General Farm Produce Number of 500 50 50 250 300 200 250 250 450 500 250 Workers Percent Migrants 5 0 0 0 5 10 10 5 5 5 0 Potatoes Number of 75 20 10 20 25 25 40 60 75 75 40 Workers Percent Migrants 60 20 0 10 10 10 20 50 60 60 20 Page 1 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-6 NEEDS FOR SEASONAL AGRICULTURAL AND HORTICULTURAL LABOR IN MONROE COUNTYa Winter Peak Only March April May June July August September October November Totals Number of 2335 230 380 920 1015 875 1015 1535 2165 2335 720 Workers Percent 34 12 4 7 11 17 11 30 32 34 8 Migrants Average Number 795 28 15 61 110 144 223 515 695 795 57 Migrants a Seasonal worker does not include farm manager, year-round hired labor, paid or unpaid year-round workers of the immediate farm family, or pick-your-own consumers. Seasonal worker includes migrant laborers, students, neighbors, trade-off time efforts, and others who work for 1 week or more during the year, at one location. Page 2 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-7 DAIRIES WITHIN 18 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance (miles) and Direction From Number and Owner a Number of Cows Plant Site

1. Fred Kemp 35 10 NW

2. Henry Noel 25 5 NW

3. William King 12 7 NNW

4. Robert Reaume 25 6 NW

5. Irving Langton 25 10 NW

6. F. Hawley and 50 8 NW J. Van Buskirk

7. Laurence Mieden 25 10 NW

8. John Reiger 30 4W

9. Fred Falkenberg 35 9 WNW

10. Frank Kominek 25 11 WNW

11. William McGowan 30 12 WNW

12. Earl and Robert Nowitzke 40 10 NW

13. William Barnaby, Jr. 15 16 W

14. George and Ruth Doty 49 13 W

15. Wilbert Knapp 20 15 W

16. Rolland Lemerand 30 16 W

17. Stella Opferman 30 14 W

18. Alvin Parron 44 14 W

19. Lloyd Schafer 29 15 W

20. M. Knapp and W. Young 50 17 W

21. Glenn Lassey 45 13 WSW

22. Arnold Hotchkiss 40 15 W

23. Donald Doty 35 12 W

24. Jerome Verhille 6 13 WNW

25. Robert Doty 20 13 WNW

26. St. Mary's Farm 93 11 W

27. Glen Johnson 49 11 WSW

28. Reuhs Bros. 149 18 W

29. Julius Jaworski 71 18 W a

Numbers refer to Figure 2.1-15. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-8 FARM SIZE, FARMLAND USE, AND FARM SALES OF COUNTIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE (1969) FARMLAND USE (ACRES) FARM SALES (THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS) CROPLAND Value of All Average Agricultural Crops Including Livestock, c Land Area Land in Percent Farm Products Sold Nursery Poultry, of County Farms of Land Number Size Pasture or All Other All Other Irrigated Average Products and Forest and their b COUNTY (Acres) (Acres) in Farms of Farms (Acres) Total Harvested Grazing Croplanda Woodland Land Land Total Per Farm Hay Products Products MICHIGAN Monroe 356,544 253,927 71.2 2,000 126.9 221,396 162,585 4,001 54,810 15,292 17,239 726 20,052 10.0 2 40 6,317 Wayne 387,200 49,527 12.8 597 82.9 38,887 25,562 2,378 10,947 4,567 6,073 326 5,865 9.8 4,866 6 993 Macomb 307,328 96,934 31.5 997 97.2 77,368 47,335 6,901 23,132 9,029 10,537 1,248 13,382 13.4 9,122 22 4,237 Oakland 554,560 101,820 18.4 863 117.9 68,085 33,362 14,182 20,541 13,706 20,029 499 8,852 10.2 4,387 43 4,421 Livingston 366,080 174,047 47.5 1,099 158.3 119,832 71,810 16,496 31,526 21,125 33,090 702 11,228 10.2 2,855 56 8,317 Washtenaw 464,720 260,283 57.2 1,699 153.1 196,810 126,019 24,074 46,717 26,136 37,337 490 18,439 10.8 5,293 50 13,097 Jackson 446,848 258,094 57.8 1,577 163.6 175,259 100,751 25,618 48,890 27,559 55,276 573 16,923 10.7 3,516 62 13,346 Lenawee 481,856 403,602 83.8 2,558 157.7 335,283 241,044 12,293 81,946 30,913 37,406 640 31,912 12.5 13,427 33 18,453 OHIO Fulton 260,288 239,839 92.1 1,738 137.9 207,129 166,959 4,477 35,693 15,942 16,768 119 35,663 20.5 10,302 35 25,327 Lucas 219,776 98,521 44.8 785 125.5 88,640 74,932 1,726 11,982 4,264 5,617 279 12,386 15.8 9,646 6 2,739 Henry 265,920 266,064 100.1 1,695 156.9 238,297 200,319 5,062 32,916 11,632 16,135 13 25,876 15.3 15,088 12 10,776 Wood 396,288 371,279 93.7 2,181 170.2 333,725 280,223 7,411 46,091 16,998 20,556 326 28,256 12.9 18,202 1 10,053 Putman 311,040 306,085 98.4 1,975 154.9 272,049 231,113 9,436 31,500 16,129 17,979 123 30,056 15.2 15,738 21 14,297 Seneca 352,640 329,755 93.5 1,887 174.7 271,501 207,941 13,167 50,393 31,816 26,438 112 20,873 11.1 11,562 33 9,277 Ottawa 167,296 130,272 77.9 976 133.0 115,093 87,620 1,910 25,563 5,493 9,686 302 9,254 9.4 6,212 7 3,035 Sandusky 261,888 240,924 92.0 1,488 161.9 208,239 160,598 6,939 40,702 13,852 18,903 566 21,225 14.2 13,188 17 8,020 Erie 168,832 106,733 63.2 702 152.0 87,830 64,461 3,434 19,935 7,869 11,034 207 9,026 12.8 4,863 15 4,143 ONTARIO CANADA Kent 616,320 559,811 d 3,748 d 484,482 d 21,229 11,076 16,296 32,911 d d d d d d Essex 460,160 353,203 d 3,768 d 318,138 d 5,573 9,978 9,279 8,248 d d d d d d a Includes cropland used for soil-improvement crops, crops failure, cultivated summer fallow and idle cropland. b Includes pastureland other than cropland and woodland pasture, rangeland, and land in house lots, barn lots, ponds, roads, etc. c Represents market value, before taxes and expenses, of all agricultural products sold by all farms in the census areas. d Data not available. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-9 CROPS HARVESTED IN U.S. COUNTIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE (1969) Field Corn Sorghum Other Green House Small Veg. and Land in Other Products Under Grain Silage Grain Silage Wheat Grains Soy Beans Hay Potatoes Melons Berries Orchards Crops Glass County Acres Bushels Acres Acres Bushels Acres Acres Bushels Acres Acres Bushels Tons Acres Acres Acres Acres Acres Square feet MICHIGAN Lenawee 77,037 7,069,410 12,682 104 4,492 96 31,343 1,379,556 15,532 78,292 2,213,558 61,216 276 1,340 5 719 3,932 128,400 Jackson 31,384 2,389,527 9,211 - - 114 9,963 577,637 10,287 1,431 25,999 87,817 184 961 64 1,126 2,443 36,000 Washtenaw 37,167 3,058,604 7,423 159 4,208 265 15,489 596,895 14,486 11,439 287,359 89,833 340 1,929 66 773 1,991 357,921 Livingston 19,418 1,479,003 8,061 - - 134 6,418 233,206 5,688 723 16,108 77,040 23 475 19 763 2,324 21,136 Oakland 7,862 603,518 1,792 3 180 23 3,540 130,298 2,907 355 7,351 33,208 96 615 52 1,232 607 984,360 Macomb 10,188 796,486 3,789 25 800 24 4,837 176,756 4,514 3,021 76,976 29,855 482 5,480 28 1,458 1,962 1,770,327 Wayne 4,275 295,448 448 - - - 2,177 74,820 1,258 11,537 237,768 5,597 8 2,174 39 469 716 1,196,462 Monroe 39,262 3,518,839 3,524 66 4,030 48 22,684 902,666 9,283 70,220 1,826,878 16,125 2,670 4,899 70 503 4,694 630,306 OHIO Erie 17,754 1,396,548 2,097 112 3,770 20 10,810 393,438 4,636 17,174 422,382 14,742 114 3,946 28 1,305 2,378 645,000 Sandusky 43,863 3,451,504 3,449 1,341 80,513 45 20,595 769,702 8,237 54,651 1,481,979 33,877 357 7,254 46 1,409 8,159 86,840 Ottawa 10,124 670,171 1,285 270 18,250 18 13,109 429,732 5,939 37,348 791,278 28,920 2 2,827 9 1,741 4,112 33,480 Seneca 57,490 4,801,680 2,959 22 1,650 48 31,221 1,443,581 13,710 81,916 2,269,753 40,243 181 1,694 16 24 4,183 111,600 Putman 64,934 5,575,890 2,789 223 14,763 28 27,129 1,091,547 11,314 96,768 2,650,298 33,322 261 5,236 9 14 10,995 - Wood 85,879 6,313,301 3,445 30 2,975 80 40,787 1,688,582 20,604 103,803 2,749,362 48,286 13 3,336 36 69 6,513 431,796 Henry 64,190 5,627,260 2,947 12 550 6 26,306 1,141,355 10,060 78,233 2,336,747 27,171 57 3,888 5 22 7,067 3,000 Lucas 22,048 1,878,614 877 - - - 7,628 323,785 2,760 31,038 787,416 9,631 771 3,653 23 612 2,844 3,203,755 Fulton 69,122 6,330,547 10,556 50 1,000 46 17,326 742,313 6,529 50,984 1,454,446 24,669 839 2,834 21 124 695 40,148 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-10 CROPS HARVESTED IN CANADIAN COUNTIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE (1971) Ontario Province County a Kent Essex Corn Grain 233,745 81,002 Silage 18,013 6,479 Wheat 43,299 48,724 Oats Grain 18,453 12,719 Silage 267 350 Barley 4,962 2,068 Mixed grain 2,226 516 Rye 340 158 Field beans 11,719 492 Tame hay 10,537 13,521 Soy beans 115,119 118,703 Potatoes 505 3,186 Tobacco 2,005 963 Other field crops 1,322 661 a All figures are in acres. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-11 LIVESTOCK AND POULTRY OF COUNTIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE (1969) Chickens County Cattle Milk Cows Hogs Sheep Horses Total Hens Monroe 13,984 2,190 15,408 4,441 942 106,870 104,781 Wayne 2,328 537 1,584 500 669 32,362 31,758 Macomb 12,574 4,966 2,649 1,683 737 62,489 61,306 Oakland 12,008 2,820 3,009 2,584 2,442 58,162 57,779 Livingston 27,660 9,508 5,812 7,497 1,426 10,550 8,721 Washtenaw 33,588 10,550 23,890 53,361 1,961 126,700 111,633 Jackson 40,794 9,566 15,283 17,327 1,616 64,048 59,572 Lenawee 46,691 10,822 39,036 12,765 1,523 284,342 258,350 Fulton a 39,548 6,340 71,393 2,922 670 566,494 436,571 Lucasa 3,968 499 10,470 421 250 113,068 112,861 Henrya 13,744 3,686 23,026 4,103 412 513,142 416,951 Wooda 23,376 1,622 23,093 7,160 812 109,996 108,852 Putnama 20,686 6,348 57,715 6,713 285 571,304 478,747 Senecaa 19,352 7,587 38,744 22,911 680 106,832 99,468 Ottawaa 5,645 1,876 5,643 1,040 200 140,324 123,916 Sanduskya 18,801 3,973 21,959 6,465 566 137,632 110,883 Eriea 8,212 3,604 7,108 2,489 437 71,477 31,808 Kent b 47,883 1,500 113,070 3,934 1,132 452,558 286,199 Essexb 16,162 6,505 27,520 865 1,133 381,461 199,870 a Counties located in Ohio. b Counties located in Canada. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-12 MUNICIPAL WATER INTAKES FROM LAKE ERIE Percent Distance Withdrawal Number of People to Percent to (miles) From Intake Point Year (106 gal/year) Served Industry Residents Plant Sitea Monroe 1972 2,000 40,000 35 65 6 Toledo 1972 29,200 500,000 40 60 28 Kingsville 1972 156 1,400 10 90 28 Leamington 1972 450 10,000 50 50 32 Port Clinton 1971 577 12,000 10 90 37 Wheatley 1972 114 1,059 54 46 42 Sandusky 1972 3,960 47,000 60 40 48 Huron 1972 450-500 7,500 33 67 53 Vermilion 1972 33 9,000 - - 62 Lorain 1972 5,027 85,000 39 61 70 Blenheim 1972 90 4,000 5 95 70 Cleveland 1972 130,875 2,000,000 52 48 93 Fairport 1971 274 36,000 66 34 108 Port Stanley 1971 88 (summer 0 100 112 residents only) Ashtabula 1972 1,900 34,000-36,000 45 55 130 Conneaut 1969 477 15,000 52 48 140 Erie 1972 16,700 180,000 35 65 167 Port Dover 1972 165 4,000-7,000 10 90 170 Port Maitland 1972 4,100 1,000 90 10 197 Dunkirk 1972 1,487 30,000 51 49 207 Port Colborne 1972 1,191 20,000 5 95 212 Buffalo 1972 47,950 500,000 30 70 233 a See Figure 2.1-20 for locations. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-13

SUMMARY

OF COMMERCIAL FISH LANDINGS (POUNDS) BY STATISTICAL DISTRICT FOR 1971 FOR THE PROVINCE OF ONTARIOa Totals Species S.D. 1 S.D. 2 S.D. 3 S.D. 4 S.D. 5 Pounds Dollars Bowfin - - - 19,640 - 19,640 589 Bullhead - - - 34,259 383 34,642 5,307 Carp 27,052 522 - 23,233 1,793 52,600 3,548 Catfish 38,514 40,949 11,159 9,207 1,207 101,036 24,474 Northern Pike - - 15 1,642 410 2,067 323 Yellow Perch 3,770,391 6,383,547 2,880,354 360,175 523,144 13,917,611 3,563,039 Suckers 4,536 262 65 5,488 2,192 12,543 1,248 Rock Bass - 284 - 18,439 8,271 26,994 5,987 Freshwater Drum 355 65,946 9,460 8,424 8,788 92,973 2,953 Smelt 12,324 958,481 1,117,242 11,041,802 526 13,130,375 571,461 Sunfish - - - 84,271 - 84,271 23,664 White Bass 3,210 9,274 44,006 23,869 11,668 92,027 22,182 Lake Whitefish 630 21 - 179 2 832 312 Yellow Pickerel 5,300 1,703 6 117 23,049 30,175 15,272 Others 371,153 985,503 16,451 25,900 78,766 1,477,773 14,333 Total Catch (lb) 4,233,465 8,446,492 4,078,758 11,656,645 660,199 29,075,559 Total Value ($) 896,694 1,719,527 852,174 613,199 173,098 4,254,692 a See Figure 2.1-21 for district areas. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.1-14

SUMMARY

OF COMMERCIAL FISH LANDINGS (POUNDS) BY STATISTICAL DISTRICT FOR 1971 FOR THE STATE OF OHIOa Species S.D. 6 S.D. 7 S.D. 8 S.D. 9 Totals Buffalo 6,628 35 100 2,347 9,110 Bullhead 14,753 55 4 21,657 36,469 Carp 2,237,111 10,058 44 912,211 3,159,424 Catfish 423,822 9,882 78 193,518 627,300 Freshwater Drum 245,313 138,085 856 441,982 826,236 Goldfish 2,754 1 - 76,821 79,576 Quillback 27,644 412 - - 28,056 Smelt 230 183 - - 413 Suckers 67,675 19,636 138 31,020 118,469 White Bass 676,287 62,989 4,687 184,949 928,912 Yellow Perch 691,726 937,868 531,917 27,395 2,188,906 Total Catch 4,393,943 2,358,408 537,824 1,891,900 8,002,871 a See Figure 2.1-21 for district areas. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

I WISCONSIN MICHIGAN ONTARIO

--                                  Detroit FERMI SITE
                      *---r,-       -

Toledo ILLINOIS INDIANA 1 i OHIO PENNSYLVANIA 1,L .....v----:J-- k Cincinnati r W E ST VIRGINIA 1

                                                                              \

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 0 50 100 I I I

• FIGURE 2. 1-1 SCALE IN MILES SITE LOCATION REV 22 04/19

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         -----T-------------                                                                    N

• wuL1.u1*:o ... 1 .. I 1 I

                                                                                     "!.!'**u*I                                              I                                            f              _ * ;                                                                                                                       1                          -: I f                                                                                                                               .                                                                                                                                     *taauv,u.e'                       _)                                                                                                                                               I
                                                                                      ' ,                                                     :                  "Offfft<KU l                            '.'               I              'IU)1Lt                                                                                                                            ,ow,uv,ut'                                                                                                                                               I f                                 /
                                                                                      -,                                                     I                            ::; I                     lll*ON...,11,                          '._"'                                                                                                                     I                                                                                                                                                 ......          I .....

I MOwh,1 L!!!.! L wNI AT,.H*I LHOT I 1

• CNAJNAM I ca**t 1

f----!'.!.* ---.!.!.. __**_!!,**' --.. ------"'"' --1-1,-. --ALAHNN - - I-------r-- ------.... **-* *_Y NOWILL -

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            --___ - ,   -                        -        . *- ocio1-*i __ .-*_.,.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              .                                                       .KEN'f

- - r I , ,;,. .;;.. --;,

                                                                              !                                                                                                                                              ,                                                                                                                                                                                          I                                    j
                                                                                                                                       ,.J
                                                                                                                                    / fa...llOlll I                                                                          I                                t                                                 -                                                                                         I                                                 I                                                                                "' - ... -uACltu*
                                                                                                               '1
                                                                                                                                     ,,                                                                                                                        I .. -

• I L ____ ;:;;.

                                                                             '                                :                       i.,..1                                             :                                I                                     I                                       I              . I                                             I I

r-- ....... -- 1 I I I C!....111!'----*+wr:;--+- I I l&JON IA"** I 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ---r-------7 I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     *vuL I

lt,,t.NJYILLI

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             - ----........J.--------,

I WNtH oa*l I IOICO; I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            - -----+---**_!'                                                                                                              \) ',,,,

I -- ',, I I I NUl¥"4 I I  : /

                                                                                                                                                                                       '                                 I                                     II                                      I                                 I i                          I                     ' NW I                             I I

1 I LUI.If I \ I uoc *-*** I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             '.                 /-*!"'**:!                                      I N                         \,,, '

NAMLIN I I ' I J -UVUI* - WALTON: :J.._ aOOCJJlle : I I I , I 1 r--*-- - -*-*---*-* *-*--' *----,---,;.-*t--!!!+---1*!'!!.!'*.:.+-'!."J,...-! .. _ PUtN.1--+-* NAMeV* . 1  :

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  '"'"""..--,/ ,<,

j CALHOUN I*******  : ' I I \\rAs ENA\\I lplNNflUa  :  : JA --KSjON  : I I I llYh I I 1 - - I I I I j Mllt:_;,J-, Oa*  : I I __ ;  :  : I I*

       ,_1'.:', '*:11 : *,';:,*,,                                                CCINVtl

I I (LA.I NCi I" 1otOl'OaT I I  !

i I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     '        NINIIITTA 1 I

I

      .,....,...,. __ ('"*'/- ---                                                                     I LIi 1 --! ! __l,!t*,!l_!IIL
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ,r" _,*<..,,..- '     ,/
                                                                                   ------ -- --- -                                     ..1, ______                                                                                                                                   IYIII                                  / ..... -

J1111;.,.:-:....,--, -----. - 7 - ------1 ,-- I 1 ho ".J r, -- 1' u

            'l*CI * :- ..  .,_ , 11f,.";lff 1                             ,

II 1 INlIDAN T I r I I ,, -

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      / ,..J I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ',LIMIN 1

,* / I (

r 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             --*!.0-.

I I I I aA'l'lll *J* 1 u11,11r...;; :

                                                                                                                                                                                                                  .:;**u i:zy ---                              ':_l_!! ___ l*-*l--i MAIINe O
                                           , N IWTON                      II D Oll(ltA

_j_ --\.-,-- J ----'-'J:__ T r.__,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   !_A!'!!..:-- -

11 I I KKIOID 1"UOt. 1"1 MICIUQAN CfNlU I I ',,,

• t I I

I I  : 4ll10N I - '. ' 1 I I j I

- * )

L

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  -L10Nl1                                                                                                                                                                                                                      
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ..i""c; ... uot/                                                                                                 AI

' CONtoac:  ! ------,__ __ L_*

I I I I_______ AfNI NI

- __ 1_____

1 IUlll N eToN: TIKONINA 1-.,.,0N 1 \_'., "0*U

                                                                                                                                                                        --1-- __  f               ::-:_
                                                                                                                                                                                               !C!.'!_t;_!)*!'!

I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          !'!'- 0 I

I t-- -----*!..J I I NA..OllON I I k : *-- / I I I IUl\lfOC.TOt, I I 1 1 i --- --- ---- 7 I ,-, I '"0"'I I 1 "'"""'cn,u I I I 1119nN I

                    , * ,lfllfNI I                        *-

r

                                                                                          *. , "°" ;

c..., I CLAIINIOJ,t I I ' - I 1 ' '-- I BRA INIIWOO* 1 .. u*?:+- V .,., 1 *iuao

                                                                                 ---1i-----
                                                                                                    '*uuu I

HOMII

                                                                                                                                                                                             . ..!".J.--!'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ------+-:"'c,;.;;:;-,,

1 , .... ,,, , cou,111111 ll HILLS I '  :, . ALF., '; I  ! LENA,V I--------- *! 1 N CH ' 1 1 1 1 1 lfflllD:

                 *-000 I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                    /

I I I DfVILII.All 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ,a';'STIO I, . MAT'UION IIAJAV'tA
                                                              -     :co-,ewa,*.-.-;0uNCv-- --                                           I I

1 r

                                                                                                                                                 - llTCNfl
                                                                                                                                                            - -lL*
                                                                                                                                                         -'"- -1
                                                                                                                                                                                -T" 9!*_!

JONU"f1Hf  : NO MOKOWi 1------ - -+-*----------C!!tl =-,- ll:M.D***: IOMfHti:" I ouou

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        *'-w l!_*!_e_!!

I 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 , .... CL H
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     '-- -- - --- --t'---- -----

1 ucu .. I J -- I E l l 1 ,d,* C01ow .. 1u Qu,111c, iI **"'LW4

                                                                                                                                                                                '-----==!!_*:*

IIIHIDA1 1 I 1

I ,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              *            -Nl'IOulUCI<:

I I I

A-NI NI I

I I I I I 50 Ml.

                   - - - - - .... -- - - - - - t - - - -                                                                                *- ----L.!*

il_---NIL,---....--- . : AH,MI; WMIAUAN*l I i- - I *- .ON o . ALaAN111 I t-------;I --- ----- I---IOlLIN --- r IOMI I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ------1---*0IIIA,.: --- ---- --
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 .AIIIN I               Ho,uo,,, I I                                       :

• C1AHO';!. 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  . -  ,                                      I I                                                                                                                                              !                                                                             ,--:.,

1 1 HAD1N01 1  ! , r: I I t  : '.  :  :  : t-..isoi. I I I NOll ,

                                                                                                ---- ---- -                            L---.....          ----*17____        I c.aaH1.&. -

I JIUIUONi I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         --- ...l ------- - ------T -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ,inuo.e I                     MV0Mttrt1 I

AD KIN DIINooK C AllflOUflA * ... ,oo.u, 1 ,  :**t1 _  : I ,' I , I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                .+

I I I L I

       *--*----*--**'-------                                                                                                          :*-*                                                                       I Legend                                                                               !                            :

c:-.-i:. .... --oa .. if I ----,H,: --L----**--"-...- : ........_11110"' ,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            ...( ..

i,....-----,---- i CA-MIIIIM I AMIOY I . -***N1 I MIDINA I . State Lines T::;:p r  :::m:.... , ,.- L:: WILLIAMS fil 00

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           '. o '°"'" ...
                    -----                                                                                                          s                                                                                                                               , ,,"

NO_,_.. * .. MADIION,uc*11Kt** International ines  :

                                                                                                                                                                                               ,o.. wAni r- -,

L I f I MON'm*l I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           *wBl UN*'*

I -----!* !'i- - - I Corporate Boundary I  :

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              !o_.,*.

• I

                                                 ,.--,                                                                                                                                                   tJ                                                                           ,

K l.. * .: __. for Cities &Towns I I ti'"'" 11.ah,ll I II

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              '                ]>       '
                                                                                                                                              --*.loji'lC--!"!*I -

f

_!t- *L-, I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   -'C"IO,o 1 I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       -*,;.ti         :

t I 1 1,.,.11 t GIIM CllllrlTONI YOIK 0 5 10 20 I *=u* I (.,,. I '!'f ' r:-:*-- jHERY : t

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 -----t----

1 I L!,,(jOIIPN: l

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ",! GPIILI                                                  -*!_1Ll'4 - -**.*

Scale in Miles

1. .

                                                                                                                                             ,----t--.!!!..'!..*.

I

                                                                                                                                             *DEHA?-:C E I

I t\N!T I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   ;                                                    0
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  .-*1 t

__ Mtl*o**, I 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                   ,... IMlI WASHtNG10H, 1

TlfllN ADAMI l I NAPOI.ION1 1 NAIIIIOH1 I 1

1 DAMAICU

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        !f fil:A"h**

I r-*w1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    *1 .. , *o..

I I t '

:NOii.i r-.,ti I

I I ""'""' I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                --*-----r----*--r -- ---

I I II Ca,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ;(?,"',,

IMONTOOMII

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     , ...... ,a 1

Fermi 2 1 .,,,qy'11' 1 t'o ..r* ... ooo ,. * *;./

• I I I -:.,*** -I S SW I TA.GI UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT L ------------7 MICll't1LLl 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                         ......                      DllAWAII' IICH<AHD L      _
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      .....oc.

1 _ .MON OOl 1 _ "c"""

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            '1
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                - --- ..,.,o... ___ ..... ,, __ ,.... , '*

1 1 I ..c,*.:.*" I t I I I 1.. I L

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   ---   or,1.aNcl' I                                                                                   J                                                                                              FIGURE 2.1-2 SITE - SURROUNDING REGION REV 22 04/19

                  \I                    WAYNE COUNTY                          CANADA ESSEX COUNTY Milan LEGEND County Lines Dundee Towns & Cities Interstate & U.S. Highway N um bers--       \!V** Y    r::1 Latitude Lines Railroads                                      11111111111,111 Township          Lines ERIE SE I Wh.......-                                    SSE               in 0M co Whiteford

___..,_ ------- MICJIGAN 0 4 8 12 I__.......___.___.__Jl__.l,..__.L_....L-1.I _J-"'---'--_Jl SCALE IN Ml LES Sylvania OHIO LUCAS COUNTY Fermi 2 rt' UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-3 SITE - IMMEDIATE ENVIRONS

REFERENCE:

ADAPTED FROM DETROIT EDISON COMPANY SERVICE AREA GENERAL MAP, 1971 REV 22 04/19

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-4 SITE AERIAL VIEW REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2102 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-5 SITE PLOT PLAN REV 22 04/19

Annulus 0-1 Mi. 1-2 Mi. 2-3 Mi. 3-4 Mi. 4-5 Mi. 5-10 Mi. Total Annulus 10-20 Mi. 20-30 Mi. Total Total 0-10 Mi. 30-40 Mi. : 40-50 Mi. 10-50 Mi. 0-50 Mi. Population 267 3035 2094 3103 2636 52828 63963 Population 268181 1631606 2402120 1132390 5434297 5498260 N N 305574 W 13048 o o E w 22783 449 E NOTE: 24301 See Corresponding Maps, Figures 2.1-2 And 2.1-3 s s Values For 0-1 Mile Annulus N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE Fermi 2 S SSW sw WSW W WNW NW NNW UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-6 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION -1970 0-10 MILES AND 10-50 MILES

Total Total Total Annulus 0-1 Mi. 1-2 Mi. 2-3 Mi. 3-4 Mi. 4-5 Mi. 5-10 Mi. Annulus 10-20 Mi. 20-30 Mi. 30-40 Mi. 40-50 Mi. 0-10 Mi. 10-50 Mi. 0-50 Mi. Population 348 3952 2726 4040 3431 65814 80311 Population 290487 1714400 2464003 1549577 6018467 6098778 N N 407896 o o E W 23779 533 E 28287 Note: See Corresponding Maps, Figures 2.1-2 And 2.1-3 s s Values For 0-1 Mile Annulus N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE Fermi 2 12~4 1:91 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1WSW 1 0 0 1WNW 1 NW 0 5 1NNW 1 0 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT S SSW SW W FIGURE 2.1-7 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION - 1980 0-10 MILES AND 10-50 MILES

Total Total Total Annulus 0-1 Mi. 1-2 Mi. 2-3 Mi. 3-4 Mi. 4-5 Mi. 5-10 Mi. Annulus 10-20 Mi. 20-30 Mi. 30-40 Mi. 40-50 Mi. 0-10 Mi. 10-50 Mi. 0-50 Mi. Population 423 4802 3314 4909 4171 79597 97216 Population 342833 1962184 2699620 1839752 6844389 6941605 N N W 20645 o W 24819 632 E E 32931 Note: See Corresponding Maps, Figures 2.1-2 And 2.1-3 s s Values For 0-1 Mile Annulus N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE Iwsw I W IWNW~ I NW INNW I a a

o911~81 Fermi 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT S ssw SW FIGURE 2.1-8 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION - 1990 0-10 MILES AND 1()"50 MILES

Total Total Annulus 0-1 Mi. 1-2 Mi. 2-3 Mi. 3-4 Mi. 4-5 Mi. 5-10Mi. Annulus 10-20 Mi. 20-30 Mi. 30-40 Mi. 40-50 Mi. Total 0-10 Mi. 10-50 Mi. 0-50 Mi. Population 531 6045 4172 6179 5250 98161 120338 Population 389812 2211899 3079497 2369871 8051079 8171417 N N 608950 W 25984 o o E W 25904 750 E Note: 38345 See Corresponding Maps, Figures 2.1-2 And 2.1-3 s s Values For 0-1 Mile Annulus N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE I~ I I I o Fermi 2 [3~B 11°351 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW FIGURE 2.1-9 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION - 2000 0-10MILESAND 10-50 MILES

Total Total Total Annulus 0-1 Mi. 1-2 Mi. 2-3 Mi. 3-4 Mi. 4-5 Mi. 5-10 Mi. 0-10 Mi. Annulus 10-20 Mi. 20-30 Mi. 30-40 Mi. 40-50Mi. 10-50 Mi. 0-50 Mi. Population 669 7608 5250 7778 6607 121322 149234 Population 444484 250601 3556762 3070040 9577887 9727121 N N 767216 W 27037 891 E W 32704 o o E Note: 44656 See Corresponding Maps, Figures 2.1-2 And 2.1-3 s s Valu. For 0-1 Mil. Annulus

                                        ~ I W IWNW I NW INNW N     NNE  NE    ENE       E     ESE  SE    SSE 14~9 1,7ssw I Iwsw                           ~ I                                                                                                     Fermi 2 0   0             0        0  Q 0 0              0        0  10                                                                                                           UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT S         SW FIGURE 2.1-10 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION - 2010 0-10 MILES AND 10-50 MILES

Total Total Total Annulus 0-1 Mi. 1-2Mi. 2-3Mi. 3-4 Mi. 4-5 Mi. 5-10 Mi. Annulus 10-20 Mi. 20-30 Mi. 30-40 Mi. 40-50 Mi. 0-10 Mi. 10-50 Mi. 0-50 Mi. Population 843 9575 6607 9790 8314 150242 185371 Population 508370 2856551 4158690 4003471 11527082 11712453 N N 966615 w W 28219 1057 E o E Note: 52013 See Corresponding Maps, Figures 2.1-2 And 2.1-3 s s Values For 0-1 Mile Annulus N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE 16~5 12~S I I I I I ~31 ~ I 0 0 0 0 0 0 Fermi 2 0 0 W WNW NW NNW UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT S SSW SW WSW FIGURE 2.1-11 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION - 2020 0-10 MILES AND 10-50 MILES

o o o o o

                 ,/
                /

+ I UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

            /0 Sider and                   FIGURE 2.1-12
          /                 LOW-POPULATION ZONE

17 WAYNE COUNTY CANADA __ L_ ESSEX COUNTY MONROE COUNTY I

                                                               \
                                                                 \
                                                                   \\\'o LEGEND County Lines                        ----
                                                                      ,i
                                                                       \  -
                                                                         \t                          Towns & Cities                                           1
                                                                          \ 0-
                                                                           \ O;.
                                                                            \ .L Interstate & U.S. Highway Numbers Latitude Lines RR New York Central Railroad                             I I I I I I 11 II II Schools                NUMBER    *   (See Table 2.1-3}

MICHIG_.,... 0 I ' 4 SCALE IN MILES 8 I 12 I OHIO LUCAS COUNTY

                              ,.J l

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-13 SCHOOLS IN THE VICINITY

REFERENCE:

ADAPTED FROM DETROIT EDISON COMPANY SERVICE AREA GENERAL MAP, 1971 REV 22 04/19

         \l WAYNE COUNTY                               CANADA

__ L ESSEX COUNTY MONROE COUNTY LEGEND

                                                            \\\i
                                                                \ -

County Lines

                                                                 \\                              Towns & Cities
                                                                  \ i.
                                                                   \ 
                                                                    \ .t.

Interstate & U.S. Highway Numbers@ 0 New York Central RR Latitude lines Railroad lllllltllflllll Recreational Areas NUMBER (See Table 2.1-3) 0 4 8 12 I I I I SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-14 RECREATION AREAS IN THE VICII\IITY

REFERENCE:

ADAPTED FROM DETROIT EDISON COMPANY SERVICE AREA GENERAL MAP, 1971 REV 22 04/19

I Augusta i Sumpter I Huron ( Woodhaven I I I wAYNE co it---- ___ ..., I WASHTENAW co London 4i Exeter I Ash I I 1 5_ CANADA I \I 12 lI _ MONRO 10 9

      @I
          'Raisi\e -
       @' @)

22 18 r 1

                                          /

I@ t7 @ 10 Mi I 2& L / Ida r _ _J. Lasalle Mon a 27 j I @', I I Bedf;;- lerie - LAKE ERIE 0 LEGEND: DAIRY (SEE TABLE 2.1-71 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-15

REFERENCE:

ADAPTED FROM SOUTHEAST MICHIGAN COUNCIL DAIRY FARMS IN THE VICINITY OF GOVERNMENTS- COUNTY-TOWNSHIP-CITY VILLAGE MAP, 1971 REV 22 04/19

ETE~ SCOFIELD RD.

                                                                        ,B' AIRPORT
                                              ~ RESIDENCE
                                                                        §§a INOUSTRY:

HEAVY LIGHT E\\\\\\\\\J COMMERCE: GENERAL BUSINESS COMPARISON SHOPPING AGRICUL TURE I I PUBLIC, RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE 1ft~2t);] (7itu of

                                        +.'

illo*nroe W o , 1 2 I 3 I SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-16 MONROE COUNTY LAND USE PLAN

REFERENCE:

ADAPTED FROM MONROE COUNTY COMPLAN, 2000,1967 REV 22 04/19

CANADA 10 Mi Lake Erie Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-17 LAKES, RIVERS, ANO STREAMS IN THE VICINITY REV 22 04/19

Augusta Sumpter if---- I WASHTENAW CO London CANADA I I L 10 Mi Legend: Bedford \it/// Monroe Water Distribution

                                -----'//////
                                     ,;,;,;,;,;,; Toledo Water Distribution c((((<((<((((((( Well Water Detroit Water Distribution LAKE ERIE Detroit And Flat Rock Distribution Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-18 POTABLE WATER SUPPLIES IN THE VICINITY REV 22 04/19

746 580 I Ash Twp. Frenchtown Twp. 320 140 871 --, Berlin Twp. 0 L __ 10mi 5mi. 375 ,, ,., l?;--1.l\} "-... {J I 1 L.r- City Of Monroe I...,

           -,                                       2              256
                 ', '\

21 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-19 DISTRIBUTION OF WATER WELLS WITHIN A 10 MILE RADIUS OF THE SITE REV 22 04/19

MICHIGAN Port Dover Port Bruce Port Stanley Port Burwell Lake Erie NEW YORK L---- PEN\\SYLVANIA Huron OHIO Legend: Water Intake Points .............. Q (Refer to Table 2.1-12) 0 10 20 30 SCA°LE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-20 POTABLE WATER INTAKES ON LAKE ERIE REV 22 04/19

ONTARIO PROVINCE (CANADA) Norfolk I Elgin Port Dover \

                                                                            \         s.o. 5
                                                                             \             /

I \ /*

                                                                         /*
                                                      .1.---,-

MICHIGAN \ S.0.4 s.o. 3 eanada - -

                                     -                       I
                            , .,,/' I                         I                              NEW YORK s.o. 2 LAKE ERIE    I         s.o. 9 I
                     ,/               I S.D. 8 PENNSYLVANIA Huron             OHIO (Refer to Tables 2.1-13 and 2.1-14) 0        10   20     30 SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.1-21 COMMERCIAL FISHING STATISTICAL DISTRICTS IN LAKE ERIE REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.2 NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES Section 2.2 was prepared circa 1974 at the time of preparation of the original FSAR. It has not generally been updated in the area of nearby industrial, transportation, and military facilities since it represents the area at the time the Construction Permit was issued. However, changes have been made based on additions/modifications of facilities in the area. 2.2.1 Locations and Routes 2.2.1.1 Industrial Facilities Industrial (and commercial) facilities within 5 miles of Fermi 2 are listed in Table 2.2-1, along with their products and number of employees (Reference 1). The Fermi 1 breeder reactor, also on the Fermi site, is not operating and has been permanently shut down. The Fermi 1 plant is located on the site with Fermi 2. The Fermi 1 oil-fired plant has also been decommissioned, and it has been demolished. The 800,000-gal oil storage tank, which supplied the oil-fired boiler, has been abandoned. There is an additional nuclear power plant site within 30 miles of the Fermi site (Reference 2). This is Toledo Edison Company's Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, approximately 26 miles to the south-southeast. There are three extractive industries within 10 miles of the site. The France Stone Company of Monroe, Michigan, is located 9.4 miles southwest of the Fermi site; the maximum quantity of explosives (mainly ammonium nitrate) stored at this quarry is between 25,000 and 35,000 lb (Reference 3). The Halloway Construction Company operates a quarry about 8 miles north of the site. A maximum of about 25,000 lb of explosives is stored at this quarry (Reference 4). Rockwood Stone, Inc., operates a quarry 3 miles north-northeast of the site. As reported to the NRC in July 1986, the maximum quantity of explosives located at this quarry is between 50,000 and 80,000 lb. The Monroe Branch of the Austin Powder Company maintains a maximum storage of approximately 25,000 lb of dynamite at a site 6.7 miles west-southwest of the Fermi site. These explosives are used for agriculture and for highway construction, as well as for quarrying activities (Reference 5). The Frenchtown Township water treatment facility is located approximately 2.5 miles south of the site. There are no explosives stored at this facility. The facility has a 1,000 gallon underground fuel oil storage tank for an onsite emergency generator. (Reference 5a). 2.2.1.2 Transportation Facilities There are two major roads within 10 miles of the plant, Interstate 75 and U.S. Routes 24/25, shown in Figure 2.1-3. Their closest approach to the plant is 4.1 miles and 5.8 miles north-west of the plant site, respectively, with average 24-hr traffic flows of 27,300 and 9200 vehicles, respectively (Reference 6). 2.2-1 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR Within 10 miles of the plant, there are four Class I railroads. The Detroit and Toledo Shore Line Railroad, 4 miles northwest of the site, passes closest to and serves the Fermi site through the use of a single spur track. This company operates a freight service only between Detroit, Michigan, and Toledo, Ohio. At their closest approach to the plant, the other three lines (the Penn Central Railroad, the Chesapeake and Ohio Railroad, and the Detroit Toledo and Ironton Railroad) come to within 4 miles northwest, 7 miles west-northwest, and 9 miles northwest, respectively. The railroad yard in Monroe is the nearest yard to the plant. It is operated by the Penn Central Railroad and has a capacity of 230 cars (Reference 7). Airports within 25 miles of the plant are listed in Table 2.2-2 and indicated in Figure 2.2-1. There are no major airports within 15 miles of the site. Three smaller airports are located about 9 miles from the site (Custer), 5 miles (Carl), and 2 miles (Marshall). The closest airport, Marshall Field, is 2 miles west of the plant. This is a small airfield with two sod runways, the longer being 1962 ft. This runway is oriented about northeast-southwest, approximately 30 degrees offset from the reactor site. Only light aircraft use this field. The weight of the heaviest aircraft using this field is about 3400 lb. The closest major airports are Detroit Metropolitan and Willow Run, which are 19 miles north-northwest and 24 miles northwest of the plant, respectively (Reference 8). Figure 2.2-2 illustrates the approach patterns for Custer, Grosse Ile, and Detroit Metropolitan Airports. None of these approach patterns lie within 5 miles of the Fermi site. There are three low level federal airways within 5 miles of the plant: V297, V96, and V10-188. The center line of airway V297 passes directly over the Fermi 2 plant and follows a southeast-northwest path. The center lines of airways V96 and V10-188 are 6.5 miles to the southeast and 4.0 miles north of the plant, respectively (Reference 8). (Airways are 4 miles wide.) The shipping port nearest the plant is the Port of Monroe. Shipping traffic to this port is through an unobstructed channel, approximately 4.5 miles long, east-southeast of the site and extending from the head of navigation of River Raisin to the deep water in Lake Erie. As shown in Figure 2.2-3, the nearest approach of this channel to the Fermi site is approximately 6 miles south of the plant. Shipping traffic to the Port of Monroe is minimal in comparison to the traffic through the Detroit River. In 1964 there were only six commercial vessel trips inbound to the Port of Monroe, as compared to 10,999 upbound and 9693 downbound through the Detroit River (Reference 7). As shown in Figure 2.2-3, the Detroit River navigation channel connects to the West Outer Channel and the East Outer Channel in Lake Erie at a point approximately 7 miles northeast of the plant. The majority of the Detroit River traffic utilizes the East Outer Channel. Traffic on the West Outer Channel has a 5-mile nearest approach to the plant. Oil and natural gas pipelines in the environs of the Fermi site are shown in Figure 2.2-4 and are described in Subsection 2.2.2.2. 2.2.1.3 Military Facilities There are currently no military facilities within 10 miles of the plant. However, there are two restricted areas in Lake Erie, identified as Zone 1 and Zone 2. These zones are 20 miles and 27 miles from the plant, respectively, and are used as impact areas for small arms, ground artillery, and antiaircraft artillery from Camp Perry and from the test firing range at Erie 2.2-2 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR Industrial Park. Restrictions on weapon horizontal firing range and direction, as well as the nature of the projectiles, preclude a threat to the plant (Reference 9). 2.2.2 Descriptions 2.2.2.1 Industrial Facilities The Fermi 1 power plant and the storage tank supporting the combustion turbine peakers of that plant are described in Subsection 2.2.1.1. The industrial facilities within 5 miles of the plant, including a description of their products and/or services and number of employees, are listed in Table 2.2-1. The Frenchtown Township water treatment facility is a water processing plant for Frenchtown Township. The water treatment plant has the capacity to process 4,000,000 gallons of water per day. The chemicals used for water processing are not a hazard to Fermi 2 (Reference 5a). 2.2.2.2 Transportation Facilities As shown in Figure 2.2-4, the natural gas distribution lines that pass nearest to the plant are those of the Michigan Gas Utilities Company. Their closest approaches are approximately 1.5 miles south and 2 miles west of the plant, with pipeline diameter sizes of 6 and 4 in., respectively. The natural gas transmission line of the Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Company passes approximately 10 miles northwest of the plant. There are currently no other gas pipelines within 10 miles of the plant. The oil-products line of the Sinclair Pipeline Company, which passes 5 miles west of the plant, is the closest oil pipeline. Four other oil pipelines pass between 6 and 8 miles northwest of the plant. Of these, three are 6-in. to 12-in. oil products pipelines of the Pure Transportation Company, Sun Pipeline Company, and the Buckeye Pipeline Company; the fourth one is a 6-in. to 22-in.-diameter crude oil pipeline of the Buckeye Pipeline Company. 2.2.3 Evaluations 2.2.3.1 Cooling Water Intake Structure The cooling water intake structure for Fermi 2 is a shoreline structure located adjacent to the existing Fermi 1 intake channel. This channel is protected by two rock jetties that extend into the lake. This intake provides cooling water and makeup water to the 5.5-acre pond, which is part of the closed-loop source of cooling water to operate the plant; the lake level at the mouth of the intake varies from 3 ft to 10 ft, depending on the status of the sandbar that continually forms at the end of the jetties and the prevailing level of Lake Erie. (Refer to Figure 2.4-9.) Navigation by large ships and barges in the Western Basin does not normally approach within approximately 5 miles of the Fermi site. As a result of the very shallow water in the vicinity of the site, no large vessel could be expected to reach the site and damage the intake structure, even if this were attempted. 2.2-3 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR In addition, assuming that the intake structure is damaged sufficiently to prevent normal cooling water intake for an extended period of time, the 5.5-acre closed-cycle circulating water reservoir is of sufficient size to allow limited periods of normal plant operation with sufficient reserve to accomplish normal shutdown. If it were ascertained that the intake structure were to be inoperable for an extended period of time, reduction in load and shutdown would be initiated in a timely manner. In addition to the circulating water reservoir, the ultimate heat sink [residual heat removal (RHR) complex] provides cooling for 7 days in conformance with Regulatory Guide 1.27. 2.2.3.2 Industrial Facilities The industrial facilities within 5 miles of the site (Table 2.2-1) do not present any potential danger to the safe operation of Fermi 2. The Rockwood Stone, Inc., quarry located 3 miles from the site stores a maximum of 80,000 lb of ammonium nitrate fuel oil (ANFO) explosive in the delivery trailers on the quarry property at the ground surface level. ANFO has a TNT equivalence of 1.08. Edison has evaluated the effects on Fermi 2 of the explosion of this maximum inventory of explosives on the quarry site and of the explosion of a maximum shipment of 40,000 lb of the explosive at the closest approach to Fermi 2 (2 miles). Regulatory Guide 1.91 was used as a basis to evaluate overpressure effects. The U.S. Navy Design Manual Number 7.2, Foundations and Earth Structures, 1982, was used to estimate the ground motion effects due to blasting. It was concluded that the operation of the Rockwood Stone, Inc., quarry and the blast-induced overpressure, hydrostatic pressure, and ground motion effects due to accidental explosions do not pose a hazard to the Fermi 2 plant. The NRC Staff performed an independent evaluation of the blast-generated displacements, velocities, and accelerations of the ground using the empirical relationships in A. J. Hendron's paper titled Engineering of Rock Blasting on Civil Projects. Based on a review of Edison's analysis and on their independent evaluation, the NRC Staff concluded that the hazards due to blast-induced overpressure, ground motion, and hydrostatic pressure changes are insignificant with respect to Fermi 2 (Reference 10). The Frenchtown Township water treatment plant is located approximately 2.5 miles south of the site. No chemicals with a potential to cause an explosion are used at this facility. Sodium hypochlorite is used for water treatment. This is not considered a hazard to Fermi 2 and it does not impact the chlorine release accident analysis as described in Section 6.4. 2.2.3.3 Offsite Transportation Facilities As described in Subsections 2.2.1.2 and 2.2.2, no roads, railroads, or pipelines cross or pass close to the plant except for the site access road and railroad spur. No conceivable event associated with offsite highways, railroads, and pipelines in the area could be expected to influence normal operation of the plant. The two principal shipping channels (described in Subsection 2.2.1.2) are 5 and 6 miles away from the Fermi 2 site. There is no potential for fire or explosion from any ship in one of these lanes to interfere with normal plant operation. 2.2-4 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR A 6-in.-diameter natural gas distribution pipeline passes 1.5 miles south of the plant. Potential explosions cannot endanger safe operation of the plant due to the size and distance of the line. Table 2.2-2 and Figures 2.2-1 and 2.2-2 indicate the nearest airports to the Fermi site and the approach patterns for Custer, Grosse Ile, and Detroit Metropolitan airports. The annual aircraft flights along the three low level federal airways V297, V96, and Vl0-l88, described in Subsection 2.2.1.2, are provided in Table 2.2-3, along with the aircraft types using these airways and an estimate of the probability of a crash at the Fermi site involving one of these aircraft. Also provided in Table 2.2-3 are estimates of the probabilities of crashes of private and corporate aircraft into the Fermi 2 spent fuel pool. The Detroit Flight Service Center, which handles air traffic along 15 airways, including V297, V96, and V10-188, makes an average of about 34,000 radio contacts per year (References 11, 12, and 13). Between one-third and one-half of all flights along these airways make at least one radio contact with the Detroit Flight Service Center; thus a conservative estimate of the total flights per year along these 15 airways is about 100,000 or about 7000 per airway. About 40 percent of these flights are by commercial aircraft. Aircraft crash data for the years 1970 through 1972 indicate that the probability of a crash during level or near-level flight is about 0.2 per million miles of operation for private and corporate aircraft (References 12, 14, and 15) and about 0.003 per million miles of operation for commercial air carriers (Reference 16). Aircraft crash probabilities provided in Table 2.2-3 are based on crash bands of 13 miles for V96, 8 miles for V10-188, and 2 miles for V297. The target area for the plant was conservatively assumed to be 0.015 square miles (References 17, 18, 19, 20, and 21). The conservatively estimated probability of a commercial aircraft crash into the Fermi 2 plant is 8.9 x 10-8 per year and for a private aircraft 8.9 x 10-6 per year. The target area for the spent fuel pool was taken to be 0.0001 square miles. A conservatively estimated probability of a private aircraft crash into the spent fuel pool is 5.9 x 10-8 per year. The exterior walls of the Category I reactor/auxiliary building were analyzed for the crash of the largest private aircraft capable of using Marshall Field and were found able to withstand such a postulated event. 2.2.3.4 Onsite Storage of Fuels and Explosives The site access rail spurs are not used for the transportation of explosives or fuel oil. Fuel oil is transported by truck to the fuel-oil storage tanks onsite. A winter blend of #2 and #1 fuel oil is required for operation of the 62.2 MWe combustion turbine peakers south of Fermi 1. The 300,000-gal fuel-oil storage tank for the combustion turbine peaker units is located approximately 1/3 mile south from the plant and safety-related plant structures. The results of any event related to the transportation and storage of fuel oil at this tank would have no effect on the normal operation of Fermi 2 or endanger safety-related plant structures or equipment. The tank is surrounded by a conservatively sized clay-lined dike with a polyethylene geomembrane inner dike liner and is equipped with piping to a foam distribution manifold on the tank. In the event of a fire involving the tank, a foam-generating fire truck can be connected to a nearby hydrant (furnished for the purpose). The foam 2.2-5 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR discharge lines from the truck can be connected to the tank manifold piping using the provided fire department connection, and foam distributed within the tank. Should the tank rupture, the tank contents will be contained within the dike, and any fire extinguished using conventional fire fighting methodologies as well as the manifold. The fuel storage facility has been designed in accordance with applicable fire codes. A 20,000 gallon liquid hydrogen storage tank is located at the HWC gas supply facility. The gas supply facility is approximately 1100 feet northwest of the RHR Complex. The tank location has been chosen to ensure that the results of any event related to transportation or storage of hydrogen at this tank would have no effect on the safe operation of Fermi 2 or endanger safety-related plant structures or equipment. The gas supply facility has been designed in accordance with applicable fire codes and the nuclear industry guidelines for permanent HWC installations. Other onsite fuel storage facilities are identified and evaluated in Subsection 9.5.1 and Appendix 9A. The only storage of explosives in the vicinity of the unit will be in quantities sufficiently small and at such a distance that no postulated accident can endanger the safe operation of the unit. 2.2.3.5 Onsite Storage of Toxic Chemicals Sodium hypochlorite and a small quantity of acids are stored onsite. Sulfuric acid for circulating water is transported in accordance with all applicable regulations. Safety measures are taken near handling and storage facilities. Any spills during transfer operations will soak into the ground and be neutralized or will drain to a chemical sump for neutralization. Sodium hypochlorite used to treat the circulating water is stored at the circulating water pumphouse in a tank located within a nominal 150 percent tank capacity retention dike and pad. Sodium hypochlorite used to treat the GSW System is stored at the GSW pumphouse in a tank located within a nominal 150 percent tank capacity retention dike and pad. 2.2.3.6 Cooling Tower Collapse The cooling towers are hyperbolic in design and any postulated failure of this tower would cause it to collapse inwardly. This failure would in no way endanger the safe shutdown of the unit. 2.2-6 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.2 NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES REFERENCES

1. Monroe County Manufacturers Directory, Monroe County Library System and the Greater Monroe Chamber of Commerce, Monroe, Michigan.

2. Electricity from Nuclear Power, Central Station Nuclear Power Plants in the U.S.,

Atomic Industrial Forum, Inc.

3. G. Edgley, NUS Corporation, and Mr. Elson, Plant Supervisor, France Stone Company, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 28, 1973.

4. G. Edgley, NUS Corporation, and W. Jarvi, Research and Development, Dow Chemical Company, Telephone Conversation, May 1, 1974.

5. G. Edgley, NUS Corporation, and G. Dridalt, Austin Powder Company, Monroe, Michigan, Telephone Conversation, February 28, 1973.

5a. Letter from M. P. Faeth, P.E., McNamee, Porter & Seeley, Inc., to E. F. Madsen, Detroit Edison,

Subject:

Frenchtown Charter Township WTP, dated April 25, 1994.

6. 1971 Average 24 Hour Traffic Flow Map, Report No. 223, Michigan Department of State Highways.

7. Inventory of Airports, Harbors, Railroads, Pipelines, and Truck Terminals; Detroit Regional Transportation and Land Use Study, January 1968.

8. Sectional Aeronautical Chart (Scale 1:500,000) - Detroit - 4th Edition; U.S.

Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Survey, Washington, D.C., May 25, 1972.

9. Preliminary Safety Analysis Report for the Davis-Besse Nuclear Power Station, Appendix 2A, pp. 2A-1 through 2A-14 and Amendment No. 6, pp. 2A-13 through 2A-15, Docket No. 50-346, The Toledo Edison Company and Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company.

10. Letter from J. J. Stefano, NRC, to B. R. Sylvia, Detroit Edison,

Subject:

Fermi 2 Site Potential Hazards Due to Operation of the Nearby Rockwood Stone, Inc., Quarry, dated October 15, 1987.

11. Telephone conversations with G. Brainerd, Supervisor, Detroit Center, Flight Service Station, FAA, 11499 Conner Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 482l3. February 22 to February 28, 1975.

12. FAA Statistical Handbook of Aviation, Department of Transportation, 1972 Edition (Stock Number 5007-0l88).

13. Detroit Sectional Aeronautical Chart, Lambert Conformal Projection Standard Parallels 41°20' and 45°40', 9th Edition, U.S. Department of Commerce, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Washington, D.C.

14. K. A. Solomon, et al., Airplane Crash Risk to Ground Population, UCLA-ENG 7424, March l974.

2.2-7 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.2 NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES REFERENCES

15. Annual Review of Aircraft Accident Data, U.S. General Aviation, Adopted May 29, 1974, NTSB-74-2.

16. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Standard Review Plan, Section 3.5.1.6, Aircraft Hazards, June 1975.

17. Darrell G. Eisenhut, " A Review of Testimony by the Division of Reactor Licensing, Long Island Lighting Company, Unit 1," May 3, 1971.

18. Shoreham Nuclear Power Station, Amendment 3, USAEC Docket No. 150-322, February 5, 1969.

19. "Zion Station Amendment," USAEC 18-Docket 50-295, December 1971.

20. Karl Hornyik, "Airplane Strike Probability Near a Flight Target," ANS Annual Meeting, Chicago, Illinois, June 10-15, 1973.

21. "Probability of an Airplane Strike," Appendix D and Appendix E, USAEC 5-Docket-50-289, February 23, 1968.

2.2-8 REV 23 02/21

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.2-1 INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES WITHIN 5 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Number of Company a Products and/or Services Employees B&M Industry, Inc. Metal stamping 50 Lisowski Brothers, Inc. Plating equipment and supplies 9 Marshall (Olen) Hardware Hardware, paint, pumps; plumbing and 2 and Airport electrical supplies; airport-flight instruction, tie down, gas and oil Neidermeier Oil Company Distribution of Union 76 fuel oil 4 Newport State Bank General banking services 16 Ohio China Company Retail and wholesale china 28 Rockwood Stone, Inc. Limestone quarry 30 Frenchtown Township Water Potable water 4 Treatment Plant a All of these facilities, except Rockwood Stone, Inc., are in Frenchtown Township, Monroe County, Michigan. Rockwood Stone is in Berlin Township, Monroe County, Michigan. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.2-2 AIRPORTS WITHIN 25 MILES OF THE FERMI SITE Distance Largest Type of (miles) and Number and Type Aircraft Likely Runway Average Direction of Aircraft Based to Land at Direction/and Runway Hours Weekly Flight Airport From Site at the Airport Airport Length (ft) Composition Attended Operations Marshall 2W 6 single-engine Piper Aztec 50°-230°/1962 Sod 0800-dusk 10 Carl 6 NNW 21 single-engine Cessna 310 180°-360°/2400 Turf 0800-dusk 10 90°-270°/2300 Wickenheiser 7 NW 3 single-engine Cessna 172 90°-270°/1900 Turf - 2 80°-360°/2600 Custer 9W 53 single-engine DC-3 20°-200°/3500 Blacktop 0800-2000 150 3 multi-engine Grosse Ile 11 NNE 142 single-engine Convair 440 30°-210°/4980 Blacktop 0700-2400 1000 6 multi-engine 170°-350°/5480 Blacktop 2 helicopters Detroit Metro 19 NNW 90 single-engine Boeing 747 30°L-210°R/ 10500 Concrete 24hrs 5544 60 multi-engine 30°L-210°L/ 8500 Concrete 90°-270°/ 8700 Concrete 150°-330°/ 4331 Concrete Bielec 21 WNW Information not 180°-3600°/ 1900 Turf - - available 50°-1750°/ 1750 Turf Frankman 21 NW 3 single-engine Piper-Apache 60°-240°/ 1930 Turf - 12 Ranchero 90°-270°/ 1340 Turf Larsen 21 NW 48 single-engine Twin Beach 45 180°-360°/ 1752 Turf Not Given 300 Lada 22 W 1 single-engine Piper Navajo 180°-3600°/2600 Sod Daylight 1 Willow Run 24 NW 69 single-engine DC-8 90°L-270°R/ 7294 Concrete- 24hrs 3800 asphalt 105 multi-engine 90°R-270°L/ 7294 Concrete 50°L-230°R/ 6656 Concrete-50OL-230OL/ 7526 asphalt 140°-320°/ 6911 Concrete-asphalt Chippewa 25 S Information not - 90°-270°/ 2600 Turf None - available Gradolph 25 W 10 single-engine - 90°-270°/ 2600 Turf Jan-Dec/ 18 1 multi-engine Mon-Sat 0800-1800 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.2-3 AIRCRAFT CRASH PROBABILITY FOR THE FERMI SITE Estimated Estimated Crash Airway Aircraft Type a Flights Per Year Target Probability Per Year V297 U.S. Air Carrier 2800 Plant 6.3 x 10-8 General Aviation 4200 Plant 6.3 x 10-6 General Aviation 4200 Spent Fuel Pool 4.2 x 10-8 V96 U.S. Air Carrier 2800 Plant 9.7 x 10-9 General Aviation 4200 Plant 9.7 x 10-7 General Aviation 4200 Spent Fuel Pool 6.5 x 10-9 V10-188 U.S. Air Carrier 2800 Plant 1.6 x 10-8 General Aviation 4200 Plant 1.6 x 10-6 General Aviation 4200 Spent Fuel Pool 1.1 x 10-8 a U.S. Air Carrier flights include such planes as the C-747, B-707, B-720, B-727, DC-8, DC-9, DC-10, L-1011, and others. General Aviation includes flights by U.S. Civil Aircraft owned and operated by persons, corporations, etc., other than those engaged in air carrier operations authorized by a Certificate of Public Convenience and Necessity. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

        \I                               WAYNE COUNTY              CANADA ESSEX COUNTY MONROE COUNTY LEGEND County Lines Towns & Cities Interstate & U.S. Highway Numbers     G Brewer (Pvt)

Latitude Lines Gradolph Airports liJ RR New York Central ( Refer to Table 2.2-2 > 0 4 8 12 I I I I SCALE IN MILES LUCAS COUNTY r1 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.2-1 AIRPORTS IN THE VICINITY REV 22 04/19

I I Ifill Dixboro I t1!I Ch'"' H;iJ LEGEND County Lines WAYNE COUNTY *l.* CANADA Towns and Cities

                                                                                                                                -e::mii:1:':11111 00
                                                            ****                                         Interstate and U.S.

I Highway Numbers __ L I*

                                         ---....*.--*:tJi-                       ESSEX COUNTY            Latitude Lines
                                                                    -*1--lii"'ll-Airports
                                          . *.\**.. ***** . =*=:*

• I Carleton .

                                                                  =                                      Approach Patterns      .......*....,__.,.

MON ROE COUNTY

• New York Central RR 0 4 8 12 I I I I SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.2-2 SELECTED AIRPORTS AND APPROACH PATTERNS IN THE VICINITY REV 22 04/19

s C,

            /./
       /         J, !

I

/i,J'1     MONROE
....i,,;,

20 " 25 23

                                '20

• FIGURE 2.2-3 LAKE ERIE NAVIGATION CHANNELS IN THE

REFERENCE:

VICINITY U.S. LAKE SURVEY CHART NO. 39, 1968 REV 22 04/19

.

1 ;_..:_::* ______

i--:i::* .;:;:

               '--.,,," .*=--.==-:*=:*

_J__ _: \t :JM .,...__

  *.*.* * * * *

• g****- :*. _)<<-

  * ::       ;.ri -:*\ **-t
                                        ,,--t-
                                                                         ....J
                                                                ----S-A INE    L BRIIJ G     ATER \

t \ SALINE HURON 1NCHESTER YORK AUGUSTA legend

                                     ?                                                *i -*-*4]
                                                                      "*J..

Crude Oil Pipelines

                                                                                                           *-*-:-:-,.:j:.*-
                                                }

Buckeye Pipeline Co.

                                                                                                                   ,                                       lakehead Pipeline Co LONDON Michigan-Ohio Pipelie Co.

Oil Product Pipelines MILAN

                                                                                         \

Buckeye Pipeline Co Pre Transportation *co. Sinclair Pipeline Co. I - I Sun Pipeline Co. j' Wolverine Pipeline Co. Natural Gas Pipelines M'.ch'.gan Gas Utilities Co. M1ch1gan Consolidated Gas C 111111111 Panhandle Eastern Pipeline c:: Oil Storage Field

                                                                                                                                                                   ,  0    ,   2    3   4     '5 6   7 SCALE IN Ml LES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.2-4 OIL AND NATUR                         IPELINES IN THE e:c:.

REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3 METEOROLOGY 2.3.1. Regional Climatology 2.3.1.1. Data Sources The regional climatology pertinent to the Fermi site was determined from data acquired by the National Weather Service and summarized by the Environmental Data Service. The 1971 through 1974 local climatological data were obtained for the Detroit Metropolitan Airport (Reference 1), Detroit City Airport (Reference 2), and for Toledo, Ohio (Reference 3). The climatological summary was obtained for the cities of Monroe (Reference 4) and Willis (Reference 5), Michigan. These data provided sufficient information to determine the climatological characteristics of the area surrounding the Fermi site. Extreme wind data were obtained from studies by Thom (Reference 6). Severe storm and tornado data were obtained from monthly storm data (Reference 7), climatological data national summary (Reference 8), the tornadoes of western Canada (Reference 9), and tornado probabilities (Reference 10). The data for meteorological extremes were obtained for Detroit Metropolitan Airport, Detroit City Airport, and for Toledo Express Airport from the local climatological data for each station. Extremes for Monroe and Willis, Michigan, were obtained from the climatological summary for each station. Monthly storm data were used to determine the number of occurrences of hailstorms and ice storms. Climatological data for restrictive dilution conditions were obtained from a variety of sources concerned with stagnating conditions in the United States (References 11 and 12). 2.3.1.2. General Climate The Fermi site is located in the southeast lower climatic district of Michigan on the western shore of Lake Erie. The lake smooths out most climatic extremes, with the most pronounced lake effect occurring in the coldest part of the winter when there is an excess of cloudiness and very little sunshine. Prevailing winds are from the western sectors in winter. Periods of easterly winds (off Lake Erie) and local lake breezes modify temperatures during the summer months. The climate in the area alternates between semi-marine and continental (Reference 4). The predominant wind in the area is from the southwest, averaging approximately 10 mph (Reference 1). The average afternoon (1:00 p.m.) relative humidity for the Fermi site area is 58 percent, and varies from 52 percent in May to 71 percent in December (Reference 1). The highest temperature recorded in the area was 105°F (Reference 2) and the lowest was -19°F (References 1 through 5). Precipitation is well distributed throughout the year. The Fermi site area receives an average of 31.15 in. of precipitation per year, with 56 percent occurring between the months of May and October. Minimum amounts of precipitation generally occur during the winter months (December, January, and February) and average approximately 2.0 in. per month. Maximum 2.3-1 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR amounts of precipitation generally occur during the summer months (June, July, and August) and average approximately 3.0 in. per month (References 1 through 3). The mean annual snowfall in the area is 33.7 in. (References 1 through 5). 2.3.1.3. Severe Weather 2.3.1.3.1. Extreme Winds According to a compilation by Thom (Reference 6) for characterizing extreme winds, the extreme mile wind speed at 30 ft above the ground, which is predicted to occur once in 100 years, is approximately 90 mph. The approximate values for other recurrence intervals are listed in Table 2.3-1, with the extrapolated value of 117 mph for the 1000-year recurrence interval (Reference 6). The extreme mile wind speed is defined as being the 1-mile passage of wind with the highest speed for the day. Based on the gustiness factor of 1.3, the highest instantaneous gust expected in 100 years is 117 mph. The highest mile wind recorded at Detroit City Airport, based on the 1934 through 1965 period of record, was 77 mph from the northwest (Reference 2). Based on the 1956 through 1972 period of record, the highest mile wind recorded at Toledo, Ohio, was a 72-mph wind from the southwest (Reference 3). The Category I structures of Fermi 2 are designed to withstand a 90 mph fastest mile sustained wind velocity, 30 ft above ground level. This wind velocity has a 100-year recurrence interval. The relationships to determine the vertical velocity distribution of the wind are obtained from Page 1139 of ASCE Paper No. 3269 for coastal areas and are as follows: for V30 60 mph 0.3

         = 30 30 for V30 > 60 mph
         = 30 30 where V30     =       basic wind velocity (mph) at a height 30 ft above ground level (grade) x       =       factor which varies from 0.3 when V30 = 60 mph to 0.143 when V30=

130 mph (Reference 3) Vz = wind velocity (mph) at a height (z) above grade Z = distance above grade in ft Thus, at heights between 100 and 150 ft above grade, the height of the upper portion of the reactor building, the wind velocity is calculated to be 123.5 mph. Gust factors have also been determined by the methods given on pages 1124 through 1198 in ASCE Paper No. 3269. For all Category I structures, the gust factor varies linearly from 1.1 at grade level to 1.0 at 400 ft. However, a gust factor of 1.1 was used for the full height of both the reactor/auxiliary building and the residual heat removal complex except for the blow-away siding design during the design tornado, where a factor of 1.0 was used. 2.3-2 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3.1.3.2. Tornadoes 2.3.1.3.2.1. Frequency During the period January 1951 through December 1974, a total of 51 tornadoes were reported within a 50-mile radius of the Fermi site (References 8 and 9). These 51 tornadoes occurred within the United States. This is an average of two tornadoes per year within this radius. There were no tornadoes reported within 50 miles of the site in Canada for the period 1951 through 1960 (Reference 9). Canadian tornado data were not available for the period 1961 to 1974. There was one tornado reported at Tecumseh, Ontario, on August 1, 1973. This tornado was not included in this analysis. According to the statistical methods proposed by Thom (Reference 10), the probability of a tornado striking a point within a given area may be estimated as follows:

        =

where P = mean probability per year

             =      geometric mean tornado path area
             =      mean number of tornadoes per year A       =      area of concern For the region surrounding the Fermi site, the geometric mean path length computed was approximately 2.15 miles, and the geometric mean path width computed was approximately 75 yd (References 7 and 10), yielding a mean path area () of 0.092 square mile, based on the January 1951 through December 1974 period of record. The use of a 50-mile radius to compute A (excluding the water area of Lake St. Clair and Lake Erie and the land area in Canada) and a value of 2.125 for  yields a tornado probability of 4.075 x 10-5 per year, or a recurrence interval of 24,500 years.

It should be noted that the June 8, 1953, tornado in northern Ohio had a reported path length of 100 miles and a path width of 440 to 1760 yd. These data were not used in the computation of , as recommended by Thom (Reference 10), who states that tornadoes with reported paths longer than 100 miles and paths wider than 1000 yd are considered doubtful observations. However, including this tornado, this yields a probability of 4.7 x 10-5, or a recurrence interval of 21,200 years. During the period of record studied, three tornadoes occurred within 5.5 miles of the Fermi site, but it is difficult to determine which occurred closest to the site. These were (1) on June 28, 1973, a tornado was observed 3 miles south of Estral Beach; no data on path length or width were given; (2) on June 12, 1973, a tornado occurred 3 miles west of South Rockwood with a path length of 0.1 mile and width of 40 yd; and (3) another nearby tornado occurred on June 11, 1968, at Monroe, Michigan. The path length reported was "short" and no path width was given. No persons were reported killed or injured, and the damage was estimated at from $500 to $5000 (References 7 and 8). 2.3-3 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR Not included in the above tornado discussion were water spouts and funnel clouds sighted in the area that did not touch the ground. Only one water spout was sighted within 50 miles of the site during the period 1965 through 1974. This occurred on August 1, 1965, 13 miles southeast of Mt. Clemens; there was no damage reported. 2.3.1.3.2.2. Parameters Category I structures housing the systems required for a safe shutdown of the plant in the event of a tornado are designed to withstand the effects of a tornado by providing either sufficiently strong structures or appropriate venting. The design parameters of the Fermi 2 design-basis tornado are

a. A rotational wind velocity of 300 mph

b. A translational wind velocity of 60 mph

c. An external pressure drop of 3 psi at the rate of 1 psi/sec.

2.3.1.3.3. Precipitation Extremes Tables 2.3-2 through 2.3-6 list extremes of precipitation and other meteorological parameters for several stations that surround the Fermi site. The maximum amount of precipitation recorded for a 24-hr period was 4.39 in. at Toledo, Ohio, in July 1969. The maximum monthly snowfall measured in the region was 28.5 in. at Monroe, Michigan, in March 1954 (Reference 1 through Reference 5). A December 1 and 2, 1974, snowstorm deposited 19.3 in. of snow at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport. The 100-year recurrence snowpack and 100-year recurrence daily snowfall were computed using data from the Detroit Metropolitan Airport for the years 1971-1974 inclusive (see Figures 2.3-1 and 2.3-2). Each of these had the data ranked according to the amount and number of occurrences in the 4-year period. From these ranked amounts, a cumulative distribution table was generated. This cumulative percentage was graphed as a function of amount and the curve visually extrapolated to the value occurring in 100 years. Snowpack Number of Maximum Cumulative Number Cumulative Occurrences Snowpack (in.) of Occurrences Percentage 10 Trace 36 100.00 8 1 21 72.22 3 2 18 50.00 5 3 15 41.67 3 4 10 27.78 1 5 7 19.41 2 7 6 16.67 1 8 4 11.11 1 9 3 8.33 2 11 2 5.56 2.3-4 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR The average number of observations per year is nine for this calculation, so that 100 years would provide 900 samples. The 100-year recurrence percentage would therefore be 0.11 percent. Referring to the graph of the cumulative frequency of snowpack versus amount, the extrapolated 100-year recurrence value is 27.8 in. Daily Snowfall Number of Maximum Daily Cumulative Number Cumulative Occurrences Snowfall (in.) of Occurrences Percentage 4 Trace 28 100.00 2 0.1 24 85.71 1 0.5 22 78.57 1 0.6 21 75.00 2 1.0 20 71.43 1 1.3 18 64.29 1 1.5 17 60.71 1 1.6 15 57.14 1 1.7 15 53.14 1 2.5 14 50.00 2 2.7 13 46.43 1 2.8 11 39.29 1 2.9 10 35.71 1 3.1 9 32.14 1 3.2 8 28.57 1 3.7 7 25.00 1 3.8 6 21.43 1 4.7 5 17.86 1 5.2 4 14.29 1 8.4 3 10.71 1 8.7 2 7.14 1 19.3 1 3.75 The average number of observations per year is seven for this calculation, so that 100 years would provide 700 samples. The 100-year recurrence percentage would therefore be 0.15 percent. Referring to the graph of the cumulative frequency of maximum daily snowfall versus amount, the extrapolated 100-year recurrence value is 28.2 in. 2.3.1.3.4. Hailstorms A review of hailstorm data for the period of 1962 through 1974 is reported in storm data for Monroe County and the immediately surrounding counties of Lenawee, Washtenaw, Wayne, Lucas (Ohio), and Ottawa (Ohio). This review indicates that there were 93 days with 2.3-5 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR hailstorms in this area. Generally, these hailstorms occurred with scattered thunderstorms which covered a wide area (i.e., northern Ohio or southern Michigan). One of the most severe storms in the area occurred on July 19, 1967, in Wayne and Monroe Counties. Hailstones varying in size from "small peas to larger than golf balls" were reported to have accumulated to depths of 6 to 7 in. in spots. Damage to both crops and property ranged from $5000 to $50,000 (Reference 7). 2.3.1.3.5. Ice Storms A study of ice storm data for the 1962 through 1974 period for Monroe County and the immediately surrounding counties indicates that there were 26 storms in this region. The storms were rarely limited to a small area, but were widespread over the state. The greatest accumulation of ice in the region came from the January 26 and 27, 1967, storm, which deposited up to 3 in. of ice in northern Ohio (Reference 7). 2.3.1.3.6. Thunderstorms Thunderstorms occur on an average of 35 days per year, approximately 80 percent occurring in the months of June, July, and August (References 1 through 3). Generally, these thunderstorms encompass a large area (on the order of several hundred square kilometers each) and are associated with strong winds, intense precipitation for short time intervals, and lightning. Lightning incidence is estimated at about 10 flashes per year per square kilometer. Each thunderstorm produces an average of about 120 independent flashes to ground (an average of one every 20 sec. for an interval of about 40 minutes). Each thunderstorm (isolated) encompasses an area of about 400 km2 (20 km on a side). With 35 days per year associated with thunderstorms, these estimates give 35 Storms flashes flashes 400 km2 x 120 storm

                                 = 10    Km2 per year.

2.3.1.3.7. Restrictive Dilution Conditions The frequency of occurrence of low-level inversions or isothermal layers based at or below a 500-ft elevation in the site region is approximately 28 percent of the total hours on an annual basis, according to Hosler (Reference 11), who takes into account lake and ocean effects on inversion frequencies. Seasonally, the greatest frequencies of inversions based on percent of total hours are 30 percent during the summer and fall. The inversion frequencies are 25 percent in the spring and 20 percent in the winter. The majority of these inversions are nocturnal in nature. The mean mixing depth is another restriction to atmospheric dilution. The mixing depth is the thickness of the atmospheric layer, measured from the surface upward, in which convective overturning is taking place, caused by the daytime heating at the surface. The mixing depth is usually at its shallowest during the early morning hours, just after sunrise, when the nocturnal inversion is being modified by solar heating at the surface. The mixing depth is at its greatest during the later part of the afternoon, 3:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m., when the maximum surface temperature of the day is reached. The monthly mean daily mixing depths, based on Flint, Michigan, upper air data for the period January 1960 through December 2.3-6 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 1964, are presented in Table 2.3-7 (Reference 12). Shallow mixing depths have a greater frequency of occurrence during the fall and winter months. Periods of high air pollution potential are usually related to a stagnating anticyclone, with the average wind speed less than or equal to 9.0 mph (4.0 m/sec), no precipitation, and a mixing depth of less than 1600 ft (Reference 14). The greatest air pollution potential in the site region occurs during the months of August, September, and October, when the tendency is greatest for a quasi-stationary anticyclone to develop in the region (Reference 15). According to Korshover (Reference 15), there were approximately 19 anticyclone stagnation cases, each 4 days or more, reported in the site region during the period 1936-1967. 2.3.1.3.8. Maximum Roof Loadings The following data itemize the maximum snow and ice load in inches of water that the roofs of safety-related structures are capable of withstanding during plant operation. The operating- basis conditions are based on the service conditions allowable stresses or strengths. The design-basis conditions are based on the strength of the structure at yield stresses with a load factor of 1.0. Operating-Basis Design-Basis Safety-Related Snow and Ice Water Snow and Ice Water Structure Load (psf) Equivalent (in.) Load (psf) Equivalent (in.) Reactor / 30 5.8 87 16.7 auxiliary building RHR Complex 70 13.5 276 53.0*

• This depth exceeds parapet height 2.3.2. Local Meteorology 2.3.2.1. Data Sources The original Fermi 2 FSAR was filed with 12 months (June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975) of onsite data obtained from a 60-m tower equipped with sensors that meet the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.23 (Reference 16). Data from previous site meteorological systems and offsite National Weather Service sources were included as appropriate.

Offsite wind, stability, precipitation, temperature, relative humidity, and fog data were based on meteorological observations from Detroit Metropolitan Airport and Toledo Express Airport, both first-order National Weather Service stations (References 1 and 3). Additional temperature and precipitation data were obtained from National Weather Service cooperative stations at Monroe and Willis, Michigan (References 4 and 5). The 1956 to 1959 period site wind, stability, and precipitation data were obtained and summarized by the University of Michigan from the Fermi 1 100-ft meteorological tower (Subsection 2.3.3.1.1) (References 17 and 18). Additional onsite data from a low-level 33-ft tower at Langton Road are presented in this section, based on data obtained and reduced by the University of Michigan for the period January 1, 1972, to December 31, 1972. These data include ambient 2.3-7 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR temperature and relative humidity; however, the low-level wind data are only briefly discussed because of unfavorable (42 percent) data recovery. Wind stability and fog data summaries for Detroit Metropolitan Airport and Toledo Express Airport were also obtained. 2.3.2.2. Normal and Extreme Values of Local Meteorological Parameters The distribution of wind direction and speed is an important factor when considering transport conditions relevant to site diffusion climatology. The monthly, seasonal, and annual distributions of wind direction and speed from the 60-m tower at the Fermi site (June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975) are presented in Figures 2.3-3 through 2.3-19. For comparative purposes, data from Detroit City Airport (81-ft level, 1951 to 1960) and Toledo Express Airport (20-ft level, 1950 to 1955) are presented in Figures 2.3-20 through 2.3-31; each month presented represents averaged data for the years reported. These data are summarized and presented in annual wind roses in Figure 2.3-32. Average wind directions for all locations show a predominance of winds from the southwest through west-southwest. Limited site data from the Langton Road Tower (33-ft level) for the January 1, 1972, to December 31, 1972, period indicate a predominance of winds from the south through west-southwest. Atmospheric dilution is directly proportional to the wind speed, with other factors remaining constant. Table 2.3-8 presents the average wind speeds and frequencies of calms for the Fermi site, the Detroit Metropolitan Airport, and the Toledo Express Airport. A calm is defined as a wind speed of <1.0 mph for the Fermi site 60-m and 150-m tower data and <1.2 mph for data recorded at National Weather Service stations and the Fermi site 100-ft tower. The threshold of the anemometer was used as the determining value of calm conditions. The highest average speed of the four stations, summarized in Table 2.3-8, is at the Fermi site at the 60-m level. This can be attributed to the higher exposure height of the wind sensors at the Fermi site and the shoreline location of the site, since wind speeds during onshore wind flows may be greater, and a lake breeze situation can develop during periods when light winds or calms are recorded at inland meteorological stations. Variations in speed can also be attributed to differences in instrumentation, data reduction techniques, and periods of record. 2.3.2.2.1. Wind Direction Persistence Wind direction persistence is important when considering potential effects from a contaminant release. Wind direction persistence is defined as a continuous flow from a given direction or range of directions. Figure 2.3-33 shows the probability of occurrence of a 22-1/2° sector wind flow persistence as a function of duration, based on data from the 60-m tower (June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975) and offsite data from the Detroit Metropolitan Airport (1959 to 1962 data period) and the Toledo Express Airport (1959 to 1963 data period). The wind persistence summary from onsite data (60-m tower) is shown in Table 2.3-9 in increments of 1 hr. Based on the onsite observation time (12 months), the 10-m level data indicate a 5 percent probability of continuous wind direction persistence of about 7 hr and a 1 percent probability of 11-hr duration. At the 60-m level, these same percentages are 7 hr and 13 hr, respectively. 2.3-8 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR The 5 and 1 percent probabilities of continuous wind direction persistences at the 60-m level were greater than those observed at the 10-m level, as should be expected. The Detroit Metropolitan Airport data at 58 ft indicate a 5 percent probability of continuous wind direction persistence periods greater than 9 hr and a 1 percent probability of continuous wind direction persistence periods greater than 15.5 hr. The Toledo Express Airport data at 20 ft indicate a 5 percent probability of continuous wind direction persistence for periods greater than about 16 hr. The maximum wind persistence at the Fermi site within a 22-1/2° sector, recorded on the 60-m tower during the June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975, period, was one period lasting for 32 hr at the 10-m level from the south, associated with an average speed of 21 mph. The maximum wind persistence at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport within a 22-1/2° sector, recorded during the 1959 to 1963 period, was a 37-hr wind from the east-southeast, associated with an average speed of 17 mph. The maximum wind persistence at the Toledo Express Airport within a 22-1/2° sector, recorded during the 1959 to 1963 period, was a 37-hr wind from the east-northeast associated with an average wind speed of 17.0 mph. Episodes of maximum wind persistence within a 22-1/2° sector for the Fermi site 10-m level (60-m tower) data, Detroit Metropolitan Airport, and the Toledo Express Airport are presented in Figure 2.3-34. 2.3.2.2.2. Atmospheric Stability Stability is a measure of the degree of atmospheric turbulence. A low degree of wind turbulence can be expected for stable conditions, resulting in relatively suppressed diffusion conditions. Conversely, during periods of instability, a high degree of wind turbulence can be associated with relatively enhanced diffusion conditions. The seasonal and annual frequencies of stability indices for the Detroit Metropolitan Airport, Toledo Express Airport, and the Fermi site 60-m tower are presented in Tables 2.3-10 and 2.3-11. The stability data for the two airports were classified according to the Pasquill-Turner approach (Reference 19). This method is an indirect approach and involves the utilization of factors such as cloud cover, solar insulation, time of day, and wind speed to classify data that are generally available at National Weather Service observation stations. The onsite stability data were determined for the 60-m tower for the June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975, period. The stabilities were classified from T(60 m-10 m) data, using the procedure outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.23 (Reference 16). Examination of Tables 2.3-10 and 2.3-11 indicates the predominance of neutral conditions. The frequency of stable (E, F, and G) conditions for both Detroit Metropolitan Airport and Toledo Express Airport is similar to the frequency of inversions based on Fermi site T(100 ft-25 ft) data from the 100-ft tower on a seasonal and annual basis (Table 2.3-12). The onsite data from the 60-m tower show a larger spread in the stability data. Onsite stability data for the 1956 to 1959 period were compiled on a seasonal and annual basis and summarized in reports by the University of Michigan (References 17 and 18). The data were based on a T(100 ft-25 ft) and were obtained from the 100-ft tower described in Subsection 2.3.3.1. The data were classified into the following three groups:

a. Strong vertical temperature gradients (T(100 ft-25 ft) < 0.98°C/100 m or

              -5.4°F/1000 ft) 2.3-9                              REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR

b. Weak vertical temperature gradients (T(100 ft-25 ft) >0.98°C/100 m or 5.4°F/1000 ft, and 0)

c. Inversions (temperature increases with height).

In addition, T(300 ft-20 ft) data are available from the WJBK-TV tower located in the northwest suburbs of Detroit, approximately 35 miles north of the Fermi site. Data from this tower were analyzed for the 1956 to 1959 period for inversion conditions only. Fermi site T(60 m-10 m) data from the 60-m tower are presented on an hourly basis over the June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975, period in Tables 2.3-13 and 2.3-14. Additional Fermi site T(100 ft-25 ft) data from the 100-ft tower are presented on a seasonal and annual basis in Table 2.3-12. WJBK-TV T(300 ft-20 ft) data for inversion conditions only are presented in Table 2.3-15 for comparative purposes. These two locations compare favorably as to frequency of occurrence of inversion conditions. Both have a maximum during the summer and a minimum during the spring. The diurnal distribution of frequency of inversions at the WJBK-TV tower compares well with that at the Fermi site using data from the 60-m tower. The maximum frequency of inversions occurs in the midmorning hours (5:00 a.m. to 8:00 a.m.), while the maximum frequency of unstable conditions occurs in the early afternoon hours (1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.). Table 2.3-16 shows the inversion persistence derived from the 60-m tower measurements over the June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975, period. The stability classes were determined from T(60 m-10 m) 60-m tower data using the classification scheme outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.23. For Table 2.3-16, an inversion was defined as the existence of a temperature difference between the 60-m level and the 10-m level of greater than -0.0°C (i.e., temperature change with height (°C/100 m) >-0.0). Figure 2.3-35 presents the probability of inversion persistence for durations greater than 6 hr, based on the frequency of occurrence with respect to surface-based inversions only. These data are based on Fermi T site data from the 100-ft tower for the 1956 to 1959 period and T site data from the 60-m tower for the June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975, period. Figure 2.3-35 shows a 5 percent probability of an inversion lasting longer than 25 hr and a 1 percent probability of an inversion lasting longer than 43 hr, using the 100-ft tower data. For the 60-m tower data, these same percentages produce inversions of 18 hr and 30 hr, respectively. Joint frequency tables of wind directions and speed by stability class are presented in Appendix 2A of the original FSAR for onsite Fermi data from the 60-m tower from June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975. Current data for the 10-m level and 60-m level are provided by the operational meteorological system (Subsection 2.3.3.2). Annual summaries of meteorological data are prepared as required by the Technical Specifications. 2.3.2.2.3. Distribution and Frequency of Precipitation Distribution of precipitation as a function of wind direction is presented in Table 2.3-17 for the Fermi site, using data from 1956-1959 from the 100-ft tower and from June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975, from the 60-m tower. The 100-ft tower data show that the highest frequency of precipitation occurs when associated with winds from the southwest through west-northwest. The average wind speeds (100-ft level) during precipitation are 11.0 mph for all 2.3-10 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR directions. The frequency of precipitation during calm conditions is 0.2 percent of the total hours of precipitation (Reference 18). The 60-m tower data show a larger spread, which may be due to the smaller sample size (12 months). A wind rose showing the distribution of wind speed versus wind direction with respect to precipitation only is presented in Figure 2.3-36. 2.3.2.2.4. Natural Fog Occurrences Fog is essentially a cloud that has developed on the ground. Therefore, the processes leading to fog formation are similar to those for cloud formation. In general, the conditions that promote water-vapor condensation in ground-level air may lead to fog conditions. Aside from the interrelated thermodynamics of the ambient air and the ground surface, a number of other factors may influence the formation of fog. These factors include the size, character, and number of condensation nuclei; the extent of cloud cover; the wind speed and direction; the time of day; and the atmospheric turbulence. The surface air may generally be treated as a mixture of dry air and water vapor. The most frequent and effective cause of fog is the cooling of humid surface air to a point where vapor condensation occurs. The condensation generally takes place on larger and more active condensation nuclei, and may occur somewhat before the dewpoint temperature (saturation) is reached. However, as long as the moisture content is sufficiently below the saturation value, condensation does not occur and fog conditions do not exist. According to Byers, there are three types of fog which predominate in the Great Lakes area (Reference 20). Spring and early summer conditions (warm atmosphere and cold lake) contribute to the formation of land and lake breeze fogs. In the fall, advection-radiation fogs form over the land. During the fall and winter, steam fogs form over the lakes. In the formation of a land and lake breeze fog, warm moist air from the land is transported out over the cold lake and, if the winds are light, a dense surface fog may develop over the lake. The fog may then be carried out over the land by a lake breeze during the day and may recede at night during a land breeze flow. These fogs rarely penetrate very far inland (i.e., 2 or 3 miles). An advection-radiation fog is formed by nighttime radiational cooling of air of high humidity that has been advected inland from the lake during the day. This advection of lake air with a high relative humidity makes possible the formation of fog with normal nocturnal cooling. Steam fog will form when cold air with a low vapor pressure passes over warm water. Steam fog is generally shallow in depth (i.e., 50 ft to 100 ft thick). According to Rondy, the western end of Lake Erie will have 70 percent to 90 percent ice coverage out to 35 miles by January 15 during a normal winter. The extreme western shoreline, where the Fermi site is located, will have 100 percent coverage out to 5 miles from the shore by January 15 (Reference 21). Therefore, steam fog in the Fermi site area will occur mostly during the fall. Fog occurs predominantly during the early morning hours when the moisture-bearing air is cooled to the lowest temperature and the vapor saturation of the air is most closely approached. This effect is illustrated in Figure 2.3-37 where the probability of fog occurrence at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport, for the December 1, 1958, to September 1, 1962, period, is plotted versus the hour of the day for the annual average. Over the year, the peak frequency of fog occurrence is about 32.1 percent of the total hours of fog and occurs 2.3-11 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR between 5:00 a.m. and 7:00 a.m. There is a notably higher frequency of fog between the hours of 11:00 p.m. and 10:00 a.m. Fog (other than frontal fog) is normally expected to dissipate during the late morning hours, particularly on clear, sunny days. However, cloud cover can extend the period of fog well into the daytime hours. The monthly percentage occurrences of fog based on Detroit Metropolitan Airport data are presented in Figure 2.3-38. As can be seen in Figure 2.3-38, the monthly distribution of fog at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport does not show the distribution of fog for a Great Lakes area station predicted by Byers. Great Lakes area fogs have peak occurrences in the spring, early summer, and fall. The Detroit Metropolitan Airport shows peaks in the fall and winter. The major cause of the difference between occurrences observed at the Detroit Metropolitan Airport and those predicted by Byers is the location of the airport with respect to Lake Erie. Detroit Metropolitan Airport is located approximately 20 miles from Lake Erie. Because of this, lake- land breeze-type fogs, which rarely penetrate more than 2 to 3 miles inland, will not be evident at the airport. Because the Toledo Express Airport is 20 miles from Lake Erie, these types of fogs will not be evident there either. However, in a location such as the Fermi site, the lake will have a greater effect on natural fog occurrences, and the types and frequencies of fog should be the same as outlined by Byers. The presence of fog onsite (at the shoreline) is associated with, for the most part, calm wind conditions. The ability of the natural draft cooling tower plume to rise to considerable heights is a significant factor in reducing the potential of adverse ground-level environmental effects. For example, under calm wind conditions, a typical plume penetration height for the Fermi 2 cooling towers is about 1000 ft above the top of the towers. In addition, the major roadways in the vicinity of the site are Interstate 75 and U.S. 24/25, whose closest approaches are 5.1 and 5.8 miles to the northwest, respectively. Dixie Highway, Pointe Aux Peaux Road, and Toll Road are closer, but are not considered major highways (Reference 22). 2.3.2.2.5. Meteorological Parameters The extremes and means of meteorological parameters have been tabulated in Tables 2.3-2 through 2.3-6 for the Detroit City Airport, Detroit Metropolitan Airport, Toledo Express Airport, and Monroe and Willis, Michigan. Table 2.3-18 presents the average temperature and relative humidity by month during the January 1, 1972, through December 31, 1972, period at the Fermi site (Langton Road Tower), the Detroit City Airport, and the Toledo Express Airport, for comparative purposes. However, the average relative humidity values by month for Fermi site data seem somewhat high and may, to some extent, be attributed to instrumentation and calibration inaccuracies. (Prevailing winds for the period were from the south through west-southwest.) Figures 2.3-39 and 2.3-40 show the means of the daily averages and extremes of ambient air temperature and relative humidity, respectively. Relative humidity data were derived from ambient air temperature and dewpoint temperature data collected at the 10-m level of the 60-m tower from June 1, 1974, through May 31, 1975. A comparison of monthly average temperatures and monthly high and low temperatures between the Fermi site data and National Weather Service data nearby, for the June 1, 1974, through May 31, 1975, period, is shown in Table 2.3-19. 2.3-12 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3.2.3. Potential Influence of the Plant and the Facilities on Local Meteorology The physical structures of the plant, especially the large natural draft cooling towers, are expected to locally increase atmospheric turbulence. There is also a potential for somewhat decreased low-level wind speeds in the immediate vicinity of the physical structures of the plant due to a wind-shielding effect. A study has shown that a cooling tower has an extended downwind wake upward to at least one and one-half times the tower height and downwind approximately two to three times the tower diameter. This will occur for wind speeds greater than 5 to 8 mph. Analysis has shown that any increase in precipitation due to the natural draft system will be minimal. Maximum precipitation from drift is predicted to occur at a distance of 3 km (1.8 miles) both northeast and west-southwest of the cooling towers at a total rate of approximately 0.008 in. annually. The increase in surface relative humidity is insignificant. The greatest relative humidity increase (nearly 21 percent at 1500 m downwind) will occur on winter mornings at an approximate height of 470 m (1542 ft). This 21 percent increase is ample to cause a visible plume from the natural draft cooling tower to extend downwind approximately 1000 m during the winter. There will be no significant fogging problems offsite on an annual basis. The offsite ground-level visibility reduction (to <1000 m) is predicted to occur only about 1 hr per year (Reference 22). The cited cooling tower studies were conducted specifically for the Fermi 2 cooling towers by the NUS Corporation. The parameters used and the results of these studies are presented in the Fermi 2 Environmental Report in Section 5.1. The models used are described in Section 6.1 and were filed with the NRC on August 30, 1974, as the reports listed below as supporting documents to Docket Nos. 50-500 and 50-501.

a. Langrangian Vapor Plume Model - Version 3 (LVPM-3), NUS-TM-S-184

b. FOG Model Description, NUS-TM-S-185

c. ICE Model Description, NUS-TM-S-186.

2.3.2.4. Topographic Description 2.3.2.4.1. General Description The terrain in the region of the Fermi site is characterized by flat plains, with the relief varying from 0 to 100 ft. More than 80 percent of the area is gently sloping. However, the actual site area is relatively flat and characterized by marshlands. Figures 2.3-41 and 2.3-42 are topographic maps of the area within 5- and 50-mile radii, respectively. Figure 2.3-43 is a topographic cross section of the Fermi site area out to 5 miles from the plant site and Figure 2.3-44 is a topographic cross section of the Fermi site out to 50 miles. 2.3.2.4.2. Topographic Influences on Meteorological Diffusion Estimates The major local topographic effect on site meteorology is the presence of Lake Erie and the resultant occurrences of lake and land breeze circulations. Lake and land breeze circulations are driven by horizontal pressure gradients across the shoreline. These pressure gradients are the result of the temperature variation between water and land. This temperature differential between water and land can be most readily explained by the turbulent mixing and transport of surface heat by wave action and currents in a lake. This turbulent mixing process within 2.3-13 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR the lake effects a continuous downward transport of surface heat through the water, thus lowering the surface water temperature (and also lowering the temperature of the overlying air), in contrast with the strong surface heating of the air over the shoreline region. This contrast is also intensified because the lake water has a higher thermal capacity than that of the soil. The temperature differential across the shoreline is enhanced under clear skies and light geostrophic winds. Because the land is heated faster than the lake, the air above the land becomes warmer than the air above the lake. The warmer air over the land begins to rise as it expands and becomes less dense. At an average height aloft of 700 m, a pressure gradient from the land to the lake is formed (Reference 23). Because of this pressure gradient, air begins to flow from the land toward the lake. This offshore flow aloft is known as the return flow. Typical return flows extend above 1500 m and have velocities that can exceed 5 m/sec. Because air is advected from the land to over the lake aloft, a surface low is formed over the land and a surface high is formed over the water. With a surface pressure gradient thus formed, an onshore wind flow at the surface (the lake breeze) is started. To complete the circulation cell of the lake breeze, there is strong upward motion (with average updrafts of over 1 mph) over the land and subsiding air over the lake. Figure 2.3-45 is a schematic representation of the streamlines during a well-developed lake breeze cell (Reference 23). Although formation of the lake breeze circulation is usually perpendicular to the shoreline, Coriolis forces become significant as the system matures. During the later afternoon, the lake breeze can be expected to have a major component parallel to the shore (i.e., to the right of the original trajectory). In the middle latitudes, lake breezes can occur during 30 to 60 percent of the days in the spring and summer months of the year. Lake breezes can also occur during the fall and winter seasons, although less frequently than during the spring and summer. Land breezes are the converse of lake breezes and may develop when lake temperatures are warmer than land temperatures, such as during the fall and early winter, or during the night in the summer. However, land breezes are generally weaker and less frequent than lake breezes. Once the lake becomes covered by ice, the temperature differential between lake and land becomes minimal, and the lake effect becomes nonexistent. The front edge of the lake breeze flow has the basic characteristics of a cold front with cool, moist lake air behind the front advancing inland. This lake breeze front may advance 30 km or more inland (Reference 24). During onshore wind flow, such as a lake breeze, cool air flowing off the lake is modified by thermal surface heating and by surface roughness effects as the air flows over the land. The air from the lake is modified significantly as it flows over the land, especially during the spring and early summer. The air is heated from below, resulting in an unstable vertical temperature gradient and hence enhanced diffusion conditions. Surface roughness effects over the land increase atmospheric turbulence (also resulting in enhanced diffusion conditions), although low-level wind speeds will decrease. The thermal and roughness effects occur at the shoreline and form a "boundary layer" which increases vertically with distance inland. Within this boundary layer is unstable air, with stable air and an intense elevated inversion (suppressed diffusion) above the boundary layer. During the late fall and winter seasons, especially when there is not as large a temperature differential between the 2.3-14 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR lake and the land as during the spring and early summer, the boundary layer is more shallow and the surface-based inversion (suppressed diffusion), normally formed right at the lakeshore, penetrates further inland. Offshore wind flows generally result in somewhat suppressed diffusion conditions. The warm air advected from over the land is cooled from below, resulting in a stable vertical temperature gradient (inversion) and less diffusion for the over-water flow than for an overland flow. There is also a decrease in wind turbulence, although wind speeds will increase as the air flows from the relatively rough land surface over the smooth water surface. In addition to lake land breezes near a shoreline, there are also downwash and upwash effects. The primary cause of a downwash or upwash condition is the difference in surface roughness between the land and the lake (Reference 24). The upwash situation occurs with the winds blowing off the lake. The air flows from the relatively frictionless lake surface over the rough land, and a reduction in low-level wind speed occurs. This reduction in wind speed enhances plume rise to the extent that the plume can more easily escape the dynamic downwash effects of the plant structure. Downwash effects occur primarily with an offshore wind. The low-level winds coming off the relatively rough land over the smooth lake increase in speed. This increase in wind speed enhances plume downwash toward the lake surface. A qualitative study of the surface characteristics of lake breezes at and in the near vicinity of the Fermi 2 site has been reported in Reference 25. The preliminary results of this study confirm the aforementioned factors. During the summer months, about one-third of the days were determined to give rise to a lake breeze situation. The inland penetration of these airflows averaged about 4 miles with a mean temperature decrease at the site of about 2°F and a relative humidity increase at the site of about 10 percent. The mean wind speed change due to a lake breeze situation was small (1 to 2 mph) when the lake breeze was in a direction so as to enhance the wind speed. Under conditions when the lake breeze occurred in opposition to a gradient wind, some wind direction changes were found. However, the infrequency of these situations makes it doubtful that the lake breeze could significantly change the atmospheric dispersion of effluents on an annual basis. Edison performed a short-term meteorological study, specifically for emergency planning application, during the lake breeze seasons of 1983 and 1984 to determine the effect of Lake Erie on plume transport characteristics at the Fermi 2 site. 2.3.3. Onsite Meteorological Programs 2.3.3.1. Preoperational Onsite Meteorological Program 2.3.3.1.1. Meteorological Facility Operations Onsite data presented in this report were collected from three different locations within the site boundary: from a 60-m tower approximately 2400 ft southwest of the Fermi 2 reactor building (since June 1, 1974) (Data from the 60-m tower were used for the diffusion estimate modeling); from the Fermi 1 100-ft tower located approximately 500 ft south-southeast of the Fermi 1 turbine building (December 1, 1956, to November 30, 1959); and from a 10-m (33-ft) tower located near Langton Road (January 1, 1972, to December 31, 1972). 2.3-15 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR Data were also collected from a 150-m tower that was located approximately 2400 ft south of Fermi 2 on the Lake Erie shoreline. One year of data (June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975) from the 150-m tower and the 60-m tower were compared (Reference 26). The results of that study show that the 60-m tower data are representative of the Fermi 2 onsite meteorological conditions. When the Fermi 2 preoperational meteorological program was completed May 31, 1976, the 150-m tower was decommissioned. At that time, the 60-m tower operations were also discontinued until approximately 18 months prior to Fermi 2 fuel load (Reference 27). Following this, meteorological data have been collected only from the 60-m tower; thus the 60-m tower data are presented in this section. The 60-m tower data were collected, developed, and analyzed according to Regulatory Guides 1.23 and 1.111, Revision 1 (Reference 26). The bases for decommissioning the 150-m tower, which was approved by the NRC (Reference 27), were as follows:

a. The analysis of the meteorological data collected shows the 60-m tower data are, for most parameters including /Q values, a more conservative characterization of the Fermi 2 conditions

b. The inland location of the 60-m tower is more representative of the air layer into which the plant effluent will be released since the gaseous release point is approximately 250 m from the shoreline on the west side (inland) of the building complex

c. Gas turbine peaking units located north of the 150-m tower affect the temperature measurements at the 10-m and 60-m levels, and consequently T values, when the winds are from the north-northwest sector. During these periods, the data have to be rejected, which can seriously jeopardize the 90 percent data-recovery requirement of Regulatory Guide 1.23

d. The Fermi 1 plant structures are located such that building wake may bias the wind data for the 150-m tower for northerly directions

e. The 60-m tower is less susceptible to the icing conditions and localized lake shoreline effects experienced at the 150-m tower

f. The 2 years of data collected on the 150-m tower compare favorably, indicating only minor variations between seasons that are considered to be within the expected statistical variations between years. Thus 1 year of data at either tower, since it can be assumed the 60-m tower correlations would be valid for any year period, can be considered representative of site meteorology.

Data and discussions for the 100-ft and Langton Road towers are presented to provide supplementary site information. Data reduction on the 100-ft tower covered only the period from 1956 to 1959 to obtain data for the Fermi 1 plant; therefore, neither the instruments, data collection methods, nor data-reduction methods meet Regulatory Guide 1.23 requirements. The 33-ft Langton Road tower was originally installed as a satellite to the 150-m tower and was not instrumented to meet Regulatory Guide 1.23 requirements. A brief description of the 100-ft and 33-ft towers is presented in the following paragraphs. On the 100-ft tower, wind speed and direction were measured at the 24-ft (7 m) level, 56-ft (17 m) level, and the 100-ft (30 m) level. Temperature sensing elements were located at 5 ft (1.5 m), 25 ft (7.6 m), 57 ft (17 m), and 100 ft (30 m). A standard National Weather Service 2.3-16 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR rain gage was located near the base of the tower. Specifically, the instrumentation of the 100-ft tower included

a. Wind instrumentation - three Bendix aerovanes

b. Temperature instrumentation - four ventilated and shielded iron-constantan thermojunctions

c. Precipitation instrumentation - one standard National Weather Service rain gage located at the base of the tower.

Data analyses are available from the above station for the December 1, 1956, to November 30, 1959, period and include only the 100-ft wind and temperature measurements T(100 ft-25 ft). The Langton Road tower (33 ft) was onsite in an open field, approximately 3500 ft west of the plant. This 10-m tower was maintained and operated by the University of Michigan. Wind data at Langton Road were collected at the 10-m level; temperature and relative humidity were recorded on a hygrothermograph housed in a conventional instrument shelter at a height of approximately 5 ft (1.5 m). Specifically, the instrumentation at the Langton Road tower included

a. Wind instrumentation - Gill propeller vane direction and speed sensors at the 10-m level

b. Temperature and humidity instrumentation - Belfort hygrothermograph housed in a conventional instrument shelter.

The specifications for the above equipment are summarized in Table 2.3-20. Data have been collected and reduced from this station for the January 1, 1972, to December 31, 1972, period. 2.3.3.1.2. Preoperational 60-Meter Tower Meteorological Data System All the preoperational meteorological data systems that have been used during the Fermi 2 program are described in this section. The data are available from the 150-m tower (Reference 26), but are not reported herein. 2.3.3.1.2.1.Instrumentation A revised Fermi 2 site meteorological program was initiated in November 1973 that more adequately measured meteorological conditions at the Fermi site and met the requirements of Regulatory Guide 1.23. The revised program included the reinstrumentation of the 150-m tower on January 23, 1974, and the installation of a 60-m tower with identical instrumentation. The two-tower program monitored most meteorological conditions, with the 150-m tower measuring undisturbed onshore flow off Lake Erie, and the 60-m tower measuring the perturbed onshore flow characteristic of conditions that could affect gaseous effluent releases during overland flow conditions. Figure 2.3-46 is a map of the Fermi site area with the meteorological tower locations. Instrumentation on the 60-m tower measured wind speed, wind direction, and temperature at the 10-m level and the 60-m level. In addition, dewpoint was measured at the 10-m level, and precipitation was measured at ground level. 2.3-17 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR The interface electronics and backup analog recorders were located at the base of the 60-m tower in an environmentally controlled instrument shelter. The primary recording was accomplished using a digital system with teletype printout in engineering units and a computer-compatible paper tape. A minicomputer, located in the instrument shelter at the base of the 150-m tower, provided continuous automatic sensor polling every 15 sec and printed out averages of the data collected from the last 15 minutes once every hour. During periods when data might be desired more often than once an hour, the operator could call for a printout at any desired time interval. The 60-m tower instrumentation was interconnected to the 150-m tower system by a 2500-ft data-transmission line. Thus, the tower was controlled by the minicomputer. The 2500-ft data-transmission line was protected at each end by optical isolators designed to withstand 10 kV. This minimized the interface effects of all but the closest lightning flashes. The revised meteorological program instrumentation specifications are shown in Table 2.3-

21. The revised site meteorological program was fully operational in May 1974. Onsite data from the preoperational test program were acquired and analyzed from the 60-m tower from June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975, from the digital printouts and the computer-compatible paper tape. AST operational onsite program data were also selected and analyzed from the 60-m tower for the period January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1999.

2.3.3.1.2.2.Calibration Analog. Every 6 months, all sensors, electronics, and recording equipment were calibrated. Additional onsite calibrations were performed during the service visits. Any necessary adjustments were made onsite and equipment that malfunctioned was either corrected onsite or replaced with similar spare equipment. After any adjustments or repairs, the calibration was repeated. Electronics calibrations were performed by simulating the output of each of the sensors with precision test equipment and monitoring the recorded values for each parameter. Wind speed sensors were replaced by a square wave frequency generator (with its output monitored by a frequency counter) that was adjusted to provide frequencies corresponding to known wind speeds. Wind direction sensors were replaced by a stable voltage source (with its output monitored by a digital voltmeter), which was adjusted to provide an output corresponding to known wind vane orientations. Temperature sensors were replaced with a stable decade resistance box, which was adjusted to provide accurate resistances corresponding to known temperatures. In all cases, the test instrument settings used were those for which the sensor manufacturer published calibration equivalents. Sensor calibrations are performed by the manufacturer. All results of both electronics and sensor calibrations are kept and filed onsite. Digital. The complete instrumentation system was calibrated every 6 months. Electronics calibrations were virtually the same as were performed on the analog system. Dewpoint electronics calibrations were performed in the same manner as those for air temperature electronics. With the exception of precipitation, sensor calibrations were performed by the manufacturer. The precipitation sensor and electronics were calibrated by placing known weights in the emptied weighing bucket corresponding to a known amount of rainfall. All results of both electronics and sensor calibration were kept and filed onsite. 2.3-18 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3.3.1.2.3.Service and Maintenance Analog. Visits were made twice a week to the 150-m tower to change chart paper, fill inkwells and pens, and change ribbons. A visual inspection of the sensors was made to see if they had been damaged. Using the same precision test equipment used for calibration, all instrumentation was checked to ensure reliable operation. Digital. Daily operational checks and service were performed by a resident technician. These checks included inspection of the data to determine that all sensors were functioning correctly and of the strip charts to ensure accurate recording. In addition, the technician marked the correct time to the nearest minute on the strip chart and verified the correct time of the digital system. Visual inspections of sensors were also performed to ensure that they had not been physically damaged. 2.3.3.1.3. Data Analysis Procedures The data analysis procedures discussed in this subsection were those used for the data reported herein, which includes data from the 60-m tower, 100-ft tower, and Langton Road tower. The total preoperational meteorological program also included the 150-m tower from which data were collected and analyzed over the period from July 3, 1973, to May 31, 1975. However, approximately 170 m north of the 150-m tower, four peaking units were located that were operated during periods of high electrical demand. When the peaking units were in operation and the wind was from the north, it was occasionally noticed that significant increases in temperature at the 60-m and 150-m levels occurred. Because of this, it was deemed necessary to delete periods during which peaking unit operation influenced the determination of the lapse rate. This influence was apparent several times during the course of the annual data collection. Because of the problems associated with the 150-m tower's location, the 60-m tower was installed. An analysis of 1 year of simultaneous meteorological data from the 150-m tower and 60-m tower (Reference 26) showed that the 60-m tower data were representative of the onsite meteorology. Thus, after the Fermi 2 preoperational onsite meteorological data collection was completed, the 150-m tower was decommissioned. Future data will be collected using the 60-m tower only (Reference 26). 2.3.3.1.3.1.60-Meter Tower Data Reduction The meteorological monitoring systems for the Fermi site are described in Subsection 2.3.3.1.2. The data acquisition system utilized two levels of instrumentation (10-m and 60-m) on the 60-m tower located approximately 2400 ft southwest of the Fermi 2 plant. The atmospheric stability conditions were determined from the temperature differences (T) between the 10-m and 60-m temperature measurements, in accordance with the Pasquill Stability Criteria, Conditions A through G. Data from the 60-m tower were read by computer from paper tape to an IBM computer-compatible disk pack and magnetic tape for further use in modeling the site meteorological conditions and /Q calculations for various time periods. Strip charts were used only for backup. The strip- chart data, when needed, were read manually and the data put on IBM cards. Data from the charts were recovered by averaging the 15-minute period immediately preceding the hour. As long as 90 percent of the time span (13.5 minutes) was available for averaging, the data were deemed valid. 2.3-19 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR As a continuing operational verification of data validity, comparisons for all sensors at all levels on the tower between analog and digital averages were made on a random basis during the preoperational phase. The results of these comparisons for all parameters at the 10-m level and the air temperature at the 60-m level of the 60-m tower are shown in Table 2.3-22. For all checks the correlations are excellent. Differences can be attributed to strip-chart-reading error combined with the greater resolution of the digital system. Precipitation at ground level was recorded onsite starting December 7, 1973. With the digital system operational, the strip charts were used only for backup, thus eliminating the strip-chart-reading task. Digital data were verified periodically against strip charts. 2.3.3.1.3.2. Langton Road Tower and 100-Ft Tower Data Reduction Data from the 10-m Langton Road tower were recorded on strip charts and manually reduced. One 10-minute sample for each 1-hr available-data period was obtained for values of the wind direction range (i.e., the extremes of the direction trace peaks). Average values of wind direction and wind speed were obtained by visually estimating a median for the 1-hr sample of the analog traces. One reading was taken for each 1 hr of data available to obtain instantaneous values of temperature and relative humidity. The manually reduced data were transcribed on cards and were used as computer input for data analysis and summary. Data from the 100-ft tower were also recorded on strip charts and manually reduced. Hourly averages of wind direction, wind speed, and temperature were obtained by estimating a median for the analog trace. 2.3.3.1.4. Meteorological Data Recovery 2.3.3.1.4.1. 60-Meter Tower Data Recovery The meteorological data recovery rates for the 60-m tower data for the June 1, 1974 through May 31, 1975 period are listed in Table 2.3-23. The joint data recovery (T, wind speed, wind direction) for the June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975, period of 91.16 percent meets the 90 percent required by Regulatory Guide 1.23 The joint data recovery of wind speed and direction and T for the January 1, 1995 through December 31, 1999 10-meter tower data that was utilized in the PAVAN model for accidental releases at offsite locations is 96.2 percent, also meeting the NRC 90 percent criterion. For the calculations presented herein, only 10-m wind speed and direction, and temperature differences between 60-m and 10-m were used to calculate the short-term postulated accidental release diffusion estimates based on the 1995-1999 data. The 10-m and 60-m wind speeds were used to calculate the long-term mixed-mode annual average X/Q and D/Q values based on the June 1974 through May 1975 period. 2.3.3.1.4.2. Langton Tower and 100-Ft Tower Data Recovery The meteorological data-recovery rates for the 33-ft Langton Tower data are listed in Table 2.3-24. Wind data for the January 1, 1972, to December 31, 1972, period have not been included in this report due to a low data-recovery rate. The recovery was 94 percent for the 2.3-20 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR temperature and relative humidity data for the report period. The data-recovery rate for the 100-ft tower was 77 percent for temperature data, and 96 percent for the 100-ft- level wind data for the December 1, 1956, to November 30, 1959, period. Data-recovery information for other levels of the 100-ft tower are not readily available. 2.3.3.2. Operational Meteorological Monitoring System The previously described preoperational meteorological program was upgraded for plant operation. The upgraded program is composed of two independent meteorological trains of instrumentation - a primary train and a secondary train - mounted on the 60-m tower. Both trains feed the data acquisition equipment of the Integrated Plant Computer System (IPCS) located in the Fermi 2 control center. The IPCS has the capability to share the meteorological data with other plant computers, display the data on IPCS terminals at various plant locations, and perform plume dispersion analysis in support of Emergency Plan activities. The NRC can also receive selected meteorological data through the Emergency Response Data System (ERDS). The operational meteorological monitoring system is described in further detail in the following subsections and is illustrated in Figure 2.3-47. 2.3.3.2.1. Instrumentation Table 2.3-25 lists the meteorological parameters monitored, the sampling height(s), and the sensing technique for the primary and secondary systems. To minimize data loss due to ice storms, external heaters are installed on all primary wind sensors. The heaters are thermostatically controlled and are of the slip-on/slip-off design for easy attachment. The wind sensor specifications are not affected by these heaters. A windscreen is mounted around the precipitation gage to minimize the amount of windblown snow and debris deposited in the gage. Electrical power is supplied to the primary and secondary systems by independent power supplies. One source of power is Fermi 2; the other is an offsite source. If one supply fails, the other automatically supplies the necessary power for both systems. Two precautions are taken to minimize lightning damage to the system. Two of the three legs are grounded and the signal cables are routed through a lightning protection panel. Each signal line is protected by transient protection diodes specifically designed to stay below the individual line voltage breakdown point. 2.3.3.2.2. Signal Conditioning Inside the environmentally controlled instrument shelter, sensor signals are conditioned. Each sensor signal requires a single printed-circuit board to perform the necessary conversion, amplification, and scaling to provide a pair of analog outputs for each parameter. Zero and full-scale test switches are front-panel mounted on each printed-circuit board to facilitate parameter testing. After conditioning through their respective printed-circuit boards, the 10-m horizontal wind direction and vertical wind speed signals pass into the Climatronics Standard Deviation Computer boards to compute the 15-minute average sigma theta and sigma phi. 2.3-21 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR The primary and secondary signal conditioner and standard deviation computer boards are completely independent of each other. 2.3.3.2.3. Data Transmission The outputs of the instrument signal conditioning equipment is transmitted to the control center via two independent transmission lines. The one line incorporates a phone line between the shelter and the nuclear operations center, where information is microwaved to the Office Service Building. From the Office Service Building, the signals are transmitted to the control center. The second line uses a separate phone line from the shelter to the nuclear operations center, where the data are transmitted to the office service building via a phone line. From the office service building, the signals are transmitted to the control center. The two signals are electrically separated from one another from the 60-m tower to the control center. The instrumentation at the 60-m tower is electrically isolated from the equipment in the control center computer room. 2.3.3.2.4. Data Acquisition The dual IPCS data acquisition multiplexors accept two trains of data from the Meteorological system primary and secondary data acquisition equipment. This data is provided to the IPCS computers to perform meteorological calculations, update the data archive, display the information on the man-machine interface, and output the data to communication devices. The IPCS provides redundant computers that provide a main (Master) and backup (Slave) capability. The redundant computers in conjunction with the two trains of data acquisition provide two independent paths of data. The IPCS system monitors available error signals to determine equipment status. If an instrument input malfunctions, if data are suspect, or an instrument input is manually removed from service, the IPCS will substitute the reading from the next level of redundancy as listed in Table 2.3-26 and indicate the substitution on the IPCS computers. Meteorological data are available in five different formats: instantaneous values, 1-minute blocked averages, 15-minute rolling averages, 15-minute blocked averages, and 1-hour blocked averages. In the event that a data path to IPCS is unavailable, a recorder is available on each train of instrumentation at the meteorological instrument building to archive the raw data. 2.3.4. Short-Term (Accident) Diffusion Estimates 2.3.4.1. Calculation of Offsite Atmospheric Diffusion Coefficients 2.3.4.1.1. Objective To evaluate the dispersion potential of the atmosphere in the Fermi site area, calculations were made of concentrations of effluents normalized by the source strength of the power plant release. These atmospheric dilution factors were calculated using the meteorological data collected onsite from January 1, 1995 - December 31, 1999. Short-term offsite transport was modeled using the PAVAN software (Reference 28), which is based on the NRC design-basis-accident methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.145 2.3-22 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR (Reference 31). PAVAN is a commercial software package applicable to nuclear safety-related analyses as well as non-safety related studies and evaluations. Its use is applicable for determining normalized offsite concentrations as required for the Exclusion Area Boundary (EAB) and the Low Population Zone (LPZ). These locations are defined in UFSAR Sections 2.1.2 and 2.1.3.3 as radial distances of 915 m and 4827 m, respectively, from the containment building. Six different /Q values, corresponding to six different time periods following an accident, were calculated. The time periods postulated to follow an accident are those specified by the NRC in Regulatory Guide 1.145. These are 0-2 hr, 0-8 hr, 8-24 hr, 1-4 days, 4-30 days and the annual period. 2.3.4.1.2. Dispersion Equations This section describes the governing atmospheric dispersion modeling equations and assumptions in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.145. Ground-level/Q values were calculated for the 2 hours following the accident for the EAB and LPZ, and for the annual period for the LPZ. Calculations were based on the following equations: 1 Q = 10 y z +A2 U (2.3-1) 1 Q = U10 3y z (2.3-2) 1 Q = 10 y z U (2.3-3) Where: is relative concentration, in sec/m3 is 3.14159 10 U is wind speed at 10 meters above plant grade, in m/sec is lateral plume spread, in m, a function of atmospheric stability and distance z is vertical plume spread, in m, a function of atmospheric stability and distance y is lateral plume spread with meander and building wake effects (in meters), a function of atmospheric stability, wind speed, and distance [for distances of 800 m or less, y=My, where M is determined from Regulatory Guide 1.145 Figure 3; for distances greater than 800 m, y=(M-1)y800m+y A is the smallest vertical-plane cross-sectional area of the reactor building, in m2 (other structures or a directional consideration may be justified when appropriate). Offsite /Qs are calculated assuming a minimum cross-sectional area, A, of the combined reactor/auxiliary building of 2300 m2, as shown in Figure 2.3-48 Plume meander is only considered during neutral (D) or stable (E, F, or G) atmospheric stability conditions where the highest /Q values resulting from equations 2.3-1, 2.3-2 and 2.3-23 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3-3 is selected. For all other conditions (stability classes A, B, or C), meander is not considered and the highest /Q value of equations 2.3-1 and 2.3-2 is selected. The /Q values calculated at the EAB based on meteorological data representing a 1-hour average is assumed to apply for the entire 2-hour period. 2.3.4.1.3. Determination of Max Sector and Overall 5 Percent Site /Q Values 2.3.4.1.3.1.Maximum Sector /Q To determine the maximum sector /Q value at the EAB, a cumulative frequency probability distribution (probabilities of a given /Q value being exceeded in that sector during the total time) is constructed for each of the 16 sectors using the /Q values calculated for each hour of data. This probability is then plotted versus the /Q values and a smooth curve is drawn to form an upper bound of the computed points. For each of the 16 curves, the /Q value that is exceeded 0.5 percent of the total hours is selected and designated as the sector /Q value. The highest of the 16 sector /Q values is the maximum sector /Q. Determination of the LPZ maximum sector /Q is based on a logarithmic interpolation between the 2-hour sector /Q and the annual average /Q for the same sector. For each time period, the highest of these 16 sector /Q values is identified as the maximum sector /Q value. The maximum sector /Q values will, in most cases, occur in the same sector. If they do not occur in the same sector, all 16 sets of values will be used in dose assessment requiring time-integrated concentration considerations. The set that results in the highest time-integrated dose within a sector is considered the maximum sector /Q. 2.3.4.1.3.2. 5 Percent Overall Site /Q The 5 percent overall site /Q value for the EAB and LPZ is determined by constructing an overall cumulative probability distribution for all directions. /Q versus the probability of being exceeded is then plotted and an upper bound curve is drawn. From this curve, the 2-hour /Q value that is exceeded 5 percent of the time is found. The 5 percent overall site /Q at the LPZ for intermediate time periods is determined by logarithmic interpolation of the maximum of the 16 annual average /Q values and the 5 percent 2-hour /Q values. 2.3.4.1.4. Wind Speed Categorization The meteorological database was prepared for use in PAVAN by transforming the five years (i.e., 1995-1999) of hourly meteorological tower data observations into a joint wind speed-wind direction-stability class occurrence frequency distribution. Seven (7) wind speed categories were defined according to Regulatory Guide 1.23 (Reference 16) with the first category identified as calm. The higher of the starting speeds of the wind vane and anemometer (i.e., 0.75 mph) was used as the threshold for calm winds, per Regulatory Guide 1.145, Section 1.1. A midpoint was also assumed between each of the Regulatory Guide 1.23 wind speed categories, Nos. 2-6, as to be inclusive of all wind speeds. The wind speed categories have therefore been defined as follows: 2.3-24 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR Regulatory Guide 1.23 PAVAN-Assumed Category No. Speed Interval (mph) Speed Interval (mph) 1 (Calm) 0 to < 1 0 to < 0.75 2 1 to 3 0.75 to < 3.5 3 4 to 7 3.5 to < 7.5 4 8 to 12 7.5 to < 12.5 5 13 to 18 12.5 to < 18.5 6 19 to 24 18.5 to < 24 7 >24 24 In the equations shown in Section 2.3.4.1.2, it should be noted that wind speed appears as a factor in the denominator. This causes difficulties in making calculations for periods of calm. The procedures used by PAVAN to assign a direction to each calm period according to the directional distribution for the lowest wind-speed class. This is done separately for the calms in each stability class. 2.3.4.1.5. Short-Term X/Q Modeling Results Atmospheric diffusion estimates developed for use in evaluating accidents are summarized in Table 2.3-27 for the above-mentioned periods following the accident. This table includes estimates for the maximum sector and overall 5 percent site /Q. 2.3.4.2. Calculation of Onsite (Control Room) /Q Values 2.3.4.2.1. Objective To evaluate the dispersion potential of the atmosphere in the Fermi site area, calculations were made of concentrations of effluents normalized by the source strength of the power plant release. These atmospheric dilution factors were calculated using the meteorological data collected onsite from January 1, 1995-December 31, 1999. Short-term onsite transport was modeled using the ARCON96 software, which is a commercially available general code for assessing atmospheric relative concentrations in the presence building wakes that is based on the NRC design-basis-accident methodology in Regulatory Guide 1.194 (Reference 32). The code user documentation and calculation methodology is documented in Revision 1 of NUREG/CR-6331, Atmospheric Relative Concentrations in Building Wakes (Reference 33). ARCON calculates relative concentrations for a specified source-to-receptor configuration with the user supplied hourly meteorological data. It then combines the hourly averages to estimate concentrations for periods ranging in duration from 2 hours to 30 days. Wind direction is considered as the averages are formed. As a result, the averages account for persistence in both diffusion conditions and wind direction. Cumulative frequency distributions are prepared from the average relative concentrations. Relative concentrations that are exceeded no more than five percent of the time (95th percentile relative concentrations) are determined from the cumulative frequency distributions for each averaging period. Finally, the relative concentrations for five standard averaging periods (0-2 hr, 2-8 hr, 1-4 days and 4-30 days) are calculated from the 95th percentile relative concentrations. 2.3-25 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3.4.2.2. Dispersion Equations This section describes the governing atmospheric dispersion modeling equations and assumptions (with noted exceptions) in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.194. The basic diffusion model implemented in the ARCON96 is a straight-line Gaussian model that assumes the release rate is constant for the entire period of release. This assumption is made to permit evaluation of potential effects of accidental releases without having to specify a complete release sequence. 2 1 y Q

          =  y z exp 0.5                                                     (2.3-4)

U y where: is relative concentration, in sec/m3 is 3.14159 U is wind speed at 10 meters above plant grade, in m/sec. y is lateral diffusion coefficient (m) z is vertical diffusion coefficient (m), and y is distance from the center of the plume (m) This equation represents a ground level release that is assumed to be continuous, constant, and of sufficient duration to establish a relative mean concentration. It also assumes that the material being released is reflected by the ground. Diffusion coefficients are typically determined from atmospheric stability and distance from the release point using empirical relationships. ARCON96 uses the same diffusion coefficient (z and y) parameterizations utilized in the NRC PAVAN code for calculating the short-term post-accident offsite atmospheric dispersion. Calculation of the onsite /Q values associated with stack releases (i.e., SGTS, RBHVAC, and the TBHVAC), the vent release option was specified in conjunction with a zero-vent velocity. According to Regulatory Guide 1.194, the NRC specifies a ground release as the acceptable release mode for performing atmospheric dispersion calculations, consistent with this philosophy, the NRC does not accept the ARCON96 vent release calculation methodology. However, ARCON96 is coded to use the ground release equations when the vent exiting velocity is less than the wind-speed. Thus, in specifying a zero vent exiting velocity for cases where the vent release option was selected, the ground release equations were implemented and the intent of Regulatory Guide 1.194 was met. The purpose for specifying the zero-velocity vent release option was to allow for consideration of the 60-meter meteorological data in the calculation of the atmospheric relative concentration. Alternatively, the ground release option could have been specified with same inputs for the release and receptor elevations with the same result. In addition, in specifying the vent release, no credit was assumed for pre-dilution of the relative source term concentration inside the secondary containment or turbine building free air volumes or in the volumetric flows of the HVAC system associated with a particular vent location. 2.3-26 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR ARCON 96 includes the effects of low wind speed and building wake by replacing z and y above by composite wake diffusion coefficients of the following form: 1 1 2

= 2y + 2y1 + 2y2       and  = (2z + 2z1 + 2z2 )    2                   (2.3-5) where Z and y are the normal diffusion coefficients and z1 and y1 are the low wind speed corrections and z2 and y2 correct for building wake. The building wake correction is calculated based on a 2300 m2 building area cross-section.

ARCON96 was run assuming the default surface roughness factor of 0.1 meters. This value is representative of a terrain having low-lying vegetation; i.e., farmland, wetland, etc. 2.3.4.2.3. Wind Speed Categorization The meteorological database was prepared for use in ARCON96 by transforming the five years (i.e., 1995-1999) of hourly meteorological tower data observations into the format required by ARCON96. The required input consists of the Julian day, hour, 10-meter wind direction, 10-meter wind speed, stability class, 60-meter wind direction, and 60-meter wind speed for each of these years. ARCON96 requires the specification of the calm threshold. /Q values calculated using wind velocities below the calm threshold are automatically included in the statistical evaluation of a specific /Q regardless of the associated wind direction. Regulatory Guide 1.194 suggests a minimum calm threshold of 0.5 m/s; however, the ARCON96 performed in support of Alternate Source Term implementation were reviewed and approved with a calm threshold of 0.33 m/s. Based on NRC endorsement of the regulatory guide and endorsement of the original AST submittal, both values are acceptable. 2.3.4.2.4. Physical Orientation of Source-Receptor Combinations and Dual Inlet Credit Consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.194, Position 3.4, the source-to-receptor distances used to calculate the atmospheric dispersion coefficients were calculated as the slant distance or direct line-of-site distances. Conservatively, the values of relative air concentrations used to evaluate vital area doses do not credit the additional distance incurred in circumventing intervening plant structures. However, such credit is permitted in accordance with the NRC methodology and was considered in evaluating the relative importance of postulated potential MSIV and secondary containment bypass leak release locations against the Turbine Building exhaust stack as a single representative release point. 2.3.4.2.4.1. DBA LOCA Post LOCA atmospheric dispersion of ECCS and primary containment leakage was evaluated based on an assumed release via the SGTS stack to the control room north and south emergency air intakes. The TBHVAC stack was the assumed release point for Main Steam Line Leakage, also having the main control room north and south emergency air intakes as receptors. The table below identifies the horizontal and vertical separation distances between the postulated source and receptor locations. The RBHVAC stack and secondary containment wall were not assumed release locations evaluated in support of the LOCA analysis performed using the Alternate Source term. Nevertheless, their physical 2.3-27 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR locations with respect to the control center emergency air intakes are included for historical purposes. Intake Separation Distance, meters Source Release Location [Horizontal/Vertical] South Emergency/Normal* North Emergency SGTS Stack 39.4/24.9 17.2/35.8 TBHVAC Stack 69.1/10.7 111.1/21.6 RBHVAC Stack 11.6/24.9 48.8/35.8 Secondary Containment Wall 13.9/0 13.9/0

• Note that the vertical distance used to calculate the atmospheric dispersion coefficients for transport to the south emergency air intake for the LOCA analysis credits only the upper, missile-proof portion of the inlet plenum. The south emergency air intake also includes a safety-related sided enclosure that extends the intake down an additional 10.9 meters.

The Fermi 2 Control Center HVAC system is designed with dual emergency makeup air inlets located on the North and South sides of the Auxiliary Building. With the exception of the TBHVAC exhaust stack, the emergency air inlets have a separation distance that is sufficient to place them outside of a 90° wind direction window centered on the line-of-sight from any of the stack locations above to the opposite emergency air intakes. Thus, consistent with Regulatory Guide 1.194, Position 3.3.2, they are configured such that neither release point is capable of simultaneously impacting both air inlets. Furthermore, the Control Room Emergency Filtration System associated with CCHVAC is capable of automatically selecting the inlet with the lowest dose. However, the operators are procedurally instructed to take manual control of the inlet selection. On this basis, consistent with Regulatory Guides 6.4 and 1.194, Position 3.3.2.3, the /Q associated with the most favorable intake is assumed and divided by a factor of four. Fermi differs from the Regulatory Guide 1.194, Position 3.3.2.3 in that the factor of four is applied from the start of the accident rather than from the time the manual action is assumed to occur. The TBHVAC stack is the assumed release point for the source term associated with Main Steam Isolation Valve leakage. This stack location does not have sufficient separation relative to the two inlets to allow dual inlet credit. The value of /Q calculated by ARCON96 is used directly (i.e., with no correction or reduction) to represent MSIV leakage transport to the control center with only credit for the ability of the operator to select the most favorable inlet. In this manner, the transport to the control center occurs instantaneously as the leakage occurs as if TBHVAC were in operation with no credit for any dilution in the TBHVAC airflow or the very large volume above the turbine deck. Each of the thirteen smoke vents on the Turbine Building roof and the external doors associated with the turbine and auxiliary buildings were also considered in selecting an appropriate release location. While the /Qs calculated for these locations were potentially larger than that associated with the TBHVAC stack value, the conservatism in the application of the stack value with no credit taken for mixing or deposition was considered adequately compensating. 2.3.4.2.4.2.Fuel Handling Accident Fermi considers two types of fuel handling accidents, one that occurs 24 hours post-scram that involves a drop of recently irradiated fuel and credits only secondary containment and 2.3-28 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR the operation of the SGTS for mitigation. The second type of fuel handling accident involving fuel that is no longer recently irradiated, which occurs following a post-scram delay period sufficient such that credit for secondary containment and SGTS operation is not required. Although not specifically required in Regulatory Guides 1.183 and 1.194, the FHA analyses submitted in support of Amendments 144 and 160, conservatively applied the 0-2 hr control room /Q values calculated by ARCON96 to the entire 30-day duration of accident. Neither type of fuel handling accident assumes credit for the operation of the Control Room Emergency Filtration System. Consequently, the factor associated with the dual inlet configuration is not credited for reducing the value of /Q calculated by the ARCON96 software. Adequate separation is credited, however, to ensure that only the single most limiting air intake is specified. The release and receptor locations used to evaluate the radiological consequences of the fuel handling accident differ from those associated with the DBA LOCA and depend on which of the two types of fuel handling accidents is to be evaluated. 2.3.4.2.4.2.1. 24-Hour Fuel Handling Accident Involving Recently Irradiated Fuel This accident postulates an initial brief period of unfiltered release via the RBHVAC stack prior to secondary containment isolation and operation of the SGTS. ARCON96 was used to calculate the atmospheric dispersion coefficient representing transport from these stacks to each emergency air intake. The source-to-receptor distances are as specified in the table in Section 2.3.4.2.4.1 except the additional vertical distance of 10.9 meters associated with the full length of the south emergency air intake is credited. 2.3.4.2.4.2.2. Fuel Handling Accident Involving Fuel No Longer Considered Recently Irradiated This accident assumes no credit for secondary containment isolation or operation of the SGTS. Consequently, the most likely release path would be via the RBHVAC stack as a consequence of continued RBHVAC operation. Several source-to-receptor locations were considered in establishing the limiting plant configuration, these included the SGTS and RBHVAC stacks as well as the reactor building railroad bay and first floor personnel air-lock (via the Outage Building front) doors. While RBHVAC was identified and the most credible release point, the outage building front doors were conservatively selected as a bounding release location. Due to the location of the outage doors on the south side of the reactor building, the corresponding limiting receptor location is the south emergency air intake. The horizontal and vertical distances between these source and receptor locations are 29.3 m and 18.6 m for an overall slant distance of 34.7 m. The overall slant distance was input to ARCON96 in evaluating the associated atmospheric dispersion as a ground release. This source-to-receptor pathway presumes the source term is removed from the building and is transported to the control room via the normal/emergency makeup air intakes. Thus, the control room envelope is effectively assumed to be intact and any maintenance that involves 2.3-29 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR breaches of the control room envelope must include the controls necessary to preserve this assumption. 2.3.4.2.4.3.Control Rod Drop Accident This accident considers two release paths: delayed release from the main condenser and a forced release from the offgas system due to the continued operation of the steam-jet air ejectors. The main condenser activity is released to the environment via the TBHVAC stack and is modeled as a zero-velocity vent release. The steam-jet air ejector activity is released to the environment through the RBHVAC stack and is also modeled as a zero-velocity vent release. ARCON96 was used to calculate the atmospheric dispersion coefficients representing transport from these stacks to each emergency air intake. The source-to-receptor distances are as specified in the table in Section 2.3.4.2.4.1. The analysis assumes no credit for the operation of the Control Room Emergency Filtration System. Consequently, the factor associated with the dual inlet configuration is not credited for reducing the value of /Q calculated by the ARCON96 software. Although the /Q values are calculated for both emergency air intakes, the analysis conservatively uses the values associated with the south emergency air intake. 2.3.4.2.5. Short-Term Onsite /Q Modeling Results Atmospheric diffusion estimates developed for use in evaluating accidents are summarized in Table 2.3-28. 2.3.5. Long-Term Diffusion and Deposition Calculations To evaluate the long-term dispersion potential of the atmosphere in the Fermi site area, calculations were made of effluent concentrations normalized by source strength of the power plant release and relative deposition rate. These atmospheric dilution and deposition factors were calculated using meteorological data collected onsite at the 60-m tower over the period June 1, 1974, to May 31, 1975. The long-term calculations are based on the straight line trajectory airflow model where a mixed-mode release, depending on wind speed, is assumed as described in Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1 (Reference 30). The models used to evaluate the long-term (annual) estimates of /Q and D/Q are described in Annex B of Appendix 11A. The analyses reported herein were performed for three separate sources at the Fermi 2 site: the containment building vent, the turbine building vent, and the radwaste building vent. Since the calculations were performed assuming a mixed-mode release based on wind speed, the release characteristics of each source are given in Table 2.3-28. It should be noted that the results of the calculations performed for /Q (undecayed and undepleted, and decayed and depleted for radioiodines) and D/Q for radioiodines and particulates are presented in Appendix 2A. 2.3.5.1. Undecayed and Undepleted /Q Estimates Values of /Q assuming no decay or depletion were calculated for the three air effluent releases using the mixed-mode techniques referenced in Annex B to Appendix 11A and 2.3-30 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, July 1977. The calculations were performed for all 22-1/2° sectors at distances of

a. 0.4 to 1.6 km in 0.4-km increments

b. 1.6 to 16 km in 0.8-km increments

c. 16 to 80 km in 8-km increments.

These values of undecayed and undepleted /Q in units of seconds per cubic meter are presented in "wheel diagrams" for each source in Figures 2.3-52 through 2.3-54. Note that each figure provides values for the three distances for each release point. The numerical /Q values are presented by distance and sector in Appendix 2A. 2.3.5.2. Decayed and Depleted /Q Estimates Values of /Q, assuming a radioactive effluent with a half-life of 8 days and using the plume depletion effect curves in Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, July 1977, in conjunction with the mixed-mode techniques, were calculated for the distances noted in Subsection 2.3.5.1. These values of decayed and depleted /Q in units of seconds per cubic meter are presented for each of the three sources in Figures 2.3-55 through 2.3-57. The numerical values are presented by distance and sector in Appendix 2A. 2.3.5.3. Relative Deposition Estimates Values of relative deposition (D/Q) per unit area were calculated for the three sources also using the mixed-mode techniques. The relative deposition-rate curves in Figures 6 through 9 of Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, July 1977, were used for the same distances as described above. These values of relative deposition per unit area (square meters) are presented for each of the three sources in Figures 2.3-58 through 2.3-60. The numerical values are presented by distance and sector in Appendix 2A. 2.3-31 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3 METEOROLOGY REFERENCES

1. Detroit (Metropolitan Airport), Michigan Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Service Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North Carolina, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974.

2. Detroit (City Airport), Michigan Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Service Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North Carolina, 1969, 1971, and 1972.

3. Toledo, Ohio Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Service Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North Carolina, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974.

4. Monroe, Michigan Climatological Summary (revised December 1971),

Climatography of the United States, No. 20-20, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Service, Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North Carolina, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974.

5. Willis, Michigan Climatological Summary (revised December 1971),

Climatography of the United States, No. 20-20, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Service Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North Carolina, 1971, 1972, 1973, 1974.

6. H. C. S. Thom, "New Distributions of Extreme Winds in the United States," Journal of the Structural Division Proceedings of the American Society of Civil Engineers, July 1968.

7. Storm Data, National Weather Records Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Service, Environmental Data Service, Asheville, North Carolina, Monthly from February 1965 to December 1974.

8. Climatological Data, National Summary - Annual, United States Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau, 1951-1958.

9. A. B. Lowe and G. A. McKay, The Tornadoes of Western Canada, Meteorological Branch, Department of Transport, Cat. No. T56-2462, Ottawa, Canada, 1962.

10. H. C. S. Thom, "Tornado Probabilities," Monthly Weather Review, 91 (10-12), pp.

730-736, October-December 1963.

11. C. R. Hosler, "Low Level Inversion Frequency in the Contiguous United States,"

Monthly Weather Review, 98 (9) pp. 319-332, 1961.

12. G. C. Holzworth, Mixing Heights, Wind Speeds, and Potential for Urban Air Pollution Throughout the Contiguous United States, Environmental Protection Agency, January 1972.

13. Deleted.

2.3-32 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3 METEOROLOGY REFERENCES

14. J. D. Stackpole, The Air Pollution Potential Forecast Program, Weather Bureau Technical Memo NMC-43, National Meteorological Center, Suitland, Maryland, 1967.

15. J. J. Korshover, Climatology of Stagnating Anticyclones East of the Rocky Mountains, 1936-1965, U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, 1967.

16. USAEC Regulatory Guide 1.23, February 1972.

17. W. E. Hewson, et al., Third, Fourth, and Fifth Progress Reports, Meteorological Analysis, UMRI Project 2515, the University of Michigan Research Institute, Ann Arbor, Michigan, January 1960.

18. W. E. Hewson, G. C. Gill, and E. W. Bierly, Final Report, Meteorological Analysis, UMRI Project 2515, the University of Michigan Research Institute, January 1961.

19. B. D. Turner, "A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area," Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 3, No. 1, pp. 81-83, February 1964.

20. H. R. Byers, General Meteorology, McGraw-Hill, Chapter 20, 1959.

21. D. R. Rondy, Great Lakes Ice Atlas, COM-71-01052, U.S. Department of Commerce, September 1971.

22. Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2, Environmental Report (Operating License Stage), Docket 50-341, Section 5.1, April 1975.

23. W. A. Lyons and L. E. Olsson, "Mesoscale Air Pollution Transport in the Chicago Lake Breeze," Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, Vol. 22, No. 11, pp.

876-881, November 1972.

24. Isaac Van der Hoven, "Atmospheric Transport and Diffusion at Coastal Sites,"

Nuclear Safety, Sept.-Oct., 1967, Vol. No. 5.

25. Edward Ryznar, An Investigation of Atmospheric Diffusion in the Vicinity of the Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant: Report No. 2., for the Detroit Edison Company under administration by the Office of Research Administration, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan.

26. Letter from A. B. Harris, Detroit Edison, to K. Kniel, NRC, EF2-32699, December 22, 1975, transmitting "Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant, Unit 2 Docket No. 50-341, Analysis of the Meteorological Data from the 150 Meter and 60 Meter Towers." EG&G Report No. ECR-75-027, November 18, 1975.

27. Letter from G. W. Knighton, NRC, to H. Tauber, Detroit Edison, April 26, 1976.

28. Atmospheric Dispersion Code System for Evaluating Accidental Radioactivity Releases from Nuclear Power Stations, PAVAN, Revision 2, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, December 1990.

29. D. H. Slade, Editor, Meteorology and Atomic Energy, National Technical Information Service, TID-24190, pp. 102-103, 1971.

2.3-33 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.3 METEOROLOGY REFERENCES

30. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases from Light-Water- Cooled Reactors. Regulatory Guide 1.111, Revision 1, July 1977.

31. Regulatory Guide 1.145, Atmospheric Dispersion Models for Potential Accident Consequence Assessments at Nuclear Power Plants (Revision 1), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, November 1982.

32. Regulatory Guide 1.194, Atmospheric Relative Concentrations for Control Room Radiological Habitability Assessments at Nuclear Power Plants, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June 2003.

2.3-34 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-1 EXTREME WIND SPEED OCCURRENCE PROBABILITIES (AT 30 FT ABOVE GROUND) Probability Recurrence Interval (years) Extreme Wind Speed (mph) 0.500 2 50 0.100 10 62 0.040 25 70 0.020 50 82 0.010 100 90 0.001 1000 117 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-2 DETROIT, MICHIGAN METROPOLITAN AIRPORT NORMALS, MEANS, AND EXTREMES Temperature Precipitation Relative Humidity Windg Mean number of days Normal heating degree days (base 65°) Average daily solar radiation (langleys) Normal Extremes Snow, Ice Pellets Fastest Mileh Sunrise to Sunset Temperatures Mean sky cover sunrise to sunset Precipitation 0.01 in. or more Snow, ice pellets 1.0 in. or more Month Percent possible sunshine Maximum Minimum Maximum monthly Minimum monthly Maximum in 24 hr Maximum monthly Maximum in 24 hr Prevailing direction 90O and abovef Directioni Daily maximum Daily minimum Partly cloudy Thunderstorms 32O and below 32O and below 0O and below Speed Record highest Record lowest Normal total Year Monthly Mean total Mean speed Cloudy Heavy Fog Year Year Year Year Year Year Year hr 01 hr 07 hr 13 hr 19 Clear (Local time) (a) (b) (b) (b) 14 14 (b) (b) 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 5 6 6 7 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 14 J 33.3 19.0 26.2 62 1965 -14 1972 1203 1.93 3.63 1965 0.27 1961 1.72 1967 8.1 13.4 1959 6.6 1968 77 78 69 73 11.3 WSW 50 W 1971 38 7.5 4 7 20 13 3 (c) 3 0 17 30 4 F 34.4 18.9 26.7 58 1966 -9 1971 1072 1.95 2.68 1971 0.15 1969 1.23 1965 8.3 17.4 1962 10.3 1965 75 77 64 69 11.3 WSW 52 SW 1967 45 7.2 5 6 17 11 3 (c) 2 0 12 27 2 M 42.8 25.9 34.4 77 1963 1 1963 949 2.41 3.59 1965 0.92 1960 1.18 1972 6.3 16.1 1965 6.5 1968 76 78 61 65 11.2 WSW 36 SW 1969 52 7.2 5 8 18 13 2 1 2 0 5 25 0 A 56.7 36.2 46.5 85 1970d 17 1964 555 3.05 5.40 1961 0.92 1971 1.97 1965 1.6 7.4 1961 4.2 1961 75 79 55 59 11.2 WSW 45 SW 1968 54 6.8 6 7 17 13 1 4 1 0 (c) 10 0 M 68.8 46.4 57.6 92 1962 25 1966 259 3.54 5.88 1968 1.15 1965 2.87 1968 (e) (e) 1970d (e) 1970d 75 78 53 56 10.1 WSW 40 SW 1970 61 6.3 7 10 14 10 0 4 (c) (c) 0 1 0 J 79.0 56.8 67.9 99 1971 36 1972d 61 3.31 6.60 1960 2.12 1959 2.62 1960 0.0 0.0 0.0 80 80 54 59 8.8 SW 39 W 1970 62 5.9 8 10 12 11 0 6 1 3 0 0 0 J 83.9 60.9 72.4 98 1966 41 1965 0 2.69 6.02 1969 1.11 1964 3.19 1966 0.0 0.0 0.0 81 82 53 58 8.3 SW 50 SW 1968 65 5.7 8 13 10 10 0 6 1 4 0 0 0 A 82.1 59.4 70.8 97 1964 40 1964 11 2.84 7.70 1964 1.06 1969 3.21 1964 0.0 0.0 0.0 84 87 56 64 8.2 SW 36 NW 1971 71 5.4 10 11 10 9 0 6 2 3 0 0 0 d d S 74.5 52.0 63.3 94 1971 33 1970 111 2.32 5.83 1961 0.43 1960 2.07 1961 0.0 0.0 0.0 84 87 57 68 8.6 SW 34 W 1970 58 6.4 8 9 13 10 0 4 2 1 0 0 0 d d d O 63.1 41.3 52.2 91 1963 18 1965 405 2.57 4.87 1967 0.35 1964 2.11 1959 (e) (e) 1972 (e) 1972 81 84 56 68 9.2 WSW 33 SW 1968 52 6.1 8 10 13 9 0 1 3 (c) 0 5 0 N 47.3 31.2 39.3 77 1968 9 1969d 771 2.27 3.31 1968 0.80 1964 1.52 1968 3.2 11.8 1966 5.2 1966d 80 83 66 74 10.6 SW 37 SW 1968 28 7.8 3 7 20 11 1 (c) 2 0 1 17 0 D 35.8 21.9 28.9 66 1966 -9 1960 1119 1.92 6.00 1965 0.46 1960 3.71 1965 8.0 17.3 1962 5.7 1966 79 81 71 76 10.8 SW 50 W 1972 25 7.9 3 7 21 13 3 (c) 3 0 13 26 1 June Jan. Aug. Feb. Dec. Feb. Feb. Feb. ` YR 58.5 39.2 48.9 99 1971 -14 1972 6516 30.80 7.70 1964 0.15 1969 3.71 1965 35.5 17.4 1962 10.3 1965 79 81 60 66 10.0 SW 52 SW 1967 53 6.7 75 105 185 131 13 33 23 11 48 140 7 a Length of record, years, based on January data. Other months may be for more or fewer years if there have been breaks in the record. Below zero temperatures are preceded by a minus sign. b Climatological standard normals (1931-1960) The prevailing direction for wind in the Normals, Means, and Extremes table is from records through 1963. c Less than one half. d Unless otherwise indicated, dimensional units used in this bulletin are: temperature in ºF; precipitation, including snowfall in in.; wind movement in Also on earlier dates, months, or years. mph; and relative humidity in percent. Heating degree day totals are the sums of negative departures of average daily temperatures from 65ºF. Sleet e Trace, an amount too small to measure. was included in snowfall totals beginning with July 1948. The term "Ice Pellets" includes solid grains of ice (sleet) and particles consisting of snow f at Alaskan stations. pellets encased in a thin layer of ice. Heavy fog reduces visibility to 1/4 mile or less. g Figures instead of letters in a direction column indicate direction in tens of degrees from true North; i.e., 09 - East, 18 - South, 27 - West, 36 - North, Sky cover is expressed in a range of 0 for no clouds or obscuring phenomena to 10 for complete sky cover. The number of clear days is based on and 00 - Calm. Resultant wind is the vector sum of wind directions and speeds divided by the number of observations. If figures appear in the averaqe cloudiness 0-3, partly cloudy days 4-7, and cloudy days 8-10 tenths. direction column under "Fastest Mile" the corresponding speeds are fastest observed 1-minute values. h Solar radiation data are the averages of direct and diffuse radiation on a horizontal surface. The langley denotes 1 g/cal/cm2. For period May 1966 through current year. i To eight compass points only. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-3 DETROIT, MICHIGAN CITY AIRPORT NORMALS, MEANS, AND EXTREMES Temperature Precipitation Relative Humidity Windg Mean number of days Normal heating degree days (base 65O) Average daily solar radiation (langleys) Normal Extremes Snow, Ice Pellets Fastest Mile Sunrise to Sunseth Temperatures Mean sky cover sunrise to sunseth Precipitation .01 in. or more Snow, ice pellets 1.0. in or more Percent possible sunshineh Maximum Minimum Daily maximum Daily minimum Record highest Record lowest Maximum monthly Minimum monthly Maximum in 24 hr Maximum in 24 hr Prevailing direction Thunderstorms 90° and abovef 32° and below 32° and below Normal total Mean total Mean speed Partly cloudy Heavy Fog 0° and below Maximum Month Monthly Year Year Year Year Year monthly Year Year hr 01 hr 07 hr 13 hr 19 Speed Direction Year Clear Cloudy (Local time) (a) (b) (b) (b) 39 39 (b (b) 35 35 35 37 37 32 35 39 35 39 39 14 6 6 32 32 32 32 32 35 35 39 39 39 39 39 39 J 33.0 20.7 26.9 67 1950 -13 1963 1181 2.05 4.38 1950 0.23 1961 1.63 1960 8.1 21.1 1939 8.4 1957 75 79 69 74 11.5 W 40 26 1971 32 7.8 4 6 21 13 3 (c) 2 0 16 28 1 F 33.9 20.4 27.2 68 1944 -16 1934 1058 2.08 4.95 1938 0.10 1969 2.43 1950 7.6 15.8 1965 10.0 1965 76 79 65 71 11.5 NW 40 23 1971d 43 7.3 4 7 17 12 3 1 1 0 13 26 1 M 42.3 27.3 34.8 82 1945 -1 1943 936 2.42 4.40 1938 0.47 1958 1.85 1949 5.4 15.5 1954 9.8 1934 74 78 60 66 11.5 NW 40 23 1972 49 7.0 5 8 18 13 2 1 1 0 5 22 (c) d A 56.4 38.8 47.6 87 1942 14 1954 522 3.00 6.89 1947 0.74 1946 2.94 1947 1.2 6.8 1943 4.2 1942 71 74 53 58 11.1 NW 37 29 1967 52 6.8 6 8 16 12 (c) 3 1 0 (c) 8 0 d d d M 68.6 49.4 59.0 93 1962 30 1966 220 3.53 8.05 1943 0.58 1934 2.53 1948 (e) 0.1 1954 0.1 1954 71 71 51 56 9.8 S 33 35 1972 59 6.4 7 10 14 12 0 4 (c) 1 0 (c) 0 J 79.1 60.3 69.7 104 1934 38 1969d 42 2.83 6.58 1960 1.01 1959 3.53 1968 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 74 53 57 9.0 S 40 28 1971d 65 6.0 7 12 11 11 0 6 (c) 4 0 0 0 J 83.9 64.8 74.4 105 1934 42 1972 0 2.82 7.05 1969 0.81 1936 2.80 1957 0.0 0.0 0.0 75 75 51 55 8.2 S 40 28 1966 70 5.3 9 13 9 9 0 6 (c) 6 0 0 0 A 81.9 63.6 72.8 101 1936 43 1934 0 2.86 7.51 1940 1.07 1936 3.65 1956 0.0 0.0 0.0 78 80 53 60 8.1 N 46 30 1968 65 5.4 10 12 9 9 0 5 1 4 0 0 0 d d S 74.2 56.0 65.1 100 1953 32 1942 87 2.44 5.90 1936 0.53 1969 2.56 1959 0.0 0.0 0.0 79 83 54 64 8.9 S 36 14 1971 61 5.4 10 10 10 9 0 3 1 1 0 (c) 0 O 62.8 44.7 53.8 92 1963 24 1972d 360 2.63 7.80 1954 0.50 1964 3.72 1954 (e) 1.0 1943 1.0 1943 77 71 55 66 9.5 S 25 29 1969 56 5.6 10 9 12 9 0 1 1 (c) 0 2 0 N 47.1 33.7 40.4 81 1950 5 1958 738 2.21 4.14 1948 0.57 1939 2.18 1951 2.5 9.2 1950 5.6 1951 76 79 64 70 11.3 SW 30 24 1970 35 7.5 4 7 19 11 1 (c) 1 0 2 13 0 D 35.7 24.1 29.9 66 1971 -5 1960 1088 2.08 4.60 1957 0.43 1943 2.45 1965 6.8 24.0 1951 6.8 1951 77 79 70 74 11.3 SW 43 21 1971 32 7.7 4 6 21 13 2 (c) 2 0 12 25 (c) July Feb. May Feb. Oct. Dec. Feb. Aug. YR 58.2 42.0 50.1 105 1934 -16 1934 6232 30.95 8.05 1943 0.10 1969 3.72 1954 31.6 24.0 1951 10.0 1965 75 78 58 64 10.1 S 46 30 1968 54 6.5 80 108 177 131 11 32 11 15 48 125 2 a Length of record, years, based on January data. Other months may be for more or fewer years if there have been breaks in the record. Means and extremes above are from existing and comparable exposures. Annual extremes have been exceeded at other sites in the locality as follows: Lowest b Climatological standard normals (1931-1960). temperature -24 in December 1872; maximum monthly precipitation 8.76 in July 1878; minimum monthly precipitation 0.04 in February 1887; maximum precipitation in c Less than one half. 24 hours 4.75 in July 1925; maximum monthly snowfall 38.4 in February 1908; maximum snowfall in 24 hours 24.5 in April 1886; fastest mile of wind 95 from d Also on earlier dates, months, or years. Northwest in June 1890. e Trace, an amount too small to measure. Below zero temperatures are preceded by a minus sign. f at Alaskan stations. The prevailing direction for wind in the Normals, Means, and Extremes table is from records through 1963. g Figures instead of letters in a direction column indicate direction in tens of degrees from true North; i.e., 09 - East, 18 - South, 27 - West, 36 - North, and 00 - Unless otherwise indicated, dimensional units used in this bulletin are: temperature in ºF; precipitation, including snowfall, in in.; wind movement in mph; and relative Calm. Resultant wind is the vector sum of wind directions and speeds divided by the number of observations. If figures appear in the direction column under humidity in percent. Heating degree day totals are the sums of negative departures of average daily temperatures from 65ºF.Cooling degree day totals are the sums of "Fastest Mile" the corresponding speeds are fastest observed 1-minute values. positive departures of average daily temperatures from from 65°F. Sleet was included in snowfall totals beginning with July 1948. The term "Ice Pellets" includes solid h Data accumulated through 1965. grains of ice (sleet) and particles consisting of snow pellets encased in a thin layer of ice. Heavy fog reduces visibility to 1/4 mile or less. i To eight compass points only. Sky cover is expressed in a range of 0 for no clouds or obscuring phenomena to 10 for complete sky cover. The number of clear days is based on average cloudiness 0-3, partly cloudy days 4-7, and cloudy days 8-10 tenths. Solar radiation data are the averages of direct and diffuse radiation on a horizontal surface. The langley denotes 1 g/cal/cm2. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-4 TOLEDO, OHIO NORMALS, MEANS, AND EXTREMES Temperature Precipitation Relative Humidity Windg Mean number of days Average daily solar radiation (langleys) Normal heating degree days (base 65°) Normal Extremes Snow, Ice Pellets Fastest Mile Sunrise to Sunset Temperatures Mean sky cover sunrise to sunset Precipitation .01 in. or more Snow, ice pellets 1.0 in or more Percent possible sunshine Maximum Minimum Maximum monthly Minimum monthly Maximum in 24 hr Prevailing direction Daily maximum Daily minimum Record highest Record lowest Normal total Maximum in 24 hr Mean speed Partly cloudy Thunderstorms 90° and abovef 32° and below 32° and below 0° and below Heavy Fog Mean total Maximum Month Monthly Year Year Year Year Year monthly Year Year hr 01 hr 07 hr 13 hr 19 Speed Directionh Year Clear Cloudy (Local time) (a) (b) (b) (b) 17 17 (b) (b) 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 8 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 17 J 34.1 18.4 26.3 62 1967d -17 1972d 1200 2.33 4.61 1965 0.27 1961 1.78 1959 8.8 14.2 1970 6.6 1957 72 78 69 73 10.9 WSW 47 W 1972d 45 7.4 5 7 19 13 3 (c) 2 0 17 29 4 F 35.7 18.8 27.3 68 1957 -14 1967 1056 1.88 3.13 1960 0.27 1969 1.35 1959 7.8 14.4 1967 7.4 1967 72 78 65 70 10.9 WSW 56 SW 1967 47 7.3 4 7 17 11 2 (c) 2 0 12 27 2 M 44.7 25.6 35.2 80 1963 -1 1960 924 2.26 4.88 1964 0.58 1958 1.56 1964 6.9 11.6 1964 7.5 1962 73 81 61 66 11.0 WSW 56 W 1957d 50 7.4 5 7 19 14 2 2 2 0 5 25 (c) A 58.4 35.4 46.9 87 1960 11 1964 543 2.77 4.94 1961 0.88 1962 2.39 1956 1.9 12.0 1957 9.8 1957 76 80 55 59 10.9 E 72 SW 1956 54 6.9 6 7 17 13 1 5 1 0 (c) 11 0 M 70.4 46.1 58.3 95 1962 26 1968 242 3.04 5.13 1968 0.96 1964 1.96 1970 (e) (e) 1966d (e) 1966d 76 79 51 56 10.0 WSW 45 W 1957 63 6.3 6 11 14 12 0 3 1 1 0 2 0 J 80.3 56.3 68.3 99 1971 32 1972 60 3.79 4.86 1960 1.89 1964 2.50 1956 0.0 0.0 0.0 82 82 54 58 8.4 SW 50 W 1969 65 6.0 7 11 12 10 0 7 1 4 0 (c) 0 J 85.1 60.2 72.7 96 1966d 43 1972d 0 2.59 6.75 1969 1.58 1964 4.39 1969 0.0 0.0 0.0 84 86 55 61 7.5 WSW 54 NW 1970 68 5.8 7 14 10 10 0 8 1 4 0 0 0 A 83.0 58.8 70.9 98 1964 37 1965 16 3.33 8.47 1965 0.81 1967 2.42 1972 0.0 0.0 0.0 86 89 57 65 7.3 SW 47 W 1965 68 5.5 9 12 10 8 0 6 2 4 0 0 0 S 75.5 51.3 63.4 95 1960 29 1961 117 2.13 8.10 1972 0.58 1963 3.97 1972 (e) (e) 1967 (e) 1967 86 90 57 70 7.8 SSW 47 NW 1969 62 5.9 8 10 12 10 0 4 2 1 0 (c) 0 d d O 63.8 40.3 52.1 91 1963 16 1965 406 2.39 3.72 1959 0.28 1964 1.71 1957 (e) 0.2 1972 0.2 1972 81 85 55 68 8.7 WSW 40 SW 1956 59 5.8 9 10 12 8 0 1 2 (c) 0 6 0 N 47.3 29.8 38.6 78 1968 2 1958 792 2.04 4.63 1966 0.77 1964 2.06 1969 3.6 17.9 1966 8.3 1966 81 83 67 74 10.3 WSW 65 SW 1957 39 7.7 4 7 19 11 1 (c) 2 0 3 18 0 D 35.8 20.8 28.3 67 1971 -11 1960 1138 1.95 6.81 1967 0.54 1958 3.53 1967 7.7 19.0 1969 8.0 1969 82 83 73 78 10.5 SW 45 SW 1971d 36 7.8 3 7 21 14 3 (c) 2 0 12 27 2 Jun. Jan. Aug Feb. Jul. Dec. Apr. Apr. YR 59.5 38.5 49.0 99 1971 -17 1972d 6494 30.50 8.47 1965 0.27 1969d 4.39 1969 36.7 19.0 1969 9.8 1957 79 83 60 67 9.5 WSW 72 SW 1956 56 6.7 73 110 182 134 12 40 19 4 49 146 8 a Means and extremes above are from existing and comparable exposures. Annual extremes have been exceeded at other sites in the locality as follows: Highest temperature Length of record, years, based on January data. Other months may be for more or fewer years if there have been breaks in the record. 105° in July 1936; maximum monthly precipitation 8.49 in October 1881; minimum monthly precipitation 0.04 in November 1904; maximum precipitation in 24 hr 5.98 in b Climatological standard normals (1931-1960). September 1818; maximum monthly snowfall 26.2 in January 1918; maximum snowfall in 24 hr 19.0 in February 1900; fastest mile 87 in March 1948. c Less than one half. Below zero temperatures are preceded by a minus sign. d Also on earlier dates, months, or years. The prevailing direction for wind in the Normals, Means, and Extremes table is from records through 1963. e Trace, an amount too small to measure. Unless otherwise indicated, dimensional units used in this bulletin are: temperature in ºF; precipitation, including snowfall, in in.; wind movement in mph; and relative f humidity in percent. Heating degree day totals are the sums of negative departures of average daily temperatures from 65ºF.Cooling degree day totals are the sums of positive at Alaskan stations. departures of daily temperatures from 65°F. Sleet was included in snowfall totals beginning with July 1948. The term "Ice Pellets" includes solid grains of ice (sleet) and g Figures instead of letters in a direction column indicate direction in tens of degrees from true North; i.e., 09 - East, 18 - South, 27 - West, 36. - North, and 00 - Calm. particles consisting of snow pellets encased in a thin layer of ice. Heavy fog reduces visibility to 1/4 mile or less. Resultant wind is the vector sum of wind directions and speeds divided by the number of observations. If figures appear in the direction column under "Fastest Mile" the Sky cover is expressed in a range of 0 for no clouds or obscuring phenomena to 10 for complete sky cover. The number of clear days is based on average cloudiness 0-3, corresponding speeds are fastest observed 1-minute values. partly cloudy days 4-7, and cloudy days 8-10 tenths. h To eight compass points only. Solar radiation data are the averages of direct and diffuse radiation on a horizontal surface. The langley denotes 1 g/cal/cm2. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-5 CLIMATOLOGICAL

SUMMARY

MONROE, MICHIGAN (MEANS AND EXTREMES FOR PERIOD 1940-1969) Latitude 41° 54 Longitude 83° 22 Station Monroe, Michigan, Monroe County Elev. (Ground) 582 feet Temperature (°F) Precipitation Totals (inches) Mean number of days Temperatures Means Extremes Snow, Ice Pellets Mean degree days** Precip. .10 inch or Max. Min. Greatest daily Daily Maximum more Daily Monthly Record Record Greatest 90° and 32° and 32° and Month Month 0° and maximum minimum highest Year lowest Year Mean Year Mean monthly Year daily Year above below below below (a) 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 33 JANUARY 32.9 18.5 25.7 70 1950 -16 1953 1218 1.95 1.74 1959 6.6 17.8 1943 7.0 1957 5 0 15 29 2 JANUARY FEBRUARY 35.3 19.8 27.6 70 1944 -8 1951 1057 1.73 1.74 1950 7.5 20.3 1962 12.8 1965 5 0 11 26 1 FEBRUARY MARCH 44.1 27.1 35.6 81 1945 -2 1943 911 2.39 1.99 1954 6.0 23.5 1954 9.0 1954 6 0 4 23

• MARCH APRIL 58.0 38.2 48.1 91 1942 16 1954 507 3.13 2.25 1965 .9 12.0 1957 8.5 1957 7 *
• 8 0 APRIL MAY 69.0 48.7 53.9 95 1952+ 29 1966 233 3.41 2.52 1968 T .3 1954 .3 1954 7 1 0 1 0 MAY JUNE 79.9 69.2 69.6 100 1944 39 1949 42 3.47 2.74 1944 0 0 0 7 4 0 0 0 JUNE JULY 83.9 62.9 73.4 102 1941+ 43 1945 3 2.80 2.57 1948 0 0 0 5 6 0 0 0 JULY AUGUST 82.3 61.1 71.7 101 1964 42 1965 12 3.16 2.12 1964 0 0 0 6 4 0 0 0 AUGUST SEPTEMBER 75.6 54.2 64.9 100 1954 30 1942 72 2.40 2.20 1959 0 0 0 5 2 0
• 0 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 64.9 43.6 54.4 91 1951 23 1952 344 2.58 2.67 1949 T T 1969 T 1969 5
• 0 3 0 OCTOBER NOVEMBER 48.9 33.3 41.1 81 1950 1 1958 717 2.11 1.66 1968 2.5 10.4 1966 4.0 1966 5 0 1 14 0 NOVEMBER DECEMBER 36.5 22.7 29.5 64 1966+ -8 1960 1097 2.08 2.75 1957 7.2 27.0 1951 8.0 1951 5 0 11 26 1 DECEMBER July Jan. Dec. Mar. Feb.

Year 59.3 40.8 50.1 102 1941+ -16 1963 6213 31.29 2.75 1967 30.7 28.5 1954 12.8 1965 68 17 42 130 4 Year (a) Average length of record, years. + Also on earlier dates, months, or years. T Trace, an amount too small to measure.

• Less than one half.

                           ** Base 65°F (H. C. S. Thom, Monthly Weather Review, January 1954)

Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-6 CLIMATOLOGICAL

SUMMARY

WILLIS, MICHIGAN (MEANS AND EXTREMES FOR PERIOD 1940-1969) Latitude 41° 05 Longitude 83° 35 Station WILLIS, MICHIGAN, WASHTENAW COUNTY Elev. (Ground) 660 feet Temperature (°F) Precipitation Totals (inches) Mean number of days Temperatures Means Extremes Snow, Ice Pellets Mean degree days** Precip. .10 inch or Max. Min. Greatest daily Daily Maximum more Daily Monthly Record Record Greatest 90° and 32 and 32° and Month Month 0° and maximum minimum highest Year lowest Year Mean Year Mean monthly Year daily Year above below below below (a) 33 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 33 JANUARY 31.4 15.6 23.5 69 1950 -18 1957 1287 1.95 1.52 1960 7.9 19.5 1943 5.0 1968+ 5 0 17 30 4 JANUARY FEBRUARY 34.0 17.2 25.6 67 1944 -14 1963 1113 1.71 1.35 1949 7.5 19.5 1962 7.5 1950 5 0 12 27 2 FEBRUARY MARCH 43.5 25.1 34.3 80 1915 -13 1943 952 2.46 1.84 1954 6.4 21.5 1954 9.0 1956 6 0 5 25 1 MARCH APRIL 54.0 35.5 46.8 85 1942 12 1964 546 3.22 2.48 1956 1.3 8.3 1957 4.0 1947 8 0

• 13 0 APRIL MAY 69.0 45.6 57.3 92 1962 22 1966 267 3.41 2.03 1968 T .3 1940 .3 1940 7
• 0 2 0 MAY JUNE 79.2 55.6 67.4 99 1952 35 1965+ 65 3.53 3.05 1967 0 0 0 7 3 0 0 0 JUNE JULY 83.2 63.7 71.0 100 1941 38 1965 12 2.97 2.74 1951 0 0 0 6 4 0 0 0 JULY AUGUST 81.6 66.8 69.2 93 1948 35 1965 31 3.45 3.95 1949 0 0 0 6 4 0 0 0 AUGUST SEPTEMBER 74.5 49.4 62.0 101 1953 25 1942 144 2.27 2.22 1945 T T 1967 T 1957 5 1 0 1 0 SEPTEMBER OCTOBER 64.1 33.6 51.9 91 1963+ 15 1965+ 400 2.62 2.42 1945 T .7 1943 .7 1943 5
• 0 8 0 OCTOBER NOVEMBER 47.7 30.1 39.0 81 1950 -4 1969 780 2.39 1.76 1958 3.7 14.0 1966 8.0 1951 6 0 2 19
• NOVEMBER DECEMBER 35.1 19.7 27.4 65 1966 -19 1960+ 1165 2.21 2.85 1957 7.1 21.0 1951 7.0 1951 5 0 13 27 2 DECEMBER Sep. Dec. Aug. March March Year 58.5 37.4 48.0 101 1953 -19 1950+ 6773 32.19 3.55 1943 33.9 21.5 1954 9.0 1956 71 12 49 152 9 Year (a) Average length of record, years. + Also on earlier dates, months, or years.

T Trace, an amount too small to measure.

• Less than one half.

                           ** Base 65°F                                                                         (H. C. S. Thom, Monthly Weather Review, January 1954)

Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-7 MONTHLY MEANS OF DAILY AFTERNOON ATMOSPHERIC MIXING DEPTHS (FLINT, MICHIGAN, 1960-1964) Month Depth (m) Depth (ft) January 700 2300 February 780 2560 March 1110 3650 April 1680 5500 May 1640 5380 June 1680 5510 July 1820 5970 August 1580 5180 September 1350 4430 October 1340 4400 November 910 2990 December 800 2620 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-8 AVERAGE WIND SPEEDS AND FREQUENCY OF CALMS FOR THE FERMI SITE, 100-FT TOWER; DETROIT CITY AIRPORT; TOLEDO EXPRESS AIRPORT; AND FERMI SITE 60-M TOWER Average Frequency Speed of Calms Sensor Height Data Period (mph) (percent) Fermi site - 10 m 60-m 1 June 1974 - 31 May 1975 8.85 0.4 a Fermi site - 60 m tower 1 June 1974 - 31 May 1975 14.64 0.6a Fermi site - 100 ft 1 December 1956 - 30 November 1959 12.4 0.30 b Detroit City Airport - 58 ft 1956 - 1959 10.3 1.10b Toledo Express Airport - 20 ft 1950 - 1955 11.01 1.38b a Calms defined as wind speeds 1.0 mph. b Calms defined as wind speeds 1.2mph. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-9 WIND DIRECTION PERSISTENCE, 60-METER TOWER (Instrument Height - 10 M) 1 June 1974 to 31 May 1975 Number of Occurrences by Direction Total Hours of Cumulative Persistence N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW Percentage 1 105 94 79 85 85 92 120 122 129 137 138 150 142 125 123 127 100.000 2 47 40 29 38 30 26 61 57 55 62 57 70 53 56 61 36 48.168 3 19 10 22 13 16 29 25 26 24 30 32 38 21 26 31 20 26.406 4 9 9 12 12 9 11 12 12 13 22 20 22 16 15 14 7 15.720 5 3 1 7 7 3 3 3 3 10 16 16 13 11 5 7 4 9.706 6 1 2 2 4 5 6 8 4 4 7 7 8 6 7 4 1 6.573 7 1 1 3 4 4 2 5 3 5 6 2 6 3 4 2 3 4.448 8 0 0 1 1 0 4 3 1 3 4 2 1 1 0 4 1 2.937 9 1 0 2 3 1 0 0 2 0 4 0 2 2 4 1 1 2.210 10 0 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 0 2 5 2 0 3 1 0 1.566 11 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 1 0 0 0.951 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.727 13 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0.643 14 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.531 15 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.448 16 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.392 17 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0.364 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.308 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0.280 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0.196 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0.112 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.084 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 27 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 28 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 30 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.056 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.056 32 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.028 (Instrument Height - 60 M) Page 1 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-9 WIND DIRECTION PERSISTENCE, 60-METER TOWER 1 June 1974 to 31 May 1975 Number of Occurrences by Direction Total Hours of Cumulative Persistence N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW Percentage 1 68 72 66 81 84 100 111 126 112 129 156 150 124 101 89 66 100.000 2 26 25 39 43 37 35 39 71 62 79 65 52 52 55 42 28 52.011 3 8 15 23 16 16 21 26 31 25 35 36 28 33 26 18 22 29.997 4 11 4 14 8 17 12 9 14 14 33 26 21 11 19 20 10 18.873 5 3 5 7 9 3 3 5 4 6 16 12 12 5 10 4 1 11.741 6 1 7 6 3 3 5 2 3 9 12 15 10 9 7 4 2 8.659 7 1 2 5 5 5 2 4 4 5 7 9 6 6 3 3 4 5.782 8 2 1 2 2 1 0 1 3 1 3 7 3 4 2 1 1 3.698 9 0 0 3 0 0 1 0 2 2 3 2 3 0 0 2 1 2.700 10 0 1 3 0 1 0 1 1 3 2 5 3 0 2 2 0 2.143 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 3 1 2 0 0 1.438 12 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 4 2 2 2 1 0 1 1.203 13 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0.704 14 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.528 15 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0.440 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0.323 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0.235 18 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.176 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.147 20 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.117 21 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.088 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.088 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0.088 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0.059 Page 2 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-10 SEASONAL AND ANNUAL FREQUENCES OF STABILITY CATEGORIES AND ASSOCIATED WIND SPEEDS FOR DETROIT METROPOLITAN AIRPORT AND TOLEDO EXPRESS AIRPORT Detroit Metropolitan Airport (1958 - 1962) A B C D E F G a Spring  % 0.23 3.39 11.70 61.81 12.42 8.50 1.95 mph 5.40 7.00 10.40 13.60 9.10 5.90 3.30 a Summer  % 1.39 8.89 18.56 39.95 11.89 14.48 4.84 mph 5.10 7.00 10.00 11.20 8.40 5.80 3.30 a Fall  % 0.11 3.24 9.67 55.90 13.03 13.48 4.56 mph 0.00 5.90 8.40 11.80 8.60 5.80 3.50 Wintera  % 0.02 0.92 4.11 74.41 10.89 7.42 2.23 mph 0.00 4.00 7.80 12.90 9.20 5.60 2.90 Annual  % 0.44 4.13 11.05 57.95 12.06 10.98 3.39 mph 5.20 6.80 9.60 12.50 8.90 5.80 3.30 TOLEDO EXPRESS AIRPORT (1959 - 1963) A B C D E F G a Spring  % 0.41 4.26 11.52 58.04 9.34 10.85 5.59 mph 5.00 6.60 9.70 12.60 8.30 5.50 3.00 a Summer  % 2.34 12.80 20.34 30.34 6.85 15.20 12.13 mph 5.00 6.60 8.50 9.70 7.10 5.20 3.06 a Fall  % 0.06 4.05 11.56 50.29 10.23 14.52 9.20 mph 0.00 5.60 7.80 10.90 8.10 5.40 3.04 a Winter  % 0.00 0.37 5.46 72.06 9.81 8.47 3.84 mph - 4.30 7.60 11.80 8.90 5.50 3.07 a Annual  % 0.71 5.40 12.26 52.58 9.05 12.27 7.76 mph 5.00 6.30 8.50 11.40 8.20 5.40 3.01 a Seasons Spring = March, April, May; Summer = June, July, August; Fall = September, October, November; Winter = December, January, February. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-11 MONTHLY AND ANNUAL FREQUENCIES OF STABILITY CATEGORIES AND ASSOCIATED WIND SPEEDS FOR 10-METER LEVEL FERMI SITE DATA Stabilities are determined from T (10 - 60 M) 1 June 1974 to 31 May 1975 A B C D E F G Total June 74 % 8.93 2.38 2.68 21.13 51.04 11.16 2.68 100 mph 18.97 8.28 9.53 9.09 9.41 6.54 4.39 8.82 July 74 % 12.05 0.57 1.29 19.23 46.92 11.48 8.46 100 mph 8.17 6.46 9.32 8.51 8.86 5.43 4.10 7.91 Aug 74  % 25.96 2.61 2.47 23.08 35.71 6.87 3.30 100 mph 7.74 8.10 8.01 8.22 7.75 5.01 4.74 7.58 Sept 74 % 2.46 0.49 0.66 20.85 55.50 9.03 11.00 100 mph 11.39 7.76 7.53 10.33 8.78 6.05 5.83 8.58 Oct 74  % 40.18 4.68 2.34 10.45 15.68 15.14 11.53 100 mph 9.83 8.79 9.25 9.01 7.69 6.37 5.63 8.34 Nov 74  % 0.42 0.00 0.14 7.38 75.77 11.00 5.29 100 mph 7.08 0.00 12.20 10.41 9.70 6.87 4.21 9.14 Dec 74  % 1.43 0.57 0.86 7.73 76.82 10.01 2.58 100 mph 9.95 13.08 7.25 7.59 8.57 6.32 3.96 8.18 Jan 75  % 2.86 0.82 1.77 61.04 25.20 7.08 1.23 100 mph 8.27 8.14 14.09 10.48 9.85 9.71 7.32 10.21 Feb 75  % 0.34 1.52 3.21 63.79 24.53 5.08 1.52 100 mph 4.24 9.16 9.28 10.38 7.77 5.89 7.04 9.39 Mar 75  % 4.73 4.43 4.73 54.36 22.90 5.76 3.10 100 mph 11.10 12.85 11.34 12.00 8.71 8.32 8.26 10.88 Apr 75  % 3.81 3.02 4.29 46.19 21.75 14.76 6.19 100 mph 11.68 11.90 11.71 10.23 9.27 9.12 5.83 9.76 May 75  % 10.24 4.45 4.75 29.38 25.52 17.21 8.46 100 mph 8.16 9.68 9.11 8.37 6.84 6.30 5.96 7.49 Annual  % 9.17 2.08 2.40 30.29 40.46 10.31 5.30 100 mph 8.95 9.94 10.08 10.04 8.79 6.82 5.41 8.86 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-12 THREE YEAR

SUMMARY

OF TEMPERATURE LAPSE RATE DATA FOR THE FERMI SITE (1956-1959) Fermi Site Data (T100 ft - 25 ft) Strong Vertical Weak Vertical Temperature Gradients Temperature Gradients Inversion (Temperature Season T < - 0.98°C/100m or T > - 0.98°C/100m or Increases with Height) (%)

                        -5.4°F/1000 ft (%)     -5.4°F/1000 ft (%)  0 Spring (March, April, May)            61.3                     15.5                     23.1 Summer (June, July, August)           38.0                     27.3                     34.8 Fall (September, October, 42.9                     26.2                     30.9 November)

Winter (December, January, 40.6 35.5 23.8 February) ANNUAL 45.4 26.7 27.9 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-13 METEOROLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS HOURLY TEMPERATURE a AVERAGE OVER A 24-HR INTERVAL Hours of Missing Data 10 - Meter 282 60 - Meter 211 Total No. of Observations 10 - Meter 8478 60 - Meter 8549 Hour 10-M 60-M 1 8.88 9.10 2 8.50 8.77 3 8.25 8.54 4 7.96 8.28 5 7.64 8.05 6 7.44 7.95 7 7.35 7.79 8 7.32 7.63 9 7.95 7.86 10 8.69 8.36 11 9.55 8.97 12 10.19 9.60 13 10.75 10.20 14 11.00 10.38 15 11.40 10.80 16 11.51 11.00 17 11.56 11.15 18 11.55 11.22 19 11.22 10.98 20 10.84 10.74 21 10.26 10.32 22 9.85 10.02 23 9.53 9.66 24 9.22 9.37 Minimum -19.30 -19.30 Maximum 34.89 34.80 Annual Average 9.52 9.45 a All units in °C Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-14 PASQUILL CATEGORIES HOURLY STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION 1 June 1974 to 31 May 1975 In Percent of Total Obs In Percent of Hourly Obs Hour A B C D E F G A B C D E F G 1 0.27 0.04 0.01 0.93 1.94 0.65 0.35 6.53 0.85 0.28 22.16 46.31 15.62 8.24 2 0.19 0.04 0.04 1.04 1.92 0.56 0.40 4.56 0.85 0.85 24.79 45.87 13.39 9.69 3 0.14 0.06 0.02 0.95 2.01 0.60 0.39 3.42 1.42 0.57 22.79 48.15 14.25 9.40 4 0.14 0.02 0.05 0.99 1.80 0.67 0.49 3.44 0.57 1.15 23.78 43.27 16.05 11.75 5 0.18 0.02 0.06 0.90 1.76 0.75 0.48 4.30 0.57 1.43 21.78 42.41 18.05 11.46 6 0.13 0.02 0.02 1.02 1.79 0.62 0.52 3.17 0.58 0.58 24.78 43.23 14.99 12.68 7 0.17 0.06 0.02 1.04 1.79 0.52 0.56 4.01 1.43 0.57 24.93 42.98 12.61 13.47 8 0.21 0.02 0.08 1.08 1.89 0.50 0.30 5.23 0.58 2.03 26.45 46.22 12.21 7.27 9 0.44 0.10 0.07 1.30 1.83 0.23 0.17 10.66 2.31 1.73 31.41 44.38 5.48 4.03 10 0.67 0.06 0.10 1.51 1.60 0.12 0.11 16.05 1.43 2.29 36.39 38.40 2.87 2.58 11 0.64 0.15 0.20 1.58 1.39 0.11 0.07 15.47 3.72 4.87 38.11 33.52 2.58 1.72 12 0.81 0.13 0.14 1.61 1.23 0.12 0.05 19.83 3.21 3.50 39.36 30.03 2.92 1.17 13 0.82 0.25 0.27 1.36 1.21 0.12 0.04 20.12 6.12 6.71 33.53 29.74 2.92 0.87 14 0.81 0.26 0.24 1.44 1.26 0.08 0.06 19.48 6.30 5.73 34.67 30.37 2.01 1.43 15 0.79 0.14 0.33 1.46 1.18 0.18 0.05 19.02 3.46 8.07 35.45 28.53 4.32 1.15 16 0.73 0.18 0.18 1.57 1.21 0.19 0.08 17.53 4.31 4.31 37.93 29.31 4.60 2.01 17 0.61 0.10 0.17 1.64 1.38 0.20 0.11 14.45 2.27 3.97 39.09 32.86 4.82 2.55 18 0.48 0.08 0.15 1.58 1.50 0.26 0.13 11.36 1.99 3.69 37.78 35.80 6.25 3.12 19 0.38 0.06 0.05 1.38 1.89 0.33 0.12 9.04 1.41 1.13 32.77 44.92 7.91 2.82 20 0.27 0.10 0.04 1.21 1.89 0.56 0.14 6.50 2.26 0.85 28.81 44.92 13.28 3.39 21 0.27 0.05 0.05 1.13 1.83 0.75 0.15 6.46 1.12 1.12 26.69 43.26 17.70 3.65 22 0.29 0.06 0.02 1.08 1.77 0.77 0.24 6.74 1.40 0.56 25.56 41.85 18.26 5.62 23 0.23 0.06 0.06 1.17 1.75 0.67 0.29 5.37 1.41 1.41 27.68 41.53 15.82 6.78 24 0.25 0.02 0.05 1.06 1.92 0.61 0.32 5.92 0.56 1.13 25.07 45.35 14.37 7.61 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-15 THREE YEAR

SUMMARY

OF TEMPERATURE LAPSE RATE (T300 FT - 20 FT) DATA FOR THE WJBK-TV TOWER (1956-1959) Inversions (Temperature Season increasing with height) (percent) Spring (March, April, May) 23.0 Summer (June, July, August) 35.5 Fall (September, October, November) 33.1 Winter (December, January, February) 23.0 ANNUAL 28.6 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-16 PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE OF INVERSIONS a FOR A GIVEN LENGTH OF TIME AT FERMI SITE Probability (percent) That Inversion Persisted for Number of Hours of Persistence t Periods Greater Than t 1 100.00 2 65.21 3 51.52 4 45.06 5 40.30 6 36.50 7 32.51 8 29.47 9 25.67 10 23.76 11 21.48 12 19.01 13 15.97 14 13.49 15 11.03 16 8.555 17 6.844 18 4.753 19 3.992 20 3.612 21 3.042 23 2.281 25 2.091 26 1.711 27 1.331 28 1.141 33 0.951 41 0.760 43 0.570 44 0.380 46 0.190 a From data from 60-m tower, 1 June 1974 through 31 May 1975. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-17 THE DISTRIBUTION AND FREQUENCY OF PRECIPITATION BY WIND DIRECTION AND SPEED FOR THE FERMI SITE (1956 -1959) 100 - Ft Tower (June 74 - May 75) 60-M Tower Average Wind Frequency With Average Wind Frequency With Speed (100 ft Level) Respect to Speed (10-m Level) Respect to Wind During Precipitation Precipitation Only During Precipitation Direction (mph) (percent) Precipitation (mph) Only (percent) NNE 12.5 4.1 7.5 7.6 NE 16.0 6.1 9.7 5.9 ENE 16.8 5.3 10.4 6.7 E 17.9 5.3 11.8 10.9 ESE 15.3 3.4 10.3 11.8 SE 14.4 3.2 10.2 5.0 SSE 13.3 3.9 9.5 8.4 S 12.5 5.3 11.7 5.9 SSW 12.6 7.3 13.6 5.0 SW 14.1 9.6 9.9 5.0 WSW 14.7 13.8 11.2 5.0 W 16.6 11.1 9.1 2.5 WNW 14.0 8.3 12.2 9.2 NW 12.5 6.4 7.4 5.9 NNW 12.9 5.1 4.2 1.7 N 11.2 3.4 8.3 3.4 CALM ---- 0.2 ---- ---- Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-18 AVERAGE TEMPERATURE AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY

SUMMARY

FOR THE FERMI SITE, DETROIT CITY AIRPORT, AND TOLEDO EXPRESS AIRPORT (1 January 1972 to 31 December 1972) Fermi Site (Langton Detroit Toledo Rd) Relative Relative Relative Temperature Humidity Temperature Humidity Temperature Humidity Month (°F) (percent) (°F) (percent) (°F) (percent) January 26 85 26 66 23 69 February 25 86 25 64 24 69 March 29 83 33 62 34 57 April 42 80 45 48 46 51 May 58 82 61 58 60 61 June 63 78 65 62 64 70 July 69 80 73 62 71 73 August 67 90 70 74 68 79 September 62 88 64 75 62 78 October 48 78 49 70 47 71 November 37 84 39 74 37 74 December 29 84 31 76 30 76 Annual 47 83 48 66 47 69 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-19 COMPARISON OF MONTHLY TEMPERATURE HIGH, LOW, AND AVERAGE BETWEEN FERMI 2 SITE DATA AND NATIONAL WEATHER BUREAU DATA COLLECTED AT THE NEAREST LOCATIONS FOR THE PERIOD JUNE 1974 THROUGH MAY 1975 June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May High 84.8 94.2 89.5 81.0 74.4 72.7 42.9 52.9 44.7 60.8 62.9 84.7 Fermi 2 Avg. 68.4 76.3 74.2 61.5 50.5 41.9 30.4 29.5 27.3 32.5 39.6 62.5 Low 47.0 52.0 55.0 34.5 24.3 15.9 11.3 8.6 -2.7 16.8 20.4 44.3 Monroe High 88.0 100.0 93.0 89.0 81.0 76.0 44.0 57.0 53.0 68.0 70.0 93.0 Sewage Plant 6.6 miles Avg. 68.4 76.3 74.2 63.8 51.6 42.8 30.1 28.9 28.2 33.5 42.5 63.8 NW Low 47.0 52.0 55.0 34.0 24.0 15.0 11.0 7.0 -5.0 12.0 17.0 38.0 High 85.0 95.0 88.0 85.0 77.0 75.0 40.0 57.0 49.0 64.0 69.0 88.0 Willis 21.6 miles NW Avg. 65.0 70.7 69.1 57.7 48.2 39.2 26.9 27.5 26.7 32.3 40.7 62.2 Low 45.0 43.0 45.0 26.0 13.0 11.0 -2.0 4.0 -11.0 8.0 18.0 36.0 High 86.0 97.0 90.0 87.0 77.0 74.0 41.0 53.0 46.0 63.0 69.0 88.0 Detroit Metro Airport 20 Avg. 65.9 72.5 72.3 59.7 48.8 40.6 28.6 28.3 27.5 32.5 40.9 62.8 miles North Low 47.0 50.0 50.0 29.0 17.0 14.0 6.0 6.0 -6.0 10.0 19.0 40.0 High 89.0 97.0 89.0 87.0 79.0 75.0 44.0 57.0 50.0 66.0 70.0 91.0 Detroit City Airport 33.7 Avg. 57.6 75.1 73.8 62.9 52.2 43.0 32.3 31.1 29.7 33.9 43.3 66.1 miles NNE Low 48.0 52.0 58.0 34.0 28.0 19.0 21.0 10.0 4.0 15.0 21.0 42.0 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-20 METEOROLOGICAL SYSTEM EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS (33-FT TOWER) Instrument Manufacturer Model Level Specifications Wind speed Gill Model 35001 33 ft Wind Direction Range: and direction propeller vane (10 m) 360°, mechanical 342°, electrical Wind Speed Range: variable 0-15 mph, 0-30 mph, 0-50 mph Threshold: Vane - 0.3-0.5 mph Propeller - 0.4-0.7 mph Temperature Belfort Model 5-592 Shelter (Base Accuracy: and relative hygrothermograph approximately Temperature: +1°F humidity 4-1/2 ft above between -20°F to ground level) +100°F Humidity: +/-3% RH between 20% and 95%, +/-5% at extremes Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-21 60-M TOWER ANALOG/DIGITAL METEOROLOGICAL SYSTEM INSTRUMENTATION (PREOPERATIONAL PROGRAM) WIND SPEED SENSORS: All Levels Sensor: Climet Instruments model #WS-011-1. Wind speed transmitter and cup assembly. Distance constant: 5 ft maximum Threshold wind: 0.6 mph Accuracy: +/- 0.1% or 0.15 mph, whichever is greater Electronics: Analog signal conditioner constructed by EG&G, Albuquerque.. Accuracy: +/- 0.1% full scale Recorder: Digital representation of Datel Systems, Inc. model #ADC-E 3-digit (BCD) analog to digital converter. OVERALL SYSTEM ACCURACY: +/- 1% or 0.15 mph Recorder: Esterline Angus Model #EAL1102S dual analog recorder (Backup) Accuracy: +/- 0.25% full scale OVERALL SYSTEM ACCURACY: +/- 1.04% or 0.38 mph, whichever is greater WIND DIRECTION SENSORS: All Levels Sensor: Climet Instruments model #WD-012-03 wind direction transmitter and wind vane assembly. Distance constant: 1 m maximum Damping ratio: 0.4 standard Threshold: 0.75 mph Accuracy: +/- 3° Electronics: Analog signal conditioner constructed by EG&G, Albuquerque Accuracy: +/- 0.10% full scale Recorder: Digital representation of Datel Systems, Inc. model #ADC-E 3-digit (BCD) analog to digital converter. Accuracy: +/- 1/2 LSB Page 1 of 3 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-21 60-M TOWER ANALOG/DIGITAL METEOROLOGICAL SYSTEM INSTRUMENTATION (PREOPERATIONAL PROGRAM) Recorder: Esterline Angus Model #EAL1102S dual analog recorder. (Backup) Accuracy: +/- 0.25% full scale OVERALL SYSTEM ACCURACY: +/- 3.2° TEMPERATURE SENSORS: All Levels Sensors: Rosemount Engineering model #171BM platinum resistance thermometer. Linearity: 0.01% full scale Stability: 0.01°C per year Aspiration rate: 24 ft/sec flow over sensor Electronics: Analog signal conditioner constructed by EG&G, Albuquerque. Accuracy: +/- 0.10% full scale Recorder: Digital representation of Datel Systems, Inc. model #ADC-E 3-digit (BCD) analog to digital converter. Accuracy: +/- 1/2 LSB Recorder: Esterline Angus Model #EAL1102S dual analog recorder. (Backup) Accuracy: +/- 0.25% full scale OVERALL SYSTEM ABSOLUTE ACCURACY: +/- 0.2°C OVERALL SYSTEM DIFFERENCE ACCURACY: +/- 0.1°C DEWPOINT SENSOR: Sensor: Environmental Equipment Division of EG&G, model #110S-M dewpoint measuring set. Range: -80°F to +120°F Accuracy: +/- 0.5°F maximum Electronics: Analog signal conditioner constructed by EG&G, Albuquerque. Accuracy: +/- 0.1% full scale Page 2 of 3 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-21 60-M TOWER ANALOG/DIGITAL METEOROLOGICAL SYSTEM INSTRUMENTATION (PREOPERATIONAL PROGRAM) Recorder: Digital representation of Datel Systems, Inc. model #ADC-E 3-digit (BCD) analog to digital converter. Recorder: Esterline Angus Model #EAL1102S dual analog recorder (Backup) Accuracy: +/- 0.25% full scale OVERALL SYSTEM ACCURACY: +/- 0.35°C PRECIPITATION SENSOR: Sensor: Fisher & Porter Company model #35-1559 EA10, precipitation gage recorder. Range: 0 to 19.5 in. precipitation Accuracy: +/- 0.015 in. of range span Sensitivity: 0.025 in. response OVERALL SYSTEM ACCURACY: +/- 0.1 in. Page 3 of 3 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-22 COMPARISON BETWEEN MANUALLY READ ANALOG AVERAGES AND DIGITAL AVERAGES FOR ALL PARAMETERS AT THE 10-METER LEVEL AND THE TEMPERATURE AT THE 60-METER LEVEL ON THE 60-METER TOWER Temperature at Wind Speed at 10- Wind Direction at Temperature at 10-m level Dewpoint 60-m level m Level 10-m Level Date Time Digital Analog Digital Analog Digital Analog Digital Analog Digital Analog 1974 June 15 04:00 18.46 18.42 15.71 15.74 18.41 18.45 12.6 12.7 198.4 198.4 June 15 14:00 18.83 18.84 16.33 16.31 18.93 18.96 12.5 12.5 191.8 192.4 June 25 03:00 11.45 11.46 6.23 6.25 11.98 11.93 6.7 6.8 341.3 341.5 June 29 09:00 19.92 19.96 14.44 14.40 20.20 20.28 5.7 5.7 231.6 230.9 July 10 16:00 23.40 23.41 21.12 21.19 23.20 23.22 12.2 12.2 042.3 042.6 July 14 03:00 25.35 25.31 16.37 16.37 25.62 25.69 7.4 7.4 244.4 244.0 July 24 06:00 14.06 14.05 13.86 13.83 17.20 17.25 2.1 2.1 319.5 319.3 July 29 09:00 24.06 24.00 19.46 19.46 23.52 23.51 6.9 6.8 274.6 274.7 August 8 13:00 23.35 23.39 18.23 18.22 22.63 22.68 8.8 8.8 137.3 136.4 August 11 02:00 23.08 23.07 19.38 19.31 23.01 23.04 11.7 11.7 159.8 160.9 August 22 02:00 20.53 20.53 16.06 16.01 20.45 20.46 7.7 7.8 057.4 056.2 August 25 02:00 16.85 16.86 14.14 14.12 18.45 18.42 5.8 5.7 027.6 027.2 September 11 a 13:00 25.51 25.88 18.98 19.22 26.12 26.07 9.9 10.1 207.3 204.6 September 11 15:00 26.28 26.21 19.35 19.24 25.99 25.75 11.9 11.7 211.9 208.7 October 26 14:00 15.95 16.43 -03.15 -02.97 15.75 15.62 13.2 12.8 279.7 280.6 October 28 12:00 03.64 03.53 06.90 06.88 16.12 16.10 7.3 7.1 127.7 127.4 November 6 04:00 04.09 03.86 02.51 02.40 04.13 04.22 5.5 5.2 287.2 282.8 November 10 14:00 09.51 09.28 06.54 06.59 09.24 09.21 9.4 9.3 127.3 122.8 November 22 20:00 04.14 04.13 01.28 01.33 04.5 04.5 5.9 5.6 244.7 239.9 November 24 10:00 12.23 12.14 11.20 11.18 11.89 11.89 11.2 10.9 255.2 249.9 December 4 17:00 03.79 -03.58 -08.95 -08.58 -03.45 -03.72 3.5 3.1 281.3 279.2 December 9 11:00 -05.20 -05.20 -09.68 -09.22 -05.18 -05.37 12.3 11.9 285.1 282.6 December 19 11:00 0.61 00.64 -00.91 00.90 00.31 0.18 12.0 12.1 253.2 248.8 December 23 12:00 04.80 04.57 00.53 00.86 05.30 05.10 9.1 8.8 249.3 245.7 Page 1 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-22 COMPARISON BETWEEN MANUALLY READ ANALOG AVERAGES AND DIGITAL AVERAGES FOR ALL PARAMETERS AT THE 10-METER LEVEL AND THE TEMPERATURE AT THE 60-METER LEVEL ON THE 60-METER TOWER Temperature at Wind Speed at 10- Wind Direction at Temperature at 10-m level Dewpoint 60-m level m Level 10-m Level Date Time Digital Analog Digital Analog Digital Analog Digital Analog Digital Analog 1975 January 3 10:00 1.48 1.58 0.25 0.32 1.04 1.01 13.3 13.0 226.7 222.7 January 6 14:00 0.48 0.53 0.23 0.25 0.18 0.21 10.7 10.9 180.0 177.8 January 12 16:00 -6.15 -6.17 -16.66 -16.76 -6.83 -6.86 9.0 8.8 246.0 243.7 January 17 03:00 -7.60 -7.36 -14.26 -14.56 -7.96 -7.76 1.4 1.4 299.1 297.1 February 5 16:00 0.23 -0.15 -0.09 0.05 -0.22 -1.03 6.6 6.1 042.9 038.7 February 10 03:00 -17.25 -16.87 -22.99 -22.61 -17.22 -16.89 4.9 4.5 248.6 249.2 February 14 23:00 -4.21 -4.52 -08.9 -9.13 -4.62 -4.74 6.5 6.0 115.5 110.3 February 15 01:00 -4.11 -4.40 -8.38 -8.36 -4.48 -4.61 7.7 7.2 118.6 117.0 March 13 23:00 -2.49 -2.62 -9.76 -9.63 -2.97 -3.14 14.3 13.8 050.9 047.3 March 14 01:00 -2.55 2.73 -12.77 -12.26 -3.07 -3.41 16.8 16.3 065.7 063.1 March 17 10:00 0.02 0.08 -1.79 -1.92 -0.73 0.94 5.8 6.0 046.4 042.0 March 24 03:00 3.39 4.22 1.38 1.71 2.73 3.10 18.8 18.5 079.6 081.0 April 4 22:00 -1.91 -2.11 -11.72 -11.32 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A April 5 04:00 -6.14 -6.13 -11.84 -11.43 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A April 10 18:00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 3.48 3.61 b 12.5 12.4 060.2 056.7 b April 11 13:00 N/A N/A N/A N/A 2.86 3.02 7.2 7.8 159.1 156.2 April 25 19:00 8.07 8.01 2.19 2.40 7.75 7.90 8.3 7.5 358.3 355.0 April 26 01:00 5.13 4.72 0.60 0.71 5.92 6.44 3.2 3.4 062.5 061.2 May 17 09:00 11.13 c 11.01 9.99 9.73c 12.33 12.32 8.1 8.0 080.9 074.3 d May 19 23:00 22.48 22.83 14.31 14.56 19.39 19.00 10.4 10.4 201.6 197.6 May 27 21:00 20.97 21.04 8.36 8.24 21.96 21.87 4.0 3.6 314.9 312.3 May 28 07:00 16.02 16.51 7.05 6.67 15.44 15.86 9.5 9.4 069.7 064.7 a Digital system of the 60-meter tower was down from 9/17/74 to 10/26/74. Comparison checks for this time period are not available. b Reading 1 hr later than indicated time. c Reading 2 hr prior to indicated time. d Reading 16 hr prior to indicated time. Page 2 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-23 PERCENTAGE OF DATA RECOVERY FOR THE 60-M METEOROLOGICAL TOWER AT THE SITE 1 June 1974 through May 1975 June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec. Jan. Feb. March April May Annual Regulatory Guide 1.23 a 93.47 93.95 98.79 87.36 74.73 100.00 94.22 98.92 97.77 82.39 87.50 90.73 91.16 10-m wind speed 96.53 94.62 99.87 97.36 95.30 99.86 94.89 98.92 87.80 96.10 99.72 99.33 96.87 10-m wind direction 97.08 94.22 98.25 86.39 78.23 99.86 96.64 99.60 96.73 94.76 99.44 99.19 95.15 10-m air temperature 93.33 96.77 99.60 99.03 99.60 99.72 95.97 99.19 97.47 92.47 87.78 98.66 96.78 10-m dewpoint temp. 93.33 96.64 99.33 97.92 95.83 99.72 95.03 96.37 97.47 92.34 98.47 89.52 96.11 60-m wind speed 99.58 96.24 99.73 97.64 98.66 99.72 96.64 99.60 91.82 96.10 97.92 97.58 97.77 60-m wind direction 98.33 96.37 99.33 90.14 95.03 99.58 96.64 99.60 97.32 95.70 97.92 99.19 97.24 60-m air temperature 99.58 96.10 99.60 98.89 99.46 99.72 95.70 99.60 97.47 92.74 99.58 91.26 97.59 a Joint recovery between 10-m wind speed, 10-m wind direction, 10-m temperature, 60-m temperature. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-24 METEOROLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY (PERCENT) FOR 33-FT TOWER (January 1, 1972 - December 31, 1972) Temperature Data Relative Humidity Data Spring (March, April, May) 94 93 Summer (June, July, August) 96 96 Fall (September, October, November) 96 96 Winter (December, January, February) 90 90 ANNUAL 94 94 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-25 METEOROLOGICAL MONITORING NETWORK (OPERATIONAL PROGRAM) Parameter Sampling Height (m) Sensing Technique Primary Monitoring System Wind speed 10 and 60 Cups/light chopper Wind direction 10 and 60 Vane/potentiometer Vertical wind speed 10 Propeller Differential temperature 10 to 60 Matched thermistors Ambient temperature 10 Thermistor Dewpoint 10 Lithium Chloride Type Precipitation 1.5 Tipping bucket Secondary Monitoring System Wind speed 10 and 60 Cups/light chopper Wind direction 10 and 60 Vane/potentiometer Vertical wind speed 10 Propeller/light chopper Differential temperature 10 to 60 Matched thermistors Ambient temperature 10 Thermistor Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-26 METHOD FOR SUBSTITUTING REDUNDANT PARAMETERS FOR THE CRITICAL METEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS Level of 10-Meter Level 10-Meter Level Redundancy Wind Speed Wind Direction Stability Indicator 0 Primary WS10 Primary WD10 Primary delta T 1 Secondary WS10 Secondary WD10 Secondary delta T 2 Primary sigma theta 3 Secondary sigma theta Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-27

SUMMARY

OF MAXIMUM SECTOR AND 5 PERCENT OVERALL SITE LIMIT /Q VALUES AT THE EAB AND LPZ FOR REGULATORY POST-ACCIDENT TIME PERIODS EAB

• LPZ*

(915 m) (4827 m) Annual 0-2 Hours 0-2 Hours 0-8 Hours 8-24 Hours 1-4 Days 4-30 Days Average Max Sector Site Limit Max Sector Site Limit Max Sector Max Sector Max Sector Max Sector Max Sector 2.09 E-04 1.54 E-04 4.86 E-05 2.98 E-05 2.17 E-05 1.45 E-05 6.02 E-06 1.71 E-06 3.66 E-07 (ESE) (ESE) (ESE) (ESE) (ESE) (ESE) (ESE) For the EAB and LPZ, the 0-2 hour maximum sector /Q value is based on the highest sector-specific 0.5% /Q sector value; and the 0-2 hour site limit is based on the 5 percent overall site /Q value. In accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.145, the higher of these is selected as the controlling 0-2 hour /Q. Also, for the LPZ, per Regulatory Guide 1.145, logarithmic interpolation between the controlling 0-2 hour value and the maximum annual average /Q in any sector is performed to derive the approximate LPZ /Q value for each of the post-accident time periods. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.3-28

SUMMARY

OF /Q (s/m3) VALUES AT THE CONTROL CENTER COMPLEX FOR REGULATORY POST-ACCIDENT TIME PERIODS Accident Time Interval (source-to-receptor) LOCA 0-2 Hours 2-8 Hours 8-24 Hours 1-4 Days 4-30 Days SGTS and ECCS leakage 6.18E-4 4.53E-4 1.88E-4 1.26E-4 8.70E-5 (SGTS stack-to-South control center intake) MSIV Leakage (TBHVAC 4.75E-4 3.78E-4 1.45E-4 9.80E-5 7.19E-5 Stack-to-North control center intake) Fuel Handling Accident 0-2 Hours 2-8 Hours 8-24 Hours 1-4 Days 4-30 Days 24-hr Drop of Recently 4.03E-3

• The two-hour value is conservatively applied for Irradiated Fuel (SGTS-to- 3.65E-3 the duration of accident.

North Emergency Intake) Fuel No Longer Recently 4.25E-3 The two-hour value is conservatively applied for Irradiated without SGTS the duration of accident. (Outage Building-to-South Emergency Intake) Control Rod Drop Accident 0-2 Hours 2-8 Hours 8-24 Hours 1-4 Days 4-30 Days Condenser Release (TBHVAC stack-to-South 1.17E-3 9.09E-4 3.41E-4 2.29E-4 1.73E-4 Emergency Intake**) SJAE Release (RBHVAC stack-to-South 7.33E-3 5.59E-3 2.35E-3 1.66E-3 1.26E-3 Emergency Intake**) This value applies during the initial unfiltered release via RBHVAC.

• • CREF and dual inlet configuration not credited for control rod drop accident analyses.

Page 1 of 1 REV 22 04/19

35 30 25 u

 !      20 0

z

  ~

0 " / BEST FIT TO PlOTTED POINTS G:

 '"0Z
                                                                 "                      y, -3.92'. X +17.43 u     15 S

0 Z

 <II 10 1

0.0' 0.1 I 10 PE"CENT OF TIME O"DINATE IS EOUAllEO 0" EXCEEDED Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-1 CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF SNOWPACK

35r---------~----------------------------------------------------------------------~ 30 25

                                          "        ~ eEST FIT TO PLOTTED POINTS

z: ~ y, -4.481. X +19.39 u

2 !)( 2 10 0.01 0.1 PERCENT OF TIME ORDINATE IS EOUALLED OR EXCEEDED Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-2 CUMULATIVE FREQUENCY OF SNOWFALL

N .15 10 5 10 15 I SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE 6/14 DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 61 74 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-3 WIND ROSE DATA FOR JUNE 1974

N 10 15 10 15 I I I SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 10 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 DET EO 10 METER WINO ROSE 7/74 DET EO 60 METER WINO ROSE 7 I 74 . Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-4 WINO ROSE DATA FOR JULY 1974

N

                 ..1 5 15
                 ...10
                                                        ...10 SPEED CLASS (MPH)                           SPEED CLASS (MPH) lD  3.0 7.0 12.0 180 24.0                  1.0 3.0       7.0 12.0 18D 24.0 I

DET EO 10 METER WINO ROSE 8/74 DET EO 60 METER WINO ROSE 8 I 74 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-5 WIND ROSE DATA FOR AUGUST 1974

N

                                                                                             .10
                                     /10                                                   I       15 I 15 I

SPEED CLASS (MPH> SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE 9/74 DEl ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 9 1 74 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-6 WIND ROSE DATA FOR SEPTEMBER 1974

N 25 20 15 " 10 " 5 10 15 I SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I OET EO 10 METER WINO ROSE 10/ 74 DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 10/74 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-7 WIND ROSE DATA FOR OCTOBER 1974

N

                                          -1 ~

~~§7~ 0 I b CI I 5 10 15 5 10 15

    ~~~

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED ClASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE 11/74 DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 11/ 74 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-8 WIND ROSE DATA FOR NOVEMBER 1974

N

                                                                                               -      15
                                                -1 ~                                        -     10
                                                                                         -   5
   ~~~
                          ~
                     ~~iS               I
                                          .10 15 I

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE 121 74 DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 12174 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-9 WIND ROSE DATA FOR DECEMBER 1974

N

                                            -j ~

25 20 15

    ~~~~&
                                                                                                          \

10 \ 5 \ Irl 0 I 5 10 15

                         ~

I

                                                 /

SPEED CLASS (MPH) . SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 1.0 12.0 180 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 180 24.0 I DET EO 10 METER WINO ROSE 1175 OET EO 60 METER WINO ROSE 11 75 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-10 WIND ROSE DATA FOR JANUARY 1975

15 N 15 10 10 SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 lao 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE 2/75 DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 2/75 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-11 WIND ROSE DATA FOR FEBRUARY 1975

15 N 10

                                                            ~~

orr---"I--I.....::::::!I iClJ I

                                                   ~a~~

_5 _ 10 _15 SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 to 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I DEl ED 10 METER WIND ROSE 3175 DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 3/15 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3~12 WIND ROSE DATA FOR MARCH 1975

N i~

        ~gPk            0Jls          0       I ~

5~8~ 10 10, 15 15 SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 30 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE 4/75 DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 4 1 75 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-13 WIND ROSE DATA FOR APRIL 1975

15 N 10 1~

          ~~~~~              c:::l       I 15
  \

10

       \
            \~~

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I DET EO $0 METER WIND ROSE 5 I 75 DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 5 I 75 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-14 WIND ROSE DATA FOR MAY 1975

N 15 15 10 10 5 5 SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0* 18.0 24.0 I I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE SU (74) DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE SU (74) Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-15 FERMI SITE WIND ROSE DATA FOR SUMMER 1974

N

                                             -j ~
    ~~~

o i. cO

                                                           ~B5J£ n:q               [ll)        15 10 15
                     ~                                                ~f 5

10 15 SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) to 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I I I DEl ED 10 METER WIND ROSE F (74) DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE F (74) Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-16 FERMI SITE WIND ROSE DATA FOR FALL 1974/75

15 N 15 1~ 10 10 5 5 0

   ~~~     , " a:n n~

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 lao 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE W (75) DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE W (751 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-17 FERMI SITE WIND ROSE DATA FOR WINTER 1975

15 N IS 10 1~ 10

   ~~~

D I ~ 0 I 0 ~~~o

    ~a~                                        ~~

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I I I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE SP 7S DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE SP 7S Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-18 FERMI SITE WIND ROSE DATA FOR SPRING 1975

15 15 N 10 10 5

                                        -1 ~                               5
    ~g~

IJ t., ~

~~~

SPEED CLASS (MPtO SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 I I DET ED 10 METER WIND ROSE 74 I 7S DET ED 60 METER WIND ROSE 74 I 75 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-19 FERMI SITE WIND ROSE DATA FOR ANNUAL PERIOD 1 JUNE 1974 - 31 MAY 1975

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED ClASS (MPH)

                                      ==-1IICl_c-.

1.1 l.1 7.112.111.124.1 I ..... '7 ** 12 ** II .. 24 ** DETROIT CITY A'RPORT TOLEDO EXPRESS A'RPORT 1961 -1980 1960 -1965 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-20 WIND ROSE DATA FOR SEPTEMBER

 ===-=-=-

SPEED ClASS (MPH) SPEED ClASS (MPH) 1 .. a .. , .. 11 .. 1... 14 .. 1.' a.. DlTIIOIT CITY "IIIPOIIT TOLEOO EKPIIUI "IIIPOIIT 1961 -1960 1960 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-21 WIND ROSE DATA FOR OCTOBER

SPEED ClASS (MPH) SPEED ClASS (MPH) 1 . . . . . ' .. 12"1. . . 24 .. I ***** ' ** 12 ** I." 24 **

 ===-IIC:IIC].                            ===-IC:II.:::J.

DETROIT CITY AllIPOIIT TOLEDO EX"'I" AI"I'O"T 1961 -1980 1950 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-22 WIND ROSE DATA FOR NOVEMBER

 ==-==-=-                                    ==-==-=-

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) I . . . . . , .. 12.' I . . . 24 .. I.' ... , ** 12.' II.' 24.' DETROIT CITY AIRI'OIIT TDLEOD EXPRESS AIRPORT 1961 - 1960 1950 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-23 WIND ROSE DATA FOR DECEMBER

=--=-=-

SPEED CLASS (t'PH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.1 1.1 7.112.1 II .. 24.' 1 . . . . . 7" 12 .. II .. 24 ..

                                    ===--==-==:II DETROIT CITY AIRPORT 1961 -1960                             1960 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-24 WIND ROSE DATA FOR JANUARY

 =-=-=-

SPEED CLASS (HPH) SF...ED CI..I.96 (HPH) I ** I ** , .. II ** 11 ** ,4 .. 1.& I ** 7.& 1:' ** 1. . . u"

                                         ==-IIC:::J.~

DITROIT CITY AIRPORT TOLEDO EX"'E" AIRPORT 1951 -1960 1960 -1965 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-25 WIND ROSE DATA FOR FEBRUARY

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) I ** I ** 7 ** 12 ** 1*** 24 ** I . . . . . ., .. 12 ** 1. . . 24" OITROIT CITV AIRPORT TOLEOO EXPREU AIRPORT 1961 -1910 1950 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-26 WIND ROSE DATA FOR MARCH

                                ~--

11 SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.1 a.1 '7.1 12.1 11.1 24.1 1.1 3.1 '7.112.111.124.'

==-1IClI.:::J.                        ==-1IClI-=:J.

DETROIT CITY "IRPORT TOI.Eoo EXPRESS "IAPORT 1961 -1960 1960 -1965 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-27 WIND ROSE DATA FOR APRIL

SPEED CLASS. (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH)

===-IC:I-=_

10' a., 7.' 12.' 1'" '4.' 1.' 3.' 7 .. 12.' I ... 24.' TOLEDO EXPltU8 AIRI'ORT OITROIT CITY AIR!'ORT 1961 -1910 1960 -1965 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-28 WIND ROSE DATA FOR MAY

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) I.' J.' '7.'12.'1'.'24.' I.' *** 7.' 12.' 1... 24.'

=-1IIIClI-C.                      =-c:::IlC_

OET..otT CITY """'OAT rOLioo I _ I.. "IRPOfIT 1961 -1980 1950 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-29 WIND ROSE DATA FOR JUNE

I.. a., SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) 7.' 12.' I **' 24.' I.' I.' 7.1 12.' I **' 24.'

 ===-IIIIIIC:':_=-

DETROIT CITY AIRPORT TOLEDO EXI'REIS AIRPORT 1951 -1950 1950 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-30 WIND ROSE DATA FOR JULY

SPEED CLASS (MPH) SPEED CLASS (MPH) I.'

                                      ===-1IIICl_c:.-

I.' 3.' 7 ** 12.'1 *.* 24 .* I.' 7.'12.'1'.'24.' DETROIT CITY " ...PORT TOLEDO EXPREII "IRPORT 1961 -1960 1960 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-31 WIND ROSE DATA FOR AUGUST

II SPEED ClASS (MPH) SPEED CL~SS (MPH) I ..... ' .. 12 .. 1. . . . . . . 1.8 ** "1 ** 12 ** 18.824.8

 ===-....c::':::J.
                                              ~

DETROIT CITY AIRPORT TOLEDO EX"'E . . AIRPORT 1951 -1960 1950 -1955 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-32 ANNUAL WIND ROSE DATA

100 l- I 1 I I I I I I I 1 I - 60 I-60 I- - 40 f- -

               ---- ~                                    -

z

             -               /10-11 ETER 0

20

~

C II:

)

g

                                    ~                      ~
                                                                        ~ '-
          ~

6O-A ETERI 1&1 CJ ~ r-.... DETRO TME ROP bLITAN Z 1&1 10 ~ ........ II)

                                                                        ~ ~~                                               -

r::: iii I-II: 8 1&1 10-MET R/ ..........

                                                                                     ~

0. --

t'.... ~

          ~

I&. 6O-METER.I 0 6

                                                                                                                       ~

II) II:

)

0

                                                                                                           ~

z:

-= 4 I- - 2 I- - I I I I ,I I I I I I I

        .1             .2         .4      .6    .8                    2             4      6             8         10       20 PROBABILITY OF PERSISTENCE        .2 t Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-33 ONE SECTOR (22y"°) WIND DIRECTION PERSISTENCE PROBABILITY

o o TOLEDO EXPRESS o DETROIT METROPOLITAN FERMI SITE 10-METER LEVEL Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-34 MAXIMUM WIND PERSISTENCE ROSE

100

            ..... I    I              I    J           I                    I          I     I     I
                                       '" \

60

            ~

60

            ~~

40 ~ r\

                                       ~

I- - 20

                                                  ~

t.. 1\ j:: i- - Z  ;" 100 FT TOWER C ~TA ""CJII:

                                                                 .~
                                                             \

!:. 10 > l- -

                                                              \\

~

J 8 ii

~ i- -

                                                                         \

0 II: 6 A. I-6O-ME ERT IIwE. DATA/\ 4

                                                                    ~

I-

                                                                           \      \

2 I- - I I I I I I \ I I I 2 4 6 8 10 20 40 60 80 100 HOURS OF INVERSION PERSISTENCE Itl - Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-35 INVERSION PERSISTENCE PROBABILITY

15 10 SPEED CLASS (MPH) 1.0 3.0 7.0 12.0 18.0 24.0 DETROIT EDISON 50-METER TOWER 10-METER WIND ROSE

            " PRECIPITATION 1974-1975 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-36 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED VERSUS WIND DIRECTION (PRECIPITATION ONLY)

j:: zw 28 (.) a: w 24 22 .

~                                    ~

lCD a: 18 20

                       -               ~
                     ~
~

0 l: 18 z c( 14 ,...- z 0 12 ~ 8 u. u. 10 ~ 0 8 ~

> ~ ~-

(.) z 8 w -~ ~ C 4 w a: 2 u. 0 o 1 2 3 4 5 S 7 * .. 10 11 12 13 14 1518 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 HOlRJ OF DA '( Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-37 FOG - OCCURANCE BY HOUR OF DAY (DETROIT METROPOLITAN AI RPORT 1958-1962)

16.- 14.- 12:- w (.) zw a: 10,- a:

)

~

o lAo o 8:- W ...~z w (.) a: w 6 -

~

4 - 2 - i o Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Au 9 Sep Oct Nov Dec Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-38 FOG - MONTHLY PERCENTAGE OCCURANCE (DETROIT METROPOLITAN AIRPORT 1958-1962)

lOoe

                      ~~

(j 25°C

2. A ... ~~ DA jIoYMAXI ~UM r J/.

20°C III W'- ~ \.~""" U ...C:::I vv-

              ~

II: ~ 15°C V,," ~v ~\ D, ILY AVEF !AGE V/J'"

                                                                                          ~ V./

II: 10°C III ~ 5°C

                                       ~"" ~

III II: ooe

                                          '\oj
                                                  ,",' l\.        /..\.~       ,. ~ ~.//

C _5°C I\.~ ~"'= ~ ~f~ ~ II: ~ -10°C DA YMINIIIi IUM

                                                             /        '"   \;/

III ~ -15°C 0 _20°C JUN. JUL AUG. SEP. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-39 MINIMUM, AVERAGE, AND MAXIMUM DAILY AIR TEMPERATURE AT THE FERMI SITE FROM 10-METER LEVEL DATA FROM JUNE 1974 THROUGH MAY 1975

DAILY MAXIMUM ~100% w CJ 90 II: W ~ 80 > 70 is i

l 60

% 50 w > 40 ~ C I' DAILY MINIMUM ~ 30 W II: II: 20 ...w W 10 ~ I 0 0 JUNE JULY AUG. SEPT. OCT. NOV. DEC. JAN. FEB. MAR. APR. MAY 1974 1975 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-40 MINIMUM, AVERAGE, AND MAXIMUM DAILY RELATIVE HUMIDITY FROM JUNE 1974 THROUGH MAY 1975

,,f

                                                                 +                                           +

L A K E E R E

                          /
                        /
                     -I
                                                                                                                /',
                                                                                                               /'
         '                                                                                                  ,/

Al/

                                                                                                       /,

CO!iTOU IIClEIWM. 5 FEET

                                                                                                            +

l),lfllM II NU.Ill$ LlvtL

                            +                               i    +
                                                                                              /
                                                   . *                                /,
                                                                                            ,/
                                         .,.,,....                                      /-

Fermi 2

                                      /'
                                                                                    /,                                  UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
                                                                                   /
                                /                                              ,/
                                                                            ,/'
                        ,.                                           _,, /                                                          FIGURE 2.3-41 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP OF THE AREA WITHIN A 5-MILE VICINITY REV 22 04/19

.IAMS         '"-'"" i
               -*   I
                              \

I

                                 \
                       !                                                                         I L, ....***

ffii:N°R,.-------- - I I I ____________ --1, __ _ NCI:

• 7 . . ,,.

j I

                                                  '           i I                       I
                                                   ',,         f
                                                         >LI .
--------1 I

I .,. ** ... L----; O Fermi 2 0 L I *0 ,.,'* 1 k

                                                                             '" 0**
                                                                                 *"c.-.,
                                                       ---   !HNC(;;-     *-::::-*;..

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

                                                            !                            t, I I,                             I i                    FIGURE 2.3-42 I                              :

MAP OF THE AREA WITHIN A 50-MILE VICINITY REV 22 04/19

LiM  : ;;; j 600 N

                                                          -------------~
                         .-                 ~

fV 2VWZ2?i 1 2 3 4 5

J 600

L=Mdd~

NNE 1

                             "Fzf" 2              3               4                5 ENE E

ESE J5 SE SSE

                                                                                       ]5
                                                                                    ,,,J 5

NOTE: ~ WATER NE, ENE, ESE, BE, AND SSE DIRECTION ARE ALL D LAND IDENTICAL. ELEVATIONS IN FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL (NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 19361. SECTION TAKEN IN DIRECTION INDICATED. Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-43, SHEET 1 TOPOGRAPHIC CROSS SECTION OUT TO 5 MILES

610 600 WSW 590 580 570 1 2 4 5 610 600 I 590 580 570 2 3 4 5 610r-----------~------------_r------------._----------_,------------, 600 INW 590 580 ~0~--~~------~----------~2~----------~3~----------~4------------~5 610~------------~----------~~----------~~----------~------------~ 600 HI 590 580 570r:~~~====~----------L2----------~3----------~4----------~5 610r-----------~r_----------~~----------~~----------~------------~ 600 HHW 590 580 570~~~--------1~--------~~~----------~3~----------~4------------~5 NOTE:

                                                                ~    WATER NE, ENE, ESE, SE, AND SSE DIRECTION ARE ALL IDENTICAL. ELEVATIONS IN FEET ABOVE SEA D    LAND LEVEL (NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935). SECTION TAKEN IN DIRECTION INDICATED.                     Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-43, SHEET 2 TOPOGRAPHIC CROSS SECTION OUT TO 5 MILES

~~~-r~--T-~----~----~----T-----r-----~--~-----'-----'----'

875 N 850 825 800 775 750 725 700 675 650 625 600 575 55O~~~~~~~----~~--~~--~~--~~--~~--~----~~--~~--~ 95Or-'-~--~~~----~----~----~----~-----'----~----~~--~----, 925 900 875 850 825 800 775 750 725 700 675 650 625 600 575 ~0~~~~~~~----~~--~~--~~--~~--~~--~~--~~--~5~0~--~ WlJ WATER Fermi 2 OLAND UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT NOTE: FIGURE 2.3-44, SHEET 1 ELEVATION IS IN FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL. TOPOGRAPHIC CROSS SECTION OUT TO 50 MILES IN.Y. MEAN TIDE, 1135.. SECTION TAKEN IN DIRECTION INDICATED.

950 925 900 875 850 825 800 775 750 725 700 675 650 625 600 575 550 I I I I I I I 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 675 650 625 600 575 550~~~~~~~--~~--~~--~~--~----~----~--~~--~--~ 50

                           ~

D WATER LAND Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT NOTE: ELEVATION IS IN FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL. FIGURE 2.3-44, SHEET 2 IN.V, MEAN TIDE, 1935** SECTION TAKEN IN DIRECTION INDICATED. TOPOGRAPHIC CROSS SECTION OUT TO 50_MILES

9~r-r-.-'--r-r----.----r----'----'----'----'----~---T~~ 925 900 875 8~ 825 800 775 7~ 725 700 675 6~ 625 600 575 5~--t-7_~~~'_--~--~~--~--~~--~~--~--~~--~--~ 725r-r-.--r-.~r---~----'-----r----.-----r----.----'----~--~ 675 650 625 600 5751.....---- 5~~t-7_~~~._--~--~~--~--~~--~~--~--~~--~--~ 675 625 600 575 r~""'.,r~

  ~~~~~~~~~--~--~--~___,h_--~--~--_b~~

rrllJ WATER D LAND Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT NOTE: ELEVATION IS IN FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL. FIGURE 2.3-44. SHEET 3 IN.V, MEAN TIDE. 1935'. SECTION TAKEN TOPOGRAPHIC CROSS SECTION OUT TO 50 MILES IN DIRECTION INDICATED.

700 675 650 625 600 575 550 700 875 DUE SOUTH 650 625 600 575 550 700 675 650 625 600 575 550 2 4 6 8 10 20 600 575 550

                        ~     WATER D     LAND NOTE:                                          Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT eLEVATION IS IN FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL.

IN.V, MEAN TIDE, 1135'. SECTION TAKEN IN DIRECTION INDICATED. FIGURE 2.3-44, SHEET 4 TOPOGRAPHIC CROSS SECTION OUT TO 50 MI LES

600~~~~~--~--~----~----~;E--~----T----'----~----'----' 575~~~~~~~~~~~~--~______~,/~~;--~~~~~~~~----; 550~~~""~~(~~~~~~~*~~~~--~1~*~":~;(~;%~--~ 2 4 6 15 25 30 35 r?l'lJ WATER DLAND NOTE: Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT ELEVATION IS IN FEET A80VE SEA LEVEL. (N.Y, MEAN TIDE, '1315.. SECTION TAKEN IN DIRECTION INDICATED. FIGURE 2.3-44, SHEET 5 TOPOGRAPHIC CROSS SECTION OUT TO 50 MILES

i 1500 '-'--Land Air Heated by Subsidence _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _- - w tu SI~i,9~h:t:l:nv:e:~:i:o~n)::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~~ ~% 1000~~~2:::~~~==::::::::::::::::::::::::==~~;;~~~ 52 (Intense Inversion) (b) w

%   500 Heated Lake Air 1------------------4Superadiabatic\----

ok-____ ~~---- Lake __ ~----~~----~~--------~---1 (a) Adiabatic Temperature Gradient * -.98 C 100m or -5.4 F 1000 ft (b) Inversion. Temperature Increasing With Height Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-45 STREAMLINES DURING A LAKE BREEZE SITUATION

                                                /'
                                             /'

y-7 e:,f 33-ft LANGTON ROAD / TOWER *

                      /'                                           COOLING TOWERS
                   /                                            2 REACTOR BUILDtNG MAIN GATE         .  -
           *** /                                              **-7
      .,_,,,                                                       I I

L..___. _. _,---, ______ .. _ ____,j I FERMI 1 100-ft TOWER

                                                   . _J         150 METER METEOROLOGICAL TOWER LAKE ERIE SHORE LINE Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-46 MAP OF SITE INCLUDING TOWE R LOCATIONS REV 22 04/19

VPN Redundant Remote Access Firewall Protected Network REV 22 04/19

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing A-2042 Fermi2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-48 CROSS SECTIONAL AREAS OF REACTOR BUILDING AND AUXILIARY BUILDING REV 22 04/19

FIGURES 2.3-49 THROUGH 2.3-51 HAVE BEEN DELETED THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REV 16 10/09

N DOIIIIIIJI) Dr5TAM:E (IQIIJ ---lit . .- _ _ ...utIlI --,~ ...... DETROIT .EDISOl CCIMPM' _ICO n ...

                                                                          ...w. AVlU5( 1/0 VAlUES

{IJMI(CAYEO .MID UUI'lETEDI so.ItCE: CClllTA1 _ _ .. ILDIII5 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-52 ANNUAL AVERAGE x/a VALUES CONTAINMENT BUILDING SOURCE (UNDECAYED AND UNDEPLETED)

N _ _ _ lit . . ., 1~1II _ _ ...ltt"

                     ",....                                                           AIIIIAl AYEUGl 1/0 YALUlS (UM)(CAfEO AID _""U[D'
 - . : . . . .ft ** ~. .                                                             SClJIC[:  IWMlSTE .,ILDI.
                            -..... An"",  .fQ"

Fermi 2 l_tlITIO ....... I\I1ID) _I ... ~fI .. llOI .. UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-53 ANNUAL AVERAGE x/a VALUES RADWASTE BUILDING SOURCE (UNDECA YEO AND UN DEPLETED)

N ...._ _ lit .....

    'UI_~ ..la'... t AIIUI. AVEItM[ I'Q 'ALVES
  , _ _ _ _ --":181                                                        (I.IIDEtAYEO _ _ ",nED) s...: ......1.11.

SOUICE: fUll ** -.wILD.'" C_(A1U_~I\(fiOl SGIIt( ' ...... .,nDI. Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-54 ANNUAL AVERAGE x/a VALUES TURBINE BUILDING SOURCE (UNDECAYED AND UNDEPLETED)

N )

 ."'DI____ICt

IIICMD _

   -.,   ~-

IlJUtDI _ _ AI(UGE: I/O YALu(S (D£CAYlO . . .I'l.[TED) SOMItE: COITAI.a' IUllDIlC 0('.,11 lOlW. (CWMf I_ICO ,.. t _MtU51IlQrAlun (O(tA'(O_0l1'l.1I101 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-55 ANNUAL AVERAGE x/a VALUES CONTAINMENT BUILDING SOURCE (DECAYED AND DEPLETED)

1.61l-09 t:

 ... _~-..u
                ..ICI'                              NIIJAI. AVEMIiE I/Q YAU.S
  . . . . . . 1PU1U1                                     (HeAYEO"" Dl'l[TEO)
-.:,   ~"UlI.                                         SOUICE:   MDMST[ IUILOUIG Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-56 ANNUAL AVERAGE X/Q VALUES RADWASTE BUILDING SOURCE (DECAYED AND DEPLETED)

N .,IIt, .". C_ _ Ice"., r _ _ _ _ /I'IILUIS OETROIT EDISOII COMPM'f' E.ltD FElr41 Z AIIlUAL AVEUG[ I/Q WALUn

     '.Col," **"'U'"                                       (DECAYED AND DEPLETED)
               .II~I.                                   ~CE:       TURlINE IUllD11IG Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-57 ANNUAL AVERAGE X/Q VALUES TURBINE BUILDING SOURCE (DECAYED AND DEPLETED)

_I . ___

             ~r DEYIOIT [DISCI! CCIIWIY [_'CO F[", ,

_ _ Ml ..... oWIJll AW[IIM[ 0/0 WALun SOUIC[: C_A,allT .molle

c.II_.~

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-58 RELATIVE DEPOSITION D/Q VALUES CONTAINMENT BUILDING SOURCE

D[TJIOIT (DID C - . _1(0

                                   -.AYE_D/O_1It 5OUIC(: 1lAllMST( IU'LOI~

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-59 RELATIVE DEPOSITION D/Q VALUES RADWASTE BUILDING SOURCE

N

---

Itt ....,

~: "1Il.1~" DETROIT [DISOlI ((WMY £MtICQ. nllu 2 AHIILW.. AY[IAGE D/Q YALUES SClJICt:: TUUI. IUILDIIIG Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.3-60 RELATIVE DEPOSITION D/Q VALUES TURBINE BUILDING SOURCE

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4. HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING 2.4.1. Hydrologic Description 2.4.1.1. Site and Facilities The Fermi site is located adjacent to the western shore of Lake Erie (Figure 2.4-1). Prior to construction of Fermi 2, the site area was a lagoon separated from Lake Erie by a barrier beach, known as Lagoona Beach, which formed the eastern site boundary. The Fermi 2 preconstruction topography is shown in Figure 2.4-2. The lagoon was connected to Lake Erie by Swan Creek, a perennial stream that discharges into Lake Erie about 1 mile north of the Fermi plant site. The site for Fermi 2 was prepared by excavating soft soils and rock, and constructing rock fill to a nominal plant grade elevation of 583 ft. All elevations refer to New York Mean Tide, 1935. The topography of the developed site as of December 10, 1972, is shown in Figure 2.4-3. Category I structures housing safety-related equipment consist of the reactor/auxiliary building and the residual heat removal (RHR) complex. These structures are indicated in Figure 2.1-5. The plant site is not susceptible to flooding caused by surface runoff because of the shoreline location and the distance of the site from major streams. Plant grade is raised approximately 11 ft above the surrounding area to further minimize the possibility of flooding. Flooding of the site is conceivable only as the result of an extremely severe storm with a storm-generated rise in the level of Lake Erie. Protection of safety-related structures and equipment against this type of flooding is provided through the location, arrangement, and design of the structures with respect to the shoreline and possible storm-generated waves. After the excavation of topsoil, peat, and soft clay, construction of the plant site to grade Elevation 583 ft (nominal) was accomplished using the following fill materials:

a. Crushed rock (1-1/2-in. maximum) within 10 ft from the building walls (water has been observed to run off rather than drain through this evenly graded crushed rock)

b. Crushed rock (6-in. maximum) inside the perimeter road (surrounding the plant main structures), except adjacent to buildings (this permits water to drain quite well)

c. Quarry run rock for most fill areas outside the perimeter road (surrounding the plant main structures) (providing good drainage for water under almost all circumstances)

d. Topsoil for grass was placed on a layer of 1-ft-deep crushed-rock fill, 1-1/2-in.

maximum, to avoid being washed down. Roof water that is collected through drainage systems from all structures and catch basins inside the perimeter road is collected and routed to the station storm-water drain system to prevent ponding of water adjacent to structures. Water in the plant storm-water drain system is then discharged into the overflow canal. In grassy areas outside the perimeter road, and in gravel areas, catch basins discharge water into the quarry run fill. In paved areas, the catch basins are usually tied to the storm-water drain system. The plant circulating water is treated within the closed loop circulating water system, which includes the 5.5-acre circulating water reservoir. 2.4-1 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4.1.2. Hydrosphere 2.4.1.2.1. Regional Conditions The region of the Fermi site is located within the western part of the Lake Erie drainage basin. The divide between the Lake Michigan and the Lake Erie watersheds lies about 50 miles west of the site. Perennial streams in the region generally flow in a southeasterly direction and discharge into Lake Erie. Tributaries of these streams are intermittent and form a dendritic drainage pattern. The average precipitation in the region ranges from 30 in. to 36 in./yr (Subsection 2.3.1.2). Average annual runoff ranges from 10 to 16 in. Infiltration is highest in the western part of the region in areas where permeable soils occur in end moraines and beach lacustrine deposits. High runoff coefficients are characteristic of the relatively impermeable lacustrine soils in the eastern part of the region. 2.4.1.2.2. Swan Creek The Fermi site is in the Swan Creek drainage basin. The watershed is an area of 109 square miles, elongated in shape from northwest to southeast (Figure 2.4-4). The basin is about 25 miles long with a maximum topographic relief of about 130 ft. The drainage area topography is flat to gently undulating and varies from about 700 ft elevation in the upper watershed to about 570 ft elevation at Lake Erie. Land in the basin is mixed in use for residential, commercial, industrial, and agricultural purposes. The surface soils are primarily lacustrine clay with some lacustrine sand ridges at the head of the watershed. The infiltration capacity of the basin soils is low. Surface drainage is poor and drainage ditch improvements are common in the upper part of the basin. Stream channel flow is retarded by typical vegetative cover of deciduous trees and brush undergrowth. There are no flow-control structures on Swan Creek. Stream level near the site is controlled by the level of Lake Erie. Gages were placed along Swan Creek in 1971 and the collected data indicate that runoff is greatest during the spring and early summer (Reference 1). Data on the adjacent River Raisin and Huron River also indicate that runoff is highest during spring and summer. However, Swan Creek stream flow is normally too low for water supply use. 2.4.1.2.3. Lake Erie 2.4.1.2.3.1. Lake Characteristics Lake Erie is approximately 240 miles long and has a mean width of 40 miles. The lake is divided into three principal subbasins: (1) a small, shallow basin at the west end which borders the site and is partially restricted by a chain of barrier beaches and islands; (2) a flat, unrestricted, and rather shallow basin in the center; and (3) a small, relatively deep eastern basin. The average depth of the lake is 61 ft and the maximum depth is 210 ft. The longitudinal axis of the lake trends northeast-southwest, a direction coincident with strong and persistent winds that predominate under normal meteorological conditions. Wind 2.4-2 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR stresses acting upon the lake surface over a sustained period can have a considerable effect on the level of the lake. The most significant lake level variations are observed mainly at the western and eastern ends of the lake and are caused by transport of water as a result of sustained wind actions. Historical records show that in about 96 percent of all extreme cases, high water occurred at the eastern end of the lake and low water occurred at the western end. This is a result of the predominantly westerly winds causing the lake to set up at the eastern end. The lake bottom in the vicinity of the site slopes very gently toward the east, reaching a depth of approximately 12 ft about 1/2 mile offshore. The soil deposits below the west end of the lake consist primarily of sand with intermittent layers of gravel and/or clay. Two primary current patterns exist in the Lagoona Beach embayment. Winds moving from the northwest clockwise through northeast result in a general southwestward airflow over the entire embayment. This airflow creates the pattern of water movement shown in Figure 2.4-

5. When the winds are from east-southeast clockwise through west, northward longshore currents are found to exist with a pronounced clockwise eddy formed south of the Point Mouillee marshes. This current pattern is shown in Figure 2.4-6.

When onshore winds from east clockwise through east-southeast and offshore winds from west-northwest clockwise through northwest occur, phase systems of current flow develop that produce variable patterns. The longshore currents shift from one primary current pattern to the other, reflecting changes in the local wind system. These phase changes are generally of short duration. Under ice cover, variations occur in the southward current flow and result in divergence of the currents immediately south of the existing plant intake and convergence north and east of Pointe Aux Peaux as shown in Figure 2.4-7. 2.4.1.2.3.2. Water Use The use of potable and agricultural surface water within 10 miles of the plant site is presented in Subsection 2.1.4.2. Surface-water users withdrawing water from intakes in Lake Erie are the only surface-water users subject to the effects of accidental or normal releases of contaminants from the plant into the hydrosphere. The existing intakes along the western shore of Lake Erie have been examined to ensure that the dilution capacity of Lake Erie is sufficient to preclude adverse effects on users from releases of contaminants (Subsection 2.4.12). It is expected that future intakes will be located in the same approximate area and likewise will not be exposed to adverse effects of contaminants. Municipalities with Lake Erie intakes, listed in Table 2.1-12, are located as shown in Figure 2.1-20. The municipal water intake nearest to the plant is the Monroe intake near Pointe Aux Peaux, approximately 2 miles southeast of the site, as shown in Figure 2.4-1. The Toledo intake is located about 18.6 miles due south of the plant site. The 1972 annual withdrawals at the Monroe and Toledo intakes were 2000 x 106 gal and 29,200 x 106 gal, respectively. 2.4.1.2.4. Ground Water Regional ground water features are discussed in Subsection 2.4.13.1.1. Ground water in the site area occurs in a dolomite aquifer, underlying a mantle of relatively impermeable glacial deposits and recent sediments. This mantle ranges up to 40 ft in thickness. Water wells are 2.4-3 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR of low yield and the water is highly mineralized. The aquifer characteristics and ground water uses are described in more detail in Subsection 2.4.13.2. 2.4.2. Floods 2.4.2.1. Flood History 2.4.2.1.1. Maximum Mean Monthly Lake Levels Based upon data collected by the U.S. Lake Survey, Detroit, Michigan (Reference 2), the highest observed monthly mean water level during the period of record from 1860 to 1973 was +4.9 ft above Low Water Datum. This level occurred during June 1973, at Monroe, Michigan. During 1973, the monthly mean water level varied between +3.0 and +4.9 ft above Low Water Datum, a vertical variation of 1.9 ft (Figure 2.4-9). In 2019, it was identified that the maximum mean monthly lake level had exceeded +4.9 ft above the Low Water Datum. This condition persisted for several months in 2019 and recurred during 2020. To address the potential for maximum mean monthly lake levels to exceed the historical observations in Reference 2 and Figure 2.4-9, additional analyses were performed to consider the impact to the site from maximum mean monthly lake levels up to +6.4 ft above Low Water Datum. See Sections 2.4.2.1.6 and 2.4.2.2.6 for additional information. 2.4.2.1.2. Maximum Wind Tide Lake gaging records at Monroe have been collected for the periods from 1932 to 1939 and from 1952 to the present. Data from gages at Gibraltar and Toledo have been in existence since 1897 and have been correlated with records from the Monroe gage. Based on this relationship, the calculated maximum wind tide at Monroe was +4.5 ft on January 30, 1939. In an earlier report covering the period 1886 to 1896, a maximum wind tide of +5.5 ft was reported at Monroe. The description of the easterly gales that produced this wind tide suggests that they were more intense than those reported during the past 77 years. Therefore, it is reasonable to accept +5.5 ft (Elevation 576.0 ft) as the maximum wind tide occurrence since 1886. 2.4.2.1.3. Seiche History Seiche history is discussed in Subsection 2.4.5.2. 2.4.2.1.4. Swan Creek Complete flood data are not available for Swan Creek as gages were not installed until 1971. Long-term information exists from gages on adjacent drainage basins. On the River Raisin near Monroe, the largest flood (record begins in 1938) occurred on March 29, 1950, and the second largest on April 6, 1947. On the Huron River at Ann Arbor, the largest flood (record begins in 1918) occurred on April 5, 1947. Maximum annual floods occur principally in April and May. Discharge frequencies at the mouth of Swan Creek, estimated using standard methods (References 3 and 4), are shown in Table 2.4-1. The estimated 100-year frequency discharge of 9300 cfs on Swan Creek is significantly less than the probable maximum flood (PMF) flow of 89,000 cfs (Subsection 2.4.3.4). In 2.4-4 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Subsection 2.4.3.5, it is demonstrated that the PMF flow on Swan Creek could not cause flooding at plant grade Elevation 583.0 ft. Therefore, water levels for the estimated discharges in Table 2.4-1 are not pertinent to site flood considerations. 2.4.2.1.5. Recent Storms 2.4.2.1.5.1. April 1966 Storm and Flood Analysis On April 27, 1966, a persistent storm system moved into the Lake Erie drainage basin. During the month of the storm, the mean lake level at Toledo, Ohio, was 1.7 ft above the Low Water Datum of 570.5 ft. The maximum surge on Lake Erie occurred at Toledo while proportionately smaller surges were measured at distances from Toledo. The water level at Toledo reached 577.50 ft, which was 7.0 ft above the datum. The surge was driven by steady northeast winds with a directional duration of about 48 hr. At the time of peak surge, 1000 hr on the 27th, the maximum wind velocity measured at the Detroit River Light Station was 38 knots. However, a maximum wind velocity of 42 knots from the east-northeast was measured at 1300 hr, by which time the surge elevation had dropped to 575.93 ft. Wave heights ranging from 6 to 7 ft were reported at the Toledo Harbor Light Station. To supplement the available wave data, a wave hindcast analysis was performed for the Fermi site. As discussed above, the times of peak surge and of peak wind velocity do not coincide, and this was considered in the hindcast analysis. The critical wind speed measured at the Detroit River Light Station was 38 knots from the northeast. This wind speed was increased by a factor of 1.30 to obtain a velocity representative of open-water conditions. The fetch aligned with the wind direction was 51,650 ft long and had associated with it a depth of approximately 13 ft at high water. A significant wave height and period of 3.8 ft and 3.2 sec, and a maximum wave height and period of 6.8 ft and 3.8 sec, would have been generated during this storm. Because the shoreline north of the Fermi site is oriented northeast, the waves that approached the site would have been attenuated by refraction and by the available depth of water over the sloping lake bottom. A conservative approximation of the lake bottom slope in this area is 1:100. Using this slope and the maximum wave period, the maximum supported wave height reaching the beach at the highest water level would have been about 1.3 ft. Waves larger than this would have broken too far seaward of the beach berm to have affected the site. The maximum runup elevation that would have been reached during this storm is 579.6 ft. This elevation is considerably less than the plant grade at the Fermi site of 583.0 ft and the probable maximum meteorological event (PMME) water level of 586.9 ft (Subsection 2.4.5). 2.4.2.1.5.2. November 1972 Storm and Flood Analysis On November 13, 1972, a sudden storm moved into the Lake Erie drainage basin. The storm produced widespread flooding after the storm winds shifted from south to northeast, resulting in local evacuation within the low-lying areas along the western and southwestern shores. The total effect of the storm was that of a wind tide plus the abnormally high water level of Lake Erie, which existed at the time. In November, the mean lake level at Toledo was 3.6 ft above the Low Water Datum of 570.5 ft. The maximum surge on Lake Erie occurred at Toledo, while proportionately smaller surges were measured at distances from Toledo. The water level at Toledo reached 577.9 ft, which is 7.4 ft above the datum, while the maximum 2.4-5 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR level at the Fermi site was 576.8 ft, which is 6.3 ft above the datum. Marblehead and Cleveland, Ohio, experienced maximum surges to Elevations 577.0 and 576.2 ft, respectively. The surge was driven by northeast winds with a directional duration of approximately 24 hr and a maximum velocity of about 40 knots over the central portion of the lake. For most of November 12, 1972, winds were light and out of the southwest. Very late on the 12th and throughout the 13th, winds shifted gradually to northwest, then to northeast. By midday on November 13, the northeast winds were established and the velocity increased to 20 knots. The water level began rising at the Fermi site at 0800 hr on November 13. The maximum wind speed at Toledo was 25 knots and was reached early on November 14. By midday on the 14th, when the wind direction was changing to north, the water level at the Fermi site had reached its maximum elevation, 576.8 ft. The water level dropped rapidly, reaching a minimum level of elevation at 1800 hr on the 14th. Wind direction remained northerly throughout the 15th and velocity varied from 5 to 14 knots. Secondary and tertiary seiches were experienced on the 15th, but decayed rapidly from bottom friction. The troughs of these seiches resulted in lake elevations of 573.5 and 573.3 ft at the Fermi site. By November 16, the water level had stabilized at approximately Elevation 574.3 ft. Waves during this storm were not measured at the site. Sufficient data describing the storm are available to hindcast the probable wave attack at the site. Waves were estimated at the Detroit River Light Station as ranging between 5 and 8 ft. Wind speed reached a maximum of 35 knots from the northeast at the Detroit River Light Station while Toledo Express Airport reported a maximum of 25 knots from direction N50°E. Applying a factor of 1.3 to the Detroit River Light Station yields an over-water wind velocity of 45.5 knots. The fetch aligned with the wind direction was approximately 51,000 ft long and had associated with it a depth of approximately 20 ft at high water. A significant wave height and period of 4.2 ft and 3.3 sec, and a maximum wave height and period of 7.6 ft and 4.0 sec, would have been generated during this storm. The waves that approached the Fermi site would have been limited in height by the available depth of water over the gradually sloping lake bottom. Figure 2.4-10 shows the bathymetry offshore of the site. A conservative approximation of the lake bottom slope in this area is 1:100. Using this slope and the maximum wave period, the maximum supported wave height reaching the beach at highest water level would have been 1.7 ft. Waves larger than this would have broken too far seaward of the beach berm to have affected the site. The maximum runup elevation which would have been reached during this storm is 579.6 ft. This elevation is considerably less than the plant grade at the Fermi site of 583.0 ft and the PMME water level of 586.9 ft. 2.4.2.1.5.3. April 1973 Storm and Flood Analysis Another storm moved into the Lake Erie Basin on April 9, 1973. Although this storm was less intense than the November 1972 storm, its total impact was nearly equal to the November storm because of the extremely high static lake level at the time. 2.4-6 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR In April 1973, the mean lake level at Toledo was measured by the U.S. Lake Survey as +4.76 ft above the Low Water Datum of 570.5 ft. The maximum surge associated with this spring storm was measured as +3.3 ft at Toledo, which brought the total stillwater level to 578.6 ft. This is 0.7 ft higher than the level reached by the November l972 storm. On April 8, 1973, wind speeds ranged from 15 to 20 knots, blowing steadily from the northeast. On the morning of the 9th, the wind speed increased, reaching a maximum value of 35 knots and shifting gradually to the east-northeast by 1430 hr. The water level began rising at Toledo, Ohio, at 0100 hr on April 9 and reached maximum Elevation 578.57 ft at 1600 hr on the 9th. The water level dropped rapidly, reaching minimum level Elevation 573.2 ft at 0100 hr on the l0th. Secondary and tertiary seiches were experienced on the 10th, but decayed rapidly from bottom friction. By April 11, the water level had stabilized at approximate Elevation 574.6 ft. At the height of the storm, an 8-ft wave height was reported at the Detroit River Light Station. To supplement the available wave data, a wave hindcast analysis was performed for the Fermi site. The maximum wind speed measured at the Detroit River Light Station was 35 knots from direction N67.5°E. This wind speed was increased by a factor of 1.30 to obtain an over-water velocity. The fetch aligned with the wind direction was 66,900 ft long and had associated with it a depth of approximately 20 ft at high water. A significant wave height and period of 4.8 ft and 3.6 sec, and a maximum wave height and period of 8.6 ft and 4.3 sec, would have been generated during this storm. The waves that approached the Fermi site would have been limited in height by the available depth of water over the gradually sloping lake bottom. A conservative approximation of the slope of the lake bottom is 1:100. Using this slope and the maximum wave period, the maximum supported wave height reaching the beach at highest water level would have been 2.0 ft. Waves larger than this would have broken too far seaward of the beach berm to have affected the site. The maximum runup elevation that would have been reached during this storm is 581.7 ft. This elevation is less than the plant grade at the Fermi site of 583.0 ft and the PMME water level of 586.9 ft. 2.4.2.1.5.4. June 1973 Storm and Flood Analysis High static lake levels continued through 1973. During June the mean lake level measured at Toledo by the U.S. Lake Survey was approximately 4.9 ft above the Low Water Datum of 570.5 ft. The earlier April 1973 storm occurred at a time when the lake was approximately 4.8 ft above the Low Water Datum. The maximum instantaneous surge associated with this June storm was measured at +3.4 ft at Toledo, which brought the total stillwater level to 578.7 ft. This was 0.1 ft above the April 1973 storm and 0.8 ft higher than the November 1972 storm. At the Fermi site, maximum stillwater levels recorded by the U.S. Lake Survey reached a peak hourly reading of 577.75 (Low Water Datum) at 0200 hr on June 17, 1973. The Fermi water-level recorder does not record instantaneous water levels; however, interpolation from stations at Toledo, Ohio, and Gibraltar, Michigan, yields an instantaneous high of approximately 578.6 ft. Detroit area newspapers reported a maximum flood stage of 578.4 ft. 2.4-7 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Wind speeds with an easterly component at the west end of Lake Erie between June 17 and June 18 were generally light to moderate. The Toledo Express Airport recorded fastest 1-minute velocities of only 9.6 knots, while the Detroit River Light Station recorded velocities between 10 and 15 knots. In addition, the Canadian government reported easterly gusts to 34 knots with an average of 20.9 knots at their Southeast Shoal lighthouse near Pt. Pelee, Ontario. The duration of these easterly winds was about 25 hr with peak velocities reached in the first 6 hr. Winds at the east end of the lake, at Buffalo, were only slightly higher but maintained an easterly component for approximately 34 hr. It was this long-duration, moderate-wind regime at the east end of Lake Erie that was primarily responsible for the flooding at the west end. Buffalo reported east winds 12 hr before Toledo. The east winds from Buffalo were met by westerly winds from Toledo, which resulted in a temporary water buildup (to Elevation 576.3 ft 4 in.) at Cleveland. When the Toledo winds finally switched from west to east, the light to moderate velocities were enough to push the surge into the western end of the lake. Wave heights, which were estimated during the storm at the Detroit River Light Station, ranged from 2 to 5 ft. To supplement available data, a wave hindcast analysis was performed at the Fermi site. Assuming a maximum steady-state wind velocity of 21 knots blowing from the east (N90°E), and applying a factor of 1.3, an over-water wind velocity of 27.3 knots is obtained. The maximum fetch aligned with the wind direction was 199,500 ft and had associated with it a depth of approximately 25 ft at high water. A significant wave height and period of 3.9 ft and 3.2 sec, and maximum wave height and period of 7.0 ft and 3.8 sec, would have been generated during this storm. The waves that approached the Fermi site would have been limited in height by the available depth of water over the gradually sloping lake bottom. A conservative approximation of the slope of the lake bottom is 1:100. Using this slope and the maximum wave period, the maximum supported wave height reaching the beach at highest water level would have been 1.3 ft. Waves higher than this would have broken too far seaward of the beach berm to have affected the site. The maximum runup elevation that would have been reached during this storm is 581.0 ft. This elevation is less than the plant grade at the Fermi site of 583.0 ft and the PMME water level of 586.9 ft. 2.4.2.1.5.5. April 1974 Storm and Flood Analysis In 1974 the highest water level measured by the U.S. Lake Survey at Toledo occurred on April 8 at 12 noon. The maximum reading was the result of sustained high static lake levels and an early spring storm. In March and April the mean lake level at Toledo was approximately 4.4 ft above the Low Water Datum of 570.5. The maximum surge associated with the storm that moved through the area on April 7 and 8 was measured at +3.6 ft, which brought the total stillwater level to 578.5 ft. This was 0.2 ft below the June 1973 storm and 0.1 ft below the spring storm of April 1973. At the Fermi site, the maximum stillwater level recorded by the U.S. Lake Survey was at Elevation 577.6 ft, which occurred at 12 noon on April 8. 2.4-8 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Fastest 1-minute wind speeds measured at the Toledo Express Airport had a northeasterly direction and obtained a maximum of 26 knots with an average of 16.3 knots. At the Detroit River Light Station, a maximum wind velocity of 28 knots from the northeast and an estimated wave height of 4 to 5 ft were recorded at l030 hr on April 8. At 1630 hr on April 8, the light station recorded an east-northeast wind at 25 knots and a wave height of 5 to 6 ft. At this time water levels were already dropping at both Toledo and the Fermi site. To supplement the available wave data, a wave hindcast analysis was performed for the Fermi site. Assuming a maximum steady-state wind velocity of 28 knots from direction N67.5°E and applying a factor of 1.3, an over-water wind velocity of 36.4 knots is obtained. The maximum fetch aligned with the wind direction was 66,900 ft long and had associated with it a depth of approximately 20 ft at high water. A significant wave height and period of 3.8 ft and 3.2 sec, and a maximum wave height and period of 6.8 ft and 3.7 sec, would have been generated during this storm. The waves that approached the Fermi site would have been limited in height by the available depth of water over the gradually sloping lake bottom. A conservative approximation of the slope of the lake bottom is 1:100. Using this slope and the maximum wave period, the maximum supported wave height would have been 1.6 ft. Waves larger than this would have broken too far seaward of the beach berm to have affected the site. The maximum runup elevation that would have been reached during this storm is 581.3 ft. This elevation is less than the plant grade at the Fermi site of 583.0 ft and the PMME water level of 586.9 ft. 2.4.2.1.6. 2019 and 2020 Lake Level Observations In July 2019, it was identified that a Lake Erie water level reading in the main control room was above the design input water level assumed in the Fermi 2 design basis flood event. Although this reading was instantaneous and localized, subsequent investigation identified that the average monthly lake level had also exceeded the design input water level of +4.9 ft (corresponding to El. 575.3 ft NYMT-1935) assumed in the Fermi 2 design basis flood event. Using these higher lake levels and factoring in the wind-driven storm surge of 11.4 ft of wave runup height from Section 2.4.5.3, the resultant site stillwater elevation was greater than the existing design stillwater maximum of +16.4 ft (corresponding to El. 586.9 ft NYMT-1935) in Section 2.4.5.3 but lower than the flood design criteria of the Reactor/Auxiliary Building (El. 588.0 ft) and RHR Complex (El. 590.0 ft). This condition persisted for several months in 2019 and recurred in June 2020. To address these (and potential future) higher observed lake levels, a supplemental analysis of the site stillwater flood elevation was performed using the Bretschneider method (Reference 30) for determining storm surge. Using the Bretschneider method, a wind-driven storm surge of 10.1 ft was calculated. This supplemental analysis therefore establishes that the site stillwater elevation of +16.4 ft (corresponding to El. 586.9 ft NYMT-1935) remains the design basis flood event limit even assuming maximum monthly mean lake levels up to +6.4 ft (corresponding to El. 576.8 ft NYMT-1935). 2.4-9 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4.2.2. Flood Design Consideration 2.4.2.2.1. Conditions Considered The following basic types of hypothetical flooding conditions were considered in the design:

a. The PMF of 89,000 cfs on Swan Creek coincides with the mean monthly maximum water level of 575.3 ft in Lake Erie. In the discussion of backwater computations (Subsection 2.4.3.5), the resulting PMF flow elevation of 577.3 ft would provide a safety margin of 5.7 ft. Even by the use of a conservative slope/area computation (Subsection 2.4.3.5), the PMF elevation would be less than 582 ft, or 1 ft below plant grade at 583 ft and 1.5 ft below the elevation of plant door sills

b. Historically, the maximum probable wind tide of 11.6 ft coincides with a maximum monthly mean lake level of 575.3 ft. The resulting stillwater flood elevation at the plant site area in this case is 586.9 ft, or 3.90 ft above the plant grade elevation (Subsection 2.4.5.3). In those infrequent instances where the maximum monthly mean lake level exceeds historical averages in Reference 2 and Figure 2.4-9, a supplemental analysis described in Sections 2.4.2.1.6 and 2.4.2.2.6 has determined that the resulting stillwater flood elevation would not exceed +16.4 (corresponding to El. 586.9 ft NYMT-1935) as long as maximum monthly mean lake levels remain at or below +6.4 ft (corresponding to El.

576.8 ft NYMT-1935). This ensures that the storm surge continues to bound the high water level of a PMP and PMF event

c. Local probable maximum precipitation (PMP) runoff on the plant site coincident with runoff from the 2-square mile area above the plant site, assuming blockage of plant drainage, would result in no adverse effects on the safety-related (Category I) facilities. The estimated PMF of 25,300 cfs with a corresponding elevation of less than 582 ft, and the 15-minute PMP of 4.9 in.

over the plant site with a grade elevation of 583 ft and door sills at 583.5 ft would not result in adverse plant site flooding, as further discussed in Subsection 2.4.2.3. The temporary local water buildup due to the failure of the plant drainage system will flow into the lower land and swamps at the northern end of the plant area and eventually discharge into Lake Erie through estuaries. The local temporary water buildup elevation will be substantially lower than the flood elevation due to the maximum wind tide, as described in item b. above

d. The potential dam failure effect is not applicable, as described in Subsection 2.4.4

e. The water level at the site is controlled by Lake Erie. The PMF flow from Swan Creek has no significant effect on the design water level at the site. The maximum lake stillwater level due to storm surge is Elevation 586.9 ft (Subsection 2.4.5.3). Plant grade is at Elevation 583.0 ft. At plant grade elevation, the lake water would extend approximately 2.5 miles inland from the plant site (Figure 2.4-11) and even further inland at maximum stillwater level.

2.4-10 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR The case (item b) above is clearly the most critical condition and is defined as the PMME. 2.4.2.2.2. Reactor/Auxiliary Building Flood Criteria The Category I reactor/auxiliary building, which houses safety-related systems and components, is designed against flooding to Elevation 588.0 ft, or 1.1 ft above the PMME stillwater flood elevation of 586.9 ft. All doors and penetrations through the outside walls below the design flood elevation are of watertight design. All safety-related systems and equipment located inside this Category I structure are protected from the PMME flood. The reactor/auxiliary building is also designed to withstand wave action associated with this flooding. Maximum wave effects and forces are discussed in Subsection 2.4.5.4. All interior floor drain systems inside the reactor/auxiliary building are not connected to the yard storm drainage system and, therefore, no potential water backflow into the structure is anticipated during the design flood condition. Shore protection is not required to preclude flooding of this structure. The reactor/auxiliary building has only a few essential penetrations in the exterior walls. All of these penetrations below Elevation 588 ft are watertight. The presence of the turbine building prevents waves and wave runup above the sill elevations on the east wall of the reactor/ auxiliary building, thereby preventing flooding of the buildings. The south wall of the reactor/auxiliary building has two large openings, two rail pockets with waterproofed seals and several waterproofed pipe-sleeved openings. These large openings are in an air-locked rail-car door and an air-locked personnel door. Both of these doors, however, will be air-locked and completely waterproofed to preclude wave runup flooding. The reactor/auxiliary building roof is designed for a live load of 30 lb/ft2. This load is equivalent to approximately 6 in. of water, or its equivalent in snow, or snow and ice load combined. Roof drains are designed for a rainfall of 4 in./hr. The reactor building roof water drains through openings in the parapet wall into scuppers and then down through conductors to the auxiliary building roof. Roof drains in the auxiliary building roof carry the runoff into the buried site drainage system by first passing through the turbine building roof drainage system. 2.4.2.2.3. Residual Heat Removal Complex Flood Criteria The RHR complex is watertight to Elevation 590.0 ft. The north, south, and west walls have no openings. The east wall has approximately 30 waterproofed pipe-sleeved openings. The east wall also has four sets of double 3 ft by 7 ft doors for access to the building. These doors are normally closed and locked, and have their thresholds at Elevation 590.0 ft and extend to Elevation 597.0 ft. They are of steel construction and are shielded behind reinforced-concrete missile walls. The east wall also has eight 4 diameter openings with water tight seals located within each of the two RHR cable vaults at elevations above 590-6. Waves reaching the east wall of the RHR complex across the flooded site would be diminished considerably by the stairs, the missile wall, and the landing at Elevation 590.0 ft in front of the doors. The insignificant amount of runup above the flooded elevation of 586.9 2.4-11 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR ft, or generated by the reduced waves, may find its way through the door threshold and door jambs, at Elevation 590.0 ft, and be diverted into the floor drain system in the building. The structure is also designed to withstand the wave action associated with this flooding. Shore protection is not required to preclude flooding of this structure. The roofs of the RHR complex are provided with an adequate number of drainage pipes to pass runoff resulting from the PMP. The PMP was obtained from U.S. Weather Bureau (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) information (Reference 5). Further, the storm-drainage provisions surrounding the RHR complex are designed to pass the discharge from the drain pipes as well as the runoff from surrounding areas. The plant area drainage system is designed so that there is no possibility of ponding near the RHR complex. The roofs of the RHR complex are designed for a postulated maximum ice and snow load of 70 lb/ft2. This load is based on the simultaneous accumulation of the most severe postulated ice resulting from the mechanical draft cooling towers drift loss (21 lb/ft2) plus the seasonal snowpack (30 lb/ ft2), and on an additional ice load (19 lb/ft2). The mechanical draft cooling tower drift loss is based on an assumed drift loss of 0.015 percent, with the fans operating at full speed. For evaluating the ice loading on the RHR complex roof, a conservative value of 0.1 percent for drift loss was used at full speed. Under freezing conditions, the fans operate at half speed or are completely shut off. The total water loss under these conditions is less than 390 gal/hr. Based on the above, it is estimated that, with two towers operating for 30 days with no wind drift, and with the temperature below freezing, the maximum ice accumulation is less than 4-1/2 in. This amount of ice is equivalent to about 21 lb/ft2 live load. The seasonal snowpack load is based on results of reported research (Reference 6). According to this reference, the seasonal snowpack load is 30 lb/ft2. 2.4.2.2.4. Category I Yard Structures Flood Design Criteria The Category I piping and electrical ducts between the RHR complex and the reactor building are below the site flood elevation of 586.9 ft during the PMME. The RHR supply, RHR return, and emergency equipment service water pipelines to both divisions will continue to function during the flood. There are two sets of Category I ductbanks between the RHR complex and the Reactor/Auxiliary building, with a Division I and Division II ductbank in each set. In each case, the buried cable ducts between the RHR complex and the Reactor/Auxiliary building provide adequate cable separation to maintain independence of redundant circuits. The first set of ductbanks was installed during plant construction. The physical separation of the two redundant, below-grade circuits is 30 ft at the point the cable ducts leave the southeast corner of the reactor building. The ducts make a sweeping bend with a minimum separation of 20 ft between them. After the bend, the ducts parallel the reactor building in a westerly direction, with 24-ft separation. This separation is constant until the ducts pass under the rail-car air lock, where the separation widens until the ducts enter (still below grade) the RHR complex. Each circuit is separately housed in a cast-in-place, rectangular reinforced-concrete duct. The duct is covered by successive layers of compacted rock fill placed up to the finished site 2.4-12 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR grade of 583.0 ft. The duct runs vary in elevation from 573.0 ft minimum to 580.0 ft maximum. Since maximum ground water elevation is 576.0 ft, the cables are not specifically designed for continuous underwater service. For low voltage power, control and instrumentation cables, there is no long term mechanism for water related insulation degradation due to lack of voltage stressor or a credible common mode failure mechanism. Therefore, low voltage cables perform their design functions while their external surface remains continuously wetted due to surrounding water. 4160-V essential power circuits are not routed within these ductbanks. The second set of ductbanks, associated manholes, and cable vaults is installed above the maximum ground water elevation of 576.0 ft with ducts sloped to the manholes, such that circuits contained are not subject to continuous wetting. These are also cast-in-place, rectangular reinforced concrete ductbanks, but are located with the ductbank top approximately six inches below the surface and manhole covers at grade level. The ductbanks rise above grade and enter above ground cable vaults at the RHR complex and also rise above grade at the entrance to the Reactor/Auxiliary building cable vaults. 4160-V essential power circuits are routed within these ductbanks. The minimum elevation for cable termination in either the RHR complex or reactor building is 588.7 ft, which is above the site maximum probable stillwater elevation of 586.9 ft. 2.4.2.2.5. Site Drainage Flood Design Criteria The storm drainage system is not used to protect Category I structures from local PMP flooding, as further discussed in Subsection 2.4.2.3. Inlet manholes in the immediate plant vicinity are located at the low points of relatively flat roadside and railroad track areas, and in local area depressions. The storm-drainage conduit discharges westward into the existing overflow canal for Fermi 1 and eventually into Lake Erie through estuaries. The storm-drainage system is designed as a gravity system with a minimum velocity of 3 fps flowing full for a rainfall intensity of 4 in./hr. Runoff coefficients used are 1.0 for roofs and paved areas and 0.5 for gravel and grassed areas. The closed storm-drainage system provides the normal means of drainage for the plant site and building roofs. The sedimentation potential of the site drainage system for anticipated rainfall conditions is negligible since the site consists principally of firmly compacted crushed-rock fill and grassed areas, and the slopes of the ditches feeding the inlet of manholes are relatively flat. The resulting velocity of the drainage flow is nonscouring. Riprap or paving is provided for protection of outlet ends at all discharge points of the storm sewer system. 2.4.2.2.6. Bretschneider Methodology for Determination of Storm Surge It has been observed that more recent maximum monthly mean lake levels may exceed historical data from Reference 2 and Figure 2.4-9. The site stillwater flood elevation in Section 2.4.5.3 of +16.4 ft (corresponding to El. 586.9 ft NYMT-1935) was originally established using the historical data from Reference 2 and Figure 2.4-9 for the initial lake level and combined with the Platzman method of determining wind tide/storm surge. To address the more recent lake levels which may exceed historical data, a new methodology was utilized. The Bretschneider method (Reference 30) of determining storm surge was identified as an NRC-approved methodology (Reference 31) for this application and shown 2.4-13 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR to be acceptable for this analysis. Using the Bretschneider method and starting from higher lake levels, the overall amount of storm surge is calculated to be +10.1 ft. Therefore, with this methodology, the site stillwater elevation of +16.4 ft (corresponding to El. 586.9 ft NYMT-1935 in Section 2.4.5.3 remains the design basis flood event limit even assuming maximum monthly mean lake levels up to +6.4 ft (corresponding to El. 576.8 ft NYMT-1935). In addition to establishing use of the Bretschneider method for determining storm surge, the effects of lake levels higher than the historical data from Reference 2 and Figure 2.4-9 was assessed in supplemental evaluations for various site flooding considerations. The supplemental evaluations were either found to be bounded by their existing analyses, given the resulting same stillwater flood level, or were determined to not result in site flood protection criteria being exceeded. 2.4.2.3. Effects of Local Intense Precipitation Flooding due to a local PMP on the adjacent 2-square mile drainage area west of the plant site, as shown in Figure 2.4-4, was examined. The local PMP shown in Table 2.4-2 was determined by use of Reference 5. The hourly distribution of the maximum 6-hr rainfall was determined by procedures presented in Reference 7. The shorter 15-minute-duration PMP was extrapolated by use of similar procedures. Due to its small area, the rational formula with a runoff coefficient of 1.0 and concentration time of 15 minutes was applied to compute the peak discharge (Reference 8). The maximum PMP intensity of 15 minutes is assumed to be 4.9 in., as shown in Table 2.4-2. The calculated peak discharge due to the local PMP is 25,000 cfs, which is 10,000 cfs greater than indicated by the PMF peak envelope curve for the Great Lakes region. The Great Lakes PMF peak discharge envelope curve indicates a maximum flow of 15,000 cfs, which represents a more severe flood than would result from the relatively flat 2-square mile local area if determined by the unit hydrograph PMP calculation procedure. The calculated peak discharge due to the local PMP is 25,000 cfs. Assuming, conservatively, that the peak discharge would pass the plant site only along the axis of the overflow canal (Figure 2.1-5), a hypothetical cross section approximately 1 mile in length and normal to the axis of the overflow canal was constructed to intersect the southernmost chimney on the plant site and the intersection of Langton and Leroux roads to the west of the site (Figure 2.4-3). Using the slope/area method and conservative values of slope and roughness coefficient, 0.001 ft/ft and 0.07, respectively, a flow of 31,500 cfs was determined as passing through the cross section with a maximum water surface elevation of 582 ft (New York Mean Tide, 1935). The peak flow due to a local PMP, 25,000 cfs, would pass through the cross section at an even lower water surface elevation. In this analysis, channel or cross-section bottom was assumed to be at maximum monthly mean lake level. And, as stated earlier, all flow due to a local PMP was assumed to pass through the hypothetical cross section. Under actual conditions, a peak flow due to the local PMP would flow both south of the plant site and to Lake Erie, as well as through the hypothetical cross section. Water surface elevations due to a local PMP would therefore be lower in actuality than those determined in our analysis. At a hypothetical water surface elevation of less than 582 ft (New York Mean Tide, 1935), as determined in the above analysis, the maximum water elevation at peak flow due to a local 2.4-14 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR PMP would be more than 1 ft below plant grade (583 ft, New York Mean Tide, 1935) and would not pose a threat to safety-related structures onsite. With respect to that portion of a local PMP falling on the plant site itself, including roof structures, runoff overflowing the roof parapets and from the downspouts, assuming that the site drainage system was completely blocked, would flow overland under conditions of site gradient (Figure 2.1-5) to lower elevations surrounding the site and then to Lake Erie itself. All door sills on safety-related structures are at least 6 in. above plant grade. Because there are no downspouts or scuppers located near doors on safety-related structures, ponded water under local PMP conditions, with the event of a blocked site drainage system, should drain overland, as described above, prior to reaching the base of door sills on safety-related structures. The local PMP is shown in Table 2.4-2, and the description of the runoff model is given in Subsection 2.4.3.3. The drainage system in the plant site area is designed with inlet manholes located at the low points of relatively flat roadside and railroad ditches and in local area depressions. The storm-drainage system is not used to protect Category I structures from local PMP flooding, as described in Subsection 2.4.2.2. 2.4.3. Probable Maximum Flood on Swan Creek The PMF is an estimated flood that may be expected from the most severe combination of critical meteorologic and hydrologic conditions that are reasonably possible in the region (References 5 and 7). The PMF on Swan Creek was estimated as the maximum flood runoff resulting from a PMP occurring on the entire drainage basin of 109 square miles, as shown in Figure 2.4-4. 2.4.3.1. Probable Maximum Precipitation The estimation of a PMP includes both time and areal distributions. Due to its small drainage area (109 square miles), the PMP is assumed uniformly distributed throughout the entire Swan Creek watershed. The time distribution of a PMP is obtained as follows. The PMP for various durations shown in Table 2.4-3 was obtained from the all-season PMP (Reference 5). Its 2-hr time distribution for the maximum 6-hr rainfall and time sequence were based on procedures presented in Reference 7. Table 2.4-3 shows the synthesized PMP for the Swan Creek watershed. 2.4.3.2. Precipitation Losses An estimate of precipitation losses was obtained using data from References 9 and 10 and studies of other similar areas. Surface soils in the Swan Creek drainage area are largely comprised of lacustrine clays, which have low infiltration capacity (Reference 11). The land use is estimated as follows: 30 percent small grain, 30 percent forage and pasture, 25 percent row crops, and 15 percent wooded land and buildings. Considering the Swan Creek type ground cover and soil surface as compared to similar type areas in other locations where studies have been made, minimum loss rates are higher in the summer months than in the winter months. These minimum losses can be characterized as follows. 2.4-15 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR

a. Winter initial losses vary from 0.0 to 0.2 in., and winter infiltration losses vary from 0.01 to 0.02 in./ hr

b. Summer initial losses vary from 0.5 to 1.2 in., and minimum summer infiltration rates are approximately 0.05 in./hr.

The Swan Creek losses adopted are initial losses of 0.5 in. and an infiltration rate of 0.02 in./hr during the probable maximum storm. This is assumed as occurring during a wet period with the most favorable antecedent conditions when the moisture capacity of the topsoil would be essentially satisfied. The adopted minimum losses for the Swan Creek area assuming the most favorable (to high runoff) antecedent (ground and rainfall) conditions are based on a conservative estimate for these conditions. The Swan Creek rainfall-excess relationships were determined by use of the minimum conservative losses during the PMP storm as shown in Table 2.4-4. The estimated precipitation losses and runoff are shown in Table 2.4-4. 2.4.3.3. Runoff Model Because Swan Creek was ungaged prior to 1971, a synthetic unit hydrograph was developed for the 109-square mile basin, as shown in Figure 2.4-4, by using Snyder's method (Reference 12). The runoff was determined at the mouth of Swan Creek north of the site. Figure 2.4-12 shows the synthetically derived unit hydrograph of 2-hr duration for the Swan Creek watershed. The hydrograph ordinates are shown in Table 2.4-4. Coefficients used in the derivation of the synthetic unit hydrograph are as follows: L = 25.4 miles, Lca = 16.7 miles, Ct = 2.0, W50 = 16 hr, and W75 = 9 hr. The terms L and Lca are distances measured on the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) 7.5-minute topographical map for the site area. Time in hours, from start of rise to peak rate, or tp, was determined using the formula

         =  (   )0.3 The value of tp was determined to be 12.3 hr using a basin parameter Ct of 2.0. Comparison of synthetic unit hydrograph values for Swan Creek with values for nearby stations with similar runoff characteristics as obtained from U.S. Army Corps of Engineers unpublished unit hydrographs is given in Table 2.4-5.

Table 2.4-5 illustrates the conservatism of the coefficients selected for the Swan Creek watershed. For example, a curve enveloping the qp values would yield a unit hydrograph peak of about 3100 cfs for the 109 square miles as compared to the 4000 cfs peak adopted. The utilization of the extreme coefficient value was intended to include the possible nonlinear runoff response of Swan Creek due to high rainfall intensities. 2.4.3.4. Probable Maximum Flood Flow The PMF for the 109-square mile watershed of Swan Creek was determined by appropriate application of the preceding analysis described in Subsections 2.4.3.1, 2.4.3.2, and 2.4.3.3. Base flow was assumed to be 100 cfs. The computed PMF hydrograph components are shown in Table 2.4-4. The calculated basin-wide peak flow in Swan Creek due to the synthesized PMP is 89,000 cfs at the mouth of Swan Creek, as shown in Figure 2.4-13. 2.4-16 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR There are no dams or other regulating hydraulic structures on Swan Creek that could affect the hydrograph. The exact PMF stream course response cannot be assessed since Swan Creek has not been gaged for a sufficient period of time. 2.4.3.5. Water-Level Determinations The water level at the site is controlled by Lake Erie. The PMF flow from Swan Creek has no significant effect on the design water level at the site. The maximum lake stillwater level due to storm surge is Elevation 586.9 ft (Subsection 2.4.2.2.1). Plant grade is at Elevation 583.0 ft. At plant grade elevation, the lake water would extend approximately 2.5 miles inland from the plant site (Figure 2.4-11) and even further inland at maximum stillwater level. To estimate the maximum floodwater level, a section through the east end of the plant site and normal to Swan Creek was selected to compute backwater effects due to the PMF flow on Swan Creek. This section is 3.5 miles wide and is bounded by Port Sunlight Road to the north and Pointe Aux Peaux Road to the south (Figure 2.4-1). Neither of the roads was constructed as a flood-protection levee. In the vicinity of the control section, the land is flat, approximately at Elevation 572.5 ft (Figure 2.4-11). The backwater calculations were done with the assumptions that the selected section has a water level at Elevation 575.3 ft, mean monthly maximum lake level, and the main plant structures are located 1500 ft west of this section. By applying the Manning formula (Reference 13) on a rectangular channel with a width of 3.5 miles and a bottom elevation of 572.5 ft, with a Manning's roughness coefficient of 0.07, the estimated rise of water level during a peak flood flow of 89,000 cfs is less than 2.0 ft. Therefore, the maximum flood level at the plant site due to the PMF flow from Swan Creek at the mean monthly maximum lake level is at approximately Elevation 577.3 ft, which provides a safety margin of more than 5.7 ft below the established plant grade of Elevation 583.0 ft. The same procedures were applied using a higher peak flood flow of 115,000 cfs, resulting in an estimated maximum flood level at the plant site at Elevation 579.1 ft, which is 3.9 ft below the plant grade. Therefore, the PMF flow from Swan Creek has no flooding potential with respect to the plant site. Additional computations, utilizing the slope/area method at a hypothetical cross section through Swan Creek above the plant site (Figure 2.4-4) determined that a flow of 106,000 cfs in Swan Creek would represent a maximum water surface elevation at the cross section of 582 ft (New York Mean Tide, 1935). The PMF of 89,000 cfs on Swan Creek (Subsection 2.4.3.4) should not cause flooding affecting safety-related structures at plant grade Elevation 583 ft (New York Mean Tide, 1935). In the above computations by the slope/area method, a hypothetical cross section normal to Swan Creek and approximately 1.8 miles in length was chosen. Channel base or the bottom of the cross section was assumed to be at the elevation of the maximum monthly mean lake level. A slope of 0.001 ft/ft and a roughness coefficient of 0.07 were used in the computations. 2.4-17 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4.3.6. Coincident Wind Wave Activity A flood on Swan Creek would result in a landward extension of the lake. Therefore, wind activity determined for the lake would apply to the stream flood condition. Wave activity in Lake Erie is described in Subsection 2.4.5.4. 2.4.4. Potential Dam Failures (Seismically Induced) There are no regulatory structures on Swan Creek. Nor are there dams on other streams or rivers in southeastern Michigan that should failure result because of seismic or other disturbances would affect water levels in Lake Erie along the plant shoreline. 2.4.5. Probable Maximum Surge and Seiche Flooding 2.4.5.1. Probable Maximum Winds and Associated Meteorological Parameters Extensive studies have been made regarding the effects of wind setup on Lake Erie. Data developed by Platzman (Reference 14), which relate lake levels at Toledo and Buffalo to various wind conditions, were used to establish the wind setup for the site. The Platzman one-dimensional wind setup model has been verified using four storms producing peak setup at Toledo (Reference 15). The model, valid for setup along the longitudinal axis of Lake Erie, has been shown to consistently calculate peak longitudinal setup greater than the measured peak longitudinal setup at Toledo when using the wind stress and bottom friction coefficients proposed by Platzman. Verification of this model is valid for input winds measured at the Ashtabula Coast Guard Station. The verification for one storm, and possibly a second, indicates that cross-lake wind setup can, at times, be significant and should be considered. The conservatism of the model in predicting the longitudinal setup increases with increasing wind speed. For a maximum 3-hr average wind speed of 74 knots, the model is estimated to compute a longitudinal wind setup at Toledo 2 ft above the value which would be measured. Whereas an allowance should be made for the possibility of cross-lake setup occurring simultaneously with longitudinal setup at Toledo, an allowance is not required at the Fermi site near Monroe since Monroe is in the vicinity of the nodal point for cross-lake setup. The nodal point is the location where the change in stillwater level due to cross-lake setup is zero. To establish meteorological conditions appropriate for calculation of the maximum probable wind setup for the site, winds with an easterly or northeasterly component that would be sustained for 6 to 9 hr were examined. The National Weather Records Center in Asheville, North Carolina, was commissioned to examine 25 years of wind records for eight stations in the vicinity of Lake Erie. The eight stations were Toledo, Windsor (Ontario), Sandusky, Cleveland, London (Ontario), Youngstown, Erie, and Buffalo. The National Weather Records Center tabulated (Reference 16) the speed, direction, and date of the fastest 1-minute wind having an easterly component. The maximum, easterly 1-minute wind speeds observed for the 25-year period at the eastern four stations (London, Youngstown, Erie, and Buffalo) were 65, 37, 60, and 44 mph, respectively. The companion maximum, easterly 1-minute wind speeds observed at the 2.4-18 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR western four stations (Toledo, Windsor, Sandusky, and Cleveland) were 40, 45, 35, and 35 mph respectively. Comprehensive analysis of these and other data (Reference 17) led to the conclusions that:

a. Maximum easterly wind speeds are substantially less than maximum westerly wind speeds

b. Maximum easterly wind speeds over the western portion of Lake Erie are somewhat less than maximum easterly wind speeds over the eastern portion of Lake Erie.

On this basis, a maximum, 1-minute easterly wind speed of 45 mph was selected as representative for the 25-year period of record for the site. This 1-minute value was converted to the probable maximum easterly wind as follows:

a. Overland wind speed was converted to over-water wind speed by multiplying the land value by 1.33. The maximum easterly wind speed over water is thus calculated as 60 mph. This wind speed is assumed to have a probability of once in 25 years

b. The maximum 1-minute easterly wind speed with a probability of once in 1000 years was calculated, using the method of Thom (Reference 18), to be 86 mph

c. A maximum 10-minute wind speed of 74 mph was calculated (Reference 19) by multiplying the maximum 1-minute easterly wind speed by 0.86

d. The 1000-year maximum easterly wind was taken as the maximum 10-minute wind speed of 74 mph.

The PMME data used to calculate the probable maximum wind tide at the Fermi site were obtained from the table of probable maximum wind estimates (over-water wind speeds) supplied by the AEC. The PMME wind speeds over the lake varied with time and distance along the lake axis. The peak 10-minute wind speed was 100 mph. Since the model used to calculate the probable maximum wind tide (Reference 14) is one dimensional, the PMME winds were directed along the axis of Lake Erie (N67.5°E). The PMME had a translational velocity of 20 mph moving from east to west, and duration of 60 hr. 2.4.5.2. Surge and Seiche History 2.4.5.2.1. Maximum Monthly Mean Lake Level Historical maximum monthly mean water levels are discussed in Subsection 2.4.2.1.1. 2.4.5.2.2. Maximum Wind Tide Historical maximum wind tides are discussed in Subsection 2.4.2.1.2. 2.4.5.2.3. Seiches Seiches are periodic oscillations of the lake water level that are caused by changes in wind stress or barometric pressure acting upon the water surface. As the wind stress diminishes, the adverse gradient of the surface water cannot be maintained and an inertial surge of water 2.4-19 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR occurs. Seiches also may result from very rapid changes in barometric pressure, usually associated with squall lines. However, sudden barometric disturbances are very infrequent on Lake Erie. Analysis of gage records of Lake Erie indicates that the average period of oscillation for a seiche traveling between Toledo, Ohio, and Buffalo, New York, is approximately 14 to 15 hr. As a result of the greater depth of water at the east end of the lake and the generally higher wind speeds associated with the prevailing westerly winds, the maximum amplitudes of a seiche on Lake Erie occur at Buffalo. Gages at Buffalo and Toledo indicate that the amplitude of the oscillations of a seiche decays rapidly with each subsequent oscillation. The rise in water level induced by the initial wind setup is greater than any subsequent rise associated with the seiche. In addition to the general seiche that occurs over the entire lake surface, a local seiche may occur between the west end of Lake Erie and Point Pelee. Local seiches with amplitudes of up to 0.8 ft have been detected from gage records at Toledo and Monroe (Reference 20). These seiches can occur when the water body is in a state of equilibrium or constant stillwater level. The stillwater level of Lake Erie near the Fermi site constantly changes in elevation, with respect to the rest of the lake during the PMME. This difference in water levels effectively damps out any seiche activity near the site. It is unlikely, therefore, that any seiche will occur simultaneously with the PMME. Consequently, for design purposes, no rise in water elevation from a seiche is considered. 2.4.5.3. Surge and Seiche Sources The maximum PMME wind tide of 11.4 ft was calculated for the Fermi site with the PMME wind speeds as input to the verified Platzman one-dimensional wind setup model of Lake Erie (Reference 15). As an additional conservatism, the previously accepted wind tide of 11.6 ft was used for design purposes. This value does not include an allowance for cross-lake setup as none is required. Monroe is in the vicinity of the nodal point for cross-lake setup, where the change in stillwater level due to cross-lake setup is zero. A total stillwater elevation of +16.4 ft (586.9 ft) was selected as the design maximum. This was based on the PMME defined by the AEC with a storm path along the axis of Lake Erie (N67.5°E). Elevation +16.4 ft results from a calculated wind tide of +11.6 ft superimposed on a maximum monthly mean lake level of +4.8 ft. This storm surge would occur at the Fermi site approximately 9 hr after the maximum wind reaches the shore. The storm surge hydrograph resulting from the PMME is shown in Figure 2.4-14. No rise in water elevation resulting from a seiche was used in the design (Subsection 2.4.5.2.3). 2.4.5.4. Wave Action 2.4.5.4.1. Wind-Generated Waves Wave characteristics are dependent upon wind speed, wind duration, water depth, and fetch length. Generated waves were calculated coincidental with the maximum storm surge 2.4-20 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR hydrograph to determine the maximum flood elevations at the site. Fetch lengths were measured to the site from the axis of the lake (N67.5°E), from N78.75°E, and from due east (Figure 2.4-15). These fetches, hereafter referred to as degrees clockwise from north, have fetch lengths ranging from 11 to 33 nautical miles. Average lake depths range from 32 to 42 ft during probable maximum stillwater levels. Using the AEC definition of probable maximum winds, component wind velocity profiles were plotted for fetch directions 67.5°, 78.75°, and 90.0° (Figure 2.4-16). Component wind velocities for fetch directions 78.75° and 90.0° were based on the wind velocity profile from 67.5°, the path of the storm. The shallow water depths over the fetch approaching the Fermi site preclude deep-water wave activity; only shallow-water waves are generated during the PMME. The shallow-water wave generation curves of Bretschneider (Reference 21) were used to calculate significant wave heights and periods (Figure 2.4-14). The generated wave height and period profiles have a phase shift in time of +1.5 hr over the wind profiles to allow for the generation and travel of waves to the site. The significant wave height is the normal available parameter from statistical analysis of synoptic weather charts. Approximate relations of the significant wave heights to other parameters of the normal wave spectra in nature have been defined. Assuming that the most probable maximum wave height, Hm, is given by the deep water simplified theoretical solution of Equation 2.4-1, then the ratio of Hm to Hs is 1.8 to 1. Hm = 0.707Hs log e N (2.4-1) where N = number of waves during a period of steady-state conditions Hs = significant wave height This value is conservative, as the wave spectrum curve is flatter for shallow-water conditions near the Fermi site than for deep-water conditions applicable to the solution. Curves of Hm are presented in Figure 2.4-16. 2.4.5.4.2. Design Waves 2.4.5.4.2.1. Selection Bases Selection of design waves depends on the wave climate at the site, the structures being considered, and the available water depths fronting the structures. Generated wave conditions during the PMME occurrence, offshore of the site location (Figure 2.4-16), are propagated shoreward to the various plant structures. In selecting design waves for various structures, the possible range of wave periods, heights, and approach directions during various times of the storm are considered to occur at critical conditions. 2.4.5.4.2.2. Incident Wave at Shoreline The maximum stillwater level and the maximum offshore generated wave height do not occur simultaneously. Therefore, various stillwater levels are considered in selecting the 2.4-21 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR critical wave conditions. The maximum generated wave height, significant wave height, and wave period (offshore of the plant site) are 21.9 ft, 12.2 ft, and 9.0 sec, respectively. These occur during the stillwater level of 582.8 ft, 1.50 hr after the maximum winds have crossed the shoreline (Figure 2.4-14). During the maximum stillwater level of 586.9 ft and 9 hr after the maximum winds have crossed the shoreline, the maximum wave height, significant wave height, and wave period are 14.0 ft, 7.8 ft, and 7.7 sec, respectively. Design waves were generated offshore of the site location from approach directions 67.5° (path of PMME), 78.75°, and 90.0°. There should be no significant wave action south of 110° (i.e., normal to the shoreline) during the occurrence of the PMME, as this direction is a 42.5° departure from the wind direction. Waves north of 67.5° also are insignificant because of diminishing fetch length, shallow water depths, and change of direction through wave refraction. An 8-sec wave period generated from 67.5° would approach the plant site shoreline from due east because of refraction effects (Figure 2.4-10). A shorter wave period would not be affected by refraction as much as the 8-sec wave period. As waves approach the shoreline, they start breaking in water depths approximately equal to their wave heights. Figure 2.4-14 shows breaking wave heights for shoreline toe elevations of 569 ft, 572 ft, and 575 ft. The upper breaking wave height limit considers the effects of wave setup. With continuous heavy wave action breaking against the shoreline, it is possible that the return flow of water lakeward will be slower, thus causing a pileup of water (wave setup) along the shoreline. The possibility of this wave setup was assumed to raise the stillwater level by an amount equal to one-tenth the breaking wave height. With this increase in stillwater level, a slightly higher wave could be supported before breaking. In selecting the proper design wave that can attack the shoreline, Figure 2.4-14 is used. Design Hs and Hm curves were plotted from the maximum values of Figure 2.4-16. For a particular shoreline or shore barrier toe elevation, the breaking wave height is the controlling factor if it is less than the unbroken wave height during a given stillwater level. In Figure 2.4-14, which includes the storm surge hydrograph, the stillwater level is read off the right-hand ordinate while the wave parameters, Hm, Hs, and Hb, are read off the left-hand ordinate. In using either the significant wave height curve (Hs) or the maximum wave height curve (Hm), the breaking wave height curve (Hb) controls until it intersects (progressing positively from left to right along the TIME axis) the Hm or Hs curve. Thereafter, the unbroken wave height controls. When using significant wave conditions and a toe elevation of 575.0 ft, the following applies:

a. For a time of +3 hr after the maximum winds reach shore, the design wave is a breaking wave of 7.9 ft to 8.6 ft, with a period of 8.8 sec, during a stillwater elevation of 584.0 ft

b. For a time of +9 hr, the design wave is a significant wave of 7.8 ft

c. The maximum design wave is a wave of 10.2 ft with a period of 8.4 sec and occurs during a stillwater elevation of 585.6 ft at a time of +5.1 hr.

2.4-22 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4.5.4.2.3. Transmitted Wave During the occurrence of the PMME, plant grade Elevation 583.0 ft is flooded for approximately 17 hr. Therefore, incident waves attacking the shoreline can be transmitted inland across the flooded plant grade. These transmitted wave heights depend on the available water depth above plant grade, the incident wave characteristics attacking the shoreline, the configuration of the shore barrier, and the location and configuration of other obstacles. A rock shore barrier has been constructed in front of Fermi 2 along the shore between Plant Coordinate System Grid N6800 and N7800. The rock shore barrier crest elevation is 583 ft nominal; the toe elevation will be 572 ft nominal. For design wave considerations, a design toe elevation of 569.0 ft was used to allow for 3 ft of scour at the toe. Transmitted wave heights (Reference 20) over the shore barrier are shown in Figure 2.4-17 for maximum and significant incident wave heights at the shore barrier. The incident water depth at the shore barrier toe and the inland depth of water above a plant grade elevation of 583.0 ft are also indicated in Figure 2.4-17. Using this inland depth of water caused by flooding of plant grade, a curve indicating the maximum wave height that can be supported over the flooded plant grade, without breaking, is presented in Figure 2.4-17. During the maximum flooding of plant grade, the maximum supported wave height is less than the transmitted wave heights. Therefore, the maximum supported wave height is the controlling factor for plant structures located more than a few hundred feet inland from the shoreline. The maximum inland supported wave heights for plant grade Elevation 583.0 and 580.0 ft are 3.0 and 5.4 ft, respectively. The actual site grade at a given location may vary from the reference elevation of 583.0 ft. However, the resultant difference in the hydrostatic pressure due to the difference of supported wave heights would be insignificant. Waves that are transmitted over the shore barrier will attack the office service and radwaste buildings of Fermi 2. These buildings are not Category I structures and, therefore, could be damaged during the storm without causing a safety concern to the public. Small waves can reach the Category I structures by traveling around the northerly and southerly ends of the shore barrier. Waves traveling around the ends of the shore barrier undergo several effects, including the following:

a. Breaking caused by the shallow depths of the flooded plant grade

b. Diffraction around the ends of the other plant structures

c. Reflection off plant structures before reaching the Category I structures

d. Reduction caused by plant grade bottom friction and side friction of obstructing structures.

The significant wave period of 7.7 sec will approach the plant sites from due east, while lower period waves can approach the northerly end of the shore barrier from 65° (N65°E), and possibly approach the southerly end from 110° (E20°S). Waves approaching the north end of the shore barrier will be reduced to the maximum inland support wave heights of 3.0 and 5.4 ft for plant grade Elevations 583.0 and 580.0 ft, respectively, in approaching 2.4-23 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Category I structures. Waves approaching the southerly end of the shore barrier will be reduced in height approaching Category I structures as a result of the maximum inland supported wave height and the protection provided by the office service and turbine buildings. Neglecting any reduction effects from protection provided by the office service and turbine buildings, waves approaching Category I structures from the south will be reduced to the maximum inland supported wave height of 3.0 ft for the plant grade elevation of 583.0 ft. 2.4.5.4.2.4. Wave Stability In selecting the proper design wave for wave runup and wave forces against Category I structures, the wave period spectra must be considered since the significant wave period might not control. In calculating minimum wave periods, Equation 2.4-2 was used to determine the limiting wave steepness in shallow water (Reference 22). H = 1 tanh 2d (2.4-2) L 7 L As mentioned in Subsection 2.4.5.4.2.3, waves attacking Category I structures are controlled by the available water depth over the flooded plant grade elevations. For plant grades with very flat slopes, the maximum supported wave height is approximately 0.78 times the water depth. The plant grade of Fermi 2 is Elevation 583 ft 0 in., and therefore a maximum wave height of 3.0 ft can be supported. Where the plant grade elevation is 580 ft 0 in., a maximum wave height of 5.4 ft can be supported. With the plant grade elevation changing from 580.0 ft to 583.0 ft in the vicinity of Grid N8000, it would be possible for either the 3.0-ft or the 5.4-ft wave to strike the north or east sides of Category I structures. Minimum wave periods calculated for wave heights of 3.0 ft and 5.4 ft are 3.4 sec and 4.5 sec, respectively. The maximum wave period of about 9 sec (Reference 22) is for a significant wave height of 7.8 ft and a significant wave period of 7.7 sec. 2.4.5.5. Resonance Resonance generated by waves can be a problem in enclosed bays or harbors when the natural period of oscillation of the bay is equal to the period of the incident waves. However, the Fermi site is not located in an enclosed embayment. The full exposure of the site to Lake Erie during PMME conditions, plus the flat slopes surrounding the site area, result in a natural period of oscillation of the flooded area that is much greater than that of the incident shallow-water storm waves. Consequently, resonance is not a problem at the site during the PMME occurrence. 2.4.5.6. Runup 2.4.5.6.1. Flood Levels Refer to Subsection 2.4.2.2 for a discussion of flood levels. 2.4.5.6.2. Maximum Runup Elevations Maximum runup elevations on the exposed north faces of the reactor/auxiliary building and the RHR complex are 593.0 and 598.0 ft for the 3.0-ft and 5.4-ft waves, respectively. The 2.4-24 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR maximum runup elevation on the exposed south faces of the reactor/ auxiliary building and the RHR complex, the exposed east face of the RHR complex, and the west face of the reactor/auxiliary building is 593.0 ft for the 3.0-ft wave. This wave could possibly reach the west face of the reactor/auxiliary building by reflection from the east face of the RHR complex. The east face of the reactor/auxiliary building is not exposed to waves and wave runup. The west face of the RHR complex is landward of the storm direction and not subject to waves and wave runup. As previously stated, no shore protection is required to preclude flooding of these structures. 2.4.5.6.3. Wave Forces Maximum wave pressures and forces against Fermi 2 Category I structures can result from a 3.0-ft or possibly a 5.4-ft wave striking the north or east faces of Category I structures. These wave heights are the maximum supported wave heights for plant grade Elevations 583.0 and 580.0 ft. Wave pressures and thrusts against smooth vertical walls have been calculated from nonbreaking, broken, and breaking wave conditions. The wave periods have been varied from the minimum wave period to the maximum wave period. The instantaneous impact forces produced by waves breaking against a structure result in intense shock pressure with a duration in the range of 1/100 to 1/1000 sec. The intense pressures occur when a thin cushion is entrapped by waves breaking on a structure. The breaking wave conditions are calculated from Minikin's formula. In adapting Minikin's formula, unrealistic results are predicted for very flat slopes (slopes fronting a vertical wall). Therefore, when the actual slope is flatter than 20:1 or even 10:1 (horizontal to vertical), pressures derived from a 20:1 or 10:1 slope should be used. Pressures and thrusts from breaking wave conditions were calculated for both slope conditions. Porous fill material, which can become completely saturated during flooded conditions, is placed from the top of slab elevation of the Category I structure to the plant grade elevation. Therefore, hydrostatic pressures against Category I structures are considered to the depth of the upper surface of the slab of both buildings. Wave pressure and thrust results for the reactor/auxiliary building and the RHR complex are presented in Figures 2.4-18 and 2.4-19. Wave pressure distribution diagrams are presented in Figures 2.4-20 and 2.4-21. The critical static pressure and thrust occur under the broken wave conditions, whereas the critical dynamic pressure and thrust occur under the breaking wave conditions for an assumed slope of 20:1 and the minimum wave periods of 3.4 to 4.5 sec. All Fermi 2 Category I structures are designed to withstand these forces. 2.4.5.7. Protective Structures The importance of the shore barrier in providing protection for Category I structures during the PMME has been greatly reduced from the originally approved concept for the following reasons:

a. Category I structures are not susceptible to flooding from storm surge and wave runup

b. Category I structures are largely protected by other plant facilities 2.4-25 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR

c. Category I structures are not subject to damage from transmitted waves behind the barrier

d. Category I structures are not endangered by wave forces from 3.0-ft to 5.4-ft waves

e. Damage to the shore barrier will not enable waves larger than 5.4 ft to break against Category I structures since these structures are located a minimum distance of 800 ft inland from the shoreline. Safety-related structures that are located this distance away would remain safe during the extreme high stillwater levels of the PMME.

The shore barrier design and location are shown in Figure 2.4-22. The parameters used in the shore barrier design are discussed in detail in this section. The shore barrier ends are to be constructed on a side slope of 3:1 (horizontal to vertical) as compared to the design slope of 2:1 used for the shore barrier. The ends of the shore barrier rubble-mound structures are of the same design as determined for the 2:1 slope. Criteria for construction of the multilayered barrier are shown in Figure 2.4-22. The ends have been flattened to a 3:1 slope to ensure that they can withstand conditions more severe than the design conditions. A shore-barrier-slope-stability analysis was performed to deter-mine the factor of safety against sliding of the shore barrier, and it was concluded that the shore barrier has a sufficient factor of safety with regard to a sliding failure occurring at any soil layer. A report of this analysis was submitted to the NRC in July 1981. The shore barrier, which allows for the possibility of 6 to 8 percent stone displacement during the PMME, extends from Grid N6800 to N7800 and preserves the integrity of the plant site fill placed to Elevation 583.0 ft. The shore barrier, including the ends, consists of a rubble-mound structure using an armor cover of stone. A toe elevation of 572.0 ft, a crest elevation of 583.0 ft, and a lakeward-side slope of 2:1 (horizontal to vertical) were considered in its design. The design wave was based on the probable maximum storm event and a design shore barrier toe elevation of 569 ft, allowing for 3 ft of scour. Hudson's stability equation was used for determining the weights of armor units (Reference 21). Stability coefficients (KD) listed in Reference 21 were used for significant wave conditions and are conservative values based on zero damage criteria for model studies. By allowing for some shore barrier damage (displacement of armor stones), a higher stability coefficient was used. An armor cover was calculated using rough angular stone (density 165 lb/ft3) placed on a 2:1 slope. Using a design toe elevation of 569.0 ft, the maximum significant breaking wave height (Figure 2.4-14) is found to be 12.2 ft during the probable maximum storm event. The possibility of some stone displacement (6 percent to 8 percent) was allowed for, with any displaced stones being replaced after the storm passed. A stability coefficient of 5.0 was used for two layers of stone placed randomly. This results in an armor layer 7.5 ft thick using 3.3-ton to 5-ton stone, as shown in Figure 2.4-22. The secondary layer is 3.5 ft thick with 600-lb to 1000-lb stone, while the filter layer is 1.5 ft thick, consisting of 30-lb to 50-lb stone. Below the filter layer is 1 ft of crushed rock (20 lb and under). 2.4-26 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Where the plant grade elevation slopes from 580.0 to 583.0 ft, to the north of the Fermi 2 location, the slope is protected against the possibility of breaking 5.4-ft waves during the maximum stillwater level. Protection of the slope is achieved by lining it with suitable rock. The NRC evaluated the as-built condition of the shore barrier and concluded that it met the requirements of General Design Criterion (GDC) 2 and was, therefore, acceptable on the basis that the inspection and maintenance program required by the Technical Requirements Manual provided reasonable assurance that the shore barrier would not be allowed to deteriorate significantly from its as-built configuration. The Technical Specifications require that the shore barrier be inspected on an annual basis and after major storms and seismic events exceeding operating-basis earthquake (OBE) intensity and be promptly restored to its prior condition in the event of any significant damage. 2.4.6. Probable Maximum Tsunami Flooding The Fermi site is located in an area of the United States designated as having potentially minor seismic activity. Any tsunami activity in Lake Erie could only be generated by local seismic disturbances. Based on the history of the area, local seismic disturbances would result only in minor excitations in the lake. No tsunami has been recorded in Lake Erie; the only remotely similar phenomena observed have been low-amplitude seiches resulting from sudden barometric pressure differences. The low-amplitude seiches that could occur would be of negligible concern to the site. 2.4.7. Ice Flooding Ice flooding is not a design basis at the Fermi site. The grade elevation of the plant site is at least 10 ft above the normal winter level of Lake Erie, and the emergency supply of water for cooling is not dependent upon natural bodies of water or the operation of intakes located where ice flooding could occur. 2.4.8. Cooling Water Canals and Reservoirs 2.4.8.1. Canals A discharge canal is provided between the natural draft cooling towers and the circulating water reservoir. The canal is not part of a Category I system and is not safety related or necessary for the safe shutdown of the reactor. 2.4.8.2. Reservoirs An open pond reservoir is provided as a collection basin from the natural draft cooling tower discharge to the circulating water pump house. The reservoir is not part of a Category I system and is not safety related or necessary for the safe shutdown of the reactor. In addition, a reservoir is provided in the RHR complex. This is a Category I reservoir that is part of a closed cycle system that is not dependent upon natural bodies of water for makeup. The design basis for this complex in relation to water levels is described in Section 3.4. 2.4-27 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4.9. Channel Diversions The plant does not use water from channels; therefore, this subsection is not applicable. 2.4.10. Flooding Protection Requirements All safety-related plant features are designed to withstand combinations of flood conditions and wave runup as discussed in Subsections 2.4.2.2 and 2.4.5.4. Protection of safety-related structures and components, including the effects of floods and waves, is discussed in Section 3.4 and Subsection 2.4.5.7. 2.4.11. Low Water Consideration 2.4.11.1. Low Flow in Rivers and Streams Plant water sources are not related to the flow of rivers and streams in the area, except to the minor extent that these flows affect the general water level of Lake Erie. 2.4.11.2. Low Water Resulting From Surges, Seiches, or Tsunamis 2.4.11.2.1. Minimum Monthly Mean Lake Level A summary of the historical minimum monthly mean lake levels was recorded by the U.S. Lake Survey during the period 1860 to 1973 and is presented in Figure 2.4-9. The minimum historic monthly mean lake level was reduced by approximately 40 percent of the recorded range of low water conditions (0.9) to give a minimum monthly mean design lake level of -1.5 ft below Low Water Datum. 2.4.11.2.2. Wind Setdown Using the computer model prepared by Platzman (Reference 14 and Subsection 2.4.5.1), values were obtained for winds of varying speed from a westerly direction. Calculations based upon U.S. Weather Bureau data at Asheville, North Carolina, indicate that westerly winds of 70 mph sustained over a period of 6 hr would have a recurrence interval of one in 250 years. Using these values, the decrease in water level resulting from wind setdown at the site would be -9.2 ft (Elevation 561.3 ft). Based upon probable maximum estimates of westerly winds furnished by the AEC, maximum wind setdown of the lake water level was calculated by Platzman's method (Reference 14) as -11.2 ft. The selected design wind setdown is -11.6 ft (Elevation 558.9 ft). This is identical to the calculated design PMME storm surge except with a minus instead of a plus sign. 2.4.11.2.3. Local Seiches and Tsunamis For the same reasons as given in Subsections 2.4.5.2.3 and 2.4.6, no decrease in water level is assumed to occur from seiche and tsunami activity. 2.4-28 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4.11.2.4. Design Level Assuming that the effect of wind setdown occurs simultaneously with extreme minimum monthly lake levels, the resulting design stillwater level is Elevation -13.1 ft (Low Water Datum), or Elevation 557.4 ft. The cooling water supply for safety-related systems is provided by the RHR complex, which contains its own water reservoir and is independent of ground water or lake-water level conditions. See Subsection 9.2.5 for a discussion of the RHR service water system. 2.4.11.3. Historical Low Water The lowest observed monthly mean lake level during the period of record (1860 to 1973) was during February 1936, when Elevation -1.2 ft (Low Water Datum) was recorded. Low lake levels are generally recorded during the month of February. The most extreme setdown on record (1897 to present) was -7.1 ft on March 22, 1955. This level was calculated from gage records obtained at Gibraltar and Toledo. If coincident occurrence of the minimum historical lake level and setdown is assumed (-8.3 ft), a minimum probable low water elevation of 562.2 ft is obtained. The conservatism of the design values is realized by comparing these figures with the respective -1.5-ft and -11.6-ft values that were combined for the design level elevation of -13.1 ft. 2.4.11.4. Future Control There is no future control anticipated for Lake Erie (Reference 23). Drainage improvements on Swan Creek have been made, but no additional controls are planned (Reference 24). 2.4.11.5. Plant Requirements As described in Subsection 9.2.5, the cooling water supply for safety-related systems is provided by the RHR service water system, which contains its own water reservoir and is independent of ground- or lake-water supplies. The main plant cooling water supply is provided by the circulating water pond (Subsection 10.4.5) and requires only makeup water from Lake Erie. 2.4.11.6. Heat Sink Dependability Requirements The RHR complex contains the ultimate heat sink for Fermi 2, which is the RHR service water system. The RHR complex includes a man-made structure with a self-contained reservoir and is discussed in Subsection 9.2.5. This service water complex is independent of local water-level conditions. 2.4.12. Environmental Acceptance of Effluents Discharge of liquid radwaste effluents is through a decant line into Lake Erie. The release point is indicated in Figure 2.1-5. Liquid effluent accidentally released at the surface from the plant eventually flows either eastward into Lake Erie or into the north lagoon after 2.4-29 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR percolation downward through the crushed-rock fill. The configuration of the surface-area drainage pattern does not permit flow westward toward inland areas. Since the lagoon drains into the lake via Swan Creek, liquid surficial discharges would ultimately reach and be diluted by waters of Lake Erie. Any percolation into ground water ultimately reaches Lake Erie (Subsection 2.4.13). The locations and users of surface and ground water pertinent to effluent releases from the plant are provided in Subsections 2.4.1.2 and 2.4.13. The effects of plant effluent releases to Lake Erie were examined by calculating dilution factors at the Monroe intake and the Toledo intake. Studies of the currents and dilution capacity of Lake Erie were made by Ayers (Reference

25) who found that except under ice-cover conditions there are two primary current patterns, northward and southward, with a velocity range from 0.1 to 0.3 mph. During ice-cover periods, the current is predominantly southerly with a velocity of less than 0.1 mph. The probable percentages of occurrence of the current patterns are 30 percent, southerly; 50 percent, northerly; and 20 percent, phase system. The duration of ice-cover ranges from 1 to 4 months.

Based on Ayers' measurements, dilution factors for the Monroe intake and the Toledo intake were estimated and are summarized in Table 2.4-6. The dilution factors were determined using the plant blowdown discharge line into Lake Erie as the effluent release point. The annual average dilution factor was calculated on the basis of 40 percent (southerly) and 60 percent (northerly) current directions, with an ice-cover duration of 2 months occurring during southerly current conditions. Current velocities used in the calculations are 0.394 fps under ice-free conditions and 0.117 fps under ice-cover conditions. The worst condition for dilution factors is based on a southerly current under ice-cover conditions with a current velocity of 0.04 fps. The subsurface diffusion of accidental releases of liquid radioactive effluents is considered in Subsection 2.4.13. 2.4.13. Ground Water 2.4.13.1. Description and Onsite Use Ground water is not used as a source of water supply for the plant. Ground water features are subsequently described. 2.4.13.1.1. Regional Ground Water Features The project area is located in the eastern lake section of the central lowlands physiographic province (Figure 2.5-1). Bedrock formations dip northwest into the Michigan Basin. They are generally covered by glacial drift deposits that vary considerably in thickness and composition. The bedrock topography at the base of the drift is irregular as a result of erosion and differential scouring by Pleistocene glaciation. The drift deposits range from nearly impervious till to coarse channel deposits of gravel and boulders. To the northwest of the site, drift deposits occur that are sufficiently thick and permeable enough to allow development of ground water. To the south, soluble limestone and dolomite formations compose the principal aquifers. The distribution of these regional 2.4-30 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR aquifers, as described by the USGS (Reference 26), is shown in Figure 2.4-23. Regional aquifers capable of furnishing public ground water supplies do not exist near the site because the bedrock formations are not highly pervious and contain poor quality water. The drift is thin and consists of nearly impervious till. Ground water conditions in Monroe County are described by Sherzer (Reference 27) and by Mozola (Reference 11). Bordering Lake Erie and surrounding the site area are soils associated with former higher stages of Lake Erie. The soils are thin, generally organic, and do not serve as aquifers. The soil units are described in Subsection 2.5.1.1.2. Geologic units in the site region, principally the bedrock formations, are described in detail in Subsection 2.5.1.1. 2.4.13.1.2. Local Ground Water Features In the site area, geologic units consist of bedrock formations that are overlain by thin and nearly impervious till and lacustrine deposits (Subsection 2.5.1.2). At the site, the lacustrine and till units have been partially excavated and replaced with crushed-rock fill (Subsection 2.4.1.1). The till and lacustrine deposits are too thin and impervious to serve as aquifers. They are about 14 ft thick at the site. Descriptions of these deposits are given in Subsection 2.5.1.2.7. The test borings explored the bedrock formations beneath the site to depths of 324.7 ft, penetrating the Bass Islands Group and part of the Salina Group. The formations dip slightly to the northwest (Subsection 2.5.1.2.3.2). The uppermost bedrock formation at the site is the Bass Islands Group; the upper surface of the Bass Islands is erosional and somewhat irregular. It is covered with till and lacustrine deposits less than 20 ft thick. At the site, the upper surface of the Bass Islands is about 550 ft elevation (Subsection 2.5.1.2.2) and exists to a depth of about l00 ft (Figure 2.5-15). It is directly below glacial drift in a 7-mile-wide band bordering Lake Erie (Figure 2.5-5). The Bass Islands Group consists of thin-bedded, fractured, locally vuggy, gray-brown dolomite, with carbonaceous shale partings. The formation is described in greater detail in Subsection 2.5.1.2.2. The Bass Islands Group comprises a confined aquifer at the site. During the exploration borings program, there was artesian flow from a number of borings penetrating the Bass Islands Group (Figures 2.5-24 through 2.5-56). Ground water in the Bass Islands Group is confined by the overlying till and lacustrine deposits. During construction dewatering, the ground water is drawn down below the confining layer. Below the Bass Islands Group are fractured limestone and dolomite formations of the Salina Group. The Salina Group formations appear to comprise aquifers even in the argillaceous beds because test borings at the plant site encountered artesian flows from them. Water quality was sampled at various zones. The water is highly mineralized. Sulfate content was similar in all formations. Results of the chemical analyses of the zones tested are shown in Table 2.5-16 and discussed in Subsection 2.5.1.2.4. The aquifers receive recharge by infiltration of precipitation on higher ground areas west of the site as indicated by a mapping of the regional ground water level, shown in Figure 2.4-24. Because the ground water surface approximates the shape of the land surface, water apparently can percolate through the till. The map was prepared from water levels measured in wells completed within the Bass Islands dolomite. These well locations are shown in 2.4-31 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Figure 2.4-25. Water-level measurement data for the wells are presented in Table 2.4-7. The slope of the water level toward Lake Erie indicates that the lake comprises the ultimate sink for ground water flow. The permeability data developed from pressure tests of borings at the Fermi site are described in Subsection 2.5.4.6. Of 29 tests in four borings, permeability varied from 210 to 2220 ft/yr. The average was 763 ft/yr. Because permeability is developed in rock joints and fractures, it can vary considerably from place to place. Ground water is not a water supply source for the plant or any of its supporting facilities. 2.4.13.2. Sources All municipal supplies within 25 miles of the site are from streams or lakes (Reference 28). In areas not served by municipal water systems, water supplies for domestic use are generally obtained from private wells. There are no industrial or municipal water wells in the site area (Reference 7). The network of private wells presently in use forms the source of water for domestic and livestock purposes in farms and homes west and north of the site, and for residences in the Stony Point area to the south, where the largest concentration of wells in the area occurs. The distribution of private water wells surrounding the site area is shown in Figure 2.4-26. This figure shows that there are about 4000 wells within 10 miles of the site. A survey of available drillers' records on approximately 400 wells in the site vicinity, filed at the Michigan Department of Natural Resources, shows that well depths generally do not exceed 70 ft. The wells are 4 to 6 in. in diameter, drilled into dolomite bedrock, and cased only through overburden soils into bedrock. Casings are uncemented, and the remainder of the hole below the casings is left open. Pumps are submersible or centrifugal (suction) type, having a capacity of about 10 gpm or less. The pumpage of water per well is probably on the order of 200 to 400 gal per day, typical of residential use. A certain amount of seasonal variation in water use can be expected because in summer months lawns and gardens are irrigated. There has been virtually no long-term ground water level decline in the site area. The largest concentration of wells is in Stony Point. Pumping there may have lowered the water levels by 5 to 10 ft, on the basis of water levels reported on numerous drillers' logs since the 1940s. The radius of influence of pumping from these wells cannot be detected more than 1 mile away from Stony Point, on the basis of water-level data. Pumping from an onsite rock quarry operation in 1969-1972 caused a temporary lowering of water level. Pumping was terminated in June 1972 and the abandoned quarry was allowed to fill with ground water. The piezometric surface in the vicinity of the quarry returned to its normal level by the summer of 1973. The ground water level was monitored during the quarry dewatering and the data are shown in Table 2.4-7. Water level in the quarry is now approximately at land surface. At the site, the confining layers have been stripped to permit the excavation for subgrade structures constructed in the aquifer. Backfill around the completed structures will not permit percolation into the aquifer at the site (Subsection 2.4.1.1). The water use trend in the area is from ground water to surface water. The low transmissibility of the formation will not permit large-yielding water wells. Undesirable water quality is typical. As described in Subsection 2.5.1.2.9 and noted on boring logs, the 2.4-32 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR ground water is high in sulfate content and hydrogen sulfide. Many neighboring communities, for example Woodland Beach and Berlin Township, have recently abandoned individual water wells in favor of a surface-water treatment-distribution system. Because surface water is available from nearby municipal systems for the communities in the area, the trend of increasing surface-water use and decreasing ground water use can be expected to continue in dense population areas. Isolated homesites, as on farms, will probably continue to use ground water. Because of the trend toward decreasing use of ground water, it is improbable that any significant change in ground water gradient will occur from well pumping. The gradient is radially out from the deep foundations of Fermi 2. There are no domestic wells downgradient from the site. If, for any reason, a reversal of ground water gradient from the site to the water wells were to occur, it would have to be for some reason other than pumping from the wells. This is true because, in order to create a gradient from the site to the water wells, the water level at the wells would have to be drawn down below their depth. It is therefore considered highly improbable that there will be any ground water condition in the future resulting in gradient reversal from the site toward the water wells. The regional lakeward gradient is shown on the contour map of Figure 2.4-25. Water-level data used to prepare the map are shown in Table 2.4-7. Water levels at the site were depressed as a result of dewatering for Fermi 2 quarry operation. Prior to construction of Fermi 2, water flowed naturally from many of the borings in the area, as indicated on the boring logs in Figures 2.5-24 through 2.5-56. On the basis of the above-grade static level implied by these flows and water levels in wells in peripheral areas, it is suggested that ground water level at the site is normally above 575 ft. Water levels in wells fluctuate seasonally, generally highest in spring and lowest in fall. Seasonal fluctuations are not related to Lake Erie fluctuations, although seasonal peaks are somewhat coincidental. The Lake Erie fluctuations are of lower magnitude (Subsection 2.4.2) than ground water fluctuations. It is suggested that the fluctuations coincide because both water bodies respond to the same influences of recharge and evapotranspiration. Water-level fluctuations in the site vicinity since 1970 are provided by the data in Table 2.4-7. The nearest government agency observation well is approximately 20 miles to the west, in the Dundee area. It is monitored by the USGS. Because the well is completed in glacial drift, water-level fluctuations in the well cannot be considered representative of water-level fluctuations that would occur in the bedrock formation wells in the site area. Flow rates within the aquifer are highly variable, owing to the fractured and jointed nature of the bedrock. The width, density, and directional pattern of openings can vary from place to place, as indicated by exposures of rock in excavations of the Fermi 2 site and in the onsite rock quarry to the south. An average velocity of flow in the bedrock aquifer is derived on the following basis: Porosity, n = 0.01, conservatively assumed (Reference 29) Permeability, k = 2 ft/day, from tests in borings 3 ft Hydraulic gradient, I = = 0.0012, determined between wells 17M2 and 2,500 ft 17Q1 (12/31/1973) 2.4-33 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Velocity, V = kI/n = 0.24 ft/day It is noted that the natural water-level gradient at the site is not available owing to construction dewatering at Fermi 2. 2.4.13.3. Accident Effects Ground water conditions of the site (Subsection 2.4.13.1) consist of a bedrock aquifer confined under artesian pressure beneath a cap of relatively impervious glacial deposits. Under natural conditions, the ground water gradient is radially out from the deep foundations of Fermi 2. In the unlikely event of an earthquake, minor cracking in the walls of at least the subgrade portion of the radwaste building structure could occur. The radwaste liquid storage tanks could also undergo stress cracking and leaking to allow fluid flow between the interior of the structure and the surrounding earth. Initially, liquid would be retained within the structure and diluted by inflowing ground water from the dolomite aquifer in contact with the structure. There would be a slow inflow of ground water and the water level inside the structure would rise until it attained the elevation of the piezometric level of the aquifer, approximately Elevation 575.0 ft. At this time, the radioactive material will have been diluted 10:1 or greater. The time required to fill the structure would be on the order of 3 to 4 weeks. This length of time is determined on the basis of the following information:

a. During construction dewatering of the reactor building basement, pumping was stopped overnight and on weekends. The excavation became flooded up to 3 ft as a result of inflowing ground water. On one such occasion, the water-level rise in the excavation was measured. The rate of rise was 0.0281 ft/hr

b. It is assumed that this same rate of rise could occur in the radwaste building excavation, but adjusted to account for the space occupied by masonry and equipment, which is approximately one-third of the total floor area. The adjusted rate of rise is somewhat higher, almost 0.042 ft/hr

c. The rate of rise decreases continuously as the water level in the structure approaches ground water level. The assumption of a steady rate of water level rise of 0.042 ft/hr is therefore conservative.

During the 3- to 4-week period during which water is rising in the structure, equipment can be mobilized for pumping, storage, processing, and disposal of radioactive material. If the structure is allowed to fill completely, diluted material would move into and through the aquifer at the same rate of flow and direction of movement as the existing ground water in the aquifer. The direction of movement to the perimeter of the owner controlled area would be east at a rate of 0.24 ft/day (Subsection 2.4.13.2) and would eventually discharge into Lake Erie. The length of time required to travel the 460-ft distance from the structure to the Lake Erie shoreline is 1920 days. By this time, the specific activity of the radioactive material will have been below the limits set forth in 10 CFR 20. (For details of this accident analysis, see Subsection 15.7.3.) 2.4-34 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR For a discussion of flood protection of the onsite storage building, see Subsection 11.7.2.2.5. 2.4.13.4. Monitoring and Safeguard Requirements It was demonstrated in Subsection 2.4.13.2 that no water wells are located downgradient from the site. As part of the operational radiological environmental monitoring program, Edison will measure the water level monthly in existing observation wells. The comparison of the data will show flow reversal if it occurs. Should a reversal in flow occur, grab samples would be taken and analyzed for gross beta and gamma isotopes if a path is available from the plant to the ground water. Results would be reported in accordance with the requirements of the Technical Specifications 5.6.2 and 5.6.3. Under accident conditions, postulated in Subsection 2.4.13.3, monitoring wells will be drilled between the affected structures and the Lake Erie shoreline to monitor subsurface travel and dispersion of radioactive material. Exploratory drilling experience at the Fermi site indicates that truck-mounted drilling rigs are available from Detroit and Toledo and that an observation well could be drilled within several days. 2.4.13.5. Design Bases for Subsurface Hydrostatic Loadings As described in Subsection 2.4.13.2, the natural ground water level at the site is on the order of 575 ft. As a conservative value for computing normal subsurface hydrostatic loadings, the ground water level is assumed to be 576.0 ft. Because of the ground-level conditions, construction dewatering is necessary during all major building excavations. In the Fermi 2 construction, dewatering was done by sump pumps placed in the excavations. At the reactor building, grout curtains were installed to minimize ground water inflow and to prevent seepage that would cause falling rock from the walls of the excavations. The Fermi 2 reactor building excavation is 204 by 154 ft, with floor elevations of 540.0 and 551.0 ft. Bedrock beneath the structure is dolomite, and was pressure grouted for added strength. The dewatering does not affect the structural integrity of the rock. All major safety-related structures have their foundations on bedrock and not within the overburden soils or drift (Subsection 2.5.4.11). Water supply wells will not be used at the facility. 2.4.14. Technical Specifications and Emergency Operation Requirements Fermi 2, together with its associated safety-related facilities, is designed to function in a safe manner despite the occurrence of any of the adverse hydrologic events previously discussed. These events have been postulated to occur in appropriate combinations, and such provisions for the safe operation of the plant have been incorporated into the design. 2.4.14.1. Flooding The probable maximum water levels in Swan Creek resulting from precipitation or flood are discussed in Subsection 2.4.3. These levels are less than those anticipated from the probable maximum surge on Lake Erie. 2.4-35 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4.14.2. Dam Failures Potential dam failures are discussed in Subsection 2.4.4. It has been found that there are no regulatory structures on Swan Creek. In addition, there are no dams on other streams and rivers in southeastern Michigan, the failure of which would affect water levels in Lake Erie along the plant shoreline. 2.4.14.3. Surge and Seiche Flooding The PMME is caused by storm surge. This event, discussed in Subsection 2.4.5, causes a stillwater level at the site of 586.9 ft, or 3.9 ft above plant grade elevation. As described, the Category I structures are designed for the PMME flood level plus runup from small waves generated on the flooded site. The openings in the structures are watertight and designed for the high-water levels. The water levels associated with the seiche, discussed in Subsection 2.4.5, have been found to be less than the storm surge. 2.4.14.4. Tsunami Tsunami is discussed in Subsection 2.4.6. Water levels associated with this event have been found to be less than for the storm surge. 2.4.14.5. Ice Flooding Ice flooding is discussed in Subsection 2.4.7. 2.4-36 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING REFERENCES

1. R. L. Knutilla, Assistant District Chief, U.S. Geological Survey, Department of Interior, Michigan, Oral Communication.

2. U.S. Army, Monthly Bulletin of Lake Levels for December 1972, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, 6 pages.

3. S. W. Wiitala, "Magnitude and Frequency of Floods in the U.S.," USGS Water Supply, 1965, Paper 1677.

4. Dalrymple, T. "Flood-Frequency Analysis," USGS Water Supply, 80 pages, 1960, Paper 1543-A.

5. U.S. Weather Bureau, Hydrometeorological Report No. 33, (NOAA).

6. U.S. Home and Housing Finance Agency, Snow Load Studies, Research Paper 19, May 1952.

7. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Standard Project Flood Determinations, EM 1110 1411, U.S. Army, 1965.

8. R. K. Lindsley, M. A. Kohler, and J. H. Paulhus, Hydrology for Engineers, pages 212-213, McGraw-Hill, 1958.

9. U.S. Dept. of Interior, Design of Small Dams, Bureau of Reclamation, 611 pages, 1961.

10. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Hydrology Guide for Use in Watershed Planning, Soil Conservation Service.

11. A. J. Mozola, Geology for Environmental Planning in Monroe County, Michigan, Report for Investigation 13, Michigan Geological Survey, 34 pages, 1970.

12. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Flood Hydrograph Analysis and Computations, EM 1110-2-1405, 1959.

13. Chow, V. T., Open Channel Hydraulics, McGraw-Hill, 1959, p. 99.

14. G. W. Platzman, A Procedure for Operations Prediction of Wind Setup on Lake Erie, Technical Report No. 11, ESSA Weather Bureau, 94 pages, 1967.

15. Dames & Moore, Platzman's Wind Setup Model for Lake Erie with Application to Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 2, Report, Verification Study, for the Detroit Edison Company, 21 pages, November 27, 1970.

16. National Weather Records Center, Compilation - Fastest One Minute Easterly Winds for Eight Proximal Weather Stations near Lake Erie: Job 12085, NWRC, Asheville, N.C., 12 pages, 1970.

17. Dames & Moore, Probable Maximum Easterly Winds over the Western Portion of Lake Erie, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 18 pages, August 27, 1970.

18. H. C. S. Thom, "New Distribution of Extreme Winds in the United States," ASCE Journal of Structural Divisions, 94, No. ST 7, 14 pages, July 1968.

19. U.S. Air Force, Cambridge Research Center, Handbook of Geophysical and Space Environment, McGraw-Hill, 1965.

2.4-37 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING REFERENCES

20. I. A. Hunt, Winds, Wind Setups and Seiches on Lake Erie, Research Report 1-2, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, 59 pages, 1959.

21. Shore Protection, Planning and Design, Technical Report No. 4, U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center, U.S. Army, 571 pages, 1966.

22. R. L. Wiegel, Oceanographic Engineering, Prentice-Hall, 1964

23. C. Gilbert, North Central Division, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Chicago, Ill., Oral Communication.

24. D. Burton, Monroe County Drain Commission, Monroe, Michigan, Oral Communication.

25. J. C. Ayers, Hydrographic Studies of the Lagoona Beach Embayment, Great Lakes Research Institute, University of Michigan.

26. C. L. McGuiness, The Role of Ground Water in the National Water Situation, USGS Water Supply, Paper No. 1809, p. 1121, 1963.

27. W. H. Sherzer, Geological Survey of Michigan's Lower Peninsula, 1896-1900, Geologic Report on Monroe County, Michigan, Vol. VII, Part 1, Michigan Geological Survey, 1900.

28. Anonymous, Data on Public Water Supplies in Michigan.

29. D. K. Todd, Ground Water Hydrology, p. 336, John Wiley & Sons, 1959.

30. Estuary and Coastline Hydrodynamics, Chapter 5, Engineering Aspects of Hurricane Surge, by C.L. Bretschneider, 1966.

31. NUREG-2182, Vol I, Final Safety Evaluation Report for the Combined License for Enrico Fermi 3, Docket Number 52-033, May 2016. (ML16140A058) 2.4-38 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-1 ESTIMATED DISCHARGE FREQUENCY - SWAN CREEK Recurrence Interval (years) Maximum Discharge (ft3/sec) 2 2250 5 3500 10 4500 20 5800 50 7700 100 9300 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-2 SYNTHESIZED LOCAL MAXIMUM PRECIPITATION a Time (hr) Cumulative Rainfall (in.) Incremental Rainfall (in.) 1/4 4.9 4.9 1/2 7.0 2.1 3/4 8.8 1.8 1 10.2 1.4 2 14.3 4.1 3 18.0 3.7 4 21.3 3.3 5 24.2 2.9 6 26.9 2.7 12 29.2 2.3 18 31.0 1.8 24 32.4 1.4 30 33.2 0.8 36 33.8 0.6 42 34.3 0.5 48 34.7 0.4 a Data from Reference 5. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-3 SYNTHESIZED PROBABLE MAXIMUM PRECIPITATION FOR THE SWAN CREEK WATERSHED a,b Maxima for Durations Indicated Cumulative Rainfall Incremental Rainfall Increments of Storm Time (hr) (in.) (in.) Sequence (2-hr periods) 2 10.7 10.7 0.2 4 16.0 5.3 0.2 6 20.2 4.2 0.2 8 21.4 1.2 0.2 10 22.0 0.6 0.2 12 22.5 0.5 0.2 14 23.0 0.5 0.2 16 23.4 0.4 0.2 18 23.8 0.4 0.2 20 24.2 0.4 0.2 22 24.5 0.3 0.3 24 24.8 0.3 0.3 26 25.1 0.3 0.3 28 25.4 0.3 0.3 30 25.6 0.2 0.4 32 25.8 0.2 0.5 34 26.0 0.2 0.6 36 26.2 0.2 1.2 38 26.4 0.2 5.3 40 26.6 0.2 10.7 42 26.8 0.2 4.2 44 27.0 0.2 0.5 46 27.2 0.2 0.4 48 27.4 0.2 0.4 a Drainage area 109 square miles. b Data from Reference 5. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-4 ESTIMATED PRECIPITATION LOSSES AND RUNOFF, PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD, SWAN CREEK a Surface Runoff Unit Hydrograph From Rainfall Base Flow Total Discharge Time (hr) (ft3 /sec) PMP Loss Runoff Excess (ft3 /sec) (ft3 /sec) (ft3 /sec) 0 0 0 0 0 100 100 2 410 0.2 0.2 0 0 100 100 4 1070 0.2 0.2 0 0 100 100 6 1860 0.2 0.2 0 0 100 100 8 2640 0.2 0.04 0.16 66 100 166 10 3420 0.2 0.04 0.16 236 100 336 12 4000 0.2 0.04 0.16 534 100 634 14 3820 0.2 0.04 0.16 957 100 1,057 16 3440 0.2 0.04 0.16 1,504 100 1,604 18 3010 0.2 0.04 0.16 2,144 100 2,244 20 2520 0.2 0.04 0.16 2,755 100 2,855 22 2060 0.3 0.04 0.26 3,347 100 3,447 24 1710 0.3 0.04 0.26 3,935 100 4,035 26 1410 0.3 0.04 0.26 4,524 100 4,624 28 1160 0.3 0.04 0.26 5,188 100 5,218 30 900 0.4 0.04 0.36 5,775 100 5,875 32 700 0.5 0.04 0.46 6,548 100 6,648 34 510 0.6 0.04 0.56 7,450 100 7,550 36 350 1.2 0.04 1.16 8,741 100 8,841 38 160 5.3 0.04 5.26 12,269 100 12,369 40 22 10.7 0.04 10.66 21,325 100 21,425 42 0 4.2 0.04 4.16 35,034 100 35,134 44 0.4 0.04 0.46 50,805 100 50,905 46 0.4 0.04 0.36 66,564 100 66,664 48 0.4 0.04 0.36 80,588 100 80,688 50 88,432 100 88,532 a Drainage area 109 square miles. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-5 U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS UNIT HYDROGRAPHS Drainage Basin Station Area (mi2) qp tp Cp 640 Ct (LLca)0.3 L Lca tr (hr) Swan Mouth, 109 36.7 12.3 451 2 6.14 25.4 16.67 2 Creeka Michigan Cedar River East Lansing, 355 7.6 36.5 279 5.1 7.1 37 18 6 Michigan Sandusky Bucyrus, 89.8 27.1 21.0 569 3.39 6.2 27.5 16.3 6 River Ohio Sebewaing Sebewaing, 105 28.46 11.0 313 2.50 4.44 16 9 6 River Michigan Juscarawas Massillon, 507 8.06 44.4 358 6.34 7.0 41.0 16.0 6 River Ohio Clinton Mt. Clemens, 733 17.5 22.2 441 3.81 6.62 32 17 6 River Michigan Grand River Lansing, 1230 6.8 38.5 260 3.4 11.2 75 42 6 Michigan a Synthetic unit hydrograph. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-6 DILUTION FACTOR ESTIMATES - LAKE ERIE INTAKES Normal Conditions South Current North Current Annual Worst Location Ice-Free Ice-Cover Ice-Free Ice-Cover Average Condition Monroe intake 320 290 1.6 x 1011 1.0 x 1010 770 26 Toledo intake 1.6 x 1016 9.0 x 1012 3.1 x 1025 1.1 x 1022 5.4 x 1013 4.3 x 105 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date R1 5S/8E-36R1b 77 594.0 9/9/64 597.6 4/28/72 D1 5S/9E-2D1b 33 590.0 5/20/65 588.11 4/28/72 J1 6S/9E-11J1b -- 581.22 2/3/72 K1 6S/9E-13K1 -- 577.02 12/29/70 577.25 12/30/70 576.68 10/22/71 C1 6S/9E-23C1 35 580.74 2/3/72 583.0 11/13/54 K1 6S/9E-23K1 95 572.0 11/24/69 570.64 9/8/70 Q1c 6S/9E-23Q1 76 572.0 11/6/69 575.4 9/8/70 574.65 10/27/70 576.39 12/29/70 575.8 2/26/71 577.0 3/26/71 576.25 4/30/71 576.3 5/28/71 574.8 7/2/71 573.0 7/30/71 572.8 8/24/71 573.52 10/22/71 572.3 10/30/71 579.13 4/28/72 C1 6S/9E-24C1 -- 576.87 12/29/70 c Q1 6S/9E-24Q1 50 575.0 9/19/69 574.76 9/8/70 573.84 10/27/70 575.97 12/29/70 573.4 11/5/71 Page 1 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date 573.4 12/3/71 574.4 1/7/72 575.4 2/4/72 576.1 3/3/72 579.8 4/7/72 580.5 4/21/72 580.73 4/29/72 582.15 5/26/72 578.57 6/23/72 578.23 7/7/72 577.73 8/23/72 578.57 10/6/72 581.90 11/24/72 582.07 12/29/72 Q2 6S/9E-24Q2 70 571.0 11/6/53 Q3 6S/9E-24Q3 65 577.0 6/13/53 R1 6S/9E-24R1 127.5 577.0 3/27/51 L1 6S/9E-25L1 32 568.0 8/2/56 L2 6S/9E-25L2 45 572.0 7/9/52 L3 6S/9E-25L3 41.5 570.0 4/28/50 L4 6S/9E-25L4 50.5 565.0 7/3/50 L5 6S/9E-25L5 28.5 572.0 6/17/53 575.04 2/3/72 M1 6S/9E-25M1 49.5 574.0 4/17/53 M1A 6S/9E-25M1A 37 570.0 10/18/55 M2 6S/9E-25M2 39 575.0 4/12/48 6S/9E-35H1 34.5 569.0 1/20/49 b J1 6S/10E-6J1 52 575.0 8/31/63 Q1 6S/10E-6Q1b 55 570.0 10/17/53 b Q2 6S/10E-6Q2 56.5 575.0 7/3/47 A1 6S/10E-7A1b 55 576.0 9/18/53 b A2 6S/10E-7A2 116 570.0 12/12/69 Page 2 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date 570.7 2/3/72 b H1 6S/10E-7H1 52 567.0 6/12/56 K1 6S/10E-7K1b 67 576.0 6/6/68 b L1 6S/10E-7L1 35 572.0 7/1/50 J1 6S/10E-8J1b 49 575.0 12/21/55 b K1 6S/10E-8K1 36 571.0 11/26/57 R1 6S/10E-8R1b 51 571.0 1/30/66 570.63 9/8/70 570.03 2/3/72 b B1 6S/10E-16B1 52 572.0 C1 6S/10E-16C1 49 570.0 6/25/54 F1 6S/10E-17F1 59 562.0 2/17/64 568.91 9/8/70 M2 6S/10E-17M2 -- 567.59 10/27/70 571.75 2/3/72 c P1 6S/10E-18P1 60 572.1 9/8/70 571.84 12/30/70 576.3 2/26/71 576.6 1/26/71 573.2 5/28/71 18P1c 6S/10E-19P1 -- 574.0 7/2/71 575.0 7/29/71 573.25 8/27/71 573.30 9/24/71 573.30 10/30/71 571.2 12/3/71 573.5 1/7/72 573.6 2/4/72 574.0 3/3/72 577.3 4/7/72 578.3 4/21/72 576.67 4/29/72 Page 3 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date 579.00 5/26/72 576.92 6/23/72 576.17 7/7/72 573.50 8/25/72 576.58 10/6/72 581.17 11/24/72 581.50 12/29/72 R1 6S/10E-18R1 80 573.49 9/8/70 569.24 10/27/70 569.56 12/29/70 B1 6S/10E-19B1 65 577.0 12/22/64 B2 6S/10E-19B2 65 583.0 2/17/69 576.86 9/8/70 571.86 10/27/70 568.94 12/29/70 583.0 2/17/69 576.42 9/8/70 571.42 10/27/70 568.3 12/29/70 571.33 8/6/71 570.26 8/27/71 570.21 9/24/71 570.14 10/30/71 570.94 12/10/71 570.94 1/7/72 571.84 2/4/72 572.34 3/3/72 575.02 4/7/72 578.19 4/21/72 576.69 4/29/72 576.76 5/26/72 574.69 6/23/72 Page 4 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date 573.69 7/7/72 573.94 10/6/72 579.11 11/24/72 B3 6S/10E-19B3 45 581.0 10/30/53 G1 6S/10E-19G1 -- 591.0 3/2/56 c H1 6S/10E-19H1 -- 570.7 5/12/71 570.4 6/1/71 570.75 7/2/71 570.32 8/2/71 570.21 8/27/71 570.57 10/1/71 569.8 11/5/71 569.5 12/3/71 570.25 12/23/71 572.0 1/31/72 571.3 2/25/72 573.0 3/14/72 574.4 4/7/72 578.0 4/21/72 576.67 4/29/72 575.58 5/26/72 573.25 6/23/72 572.50 7/7/72 570.67 8/25/72 572.67 10/6/72 578.17 11/24/72 578.92 12/29/72 M1 6S/10E-19M1 56 580.0 5/17/68 570.03 9/8/70 572.36 2/3/72 M2 6S/10E-19M2 40.5 580.0 12/8/45 M3 6S/10E-19M3 31 582.0 4/12/49 Page 5 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date P1 6S/10E-19P1 58 569.0 10/6/64 R1 6S/10E-19R1 45 566.72 9/8/70 573.94 4/28/72 c P1 6S/10E-20P1 84 568.0 3/18/70 568.0 4/1/70 567.3 5/6/70 559.8 8/10/70 562.2 8/19/70 563.58 3/1/71 565.38 4/1/71 562.58 5/3/71 554.48 6/1/71 548.38 7/1/71 544.78 7/23/71 Destroyed -- c P2 6S/10E-20P2 -- 568.0 3/18/70 567.2 5/6/70 564.3 6/25/70 563.9 7/30/70 563.8 8/18/70 566.92 3/1/71 567.62 4/1/71 565.92 5/3/71 564.52 6/1/71 559.12 7/1/71 556.77 8/2/71 552.02 8/27/71 551.81 10/1/71 550.94 11/5/71 549.61 12/3/71 549.14 12/23/71 E1 6S/10E-20E1 62 583.0 10/27/70 Page 6 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date 585.18 4/28/72 E2 6S/10E-20E2 -- 580.51 12/29/70 N1 6S/10E-20N1 53.5 565.0 5/26/50 C1 6S/10E-28C1 58 569.0 12/12/50 D1 6S/10E-28D1 39 568.19 10/22/71 D2 6S/10E-28D2 51.5 571.0 3/12/51 E1c 6S/10E-28E1 -- 567.97 9/8/70 567.88 10/27/70 569.84 12/29/70 571.5 2/26/71 572.1 3/26/71 571.75 4/30/71 570.4 5/28/71 568.5 7/2/71 566.0 7/30/71 566.17 8/27/71 565.82 9/24/71 565.9 10/30/71 566.17 12/3/71 567.5 1/7/72 569.3 2/4/72 570.84 3/3/72 572.1 4/7/72 572.8 4/21/72 572.42 4/29/72 571.50 5/26/72 570.00 6/23/72 569.58 7/7/72 569.17 8/25/72 570.92 10/6/72 573.00 11/24/72 573.42 12/29/72 Page 7 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date E2 6S/10E-28E2 74.5 574.5 6/30/51 E3 6S/10E-28E3 43 577.0 5/1/56 E4 6S/10E-28E4 56.5 575.0 4/19/52 E5 6S/10E-28E5 51 572.0 7/28/65 E6 6S/10E-28E6 -- 568.8 10/22/71 E7 6S/10E-28E7 -- 569.4 10/22/71 576.4 5/1/72 F1 6S/10E-28F1 68 573.0 11/20/67 571.81 10/22/71 M1 6S/10E-28M1 68 572.0 5/17/49 A1 6S/10E-29A1 -- 566.52 10/22/71 570.65 4/28/72 B1c 6S/10E-29B1 -- 567.45 7/1/70 567.42 8/3/70 566.22 9/1/70 566.37 10/1/70 566.87 11/2/70 567.07 12/2/70 567.17 1/4/71 566.6 2/1/71 568.57 3/1/71 569.57 4/1/71 568.43 5/3/71 567.87 6/1/71 565.97 7/1/71 564.82 8/2/71 564.15 8/27/71 564.15 10/1/71 563.57 11/5/71 563.57 12/3/71 563.77 12/23/71 564.57 1/31/72 Page 8 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date 563.87 2/25/72 564.37 3/14/72 565.27 4/7/72 566.24 4/21/72 566.40 4/29/72 567.07 5/26/72 564.99 6/23/72 564.90 7/7/72 566.24 8/25/72 567.07 10/6/72 569.74 11/24/72 570.07 12/29/72 D1 6S/10E-29D1 28.5 570.0 10/2/54 563.25 10/22/71 567.45 4/28/72 E1 6S/10E-29E1 38.5 572.0 7/16/53 E2 6S/10E-29E2 31 567.0 8/31/55 E3 6S/10E-29E3 60.5 572.0 7/13/62 E4 6S/10E-29E4 40 572.2 1970 562.4 10/22/71 H1 6S/10E-29H1 39 571.0 H2 6S/10E-29H2 38.5 569.0 10/15/47 J1 6S/10E-29J1 37 570.0 5/27/60 J2 6S/10E-29J2 35 567.0 6/4/56 570.55 2/3/72 J3 6S/10E-29J3 35 572.0 1/8/53 J4 6S/10E-29J4 74 566.0 11/18/52 J5 6S/10E-29J5 46 568.0 7/25/64 J6 6S/10E-29J6 40 572.0 6/2/52 J7 6S/10E-29J7 45 571.0 6/13/53 J8 6S/10E-29J8 28 572.0 4/12/49 J9 6S/10E-29J9 38 570.0 5/13/50 Page 9 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date J10 6S/10E-29J10 31 570.0 7/29/53 J11 6S/10E-29J11 36 572.0 6/14/57 K1 6S/10E-29K1 30 575.0 3/19/52 K2 6S/10E-29K2 47 573.0 6/7/63 Q1 6S/10E-29Q1 40 566.0 R1 6S/10E-29R1 30 573.0 4/18/57 R2 6S/10E-29R2 50 564.0 11/16/54 B1 6S/10E-30B1 60 569.0 10/7/68 C1 6S/10E-30C1 40 569.0 11/26/63 568.93 2/3/72 E1 6S/10E-30E1 29 571.0 8/8/45 H1 6S/10E-30H1 42.5 570.0 9/18/65 H2 6S/10E-30H2 49 572.0 10/28/57 A1 6S/10E-32A1 49 570.0 6/7/56 A2 6S/10E-32A2 41.5 575.0 6/11/51 c P2 6S/10E-20P2 546.94 1/31/72 547.14 2/25/72 540.34 3/14/72 537.99 4/7/72 540.77 4/21/72 541.86 4/29/72 542.94 5/26/72 539.11 6/23/72 540.44 7/7/72 552.86 8/25/72 557.19 10/6/72 561.52 11/24/72 564.69 12/29/72 P3 6S/10E-20P3 62 576.0 12/15/65 551.55 7/25/72 E1c 6S/10E-21E1 42 557.91 7/1/70 559.59 8/3/70 Page 10 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date 555.02 9/1/70 555.74 10/1/70 556.74 11/2/70 556.60 12/2/70 556.94 1/4/71 556.1 2/1/71 557.14 3/1/71 556.94 4/1/71 555.49 5/3/71 556.54 6/1/71 555.94 7/1/71 555.99 8/2/71 556.53 8/28/71 557.12 10/1/71 556.24 11/5/71 556.24 12/3/71 556.64 12/23/71 558.14 1/31/72 559.44 2/25/72 559.64 3/14/72 562.16 4/7/72 562.99 4/21/72 561.91 4/29/72 561.99 5/26/72 564.16 6/23/72 563.99 7/7/72 560.32 8/25/72 560.37 10/6/72 560.91 11/24/72 563.74 12/29/72 Page 11 of 12 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.4-7 WATER WELL DATAa Map Reference Elevation of Number Well Number Depth (ft) Water Level (ft) Date a Shown in Figure 2.4-25. b Not shown in Figure 2.4-25. c Monitor wells are underlined. Explanation of well numbering system: The well locations are identifiable by the well number. The well numbering system, which is commonly used by water resource agencies, including the U.S. Geological Survey, designates the location of the well within a 40-acre parcel of land. The standard one-square-mile section is subdivided into 40-acre parcels as follows: D C B A E F G H M L K J N P Q R As an example, suppose a given well is located as follows:

a. Township 7 South

b. Range 10 East

c. Section 32

d. northeast corner.

That well would be given the number, 7S/10E-32A1. The number 1 following the letter A indicates that this is the first well inventoried in the 40-acre parcel lettered A. All the wells within the immediate vicinity of the site are shown in Figure 2.4-25. These wells are identified and located by the last two digits of the previously described well numbering system and listed under the heading, "MAP Reference Number." Page 12 of 12 REV 16 10/09

r---.J-- - , , ') i .......... ... I i I J

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        '0'
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         ..\_,.______
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     /! N :;

l I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           'I                      ' ) -

DUMPING ' I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     \J               \

GROUND l

                                                                                                                                                /

__ .,,.. -- n

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       \

I , ' 1 I , I "'

                                                                                                                                           //                                                                                                                                                                                  :' f /                                                         r
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             !!/                                                         \

,i ..

                                                                                                                                      , ,/
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         /
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        '                                                  I'
                                                                                                                                  ,/                                                                                                                                                                                       ',         '
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             \    '
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      \

2 ,, ,- ..... r******** .... __ .' I

• I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ....... ./                               *-,

l

                                                                                                                                                                                 / ,- - -*- ..

jouMPING/ ,----/ \ f GROUND;

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    \'

I

                                                                                                                                                                                              )+                                                    \                     i               + i                                                                                                    "             -
                                                                                                                                                                /
                                                                                                                                                                       ,,. -*             I I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      \                 !*----

I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              /
                                                                                                                                                           ,                                                                                                                                                                                                                I I
                                                                                                                                                   /                                                                                                                                                                                                                    I I

I I I

                                                                                                                                         ,/'                                                                                                                                                                                                                    I
                                                                                                                         '      I
                                                                                                                             ){
                                                                                                                           '   I                                                                                                                                                                                     /
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   /
                                                                                                                       /-*      b MONIOE INTAKI

( ---__,, _,.,, .,.--- ...... ______ ,,,,--- .."1 ,/ _,/

                                                                                                                     /                                                                                                                                                                            /,i
                                                                                                           ,/ .                                                                    I l:',
                                                                                                                                                                                      /

A K E l

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   £      R
                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ,.,.,.-o.,,,.,.,, ......... -e.!*_!:.11:.----- __ _,,,,. _,   /"               E
                                                                                                         /                                                                      l I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               -==--=--==--==-==----------* ...
                                                                                                                                                             .. \ ....        l SCALE
                                                                                                       /                                                   ./               /
                                                                                               --- -.J                                                   \
                                                             . .. -------.../-
                                                                                                                                                        \
                                                                                                                                                          'i CONTOURINTERVAL5FT CONTOUR INTERVAL OFFSHORE 6 FT
                                                        + ,I                                                                                                                                   +

I Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-1

REFERENCE:

THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FROM PORTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING SITE VICINITY MAP U.S.G.S. QUADRANGLES: ESTRAL BEACH, MICH., 1942, STONY POINT, MICH., 1952, ROCKWOOD, MICH., 1952, AND FLAT ROCK, MICH., 1952. REV 22 04/19

T SWAN CREEK \\

                                                                                           /.

I

                                                                                                                 \  i----

LAKE ERIE NORTH LAGOON

                                       /
                              /

1000 0 1000 2000 SCALE IN FEET

                                                                  /
                                            *- I I

Fermi 2 1- UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT I --;

                                 ....._____/.....___    . /

FIGURE 2.4-2 I 7 I TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE AND ENVIRONS

REFERENCE:

71 .....__  ;

                                                            /

AFTER FERMI 1 AND BEFORE FERMI 2 CONSTRUCTION

                                                                /

PORTION OF THE DETROIT EDISON TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP - 1968

                                                                    /*--.........

REV 22 04/19

SWAN CREEK-- NORTH ARROWl

                                                   --; a'. AEEI 6 uFERMI2 1.-

1000 0 1000 2000

                                                                     -\                                                             SCALE IN FEET
                                                                          -,               -", .Fermi                         2
                                                                                                   -    ___UPDATED            FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-3 a                     ~SITE                  TOPOGRAPHIC MAP BEARNOS    BASED O

REFERENCE:

coNrucN ogiDi PORTION OF THE DETROIT EDISON ._._.. TOPOGRAPHICAL MAP- 1972 REV 23 02/21

9 SCALE, MILES

                                                    .<<.~'

_ _ WATERSHED BOUNDARIES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-4 SWAN CREEK WATERSHED

REFERENCE:

PORTIONS OF DETROIT AND TOLEDO U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC MAPS. REV 22 04/19

                                                                                                                      ,,'\.
                                                                                                                            "\

J7

                                                                                                                                           )
                                                                                                                                              ,/.,

r

                                                               , I b MONROE INTAKE J

A ___/ SCALE IN MILES 1/

                                                                                +                                                         CONTOUR INTERVAL5FT Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-5

REFERENCE:

THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FROM PORTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING U.S.G.S. WATER CURRENT PATTERNS WITH WINOS FROM TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLES: ESTRAL BEACH, MICHIGAN, 1942, NORTHWEST THROUGH NORTHEAST STONY POINT, MICHIGAN, 1952, ROCKWOOD, MICHIGAN, 1962, AND FLAT ROCK, MICHIGAN, 1952. REV 22 04/19

                                                                                                                                     \
                                                                                                                                      \\   ,_
                                                                                                                                         \    '1/4
                                                                                       '"111:::::::

_2:.__j l---L._

                                                                                                                                                    \._
                                                                                                                                                     ,)

___,/ '

                                                                                                                                       \,.

SCALE IN MILES

                                                                     +
                                                                                                                                    CONTOUR INTERVAL5FT Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-6

REFERENCE:

THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FROM PORTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING U.S.G.S. WATER CURRENT PATTERNS WITH WINOS FROM TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLES: ESTRAL BEACH, MICHIGAN, 1942, EAST-SOUTHEAST THROUGH WEST STONY POINT, MICHIGAN, 1952, ROCKWOOD, MICHIGAN, 1952, AND FLAT ROCK, MICHIGAN, 1952. REV 22 04/19

                                                                                                              \        I
                                                                                                                \
                                                                                                                   \

I

                                                                                                                  ,\::
                                                                                                       "\/

N,! ,\ I , ~ '.

                                                                                                                                   ~~

f

                                                                                                                       .j' DUMPING GROUND               !           \,                         ,

to \, \

                                                                                         !           'i    \                      f.'\
                                                                                        !             I      \                    \~
                                                                                       !~~               j\.., ~
                                                                                                 ",--y " \
                                                                                .., I/                                ",     1'\
                                                                                ~ /                                     \
                                                                               'l                                             .
                                                                               !!                                        \"""

f' DUMPING GROUND SCALE IN MILES

                                                             +                                                   CONTOURINTERVAL5FT Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

REFERENCE:

FIGURE 2.4-7 THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FROM PORTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLES: ESTRAL BEACH, MICHIGAN, 1942, WATER CURRENT PATTERNS UNDER ICE STONY POINT, MICHIGAN, 1952, ROCKWOOD, MICHIGAN, 1952, AND FLAT ROCK, MICHIGAN,1952. CONDITIONS REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR FIGURE 2.4-8 HAS BEEN DELETED THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

LAKE ERIE (PEItIOD Of ItECOItD IUO-Ienl

      +6                IUIlClltUIt MONTHLY MEAN LAKE LEVELS 11115                                                                                       .71                                                                                 '875 IIIn 11173          11115                                                              ,en         .15        1t15                                                             1tI75 1tI75 573.52'
      +5                                                                                                      11175                                '875                                                                           +5
                                                                                                                                                                                                      '815
               '811                                                                                1tI75                                                  ~71                              ~7:S
          ..71                                                                             '871.n                                                                             '871 ..n
                                                                                 '8n ..71                                                                        '8n'871
      +4                                                                                                                                                                                                              ..,.- ---+4
                                                                                                                                                                                                             ~ _ _ PItOIAILE
                                                                                                                                                                                                       /                    LEVELS
                                                                                                                                                                                        - __ - '                             (le75~3

_---_ RECDItDED ...o ..-'"

                                      ..,                 "LEVELS
                                                              ........ .,l1973-1974)                                  ,,'"
                                                                                                                                ...  ~------

rTEN YEAR AVERAGE ..- ,. - --- II: II: /

                                                                                                                                                                  .....       -,                   ..- "                          +2 II:
                                                                                                ,--"                          LONG TERM AVERAGES
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  +,
      -+,

~. ! LOW WATER DATUM 568.6 N.Y.M.T.,IGLD* o HISTORICAL MINIMUM MONTHLY LAKE LEVELS o

                                            '814_                                                                                       ,8MIN4                                                                               '8M
       -,----                  eM
                                      ,814                11154 11114                                             '8M
                                                                                                                                 .M                1t:s4
                                                                                                                                                         ,n4                                                 '8M 11154       -I
                                                                                '8M                                                                             '854                                                              567.49'
          '8. '8" .54                                                                11114 .14'8. . . . '814                                                             18.4 _      '8111 '8" _
      -2                                                                                                                                                                                                                          -2 MINIMUM                   MONTHLY      MEAN LAKE LEVELS                           (DESIGN) z    *...... 0:

0: u 0:

                                                                                                                        ...0:C                ....  .. .... ..             >    ...u   z     ..
                                                                                                                                                                                             ...... :II...     .... ....

I~ Z c Z

                                        ~

c c c 0:

                                                                                   ~   ~                                            ~

IE Z

           ~               :II  C      :II
                                              ~
                                                    ~
                                                            ~

C u 0 i Q :II :II ~ ~ C

                                                                                                                                                     ~      \oj   u 0

0 Z Q ~ :I ~ 1973 1974 1975

                                                                                                                                                                           *ADD 1.94' TO CONVERT TO N.Y.M.T., 1935 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-9

REFERENCE:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE, MAXIMUM AND MINIMUM MONTHLY MEAN MONTHLY BULLETIN OF LAKE LEVELS LAKE LEVELS - FOR JANUARY 1974, NATIONAL OCEAN SURVEY, LAKE SURVEY CENTER.

Lake Erie WAVE CRESTS

                                    )WAVE ADVANCE = 25.5 WAVE LENGTHS
                                    / TIME INTERVAL = 204 SECONDS LEGEND:
                                     - - - - LAKE BOTTOM CONTOURS SOUNDING DATUM: NVMT 1935 WAVES REFRACTED DURING TIDE* +16.4 FEET NVMT 1935 WAVE PERIOD* 8.0 SECONDS WAVE DIRECTION FROM N67.5 ° E 100,000 50,000 0        100,000 SCALE IN FEET Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-10 WAVE REFRACTION

REFERENCE:

U.S. LAKE SURVEY, CHART NO. 39, 1968 REV 22 04/19

0 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-11 SITE AREA TOPOGRAPHY SHOWING 583-FT CONTOUR

REFERENCE:

u.s.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE STONY POINT, MICHIGAN - 1967. REV 22 04/19

ONE INCH RAINFALL EXCESS 4 1---------------~~~~----------~----------------~--------------~ f/) I&.. U I&.. of/) 3 ~------------~~~----------~~~----------------r_--------------_; Q Z

~

f/)

I o

t:

~ 2 1---------~~--~~--------------~--~------------~--------------~

1&..- ~ Z

I It:

O~--------------_+--------------~r_--------------+_------------~~ o 10 ,20 30 4Q TIME, HOURS Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-12 UNIT HYDROGRAPH - SWAN CREEK AT MOUTH

t:-1~~ RALL~::}.E~OW 100~-----T------~--~~~rw. .~----~------~------r-----, OO~-----+------+---L--+~~--+---~~~~--~----~r-----~ ( \ 88,530 CFS 80~+----+----t--+--\t----+---t---------i ro~-----+------~----~----~H---~~------;-------r-----~ en I&. (.) 60 I&. 0

                                         \

en Q Z C en

) 50 0

l:

                                           ~

I-III' 0 ex:

                                             \

c l: 40 (.) en Q

                                               \

30

                                                 \

20

                                                     \

10 \

                   /

0

            ~

0 12 24 36 48 80 72 84 96 TIME,HOURS Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-13 PMF HYDROGRAPH - SWAN CREEK AT MOUTH

22

             ~------r-------r-------r-------r-------r-----~~

20 ~------~------~~------~~~--~r-------~------~ 586

                                                                             \,

18

                                                                                        ..~

584 ell I

                                                                                        ~

16 582 >: 2 i= w I-w w w I- 2

t 0

   ~

14 580 i= 0( w

t >

w w ~ w 0( a:

t w I-12 578 0(

t

                                                                                        ~
                                                                                        ~

i= en 10 576 8 6

                      -9         -3     o    +3         +9            +15 TIME (HOURS)

LEGEND: Hm

• MAXIMUM HEIGHT H
• SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT s

Hb

• BREAKING WAVE HEIGHT FOR SHORE Fermi 2 BARRIER TOR ELEVATION UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT (UPPER LIMIT CONSIDERS WAVE SETUP)

Ts

• SIGNIFICANT WAVE PERIOD FIGURE 2.4-14 STORM SURGE HVDROGRAPH FOR PMME

83°20' 13'15' 93 ° 10' -*05* 93*00* ez*55* ONTARIO I ' " 29 38 20 : 0 \20,.., 25 r*or, I t'

                                                                                                                                                                                                          /:,;;/
                                                                                                                                                                                                           //

1# I '\ r*Nf(

                                                                                                                                                                                                                             /

I. 0

• I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    \;>2\ I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      \
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ?O \ "'* *f I 22 I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       \28\

1! 24 I 28 JC 30 f"CLL I / ,\ ' \r**i 27 - ;'- 23 liH (,1 \ 23 \ 1 r,w 2" - ,'-28 21 /I

                                                                                                                                                                                                       't I

i(J J,9,1,iwtj. ti \ .- 2,--",-:_ 26 2E < '- 30 li, I, 1 // J *

                                                                                                                                                                                                     / 24 I I

OOWNBOUNO

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              \ ?.:.""'t°
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    \ 24 '

1,,, 26 _;;,-;._ - 2-:' 20 ZB

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               .....

• _...... Subw,,q,,fN1 Sr**e.

_.-~- JB (_ '1() Jv

                                                                                                                                                                                   /                I                 I TEMPORAPr                                  \            \                         Y,                                                                                                                                                                               . - 'o"19
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         .__-                                                                  JC)          ' -,

v/ s S I 22 I I 2* I '*

• o, hi". *' // .,..,,--

J, 1

                                                                                                                                                                             /                                    /f 24 .:)UMP/lvr,                                                                             PBOuNo                                                                                                                                        23            "._.<'

• 22 / <-"2 // \ \ - <"" /,, .,, ll -.:._ o _,...30 J;

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         ,.,                           \                                                     * /.*,                            ':.t;,,_b"'e:9.a                                                                                                  ,*"'-'                                   .- '_,.c I                I                                                               -' I _,

I \:.,,28 C'6 ,J, , /I ' ' ,* 1

                                                                                                                                                                    //                                                                                                                                                         O ',                                ,,;.1f,,::,1llr                                                                                                                                      *'

2, 23 23 /  ! GPOuND 22,,\ r***,,k.', ' 2r'-. 28 /"**,., -1; 29 :19 \ ,\ '**\

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ') ,, '                               0   3
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    '--             O JO J I           ,3 I 25 I                         ?4                                                                                            27         ..,., /*.,,                                     '/'**., , , , I , I , . ' . (' c'*'                                                                                       ** ** ..,o J                        ----

y 1 18 .,.-//' 201 , I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   \                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        32 BREST BAY             IB                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        2                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  37 16                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   **_*-;';-t-to*'\..                                                ,2 8                 1-3                                                      3?

20 CI ' \ ;61-,_"J* 2!_7c._ -o_ f

• j, _,'..:. '* 2e_o_,,___ *"_l'_"_*,_*:,_-,_: . _, ,. ,l_,::' . _. *1" ** _1_ '--;?- ,..- __

u m ';'t _*.::'*::_:_:,.::::** ::*_ _....::.- -f-- ' --'2"'ri_ -/ _-2 r,'

     - J.'...::'.C:..---_:.1:-jc:::::::_!2.._;_...l.2---.--+-'-.:_s*:::'*:'::;*::;                              _                  -hL----:-f-                                                                         7-=                                  :;;:;;::;:-;;-;;;
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                -;IWv,11                       i
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              --L  ;     f                     7                 Oi        r::
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 .    :-                                                -rr r        2 29                                       ,,                  ,*                          /

( JI J C === I) 23 I --- St -- 1 27  ;?9 ,,**o '--29 \ 32 23 / ;,,,,h,l.9 :3 IJ 2? --- 26 -- 12,8\-, 9 , 27- --- 27 <, \

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ' '\          .,o                         _ JO              (§\ 31                .l' I

19 22 /3 I .-  : ----'.!IJ_--f .'.:.c,"7 .. .. w; 1'- \ J 3' ]I 32 I r," 2 26 II I' *

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                *   *,.

• 3 , 3 Cl 32 15 19

                                                                                                                            ,//
                                                                                                                                  /

24

                                                                                                                                                           '+ 25 I
                                                                                                                                                                                     /                25 6

26 1\ 1 I \\ \ CI c s 2 7 2 8 o c-;, 190 I 180 11Q>9

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    -;-----=------                    tjo\                                      J2 33
                                                                                                                                     )

18 / 23 I 2 26 1 8 1 I 28 8 3 -- JJ 33 2 2 2 9 29 C)J )I J )' -

                                                                                                                      * /              /                                                                                                                                                         .J_.Jv- --L.                                                                                                                                                                   3                                                     I            , @                    -------

19 .. . 21

                                                                                                                  ;),,0 /
                                                                                                                 -i/                 (")

2-c, c, & s 27 / I 2 7

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ---JI/ -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            / 1/ /                 '-"a
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            \ ----- -                                      -----

o ------- J;) 30/ JI 32 JZ 33 24/ 26 .,,.- 29 - / // ' '( 29 J J

                                                                                                          /                                                                                                                26           --                                          I?                               \ '                                                                                             3:'.'.l                                        3J-- ---- I--- -   -

19 9 24 29 I 20 / - -_ ___ _ 32

                                                                                                      /                  1                                                    /

• 8- "1l---- ,/;, 28 \2, ------ 30 --JJ(,i_:'), l 1 I - 2 J O ,3,

                                                                                              /                                                          2s
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                -,1\9 25 0 J, - 2" 12 2  &                          / // 2 8                            26 \         ,                                                                                                                        3 0                                                                   JI 26                                                                                                                             ,                               9                                                                                                                             31
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          '                                                                                                                                                                                                                            32 24
                                                                                   /
                                                                                         /

24

                                                                                                                                      \ -
                                                                                                                                                  ----kl-                /
                                                                                                                                                                                               -                             ,       26                        /
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             /,/ I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       ;:/

29

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            \

29

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          /
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             )        J                                                    @                                                             32
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ]
                                                                                 /                                          23 - --                                                                                                                                          27                                                                             29                                                                                                             r-:;;,,                                                                                      JI 26I   1                                                                               /    ",\'                                                        29   \           3*0   ,                                                             '.'                       30                '                                                                                                                                                         32 25                                               27                       25                                                                                                                                                                                     J                                                             (!])

i4 / 23 --- 28 / '.)', / 29 \ I ' 30 1 33

                                                                      ,                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            32
                                                                    ,, 1/

• ____ 1 1 \I 24

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        -------------' -- j-------- ---3,----:V-------Ji __ _
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        -'           ,:_ ____:ft-_.:,.;L':::.. :!:'i.. ;,
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               --29' 0--;;::,-
                                                                            ,,_                       -----                                                                                                                                    ///
                                                                        /       - 24                                             23                                  /

• M :. <o,, 31 3 33 f::::::,- _ ---,/6 -- 8------ - , _.,. 27 ,,,.,,, __ ,,, 29 1

{*'es 7-- -I' / 26 30 1 31 ________________ 31',, ...;, 30 31

                                                                       ' *                                                                                                                        '                                     8                                                                                                                                                                                                  1     3 23                                        I                             2          s,.,bm.,g.d              // 2   /                                                   ,.,,. ,,,,

b\ v--s l; 24 24 I N, s,** I // ,,,.,,,,.. 29 ?9 ' "(o 31

                                                                        ',,*                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   30                                                                                                                                                32 23
                                                                              '-, '                                        24 25 I I I

1 28 1 1

                                                                                                                                                                                                                          / I'/

1 28 r.-" ,,,,.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ,,                                                   29                  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        \ \  ......__   '

9

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             '1/2  
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ,-1.'Q s 30
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       \ 3.

I --

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         " ]I o "'o.,

31

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      \ -<2)5 .,,b,..e*g*,.                                          31                          JJ

• 21 '-,23 / / / , 1}.-,,,/ \

g \::1/ J/  ;* Net S11A-*, I 19 , S & M 23 29 29., ' ...:, , ]I

                                                                                                                                                    ,.c/26                                 27                          //                                                                  28                                     29                            \                   """-.              ,                      30                                      Fj G I '28/                        ,/

1

                                                                                                       ,                                                                                                        I *11°,,,, ,,,,                                   28                                                                                                 '                          '           ' Subm**gd                                       ;,:,,

20 23 Cb...::.1 I I Cl \\ ,

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      , '-.'f'!                 1                            I,( I iMiddle:

19 ', ' 23 ,,,, r*5 *-'1u* Jo ,/ ">B 24 27

• II I/ I -'1;_. 28 \ ... 0 c 24 2;,, I 2 2 / /,,,, 28 28 29 2 9 \ 30 '  ;;_ ,>

                                                                                                                                                'I                                               I,,,,        2   .,                                                                               Si,bmtr9ed                                                                        \                                                                                1
                                *::-o

• 21 ', 23 I rt,J} *4l / 29 \ -.,:: 1 1"'

17 23 ', / 26 ,,,. (Ar: ' ' ]. / 27 30 '\,. ' Fermi 2 Ne,:;,..... ___'.,'.+-----=--1-..:...._________ -;----+-----.::'.__ _U,____ 5' ?,,f-'.::.. :;,-,: ",;_,7,-----__::..:___2288___2 88____; ?ie11-; ---'"'- 30 -- -

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         --;:-:,vn,-----":"'--,7l*:-) -::-f 22                          ,,
                                                                                                                                                                         ,,                                                                                                           2                                  2         29                                        :;:

21 5ubw,*,,-d N.1 St*.h*s

• t ,.... ......,.... ,..- 27 16

                 ,.  '                 n

• 22 ,. -*- S J >..?'(

                                                                                                                                  -- J,-,:'--2'5'.                                                                                  n                                                ;,a 28 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-15 FETCH DIRECTIONS

REFERENCE:

U.S. LAKE SURVEY, CHART NO. 39, 1968 REV 22 04/19

        ~-------r------~~------~------~--------~-------t22 FETCH DIRECTIONS IN DEGREES CLOCKWISE FROM NORTH 1~~-------+--------4----+~~~--~~~--------+-------~ ~

95 18 Hm-78.75° 85 16 Hm-67.5° j:: w w i a; 75 14 ... l:

 ~                                                                        CI Q                                                                        iii w                                                                        l:

w w 5; >

                                                                          <I:

Q 65 12 3: Z i 35 25 ~-------+--------~r-----~ 4 15~------~--------~------~--------~--------~------~ 2

      -15        -12          -6        o        +6       +12      +15 TIME (HOURS' LEGEND:

Hm

• MAXIMUM HEIGHT Hs - SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHT Ts - SIGNIFICANT WAVE PERIOD U - COMPONENT WIND VELOCITY Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-16 WIND AND WAVE CHARACTERISTICS VERSUS TIME

14 .. :~.; . 18

! tttdt* , ,

p

                                                      ;H tm 12                                                                      16 10                                                                      14 8                                                                      12

_H ts I='

                                                   -,. I I
            ~      6                                                                      10 LLI                                                                              LLI LLI                                                                              LLI IL.                                                                              IL.
            ~

z:: :z::

                                                                                             ~

52 4 8 0.. W LLI

z:: 0 LLI a::

u" , LLI

            ~                                                     sup                        ~
            ~

2 6

                                                                                             ~

o 4 d,

                 -2                                                                       2 I.,
                 -4                                                                       o
                    -12     -6            o       +6                 +12    +18       +24 TI ME (HOURS)

LEGEND: ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NYMT. 1936. FOR A SHORE BARRIER TOE ELEVATION OF 669.0 FT AND CREST ELEVATION OF 583-:-0FT~ Htm - WAVE -HEIGHT TRANSMITTED OVER SHORE BARRIER FOR INCIDENT

        ,MAXIMUM WAVE HEIGHTS H ts -WAVE HEIGHT TRANSMITTED OVER Fermi 2 SHORE BARRIER FOR INCIDENT                            UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT SIGNIFICANT WAVE HEIGHTS HIUP '- MAXIMUM WAVE HEIGHT SUPPORTED OVER INLAND FLOODED PLANT                                          FIGURE 2.4-17 GRADE (ELEVATION 683.0 FTI WITHOUT BREAKING
   ~ - DEPTH OF WATER AT SHORE BARRIER                        TRANSMITTED AND SUPPORTED WAVE HEIGHTS WITH A TOE ELEVATION OF 669.0 FT                                   VERSUS TIME d -INLAND DEPTH OF WATER ABOVE PLANT
        ,GRADE ELEVATION OF 683.0 FT.

WAVE NON-BREAKING WAVE (1) BROKEN WAVE STATIC FORCES BREAKI~ (MINIKIN METHOD) (SAINFLOU METHOD) PRESSURE (PSF) 2.960 2.925 3.060 THRUST (LBS./FT. OF WALL) 70.100 6B.700 75.000 DYNAMIC WAVE PERIOD FORCES ARE (SECONDS) 3.4 7.7 9.0 3.4 7.7 9.0 INDEPENDENT OF FORCES WAVE PERIOD 10% SLOPE 2.460 660 520 PRESSURE (PSF) 150 IBO IB2 122 5% SLOPE 3.000 900 700 10% SLOPE 2.460 660 520 THRUST (LBS./FT. 1.125 1.235 1.245 256 OF WALL) 5% SLOPE 3.000 900 700 CASE o* 46.9' (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF REACTOR 5LAB) d.3.9' (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF PLANT GRADE) H.3.0' (WAVE HEIGHT) BREAKING WAVE NON-BREAKING WAVE (I) BROKEN WAVE STATIC FORCES (MINI KIN METHOD) SAINFLOU METHOD) PRESSURE (PSF) 3.100 2.925 3.160 THRUST (LBS./FT. OF WALL) 77.000 68.700 BO.IOO DYNAMIC WAVE PERIOD FORCES ARE 4.5 7.7 9.0 4.5 7.7 9.0 INDEPENDENT OF FORCES (SECONDS) WAVE PERIOD 10% SLOPE 4.4BO 1.870 1.460 PRESSURE 319 (PSF) 26B 312 215 5% SLOPE 5.500 2.460 1.950 10% SLOPE 8.060 3.360 2.640 THRUST (LBS./FT . 3.664 3.900 3.950 814

'IF WALL)        5% SLOPE         9.900       4.430       3.520 (I)  DYNAMIC FORCES OF NON-BREAKING WAVES RESULT FROM CLAPOTIS AFFECT.

CASE 2 o

• 46.9' (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF REACTOR SLAB) d
• 6.9' (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF PLANT GRADE)

H

• 5.4' (WAVE HEIGHT)

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-18 WAVE PRESSURE AND FORCES AGAINST REACTOR BUILDING

BREAKING WAVE NON-BREAKING WAVE (1) BROKEN WAVE STATIC FORCES (MINI KIN METHOD) (SAINFLOU METHOD) PRESSURE (PSF) 2.334 2.240 2.371 THRUST (LBS./FT. OF WALL) 43.641 40.208 411,1148 DYNAMIC WAVE PERIOD FORCES ARE (SECONDS) 3.4 7.7 9.0 3.4 7.7 9.0 INDEPENDENT OF FORCES WAVE PERIOD 10% SLOPE 2.460 660 520 PRESSURE 150 180 182 122 (PSF) 51 SLOPE 3.000 900 700 10% SLOPE 2.460 660 520 THRUST 1.125 1.235 1,245 256 (LBS ./FT. OF WALL) 51 SLOPE 3.000 900 700 CASE o ..... (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF RHR SLAB) d

• 3,9' (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF PLANT GRADE)

H*3.0' (WAVE HEIGHT) BREAKING WAVE NON-BREAKING WAVE (1) BROKEN WAVE STATIC FORCES (MINI KIN HHETHOD) (SAINFLOU METHOD) PRESSURE (PSF) 2,409 2,240 2.477 THRUST (LBS./FT. OF WALl) 46,487 40,208 49,174 DYNAMIC WAVE PERIOD FORCES ARE (SECONDS) 4.5 7.7 9.0 4.5 7.7 9,0 INDEPENDENT OF FORCES WAVE PERIOD 10% SLOPE 4.480 1,870 1,460 PRESSURE 261 312 319 215 (PSF) 51 SLOPE 5,500 2,460 1.950 10% SLOPE 8.060 3,360 2.640 THRUST 3,900 (LBS./FT. 3,664 3.950 814 OF WALL) 51 SLOPE 9.900 4,430 3.520 (1) DYNAMIC FORCES OF NON-BREAKING WAVES RESULT FROM CLAPOTIS A~FECT. CASE 2 o ..... (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF RHR SLAB) d

• 6.9' (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF PLANT GRADE)

H

• 5.4' (WAVE HEIGHT)

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-19 WAVE PRESSURE AND FORCES AGAINST RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX

SM.S~r-_ _ _ _~c.~,~sr~'r~CL~.p~o~r~" _________ 591, 1~1- _ _ _ _""'Wlt...W'-'I.Wli!.l.i._ _ _ __

                  ~:~: ~d~:"\"1.'\'"r.'~L-:':-'."'I,71,,"!:.Yo~,-!!"!:!"~L¥.!"f!,~."ll'ICn:'n;;....."n---

513,0 112 'Sf (DYNA"IC ,II.USUII.() 510.0 TO' Of , ANT GIlAO III "SF(DYNAMle "R(SSUM "OROUS fiLL. TOP 01 TUUINI SlAi

                                                     !!!!L Us.,

0' 5155.6 .700 LIS./n.

                                              "AU (SUYle fOlKl) rQIII    0'                                                                                          TQIII 01 5"0. o-l!---rno!nr-~oirllo~o--;'-'                        .*;;-".-i;"fi*:" ' ' ' ' ' '-' SU ' -   5"0.0 ~f---"""!..OO'--"'20"'OO"--""1.......-t"...:~U.",,,,IO,,,,.,-,L!!
                                            'lllSSUft( ('U)               (STAflC 'R!$SUltO                                                       'IlUSUIt[ {'Sf}             (STATIC 'RUSUIt( I
                              'olAV! "IlAMUIlS                                                                                        WAVE 'UAMl1(R$

H .. l.O' (H(lCWT Of OIlIGINAL fll[ wAVl) Jot

• 5.At (HlIGH' Of ORIGINAl fR([ WAY£)

f

• t.O SUOMOS ( .... AVt '(1\100) ,
• 9.0 5[(01105 (WAV( 11(11.100) 4 .. l.9 1 (O[,TH fllOH 5T1I.LWAr(ll L!vEl fO TO' 01 'LANT GIlAD!) 4.6.9 1 (O(PTH '11.0" $TIUWAf(A llVEL. TO TOP' 01 'lAN' GRAO(I NON-BREAKING WAVE CONDITION CRS uq 586.

r- 215 I .. LBS./fT.Or .... All(OYNA"" lORC£)

                                                                                                                                                         'Sf (OY"AMIC 'A($SUA()

513.0 510. fOf' or 'LA,Nf ItA

                -                                                                   'OROUS                              -

i flL.L.

                                                                                                                        ~

TOft' 01

                ~

fOftO'

                ~                                   TUII.IlME SUI                                                                   ~                         rU"8IHE SLAB
                ~

lli& ~

                                                                                                                        ~
                                                                                                                                   ;                             5U.
                ~ 556.l             1S.00)LIS./fT.

Ol .... ALL

                                                                                                                        ~  556.9              '0.100 L8S.ln.

or .... ALL (STATIC ro,,([ I (STATIC fOil") rOft' 01 TM' OF 5.. 0......4---:-:1""'00..--"'20"'0.".0--~,;-.-;;:,,;,!or.,p~~~!~LO!. S!!!.. S.. O.OI--1f---""b:o.. o -......,',:,oo"'0----'1,. ",,-;!o--i;~::;>C'-'T"""'-'.'"LA'-'.

                                            'R(SSURl ('Sf)                  (SfAfte 'RU5UII.[1                                                    PRESSUA[ ('SF)                  (STAlIC USUR!)

WAV( PAll.AI'ItT[IlS WAVt PUAMU(RS 7.: ~i~~t~::~:::~rW!~;t H!~~7~) ",. 5.41 U"(AKIHG WAV( HtlGHT)

                                ~_   ],9 1 (eR(AttllfG      ~Af[R     OtllTH)                                                          4._
                                                                                                                                        , * (IHO(ll[HO[NT or WAVE P(RIOOI 6.9 1 (IR(AJ(.IHG ... A1(R OEP""')

BROKEN WAVE CONDITION

                                        ....---l,OOO le5./fT .01 WAll (DYNAMIC lOIlCE)

SIt.6 -9.900 lIS.lfT: Of WALL (DYNAMIC rOAC£) 588 '~=l~53$iisr;;IL~L;;;w.;.:r~":,'~';;":::L~ l.OOO 'SF 516.

                             +-.........!ILlIU:wIUiWUOIJ.._'"T"_ _ __

516.1 (DYNAMIC 'R($StM() S.500 '51 m ..... {OYNAMIC 'IIU5UIt" SlO.O

                                                                                  '01101)5 filL w                                                            'OIlOOS
                                                                                                                        ~           ~                                                  fiLl TOP 01
                                                                                                                        !                                        Tor or fUR"H( $LAB                                                                                              TURBIN[ SLU
                                                      .lI.L.Q                                                                                                         o
                                                                                                                        ~          :::

10,100 LIS.IIT.

                                                                                                                        ~ SU.S                 17.000 LIS.JrT 01 WALL or WALL                                                                                           (SUIIC '01lCE)

(STAIIC rOIKE) lOP 01 10flor 5.. 0*0---t--....."r;;OO~O;--'r;,OOO=---";-". ,.... ""'"i'i':" =' -.-"-'-' 5040.0-l---,~O!;;00;--'r;'O:!;00;:---'\;,."";;.;0"""'.'7: -' -' ' '---"..*..*

                                            'IIUSUllt (PSI)                (SUftC fllI,nSUIIl)                                                   ,RU$UIl( {'SFI                  (SUTIC PIUSSIJA[)
                              ~AV[    'UAMlUltS                                                                                        WAVE 'AIIAH(TtIlS
                              ",. l.O' ('RlAKING ..,AVE H(IGHT)                                                                        t\- 5.4 1 (III(AJ(.IHG ..,AY' H(lGHy) d.-
                               ,

• l.~ 5[(OHOS (WAYE '(RIOO) l.t* (81l[UING WU(R O(llTHI T
• 4.51 SECC>>t05 (WAV( '[RIOO) db- 6.9' (SIIUttING ... AT(A DEPTH)

BREAKING WAVE CONDITION NOTES:

1. ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NYMT, 1935 DATUM

2. 5 PERCENT SLOPE ASSUMED Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-20 WAVE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTIONS AGAINST REACTOR/AUXILIARY BUILDING

CREST OF CLAPOTIS CREST OF CLAPOTIS EL.591.1 k---------------------------------------------------------------~ STILLWATER LEVEL 586.9 r-~-----------------------------------------------S-T-IL~L~W-A~T-E~R~L~E~V~E~L~___ 586.2 p....~- 1245 LBS/FT OF WALL (OYNAMIC FORCE) 585.8 tofIr----"It--- 3950 LBS./FT. OF WALL (DYNAMIC FORCE) TOP OF PLANT GRADE 583.0 I-~...----------------------~~~;..::.:...:;.;,.~:.:.:.:...:.:..::.......--- 580.0t-______~~~--------------------------------------r-------~T~O~P~O~F~P~L~A~N~T~G~R~A~D~E~___ J- 319 PSF (DYNAMIC PRESSURE) POROUS POROUS FILL FILL 563.0 .....- - 40208 LBS./FT. 563.0 k - - - 40208 LBS/FT. OF WALL OF WALL (STATIC FORCE) (STATIC FORCE) EL.557.0 ~ TOP OF RHR SLAB ......lL_____________ ________--I___________..L...__.lL_____________ 551.0~________~~~--------~~~~~T~O-P-O--F-RH~,-R--S-L-A-B--~L-------------______ 1000 2000 2240 1000 2000 2240 PRESSURE (PSF) (STATIC PRESSURE) PRESSURE (PSF) (STATIC PRESSURE) WAVE PARAMETERS WAVE PARAMETERS H = 5.4' (HEIGHT OF ORIGINAL FREE WAVE) H = 3.0' (HEIGHT OF ORIGINAL FREE WAVE) T = 9.0 SECONDS (WAVE PERIOD) T = 9.0 (SECONDS (WAVE PERIOD) d = 6.9' (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF PLANT GRADE) d = 3.9' (DEPTH FROM STILLWATER LEVEL TO TOP OF PLANT GRADE) NON-BREAKING WAVE CONDITION Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-21, SHEET 1 WAVE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AGAINST RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX

WAVE CREST WAVE CREST 590.7 589.0 STILLWATER LEVEL STILLWATER LEVEL 586.9 586.9 TOP OF PLANT GRADE 583.0 TOP OF PLANT GRADE 580.0 POROUS POROUS FILL FILL 564.2 ......- - 49174 LBS./FT. 563.7 14---45049 LBS./FT. OF WALL OF WALL (STATIC FORCE) (STATIC FORCE) 551.0 L.._ _ _ _ _......._ _ _ _ _.......I'--_JL.._TOP __ OF _ RHR __SLAB _ _.1-._ _ _ _ _ __ TOP OF RHR SLAB 551.0 " - -_ _ _ _......._ _ _ _ _ _L...._~~-------- . . . .- 1000 2000 2371 1000 2000 2477 PRESSURE (PSF) (STATIC PRESSURE) PRESSURE (PSF) (STArTiC PRESSURE) WAVE PARAMETERS WAVE PARAMETERS Hb  : 3.0' (BREAKING WAVE HEIGHT) Hb : 5.4 (BREAKING WAVE HEIGHT) T  : (INDEPENDENT OF WAVE PERIOD) T  : (INDEPENDENT OF WAVE PERIOD) db  : 3.9' (BREAKING WATER DEPTH) db : 6.9' (BREAKING WATER DEPTH) BROKEN WAVE CONDITION Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-21, SHEET 2 WAVE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AGAINST RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX

WAVE CREST WAVE CREST 589.6 588.4 STILLWATER LEVEL STILLWATER LEVEL 586.9 586.9 TOP OF PLANT GRADE 583.0 TOP OF PLANT GRADE 580.0 POROUS FILL POROUS FILL 563.91+-- 46487 LBS./FT. 563.51+-- 43641 LBS./FT. OF WALL OF WALL (STATIC FORCE) (STATIC FORCE) TOP OR RHR SLAB 551.0 L-_ _ _ _ _-L_ _ _ _ _ _......_...s.._ _ TOP_ _OF_ RHR _ _SLAB _ _.....L_ _ _ __ 531.0L------~-----~-~L---------~----- 1000 2000 2334 1000 2000 2409 PRESSURE (PSF) (STATIC PRESSURE) PRESSURE (PSF) (STATIC PRESSURE) WAVE PARAMETERS WAVE PARAMETERS Hb = 3.0' (BREAKING WAVE HEIGHT) Hb = 5.4' (BREAKING WAVE HEIGHT) T = 3.4 SECONDS (WAVE PERIOD) T = 4.5 SECONDS (WAVE PERIOD) db = 3.9' (BREAKING WATER DEPTH) db = 6.9 (BREAKING WATER DEPTH) BREAKING WAVE CONDITION Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-21, SHEET 3 WAVE PRESSURE DISTRIBUTION AGAINST RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL COMPLEX

Figure Intentionally Removed Refer to Plant Drawing C-0040 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-22 SHORE BARRIER DESIGN REV 22 04/19

CANADA PATTERNS INDICATE AREAS UNDERLAIN BY ONE OR MORE AQUIFERS GENERALLY CAPABLE OF YEILDING TO A WELL AT LEAST 50 gpm OF WATER CONTAINING NOT MOR THAN 2000 ppm OF DISSOLVED SOLIDS (INCLUDING AREAS WHERE MORE HIGHLY MINERALIZED WATER IS ACTUALLY USEDI. LEGEND: UNCONSOLIDATED AND SEMICONSOLIDATED AQUIFERS ALLUVIAL SAND AND GRAVEL D WATERCOURSE - ALLUVIAL VALLEY TRAVERSED 50 0 90 BY PERENNIAL STREAM FROM WHICH RECHARGE CAN BE INDUCED SCALE, MILES mm SURFICIAL ALLUVIAL VALLEY NO LONGER TRAVERSED BY PERENNIAL STREAM (ABANDONED WATERCOURSEI, OR BURIED ALLUVIAL VALLEY .-----------------------. CONSOLIDATED - ROCK AQUIFERS Fermi 2 r=*:\:q SANDSTONE (INCLUDES SOME SANDI CARBONATE ROCKS (LIMESTONE AND DOLOMITE; LOCALLY INCLUDE GYPSUM) 1----------------------1 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-23 REGIONAL AQUIFER DISTRIBUTION

REFERENCE:

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WATER SUPPLY PAPER NO. 1800, 1963. REV 22 04/19

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  .r ----- .... -                                    \

I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       \

i I I \ I t I I I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            \

I I I I I I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             \

I I I \ [t I I

                                                             -- ..--.----------                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        \        G\',
                                                                     \

I I I I \

                                                                         *,-\                                                                                                                                                                                           I                                         I /

L **;\ I N I I I I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                \        \
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           \

DUMPING / I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 \
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      \\
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      /
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    /
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   /.

GROUND I/ I I \ \

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        *1-\

I I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ,;)
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   \

f \ r j I I \ *, ... i I I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     \

f L __

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ) I I                                    \ ""' \\

I I I \ \ I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   ---                 Ii I                              \  \

If I \ I I t \ I I \ I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              \
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             \
                                                                                                                                                                                                                        ,r--* ..                                                                  i 1
                                                                                                                                                                                                                  /              )                                                              I I

( (__ ,.. , I I \ I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   '*                                                                                 I f_,, \                                               I I I I I f DUMPING/
                                                                                                                                             , ........ ,                                                                                       I I GROUND/
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  + I I

• I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           \.                  L __ -
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ~ _f
                                                                                                                                                         \
                                                                                                                                                                                                                              '"'-- .*\

__ _, _ _ , *. . -*,) I I \ _ c_)

                                                                                                             .*l I

LEGEND: i-.. . .,. MONROE INTAKE

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          -570- ELEVATION OF PIEZOMETRIC A
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 /                                                                      SURFACE DASHED WHERE K            E R

I,./ E INFERRED.

                                                                                              ........                                         /                                                           \                          E
                                                                                                                                            /
                                                                                                                                                                                            .......... ,, .....,. ** .,,r a---....,................ -** ..-*
                                                                                                                                 \ *,
                                                                                                                                          /

t

                                                                                   ,...... -.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  0          I 111&.1
                                                                                 .:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            I
                                                                                                                             ,)                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               I SCALE IN MILES
                                                                                                                                 \. _                                                                                                                                                                                 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-24

REFERENCE:

THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FROM PORTIONS OF THE FOLLOWING U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLES: ESTRAL BEACH, MICHIGAN, 1942, PIEZOMETRIC SURFACE 1961-1966 STONY POINT, MICHIGAN, 1952, ROCKWOOD, MICHIGAN, 1952, AND FLAT ROCK, MICHIGAN, 1952. REV 22 04/19

                               ., . f' I       I I

FERMI UNIT2 LEGEND:

• WELL LOCATION (SEE TABLE 2.4-7 FOR EXPLANATION OF WELL NUMBERING SYSTEM.)

(!)WELL WITH HYDROGRAPH PLOT. Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY NALYSIS REPORT CONTOUR INTERVAL=5 FEET FIGURE 2.4-25 WELL LOCATIONS

REFERENCE:

U.S.G.S. TOPOGRAPHIC QUADRANGLE STONY POINT, MICHIGAN - 1967. REV 22 04/19

                            . 74S        580 171                                              0 10 II                1 IIL 2 2151 LEGEND:

NUMBERS REFER TO NUMBER OF Z S 4 II GROUNDWATER WELLS IN EACH SECTOR. SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.4-26 WATER WELL DISTRIBUTION REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5. GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY The Fermi site is located on the shore of the western end of Lake Erie at Lagoona Beach, Frenchtown Township, Monroe County, Michigan. Geologic and seismic studies of the Fermi site were conducted for Fermi 2 in 1968 and 1969. Detailed foundation studies were performed for the Fermi 2 reactor/auxiliary building in 1969, and rock foundation grouting for these structures was performed in 1970. Detailed foundation studies were performed in 1972 for the Fermi 2 residual heat removal (RHR) complex. Foundation grouting for the RHR complex has been completed. The geologic, seismic, and foundation studies for Fermi 2 were conducted by Dames & Moore (D&M) with the results of a few of the studies presented in the Fermi 2 PSAR. The location of Fermi 2 is shown in Figure 2.4-1. The topography of the site with the location of the principal plant facilities is shown in Figure 2.4-3. The site is located within the Central Stable Region tectonic province of the North American continent. Some regional faulting and seismic activity is known, but the region is characteristically one of relative stability. There are no known faults within 25 miles of the site and there are no capable faults within 200 miles of the site. Approximately 3100 ft of Paleozoic sedimentary rocks overlie the Precambrian basement in the area. Overlying the Paleozoic sedimentary rock strata are Pleistocene soils of glacial origin that are less than 20 ft thick at the site. The site is located on the southeast side of the Michigan Basin. The sedimentary rock strata generally dip to the northwest toward the center of the Michigan Basin. The bedrock immediately underlying the site consists of dolomites of the Bass Islands Group of the Silurian System. The Bass Islands Group is competent dolomite with thin shale beds and is variably fractured and contains some vuggy zones. No geologic conditions are known that could have an adverse effect on the safety of plant facilities. All major Fermi 2 Category I structures are supported in the Bass Islands dolomite. Foundation pressure grouting of the bedrock was performed to improve subsurface conditions. A test blasting program was conducted, and blast monitoring was provided during construction. Criteria for foundation treatment and design were formulated, based on foundation studies performed at the locations of Category I and other major structures. All Category I structures are designed to respond to peak horizontal ground accelerations of the rock surface at foundation levels of 8 and 15 percent of gravity for the operating-basis earthquake (OBE) and safe-shutdown earthquake (SSE), respectively. Site-related response spectra were used to analyze the response of structures to earthquake ground motion. The results of the geologic and seismic studies for Fermi 2 are summarized in Subsections 2.5.1 through 2.5.3. The stability of subsurface materials at the locations of Fermi 2 Category I and major structures is summarized in Subsection 2.5.4. 2.5.1. Basic Geologic and Seismic Information Basic geologic and seismic data were obtained by D&M for the Fermi site from 1968 through 1972 in three major programs:

a. Geologic and seismic studies in 1968 for the Fermi 2 site 2.5-1 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR

b. Foundation studies in 1969 for the reactor/auxiliary building

c. Foundation studies in 1972 for the RHR complex.

The general scope of these studies is outlined in the following paragraphs. The geologic and seismic program of investigation conducted in 1968 at the Fermi site for Fermi 2 (Reference 1) included the following:

a. A thorough review of pertinent geologic literature (published and unpublished) and interviews with university and state geologists

b. A geologic reconnaissance of the site and surrounding area, and a review of maps and aerial photographs

c. Field explorations that were performed to evaluate the geologic and seismologic characteristics of the site, consisting of the following:

1. Geologic test boring program

2. Geologic inspection of the site and surrounding area

3. Geophysical refraction survey

4. Blast monitoring observations

5. Micromotion measurements

6. Borehole geophysical measurements

7. Ground water observations

d. A laboratory soil- and rock-testing program for Fermi 2 was conducted.

In 1969, a comprehensive foundation investigation was performed at the Fermi 2 reactor/auxiliary building and adjacent structures (Reference 2). The field explorations consisted of the following:

a. Test boring program

b. Water pressure testing in selected borings

c. Ground water observations

d. Ground water sampling.

Laboratory testing during this investigation consisted of density and unconfined compression tests on selected rock cores and chemical analyses of ground water. In 1972, a comprehensive foundation investigation was performed at the location of the Fermi 2 RHR complex (Reference 3). The field exploration program consisted of the following:

a. Test boring program

b. Water pressure testing

c. Piezometer installation

d. Geologic reconnaissance.

2.5-2 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Laboratory testing for this investigation consisted of pulsating load triaxial tests, unconfined compression tests, consolidation tests, moisture-density tests on soil samples, and unconfined compression tests on rock cores. Supplementary seismic evaluations were completed for the Fermi 2 site in October 1982 by Weston Geophysical Corporation. These evaluations led to the establishment of facility site specific response spectra that were subsequently used to validate the satisfactory nature of the original facility design-basis earthquake provisions. The site-specific earthquake was characterized in terms of Richter magnitude (from 4.9 to 5.9) and epicentral distance (25 km). Site-specific response spectra were developed from real-time histories for the appropriate magnitude and distance, and foundation conditions similar to the Fermi site. (Weston Geophysical Corporation, Draft Site Specific Response Spectra for Enrico Fermi 2; October 1982.) 2.5.1.1. Regional Geology 2.5.1.1.1. Physiography The Fermi site is located in the northern portion of the midwestern United States in the Central Lowlands Physiographic Province. This physiographic province has been subdivided into eight physiographic sections. Michigan is located in the Eastern Lake Section (Figure 2.5-1). The Eastern Lake Section is characterized by glacial landforms (including end moraines, ground moraines, outwash plains, kames, eskers, and drumlins) and by beach and lacustrine deposits formed during the fluctuations of the Great Lakes. The glacial deposits overlie maturely dissected bedrock cuestas and broad areas of relatively flat-lying bedrock. The bedrock is exposed locally. The bedrock surface was dissected prior to being covered with glacial drift. The rock surface tends to be gently rolling with well-developed valley systems. The Fermi site is located on a lake plain formed during the high-water stages of Lake Erie. There is little topographic relief on the lake plain, which results in poor surface drainage. It has been dissected by eastward-flowing creeks and rivers. The relief on the lake plain within the vicinity of the project area is approximately 25 ft. 2.5.1.1.2. Stratigraphy 2.5.1.1.2.1. Soil Units The soil units in the region include Pleistocene-aged deposits consisting of alluvium, lacustrine materials, peats, tills, outwash, glaciofluvial materials, glaciolacustrine materials, and residual soil. Figure 2.5-2 shows the distribution of surface Pleistocene glacial deposits of the southern peninsula of Michigan and portions of surrounding states. The site area is located in a glaciolacustrine section on the western edge of Lake Erie. The distribution of surface soil units within eastern Monroe County is shown in Figure 2.5-3. The soil deposits in Monroe County range in thickness from 0 to over 150 ft (Reference 4). 2.5-3 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.1.1.2.2. Rock Units The distribution of the rock units that form the bedrock surface within the region is shown in Figure 2.5-4 and the stratigraphic sequence of the various-aged rock units is shown in the legend. The rock units in the Michigan Basin consist of sedimentary strata of Jurassic, Pennsylvanian, Mississippian, Devonian, Silurian, Ordovician, and Cambrian ages, as well as an igneous and/or metamorphic complex of Precambrian-aged rocks. The sedimentary sequence in the Monroe County area includes Devonian- through Cambrian-aged strata. The local distribution of these strata is shown in Figure 2.5-5. These strata consist of 2500 to 3500 ft of limestones, dolomites, sandstones, and shales. The Precambrian basement in southeastern Michigan consists of crystalline rocks of igneous and metamorphic origin (Reference 4) and occurs at a depth of about 3100 ft. 2.5.1.1.3. Structural Geology The Fermi site is located within the Central Stable Region tectonic province of the North American continent. This tectonic province is characterized by a thick sequence of sedimentary strata overlying the Precambrian basement. The Precambrian basement is exposed in Wisconsin, Minnesota, and the upper peninsula of Michigan. During Paleozoic and early Mesozoic time, the area was subjected to a series of vertical crustal movements that formed broad basins and arches. The arches and basins have been modified by local folding and faulting. Major geologic structures are shown in Figures 2.5-6 and 2.5-7. The relation between structures and gravimetric and magnetic anomalies is discussed in Subsection 2.5.1.1.5.2. 2.5.1.1.3.1. Folding The distribution of major folds in the region is shown in Figure 2.5-6 and the characteristics of these folds are presented in Table 2.5-1. The Fermi site is located on the southeast side of the Michigan Basin, which corresponds to the northwest flank of the northeast-trending Findlay Arch. Ells (Reference 5) has proposed the name "Washtenaw Anticlinorium" to describe a broad northwesterly plunging structure in southeast Michigan that is composed of several smaller folds. This broad structural feature covers about 4500 square miles within Michigan and continues into Ohio, Ontario, and Lake Erie. Local structures within this broad structurally high region include the Howell Anticline, the Freedom Anticline, and the Lucas Monocline. The northwest-trending Howell Anticline is located north and northwest of the project area. The northwest-trending Freedom Anticline is located west of the project area, and the north-to-northwest-trending Lucas Monocline lies southeast of the project area and along the projected trend of the Bowling Green Fault. The direction and amount of regional dip of the strata in south-eastern Michigan are variable. In the vicinity of the site, the strata dip northwest toward the Michigan Basin at 0.5° or less (Reference 4). The Howell Anticline approaches to within about 25 miles north of the site and extends approximately 80 miles to the northwest. The northwest-southeast-trending fold is located on the southeast flank of the Michigan Basin and has a maximum structural relief, in the early Paleozoic rocks, of about 1000 ft (Reference 22 in Reference 5). The relief is less 2.5-4 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR pronounced in the younger strata. It has been suggested that faulting is associated with the Howell Anticline (References 5, 6, and 7) as discussed in Subsection 2.5.1.1.3.2. The Lucas Monocline is a north-to-northwest-trending series of folds in southeastern Michigan located approximately 30 miles southwest of the site. It has been inferred by Ells (Reference 5) that the Lucas Monocline may connect with or be associated with the Bowling Green Fault, which is mapped in northwest Ohio (References 6 and 8). Other researchers (Reference 9) have inferred that the Lucas Monocline is actually a fault structure. The folds bend northwestward in southern Michigan where they join the Freedom Anticline. The early Paleozoic rocks in this folded area have a maximum structural relief on the order of 500 ft. The Chatham Sag (References 5 and 10) is a broad, gentle northwest-trending syncline that has been mapped as far south as the north shore of Lake Erie. The axis of the syncline lies about 50 miles northeast of the site. The Chatham Sag crosses the Findlay-Algonquin Arch System and is virtually unrecognizable in the early Paleozoic strata. A system of small faults, the most prominent of which is the Electric Fault, is associated with this structure. Several small earthquakes have occurred near the juncture of the Findlay, Cincinnati, and Kankakee Arches. These earthquakes cannot be associated with any known structures, but are believed to have occurred along a zone of structural weakness that separates the three arches. A portion of the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) tectonic map of the United States is shown in Figure 2.5-8. This map shows the detail of some of the structural features in the Michigan Basin area. 2.5.1.1.3.2. Faulting The distribution of major faults in the region is shown in Figure 2.5-7, and their characteristics are presented in Table 2.5-2. The Bowling Green, Electric, Tekonsha Trend, and Albion-Scipio Trend faults are the four major faults within 100 miles of the project area. The Bowling Green Fault is located approximately 35 miles southwest of the site. It has been inferred by some workers (Reference 9) that faulting extends northward into southeast Michigan. Some (Reference 5) have inferred that major faulting is not present in this area in Michigan and have interpreted the structure to be a result of folding. Others (Reference 11) believe no major faulting to be affiliated with the structure at all, and interpret it as being a monocline. Since the very existence of the fault is in question, no clear-cut evidence is available that would either indicate age of last movement or definition of the fault. For purposes of conservatism, the Bowling Green structure is assumed to be a fault. The fault is not believed to extend into Michigan (Reference 12). The evidence available for faulting is described as follows (Reference 7): A drop by faulting of more than 200 feet in the top of the Trenton Limestone is indicated between well locations in the vicinity of Findlay, Cygnet, and Bowling Green, Ohio. The fault which is down-thrown on the west extends northward and connects with the Lucas County (Ohio) - Monroe County (Michigan) monocline. 2.5-5 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Thus, the only evidence of the age of last faulting is Middle Ordovician (based upon evidence in the Trenton Limestone). Evidence of faulting along the west flank of the Howell Anticline has been presented (References 7 and 13) and it has been suggested that total vertical displacement may be as much as 1000 ft (Reference 13). The type of faulting, amount of displacement, and orientation have not been absolutely determined. More recent work (Reference 5) has revealed that faults of major displacement are not believed to exist in connection with the immediate west flank of the Howell Anticline and it is shown that, although minor faulting may have occurred along the west flank or across the structure, it is not of the magnitude generally described by earlier investigators. Developments of the Howell Anticline associated with major faulting may have begun as early as Late Ordovician and continued throughout most of the Paleozoic. If the presence of Jurassic-aged rock in the Michigan Basin is considered, developments may have taken place as late as Cretaceous time. The age of last faulting within the State of Michigan, however, appears to be Paleozoic (Reference 14). A system of faults located 45 miles northeast of the site is associated with the Chatham Sag. The Electric Fault in this fault system has a reported maximum vertical displacement of 300 ft (Reference l5). Maximum displacements of less than 100 ft have been reported for other faults in this system (Reference 15). Faulting has been postulated along the Tekonsha oil field structure, and several small seismic events have been tentatively correlated to these. The structure trends northwest-southeast for an inferred length of 60 miles. Only limited, minor structural indications of this fault have been recorded. The age of the faulting in the southeastern portion of the Michigan Basin is assumed to be Ordovician, although some evidence exists of minor movement in post-Ordovician time (Ells, personal communication). The Keweenawan-Lake Owen Fault System lies northwest of the Michigan Basin, approximately 430 miles northwest of the site. It has a northeast trend on the Keweenawan Peninsula in Lake Superior. Vertical displacements on this fault system of a few thousand feet to more than 9000 ft are known (Reference l6). This fault system is not associated with the Michigan Basin. The Rough Creek-Kentucky River Fault System in southern Illinois and central Kentucky is approximately 350 miles south of the site. 2.5.1.1.3.3. Pop-up and Affiliated Structural Features Pop-up features in bedrock have been identified in various parts of western New York State, and in Canada. The existence of several of these features has been documented (Reference

17) in various parts of the North American continent and their existence has been attributed to the release of postglacial horizontal compressive stresses. In addition to occurring in regions where activities of Man have been limited, these and affiliated phenomena have been seen in man-made structures such as excavations into bedrock.

2.5-6 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Actual pop-ups have not been noted in southeastern Michigan or adjacent portions of Ohio, Indiana, or Canada, but surficial folding of Devonian shales has been observed in northwestern Ohio. Although pop-ups have not been specifically documented in the site region, pop-ups or "heave" are fairly common occurrences in quarries in a wide range of localities due to a reduction of lithostatic load. The small mound-like features noted during the mapping of excavation at the site are believed to be of organic origin. During the excavation process, no rockbursts, pop-ups, or heaves were seen. This can be attributed to a lack of compressive stresses as described in Reference 17 and insufficient depth of excavation to reduce lithostatic loading sufficiently to cause such features to occur. 2.5.1.1.4. Ground Water In the region surrounding the site, ground water aquifers are present in two types of material: glacial outwash deposits and Paleozoic bedrock. An expanded discussion of regional ground water conditions is found in Subsection 2.4.13. 2.5.1.1.5. Geologic History 2.5.1.1.5.1. General The study of geologic history provides an insight as to the tectonic stability of a region and a better understanding of stratigraphic relationships between various soil and rock units. It also furnishes correlative data that assist in the interpretation of events in adjacent regions. An accurate interpretation of geologic history is the result of years of cumulative effort. It is based on numerous examinations of soil and rock units in exposures, and from borings with regard to lithology and fossil content. The generalized stratigraphic succession and the distribution of the bedrock units in Michigan are presented in Figure 2.5-4. They are composite in nature. The entire series of stratigraphic units is not likely to be encountered at any given locality; however, it is a graphic illustration of the changing geologic history. Individual time units are discussed in the following paragraphs, and the tectonic and structural features mentioned are shown in Figures 2.5-6 and 2.5-7. 2.5.1.1.5.2. Precambrian The basement rocks of Michigan are Precambrian in age. They include granite, felsic and mafic gneiss, volcanics, metavolcanics, metasediments, mafic volcanics, and mafic intrusives (Reference 18). Radiometric dates range from approximately 600 to 3500 million years (Reference 19). These rocks represent a complex series of geologic events that include sedimentation, uplift and erosion, subsidence and deposition, mountain building, volcanism, and igneous intrusions followed by erosion, which have produced an irregular surface upon which the overlying Paleozoic sediments have been unconformably deposited. The regional Bouguer gravity map (Figure 2.5-9) and the regional magnetic map (Figure 2.5-

10) of the Southern Peninsula of Michigan substantiate the conclusion that the basement 2.5-7 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR rocks are both structurally and lithologically complex. The Mid-Michigan Anomaly, the dominant feature of the gravity map and to a lesser degree of the magnetic map, has been interpreted by Hinze (Reference 20) as originating from the mafic rocks of Keweenawan age similar to those that outcrop in the Lake Superior region. This feature consists of a positive gravity anomaly and a correlative magnetic high. Pirtle (Reference 21) states, "...it is believed that the principal folds now existing in the later sediments are controlled by trends of folding or lines of structural weakness which existed in the basement rocks." This opinion is still the prevalent one shared by most workers (Reference 20). The most obvious example of this correlation is the alignment of the Washtenaw Anticlinorium with the Mid-Michigan Anomaly in Washtenaw and Livingston Counties. 2.5.1.1.5.3. Cambrian At the beginning of the Cambrian Period, a mountainous belt extended across most of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Erosion of topographic highs dominated while clastic sediments accumulated in the surrounding lowlands. Paleozoic deposition in southern Michigan began when Late Cambrian seas spread across the interior of the continent, depositing clean sandstones, dolomites, and limestones characteristic of shallow, clear seas with bordering land masses of low relief. The accumulation of sediments in the Michigan Basin originated with Late Cambrian subsidence. During this period of geologic history, the Michigan and Illinois Basins were not separated. This early, undifferentiated basin is known as the Eastern Interior Basin. 2.5.1.1.5.4. Ordovician The Ordovician was the period during which Paleozoic seas became fully established in Michigan. The variable nature of the rocks in southern Michigan, as revealed by deep-boring data, suggests fluctuating marine conditions. Deposition of Lower Ordovician dolomite and sandstone indicates that seas were present in the Lower Peninsula while absent in the Upper Peninsula. Two regressions of the sea during the Ordovician are indicated by unconformities within the sedimentary sequence of southern Michigan, one at the top of the Prairie du Chien Group during the Early Ordovician and the other at the top of the Eden Group during the Late Ordovician. 2.5.1.1.5.5. Silurian Seas persisted in Michigan from Ordovician into Silurian time. Apparently, the entire state was occupied by offshore waters so that the Silurian marine deposits in Michigan are mainly chemical precipitates formed in clear seas. Locally, shallow banks supported reefs. It is believed that coral reef formations along the margins of the Michigan Basin effectively isolated the basin area from the main marine body and formed an evaporation basin. Great accumulations of Silurian salt, anhydrite, and gypsum were formed. The Silurian was a time of accelerated downwarping of the Michigan Basin. Slight expressions of the Findlay and Kankakee Arches are seen in the Upper Silurian sediments in the southeast and southwest corners of Michigan, respectively. 2.5-8 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Near the close of the Silurian Period, the seas withdrew from the Michigan Basin. 2.5.1.1.5.6. Devonian During Early Devonian time, the southeastern portion of the Michigan Basin was subjected to erosion and/or nondeposition. To the north and northwest, however, marine sedimentation continued. By Middle Devonian time, the Michigan Basin was fully occupied by the sea, which deposited limestones and, finally, shales in a relatively shallow-water environment. 2.5.1.1.5.7.Mississippian Marine waters that existed since Middle Devonian time continued into Early Mississippian time. Alternating shales, siltstones, and sandstones are representative of sediments of Mississippian age. Tilting of the Michigan Basin area is believed to have occurred in Early Mississippian time, resulting in a marked expression of the Findlay Arch and possibly the northeast-southwest trending folds in the central portion of the Michigan Basin. Toward the close of Early Mississippian time, a major regression of the sea maintained much of southern Michigan as a near-shore and beach environment. Middle Mississippian rocks are absent, which indicates that either there was no deposition due to a complete withdrawal of the sea from Michigan, or there was deposition and subsequent erosion. Upper Mississippian deposits indicate a transgression of the sea. Some evaporite deposits similar to those found in Silurian sediments are present. Near the close of the period, the seas freshened and limestone was deposited. In latest Mississippian time, the Michigan Basin was subjected to uplifting and folding that involved the Precambrian basement features. This activity produced many of the structures in Paleozoic rocks of the Michigan Basin in which gas and oil later accumulated (References 19 and 22). 2.5.1.1.5.8. Pennsylvanian The pattern of alternating sedimentation established during the Mississippian Period continued into Pennsylvanian time and reached its peak with a characteristic cyclical sedimentation of alternating marine, brackish-water, and terrestrial deposits. Organic accumulation in the brackish-water swamps formed widespread coal beds. From Pennsylvanian time to the Pleistocene Epoch, the area remained above sea level. Erosion prevailed in post-Pennsylvanian time with the exception of some terrestrial sandstone and shale deposition during the Jurassic Period. The entire Mesozoic Era was relatively inactive, although broad uplift and some erosion did occur. Minor fault activity is believed to have taken place along the Keweenawan Fault System into Cretaceous time. 2.5-9 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Geologic evidence suggests that southern Michigan existed as a low stable land mass for over 200,000,000 years, while the Appalachian Mountains, Rocky Mountains, and other structural features in North America were being formed or were undergoing additional movements. 2.5.1.1.5.9. Jurassic The geologic record is almost completely missing from the end of Pennsylvanian time until the Pleistocene. The only rocks representing this long span of time are some sedimentary strata that for many years were referred to simply as "red beds." Their age was long uncertain but was thought to be Pennsylvanian. Early maps showed them as such. In recent years, fossilized microscopic plant spores have been found in well samples from the red beds. They have been identified as being Late Jurassic in age (Reference 19). Surface exposures of the rocks have not been found, and their presence beneath the glacial drift has been demonstrated only by well samples. The Jurassic red beds are normally about 100 ft thick, but in places attain thicknesses of 300 to 400 ft (References 19 and 22). The rock consists mainly of sandstone, shale, and clay, with minor beds of limestone and gypsum. 2.5.1.1.5.10. Pleistocene Glaciation began during Pleistocene time some 1,000,000 years ago. In general, four distinct glacial advances are recognized throughout North America during this division of geologic history. From oldest to youngest, these are known as the Nebraskan, Kansan, Illinoian, and Wisconsinan glacial stages. There is positive evidence in Michigan for only the Wisconsinan glacial advance. However, Illinoian and Kansan glacial deposits are found to the south of Michigan in Ohio and Indiana. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that Michigan was overridden by at least these two earlier advances as well (Reference 19). The Wisconsinan glacial deposits blanket large portions of Michigan (Figure 2.5-2). These deposits represent a complex series of ice lobes that advanced and retreated a number of times. The ice sheets modified the Great Lakes basin and are responsible for almost all of the present-day surface topography. 2.5.1.2. Site Geology 2.5.1.2.1. Physiography The site area (Figure 2.4-3) is located on a featureless lacustrine plain (Figure 2.4-1) along the western shore of Lake Erie. The plain was formed during the high-water stages of Lake Erie. It is essentially flat lying and generally poorly drained, but it has been slightly dissected along Swan Creek, which flows into Lake Erie at the northern edge of the Fermi site. The plain slopes gently to the east. The average elevation of the lacustrine plain is about 660 ft above mean sea level, or approximately 90 ft above mean lake level. The relief within the site boundaries is approximately 9 ft. 2.5-10 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.1.2.2. Stratigraphy 2.5.1.2.2.1. Soil Units Local sand deposits are encountered in an old channel of Swan Creek at the north end of the site, and in the barrier beach, which forms the shoreline of Lake Erie at the site. Other sand deposits are encountered offshore. The maximum thickness of sand encountered in the lake is 25 ft. More recent surficial deposits of silt, peat, and clay are encountered in the lower, swampy areas at the site. A compact, relatively impermeable till mantles the rock throughout the site area. Occasional boulders, up to 3 ft in diameter, are encountered near the bedrock surface. The till is approximately l4 ft thick and is overlain by about 7 ft of impermeable stratified lacustrine clay. Approximately 5 ft of lacustrine peaty silts and clay had been removed from the site area at the time of the Fermi 2 foundation investigation. The surface of glacial till was exposed at an average elevation of 566 ft, which is approximately 6 ft below the water surface of adjacent Lake Erie. The till consists of nearly impermeable silty to sandy clays with varying amounts of gravel and cobbles. The thickness of the till deposit on top of bedrock within the immediate Fermi 2 plant area, as determined from the borings, ranges from a minimum of 8 ft to a maximum of 15.5 ft, and has an average thickness of approximately 14 ft. Wider variations may be present since both the upper and lower surfaces of the till are erosional surfaces. 2.5.1.2.2.2. Rock Units The bedrock strata in the site area range in age from Silurian to Precambrian as shown in Figure 2.5-11. The bedrock surface is shown in Figure 2.5-12. A total of 40 test borings were drilled at the site for Fermi 2 detailed foundation studies. The locations of these borings are shown in Figures 2.5-13 and 2.5-14. The deepest boring at the site extended 109 ft into the Unit C bed of the Salina Group. Relationships between the units encountered during the drilling program are shown in the subsurface sections, Figures 2.5-15 through 2.5-20. The description of the stratigraphic units below Unit C of the Salina Group is based on published reports. The estimated thicknesses of these deeper units are based on logs of boreholes drilled in the general area and on interpretation of structural geologic maps of the general area. Bass Islands Group - Dolomite of the Bass Islands Group forms the uppermost bedrock stratum at the site and overlies the Salina Group. In the borings at Fermi 2, the Bass Islands dolomite is a gray-brown, thinly bedded rock of dense, finely crystalline character. Black shale partings about 1/8 in. in thickness are interspersed throughout the dolomite at spacings of about 4 in. Both the dolomite bedding and the shale partings are essentially horizontal. Occasional soft gray clay seams between 1/4 in. and 8 in. in thickness occur at random in the dolomite and are usually associated with fractured zones and vugs. Two marker beds in the Bass Islands Group were penetrated by the borings and have been correlated throughout the site. The upper marker bed is an oolitic dolomite ranging from 1.8 to 3.5 ft in thickness. The lower marker bed is a soft black shale. Recovered thickness of the shale among the several 2.5-11 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR borings ranges from 0.2 to 1.2 ft; however, its in-place thickness is greater than the amounts recovered. Fractures are present to a variable degree in the Bass Islands Group; joints are relatively tight and discontinuous, and usually display only very minor solution activity. The dominant trends of joints are N45°-60°W and N40°-50°E and are nearly vertical in dip (Reference 23). Where the rock is densely fractured, intervals have closely spaced joints that form fragmented zones. Fractures are oriented from 0° (horizontal) to 90° (vertical), and the thickness and depths of these zones are variable throughout the site. The fragmented zones range in thickness from a few inches to as much as 4.5 ft, and average about 1 ft. Small vugs are present throughout the Bass Islands Group. They range from barely visible to 2 in. in maximum dimension. The amount of open space created by vugs ranges from about 0 to 30 percent of the total rock mass, with an average of 5 percent to 10 percent. Numerous vugs are also present which are lined with crystals of the mineral celestite. Fractures connect some of the vuggy zones, which increases the permeability to the rock mass. The thickness of the Bass Islands Group, where fully penetrated by the borings, increases from 13.5 ft at boring 20 where part has been removed by erosion, to 101 ft at boring 201 (Figures 2.5-13 and 2.5-14). Salina Group - The Salina Group at the site is subdivided into five beds referred to as:

a. Unit G, shales and argillaceous dolomite

b. Unit E, argillaceous dolomite

c. Unit C, dolomite

d. Unit A-2, dolomite

e. Unit A-1, dolomite.

Borings at the site encountered only the lower portion of the Bass Islands Group and extended as deep as Unit C of the Salina. Beds of the Salina Group in the site area consist of alternating layers of dark gray dolomite and shale. The maximum thickness of Salina Group strata penetrated during drilling was 224 ft in boring 79. None of the borings passed through the Salina Group into lower strata. Some brecciation was noted at the Bass Islands-Salina contact. No salt beds were encountered in the vicinity of the site. Figure 2.5-21 is an isopach map of the Salina salt beds in southeastern Michigan. Salt present in Wayne County thins to the south and is absent in Monroe County. The only salt underlying the site is an insignificant quantity in the form of very small salt crystals (1/16-in. in diameter) disseminated through several feet of a dense dolomite in the Unit G, E, and C formations. The shale intervals of the Salina Group, as observed in recovered core, range from soft to hard and from 0.01 ft to 2.2 ft in thickness. Gray clay seams in the sequence are soft and occur predominantly in fractured and vuggy zones, and are responsible for the lower percentages of core recovery. The vugs are sedimentary features caused by decay of fossil matter or other depositional and consolidation features and do not indicate karst conditions at the site. Little of this material was recovered during drilling, but the maximum clay thicknesses are believed not to exceed 1 ft. 2.5-12 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Unit G - Unit G directly overlies Unit E and consists of gray, hard and soft shales, dolomitic shales, and argillaceous dolomites with occasional traces of anhydrite. Unit G was observed to be about 60 ft thick at the site. Unit E - Unit E, which directly overlies Unit C, consists of gray to brownish-gray, vuggy, shaly dolomite, dolomitic limestone, and limestone breccias. All vugs encountered in the borings were less than 2 in. in diameter. Due to the vugged zones, the unit is highly permeable and shows minor artesian ground water flow. Unit E is uniformly about 60 ft thick in the vicinity of the site. Unit C - Unit C directly overlies the A-2 dolomite unit and consists of a buff to gray, hard, thin- to medium-bedded dolomite with thin seams of shaly dolomite and anhydrite. Generally, anhydrite layers were less than 6 in. in thickness and the thickest layer encountered was a 6-ft layer in boring 209 at approximate Elevation 295 ft. The base of Unit C was not penetrated in the borings drilled for this study. Unit C is estimated to be about 140 ft thick at the site. Units A-2 and A The A-2 and A-1 units are buff-white to brownish-gray, very finely to finely crystalline dolomite. Stylolites, argillaceous thin layers, and partings are present. Although the test borings at the site did not go as deep as the A units, the units are considered to be present below the site. Niagaran Group - The Niagaran Group consists of buff, gray, and light brown, fossiliferous, finely to coarsely crystalline dolomite. This group is stratigraphically equivalent to the Clinton and Guelph-Lockport Groups of southeastern Ontario, and has an estimated thickness of 425 ft near the site (Reference 24). Cataract Group - This group is a buff to gray, fossiliferous dolomite with thin layers and partings of green to gray shale. Traces of pyrite and glauconite are present. Estimated thickness near the site, based on Michigan well logs, is 100 ft. Richmond Group - The Richmond Group contains approximately 625 ft of shale and dolomite, based on Monroe County well logs. The shale is gray to green with some brick-red units throughout the section. Dolomite occurs as stringers within the shale and as gray to buff, fossiliferous beds containing red and gray shale seams. Trenton-Black River Group - The Trenton Group is generally undivided in subsurface from the underlying Black River Group. These rocks consist of gray-brown to buff, fossiliferous dolomite and dolomitic limestone with noticeable oil stains and gas shows. Estimated thickness near the site is 825 to 850 ft. Several thin layers of metabentonitic clay occur within a 1-ft zone at the bottom of the Trenton Group. These layers have been noticed in drillers' logs of Monroe County and are discussed by Hussey (Reference 25). The Trenton-Black River Group unconformably overlies the St. Croixan Series at the site due to the local absence of Lower Ordovician deposits (Reference 16). St. Croixan Series - The St. Croixan Series comprises dolomite, sandstone, and minor amounts of shale in approximately 475 ft of section. The dolomite is buff, white to gray, slightly glauconitic, finely crystalline, and occasionally shaly. The dolomite occurs in the upper section of the series and is underlain by buff, white to gray, fine- to coarse-grained sandstone. Gray shale layers occur throughout the sandstone as partings or more uncommonly as beds several feet in thickness. 2.5-13 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Precambrian - The Precambrian basement is a metamorphic-igneous complex composed of granite and granitic gneiss (Reference l8). Estimated depth near the site to the Precambrian rock is about 3100 ft. 2.5.1.2.3. Structural Geology The borings have not disclosed faulting at the site. Differential elevations in the bedrock strata were investigated and are interpreted as a shallow synclinal fold. The axis of the fold trends approximately N60°W and passes through the Fermi 2 area, as shown in Figures 2.5-22 and 2.5-23. The strata dip toward the axis of the fold at about 4° and 1.5° to the north and south sides, respectively. The axis of the synclinal fold plunges to the northwest at about 1.5°. Several marker beds were used to trace the folding and to determine the configuration and continuity of the rock structures. The primary marker bed used was the lower oolitic horizon in the Bass Islands dolomite. Other marker beds were a thin continuous shale seam within the Bass Islands Group, and the contact between the Bass Islands Group and the Salina Group. Small local folds of the shale, encountered at the site area, are quite common in southeastern Michigan and are not necessarily related to regional tectonic trends. Many have been detected through oil and gas exploration in Monroe and Wayne Counties. 2.5.1.2.3.1. Jointing The Bass Islands dolomite is highly jointed. The vertical joints range from open to closed. Some are filled with gypsum, anhydrite, or selenite. The nature of this jointing has been observed in excavations for Fermi 2 and in a quarry located less than 1 mile west of Fermi 2. This quarry has been allowed to fill with water, and excavations for Fermi 2 have been filled so that observation of these joints has been obliterated. Nevertheless, mapping of the joints has been accomplished in the excavation for the reactor/auxiliary buildings (Reference 24) and more recently in the excavation for the RHR complex. Mapping of the excavation for the reactor/auxiliary building indicated trends of N45°-60°W and N60°-50°E. The RHR complex excavation exhibits joint trends of N21°-35°W and N54°-72°E. Quantity and degree of openness of jointing tends to decrease with depth in all excavations encountered at the site. 2.5.1.2.3.2. Folding The regional structure at the site indicates a northwest dip of less than 0.5°. Local warpings superimposed on the regional dip are known to be present. Contour maps drawn using the base of an oolitic horizon marker bed within the Bass Islands Group indicate a shallow synclinal fold (Figures 2.5-22 and 2.5-23). The axis of the fold trends approximately N60°W and passes through the Fermi 2 area, as shown in Figures 2.5-22 and 2.5-23. The fold is asymmetrical and the strata on the northeast side dip southwest at about 4°. The strata on the southwest side dip northeast at about 1.5°. The axis of the syncline plunges northwest at about 1.5°. A small anticlinal feature superimposed on this shallow synclinal fold is indicated on Figure 2.5-23 on the basis of boring data. During the course of mapping of the 2.5-14 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR excavation, this feature was also observed. It was noted that, in general, foundation surface bedding planes are higher in the east-central region of the excavation and gently dip to the south, west, and north, implying a slight doming of the bedding planes in this region of the excavation. 2.5.1.2.3.3. Faulting There are no reported faults within 25 miles of the site. All reported regional faults are tabulated in Table 2.5-2 and are shown in Figure 2.5-7. 2.5.1.2.4. Ground Water The surficial deposits at the site consist of low-permeability glacial till, lacustrine clay, and peat. Some fine sand is present along the shoreline of Lake Erie. The surficial deposits locally act as a confining layer above the Paleozoic bedrock aquifer, and a slight artesian pressure exists at the site. More detailed information on ground water conditions at the site is found in Subsections 2.4.13 and 2.5.4.6. The rate of flow of artesian ground water was noted at varying depths during the 1968 and 1969 boring operations for Fermi 2 Category I structures and is shown in Table 2.5-3. Similarly, any noticeable odor of hydrogen sulfide gas was noted. These observations are presented on the boring logs. Chemical analyses of ground water were made and the results are given in Subsection 2.5.4.6. 2.5.1.2.5. Geologic History The geologic history of the region is discussed in Subsection 2.5.1 and includes the history as represented by the geologic units from the Precambrian to the Pleistocene. At the site, the borings penetrated only the Middle and Early Silurian rocks (Niagaran and Cayugan Series) indicated on the site stratigraphic column, Figure 2.5-11. The presence of Precambrian, Cambrian, and Ordovician rocks underlying the Silurian sequence shown on the legend of the regional geologic map, Figure 2.5-4, has been proven by borings in areas adjacent to the site, and these rocks are probably present at the site. Those portions of the regional geologic history that are applicable to the site are the Precambrian, Cambrian, Ordovician, Silurian, and Pleistocene. 2.5.1.2.6. Hydrocarbon Production and Subsurface Gas Storage Potential Neither hydrocarbon production nor subsurface gas storage is believed to have great potential within the site vicinity. 2.5.1.2.6.1. Hydrocarbon Production Potential As mentioned in Subsection 2.5.1.2.2.2, oil stains and gas shows have been noted in the Trenton-Black River Group of Middle Ordovician age. The Trenton-Black River Group does hold distinct possibilities for future hydrocarbon production. Virtually all Ordovician hydrocarbons have come from the eight-county area which includes Monroe and surrounding counties. Of this production, the AlbionScipio Trend, which crosses Calhoun, Hillsdale, and Jackson Counties, accounts for nearly 74 2.5-15 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR percent of the productive drilled acreage and most of the cumulative Ordovician hydrocarbons (Reference 26). The eight-county area has been analyzed for hydrocarbon yield per square mile and has been thought to have been adequately drilled to assess its future potential. Ells (Reference 26) says: For the purpose of estimating the amount of undiscovered hydrocarbons in the Middle Ordovician Trenton-Black River rocks, it is assumed that the eight-county area has been completely explored, that no additional fields will be found and that the total production from this area amounted to 92,694,457 bbl. From this standpoint, although the majority of Ordovician oil is presently obtained from this eight-county area and primarily from the Albion-Scipio Trend, significant future hydrocarbon development is unlikely and the remainder of the Michigan Basin holds more promise for increased future development. 2.5.1.2.6.2. Subsurface Gas Storage Potential Subsurface storage of gas has been successfully carried out in the State of Michigan and has been largely restricted to converted gas fields. The nearest such field that has been used for subsurface storage of gas is the Northville Field in Wayne County. Other fields affiliated with subsurface gas storage are found in St. Clair and Macomb Counties at some distance from the site. Monroe, Lenawee, and Washtenaw Counties and most of Wayne County are not considered prime candidates for gas storage. Increased gas storage is far more likely in regions of converted gas fields (Reference 27). This would preclude any great potential for subsurface storage of gas in isolated anticlinal structures as may occur in the site region. 2.5.1.2.7. Engineering Geology Geologic conditions at the site are considered satisfactory for the support of the foundations of the Fermi 2 facilities. The foundations for all Category I structures are established into the Bass Islands dolomite beneath the glacial till and lacustrine deposits. Fracturing is present to a variable degree in the Bass Islands Group. It ranges from sparse to dense. In the former case, the fractures occur as singular, isolated structures of different lengths and orientations. Other intervals are characterized by closely spaced fractures that form fragmented zones. The fragmented zones range in thickness from a few inches to as much as 4.5 ft. They average about 1 ft in thickness. The thicknesses and depths of these zones are variable. Occasionally they occur at similar elevations, but the extent of lateral continuity is difficult to ascertain. Vuggy zones are present throughout the Bass Islands Group and range from barely visible size to 2 in. in maximum dimension. The amount of open space created by vugs ranges as high as 30 percent of the total rock mass with an average of 5 percent to 10 percent. Fractures connect some of the vuggy zones, the connections thereby increasing the permeability of the rock mass. Comprehensive subsurface explorations, careful inspection of all excavations, and monitoring of foundation grouting (Subsection 2.5.4) ensure that no cavities of 2.5-16 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR detrimental size underlie the plant structures. Several sinkholes are known in Whiteford, Bedford, and Ida Townships of Monroe County (about 15 to 20 miles from the site), but none are reported or have been encountered in the site area (Reference 4). Nearly all occur in rocks of the Detroit River Group, which lie stratigraphically above the Bass Islands Group and are not present at the site. A study of older published reports of drillers' logs and of four modern reports, including detailed study of well logs and cuttings conducted by Eschman, indicates that no salt deposits underlie the Fermi site (Reference l). Figure 2.5-21 indicates the thickness of salt deposits in the Salina Group in southeastern Michigan. The contours shown represent points of equal thickness. The 0 isopach line or contour, therefore, represents the outer margin of the salt beds. The Fermi site is outside the salt area. The nearest occurrence of salt is shown to be about 10 to 15 miles north of the site. There is no solution mining within 17 miles of the site and the local geology indicates that there is no likelihood of future solution-mining activity in the site area, because minable salt does not occur within 15 miles. The closest reported salt-mining operation was in Wayne County about 17 miles north-northeast of the Fermi site (Reference 28). This is the same general area of current active mining operations that was studied in detail in the D&M report of the River Rouge Generating Plant site (Reference 29). Accidental gas blowouts, associated with oil and gas exploration activity, have occurred to the north in the region (Reference 30). In blowouts, gas has been known to travel several miles along permeable horizons from the source well and cause damage in the outcrop area of the permeable stratum. However, there is no anticipated danger of gas blowouts at the site since the highest relatively permeable stratum in the area is the Salina E formation, which outcrops beyond the shoreline in Lake Erie. The results of ground water chemical analyses show that ground water at the site contains concentrations of sulfates that are potentially deleterious to portland cement, concrete, or grout. The potential for sulfates affecting cement, concrete, or grout stems from their chemical composition. When certain alumina-bearing compounds are present in the cement of a hardened concrete, its exposure to water containing sulfate ions results in the formation of ettringite, accompanied by a volumetric expansion within the fabric of the hardened paste, which can result in disruption of the gel structure. Hence, for concretes that will be exposed to sulfate containing soils or waters, low tricalcium aluminate (3 CaO*A12O3) cements are often specified (Reference 31). For this reason, Type V, modified Type II, and Canadian Standards Association (CSA) A5-1971 cement was used for grouting and for all subsurface concrete construction that would come into contact with the ground water. Since there is no known tricalcium aluminate present within the Category I crushed-rock backfill and it is not bonded like a concrete or cement grout, there would be no similar deleterious effect upon the crushed-rock backfill. Consolidation characteristics are described in Subsection 2.5.4. 2.5-17 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.1.2.8. Test Borings Geologic borings were drilled at the Fermi 2 site in 1968, 1969, and 1972 to determine the details of the lithology, structure, and physical properties of the subsurface strata. Borings were drilled in l970 to determine static and dynamic soil and rock properties. The borings range in depth from 12.1 to 324.7 ft below the ground surface and were drilled at the locations indicated in Figures 2.5-13 and 2.5-14. Detailed descriptions of the soil and rock encountered in the borings are presented in Figures 2.5-24 to 2.5-56. The soils were classified. The Unified Soil Classification System is described in Figure 2.5-57. Rock was cored utilizing NX and BX coring equipment and samples of the overburden soils were obtained. The field exploration program was conducted under the technical direction and supervision of D&M. Rock core from other borings drilled under the supervision of Soil and Foundations Associates was carefully examined by D&M. Five of the borings were utilized for pressure tests to obtain water leakage data as an aid in establishing criteria for dewatering and foundation grouting. The results of pressure testing are shown to the right of boring logs 201, 203, 209, 210, and RHR-3 in Figures 2.5-33, 2.5-35, 2.5-42, 2.5-43, and 2.5-50. 2.5.1.2.9. Geophysical Explorations Geophysical investigations performed at the site in 1968 consisted of a seismic refraction survey and a borehole geophysical survey. The velocity of compressional wave propagation and other dynamic properties of the natural subsurface materials were determined by these studies, and were used in evaluating the response of the materials to earthquake loading. The results of the field geophysical studies are presented in Figures 2.5-58 through 2.5-61. Micromotions were measured to indicate the pattern of vibration at the site based on ambient background vibration analyses. These measurements, given in Table 2.5-4, are of assistance in estimating any predominant natural period of vibration at the site. Poisson's ratio and other dynamic moduli for the various materials (crushed-rock fill, glacial till, Bass Islands Group) in the stratigraphic section at the site were estimated based on computed and/or empirical data for similar materials. Shear wave velocities for the upper bedrock at the site were computed using the measured compressional wave velocities from the refraction survey and estimated Poisson's ratio. The computed shear wave velocities were then confirmed by the data developed in the borehole geophysical survey. In general, relatively good agreement was obtained from these two methods of evaluating shear wave velocity. Compressional wave velocities for the deeper rock strata have been measured in the region. These data were used to compute shear wave velocities for the deeper rock strata, based on estimates of Poisson's ratio measured in similar materials. Measured and computed geophysical data for the stratigraphic section at the site are presented in Figure 2.5-58. 2.5-18 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.1.2.9.1. Geophysical Borehole Logging Borehole geophysical measurements were made in three deep borings by the Birdwell Division of Seismograph Service Corporation. Four types of logs were run, providing the following categories of reduced data:

a. Compressional wave velocity (in situ) (Figure 2.5-58) at each 1-ft interval

b. Shear wave velocity (in situ) (Figure 2.5-58) at each 1-ft interval. (In these three borings the shear velocity was not measured directly, but was calculated from an empirical relationship between compressional velocity and bulk density)

c. Poisson's ratio (Figure 2.5-58) computed from compressional wave velocity and shear wave velocity

d. Bulk density, derived from density log (Figure 2.5-58).

Representative logs are shown graphically in Figures 2.5-59 and 2.5-60. 2.5.1.2.9.2. Seismic Refraction Survey Two seismic refraction surveys, shown in Figure 2.5-61, were conducted to evaluate the bedrock characteristics at the site during the 1968 Fermi 2 investigation. The seismic lines were located along the barrier beach at the east edge of the site, as shown in Figure 2.5-22. One line was 250 ft long and the other was 500 ft long with some overlap in coverage. The results of the seismic refraction surveys were used to obtain dynamic properties of the foundation materials. Permanent records of the compressional waves generated from this survey were obtained using an Electro- Technical Labs ER75012 Seismic Timer, a 12-trace refraction seismograph. Geophone spacing was 25 and 50 ft, respectively, for the two lines. The compressional velocities measured during these studies are presented in Figures 2.5-58 and 2.5-61. Access to additional geophysical refraction work in southeastern Michigan was provided by others. The compressional wave velocities measured in other regional surveys were slightly higher than the results obtained during this study. The other profiles were in slightly different material, higher in the geologic column. During the refraction surveys, the vibration levels within the existing Fermi 1 plant, and wave data generated in the foundation materials by the explosive charges, were monitored by a blast monitoring program. 2.5.1.2.9.3. Ambient Vibration Measurements Ambient vibration measurements were made at two locations during the 1968 Fermi 2 investigation using D&M Micromotion Equipment (Hosaka Recording System). This equipment, which measures ambient ground displacements, has a magnification of up to 150,000. The equipment is capable of recording ground displacements ranging in frequency from 1 cycle per second to 30 cycles per second. The ambient vibration records can be used to indicate predominant periods of ground motion at the site, under the test strain levels. Ambient station measurement No. 1 was obtained on 2 ft of soil covering a rock outcrop in an old quarry located in the northwest portion of the site. The second measurement was on 2.5-19 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR approximately 20 ft of soil overlying rock. At the first location, the intensity of ground motion was very low with only a slight suggestion of predominant periods, indicative of hard rock. At the second observation point, the intensity of ground motion was so low that it was obscured by machinery noise. The depth of bedrock at each location and the predominant ground periods observed are indicated in Table 2.5-4. 2.5.1.2.10. Laboratory Tests During the 1968 investigations of Fermi 2, representative rock cores that were extracted from certain borings were subjected to a laboratory testing program to evaluate the physical properties of the rock encountered at the site (References 1 and 2). The depths of the rock cores that were tested and tabulated in Table 2.5-5 and in Appendix 2D represent depths from the original ground surface. In some cases the rock samples tested were from above the foundation level. Testing of rock samples from this zone was carried out in order to arrive at conservative foundation design parameters since the rock above foundation level is more weathered and less competent than the rock below. Laboratory tests included the following:

a. Density tests

b. Unconfined compression tests

c. Shockscope tests

d. Resonant column tests.

The density and unconfined compression tests were performed in accordance with ASTM standards. The shockscope and resonant column tests were performed according to generally accepted methods. There are no ASTM standards for these tests. Chemical analyses of ground water samples were performed during the 1969 investigation. Additional laboratory testing was performed in 1972 on soil samples and rock core obtained from borings at the Fermi 2 RHR complex (Reference 3). 2.5.1.2.10.1. Static Tests Density Tests - Density tests were performed on representative rock cores that were selected from 1968 and 1969 borings made during the investigation of Fermi 2. The results of these tests are given in Table 2.5-5. Unconfined Compression Tests - During the 1968 and 1969 Fermi 2 boring program, several representative unconfined compression tests were performed on selected rock samples to evaluate the strength and elasticity characteristics of the bedrock. The tests on the rock cores were performed by the Robert W. Hunt Company in accordance with ASTM standards. The results of the rock compression tests and associated density determinations are presented in Table 2.5-5. Later, during the 1972 foundation investigation for the RHR complex, additional unconfined compression tests were performed by the Robert W. Hunt Company. The results of these tests are given in Table 2.5-6. 2.5-20 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.1.2.10.2. Dynamic Tests Shockscope Tests - Several samples of the rock materials underlying the site were tested in the shockscope during the 1968 and 1969 studies. The shockscope is an instrument developed by D&M to measure the velocity of propagation of compressional waves in the material tested. The velocity of compressional wave propagation observed in the laboratory is used for correlation purposes with the field velocity measurements obtained in the geophysical refraction and borehole surveys. In the shockscope test, samples are subjected to a physical shock under a range of confining pressures, and the time necessary for the shock wave to travel the length of the samples is measured using an oscilloscope. The velocity of compressional wave propagation is then computed. Since this velocity is proportional to the dynamic modulus of elasticity of the sample, the data also are used in evaluating dynamic elastic properties. The results of the tests are presented in Table 2.5-7. Resonant Column Tests - Resonant column tests were performed on two representative samples of rock from the 1968 boring program to determine the shear modulus of rigidity of these materials. The samples are subjected to steady-state, sinusoidal, torsional forces applied to the top of the sample. The frequency of the force application is varied until the resonant frequency (the frequency associated with the maximum steady-state amplitude) is attained. The shear modulus is computed from the resonant frequency of the sample. The results of the resonant column tests are presented in Table 2.5-8. 2.5.1.2.11. Static and Dynamic Properties of Foundation Materials Static and dynamic soil and rock properties of foundation materials for Fermi 2 were determined for the reactor/auxiliary building and adjacent turbine and office service buildings and are presented in Table 2.5-9 (Reference 32). The properties were modified for the Fermi 2 RHR complex in order to be representative of the local soil and rock conditions. The properties used for design criteria for the RHR complex are presented in Table 2.5-10 (Reference 3). 2.5.2. Vibratory Ground Motion Basic Fermi 2 site vibratory ground-motion evaluations were conducted by D&M in 1968. A reaffirmation of the acceptability of this early work was provided by Weston Geophysical in 1982. The following paragraphs of this section present the data summarized from the original D&M investigation. However, any recent data of significance are identified and appropriately noted. 2.5.2.1. Geologic Conditions of the Site A complete discussion of the regional stratigraphy, structure, and geologic history is found in Subsection 2.5.1. This site is located within the Central Stable Region of North America, an area in which the geologic structure is relatively simple. The region is characterized by a system of broad, circular to oblong sedimentary basins that include the Michigan, Appalachian, and Illinois Basins. Stable regions, including the Cincinnati Arch Complex 2.5-21 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR (including the Findlay, Algonquin, and Kankakee Arches), separate the basins. Numerous secondary features are superimposed on these broad structures. The site lies along the southeast edge of the Michigan Basin and northwest of the axis of the Findlay Arch. Precambrian crystalline basement rock lies about 3100 ft below the ground surface in the vicinity of the site. The crystalline basement complex is mantled by sedimentary rocks of Paleozoic age (Subsection 2.5.1.1.2.2). The bedrock surface at the site ranges in depth from approximately 15 to 30 ft below the existing ground surface. The overburden materials consist of sands, silts, and clays of Pleistocene age. The uppermost bedrock unit at the site consists of the Bass Islands dolomite of Late Silurian age. Prior to glaciation, the Bass Islands Group was covered by deeply weathered and jointed rocks that experienced solution activity. Glacial advance and retreat scoured the younger rocks, and exposed the hard and relatively unweathered Bass Islands Group. The Bass Islands dolomite is on the order of 80 ft thick in the site area. The Salina Group underlies the Bass Islands and is about 525 ft thick near the site. This material consists of interbedded shales, limestones, and dolomites and is underlain by the Niagaran dolomite. Faults have not been identified within the basement rocks or overlying sedimentary strata at the site. The closest fault, the Bowling Green Fault, is postulated approximately 35 miles southwest of the site. The vertical displacement of this fault is thought to be several hundred feet. Other known faults in the area are more distant from the site. Most faults in the region are believed to have been dormant since late Paleozoic time, at least 200 million years ago (Subsection 2.5.1). Folding is known throughout southeastern Michigan. The most prominent secondary feature is the Howell Anticline, located in the southeastern portion of the Michigan Basin. Since the area has undergone multiple Pleistocene glaciation, it may be inferred that this region has been subjected to repeated slight bending in the last few hundred thousand years (Subsection 2.5.1). 2.5.2.2. Underlying Tectonic Structures A discussion of tectonic structures in the region surrounding the site is found in Subsection 2.5.1. The most significant structural features are listed below:

a. The Bowling Green Fault trends north-south in north-western Ohio. An inferred extension of this fault lies approximately 35 miles southwest of the site (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3.2)

b. The Howell Anticline, the most prominent fold in the region, approaches to within about 25 miles north of the site and extends approximately 80 miles to the northwest (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3.1)

c. The Chatham Sag is a broad, gentle, northwest-trending syncline that has been mapped as far south as the north shore of Lake Erie. The axis of the syncline lies about 50 miles northeast of the site. A system of faults, including the Electric Fault, is associated with this structure (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3.1)

d. The Keweenawan Fault System, which is characterized by vertical displacements from a few thousand feet to more than 9000 ft, lies northwest of the Michigan Basin approximately 430 miles northwest of the site. It has a 2.5-22 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR northeast trend on the Keweenawan Peninsula in Lake Superior (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3.2)

e. The Rough Creek-Kentucky River fault complex in southern Illinois and central Kentucky approaches to within about 350 miles south of the site (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3.2).

2.5.2.3. Behavior During Prior Earthquakes Although a few distant earthquakes have been felt at the site, detailed onsite studies suggest that their intensities have not been sufficient to affect local surface or subsurface materials. There is no physical evidence at the site to indicate that the area has experienced seismic activity at any time. 2.5.2.4. Engineering Properties of Materials Underlying the Site The engineering properties of unconsolidated surficial deposits and bedrock are presented in Subsections 2.5.1 and 2.5.4. Seismic wave velocities are presented in Subsections 2.5.1.2.9, 2.5.1.2.9.2, and 2.5.4.2; density values are presented in Subsections 2.5.1.2.9.1, 2.5.1.2.10, and 2.5.4.2; water contents are indicated by wet and dry density values given in Subsection 2.5.1.2.10; rock quality designation is presented below and in Subsection 2.5.4.2; and strength characteristics are given in Subsections 2.5.1.2.9.1 and 2.5.4.2. 2.5.2.5. Earthquake History 2.5.2.5.1. 1968 Evaluation The site is located in one of the most seismically stable regions in the United States. No earthquake epicenter has been located closer than about 25 miles and only seven earthquakes have been reported within 50 miles of the site since the beginning of the 19th century. None of these shocks were greater than Intensity V on the Modified Mercalli Scale. Eleven earthquake epicenters of Intensity V to VIII have been reported within 50 to 100 miles of the site and another 24 of Intensity V to VII are located at distances between 100 and 200 miles. The closest Intensity VII shock was located at 90 miles and the closest Intensity VIII shock was located at 100 miles from the site. A list of larger earthquakes located 200 or more miles from the site is presented in Table 2.5-12. A list of earthquakes with epicenters located within a distance of about 200 miles from the site is presented in Table 2.5-13. This list presents all reported earthquakes within 50 miles of the site and significant shock (Intensity V and greater) within 200 miles of the site. The epicenters of these shocks are shown in Figure 2.5-62.

All intensity values in this subsection refer to the Modified Mercalli Scale. The intensity scale, which is described in Table 2.5-11, is a means of indicating the relative size of an earthquake in terms of its perceptible effect. 2.5-23 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Although at least six shocks have been felt at the site within the past two centuries, the maximum intensity at the site has not exceeded Intensity IV. None of the recorded earthquakes caused any damage at or near the site. Since the beginning of the 19th century, twelve earthquakes of Intensity V or greater have been reported within 100 miles of the site, and only 37 earthquakes of Intensity V or greater have been reported within about 200 miles of the site. The 1776 and 1925 events have not been located precisely enough to plot on the figure. Few were of high enough intensity to cause structural damage to reasonably well-built structures. None of these shocks were greater than Intensity VIII and only six can be considered more than minor disturbances. These earthquakes occurred in 1875 (Intensity VII), 1930 (Intensity VI and VII), 1931 (Intensity VII), and two in 1937 (Intensity VII and VIII). The epicenter of the closest of these shocks was about 100 miles from the site. These six earthquakes, along with a number of smaller shocks, are concentrated in a 40-mile-long northeast-southwest-trending zone extending south of Lima, Ohio. This zone of earthquake activity is located near the juncture of the Findlay, Cincinnati, and Kankakee Arches. The earthquakes closest to the site were four Intensity III and IV shocks near Toledo, Ohio (about 30 miles distance), an 1877 Intensity V shock west of Detroit, Michigan (about 30 miles from the site), and a 1961 Intensity V shock in northern Ohio (about 55 miles south of the site). The several Intensity III and IV shocks were reported in the Toledo newspapers. These shocks were not felt at the site. The 1961 earthquake occurred near the Bowling Green Fault and/or the confluence of the Bowling Green Fault with the axis of the Findlay Arch. The 1877 Detroit shock has not been related to any specific geologic structure. Although one or more of these small shocks may have been felt in the vicinity of the site, there were no reports of disturbance near the site, and no damaging effects were experienced. It is estimated that intensities at the site due to these shocks were on the order of III or less. The other five earthquakes within 50 miles of the site were Intensity V or smaller and probably were not felt at the site. For purposes of this study, it is considered that the most significant earthquakes in the region were the 1937 Intensity VII to VIII earthquakes south of Lima, Ohio; the 1947 Intensity VI earthquake in south-central Michigan; the 1943 Intensity V earthquake in Lake Erie, about 100 miles east of the site; and the 1961 Intensity V earthquake in northern Ohio. This evaluation has been made considering such factors as epicentral intensity (with regard to both damage to structures and perceptible area), distance from the site, and geologic structure (with regard to the possible relationship of geologic structure near the earthquake epicenter to structure near the site). A discussion of each of these significant earthquakes follows. The earthquake of March 8, 1937, was the single most significant shock recorded within 200 miles of the site during the period of record. The shock occurred in an area that has experienced the most concentrated earthquake activity within the region. The area is located at the south end of the Findlay Arch near the confluence of the Cincinnati and Kankakee Arches. Residual stress fields from late Mississippian time may still be slightly active in this area and this locality is probably weaker than the surrounding region due to the confluence of structural features. Earthquakes in the region were generally located at the transition between major tectonic features, rather than within a structural block. The earthquake was felt in an area of about 150,000 square miles. The shock was reported in the 2.5-24 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Detroit newspapers and was felt near the site with about Intensity IV. The effect in Michigan was not great and no damage resulted. The earthquake of August 9, 1947, occurred at approximately 8:47 p.m. northeast of Kalamazoo, Michigan. The effects near the epicenter were minor, consisting primarily of damage to a few brick chimneys. There also were reports of loose plaster shaken from ceilings and loose bricks shaken from a few buildings. Based on the damage reports, the epicentral intensity of this earthquake was Intensity VI. The earthquake was felt within an area almost 200 miles in radius. The shock was felt in the vicinity of the site with Intensity III or less. This shock may be related to the Tekonsha oil field structure (see Subsection 2.5.1.1.3.2). The earthquake of March 8, 1943, occurred at about 11:26 p.m. The maximum intensity of this shock was probably Intensity V and the duration of shaking was only several seconds. It was felt in a relatively large and irregular area extending from Toronto, Ontario, as far south as Zanesville, Ohio. The total perceptible area of this shock was on the order of 40,000 square miles. Its location in the middle of Lake Erie reduced the area likely to sustain damage. The damage from this earthquake was trivial, with the highest intensity (VI) reported in Cleveland, Ohio. In Detroit, houses shook and windows rattled, but there were no reports of damage or of tall-building disturbance which is usual for more distant larger shocks. The shock was felt in the vicinity of the site and was reported to be about Intensity III. This shock may be related to an extension of the Chatham Sag into the northern part of Lake Erie. The Intensity V earthquake of February 22, 1961, was the largest and most recent shock within 55 miles of the site. The epicenter of this shock has been located near the southern end of the Bowling Green Fault. Since only one seismograph recorded this shock, its specific location is somewhat tenuous. The shock was felt only in the local area and no damage resulted. The shock was not felt in the vicinity of the site. The limited perceptibility of this recent earthquake, indicating a rather low energy release, minimizes its significance in this study. 2.5.2.5.2. 1986 Reaffirmation Earthquake reassessment activities, in which new site-specific earthquakes were defined and which provided documentation of the satisfactory conclusions reached from evaluation of the preceding earthquake history, were completed in 1982. Additional seismic activity has occurred since 1968 and is summarized through July of 1986 in the following paragraphs. Six more earthquakes have occurred within 200 miles of the site. Two of these were minor disturbances located near Colechester, Ontario, with epicentral intensities of III and IV. One occurred in 1968 near Attica, Michigan, with an epicentral intensity of V. The three others were located in Ohio near Celina, Perry, and St. Mary's and had intensities of VI, VI, and V respectively. Six other earthquakes can be added to the list of earthquakes located 200 or more miles from the site. A 1975 earthquake was located near Wellston, Ohio (Intensity V), about 215 miles from the site. A major earthquake shook Sharpsburg, Kentucky (Intensity VII) in July 1980, 2.5-25 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR about 300 miles from the site. A 1984 earthquake was located near Sudbury, Ontario (Intensity V), about 350 miles from the site. Two other 1984 earthquakes of Intensity V were located about 285 miles from the site near Clay City, Indiana. Finally, one 1985 earthquake near Edgebrook, Illinois, which is located about 250 miles from the site also had an intensity of V. Documentation for all these earthquakes has been provided in Tables 2.5-12 and 2.5-13 and their epicenters are shown in Figure 2.5-62. The most significant earthquakes since 1968 are the 1977 Ohio earthquake, the 1980 Kentucky earthquake, and the 1986 Perry earthquake. The June 1977 earthquake was located near Celina, Ohio, and had a Richter magnitude of 3.2. The earthquake was felt over about 550 sq km2 of western Ohio from Celina, south to Chickasaw, west to Fort Recovery, and north to Rockford. Several instances of slight damage were reported in the area. The maximum intensity reported was a VI near Celina, Coldwater, Fort Recovery, and Rockford, Ohio. Damage ranged from sidewalk cracks to plaster cracks and hairline cracks in exterior walls. The estimated intensity at the site is a II. The shock of July 27, 1980, is the strongest earthquake to be centered in Kentucky and the strongest earthquake to be felt in this region since the southern Illinois earthquake of 1968. It was felt over an area of approximately 600,000 km2 of the central United States and Canada. The epicenter was located near Sharpsburg, Kentucky, and the epicentral magnitude and intensity were 5.1 and VII respectively. The worst damage was at Maysville, Kentucky, approximately 50 km north of the epicenter, where 37 business structures and 269 residences suffered damage of some degree. Most of the significant damage to structures occurred in the older downtown section of the city. The damage was mostly to older brick structures probably built during the middle 1800s. Ground cracks were reported to have occurred about 12 km from the epicenter at Owingsville and Little Rock, Kentucky. Reports of the duration of ground vibration were about 15 sec of strong motions and up to several minutes for sensible vibrations. The intensity in Michigan varied from II to IV and was reported to be at II in Monroe, Michigan. The earthquake of January 1986, was located about 11 miles south of the Perry Nuclear Power Plant site and had a Richter magnitude of 4.96. The earthquake was rated as a Modified Mercalli Intensity of VI. Seventeen people were treated for minor injuries. Structural damage was confined to slightly damaged chimneys, cracks in concrete and under blockwalls, some cracked and fallen plaster, a few broken windows, and some well-water silting. The January 31, 1986, Ohio earthquake was felt at the Fermi site as a Mercalli Intensity IV event. No unusual conditions were observed. The earthquake was not strong enough to be designated an event at Fermi. However, detailed earthquake instrumentation evaluations were completed and evaluation procedures and instrumentation interpretation techniques were verified. 2.5-26 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.2.6. Correlation of Epicenters With Geologic Structures The majority of the significant earthquakes in the region can be associated with well-defined geologic structural zones (Figure 2.5-62). The major geologic structures are described in Subsection 2.5.1.1.3 and are shown in Figures 2.5-6 and 2.5-7. As indicated by Tables 2.5-1 and 2.5-2, the folding and faulting in the central stable region are principally Paleozoic. Recent investigations (References 33 and 34) have indicated that the present seismic activity is not related to surface faulting. Seismic activity occurs in regions bounded by structures of Paleozoic age. The random nature of epicentral locations is the result of stress release in randomly distributed Precambrian crustal blocks (Subsection 2.5.1.1.5.2 contains a more complete discussion). Any present seismic activity occurring near a fault or fold of Paleozoic age does not indicate that the structure is active. To the north and west of the site, earthquakes are rare and appear to occur near anticlinal structures in northern Michigan. To the west of the site, earthquake activity has consisted of infrequent minor shocks that occur in the random epicentral region of southern Wisconsin and northern and central Illinois. To the south, at Anna, Ohio, recent investigations (Reference 35) conducted in the area indicate that earthquake activity is associated with complex Precambrian basement structures. Geologic conditions in this area are unique and the seismic events that occurred here cannot be considered random. However, as described in Subsection 2.5.2.9, in defining the maximum earthquake, an event similar to the Anna event was considered to be able to occur along the axis of the Findlay Arch at its closest approach to the site. These recent studies only indicate that the acceleration values used in design are more conservative than had previously been assumed. The zone of major earthquake activity closest to the site is in the vicinity of New Madrid, Missouri, more than 500 miles to the southwest. Earthquakes near New Madrid in 1811 and 1812 are considered among the largest ever to have occurred in the United States. It is reported that these shocks (possible Intensity XI) were felt in an area of 2 million square miles and changed the surficial topography in an area of about 30,000 to 50,000 square miles. The structural damage resulting from these earthquakes was small due to the lack of construction and habitation in the region. It is estimated that intensities felt in the vicinity of the Fermi site due to these shocks were probably on the order of III to IV. Their influence would be predominant only at low frequencies and is enveloped by existing design criteria. These earthquakes occurred within the extensively faulted New Madrid (Reel Foot) seismographic region (Reference 36). The geologic structure in southern Illinois and western Kentucky is not related to the geologic structure in the vicinity of the site. The Rough Creek fault complex crosses major regional structures and probably forms a boundary separating the stable continental interior to the north from the seismogenic upper Mississippi Embayment. There is no geologic evidence to relate this fault system with structure or faulting within the continental interior. Thus, the seismically active region at the boundary and to the south should be considered dissimilar and distinct from the seismically quiet region to the north. Another area of concentrated earthquake activity is in the vicinity of Cleveland, Ohio. Since the turn of the century, five Intensity V shocks have been reported in this area. No shock larger than Intensity V has been reported and none of these earthquakes were large enough to 2.5-27 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR have been felt in Michigan. These shocks have not been related to a known tectonic feature. Several small shocks in southern Michigan, northern Indiana, and in Lake Erie, similarly, cannot be positively related to known faults. The 1947 southern Michigan shock apparently is coincident with the alignment of the Tekonsha oil field and may be associated with oil field structures. Structure and faulting is inferred for the oil field. The validity of an Intensity VI shock in 1883 in southern Michigan has been questioned. Although the magnitude of this earthquake is dubious, its location may indicate a relation to oil field structures. The 1947 Intensity VI south-central Michigan shock and the 1943 Intensity V Lake Erie shock are the largest earthquakes in the region that cannot be positively related to specific tectonic features. Since the geologic structures in the region are believed to have been dormant since Paleozoic time, earthquake activity in the area may represent final crustal readjustment to Pleistocene glacial advance and retreat. Glacial rebound in the site area is nonexistent as far as is known. 2.5.2.7. Identification of Capable Faults No known capable faults occur within 200 miles of the site. Significant tectonic structures that occur within 200 miles of the site, however, are described in Subsection 2.5.2.2 and their locations are shown in Figure 2.5-7. A description of these structures is included in Subsection 2.5.1.1.3 and a summary of the major faults is given in Table 2.5-2. Information on the activity of the structures is included in Subsections 2.5.2.5 and 2.5.2.6. 2.5.2.8. Description of Capable Faults No known capable faults occur within 200 miles of the site. For a description of regional faulting, see Subsection 2.5.3. 2.5.2.9. Maximum Earthquake The effect at the site of a possible future earthquake similar to a large historical shock has been investigated. For this evaluation, the first shock considered was the March 8, 1937, Intensity VIII earthquake near Lima, Ohio. Should a shock similar to this earthquake occur in the vicinity of the confluence of the Findlay, Cincinnati, and Kankakee Arches, the attenuated ground acceleration at the site would be less than 5 percent of gravity. A review of the regional seismic history indicates that the shocks occurring near Lima, Ohio, have been localized within a very small area. The epicentral areas generally trend north-south and are quite limited in extent. An additional shock (1961) was located near the confluence of the Bowling Green Fault and the axis of the Findlay Arch. Even if a shock as large as the 1937 Lima shock were to occur at this location, or at the closest approach of the Bowling Green Fault, or the axis of the Findlay Arch to the site, the maximum expected ground acceleration would be less than 10 percent of gravity. The 1811-1812 Intensity XII New Madrid, Missouri, series of earthquakes was also studied. Should a shock as large occur as close to the site as the closest approach of the Rough Creek-Kentucky River fault complex (about 350 miles), the attenuated ground acceleration at the site would be less than 5 percent of gravity. 2.5-28 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR It is also concluded that either of these occurrences would result in ground motion at the site significantly less than that selected for the safe-shutdown earthquake (SSE). Small earthquakes similar to the 1947 and 1943 shocks (Subsection 2.5.2.6) could occur in the vicinity of the site. On this basis, the effect of a shock similar to the 1947 south-central Michigan or the 1943 Lake Erie earthquake with an epicenter near the site has been considered. A conservative estimate of the maximum horizontal ground acceleration at the rock surface, due to such a shock, is less than 10 percent of gravity. Confirmatory site-specific earthquake evaluations were completed in 1982 to reaffirm the acceptability of the established Fermi 2 facility seismic design bases. This site-specific evaluation was completed assuming a Richter magnitude 4.9 to 5.9 quake with an epicenter less than 25 km from the site. This assumption is consistent with a quake at the Fermi 2 site similar to that which occurred in Anna, Ohio, in March 1937, and which would also account for a quake at the site such as the July 27, 1980, Kentucky experience in the Central Stable Region as well as the recent January 31, 1986, Perry, Ohio, event. Site-specific spectra were derived directly from representative real-time histories for the appropriate magnitude and distance, and foundation conditions similar to the Fermi site. The 84 percentile of such spectra represented the comparative evaluation level for which the facility seismic design capability was reaffirmed. 2.5.2.10. Safe-Shutdown Earthquake Category I structures at the plant are founded on rock and are designed so that they can be safely shut down in the event ground accelerations at the site exceed those that are operationally tolerable. Consequently, an evaluation has been made of the degree of ground motion that is remotely possible, considering both seismic history and geologic structure. In developing the SSE evaluation, consideration was given to the fact that there is a history of minor to moderate earthquake activity in the region that cannot be related directly to known tectonic features. Category I structures, systems, and components are designed for a safe shutdown due to horizontal zero period ground accelerations at the rock surface at foundation level, of 15 percent of gravity (0.15g). 2.5.2.11. Site-Specific Earthquake In response to a request from the Geosciences Branch, a site- specific earthquake ground response spectrum (essentially per Regulatory Guide 1.60 pegged at 0.15g horizontal) was developed, exhibiting a significantly higher ground response than the SSE ground response. Reevaluation of structures, systems, and components required for cold shutdown was presented to the NRC in the Supplementary Seismic Evaluation Report, Detroit Edison Report No. EF2-53332, Revision 1, dated July 15, 1981. Also see Subsection 3.7.1.2.1. 2.5.2.12. Operating-Basis Earthquake On the basis of the seismic history of the area, it does not appear likely that the site will be subjected to significant earthquake ground motion during the life of the plant. However, Category I structures are conservatively designed to respond, within elastic limits, and with no loss of function, to a horizontal ground acceleration on the rock surface at foundation 2.5-29 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR level of 8 percent of gravity (0.08g). Subsequent review by Weston Geophysical demonstrated that the operating-basis earthquake (OBE) peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.08g has a return period, as a minimum, of the order of 100 to 300 years. 2.5.3. Surface Faulting No faults are known within 25 miles of the site. Detailed information concerning faulting on a regional and site basis is included in Subsections 2.5.1.1.3 and 2.5.2.7. 2.5.3.1. Geologic Conditions of the Site Details of the stratigraphy, structure, and geologic history of the site are found in Subsection 2.5.1.2. 2.5.3.2. Evidence of Fault Offset No faults are known within 25 miles of the site (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3). 2.5.3.3. Identification of Capable Faults No faults are known within 25 miles of the site (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3). 2.5.3.4. Earthquakes Associated With Capable Faults No faults are known within 25 miles of the site, and no earthquakes have been reported closer than 25 miles from the site (Subsections 2.5.1.1.3 and 2.5.2.5). 2.5.3.5. Correlation of Epicenters With Capable Faults No faults or earthquake epicenters have been reported within 25 miles of the site (Subsections 2.5.1.1.3 and 2.5.2.5). 2.5.3.6. Description of Capable Faults No faults are known within 25 miles of the site (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3). 2.5.3.7. Zone Requiring Detailed Faulting Investigation There is no known geologic basis for the possible existence of faulting in the site area. Therefore a detailed faulting investigation is not warranted. 2.5.3.8. Results of Faulting Investigation A review of all available literature, conferences with geological organizations, and onsite investigations revealed that no surface or subsurface faults exist within 25 miles of the site (Subsection 2.5.1.1.3.2). 2.5-30 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.3.9. Design Basis for Surface Faulting Surface faulting at the site is not considered for design. 2.5.4. Stability of Subsurface Materials 2.5.4.1. Geologic Features Pertinent geologic features of the site are discussed in detail in Subsection 2.5.1.2. Competent bedrock strata underlie the site and there are no major solution cavities or zones of solution weathering in the site area. However, due to the presence of zones of extensively fractured or highly vugged rock, pressure grouting was used to provide assurance that zones of this type are not horizontally continuous across the site. The foundation rock will satisfactorily support all static and dynamic loads imposed by all Category I and other heavy settlement sensitive structures. 2.5.4.2. Properties of Underlying Materials A description of the site geology is given in Subsection 2.5.1.2. Test boring data are presented in Subsection 2.5.1.2.8. Grain- size classification is presented in Subsection 2.5.1.2.8; consolidation characteristics are given in Subsection 2.5.4.5.2; water content is indicated by wet and dry densities given in Subsection 2.5.1.2.10; unit weight values are given in Subsection 2.5.1.2.9; shear moduli are presented below; damping is considered below; and Poisson's ratio values are given below and in Subsection 2.5.1.2.9. Seismic wave velocities are given below and in Subsection 2.5.1.2.8. Density values are given below. Rock quality designations are considered below and in Subsection 2.5.2.4. Strength characteristics are given below. Based on an analysis of the results of laboratory testing together with a review of published data and a comparative evaluation of the soil and rock materials at the residual heat removal (RHR) complex (Reference 3) with those determined for the reactor site (Reference 2), design parameters were developed and are presented in Tables 2.5-9 and 2.5-10. The parameters presented in Tables 2.5-9 and 2.5-10 are discussed below. A brief description of the method of determining the values is given, and the range of variation is discussed. 2.5.4.2.1. Density The densities given for the rock fill material were determined from large-scale density tests performed in a compacted test fill (Reference 2). In determining the submerged density, the rock fill material was assumed to have a specific gravity equivalent to that of dolomite. The range of variation given is considered appropriate for a controlled compacted fill of 1.5 in. and smaller crusher-run rock. The densities for the in situ glacial till and their range of variation were assessed from the moisture- density tests performed on relatively undisturbed samples. An appropriate specific gravity was used in calculating the submerged density. Bedrock density and its range of variation were determined from the results of measured densities of representative rock cores. 2.5-31 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.4.2.2. Wave Velocities The compression and shear wave velocities presented in Table 2.5-9 for the crushed-rock fill, glacial till, and in situ rock are measured values (References 1, 2, and 3). The range of variation of wave velocities has been estimated with consideration for the inherent uncertainties in methods of measurement and variations in grain size, density, and strength of the various materials. 2.5.4.2.3. Poisson's Ratio The tabulated values of Poisson's ratio for the compacted rock fill and glacial till were computed from the shear and compression wave velocities. Where possible, the load-settlement data from plate load tests were compared to provide a further check on the values computed from the wave velocities. Values for in situ rock were estimated from the seismic investigation (Reference 1). The range of variation for Poisson's ratio was estimated with consideration for probable differences in wave velocities, grain size, density, and strength of the materials being considered. 2.5.4.2.4. Static Modulus of Elasticity The tabulated static moduli of elasticity for the rock fill and glacial till were computed from the results of load-settlement behavior recorded during plate load testing and, for the glacial till, from unconfined compression tests performed on relatively undisturbed samples (References 1, 2, and 3). Laboratory values for static modulus of elasticity were derived from unconfined compression tests. Based on certain empirical formulae (Reference 37) and literature research (References 38 and 39), combined with experience, knowledge, or rock characteristics such as Rock Quality Designation (RQD), vugs, discontinuities, and clay seams and tempered with conservatism, a factor of 0.25 was applied to the average laboratory values. This figure was then taken to be the in situ static modulus of elasticity. A range of +/-50 percent was utilized in presenting this value to account for the expected variability of characteristics within the Bass Islands Group. 2.5.4.2.5. Dynamic Modulus of Elasticity The dynamic moduli for the glacial till were determined from elastic analysis of the data provided by the Pulsating Load Triaxial Tests. The dynamic moduli of the compacted rock fill and the bedrock were determined by elastic analysis of the results of the field seismic studies (References 2 and 3). The range of values presented reflects the accuracy of field measurement and analysis together with the anticipated variations in grain size, density, and/or strength of the various materials. 2.5-32 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.4.2.6. Shear Moduli The shear moduli of the till maerials were computed from the results of Pulsating Load Triaxial Tests. For the compacted rock fill and the bedrock, the shear moduli were computed using the elastic relationship between the shear modulus, modulus of elasticity, and Poisson's ratio. The range of values reflects inherent uncertainties in methods of analysis and anticipated variations in grain size, density, and/or strength of the various materials. 2.5.4.2.7. Damping Values The tabulated values of damping are based largely on a review of available published data. The values of damping presented for the glacial till were computed from the results of Pulsating Load Triaxial testing. The damping capacity of the bedrock was developed from various dynamic tests (Reference 1). All of the tabulated damping values are expressed as a percentage of critical damping. 2.5.4.2.8. Rock Quality The quality of the rock as observed in recovered drill core was evaluated by measuring:

a. Rock quality designation

b. Fragmented zones

c. Fracture density.

The data are included on the core boring logs (Figures 2.5-33 through 2.5-55). The average RQD in the upper 15 to 20 ft of bedrock in all borings at the RHR complex was 47 percent, or the "poor" quality classification. The average core recovery throughout this depth interval was 92.4 percent, sufficiently high to yield reliable RQD values. Fragmented zones are present. They range in thickness from 6 in. to 3 ft and occur at different elevations in each boring. The lack of depth and thickness correlation between borings suggests that the fragmented zones are not continuous laterally across the site. Fracture density ranged typically from very close (less than 2 in.) to close (2 to 6 in.) in the upper 15 to 20 ft of bedrock at both the RHR complex and the reactor site. The fracture density is directly influenced by the spacing of shale partings along with the core separates during drilling operations and subsequent handling. 2.5.4.2.9. Rock Strength Corrected values for ultimate compressive strength and modulus of elasticity of bedrock, as determined by laboratory unconfined compression tests, are presented in Table 2.5-5. Elastic moduli values were computed from plots of unit axial stress versus unit axial strain derived from laboratory test results. Records of these laboratory test results are contained in Appendix 2D. Results of unconfined compression tests on rock from borings taken from the reactor site and from the RHR complex are presented in Tables 2.5-5 and 2.5-6. 2.5-33 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5.4.3. Plot Plan A topographic map of the site showing the location of Fermi 2 facilities is given in Figure 2.4-3. The plant facilities are shown in relation to bedrock topography in Figure 2.5-12. The boring plan in relation to plant facility locations is given in Figures 2.5-13 and 2.5-14. Subsurface sections in relation to plant facilities are presented in Figures 2.5-15 through 2.5-20. Structural geology in relation to facility location is shown in Figures 2.5-22 and 2.5-23. 2.5.4.4. Soil and Rock Characteristics A table and profiles of a compressional and shear wave velocity survey are presented in Subsection 2.5.1 and in Figures 2.5-58 through 2.5-61. Graphic core boring logs are presented in Subsection 2.5.1 and in Figures 2.5-24 through 2.5-56. Compressional and shear wave velocities are presented in Subsections 2.5.1.2.9, 2.5.1.2.10, and 2.5.4.2. 2.5.4.5. Excavations and Backfill 2.5.4.5.1. Rock Excavation Early in the reactor building excavation, a test blasting program was conducted to control the excavation blasting at Fermi 2 relative to Fermi 1 (References 13, 40, 41, and 42). Ground motions were measured at varying distances from test blasts for a selected range of blast loads, and attenuation data were developed as shown in Figure 2.5-63. The blasting criteria for limiting onsite seismic disturbances were (a) particle velocity limited to 1 in./sec, and (b) particle acceleration limited to 5 percent of gravity. The blasting program was carefully supervised by qualified engineering personnel and was monitored with instruments. Subsequent to blasting operations, the exposed foundation bedrock was sluiced with high-pressure water jets and carefully examined by a qualified geologist to ensure that no excessive natural fracturing or blasting back-break existed that might be unsuitable for foundation support. All heavily fractured rock, clay seams, weathered shale, and other unsuitable materials exposed at final foundation grade were removed. Based on the limiting criteria, the production shot loads for the reactor/auxiliary building foundation excavation were as follows. Pounds per Delay Minimum Distance From Fermi 1 (ft) 25 400 40 500 50 600 65 700 80 800 100 900 150 1000 175 1100 200 1200 2.5-34 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR The charge limitation for the initial blasting to excavate for the RHR complex foundation was based on the distance to Fermi 2 facilities, as follows: Distance to the Nearest 144-in.-Diameter Pounds per Delay Circulating Water Pipe (ft) 0.30 60 0.60 75 1.40 100 3.50 150 6.25 200 On the basis of blast-induced ground or structure motions measured during initial blasts (Reference 43), the charge limitation was increased as follows: Pounds per Delay Distance to the Circulating Water Pipe (ft) 1.0 60 1.0 75 1.4 100 3.5 150 6.25 200 2.5.4.5.2. Earthwork Fill materials required to raise the site to required final grade were obtained from an onsite rock quarry and supplemented by offsite quarry-supplied rock. Fill placed at the site and properly compacted was used for the support of minor structures. All Category I and other major structures are supported on competent bedrock; the walls were framed and placed on the structural base slab. Crushed rock was then compacted in layers between the walls and the blast-excavated rock face. A test section of compacted stone fill material was constructed to permit onsite plate load testing and seismic studies of the fill material (Reference 3). Plate load tests were performed on both the compacted crushed-rock fill and the in situ glacial till. The locations of the plate load tests are indicated in Figure 2.5-14. The results of the plate load tests are given in Table 2.5-14. A seismic investigation of the compacted crushed- rock test area was also performed. The results of the compression wave velocity measurements are shown in Figure 2.5-64. Information on compaction criteria, gradation criteria, methods of placing and compacting, and thickness of lifts of the crushed- rock structural backfill is found in Detroit Edison specification 3071-37, Fill Materials, Placement and Compaction (Appendix 2C), and in Building Work specification for RHR Complex 3071-142. Because of the difficulty of preparing representative samples for laboratory testing, there were no laboratory static or dynamic tests performed on samples of the crushed-stone compacted fill material. Crushed-stone compacted fill material obtained a high degree of density when placed in accordance with specifications 3071-37 and 3071-142. This dense compacted-rock fill with its select gradation was further reinforced by the interlocking mechanism of the angular, well-graded particle sizes of the rock fragments and afforded 2.5-35 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR resistance to penetration by conventional sampling methods. Field plate load and seismic tests were used as the basis for deriving the values presented in Table 2.5-9. The replacement of the underground service water piping has been analyzed in accordance with the UFSAR to allow the use of controlled Low Strength Material (CLSM) and 21AA backfill material in the installation of the buried pipe. This results in partial CLSM and 21AA backfill material against the RHR complex walls. Consolidation tests were done on relatively undisturbed samples of glacial till (Reference 3). The results of the tests are shown in Figure 2.5-65. There are no Category I buildings placed directly on crushed-rock fill. Additional testing on the in-place structural backfill after its placement in accordance with the specification for such placement was not performed. The onsite quality control program required constant inspection to ensure that the work was being performed in accordance with the referenced specification. Since the test results taken from the large compacted test fill area formed the basis for developing the specification, assurance that specification objectives throughout the site were being met was obtained by using trained personnel in a continuously monitored quality control (QC) program. Fill that did not meet the specification requirements was rejected. Construction supervision and constant QC inspection were utilized to ensure that all work was continuously performed in accordance with the specifications. During the course of safety evaluation review, the NRC requested additional information regarding backfill (drawings) for structures and components. This information was provided to the NRC with Reference 32 in June 1981, wherein it was mentioned that the following representative drawings show the backfill at the site: 6C721-2106, 6C721-2324, 6M721-2680, and 6M721-4232. 2.5.4.6. Ground Water Conditions A summary of ground water conditions appears in Subsection 2.4.13. The history of ground water conditions at the site is summarized below. The natural surficial deposits at the site consist of low- permeability glacial till, lacustrine clay, and peat. The surficial deposits locally act as a confining layer above the Paleozoic bedrock aquifer, and a slight artesian pressure exists at the site. Various parameters were investigated and their relationships to local ground water features have been noted. Pressure tests were conducted in borings 201, 203, 209, and 210 in 1969 during the comprehensive foundation investigation for the reactor/auxiliary building. Test data are shown in Table 2.5-15. The results of these tests are presented to the right of the boring logs as shown on Figures 2.5-33, 2.5-35, 2.5-42, and 2.5-43. Pressure testing was accomplished by means of inflatable packers set in the area to be tested. Water under pressure was forced into this area and the rate of take of the water at various pressures was recorded in gallons per minute. From these data, permeability of the rock was calculated by use of the following formula: 2.5-36 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Q K = Cp (2.5-1) H where K = permeability in feet per year Q = flow in gallons per minute H = head of water in feet of water acting on the test section Cp = a constant of 4900 for nx-sized hole and a 10-ft test section (Reference 44) Ground water observations were made by observing the rate of artesian flow at varying depths. These observations were made by drilling to a certain depth and collecting water as it flowed from the top of the boring and timing the rate of filling of a container of known volume in gallons. It was then possible to determine rate of artesian flow in gallons per minute at various levels in the boring. Further ground water observations were made after completion of the borings by inserting standpipes in the borings, allowing the water to rise to its static level, and measuring the elevation of the top of the water. Other observations were made at this time in regard to water quality. These observations ranged from simply noting the odor of H2S gas (shown on the boring logs) to collecting ground water samples for chemical analyses of the ground water. In 1972, foundation investigations for the RHR complex included the installation of six piezometers in borings RHR 1, 2, 5, 6, 7, and 8. The installation of these piezometers and data gathered from them refute the 1969 water-level data in that water levels are generally much lower and artesian flow is not noted. This is due exclusively to construction dewatering. The overall result has been to reverse the ground water gradient at the plant site from toward the lake to away from the lake. During quarry operations between 1969 and 1972, a decline in ground water level occurred. Also, during this period a decline occurred because of a regional drought condition. After the spring of 1971, the quarry operation was restricted to the southern end. The northern part was diked and functioned as a ground water recharge pit, with the water level maintained full at about Elevation 570 ft. Quarry operations ceased on June 30, 1972. Water-level observations were made during and after the quarry operations in several observation wells, as shown in Figure 2.4-25. Water-level data are given in Table 2.4-7. As mentioned above, dewatering was carried out specifically for rock excavation. Conventional dewatering by pumping from sumps was employed. A grout curtain was constructed around the reactor/auxiliary building rock excavation to decrease the extent of dewatering required and to minimize the extent of depression of the surrounding ground water level. The curtain wall grout plan for the excavation of the Fermi 2 reactor/auxiliary building (References 45 and 46) delineated 96 grout holes spaced at 12-ft centers and located as shown in Figure 2.5-66. A grout curtain was not used for the RHR complex excavation. Grouting of the rock mass under the plant facilities will force that moving ground water which would have flowed through the grouted rock to be diverted around it. This diversion will increase slightly the ground water flow rate in the rock immediately outside and below 2.5-37 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR the grout curtain and might increase slightly the solutioning of the carbonate rocks in that zone. In view of the low flow rate of the ground water in the bedrock aquifer (see Subsection 2.4.13.2), the minor expected increase in flow rate through diversion of ground water around the grout curtain is not expected to significantly accelerate solutioning at the site. Water samples for laboratory analyses were obtained from stratigraphic horizons within the site area during the 1969 boring program. The elevations at which water samples were obtained are noted in the boring logs. Some water samples were obtained from artesian flows at various depths during the borings, usually after the boring had flowed for several hours. After completion of the boring, the remaining samples were obtained from borings 210 and 209 at 10-ft intervals between double-inflatable packers from artesian flow through a 3/4-in. discharge pipe. At each sample interval, the water flowed a minimum of 20 minutes before a sample was taken. Selected ground water samples were tested to determine pH, sulfate content, and chloride content. These tests were performed by Mr. Bernard Erlin, Materials and Concrete Consultant. The results of chemical analyses of ground water samples are shown in Table 2.5-16. All of the ground water tested had a relatively high sulfate content, in the range of 1168 to 1865 ppm. The depth at which ground water samples were obtained varied from the rock surface to more than 200 ft below the rock surface. No marked variation of sulfate content with depth was observed. The chloride content of the ground water, as sampled, ranged from 21 to 1164 ppm. The random and occasional high chloride contents measured were affected by boring operations where salt was used as an additive to the boring fluid. Salt was used with the boring fluid in borings 209 and 210 and in zones of close fractures; this would have affected the chloride content of ground water sampled from adjacent borings. Based on the results of measured chloride content of samples that should not have been affected by salt in the boring fluid, the natural ground water at the site appears to have a chloride content of less than 100 ppm. The hydrogen ion concentration (pH) of the ground water ranged from 7.3 to 8.1; thus, the ground water is not acidic. Although the ground water was not tested for the presence of free carbon dioxide, it can reasonably be assumed that the water has been saturated with calcium carbonate by its passage through limestone and dolomitic bedrock. 2.5.4.7. Response of Soil and Rock To Dynamic Loading Response spectra for the SSE and the OBE are presented in Figures 2.5-67 and 2.5-68 respectively. The SSE (originally designated design-basis earthquake or DBE on the project) was anchored at the zero period acceleration level previously described and configured to match the shape of existing spectra for similar site conditions. At the time the facility design bases were established, spectra from El Centro 1940, Olympia 1949, El Centro 1934, Helena 1935, and Taft 1952 were used in developing envelope spectra for design bases purposes. The OBE was similarly shaped but anchored at a zero period acceleration approximately half the SSE. In the decade since the Fermi design bases were established, more conservative assumptions have been made regarding the shape of facility site response spectra in 2.5-38 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR intermediate frequency ranges. For this reason, the Fermi project developed a site-specific earthquake response spectrum, incorporating all potential conservatisms, and reevaluated those items in the facility necessary for shutdown with a loss of offsite power, to ensure the acceptability of the plant with respect to site-specific earthquake excitation. These activities reaffirmed the Fermi 2 seismic design adequacy. Soil structure interaction phenomena were evaluated at the Fermi site, and found to be negligible. Category I structures at Fermi 2 are founded in bedrock. A study completed for the Fermi 2 structures founded on rock showed that it can be safely assumed in accordance with existing studies and the unique finite element analysis undertaken for Fermi, that the Fermi 2 foundation behaves as a rigid medium, and that soil structure interaction effects are negligible. Therefore, the site earthquake response spectra developed for the bedrock represent the base excitation to be experienced by facility Category I structures. Category I buried piping and electrical ducting runs between Category I structures at the Fermi site. These buried pipes and ducts have been subjected to a rigorous dynamic analysis including the effects of interaction with the supporting foundation material. Flexibility has been provided at all building and manhole intersection points to minimize potential concrete strains. The design integrity of these buried components is proven by evaluation of anticipated earthquake wave propagation phenomena. The response spectra indicate the estimated response of a structure subjected to earthquake ground motion. The spectra are presented over a range of frequencies corresponding to the natural frequencies of the various structural elements. The spectra represent the maximum amplitude of motion in the various elements of the structure for typical degrees of damping. Response spectra are also discussed in Section 3.7. 2.5.4.8. Liquefaction Potential All Category I structures are supported within the Bass Islands dolomite, which is not susceptible to liquefaction. 2.5.4.9. Earthquake Design Basis The earthquake design basis is presented in Subsection 2.5.2. 2.5.4.10. Static Analyses The strength of the foundation rock was evaluated in the laboratory by means of unconfined compression tests (Subsection 2.5.1.2.10). Considering these values to be appropriate for rock with an RQD of 100, a reduction factor was selected based on an assessment of the measured RQD values, information on vug volume and size, fracture orientation and spacing, and presence of clay and shale seams (Subsection 2.5.1.2.2.2). On this basis, the ultimate bearing capacity of the rock mass in the plant and RHR complex is considered to be on the order of 300,000 lb/ft2. Using a factor of safety of 12, the recommended design bearing capacity is 25,000 lb/ft2. However, no credit was taken for a possible increase in the recommended bearing capacity by rock grouting. Settlement was computed using the elastic moduli information with modifications based on experience, RQD, vugs, discontinuities, and clay seams to produce conservative deformation 2.5-39 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR moduli appropriate for the in situ rock. The total settlement of the RHR complex is estimated to be on the order of 0.25 in. for an assumed applied pressure of 3000 lb/ft2. The total settlement of the reactor /auxiliary building is conservatively estimated to be on the order of 0.3 to 0.5 in. for an assumed applied pressure of 25,000 lb/ft2. Computed lateral pressures are presented in Table 2.5-17. In computing lateral pressures appropriate for the compacted rock fill, it was necessary to estimate the probable angle of internal friction of this material. Based on observation of the material placed in the field and on research of available published data, the angle of internal friction was assumed to be 40°. All static lateral pressure data presented in Table 2.5-17 are expressed as equivalent fluid pressures. For rigid walls, the tabulated values of lateral pressures are derived for the case of earth pressure "at rest." For cantilever walls, the tabulated values are derived for the case of "active" earth pressure. Dynamic lateral pressure increments due to rock fill were determined using methods described in Reference 47. The dynamic increments of lateral pressure on the walls of the substructures due to ground water were obtained using Westergard's Theory (Reference 48), modified by Matuo and Ohara (Reference 49). These lateral pressure increments for the RHR complex and reactor/auxiliary building are provided in Figures 3.8-48 and 3.8-49, respectively. Static pressures imposed by rock on rigid or cantilever walls above the ground water level will be negligible. The lateral pressure in rock cuts below the water table will be limited to hydrostatic water pressure. 2.5.4.11. Criteria and Design Methods 2.5.4.11.1. Foundations The criteria for foundation support are based on the properties of the underlying materials (Subsection 2.5.4.2) and soil and rock characteristics (Subsection 2.5.4.4). The ultimate bearing capacity of the rock mass in the plant area is estimated to be on the order of 300,000 lb/ft2 (Subsection 2.5.4.10). Assuming a combined static and dynamic maximum loading as high as 25,000 lb/ft2, the factor of safety against further foundation failure could exceed 12. Considering the rock to be strengthened by the grouting operations, the factor of safety is considerably in excess of 12. The average foundation load data for Category I and other structures are given in Table 2.5-18. The average foundation loads are considerably less than the assumed 25,000 lb/ft2; therefore, the factor of safety will be larger than 12. The criteria for seismic design are presented in Subsections 2.5.2.10 and 2.5.2.11. Seismic design methods are presented in Section 3.7. 2.5.4.11.2. Cement In consideration of the high sulfate content of the natural ground water, sulfate-resistant cement was used for all cement grout and subsurface concrete that will be in contact with the ground water. Type V portland cement conforming to the requirements of ASTM Designation C150-68 was used. In concrete work above Elevation 573.0 ft, Type II portland 2.5-40 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR cement conforming to the requirements of ASTM Designation C150-68 was used. As stated in Subsection 2.5.1.2.7, CSA A5-1971 cement was also used. The use of calcium chloride or other chlorides as admixtures incorporated into concrete or grout mixtures was prohibited as such admixtures reduce the resistance of the concrete or grout to sulfate attack. 2.5.4.12. Techniques To Improve Subsurface Conditions 2.5.4.12.1. Grouting - Reactor/Auxiliary Building Rock strata below the foundation levels of the Category I structures were pressure grouted. It ensured that no continuous open zones existed across the excavation in the bedrock. The complete grouting program for the reactor/auxiliary building was successfully carried out (References 50, 51, and 52). The sequence of grouting operations for the reactor/auxiliary building consisted of drilling, washing, pressure testing, and grouting each grout hole. The elevations of the bases of grout holes were selected for the reactor/auxiliary building at elevations of 483 and 499 ft, respectively. These elevations were chosen on careful study of RQD, core recovery, and fracture data, modified after visual inspection of the rock core itself. Since the in situ rock was judged to be sufficiently sound to support the vertical loads and grouting was performed only to provide a more homogeneous rock mass beneath the structures, it was judged that grouting into the underlying Salina Group would have no effect on foundation stability. Grouting was performed in two stages, herein referred to as first and second zones, extending to depths of 6 and 50 ft below the rock surface, respectively. Initial or primary holes within each zone were spaced 30 ft on centers, and final closure was achieved by subsequently grouting all intermediate holes (secondary, tertiary, and quaternary holes). The locations of all holes are presented in Figures 2.5-69 and 2.5-70. During grouting operations, two additional grout holes were drilled (Nos. 75A and 76A). Hole 75A was drilled to replace hole 75, which was abandoned when a drill bit was lodged in the hole. Hole 76A was drilled because of the low grout take (1.5 ft3) in hole 77. The relatively low grout take in hole 76A indicated that intermediate holes were probably not necessary when low grout takes are recorded. All grout holes were drilled with percussion drilling equipment, and any anomalies in the general rate of penetration of drilling were noted. On some holes, detailed logs of rate of penetration were recorded. These records assisted in delineating the extent of rock fracturing and thus assisted the planning of grout mixes. In general, the rate of penetration of rock varied between 20 and 50 sec/ft. Very few voids were encountered; the largest was a 20-in. void observed in hole 67. All grout holes penetrated to an elevation of 515 ft, with the exception of holes 51 and 27, which extended to 518 and 526 ft, respectively. These two holes were terminated short because of drilling difficulties. Subsequent to drilling operations, holes were washed and pressure tested. On many holes, the drilling operations combined with a relatively large flow of ground water provided clean holes. Consequently, no additional washing was required. Each hole was pressure tested at a selected pressure and the steady water take was recorded. The results of pressure testing were used in determining the initial grout mixes for each particular hole. 2.5-41 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR Grout mixes injected into the grout holes all contained a 2:1 ratio of cement to flyash. The ratio of water to cement plus flyash varied from 3:1 to slightly less than 1:1. For holes with high grout takes, final grout mixes included sand, which was added to give a sand-to-cement ratio of 1:1 or 1.5:1. All holes were pressure grouted in one stage. The grouting of each hole was started with a water-to-cement plus flyash ratio of 3:1 or 2:1. If the pressure did not increase after approximately 10 ft3 of grout had been pumped, then the mix was thickened initially by decreasing the water-to-cement ratio and then further, if necessary, by adding sand to the mix. All holes were grouted to refusal. Individual grout takes for various mixes are summarized in Table 2.5-19. A total of 1644 ft3 of pressure grout was injected into the grout holes. An additional 72.5 ft3 of grout was used to backfill the upper portion of the holes above the packer. Table 2.5-20 summarizes the grout take for each zone. Detailed descriptions of the foundation rock encountered in five exploratory borings, drilled following completion of the grouting program, are presented in Figures 2.5-71 through 2.5-75. Grout encountered in rock cores is noted in the logs of borings. Only one void of 0.3 ft was encountered in the post-grout exploratory boring in boring 216. Since boring 216 was drilled within 5 ft of a secondary grout hole and the void contained no grout, it was not an interconnected void, but an isolated feature. Upon completion, all five of the exploratory borings were tremie grouted. Subsequent to grouting operations, a complete rock subgrade inspection of the reactor/auxiliary building was carried out; the results of this inspection are summarized in Figure 2.5-76. 2.5.4.12.2. Grouting - Residual Heat Removal Complex The sequence of grouting operations (References 53 and 54) for the RHR complex consisted of drilling, washing, and grouting each grout hole. The elevation of the bases of the holes was selected at 530 ft. Grouting was performed in two zones extending to depths of 6 and 20 ft below a concrete leveling mat placed over the original rock surface at Elevation 550 ft. Initial or primary holes within each zone were spaced 30 ft on centers and final closure was achieved by subsequently grouting all intermediate holes (secondary, tertiary, and a few quaternary holes). Figures 2.5-77 through 2.5-81 show locations of all holes, as well as amounts of grout taken. Prior to drilling and grouting operations, eight exploratory holes were core drilled to depths of 20 ft, and then washed and pressure tested. The logs of these borings are shown in Figures 2.5-82 through 2.5-85. Each interval was tested at a selected pressure and the steady water take was recorded. All grout holes were drilled with percussion drilling equipment and then washed prior to grouting. Grout mixes injected into the grout holes contained a 1:1 to 1.5:1 ratio of cement to flyash. The ratio of water to cement plus flyash varied from 3:1 to approximately 1:1. The grouting of each hole was generally started with a water-to-cement plus flyash ratio of 3:1 and if the pressure did not increase after approximately 10 minutes, the mix was thickened by decreasing the water-to-cement ratio. All holes were grouted to refusal. Table B1, Appendix 2B, summarizes the grout take for each zone. Detailed descriptions of the foundation rock encountered in eight exploratory borings drilled following completion of 2.5-42 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR the grouting program are presented in Figures 2.5-86 through 2.5-89, and water-pressure test results are shown in Table B2, Appendix 2B. Subsequent to cleaning the exposed rock surface, and prior to placement of the concrete mat, a complete rock subgrade inspection was carried out. A map summarizing the results of this inspection is shown in Figure 2.5-90. In addition, photographs were taken completely covering the side walls of the excavation and are available for inspection. A detailed report on the results of the foundation treatment is found in Appendix 2B. 2.5.4.12.3. Effectiveness of Grouting Program The grouting program was intended to seal cracks in the foundation bedrock that may have been horizontally continuous. As part of the preliminary explorations and later the grouting program, observations were made during drilling with respect to water losses and dropping of drill rods. It was observed that water losses were generally not great and that there were no instances of drill rod drop. Based on these observations, no areas of major or continuous solution activity were detected. However, the core recovered did show vugs, indicating that minor solution activity was present. To ensure that no continuous horizontal zones could be present below Category I structures, pressure grouting was undertaken. The grouting program has the further benefit of enhancing the bearing capacity of the rock. The grouting program consisted of drilling primary, secondary, and, where necessary, tertiary grout holes until the requirements for discontinuing grouting were achieved. Subsequent to grouting, a number of holes were drilled to ascertain the effectiveness of the grouting program. The borings drilled after grouting generally produced the same results as the exploratory holes prior to grouting. That is, the core recovery and RQD showed no appreciable difference. Furthermore, the postgrouting borings showed very little evidence of grout in the core or drill water. The lack of grout in postgrouting borings is attributed to the nonexistence of open or continuous solutioning in the bedrock. The low grout takes during consolidation grouting and the lack of grout in postgrouting borings provide evidence of the noncontinuity of any open features. In addition, the lack of both drill rod drops and water losses in postgrouting borings further indicates that no open channels exist in the bedrock foundation. 2.5.4.12.4. Base Slab Construction The reactor/auxiliary building base slab is a 4-ft-thick reinforced-concrete slab consisting of 4000 psi concrete at 28 days with ASTM A-615 grade 60 reinforcing steel. The slab is supported by a leveling slab also constructed of 4000 psi concrete that is in turn supported by pressure-grouted competent bedrock. Shortly after placement of the base slab, radial superficial cracks appeared. A report covering the investigation and treatment of these cracks is documented in Reference 55. All possibilities that may have caused the cracking of the slab were considered. However, after a review of all of the postulated potential causes for the surface hairline cracks, and a detailed observation and mapping of the location, arrangement, depth, and thickness of the cracks themselves, it is concluded that the cracks were most probably caused by the restraint of the slab at its perimeter during temperature fluctuations and by shrinkage strains that 2.5-43 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR developed during the curing of the thick and heavily reinforced concrete slab. The cracks were very thin, and most of them did not penetrate the full depth of the slab. The lack of differential vertical displacement on both sides of a crack indicated that vertical shear planes resulting from upheaval or settlement of the underlying concrete level slab or grouted bedrock had not occurred. The radial symmetry of the cracks further supported the belief that vertical displacement, local, random, or general in orientation, did not occur. As stated on page A7 of the D&M report "Results of Rock Foundation Treatment," dated January 12, 1975 (Reference 23), "No zones of excessive fracturing or highly vugged material exist in horizontal layers across the site; localized openings in the foundation rock have been adequately treated; and the near surface fractures have been filled." Part B of the same referenced report outlines the careful attention placed on preparing the rock surface to receive the 2- to 4-ft-thick level mat and then the 4-ft-thick structural slab that later developed thin radial superficial cracks. After reviewing these data, reviewing the conclusions presented by consultants, and observing and investigating the extent and orientation of the cracking, it is concluded that the source of the cracking is not the solutioning or jointing in the bedrock. The placement of crushed-rock fill outside the subbasement walls and at an elevation higher than the slab was not related to the cracking. The schedule for fill placement was done one section at a time and generally followed the initial observation of radial cracking. 2.5.5. Slope Stability During the excavation for the reactor/auxiliary building and RHR complex, which included blasting, there were no instances of instability of the excavation slopes and therefore no need for stabilization measures. There are no excavation or natural slopes whose failure could adversely affect the safe operation of the plant. However, a shore barrier was erected at the east end of the plant bordering on Lake Erie. For a discussion of the shore barrier, see Subsections 2.4.5 and 3.4.4.5. 2.5-44 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY REFERENCES

1. The Detroit Edison Company, Preliminary Safety Analysis Report, Vol. 1, Section 2 - Site, Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 2, 1969.

2. The Detroit Edison Company, Preliminary Safety Analysis Report, Amendment 2, Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 2, April 1, 1970.

3. Dames & Moore, Foundation Investigation Residual Heat Removal Complex, Enrico Fermi Unit II, Final Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 24 pages, August 28, 1972.

4. A. J. Mozola, Geology for Environmental Planning in Monroe County, Michigan, Report of Investigation 13, Michigan Geological Survey, 34 pages, 1970.

5. G. D. Ells, Architecture of the Michigan Basin, Studies of the Precambrian of the Michigan Basin, Michigan Basin Geological Society, pp. 60-68, 1969.

6. G. V. Cohee, Cambrian and Ordovician Rocks in Recent Wells in Southeastern Michigan, AAPG Bulletin, 31(2): 293-307, 1947.

7. G. V. Cohee, Cambrian and Ordovician Rocks in the Michigan Basin and Adjoining Areas, AAPG Bulletin, 32(8): 1417-1448, 1948.

8. G. V. Cohee, Geology and Oil and Gas Possibilities of Trenton and Black River Limestones of the Michigan Basin and Adjacent Areas, USGS Preliminary Chart II, Oil and Gas Inv. Ser., 1945.

9. J. H. Fisher, Early Paleozoic History of the Michigan Basin, Studies of the Precambrian of the Michigan Basin, Michigan Basin Geological Society, pp. 89-93, 1969.

10. G. D. Ells, Structures Associated with the Albion-Scipio Oil Field Trend, Michigan Geological Survey, 86 pages, 1962.

11. A. Janssens, "Stratigraphy of the Cambrian and Lower Ordovician Rocks in Ohio," Bulletin 64, Ohio Geological Survey, pp. 28-29, 1973.

12. W. J. Hinze, Department of Geosciences, Purdue University personal communication (Telecon between Dames & Moore and W. J. Hinze on January 31, 1975).

13. R. B. Newcombe, Oil and Gas Fields of Michigan, Publication 38, Geological Series 32, Michigan Geological Survey, 293 pages, 1933.

14. Michigan Geological Survey, letter on file with Dames & Moore.

15. D. McLean, Geologist, Petroleum Resources Department, Toronto, Canada, Personal Communications.

16. G. D. Ells, Geologist, Michigan Geological Survey, Lansing, Michigan, Personal Communications.

17. M. L. Sbar and L. R. Sykes, "Contemporary Compressive Stress and Seismicity in Eastern North America," GSA Bulletin, V. 84, p. 1861-1882, 1973.

2.5-45 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY REFERENCES

18. W. J. Hinze and D. W. Merritt, Basement Rocks of the Southern Peninsula of Michigan, Studies of the Precambrian of the Michigan Basin, Michigan Basin Geological Society, pp. 28-59, 1969.

19. J. A. Dorr and D. F. Eschman, Geology of Michigan, University of Michigan Press, 476 pages, 1970.

20. W. J. Hinze, Michigan Geological Survey Division, Department of Conservation, Lansing, Michigan, Personal Communications.

21. G. W. Pirtle, Michigan Structural Basin and Its Relationship to Surrounding Areas, AAPG Bulletin, 16(2): 145-152, 1932.

22. G. V. Cohee, Geologic History of the Michigan Basin, Washington Academy of Sciences Journal, Vol. 55, 1965.

23. Dames & Moore, Results of Rock Foundation Treatment, Fermi II Nuclear Power Plant, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 8 pages, January 12, 1971.

24. R. J. Brigham, Structural Geology of Southwestern Ontario and Southeastern Michigan, Paper 71-2, The Province of Ontario Department of Mines and Northern Affairs, Petroleum Resources Section, 110 pages, 1971.

25. R. C. Hussey, The Middle and Upper Ordovician Rocks of Michigan, Publication 46, Geological Series 39, Michigan Geological Survey, 89 pages, 1952.

26. G. D. Ells, Future Oil and Gas Possibilities in Michigan Basin, AIPG MEMOIR 15, Volume 2, 1971.

27. G. D. Ells, personal communication (Telecon between Dames & Moore and G. D.

Ells on February 6, 1975).

28. C. W. Cook, The Brine and Salt Deposits of Michigan, Publication 15, Geological Series 12, Michigan Geological Survey, 188 pages, 1914.

29. Dames & Moore, Ground Stability Evaluation Phase I, River Rouge Generating Plant Site, River Rouge, Michigan, for the Detroit Edison Company, 16 pages, 1971.

30. R. E. Ives, Head, Petroleum Geology Section, Michigan Geological Survey, Lansing, Michigan, Personal Communications.

31. G. E. Troxell, et al., Composition and Properties of Concrete, McGraw-Hill, p.

48, 1968.

32. Dames & Moore, Static and Dynamic Soil and Rock Studies, Fermi II Nuclear Power Plant, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 16 pages, February 3, 1970.

33. O. W. Nuttli, State-of-the-Art for Assessing Earthquake Hazards in the United States, Report 1, Design Earthquake for the Central United States, Misc. Paper 5-73-1, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, 45 pages, 1973.

2.5-46 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY REFERENCES

34. P. C. Heigold, Notes on the Earthquake of September 15, 1972 in Northern Illinois, Environmental Geology Notes, Number 59, Illinois State Geological Survey.

35. Dames & Moore, "Interpretation of Mechanism for the Anna, Ohio, Earthquakes,"

in Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station PSAR, Public Service of Indiana, Appendix 2E, Amendment 3 (January 1976), Docket Nos. 50STN546 and 50STN547.

36. R. G. Stearns and D. W. Wilson, Relationship of Earthquakes and Geology in West Tennessee and Adjacent Areas, Manuscript, Tennessee Valley Authority, 1973.

37. I. W. Farmer, "Engineering Properties of Rocks," E. & F. N. Spon Ltd., pp. 30-40, 1968.

38. D. U. Deere, University of Swansea Short Course on Rock Mechanics, 148 pages, 1967.

39. K. G. Stagg and O. C. Zienkiewicz, Rock Mechanics in Engineering Practice, John Wiley and Sons, 1968.

40. Dames & Moore, Test Blasting Program, Enrico Fermi Nuclear Power Station near Monroe, Michigan, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 14 pages, July 2, 1969.

41. Dames & Moore, Quarry Planning, Blasting and Safety Procedures, Enrico Fermi Nuclear Power Station, Monroe, Michigan, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 16 pages, August 29, 1969.

42. Dames & Moore, Blast-Induced Vibration Sensitivity Study, Enrico Fermi Nuclear Power Station Near Monroe, Michigan, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 6 pages, September 29, 1969.

43. AEC from Detroit Edison, EF-2-21,955a, January 17, 1974; and Edison Research Report 69H19-8, RHR Complex.

44. Design of Small Dams, Bureau of Reclamation, U.S. Department of Interior, p.

194, 1973.

45. Dames & Moore, Evaluation of Dewatering Requirements, Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 13 pages, December 31, 1969.

46. Dames & Moore, Technical Supervision of Grouting Operations, Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant, Monroe, Michigan, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 4 pages, May 15, 1970.

47. H. B. Seed and R. V. Whitman, "Design of Earth-Retaining Structures for Dynamic Loads," Specialty Conferences, Cornell University, June 22-24, 1970, ASCE 1970.

2.5-47 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR 2.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY REFERENCES

48. H. M. Westergard, "Water Pressures on Dams During Earthquakes," Transactions ASCE, Vol. 98, 1933.

49. H. Matuo and S. Ohara, "Lateral Earth Pressure and Stability of Quay Walls During Earthquakes," Proceedings of the Second World Conference on Earthquake Engineering, Vol. I, pp. 165-182, 1960.

50. Dames & Moore, Evaluation of Rock Foundation Treatment, Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 5 pages, January 16, 1970.

51. Dames & Moore, Procedures for Technical Supervision, Curtain Wall and Structural Grouting, Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 11 pages, June 29, 1970.

52. Dames & Moore, Results of Rock Foundation Treatment, Fermi 2 Nuclear Power Plant, Report for the Detroit Edison Company, 14 pages, January 12, 1971.

53. Sargent and Lundy, Foundation Design of Residual Heat Removal Complex, Enrico Fermi Atomic Plant - Unit 2, Report SL-3044, 17 pages, March 12, 1973.

54. Sargent and Lundy, Pressure Rock Grouting for Residual Heat Removal Complex, Enrico Fermi Atomic Power Plant Unit 2, Detroit Edison Company Specification 3071-135, September 21, 1973.

55. The Detroit Edison Company, Technical Report on Reactor Building Base Slab Cracks, Report EF2-29332, 8 pages, November 6, 1974.

56. United States Army Corps of Engineers, Retaining and Flood Walls, Engineering Manual EM 1110-2-2502, September 29, 1989.

2.5-48 REV 24 11/22

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-1

SUMMARY

OF MAJOR FOLDS IN REGION OF FERMI 2 Name Identification a Major Movement Kankakee Arch S, B, G Ordovician or Devonian to Late Mississippian Michigan Basin S, B, G Early to Late Paleozoic Appalachian Basin S, B, G Early to Late Paleozoic Valley & Ridge S, B, G Late Paleozoic Cincinnati Arch B Ordovician to Post - Pennsylvanian Findlay Arch B Cambrian to Devonian Algonquin Arch B Cambrian to Devonian Waverly Arch B Early Ordovician Howell Anticline B, G Ordovician through Mississippian Lucas Monocline B, G Ordovician through Mississippian Freedom Anticline B, G Ordovician through Mississippian Chatham Sag B Late Silurian and Post-Silurian Washtenaw Anticlinorium B Middle Ordovician through Late Mississippian Logansport Sag B Ordovician or Devonian to Late Mississippian Francisville Arch B Mississippian a S = Surface. B = Borehole. G = Geophysical. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-2

SUMMARY

OF MAJOR FAULTS Fault Name Identificationa Displacement Last Movement Bowling Green Fault S, B, G West side down Post-Middle Ordovician to Pre-Devonian Electric Fault B South side down Post-Silurian Tekonsha Trend B, G (Fracture zone) Post-Ordovician Rough Creek- G North side down Cretaceous (Rough Creek) Kentucky River Fault S, B, G (Except Kentucky River Post-Ordovician to Pre-System Fault, south side down) Mississippian (Kentucky River) Keweenawan-Lake S, B, G South side down Keweenawan and Post - Owen Fault System Keweenawan Albion-Scipio Trend B, G (Fracture zone) Post-Middle Ordovician to Pre-Pennsylvanian Royal Center Fault B Southeast side down Post-Devonian Fortville Fault B Southeast side down Post-Devonian a S = Surface. B = Borehole. G = Geophysical. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-3 OBSERVED WATER FLOW AND WATER LEVEL DATA Piezometric Piezometric Boring Artesian Flow Artesian Flow Surface 12-19-69 Surface 12-19-69 Boring Surface Bottom From Elevation From Bottom of (lake level at (lake level at Number Elevation Elevation 550-510 (gpm) Boring (gpm) Fermi 1, 573.0) Fermi 1, 572.8) 201 565.0 451.4 5 20 569.5 570.0 202 564.3 438.0 5 36 568.4 569.9 203 565.4 448.9 3 22 569.8 569.8 204 564.9 452.4 3 10 568.9 569.7 205 565.8 448.6 3 50 570.0 569.9 206 567.2 455.9 0 3 570.1 569.7 207 566.8 454.8 5 17 569.9 569.6 208 566.9 454.2 0.5 0.5 569.9 569.9 209 567.0 253.1 2 60 571.9 571.1 210 566.6 451.6 0.5 20 569.9 569.8 211 567.4 452.4 0 10 570.2 569.8 212 567.2 410.4 4 43 569.4 569.7 213 568.0 452.5 0 0 570.0 569.8 214 565.6 453.2 5 5 569.0 569.6 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-4 AMBIENT VIBRATION MEASUREMENTS Ambient Station Depth of Predominant Period of Number Bedrock (ft) Ground Motion (sec) 1 2 0.7 to 1.1 2 20 0.10 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-5 ROCK COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS FERMI 2 REACTOR/AUXILIARY BUILDING SITE Depth Below Ultimate Boring Original Compressive Modulus of Number Surface (ft) Elevation (ft) Formation a Density (lb/ft3) Strength (lb/ft2) Elasticity (lb/ft2) 20 27.0 546.7 BI 154 2.26 x 106 9.0 x 108 32A 52.0 527.6 BI 145 1.39 x 106 6.28 x 108 28 106.0 466.5 S 162 1.30 x 106 3.75 x 108 4 58.0 514.5 BI 138 1.12 x 106 6.51 x 108 201 50.7 514.3 BI 151 1.29 x 106 5.75 x 108 201 73.2 491.8 BI 169 1.62 x 106 5.04 x 108 202 49.2 515.1 BI 146 1.41 x 106 3.89 x 108 203 58.2 507.2 BI 154 1.31 x 106 3.17 x 108 208 16.2 550.7 BI 145 0.62 x 106 3.29 x 108 210 20.6 546.0 BI 153 0.99 x 106 2.2 x 108 211 18.4 549.0 BI 170 2.70 x 106 1.8 x 108 211 35.1 532.3 BI 146 0.85 x 106 2.5 x 108 213 24.6 543.4 BI 149 0.82 x 106 7.2 x 108 a BI = Bass Islands Group. S = Salina Group. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-6 ROCK COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS - FERMI 2 RHR COMPLEX Boring Number Depth (ft) Formation a Ultimate Compressive Strength (lb/ft2) RHR-2 39.1 BI 1.31 x 106 RHR-3 29.2 BI 1.18 x 106 RHR-4 31.0 BI 1.46 x 106 RHR-5 40.5 BI 1.20 x 106 RHR-6 29.2 BI 1.49 x 106 RHR-7 33.9 BI 1.06 x 106 RHR-8 36.3 BI 1.09 x 106 a BI = Bass Islands Group. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-7 SHOCKSCOPE TEST RESULTS Velocity of Compressional Wave Boring Number Depth (ft) Formation a Propagation (ft/sec) 4 28.5 BI 12,500 4 36 BI 10,500 4 42 BI 10,000 4 58.5 BI 11,000 18 29 BI 14,000 18 40 BI 14,500 79 30 BI 11,500 79 97 BI 12,500 79 240 S 14,500 a BI = Bass Islands Group. S = Salina Group. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-8 RESONANT COLUMN TEST RESULTS Boring Number Depth (ft) Formation a Rock Type Shear Modulus (lb/ft2) 32A 25 BI Dolomite 150 x 106 25 96 S Calcareous Shale 30 x 106 a BI = Bass Islands Group. S = Salina Group. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-9 STATIC AND DYNAMIC SOIL AND ROCK PROPERTIES - REACTOR/AUXILIARY BUILDING Bass Islands Property Crushed-Rock Fill In Situ Glacial Till Bedrock Density (lb/ft3): Dry density 139 +/- 4% 125 +/- 4% 150 +/- 10% Wet density 144 +/- 5% 140 +/- 5% -- Submerged density 90 +/- 3% 80 +/- 3% 110 +/- 10% Wave velocities (ft/sec): Compression wave 2,500 +/- 15% 7,700 +/- 7% 13,000 +/- 10% Shear wave 900 +/- 25% 2,200 +/- 15% 7,600 +/- 15% Poisson's Ratio: Static or dynamic 0.4 +/- 10% 0.45 +/- 10% 0.24 +/- 10% Modulus of elasticity (lb/ft ): 2 Static 1.2 x 106 +/- 25% 0.5 x 106 +/- 20% 120 x 106 +/- 50% Dynamic 4.0 x 106 +/- 30% 1.2 x 106 +/- 30% 180 x 106 +/- 50% Increase per foot of depth 0.48 x 106 +/- 25% 0.48 x 106 +/- 20% 0 Shear modulus (lb/ft2): Dynamic 1.4 x 106 +/- 30% 0.4 x 106 +/- 30% 72 x 106 +/- 50% Increase per foot of depth 0.17 x 106 +/- 25% 0.17 x 106 +/- 20% 0 Damping values (percent of critical): Within earthquake levels 7% to 10% 5% to 8% 1% Page 1 of 1 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-10 STATIC AND DYNAMIC SOIL AND ROCK PROPERTIES - RHR COMPLEX Crushed-Rock Fill Glacial Till a Bass Islands Bedrock Density (lb/ft3) Dry density 139 +/- 4% 124 +/- 2% 150 +/- 10% Wet density 144 +/- 5% 139 +/- 2% Submerged density 90 +/- 3% 77 +/- 2% 110 +/- 10% Wave velocities (ft/sec) Compression wave 2500 +/- 15% 7700 +/- 7% 13000 +/- 10% Shear wave 900 +/- 25% 2200 +/- 15% 7600 +/- 15% Poisson's Ratio Static or dynamic 0.4 +/- 10% 0.45 +/- 10% 0.24 +/- 10% Static modulus of elasticity (lb/ft2) 1.2 x 106 +/- 25% 4.0 x 105 +/- 30% 120 x 106 +/- 50% Dynamic modulus of elasticity (lb/ft2) Single 1.0% 1.2 x 105 +/- 50% Amplitude shear 0.1% 4.0 x 106 +/- 30% 4 x 105 +/- 50% 180 x 106 +/- 50% Strain 0.01% 13 x 105 +/- 50% Static modulus of rigidity (lb/ft2) 4.0 x 105 +/- 30% 1.4 x 105 +/- 30% 48 x 106 +/- 50% Dynamic modulus of rigidity (lb/ft2) Single 1.0% 0.7 x 105 +/- 50% Amplitude shear 0.1% 1.4 x 106 +/- 30% 2.5 x 105 +/- 50% 72 x 106 +/- 50% Strain 0.01% 7.5 x 105 +/- 50% Damping values (percent of critical damping) Single 1.0% 19.0% Amplitude shear 0.1% 7% to 10% 17.0% 1% Strain 0.01% 9.0% Modulus of subgrade reaction (lb/ft3) 1.0 x 106 +/- 25% 6.5 x 105 +/- 50% a Values reported were determined specifically for in situ conditions. However, the glacial till, compacted to at least 95 percent of maximum dry density, is expected to exhibit static and dynamic properties that fall within the ranges of variation reported in this table. Page 1 of 1 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-11 MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY (DAMAGE) SCALE OF 1931 (Abridged) I. Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances (I, Rossi-Forel Scale) II. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings. Delicately suspended objects may swing (I to II, Rossi-Forel Scale) III. Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings, but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motorcars may rock slightly. Vibration like passing of truck. Duration estimated (III, Rossi-Forel Scale) IV. During the day felt indoors by many, outdoors by few. At night some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make creaking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motorcars rocked noticeably (IV to V, Rossi-Forel Scale) V. Felt by nearly everyone, many awakened. Some dishes, windows, etc., broken; a few instances of cracked plaster; unstable objects overturned. Disturbances of trees, poles, and other tall objects sometimes noticed. Pendulum clocks may stop (V to VI, Rossi-Forel Scale) VI. Felt by all, many frightened and run outdoors. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys. Damage slight (VI to VII, Rossi-Forel Scale) VII. Everybody runs outdoors. Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. Noticed by persons driving motorcars (VII, Rossi-Forel Scale) VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordinary substantial buildings, with partial collapse; great in poorly built structures. Panel walls thrown out of frame structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned. Sand and mud ejected in small amounts. Changes in well water. Persons driving motorcars disturbed (VII+ to IX-, Rossi-Forel Scale) IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb; great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations. Ground cracked conspicuously. Underground pipes broken (IX+, Rossi-Forel Scale) X. Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations; ground badly cracked. Rails bent. Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes. Shifted sand and mud. Water splashed (slopped) over banks (X, Rossi-Forel Scale) XI. Few, if any (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Broad fissures in ground. Underground pipelines completely out of service. Earth slumps and land slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly XII. Damage total. Waves seen on ground surface. Lines of sight and level distorted. Objects thrown upward into the air Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-12 DISTANT EARTHQUAKE EPICENTERS (200 OR MORE MILES FROM THE SITE) (1800-1986) Affected Approx. Area Distance Estimated Maximum North West (square From Site Intensity Date Time Intensity Location Latitude Longitude miles) (miles) at Site 1811 Dec 16 0200 XII New Madrid, Missouri 36.6 89.6 2,000,000 530 III - IV 1812 Jan 23 - XII New Madrid, Missouri 36.6 89.6 2,000,000 530 III - IV 1812 Feb 7 - XII New Madrid, Missouri 36.6 89.6 2,000,000 530 III - IV 1870 Oct 20 1125 IX Montreal-Quebec, 47.4 70.5 1,000,000 730 IV Canada 1886 Aug 31 2159 X Charleston, South 32.9 80.0 2,000,000 650 IV Carolina 1895 Oct 31 0508 VIII Charleston, Missouri 37.0 89.4 1,000,000 460 III 1905 Mar 13 1030 V Menominee 45.0 87.7 Local 300 - 1909 Jan 22 2115 V Houghton, Michigan 47.2 88.6 Local 435 0 1909 May 26 0842 VII Beloit, Wisconsin 42.5 89.0 500,000 290 0 1909 Sep 27 0345 VII Indiana 39.0 87.7 30,000 310 0 1925 Feb 28 0919 IX St. Lawrence River 47.6 70.1 1,000,000 780 II 1926 Nov 5 0953 VII Southeast Ohio 39.1 82.1 350 205 0 1929 Aug 12 0625 IX Attica, New York 42.9 78.3 100,000 270 II 1935 Nov 1 0104 VI Timiskaming, Ontario 46.8 79.1 1,000,000 340 III - IV 1944 Sep 5 0039 VIII Cornwall-Massena 44.9 74.5 175,000 480 II 1963 Feb 27 0600 IV Grimsby, Ontario 43.2 79.5 - 220 0 1968 Nov 9 1203 VIII Southeast Illinois 38.5 88.0 1,000,000 350 II 1975 Feb 16 2321 V Near Wellston, Ohio 39.0 82.4 Local 215 0 1980 Jul 27 1852 VII Sharpsburg, Kentucky 37.8 83.7 260,000 300 II 1984 Jul 6 1724 V Near Sudbury, Ontario 46.5 81.2 Local 350 0 1984 Jul 28 2339 V Near Clay City, 39.2 87.1 Local 285 0 Indiana 1984 Aug 29 0650 V Near Clay City, 39.4 87.2 Local 285 0 Indiana 1985 Sep 9 2206 V Near Edgebrook, 41.9 88.0 Local 250 0 Illinois Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-13 EARTHQUAKE EPICENTERS WITHIN 200 MILES OF THE SITEa (1776-1986) Approx. Affected Distance Area From Estimated Maximum North West (square Site Intensity Date Time Intensity Location Latitude Longitude miles) (miles) at Site 1776 Summer 0800 VI Near Muskingum River - - - 170 - 1833 Feb 4 - VI Near Kalamazoo, 42.3 85.6 - 125 - Michigan 1857 Mar 1 - V Near Eastlake, Ohio 41.7 81.2 - 110 - 1872 Feb 6 0800 V Wenona, Michigan 43.5 83.5 Local 110 0 1875 Jun 18 0743 VII Urbana and Sidney, Ohio 40.2 84.0 40,000 130 - 1877 Aug 17 1050 V SE Michigan near Detroit 42.3 83.3 200 25 0 1882 Feb 9 1500 V Swandors and Dodkins 40.5 84.0 Local 110 0 near Anna, Ohio 1883 Feb 4 0500 VI Indiana and Michigan, felt 42.3 85.6 8,000 125 - at Kalamazoo 1884 Sep 19 1414 VI Near Lima, Ohio 40.7 84.1 125,000 95 IV 1900 Apr 9 1400 VI Near Brunswick, Ohio 41.4 81.8 - 95 III 1901 May 17 0100 VI Southeast Ohio 39.3 82.5 7,000 190 0 1902 Jun 14 0700 V Near Dover, Ohio 40.3 81.4 - 150 0 1906 Apr 23 0712 V Near Ada, Ohio 40.7 83.6 - 90 II 1906 Jun 27 1610 V Fairport, Ohio 41.4 81.6 400 95 0 1925 Mar 27 2306 V Southwestern Ohio - - - 170 - 1926 Oct 28 0240 III East Toledo, Ohio 41.6 83.6 Local 30 0 0500 IV Toledo, Ohio 41.6 83.6 Local 30 0 1927 Oct 29 - V Near Alliance, Ohio 40.9 81.2 - 125 - 1928 Sep 9 1500 V Lorain and Cleveland, 41.5 82.0 1,500 70 0 Ohio 1929 Mar 8 0406 V Bellefontaine, Ohio 40.4 84.2 5,000 130 0 1930 Sep 20 1440 VI Anna, Ohio 40.3 84.3 - 125 0 1930 Sep 30 1440 VII Anna, Ohio 40.3 84.3 - 130 - 1930 Nov 20 - III Near Brighton, Michigan 42.6 83.4 - 45 II 1931 Jun 10 0330 V Malinta, Ohio 41.6 84.0 - 55 - 1931 Sep 20 1805 VII Anna, Sidney, Houston, 40.2 84.3 40,000 130 0 Ohio 1932 Jan 22 - V Near Akron, Ohio 41.1 81.5 - 110 0 1937 Mar 2 0948 VII Anna, Sidney, Ohio 40.7 84.0 90,000 110 III Page 1 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-13 EARTHQUAKE EPICENTERS WITHIN 200 MILES OF THE SITEa (1776-1986) Approx. Affected Distance Area From Estimated Maximum North West (square Site Intensity Date Time Intensity Location Latitude Longitude miles) (miles) at Site 1937 Mar 3 0450 V Anna, Sidney, Ohio 40.5 84.0 Local 110 0 1937 Mar 9 2445 VIII Anna, Sidney, Ohio 40.6 84.0 150,000 100 IV 1938 Mar 13 1040 II Detroit River 42.3 83.1 Local 25 II 1943 Mar 9 2226 V Lake Erie 42.2 80.9 40,000 120 IV 1947 Aug 9 2047 VI South-Central Michigan 42.0 85.0 50,000 90 III 1948 Jan 18 Night III Toledo, Ohio 41.6 83.6 Local 30 - 1952 Jun 20 0438 VI Zanesville, Ohio 39.8 82.2 10,000 170 0 1953 Jun 12 2345 IV Toledo, Ohio 41.6 83.6 Local 30 0 1955 May 26 1309 V Cleveland, Ohio 41.5 81.7 Local 85 0 1955 Jun 28 2016 V Cleveland, Ohio 41.5 81.7 Local 85 0 1956 Jan 27 1103 V West-Central Ohio 40.5 84.0 Local 110 0 1957 Jun 29 0525 V Southeast of London, 42.9 81.2 Local 120 0 Ontario 1958 May 1 1647 V Cleveland, Ohio 41.3 81.4 Local 110 0 1961 Feb 22 0344 V Findlay, Ohio 41.2 83.4 Local 55 0 1967 Apr 7 2340 V Columbus, Ohio 39.6 82.5 3,000 165 0 1968 Oct 31 V Attica, Michigan 43.0 83.0 Local 80 II 1976 Feb 2 2114 III Colechester, Ontario 42.0 82.7 Local 25 II 1977 Jun 17 1539 VI Near Celina, Ohio 40.7 84.6 200 110 II 1980 Aug 20 0934 IV Near Colechester, Ontario 41.9 83.0 Local 15 III 1986 Jan 31 1646 VI Near Perry, Ohio 41.7 81.2 - 110 IV 1986 Jul 12 0819 V St. Mary's Ohio 40.6 84.4 Local 115 0 a. Earthquakes of Intensity V or greater only are tabulated beyond a distance of 50 miles from the site. All known shocks within 50 miles of the site are indicated. Page 2 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-14 RESULTS OF PLATE LOAD TESTS ON FILL AND TILL Average Movement of Plate For a Contact Stress of 10,000 lb/ft Material Plate Diameter (in.) Initial Load Cycle (in.) Average of Rebound Cycle (in.) Fill 12 0.035 0.006 24 0.091 0.027 30 0.097 0.040 Till 12 0.050 0.040 24 0.092 0.049 30 0.101 0.052 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-15 WATER PRESSURE TEST DATA Water Period of Water Calculated Boring Pressure Steady Flow Intake Permeability Number Test Section Depth (ft) (psi) (minutes) (gpm) (ft/yr) 201 23-1/2 1/2 25 20 2.5 211 33 - 43 30 20 8.0 564 43-1/2 1/2 45 10 7.0 327 53 - 64 75 10 6.0 169 63-1/2 1/2 70 10 8.0 240 203 15 - 25 13 20 8.5 1380 21 - 31 17 20 12.4 1540 30 - 40 30 20 9.0 635 39 - 49 37 20 24.0 1370 48 - 58 55 20 10.5 404 57 - 67 55 20 6.5 250 66 - 76 55 20 5.5 210 75 - 85 55 20 23.0 884 84 - 94 55 20 22.0 845 93 - 103 55 20 22.0 845 102 - 112 65 20 19.0 616 209 36 - 46 30 20 11.5 810 43 - 53 30 20 19.0 1340 52 - 62 40 5 6.0 316 61 - 71 40 10 13.0 685 70 - 80 40 10 13.0 685 79 - 89 40 10 2.0 105 88 - 98 40 10 10.0 526 97 - 107 40 10 3.0 158 106 - 116 40 20 17.6 930 115 - 125 40 15 16.6 875 Page 1 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-15 WATER PRESSURE TEST DATA Water Period of Water Calculated Boring Pressure Steady Flow Intake Permeability Number Test Section Depth (ft) (psi) (minutes) (gpm) (ft/yr) 124 - 134 40 15 16.0 845 133 - 143 40 20 15.0 790 142 - 152 40 20 9.5 500 210 14 - 24 15 15 15.8 2220 23 - 33 30 20 15.5 1090 45 - 55 50 20 11.5 486 54 - 64 50 20 16.5 697 63 - 73 50 15 21.0 888 72 - 82 50 20 21.0 888 81 - 91 50 20 20.0 845 90 - 100 50 20 15.0 634 Note: Permeabilities were calculated using the method outlined in Reference 4; i.e., using the formula K = Cp (Q/H) where K = permeability in feet per year Cp = a constant dependent on hole size Q = flow in gallons per minute H = applied pressure in feet of water units Page 2 of 2 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-16 CHEMICAL ANALYSES OF GROUND WATER Boring Number Depth (ft) Formation a pH Chloride (C1-, ppm) Sulfate (SO4--, ppm) 201 30.0 BI 7.65 33 1685 201 85.0 BI 7.60 34 1747 204 18.0 BI 8.00 43 1661 205 17.4 BI 8.10 45 1865 205 27.4 BI 8.00 43 1733 205 117.0 S 7.30 424 1790 207 19.8 BI 7.40 356 1776 207 20.0 BI 7.70 51 1747 208 27.2 BI 7.90 1164 1168 208 110.0 S 8.10 183 1282 209 92.0-102.0 BI-S 8.10 102 1771 209 97.0-107.0 BI-S 8.05 156 1738 209 102.0-112.0 S 8.00 91 1738 209 132.0-142.0 S 7.80 116 1757 209 147.0-152.0 S 8.10 122 1800 209 151+ S 8.10 115 1757 209 210+ S 7.90 162 1771 210 20.4-30.5 BI 7.60 603 1738 210 30.4-40.5 BI 7.65 547 1728 210 40.4-50.5 BI 8.00 1145 1709 210 50.4-60.5 BI 8.00 362 1742 210 60.4-70.5 BI 8.10 198 1709 210 70.4-80.5 BI 7.70 65 1752 210 80.4-90.5 BI-S 8.00 156 1699 210 90.4-100.0 S 7.50 21 1718 210 67+ BI 7.70 48 1747 a BI = Bass Islands Group. S = Salina Group. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-17 LATERAL PRESSURE VALUES a Crushed- Bass Islands Lateral Pressure (lb/ft2/ft) Rock Fill Bedrock Static-rigid wall above water 96 b,c 0 Static-rigid wall submerged 122b,c 63 Static-cantilever wall above water 32c 0 Static-cantilever wall submerged 80c 63 d Dynamic-rigid wall above water - d Dynamic-rigid wall below water - a During the course of safety evaluation review, the NRC requested additional information regarding the technique for the dynamic lateral pressure computation. This information was provided to the NRC as Reference 32. b Alternate values calculated per Reference 56 were used in the re-analysis of some subsurface exterior walls. c A factor of safety of 1.5 is applied to these values when the foundation walls are required to perform safety-related functions. d See Figures 3.8-48 and 3.8-49. Page 1 of 1 REV 22 04/19

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-18 FOUNDATION DATA Approximate Uniform Approximate Plan Foundation Applied Foundation Dimensions (ft x ft) Elevations a (ft) Load (lb/ft2) Category I Reactor building 120 x 155 536 7500 Auxiliary building 80 x 155 536 4000 to 5000 RHR Complex 120 x 310 547 4000 to 5000 Other structures Turbine house 210 x 375 558 5000 Radwaste building 100 x 190 552 2500 a USGS datum. Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-19 CURTAIN WALL GROUTING

SUMMARY

OF GROUT TAKES Hole Grout Take in Cubic Feetb Observed Horizontal Distance of Numbera Mix A c Mix B d Mix C e Total Grout Travel (ft) 1 3 10 13 12 2 1.5 10.5 12 3 6 3 9 12 4 3 3 5 9 9 6 6 6 7 18 18 8 6 6 9 6 6 10 6 9 15 11 9 9 12 4.5 4.5 13 10.5 10.5 14 1.5 1.5 15 10.5 6 16.5 16 3 3 17 18 3 21 36 18 3 3 19 6 4.5 10.5 24 20 3 3 6 21 3 1.5 4.5 22 12 18 30 12 23 6 10.5 16.5 24 24 10.5 6 16.5 12 25 9 12 21 12 26 9 3 12 27 12 24 36 24 28 9 9 18 12 29 9 18 10 37 30 6 15 7.5 28.5 24 31 9 27 10 46 12 32 12 3 15 12 33 9 12 21 12 34 6 12 18 12 35 10.5 21 5 36.5 12 Page 1 of 3 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-19 CURTAIN WALL GROUTING

SUMMARY

OF GROUT TAKES Hole Grout Take in Cubic Feetb Observed Horizontal Distance of Numbera Mix A c Mix B d Mix C e Total Grout Travel (ft) 36 1.5 1.5 12 37 18 27 45 12 38 1.5 1.5 39 21 44 65 24 40 9 24 26 59 24 41 12 18 30 12 42 12 21 33 12 43 7.5 3 10.5 44 1.5 1.5 45 12 9 21 46 12 21 33 12 47 12 3 15 24 48 12 10.5 22.5 12 49 12 12 24 50 12 18 30 51 12 30 5 47 12 52 9 10.5 19.5 24 53 6 12 18 12 54 12 27 39 12 55 7.5 3 10.5 56 1.5 1.5 57 12 15 27 12 58 9 12 21 12 59 1.5 1.5 60 10.5 18 28.5 12 61 7.5 18 5 30.5 62 7.5 15 22.5 63 9 18 27 24 64 9 21 30 24 65 21 46 67 24 66 15 30 15 60 36 67 24 6 30 12 68 15 15 69 22.5 3 25.5 70 19.5 19.5 Page 2 of 3 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-19 CURTAIN WALL GROUTING

SUMMARY

OF GROUT TAKES Hole Grout Take in Cubic Feetb Observed Horizontal Distance of Numbera Mix A c Mix B d Mix C e Total Grout Travel (ft) 71 1.5 1.5 12 72 15 12 10 37 12 73 18 7.5 25.5 24 74 15 9 24 12 75 Abandoned - Driller Lost Drill Bit in Hole 75A 9 12 21 24 76 12 12 76A 6 6 77 1.5 1.5 78 7.5 7.5 12 79 21 21 24 80 15 15 a All grout holes were brought to refusal with a grout pressure ranging from 8 psi to 20 psi with the exception of holes 2, 3, and 68 in which there was a heavy grout return through the surface of the rock which was highly fractured above packer. b An additional 72-1/2 ft3 of grout was used for filling inside the casing subsequent to pressure grouting. c Mix A - Water:cement + flyash ratio of 2:1 or greater. d Mix B - Water:cement + flyash ratio of 1.5:1 or less e Mix C - Water:cement + flyash ratio of 1:1 or less plus a water:sand ratio of 1:1. Page 3 of 3 REV 16 10/09

FERMI 2 UFSAR TABLE 2.5-20

SUMMARY

OF GROUTING FIRST ZONE GROUTING (holes drilled 10 ft into rock) Holes Holes Percent Holes Sacks Cement Unit Take (sacks Drilled With Take With Take and Flyash per foot of hole) Primary 75 87 1629.00 3.17 Secondary 65 75 1066.25 2.08 Tertiary 39 29 174.00 0.21 Quaternary 7 27 109.25 0.84 Total 186 -- 2978.00 -- Average 52.75 1.58 SECOND ZONE GROUTING (holes drilled approximately 50 ft into rock) Holes Holes Percent Holes Sacks Cement Unit Take (sacks Drilled With Take With Take and Flyash per foot of hole) Primary 91 99 1340.25 0.46 Secondary 89 100 652.50 0.31 Tertiary 47 98 357.75 0.18 Quaternary 9 100 106.50 0.27 Total 236 -- 2457.00 -- Average 99.22 0.31 Page 1 of 1 REV 16 10/09

LAKE ...__" SUPERIOR SUPEl?IOR / UPLAND

                                                                                                     '*: PROVINCE                                    ONTARIO ICH!GAN L             - ----

r7--1 _______,/' ---..__ r-.

                                                                                                \j 
                                              =J I /..,.{/ /
                                                                                 /?
                                                                          ,.,,..J :,,;
                                         /                                I                                      LAKE J_.,,/ /                       .--' C/1/     0                               1       HURON
     '.SCONSIN)

I

                                                                     //                                          I I

II r' J (1 ( "'

                                            !                                                ()              .f
                                                                                                           ,,   _,-*/"'.,\

( "- ( \ ('/ \ ( \ MICHIGAN .\ I I 4."'4.

               --_J                                               )

U ) Vf Eti' SECTION R

                                                                                                                                                 £
                                                                                                                                                                      ,/
                                                               -                                         sir£
                                                                                                                                        £   £R I 0
                                                                               ----i-----   I                                  [....At<       /

I r,,,. , ..:>, V' I I A. V V' PENNSYLVAN l A TliLL. PLAINS v 1,._(cl ND I ANA SECTION

                                                                                                                                                       /1
                                  !oft                                                                                 HIO V' -1'

()

                                                                                                                                                    ,J ti L_ _____ _

0 0 Qf, .',..J.r-..//' 1*,J' V'

                        ,                                                                                     R:.-,

r*

                  ,...__ --                         , ....\

V'

                                                                                                                      ,_ _I;
                                                                                                                        )

WEST VIRGINIA

                                               "\ .i         -                                                          I
             , *) -'v-- "I, INTEAIOA
                                                                                                                          \
           )                                      L.OW         PL.ATEAU
    ,*****                                              PROV I NOE                                                                                         SCALE IN MILES

REFERENCE:

Fermi 2 MODIFIED FROM FENNEMAN, N. 1946; PHYSICAL UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT DIVISIONS OF THE UNITED STATES IN COOPERATION WITH THE PHYSIOGRAPHIC COMMITTEE OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY. FIGURE 2.5-1 MODIFIED FROM: BASEMENT ROCK MAP OF THE CENTRAL LOWLAND PROVINCE UNITED STATES, COMPILED BY RICHARD W. BAYLEY, REGIONAL PHYSIOGRAPHIC MAP UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, AND WILLIAM MUEHLBERGER, UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS, 196B. REV 22 04/19

E ---- LEGEND: m 110 110 GjilliJ WISCONSIN END LAKE SEDIMENTS E.::::f MORAINES -- NO GLACIAL DEPOSITS GROUND MORAINES

                              ,, ....... , AND OUTWASH Fermi 2 PLAINS      UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT ICE CONTACT STRATIFIED DRIFT FIGURE 2.5-2 REFERENCI=:

REGIONAL SURFACE GEOLOGICAL MAP GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 1959, GLACIAL MAP OF THE UNITED STATES EAST OF THE ROCKY MOUNTAINS. REV 22 04/19

LEGEND LACUSTRINE CLAY D LACUSTRI NEANDDELTACLAY LACUSTRI NE LOAM MUCKAND PEAT MA RSHES ALLUVIAL DEPOSITS

                                                       ,..,- GLACIAL LAKE SHO RELINE; INDEFINITE WHERE DASHED 0

SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

REFERENCE:

FIGURE 2.5-3 MAZOLA, A. J,, 1969, GLACIAL DEPOSITS OF MONROE COUNTY, MICHIGAN: FROM REPORT OF INVESTIGATION 13, GEOLOGY AREA SURFACE GEOLO GICAL MAP FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING IN MONROE COUNTY, MICHIGAN: GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES. REV 22 04/19

890 84° 830 8:ZO 800 790 47°

 * ..                                                                                               460 440 llIIIII]  JUASSIC         -SILURIAN             DEVONIAN 50      25 SCALE IN MILES 0         50    100 PERMIAN          I:::::  ORDOVICIAN E     PENNSYLVANIAN    mm l:lliW   CAMBRIAN Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

REFERENCE:

D ,PRECAMBRIAN FIGURE 2.5-4 THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FROM: REGIONAL BEDROCK GEOLOGICAL MAP A)GEOLOGIC MAP OF NORTH AMERICA" BY THE U,S,G,S,, 1966 B) "BEDROCK OF MICHIGAN" BY THE MICHIGAN STATE GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, 1968 REV 22 04/19

LEGEND i DETROIT RIVER GROUP ANDERDON FORMATION LUCAS FORMATION AMHERSTBURG FORMATION

                                                                               ,§YLVANIA Ss BASS ISLANDS GROUP SALINA GROUP

__ ..,,.,,,,,,.-- CONTACTS ARE INFRARED

• ACTIVE QUARRIES ABANDONED QUARRIES A REPORTED NATURAL OUTCROPS REPORTED SINK HOLES e OIL OR GAS WELL RECORD LARGER SOLID CIRCLE DENOTES SEVERAL RECORDS IN THE IMMEDIATE VICINITY 0 6 laia!!!!l;;;;;l!!!"!l;;;;;iiiiiiiiiiiiil!!"""'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!iiiiiiiiiiii.a!!!'!!!"""'!!!!...-!;;;iiiiii--!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

REFERENCE:

FIGURE 2.5-5 MAZOLA, A. J., 1969, BEDROCK GEOLOGIC MAP OF MONROE COUNTY, MICHIGAN: FROM REPORT OF INVESTIGATION 13, AREA BEDROCK GEOLOGICAL MAP GEOLOGY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING IN MONROE COUNTY, MICHIGAN; GEOLOGICAL SURVEY DIVISION, DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, 1970. REV 22 04/19

ONTARIO

                      '--. ... MICHIGAN 3

l, I WISCONSIN CHICAGO

,,.'f WESTf VIRGINIA cf s

It" LEGENDi ANTICLINE OR ARCH

                                                                        -=-=---=--

SCALE IN MILES KNOWN --W INFERRED-Fermi 2 SYNCLINE KNOWN -f,+ INFERRED-f-9 MONOCLINE --,-- UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-6

REFERENCE:

ELLS, G.D., 1969, ARCHITECTURE OF THE MICHIGAN MAJOR FOLDS MAP BASIN IN STUDIES OF THE PRECAMBRIAN OF THE MICHIGAN BASIN: MICHIGAN BASIN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY. REV 22 04/19

ONTARIO L,

                                           ./                                                               LAKE HURON DES PLAINES DISTURBANCE KENTLAND I

DISTURBANCE 1e I ILLINOIS I I I

                                    'I t8 I

( I I CINCINNATI

                                                                                      \

SERPENT MOUND DISTURBANCE w---- f

                                                                                                                   /
                                                                                                                   -,./
                                                                                                                        ,//

I f _,, ,..J \._, /\"'

                                                                                                       --,/

I \ r' WEST VIRGINIA f?ouo 1 /

           ,., Cf?,d,r.,:-
                     '                 ,' r--l .._,,,                                1.oNE
                                                                                                           \
                       "'II(                                 -tU3/4;,FAU.!:l-
                                                                      '1-"l
                                '/';lDNe                  'I-.... -. .. _ _
                                                                                                                        -=-=-===--===--

LEG.END:

                                               ,-'>\ ' - _, .,,. .,,.
                                                        '                        TRACE OF FAULT                            0   25   50   /5 100
                                                                                -*TREND HACHURES SHOWN ON                  SCAL.E IN MIL.ES DDWNTHROWN SIDE

REFERENCE:

BRIGHAM, R. J., 1972, STRUCTURAL GEOLOGY OF Fermi 2 SOUTHWESTERN ONTARIO AND SOUTHEASTERN UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT MICHIGAN, ONTARIO MINES AND NORTHERN AFFAIRS AFFAIRS. PETROLEUM RESOURCES SECTION PAPER 71-2. FIGURE 2.5-7 BRISTOL, H, M,, AND T. C, BUSHBACH, 1971, STRUCTURAL FEATURES OF THE EASTERN MAJOR FAULTS MAP INTERIOR REGION OF THE UNITED STATES IN ILLINOIS GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, ILLINOIS PETROLEUM PUB 96, REV 22 04/19

LEGEND: THRUST FAULT NORMAL FAULT EN ECHELON FAULT SYSTEM (/ft'\

                                                                                                         .... __ .,1, ___ A,._

BURIED FAULT UNCLASSIFIED FAULT INTENSELY DISTURBED. LOCALIZED UPLIFT ANTICLINAL AXIS

                                                                                                          ---+---                   SYNCLINAL AXIS AXIS OF OVERTURNED ANTICLINE

() ELONGATE.CLOSELY COMPRESSED ANTICLINE STRUCTURE CONTOURS NOTE: STRUCTURE CONTOUR LINES ARE CONSTRUCTED ON THE TOPS OF DIFFERENT LITHOLOGIC UNITS IN IN DIFFERENT LOCALITIES. THE NAMES AND BOUNDARIES OF THESE CONTOURED UNITS ARE

                                                                              <:)

DELINEATED BY DOTTED LINES ON THE MAP. LIMA*, :rlON/ 25 0 110 0 i,5 r-, ii-ii f I MUNCIE i SCALE IN MILES D A N A II

• Fermi 2

_ h \) r IANArqus* I SPRINGFIELD UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT N II I ' I _.:* I\'\ \. \ TERRE HAUTE I FIGURE 2.5-8 I

REFERENCE:

\                                           I                               /                                          REGIONAL TECTONIC MAP UNITED STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AND THE AMERICAN I II ASSOCIATION OF PETROLEUM GEOLOGISTS, 1962, TECTONIC MAP OF THE UNITED STATES.                                          CINCINNATI
                                                    .L '"'-..., ...__

f" I SERPENT MOUND REV 22 04/19

79 ° LEGEND:

                                                                                                 ,,,--.....50---- BOUGUER GRAVITY CONTOUR (CONTOUR INTERVAL 10 MILLIGALS)

C ( 0 1.0 7G SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-9 BASE MAP FROM: WOOLARD, G.P. AND JOESTING, H.R., REGIONAL BOUGUER GRAVITY MAP 1964, BOUGUER GRAVITY ANOMALY MAP OF THE UNITED I STATES; AMERICAN GEOPHYSICAL UNION AND UNITED BUCKHANNON.,,........---. '-39

                                                                                           °

• I STATES GEOLOGICAL SURVEY.

                                                -----dlllllV, REV 22 04/19

J h

                           ......                                                                                \,
                              /'
                                       ,/                                                                         \1
                          /                                                                                        \"
                        /                                                                                           :.4;,

lo

                                                                                                                       \
                                                                                                                        \

I \

                    /                                                                                                      \

i I \ i I l \

                 "                                                                                                               \
                                                                                                                                  \

i

                                                                                                                                   /
                                                                                                                                  /
                                                                                                                               /
           \

i i i I I I - KEY: e INDICATES PRECAMBRIAN SAMPLE SCALE IN MILES CONTOUR INTERVAL= 100 GAMMAS

• IO 0 IO Fermi 2

REFERENCE:

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT MAGNETIC MAP - A) HINZE, W,J,, AND MERRITT, D,W,, 1969, BASEMENT ROCKS OF THE SOUTHERN PENINSULA OF FIGURE 2.5-10 MICHIGAN IN STUDIES OF THE PRECAMBRIAN OF THE MICHIGAN BASIN: MICHIGAN BASIN GEOLOGICAL SOCIETY B) THE PRECAMBRIAN WELL LOCATIONS ARE FROM THE REGIONAL MAGNETIC MAP MICHIGAN GEOLOGICAL SURVEY, 1968, MICHIGAN'S OIL AND GAS FIELDS, 1967: ANNUAL STATISTICAL

SUMMARY

NO, 8, REV 22 04/19

(/)

E C,) W(/)_

W ~WI-I- STRATI GRAPH Ie :cC) a:: zw LITHOLOGY (/) NOMENCLATURE Cl..O ct.J w::C::w

                 )0-a::      ;>-Q!:,

(/) C) ;q::r: I-QUAT. Rlclnt and PlllltOCI.,... 15-30 ~r~~JlI~ms and BoIS 1,land, Graul! 80 Dalamitl G Shalll and Sholy Dolomitl

                                             . .,-                    II) E   Shaly DOlamit~

So I i no Group 525 Q - "1Limlltone an Limestone Breccias Z l!j C c( Dolomite and Shaly

                                                                         ~

h Dolomite a:: A Limestone and

)

I Dolomite

                 ..J I/)

Nlaooran Group 425 Dolomite Cataract Group 100 Shale and Dolomite Richmond Group 625 Shale and Dolomite Z c( (,)

                >0 Q

a:: 0

                                                         .L Trenton - Black River                 825-850          Dalomit.. and Shalll Group Sandstones (w i th 475           same Dolomites)

Granitic Gneiss NOTE: THICKNESS OF THE BASS ISLANDS GROUP AND PART OF THE SALINA GROUP BASED ON SITE EXPLORATORY BORINGS. OTHER THICKNESSES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT BASED ON MICHIGAN WELL LOGS, BRIGHAM, (1972) FISHER, (1969) AND ELLS, (ORAL COMMUNICATION) FIGURE 2.5-11 SITE STRATIGRAPHIC COLUMN

                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ~
                                               <><PT" COORDINATES                                                CooRDINA.T&:S    oe,.".

E~V." NORTH EMT

                                                                            ~

NoRTH SAn

                                                                             .. '0_

34-c;"

     *a 573.0      "700      S:z~o                               573.1       ~<.OO    4_       2.1'-0"

nl." 70&0 "250 e5~O" 612..8 10000 5600 2a~.. *

>72.'"  ?~6a  !:!o250 ",",'-e:.- 70 5n.'2. 1000 0 48 00 2&'-10" 4 5'72*5 7660 5250 .t~" 71 ".,. 10Boo 6400 30'-7' n

      ~      578*4       7980     52!SO          "'2.*-G~            571.9                S600     2'9'-2" "8      !5?a.5    1&0      5550           S<4t.o*       7S    512..0      10&00    3'2-00    '2.S'-(i.-

7 572.7 7080 ......0

                                                 ~~~::               &'3."       10800     4800    2.,'-Gi'

7. 7_

5"72.'

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           /f 7S    573.0       11=0 7"""      5'00                                                    "'400     32~1I~

Q 57!)*4 7'-&0 5&50 41"0" 7<0 5"12.0 11<0.00 5,,"00 '31'-<;

     '0      "..9.,     7980      s~so          ",,",'-c<.'   77     513.0       1'2.,\00 ~4<>o     21'-0*
     ":~ I                                                                                                                                                                                                                           If 58,..,        3'3',0"                                   $(600 7.
            ~73.e       <07&0                                        512.2-      12400              Z9~6" 7080      5800           8'9'-0'                                   6200    32..'*..*

572.~ 5'2.S 912.G ~"O 4ot.o" eo 51$" 7550 5'200 3!t1'.5-I NOTE:

      '4    571.G        7&80     saso          94'*0'         6'    57.... 7     8800     3540    :2.2~*e
                                                               ...8.

5 ...... eeo o S?a.2 ",00 82

                                  '800          ~"2'                                       6000 CONmu",,,,,,,, '" ""

1~;:~_ 511.8 7251 ... '6'1. 51t'*0" .s 7130 5910 17 570.0 767,. 10"3\5 ~.'-,," "'11'50 5"0 '2.o:'0~

           "572..$      7.,.16                  !4"2~                   -                  59"10     2 0 '-0" ca."'1I~                                        7~70 5:12.0     7892      .:093&        SG"ou         86                  .",70    5990     20'-0*

to 86'-0' 01 5..,.97 7<07. 7579 5970 '2.0'*0" 5"1-1-.2 8124 7594 sa soso 2 0 '-0.

                        ,'0'

_9'-~- 79'90 I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                          /;

51",*3 0040 "'0'- 7_30 2<::;-0" 8'

                                                                                          ",70 5TI.        .510'3    eQ40          24"-0"                                              '2.0'-0" 7~30     ~990 571.3       8-"S~     8'2.5,,"       &'3."0'             5"12,2:     1400              .'$1'-0*
                                                                                           "'2-~
     '4      575 5      8141       8"100       ,4'*3#                en'3.'       71-_~   ra'le. 29'-0' 25      573.8      8581                     9&"';;'"      S. 571.2-                Me<. SQ'-",,-
                                                               "7.

691~ 7<.~5

     ""     .512.8      8372-                   "10'-0"        94    $73-7       192.Ci>   914<.0   30.'-(","

27 571,8 eSle ""l"';'o~ 57,\,0 el~6 9607 S&'_OH

     '8     57.0        .~04      10022         \Ol'~O-              5"12.7      BS-ee. 1148       2<;;.'-0"
                                                                                                                                                                                            /

572.( 780. 29 90$0 \O'2.SG> 90',,"-' 574.1 65,0 2G'-~r' Bass S. 91,.., 30 10662 151'-0' 5"19.8 8601 &-+';;9 2.8'-(;."

                                                              ,00 57"'1 a'      5,"Z7                                2t'-O'              5.., .... 1                     28"0" 3'

0;0000 4800 ~O~~ 5"197 5990 2.8'-0' 515-2. 87&"\- 73C'i2.

                                                              '0'
                                    +~90                                                             2~'*,"

4400

                                                              ,02 3'~      .519.,      5990                   24j'-O~               S13.!l       go Iii>  802~      41'-0'
             ~13*a      ,",,00     4000          2.4'-0"             312_a        9"'2.47 8684       28'-0' S74.2                  a600                        ,os                         934 ..
                                                                     ,...,.0
                        ~ooo                     '25~o'              5"12.&       947~               ~I"o" os      5...,.51   <0000      a2=           24",."        ,04   SGI.S        9254     772.9     32'-0' 512*'30 . c;;4oo      4800          2;~'-3" 2.+'-10"      '0'                9411      aun
                                                                                          ""'0 312'-'::

I 37 5Tl.7 I cc400 4400 'OG 558.0 9cc4B SO'-(O~ 513." ' ~4<>o 4000 27'-0' '07 5,"1.0 <)720 ",oos 30'-0" 39  !!no.o 51S.S C'i400

                         <.400 3'00          as'-~"

2.2.'-10 40 6200 4, 572..1  ;;,;eoo 4"'0 21'-","

                                                ,0'-0* 'ELEVATIONS SHOWN ARE NOMINAL 4'       ~12.a      <0805      4385          2;3'-4~

4a 5""3.1 ,,",so 40()O 44 5""~_O Go892. 3<<:'93 2.'\'-4" 45 513,1 7200 q.eoo Ig'-o" Sl~*\ T2.00 "400 2.2.:"4"

     <7     5'13.G      "72.0.0   4000          22'-4~

48 514.1 ?ZOO 3&00 \9'-10*'

4. S14-.\ aooo

                        "'00 7.eo                    ~~-o*

B> 51S,7 4800 2\'-0" Sl 519*1 "7&00 4400 '2.1'-0" 513.10 "74000 4000 II~ c;.H 54 S74,1

            .577.0
                        ...,600 1980       ""00
                                   ,,000
                                                \9'-Z**

82.~4* os S1~,o 8000 4&00 22.'-0'* \ 5<> 8000 -4Aoo 1<;):"0" 51~.o ENLARGED VIEW OF SEISMIC 57 516.0 8000 4000 i \9*-a.~ S"-UDY BORINGS

5. 514.0 &000 a~ol 11~9" I 77(.2.'

57<0*8 a400 6000 51'30 Moo 5eOo, 32-0*'

                                  ~~~ I 59'-'-"

G'

             ~~.;       6400                    '2.7(.<</                                                                                                                                                                   o INDICATES PROPOSED BORING LOCATIONS FOR UNIT NO.2 8400                    24'-co"
    ""                                                                                                                                                                                                                            (201-21) 512.7                 4400         18'_10-in 8-4-00 iN
    "'4     513.0       S40Q       4000
    .5       511.1      9200
                                   ""00         2G(.7 N                                                                                                                                                                    Ell     INDICATES PROPOSED BORING LOCATIONS FOR UNIT NO.2
     "       "13.~       92,00     4BoO         24-'-0*

07 519.0 9200 ,,"000 3'3:,,* -- ,00'1. 1~ (108-124) INDICATES BORING LOCATION TAKEN FOR UNIT NO.1

                                                                                                                                                                            .~

A INOICATES PROPOSED BORING LOCATIONS FOR UNIT 2 (1-31) t

                                                                                                                                                                                                                           <J      INDICATES PROPOSED INLAND BORING LOCATIONS FOR UNIT 2 (31-78
                                                                                                                                                                                                                           @       INDICATES DEEP BORING LOCATION INDICATES BORING LOCATIONS FOR SEISMIC SOil RESPONSE STUDY INDICATES BORING LOCATIONS TO 80nOM OF SAND STRATUM LAKE ERIE
                                         /

rus 2-Of 'I'fOO SIU

+::: .m 103 7471 !IllS "00

                                                                                                                                                                                                           .. 00    EN        0 BOR-IN .eo IN     EAC.TCMIr. U)(..

• TUR'alNE AND RAo-NA'TE ~L,¥"

t~ p~ nTT IUT UlT

                                                                                                                                                                                                           ..00 III  'U5    54215 IU:  115U   SUI5 II!  t2.&O  un JH   1-421)

Fermi 2 LEGEND:

                                                                                                                            .... -.- ...... TOP OF BEDROCK CONTOUR (10 FOOT CONTOUR INTERVAL)

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT l TOP OF BEDROCK CONTOUR (2 FOOT CONTOUR INTERVALI

                                                                                                                               -+           INDICATES SUBSURFACE SECTION SHOWN ON FIGURES 2.6-16 AND 2.6-16 FIGURE 2.5-12 DETAILED LOGS SHOWN ON FIGURES 2.5-24 THRU 2.6-66.

BEDROCK TOPOGRAPHIC MAP - SITE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY DRAWING NO. 6MS721-40. REV. I REV 23 02/21

                                                                                                                                                                            /

II, Itfit'"

                                                                                                                                                                    ~J~/~~
                                                                                                                                                                       ,I'       I        _ ....

I  ;"'10"'/ LA IE EllIE

                                                                                                                                                                        ~
                                                                             )(;107
                                                                                                                                                             ---------L            '/'
                                                                                    )(105 x fO ';
                                                                                                                                                                           ~f-
                                                                                                                                                                      ~MLARG[D     VI£' OF SflSMIC
                                                                                                                                                                      -   STUDT BORINCS
                                           \
                                             \
                                              \
                                                \
                             /                    \
                                                   )

(1,,6400 A'

                                              /

CEarER Of

                                                                                        '.:::....---                                                                                                fERMI t IEACTO~

f21Y:l) I

                                                                                                       -I IT NO.2 (201-211

:::'~m '"O::;::'~o~n" "'!:,~~,

                                                                                                                                ~~~ING ". "'" ~:~~~~". , ,non, OSED BORING lOCATIONS  TIONS FOR UNIT UN NO. 2 (108-1241 DleATES PROP                       BORING lOCA      R UNIT NO.1         311 o INDICATES               BO~POSED          BORING          LOCATIONS F                                          Fermi 2
                                                                            * '''''" ~~o "~,,                                                                  ,

(} INDICATESPR RING lOCATION SOil RESPONSE STUD UPDATED FINAL SAFE,TIY~~ _ _REPORT ANALYSIS __ INDICATES DEEP BOlOCATIONS FOR SEISMIC RATUM INDICATES BORI TO INDICATES BORING NG lOCATIONS BOTTOM OF SAND ST FIGURE 2.5-13 DmOITEDISONPROPERTt BORING PLAN - SITE VICINITY DETROIT EDISO N COMPA N y DRAWING 6MS721-40 REV 23 02/21

NOOO , N*7:200 , N*"400 N'7,600 E'4,600 SU8SURFACE .

                                                                  ~ .. s:                          E~         SECTION DESIGNATION E  RHR-7              R R-4
                                                                                     *~FI+

1 RESIDUAL. HEAT 1+ REMOVAL. COMPL.E \.;:; i E,800

                                                         ~I R"HR-6               RW-3 to.                                             !

RKR-e R'H -5 R~ R-2 l.-f# E'5,000 C~ 201 202 203 PLATE LOAD TEST AR EA 204 Zl6 79 20

                                                                                       / .....BO I

E* 5,200 RE~'CTOR " S2 3S .214 206 207 a 207 A 20B AUX BL.DG. 0 PLATE LOAD TEST AREAl 209 J 0 t210 215 I E'5,400

                                            ---~-- r- r-~~~ ~

c....3"

                                                                               ~-
                                                                               ~c 217@          c:::!

r

                                                                               ~:;)

TURBINE BUIL.DING 91 Cl:1D S7 213 S SERVICE BLDG. E* 5,600 I E* 5,800 o !SO 100 ZOO I " I SCALE IN FEET KEY: S BORINGS DRILLED FOR P.S.A.R. (1968)

• BORINGS DRILLED FOR SUPPLEMENT TO P.S.A.R. (1969)

@ BORINGS DRILLED FOR SOIL AND ROCK STUDIES (1970) BORINGS DRILLED FOR RHR COMPLEX ~----------------------------------~ FOUNDATION INVESTIGATION (1972) Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-14 BORING PLAN - REACTOR/AUXILIARY BUILDING, RHR COMPLEX, TURBINE RADWASTE SOURCE DRAWING

REFERENCE:

BUILDING. AND SERVICE BUILDING REFERENCE 3, PLATE 2 REV 22 04/12

740-----------------------------------------------------________________________________________________----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------____________________----740 LAGOON RHR REACTOR A APPhOXIMATE FINISH GRADE COMPLEX AUX. BUILDINGS I 6 BORING NUMBER LAKE ERIE A

                                        -tIiI"-f  1.......-     '7 9 583, 540 480----~
~
""~                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ti 440~

t:

....                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ~

t: 420 :t

~                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 (:>
~                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ~
~                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 ~

400 i""4l I4j iZ 380 380 360 340 320 320 300 280 240--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,240 NOTES: SECTION A - A' 100 0 100 200 300 -400 500 ELEVATIONS REFER TO GREAT LAKES, SURFACE SECTION WERE OBTAINED BY INTERPOLATING BETWEEN TEST BOR-tnt!"- t.w4  ! I SURVEY DATUM, SCALE IN FEET INGS. INFORMATION ON ACTUAL SOIL GROUND SURFACE ELEVATIONS ARE AND ROCK CONDITIONS EXISTS ONLY CORRECT ONLY ATTEST BORING AT THE TEST BORING LOCATIONS AND LOCATIONS. Fermi 2 IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE SOIL AND THE DEPTH AND THICKNESS OF THE ROCK CONDITIONS BETWEEN THE TEST SOIL STRATA AND THE DEPTH OF THE BORINGS MAY VARY FROM THOSE ROCK STRATA INDICATED ON THE SUB- INDICATED. UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-15 SUBSURFACE SECTION A-A' FROM FIGURE 2.5-13

74~ ____________________________________________________________________________________~__~7r9_____ ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------740 8 LAGOON ING NUMBER 81 At>PROXIMATE WATER SURFACE

                                                                                                                                                                                                ;----$40
                                                                                                                                                                                                ~--6eo
                                                                                                                                                                                                ~--       $00
                                                                                                                                                                                                ---480
                                                                                                                                                                                                ---460
                                                                                                                                                                                                              ...!4.!
                                                                                                                                                                                                . - - - - 440 ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                              ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                ---420 ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                              ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                              ~

400 ~

                                                                                                                                                                                                              ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                ---380 340 320 300 280 260 00     0   100 200 300 400 500 limW!!'    ;   ;   ;   I   I 240~------------------------------------------------------------------

SCALE IN FEET NOTES: SECTION B - B' ELEVATIONS REFER TO GREAT lAKES SURFACE SECTION WERE OBTAINED BY INTERPOLATING BETWEEN TEST BOR-Fermi 2 SURVEY DATUM. INGS. INFORMATION ON ACTUAL SOil UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT GROUND SURFACE ElEVATIONS ARE AND ROCK CONDITIONS EXISTS ONLY CORRECT ONLY AT TEST BORING AT THE TEST BORING lOCATIONS AND lOCATIONS. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE SOil AND FIGURE 2.5-16 THE DEPTH AND THICKNESS OF THE ROCK CONDITIONS BETWEEN THE TEST SOil STRATA AND THE DEPTH OF THE BORINGS MAY VARY FROM THOSE ROCK STRATA INDICATED ON THE SUB-SUBSURFACE SECTION B-B' FROM INDICATED. FIGURE 2.5-13

c c* BORING 211 '**BOR INGS 208 a 209 BORING 206 BORING 204 BORING 201 570 r - GROUND SURFACE 570 T ILL AUXILIARY BUILDING I TILL UN IT 2 ___- - - - - , T

                         ..~~~~TURBINE BUILDING ...~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~R~E~A~C~TOR                                                              UNITBUILDING 550                1=;:;::::;~===__U~N~I:..:.T..:2i;....__                1--

2-550

                           -~--------r------~                                           I                                                             ----.-..... ---~-----

n III III II "- II ~ 530~ I II ~

                                                                                                                                                                                      ~             ~

I tI) V

                                                                                                                                                                                      ~      510    ~

IV oq: v ..,j tI) ~

                                                                                                                                                                                      ......        C) 4.90 i:::

v ~ I ~ ~ IV 47t? ~ VII

                                                                                                                                                                                                    ~

VI 450 VIII 450 SECTION C - C' 430 430 KEY: r TILL BROWN TO GRAY SANDY SILTY CLAY

                                                                                                     ~ DARK GRAY DDLDMITIC SHALE. FRAC*

WITH SOME COBBLES AND BOULDERS (TILL). U TURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE. 0° TO 60° WITH OCCASIONAL FRAGMENTED I;l GRAY TO BROWN MICROCRYSTALLINE ZONES. VUGS IN DOLOMITIC MATERIAL U UP TO 10%. 1/32 TO 1/21NCH. g 0~ ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRAC* TURES VERY CLOSE TO MODERATELY GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. CLOSE. 0°-90°. VUGS LESS THAN 10% WITH ZONES OF 20-40%.1/16 TO 1§ FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE

                                                                                                  <t       WITH FRAGMENTED ZONES. 0' TO 90°.

112 INCH.

                                                                                                  ~        VUGS LESS THAN 10%. 1/16 TO 112 I-:;l                                                 INCH.

I I

                                                                                                  <t NOTES:

U GRAYISH BLUE TO GRAY WITH BLUE L V) STREAKED MICROCRYSTALLINE VIII GRAYISH*BLUE BRECCIATED DOLO* GROUND SURFACE ELEVATIONS ARE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE MITE HEALED WITH BLUISH*GRAY CLAY TO CLOSE. NEAR HORIZONTAL WITH CORRECT ONLY AT TEST BORING g Q. MATRIX. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO SOME 90°. VUGS 5-10% WITH SOME G LOCATIONS. 1§ ZONES UP TO 40%. 1/32 TO 112 INCH. FRAGMENTED. 0° TO 90°. VUGS IN DOLOMITE FRAGMENTS LESS THAN THE DEPTH AND THICKNESS OF THE SOIL AND ROCK STRATA INDICATED ON ;g LlGHTGRAYTO BROWN OOLITIC 10%. 1/B TO 1/2 INCH. THE GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE ~ ~~~E~~~E~~~~~~:.E~o~~~oS!~~ 400 50 o 50 I I SECTIONS WERE OBTAINED BY INTER- TO 90°. SOME FRAGMENTED ZONES. POLATING BETWEEN TEST BORINGS. IN* VUGS UP TO 10% WITH ZONES OF UP TO FORMATION ON ACTUAL SOIL AND 40%.1/32 TO 112 INCH. . ROCK CONDITIONS EXISTS ONLY ATTHE 1;;1 LIGHT GRAY TO TAN MICROCRYSTAL* SCALE IN FEET TEST BORINGS AND ITiS POSSIBLE THAT THE SOIL AND ROCK CONDITIONS LJ LINE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. THINLY BEDDED WITH DARK GRAY Fermi 2 BETWEEN THE TEST BORINGS MAY SHALE PARTINGS AND LAMINAE. VARY FROM THOSE INDICATED. FRACTURES VARY FROM ZONES OF FRAGMENTED AND VERY CLOSE. 0°*

• • EXTRAPOLATED TO CROSS-SECTION LINE 90° TO ZONES OF MODERATELY CLOSE UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT TO WIDE. 0° TO 20° AND 30°-70°.

FROM MORE THAN 80 FEET VUGS LESS THAN 10% WITH THIN ZONES OF 10 TO 20%.1/32 TO 112 INCH. FIGURE 2.5-17

                                                     ~ LIGHT U

GRAY TO BROWN ARGILLA* CEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE SUBSURFACE SECTION C-C' FROM TO VERY CLOSE. 0° TO 90°. VUGS LESS THAN 10%. 1/16 TO 1-112 INCHES. FIGURE 2.5-14

o BOR ING 210 ** BORING **BORING 209 GROUND SlJRFACE 208 BORING 211 I BORING 212 570 I RADWASTE TILL

                                                         ~                                                                                                                                              TILL                         BUILDING I
                                                                                                                                                                  ,"I                               I                                  UNIT 2
                                               ---1-------

I ___________ l _______________ l _______ LII * }-II

      ---------,'n'---

I _~ ~ TURBINE B~I':~~~~~-= _____

                                                        *I                                                                                                                                          *
                                                                                                                                                                                                  ...II tt J I                                                                                                    IV                                     I                                                ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~

I I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~     510    ~

t..: I IV

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~
                                                     ~:-                                      V I                V                               "
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ~

I

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ~

I tf) I tf)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ~

t

                                                                                ........... -VI---J                                                                                                 I             IV
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~            i:::

VII

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  ~

VI --I I VI ~

       '---VII                                          III I   V'II                                                      ......

• 450 ~

VIII I ~

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     <::I I        VI                                 ---  ~     430 I                                                ~

VI * -..I

                   /'                                                                                                                                              VII                              I
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~

410 SECTION D - D' 390 KEY NOTES: i TILL BROWN TO GRAY SANDY SILTY CLAY WITH SOME COBBLES AND BOULDERS GROUND SURFACE ELEVATIONS ARE (Till). CORRECT ONLY AT TEST BORING ~GRAY TO BROWN MICROCRYSTALLINE U ivlllGHT GRAY TO BROWN ARGILLA* LOCATIONS. UARGllLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRAC- CEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, O~ TO 90~. VUGS LESS TURES VERY CLOSE TO MODERATELY THAN 10%, 1/16TO 1-1/2INCHES. THE DEPTH AND THICKNESS OF THE CLOSE, OO~90~. VUGS LESS THAN 10% r:;-l DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE. FRAC-WITH ZONES OF 20~40%, 1/16 TO 112 SOIL AND ROCK STRATA INDICATED ON INCH UTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, 0" TO THE GENERALIZED SUBSURFACE o f""';"lGRAYISH BLUE TO GRAY WITH BLUE 60 a WITH OCCASIONAL FRAGMENTED SECTIONS WERE OBTAINED BY INTER- L.-JSTREAKED MICROCRYSTALLINE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE "

                                                                                                                                             ~

o ZONES. VUGS IN DOLOMITIC MATERIAL lIP TO 10%, 1/32 TO 1/21NCH 50 50

                                                                                                                                            ~"'                                                                        I                     !

POLA TlNG BETWEEN TEST BORINGS. IN- TO CLOSE, NEAR HORIZONTAL WITH t SOME 90". VUGS 6~10% WITH SOME FORMATION ON ACTUAL SOIL AND L:J QGRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE.

                                                                                                                                            ~

1 ZONES UP TO 40%, 1/32 TO 1/2 INCH. FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE ROCK CONDITIONS EXISTS ONLY ATTHE r:;l ~ WITH FRAGMENTED ZONES, 0' TO 90° L:.J LIGHT GRAY TO BROWN OOLITIC

                                                                                                                                                      ~~CGHSlESSTHAN'O%."'6TO'12 TEST BORINGS AND ITiS POSSIBLE THAT                                      DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE TO                                                                                                    SCALE IN FEET MODERATELY CLOSE, 0~*46Q AND 40' THE SOIL AND ROCK CONDITIONS                                             TO 90~, SOME FRAGMENTED ZONES.           ~GRAYISH-BLUE          BRECCIATED DOLO-BETWEEN THE TEST BORINGS MAY                                             VUGS UP TO 10% WITH ZONES OF UP TO 40%, 1/32 TO 1/2 INCH.

UMITE HEALED WITH BLUISH-GRAY CLAY MATRIX. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO VARY FROM THOSE INDICATED. Fermi 2 FRAGMENTED, O~ TO 90'. VUGS IN r:-lUGHT GRAY TO TAN MtCROCRYSTAL- DOLOMITE FRAGMENTS LESS THAN L:.JLlNE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. 10%. 1/8 TO 1/2 INCH.

                  **EXTRAPOLATED TO CROSS SECTION LINE FROM MORE THAN 80 FEET                          THINLY BEDDED WITH DARK GRAY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT SHALE PARTINGS AND LAMINAE.
                   *EXTRAPOLATED TO CROSS SECTION LINE FROM LESS THAN 20 FEET                          FRACTURES VARY FROM ZONES OF FRAGMENTED AND VERY CLOSE, 0'*

90 0 TO ZONES OF MODERATELY CLOSE TO WIDE, 0 0 TO 20" AND 30°-70°. VUGS LESS THAN 10% WITH THIN ZONES OF 10 TO 20%, 1/32 TO 112 INCH. FIGURE 2.5-18 SUBSURFACE SECTION D-D' FROM FIGURE 2.5-14

E RHR-7 RHR-4 RHR-/ 579- -579 Quarry I Run Fill I 1 Till 554- I -554 iI- - - - - - RHR- - - - - - -____________ ..., ------------------------------ Complex

         'L4:~"         *                                                       *i     Bass                                     ..
                                                                                                                                                    '~"
                                                                                              /oOlitic dolomite marker bed      III I

• l(

529- -529

         ~......                                                                                                                                     ~
         ~                                                                      I
         <;:)                                                                         Islands                                                        ~
                                                                                                                                                     <;:)

t:::: * / shale marker bed t::::

         ~       504-                                                                                                                 -504
                                                                                *                                                                    ~

lJ..J

• III lJ..J

         ~                                                                      I                                                                    ~

II

• Group til I

479- -479

                       ""                                                                                                       til 454-Sa lina Group I
                                                                                                                                      -454 SECTION E - E' LEGEND:

• FRAGMENTED ZONE NOTES:

ELEVATIONS REFER TO N.Y.M.T., 1935. SURFACE ELEVATIONS ARE CORRECT ONLY ATTEST BORING LOCATIONS. THE DEPTH AND THICKNESS OF THE SOIL STRATA AND THE DEPTH OF THE ROCK STRATA INDICATED ON THE SUB-SURFACE SECTION WERE OBTAINED BY INTERPOLATING BETWEEN TEST BOR-INGS. INFORMATION ON ACTUAL SOIL AND ROCK CONDITIONS EXISTS ONLY 25 0 25 AT THE TEST BORING LOCATIONS AND IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE SOIL AND 0<>d~~~1 ROCK CONDITIONS BETWEEN THE TEST SCALE IN FEET BORINGS MAY VARY FROM THOSE INDICATED. Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-19 SUBSURFACE SECTION E-E' FROM' FIGURE 2.5-14 REFERENCE PLATE 6A REV 1 3/88

F F' RHR-4 RHR-5 58/- / -58/ Quarry Run Fill Till 556- -556 __ ..!l~..£~e!!!x_____________;

                   ~
                   ~                            .
   ~                                               Bass                                                ~

L4:

                  =~                               xoolitic dolomite marker bed                -53/ ~

L4:

   ~    53/-
   ~

i::

• Islands I-

   ~    506-                                    ...,..-shale marker bed
                  *=
   ~
                   ~

Group / 48/- -48/

                   -                           Sal ina Group 456-                                                                              =    -456 SECTION F - F' LtGtIlO.

• rUGMlIl1£O 10llt NOTES:

ELEVATIONS REFER TO N.Y.M.T.* 1936. SURFACE ELEVAnONS ARE CORRECT ONLY ATTEST BORING LOCAnONS. THE DEPTH AND THICKNESS OF THE SOIL STRATA AND THE DEPTH OF THE ROCK STRATA INDICATED ON THE SUB* SURFACE SECnON WERE OBTAINED BY 215 o 25 INTERPOLAnNG BETWEEN TEST BOR* INGS. INFORMAnON ON ACTUAL SOIL AND ROCK CONDInONS EXISTS ONLY SCALE IN FEET AT THE TEST BORING LOCAnONS AND IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE SOIL AND ROCK CONDITIONS BETWEEN THE TEST BORINGS MAY VARY FROM THOSE Fermi 2 INDICATED. UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-20 SUBSURFACE SECTION F-F' FROM FIGURE 2.5-14 REF~RENCE 3 PLATE 60

 >Ill SOAUE
                *LEN WEE

• MON Of LAKE ERIE SCAlC 1---.;,i:*O!O IIIL[S LEGEND:

ISOPACH SHOWING TOTAL THICKNESS OF SALT. ISOPACH INTERVAL 200 FEET.

      @ WELL REPORTING SALT IN SALINA FORMATION

• WELL WITH NO SALT IN SALINA FORMATION 8 DAWN GAS FIELD, SALT OTO OVER 300 FEET THICK 0 10 20 I t I SCALE IN MILES Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-21

REFERENCE:

ISOPACH MAP-TOTAL THICKNESS OF SALT IN LANDES, K. K., 1945, THE SALINA AND BASS SALINA FORMATION IN SOUTHEASTERN ISLANDS ROCK IN THE MICHIGAN BASIN: MICHIGAN USGS., PRELIMINARY DM-40, 01 LAND GAS INV, SER. REV 22 04/19

nr---+~~~'\ t: CQEf..'I::.' ...

                                                                                                                                                                         \ /
                                                                                                                                                                        '\J                            -~ Y. _  ***

o SEISMIC REFRACTION LI NE LEGEND: STRUCTURAL CONTOURS ON BASE OF OOLITIC DOLOMITE MARKER MARKER BED OF THE BASS ISLANDX S GROUP COUNTOURS DRAWN FROM DIRECT OOLITIC MAR KER BED CONTROL

                                                                                                                         ,/
                                                                                                                            /                                                                                                                    L ..... ~E EI~'IIr.            CONTOURS PROJECTED TO OOLITIC MARKER 1

( BED FROM OTHER RECOGNIZABLE STRATIGRAPHIC I CONTACTS I I /' INFERRED CONTOURS

                                                                                                                                                         /
                                                                                            \                      I                                   (
    ",                                                                                        \                     \                                I                                                                                                                    ... BORINGS IN WHICH OOLITIC DOLOMITE
                                                                                                \                     \                           /
'- '\ """                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       MARKER BED IS ENCOUNTERED
          -------'"'-"'.,                                                                         \                     \                       I
                                                                                                                          \
                                                                                                      \
                                                                                                    \
                                                                                                                            \

I BORINGS IN WHICH A RECOGNIZABLE CONTACT

                                                                                                         \                    \                 I                                                                                                                         IIIiI OR MARKER BED IS ENCOUNTERED
                                                                                                                                                 \
               \
                 \      \
                                                                                                           \ ,,' s~0                     L.IHE
                                                                                                                                                  \
                                                                                                                                                    \                                                           ,,                                                              BORINGS IN WHICH A RECOGNIZABLE STRATIGRAPHIC
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          .. INTERVAL IS ENCOUNTERED
                                                                                                                                 ,I lao \ \                       ',,,,

E.NLARt:4E.-b

                                                                                                                                                                                       ,X 102    '!STVOY vIEW ~ SEISM\C e.~Fo! ~    ______ _                                               INDICATES SUBSUR FACE SECTION SHOWN ON FIGURES I                                              I     ,
                                                                                                                                            \

I I', 2.5-15 AND 2.5-16. I I '

                                                                                                                                                           \                          \                                     '-                                       NOTE:
                                                                                                                                                              \1             \,       I             .,,--r-----~-------                                              CONTOURINTERVALIS10FEE~
                                                                                \                                                                                                                                                            ~.                      GRID SYSTEM IS THAT USED FOR PLANT AREA BY DETROIT
                                                                                                                                                                                 \ ~~ --r-
                                                                        \_                                                                                       \            \       I       I     1            I              \
                                                                           ~7                                                 ~       \           \-2i\                                                                         ~9~          ~                       EDISON COMPANY.
                                                                            \      \ ) \                          \ --J - \ -\ - -\ -: -L - -                                                                                      ~ ---1
                                                                                                                                              -'0 7i:') : l'
                                                                                        ;' J.I /1
                                                                      *-*-Jr ,_*_,..,!*_.1 .-._.t.....29~_._._.~ __ . .l2 +_._.                                         \ .-l'!..._._)    ._1_.      2~_._._._._         28         ~";:.

1 I~I  ! /1 I  :-r:----1\--'.~+!-

                                                                     /;          '/ I           /             /                 '0             ~               '.J;?                 ~,                         >;,- - - - - . - - - - - - -

I , 1 iff cl

                                                            ~'--I----- FERMI UNIT 1 /                      I
                                                                                    ,                  ,J0
                                                                         ~   -  -/ (      CL _ _

t8'

                                                                                /

I ,-- - \ j,~.

                                                  /

I I ..:./ '.-:: ~ --.,/

              /         :'
             \   /---

soo 0 IlOO 1000

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               ~l~J~~I~I~~~'~~~I SCALE IN FEET Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-22

REFERENCE:

STRUCTURAL CONTOUR MAP OF SITE VICINITY MAP PREPARED FROM DRAWING 6MS721-40 BY THE DETROIT EDISON COMPANY ENGINEERING DESIGN AND SERVICES DEPARTMENT. REV 23 02/21

g <::) <::) 8...

                                                                                            <::)                           <::)                      <::)

C) C)

                                                                                                                                                     <:)
             \o                                                                            t\j Q:)

C)tt; C) It) I() le) I()' le)'

                                                                                                                                   't,...

l4J UI

                                                    --                    $                                                          t,J 0,  ---

4 I 530 a: 0 N J:

                                               ,..,     g::                                           <O I

• a:

52.8 I a: J: u.. .,. C) C) " 526 It) LA. I

        "-'                                             a:_

J: a: (.C)

• er:

I a: J: 04 ct LLJ I:) 0 a::

                                                                                                                 ...J4 a:

J: C) a: 52.6 w LEGEND: , ____ 540 STRUCTURAL CONTOURS ON THE BASE OF THE OOLITIC DOLOMITE INDICATES SUBSURFACE SECTION 0 50 too 200 MARKER BED OF THE BASS ISLANDS GROUP BORINGS DRILLED IN 1968; OOLITIC MARKER BED ENCOUNTERED BORINGS DRILLED IN 1968 (LOG NOT PRESENTED WITH REPORT) bod SCALE IN FEET I BORINGS DRILLED IN 1969; OOLITIC MARKER BED ENCOUNTERED Fermi 2 NOTE: CONTOUR INTERVAL IS TWO FEET ELEVATIONS REFER TO U.S.G.S. DATUM UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-23 STRUCTURAL CONTOUR MAP OF SPECIFIC SITE REFERENCE 45 AREA PLATE 1 REV 22 04/19

i= i= IJl w W I-w BORING 10 W z BORING 16

                    !:                                                                                      !:    ::l l:    0 C.l
                    ~

w SURFACE ELEVATION 570.7 t* W ~....I SURFACE ELEVATION 571.8 Q DESCRIPTIONS Q DESCRIPTIONS SYMBOLS SYMBOLS o

                                                                                                                   !II WAT R 0                   LAKE ERIE GRAY SAND AND SILT, LOOSE - (SM' iiACK PEAT GRAY AHD BRO'MI CLAY - (eL) ILACUSTRINe ORIGIN'                                         SROWN AND GRAY SILTY CLAY (LACUSTRINE ORIGINI- (eL) 10                                                                                       10 BROWN CLAV WITH LlTTLIIAHD ANO GRAVEL tTILL' - (eL)                                     GRAY CLAV WITH GRAVEL AND TRACE OF SAND ITILL) - (eLI GRADING ORAYISH - BROWN WITH ROCK 'RAGMENTS                                             OCCASIONAL ROCK FRAGMENTS 20                                                                                     20 BASI ISLANDS GROUP BUFF TO LIGHT GRAY, LOCALLY DRAB, HARD, DENSE BAlI IILANDS GROUP                                                                              MASSive THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH 3O-+E:t:3 BUfF TO LIGHT GRAY. LOCALLY DRAB. HARD. DENSe                                           A FEW SHALE SEAMS AND INCLUSIONS OF ANHYDRITE MASSIVE LOCALLY THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED                                                   BUPF OOLITIC DOLOMITE FROM 2* .6' TO 26.9' DOLOMITE WITH A FEW THIN SHALE SEAMS AND INCLUSIONS OF ANHYDRITI 40 --+-C=-

an SEAM OJI DARK GRAY SOFT SHALE WITH STREAKS OP wtflTI ANHYDRITE FROM 44,1)' TO .... .8' BORINO COMPLETED AT 52.0' ON 10118/68 BORINO COHtLETED AT 48.0' ON 11/12_ ... CASING TO 10.0' 50-N)( CASING TO 30.0' 50-......~~ NX CASINO TO 17.0 60-i= w w BORING 18 SURFACE ELEVATION 572.5

                                                      ~

w DESCRIPTIONS Q O--~. .~~------------------- LAKE ERIE BROWN AND GRAY CLAYEY SILT AND SlLTV CLAY (LACUSTRINE ORIOIN. - (eL) MOrrLED BROWN AND GRAY, CLAYEY SILT Willi FINE 10 GRAVEL AND SAND $&AMI (LACUSTRINE ORIGIN' - IMU GRAY FINE SAND WITH OCCASIONAL ROCK FRAGMENTS - ISP) 20 __......I1'IT11T!1 GRAY SANDY SILT WITH ROOK FRAGMENTS - ISM' BASI ISLANDS GROUP DUFFTO LIGHT FRAY, LOCALLY ORAl, HARD, DENSE, MASSIVE LOCALLY THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED DOLOMITE 30 -+i=:;::JI WITH A FEW THIN SHALE SEAMS AND INCLUSIONS OF ANHVDRITE

r SEAM OP DARK GRAY MODERATELY HARD TO SOFT SHALE AT 25.6 BORING COMPLETED AT 58,0" ON 9/28/61 NX CASINO TO 215.0 60-NOTES:

ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE. '131 l'I INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE ntE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAWLER. WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER TO TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT Wlnt A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH. AND PERCENT OF CORE Fermi 2 RUN RECOVERED. UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT ALL CORE WAS NX SIZE EXCE" WHERE NOTED. FIGURE 2.5-24 LOGS OF BORINGS 10, 16, AND 18

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4.1

l!!z BORING 20 :J BORING 22 013 (J..I SURFACE ELEVATION 573.7 SURFACE ELEVATION 574.3

                                                                                            ~~

SYMBOLS OESCRIPTIONS ..I <I: SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS O__;m~<II~~~..~.................................

                                                                                                                  , ERIE LAKE ERIE 10--""""""""         BROWN AND GRAY CLAYEY SILT WITH TRACE OF SAND AND OCCASIONAL ROCK FRAGMENTS ILACUSTRINE 10--11::::::::::1 ORIGIN) - ICL-ML)                                                             BROWN SILTY CLAY WITH liTTLE SAND AND TRACE OF GRAVEL ILACUSTRINE ORIGIN' - ICll GRAV FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH TRACE OF SilT - (SP' GRAY FINE SAND AND SILT - ISMI 20                   GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH OCCASIONAL SILT              20 POCKETS AND ROCK FRAGMENTS - (SP' BASS ISLANDS GROUP j::

BUFF TO LIGHT GRAY LOCALLY DRAB, HARD. DENSE W MASSIVE LOCALLY THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED DOLOMITE W GRAY Sil TV CLAY WITH OCCASIONAL POCKETS OF Sil T tTlll) - WITH FEW THIN SHALE SEAMa AND INCLUSIONS OF 1: 30 __-"'T.r.oII ICL-MLI ANHYDRITE

                                                                                   ~
                                                                                   ~

GRADING WITH ROCK FRAGMENTS W SALINA OROUP SALINA GROUP Q FORMATION G FORMATION Q GRAY HARO AND SOFT SHALES, DOLOMITIC SHALES 40-+1==1 GRAY HARD AND SOFT SHALES, DOLOMITIC SHALES. AND ARGlllANCeous DOLOMITE WITH OCCASIONAL ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE, WITH OCCASIONAL TRACE TRAce OF ANHYDRITE OF ANHYDRITE 50--+-1==1 50-~t=:I BORING COMPLETED AT 66,0' ON 9/30/68 70--+-1=:1 70-- NX CASING TO 38.0' 80--....1==1 BORINO COMPLETED AT 81.0' ON 91211S1 NX CASINO TO 28,0 90-i= W f!!z W 1: :J BORING 24 0<11

c (,JW I-

         ~

=i SURFACE ELEVATION 573.0 W 0:=

Q ..1<1: DESCRIPTIONS m<ll SYMBOLS 0 LAKE ERIE NOTES: 10 ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 BROWN TO GRAY SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL [! INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE ILACUSTRINE ORIGINI - (Cli NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRive A SAMPLER. GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SANO WITH SOME SILT ANO 20 _ ......4===1 GRAVEL - ISI'I WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER TO TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. C INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 30 100% I INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH. AND PERCENT OF CORe RUN RECOVERED, ALL CORE WAS NX size EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. 40 110 SALINA GROUP 100/S" FORMATION 0 37% GRAY HARD AND SOFT SHALES, DOLOMITIC SHALES AND ARGillACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH OCCASIONAL 50 TRACE OF ANHYDRITE 37% 60 -"';r-tr=!I CO~6~~~~I~~O:TIONAL Fermi 2 GRAY TO BROWNISH GRAY VUGOY HARD TO SOFT SHALV DOLOMITE, DOLOMITIC liMESTONE AND liMESTONE BRECCIAS

               '2%

70 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 8'% BORING COMPLETED AT 74.3' ON 10112/68 4" CASINO TO 20.0' NX CASING TO "6.5' FIGURE 2.5-25 LOGS OF BORINGS 20, 22, AND 24

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4.2

i= l::! w z w  :::I BORING 26 BORING 28

     !:    0 W     VI

t (.)

l-0.. w s: 0

                   ...I 0..

E SURFACE ELEVATION 572.8 SURFACE ELEVATION 572.5 Q ...I <t II! VI SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS DESCRIPTIONS 0 0 LAKE ElliE LAKE ERIE 10 10 QRAY SANDY CLAV WITH SOME GRAVEL - (OLI (LACUSTRINE ORIGIN' GRAY SANOY CLAY WITH OCCASIONAL GRAVEL - ICLI 20 20 {LACUSTRINE ORIGINI GRAY MEDIUM SAND. COMPACT - (SP, 30 GRAY SANDY CLAY WITH SOME QR.4VEL AND ~OHAL POCKETS OF SAND - (CLI ITILL) 30 GRADING ROCK FRAGMENTS AND BOULDERS GRAY SIL TY CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEL. VERY 40 ;ALINA GROUP 40 HARD (TILL) - (CLI FORMATION Q GRAY VUGOY THINLY BEDDED. ARGILLACeous.

MODERATELY HARD TO SOFT DOLOMITE FORMATION & 50 GRAY TO BROWNISH GRAY. VUOay. HARD TO 50 GRAY MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND WITH SOME GRAVEL AND SOFT, INTERBEDDED ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. ROCK FRAGMENTS. VERY COMPACT - ISPI DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE AND LIMESTONE 8REC~IA 60 TRACE OF SALT CAYITAU 60 SALINA GROUP FORMATION E BUFF TO GRAY VUGGY, HARD TO SOFT. INTERBEDDED ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE BORING COMPLETED AT 70..cr ON 10""'" AND LIMESTONE BRECCIAS

                                                    ... CASINO TO 21.6'                                  UPPER 20 FT. VERY SOFT, AND ARGILLACEOUS 70                                               NX CASINO TO 43."

70 GRADING HARD TRACE OF SALT CRYSTALS 90-~-E::il BORING COMPLETED AT 107.0' ON 10/30/68 4" CASING TO 19.6 NX CASING TO 77.5' ax CASING TO 91.0' 100 ax CORE FROM 89.0' TO 107.0' 110-NOTES: ALL ELEVATION' REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE. 1'3& (! ~NNDci~~TTE~E~~~:~O~~~HcEJ~~J~o~ri~l;'EF~~REI NUMIER OF BLOWI REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETEfI Of TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. C INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 100% IINDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PEACENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. ALL CORE WAS NX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2,5-26 LOGS OF BORINGS 26 AND 28

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4,3

i= w BORING 30 w

                      ~

l: SURFACE ELEVATION 573.1 I-W o SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS o l.AKE ERIE 10 GRAV SILTY LACUSTRINE CLAV WITH TRACE FINE GRAVEL-20 leLI GRAY FIHi fO MEDIUM SAND WITH LlnLE GRAVEL AND TRACE 0' CLAY - (IP)

GRADING VERY COMPACT 30 GRADING CLAYEY 40 GRAY SAHOY CLAY, VERY HARD ITILL) - (eL) GRAY CLAYEY SILT WITH SEAMS OF FINE TO MEDIUM SAND-lML-SMI 50 GRAY SANDY CLAY WitH BOULDERS AND ROCK FRAGMENTS tTtLLI - (CLI 60 70 SALINA GROUP FORMATION E BUFF TO GRAY VUGGY. HARD to SOFT INTERBEDDED ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMiTe. DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE AND LIMESTONE BRECCIAS TRACE OF SALT CRYSTALS 80 NOTES: ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDe, 1935 II INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES 90 UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO CRIVI! A SAMPLER. TRACE OF SALT CRYSTALS WITH AN OUTSIOE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. INDICATES OEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED, ALL CORE WAS NX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. FORMATION C BUFF TO GRAY THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH THIN LAYERS OF SHALY DOLOMITe AND ANHYDRITE BORING COMPLETED AT 131.0' ON 10/24168 130 --+/--I.i::::tI NX CASING TO 18.0' 8)( CASING TO 131.0' 8)( CORE FROM 78.0" TO 131.0' 140--- Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-27 LOG OF BORING 30

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4.4

BORING 32A BORING 32A (continued) i= ~ w z w ::l

            ~   0 w VI                      SURFACE ELEVATION 579.5 J:

u oJ I- 3: a.

a. 0 :!!

w oJ < Q III VI SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS 0 150 SROWN SAND, GRAVEL AND CLAY - FILL

                                                                                  ....711" END OF FILL BROWN CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVeL, 10                  OCCA$ONAL TREE ROOTS AND TRACES OF PEAT       160 fCL'

{LACUSTRINE ORIGIN' 20 --""-I BROWNISH-GRAY CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEL - (eLI ITILL! 170 2." BASS ISLANDS GROUP SUfFTO LIOHT GRAY, LOCALLY DRAB, HARD FORMATION E GRAY TO BROWNISH-GRAY, VUGGY, HARD TO DENSE, MASSIve. LOCALL v THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH A FEW THIN SHALE 37" SOFT SHAL V DOLOMITE. DOLOMITIC LIME* SEAMS AND INCLUSIONS OF ANHVDITE 180 STONE AND LIMESTONE BRECCIAS WITH ARTeSIAN GROUND WATER HOW 190 40 ---1-b:::::::1 20lI 50 ---1-1=:=1 lUFf TO LIGHT GRAY HARD OOLITIC DOLO- 200 MITE FROM 50.0 TO 53.8 3BlI THIN SEAMS OF BLACK SHALE FROM 54.0' TO 51.0' 56" 210

                                                                                  .7" 70--+.0::::1                                                      220 ",."

BLUISH-GRAY HARD AND SOfT DOLOMITIC ,.... 80---1-0:::::1 $HALE FROM 78.8' TO 77.1 230 FORMATION C BUPF TO LIGHT GRAY HARD, THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH THIN LAYERS OF SHALY COLOMITE AND ANHYDRITE 90 ---1-t::=:d 240 BORING COMPLETED AT 241' ON 12113/68

                                                                                                             ." CASING TO 15' NX CASING TO 30.5' ax CASING TO 203' ax CORE FROM 161.5' TO 241,0' 100 -+ft:;;TI                                                      250--

110-~F"f SALINA aROUP FORMATION G GRAY HARD AND SOFT SHALES, DOLOMITIC SHALES AND DOLOMITE WITH OCCA~ONAL TRACE OF ANYORITE NOTES: ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE. 1935 II INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. C INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERV. I INDICATES OEPTH. LENGTH. AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. ALL CORE WAS NX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. 15O--1..I:::1t;::L Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-28 LOG OF BORING 32A

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4.5

              ~

w BORING 52 w

              !:                        SURFACE ELEVATION 573.6
              ~

a-w Q SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS O------~~!!~T~O~~~O~,L*T~O~,~Q~ .................................. BROWN AND GRAY SILTV CLAV WiTH TRACE OF FINE SAND - (eLi (LACUSTRINE ORIGIN I 10 GRADING WITH AOCK FRAGMENTS ITILLI BASS ISLANDS GROUP BUFF TO LIGHT GRAY. LOCALLY DRAO, HARD. DENSE. MASSIVE, LOCALL V THIN TO MEDIUM 20 --+..c:;::::II BEDDED AND DOLOMITE WITH A Few THIN SHALE SEAMS AND INCLUSIONS OF ANHYDRITE BUFF FRIABLE OOLITIC DOLOMITE FROM 21.7' TO 23.2' NOTES: 40 --+-c::=:t ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 I! INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION reST. FIGURES UNDER THE SLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRive A SAMPLER, WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. 50 --+-tI:::::::t INatCATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERV, INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. ALL CORE WAS NX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. BUFF HARD OOLITIC DOLOMITE FROM 66.5' TO

                                        ~88.3*

son SHALE 70 --HJX::;:l GRAV FROM 68.3' TO M.e' BORING COMPLETED AT 71.5' ON 118/61 4" CASING TO 14.0' 80-- Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-29 LOG OF BORING 52

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4.6

j:: w w

c

                ...w l-
                           ~

z

I eu enw i: ...

oJ BORING 79 SURFACE ELEVATION 572.0 160

                                                                                               ,-           BORING 79 (continued) eoJ :ii                                                        170  -78%

Q SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS CD ~ 0 WATER "" BLACK PI!AT - (PT) GRAY AND BROWN SILTY CLAY - (CLI (LACUSTRINE ORIGIN) 180 10 " GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH OCCASIONAL GRAVEL AHD ROCK FRAGMENTS - (Cli 190 TRAce Of! SAL T CRVSTAL! InLLI 20 BASlISLANOI GROUP au,F TO LIGHT GRAY LOCALLY ORAl, HARD, DENSI. MASSIVE. LOCALLY THIN TO MEDIUM 200 30 BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH FEW THIN SHALE SEAMS AND INCLUSIONS 0' ANHVDRITE.

                                               '" SEAM OF SOFT GRAY SHALE AT 27.15' 210 BUFF TO LIGHT GRAY HARD OOLITIC DOLO*

• 67%

MITE FROM 31.&' TO 41.0' 40 '" SEAM OF DARK GRAY SOFT SHALE AT 41.5' '"" FORMATION C 220 BUFF TO GRAY HARD, THIN TO MEDIUM eEODED DOLOMITE WITH THIN LAVERS OF SHALY 50 DOLOMITE AND ANHYDRITE 230 60

                                               .." LAYER OF BLACK HARD SHALE AT 615#     240 70 4" LAVER OF WHITE ANHYDRITE AT 78,0-       250 80                                                                                7'"

3" SIAM 0' SOFT DARK GRAY SHALE AT M.O' 260 90 270 96" 100 SALINA GROUP FORMATION a GRAY HARD AND SOFT SHALES. DOLOMITIC 280*1<'*" WHITE AMORPHOUS ANHYDRITE FROM 280.0' SHALES. ARQILACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH TO 281.5' OCCASIONAL TRACE OF ANHYORITE 110 - 290 120 300 130 310 140 320 ,- 150 BORING COMPLETED AT 324.7' ON 12/16/68 RX CASING TO 70' ax CASING TO 240' ex CORE FROM 121.5 TO 324.7' FORMATION E 160 GRAY TO BROWNISH-GRAY, VUGQY HARD TO SOFT SHAL V DOLOMITE, DOLOMITIC LIME. STONE AND LIMESTONE BRECCIAS NOTES: ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE. 1935 II ~NNDri~:TTE~ES~~~~AC~~~~NcEri~':.!:.O~ri~::;'EF~~~RES NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIREO TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER TO TWO INCHES. ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. Fermi 2 INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERV. UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT INDICATES DEPTH. LENGTH. AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. FIGURE 2.5-30 ALL CORE WAS NX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. LOG OF BORING 79

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4.7

i=. w ~ w z BORING 81

               !!:  :J x:   81    ffl                                                                                 BORING 81 (continued)
               ~

Q., l:,-l,Q., SURFACE ELEVATION 574.7 w o!:E Q .... '< IIICIl SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS 0 160 8ROWN AND GRAV FIRM SILTY CLAV - (Cli (LACUSTRINE ORIOIN) FORMATION E GRAV TO BROWNISH-GRAV. VUGGY HARD TO SURFACE WATER AT **l' SOFT SHAl.V DOLOMITE, DOLOMITIC LIME* BROWN TO BROWNISH - GRAY VERY HARD SlLTV STONE AND LIMESTONE BRECCIAS WITH 10 CLAY WITH GRAVEL - ICll ITILL) 160 ARTESIAN aROUND WATER FLOW BASS ISLANDS GROUP BUFF TO LIGHT GRAV. LOCALLY ORAl, HARD DENSE. MASSIve, LOCALLY THIN TO MEDIUM 20 BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH A FEW THIN SHALE 170 6'" TRACE OF SALT CRYSTALS SEAMS AND INCLUSIONS 0' ANHYDRITE 180 BLACK SHALE SEAMS FROM 33.Q' TO "'.0- ."" BUFF TO LIGHT GRAY HARD OOLITIC DOLO* MITE FROM 31.1' TO 40.1' 3" SEAM OF SOFT BLACK SHALE AT 40.5' 190 2... 60--+~;;( 200 50" 60 --+t=::::d 210 5" LAVER OF SOFT DARK GRAY DOLIMITIC SHALE AT 62.7' 220 FORMATION C aUFF TO LIGHT GRAV HARD, THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH THIN LAVERS OF HARD AND SOFT aLACK SHALE FROM 73.7' SHAL V DOLOMITE AND ANHYDRITE TO 1*.5' BORING COMPLETED AT 223.7' ON 12/17/68 80 --+.ft-'-l 230-- 4" CASING TO 14' 9O--+....",,~ SALINA GROUP FORMATION Q 100 ---'1=-1==1 GRAY HARD AND SOFT SHALES. DOLOMITIC SHALES, AND ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH OCCASIONAl. TRACE OF ANHYDRITE NOTES: ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIOE, 1935

• INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER. WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES.

120--4--E3 c INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERV.

                                                                                             ",o"I INDICATES DEPTH. LENGTH. AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED.

130_-+E3 ALL CORE WAS NX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. 140 ---I-il=~ 160-......'=:::r... Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-31 LOG OF BORING 81

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4.8

i= ~ BORING 82 BORING 82 (continued) UJ z UJ :J

               !!:  0 CI)

(J w

               ...w
               ~    ::

0

                          ...:E
                          ....I               SURFACE ELEVATION 576.5
                    ....I <t Q !XI CI)   SYMBOLS              DESCRIPTIONS 0                                                                 150 BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITH TRACE 0' SILT AND QRGANIC MATTER - (SP)

TRACe OF SHELL FRAGMENTS 10 GRAY SILTY CLAY - (CL' 160 FORMATION C 71~ BROWN TO DARK GRAY SILT WITH TRACE OF FINE BUFF TO LIGHT GRAY HARD THIN TO MEDIUM SAND AND GRAVEL - IMLI BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH THIN LAYERS OF SHALY DOLOMITE AND ANHYDRITE 20 170 BASS ISLAND GROUP 100, SUFF TO LIGHT GRAY, LOCALLY DRAB, HARD, DENSE, MASSive, LOCALL v THIN TO MEDIUM BEDDED DOLOMITE WITH A FEW THIN SHALE SEAMS AND INCLUSIONS OF ANHYDRITE 180 3" LAYER OF CRYSTALLINE ANHYDRITE AND 100'>', CALCITE AT 35.0 190 l00~ SALINA GROUP 100' TRAce OF SALT CRYSTAl.S FORMATION G 50-+1=:::t GRAY HARD AND sOl'r SHALES, DOLOMITIC SHALES. AND ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE wtTH 200 BORING COMPLETED AT 202,0' ON 12/24/68 OCCASIONAL TRAce OF ANHYDRITE NX CASINO TO 54,9' ax CASING TO 156.0' 60--+-~3 210-70--+-F=~ 8O-......F=~ 90--t-t=::::I NOTES: ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE. 1935

                                                                                                 *   ~N:ri~~T:~eS~~~~~~~~~NcE6~:J~OI~6~:T/~~~RES NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, FORMATION e                                                      WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER TO TWO INCHES, ONE GRAY TO BROWNISH GRAY VUGQV HARD TO                           FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIOHT FALLING 30 INCHES.

SOPT SHALY DOLOMITE. DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE AND l.IMESTONE BRECCIAS C INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVEAV. 110 I

                    -""'I~::j                                                                        INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED, TRACE OF SALT CRYSTALS                              100%

Al.L CORe WAS NX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. 120 -~I::z::::j 140 --+-I::::'::::rI 150 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-32 LOG OF BORING 82

REFERENCE:

FERMI 2 PSAR - FIGURE 2.5-4.9

CORING WATER DATA (MEASURED) BORING 201 VI W Ii; >

           ~       a:                                                                                                       Z        ..J              f-            ~

W W Q Q. W W W m f-w a:!:!CJCJ  ::e<t f-  :::i..., W

           !:!::   ::e:::I   Za:

WW Q SURFACE ELEVATION 565.0 Wf-Z!!: f-<t-...J W -0: m> U. J: u> 0 <t>a:..J VI a: <t .... J: f- Z a:O a: 3:a::::I- a:  :::I w* f-Q. W Z wU Q.W W Q a: W f- ~  ::eti: a:- Q.

I

                                                                                                                                                      ...W VI    Q           W                     W Q

a: a: m <t a: Q LITHOLOGY 0 3: Q. 0 BROWN SilTY CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEL [TilLI o BORING 201 CONTINUED 5 r-- 5 70 t--+--+--I.-I~""f GRAY BRECCIATED DOLOMITE. FRACTURES MODERATELY ClOSE,60* 90" VUGS 10%, 1/8 *1/2INCH. 70 r-- ARTESIAN 10 60 32 FLOW 3 GPM 10 92 40 LIGHT GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. 75 GRAY BRECCIATED DOLOMITE. FRACTURES MODERATEL Y CLOSE 60 90 75 FRACTURES CLOSE,Oo AND goo, 75.0*78,0 FEET, VERY CLOSE. 0° AND 90° VUGS 10%, 1/8 *1/2INCH. 78.0*85.0 FEET 15 63 29 r- 15 " 63 GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES MOOERATEL Y CLOSE 90 ,VERY CLOSE, 1/2 INCH SOFT GRAY CLAY LAYER. 79.0 FEET 80 0°.10°, FISSURES MODERATEl Y CLOSE, 90°, VUGS 20%,1116 1 INCH, WITH SOME CLAY FILLINGS IN VUGS 80 1 INCH GRAY CLAY SEAM, 17.0 FEET ARTESIAN FLOW4 GPM 64 40 20 95 70 liNCH DARK GRAY HARD SHALE lAYER, 20.3 FEET r-- 20 LIGHT GRAY BLUE STREAKED DOLOMITE. FRACTURES MODEAATEL Y CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE 0- 90 85 VUGS 10%, 1/16 *1/4 INCH. 85 1/4 TO lf21NCH SOFT GRAY CLAY LAYERS,S5.0* 86.0 FfET 1/2 INCH DARK GRAY SHALE LAYER, 22.5 FEET DARK GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES MODERATEL Y CLOSE. 0'- 90 FRACTURES MODERATEL Y CLOSE, 90°. 30° AND 10°,85.0.88.0 FEET STYLILITES, 57.0*90.0 FEET

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     ~PEN lEND 25                            VUGS -< 10% 1116 *1/4 INCH.

1/2 INCH VERY SOFT CLAY LAYER, 2l.0 FEET r- 25 12 75 50 112 INCH VERY SOFT CLAY LAYER. 26.6 FEET 90 r-STYLILlTES,26.0 27.0 FEET 94 40 LIGHT GRAY DOLOMITE. FRACTURES MODERATEL Y CLOSE, lO~ 60- AND CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, AT 90°. VUGS...:: 10%,-< 1/l2 INCH. 211 90 VUGS 10%. 1/8 112 INCH, 90.0* 9l.0 FEET ARTESIAN 30 FLOW5GPM SULPHUR AND H S ODOR r-- 30 13 94 65 2 ENO 2*1/2*1/2 INCH ANHYDRITE VUG FILLINGS OR INCLUSIONS. 94.0 FEET ARTESIAN 95 84 65 95 flOW 10 GPM STRONG SULPHUR & 1/2 INCH DARK GRAY SOFT CLAY LAYER,ll.O FEET 14 85 38 H S ODOR 2 35 LIGHT GRAY OOLITIC D~LOMITE (MARKER BED) r-- 35 DARK GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE 114 INCH DARK GRAY SHALE LAYER,97.5 FEET 15 100 80 100 100 564 1/2 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER DIPPING lOo,99.5 FEET 2 INCH SOFT CLAY LAYER, 19.0 FEET r-1/4 INCH DARK GRAY SHALE LAYER,101.6 FEET 40 98 80 MEDIUM GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE 1/2 INCH SOFT GRAY CLAY LAYER, 41.0 FEET 40 SHALE PARTING$41/16 INCH, VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 97.t) *104.0 FEET 16 .8 80 105 105 FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, 0° TO 60°, 911.0* 10S.0 FEET VUGS lO%, 1/l2* 1/8 INCH, SOME WITH ANHYDRITE CRYSTALS .... K rESIAN 1/2 INCH SOFT GRAY CLAY LAYERS, 4l.5 *44.8 FEET FLOW 20 GPM 45 LIGHT GRAY BRECCIATED DOLOMITE. VUGS 10%, 1/16*1 INCH r-- 45 DARK GRAY MEDIUM HARD TO SOFT DOLOMITIC SHALE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0°.90° STRONG SULPHUR & H S ODOR 2 110 327 110 17 58 50 ** 90 SOME ANHYDRITE CRYSTALS UP TO 1 INCH DIAMETER, 51.0*52.0 FEET r- 50 BORING COMPLETED AT 113!i FEET ARTESIAN

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   -115 ON 1112.09                                    FLOW 20 GPM 115 -                                                       CASING USED TO 17 3 FEET 55 169 r--  55 FRACTURES MODERATEL Y CLOSE,Oo AND 90°, 59.0*60.0 FEET 60                  97  86       FISSURES MODERATELY CLOSE, 0° AND 90°, 1/16*1/4 INCH,59.0 60.0 FEET I-- 60 LIGHT GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE.

2*t/2INCH DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER,63.S FEET FRACTURES HEALED, VERY CLOSE, 30° TO goo, WITH ANHYDRITE CRYSTALS NOTES' 65 VUGS 20%, 1/16 *1/2 INCH, 63.0*66.0 FEET I-- 65 Fermi 2 All ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 rt INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE 1+1/2 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY lAVER,69.4 FEET NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 70 240 '-- 70 FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. o INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 100% I INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. ALL CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. FIGURE 2.5-33 LOG OF BORING 201

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.10 AND 2.5-22.11 REVISED

CORING BORING 202 CONTINUED WATER DATA (MEASURED)

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ....-65 a::                                                                                                   en          W
                                                                                                                             ...J t;; >                   65 j:'   W         0                                     BORING 202                                             Z                UJ  I-       j:'                               fRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, 0° AND WIDE, 30°, 66.8 72.8 FEET W

W CO I-w a:: Q(!)(!) 0..

E I- :J..., W

   !:!::  :E Za::                                                                                           WI-Z~           <I;   W   -a::

co> W 31NCH VERTICAL FRACTURE,67.0 FEET

J WW 0 0 I-<I;-...J en a:: <1;_  !:!::

l: Z u> a:: 0 a:: SURFACE ELEVATION 564.3 <I;>a::...J a:: :J W

• I- Z WI) ~a:::J- W en en  ::!;t;: l:

I- 70 W Q

J "-w a:: a:: :g wOa::

Q I-

                                                                                                                           <I;    W a::

a::- W W 13 90 50 LITHOLOGY i: 0. Q o 0 0.. 0 LIGHT TO MEDIUM GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE, SHALE PARTINGS AT 0° 30° 2 INCH DARK GRAY SHALE LAYER. 76.2 fEET 1--75 BROWN SIL TV CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEL ('TILL! 75 2 INCH DARK GRAY SHALE LAYER. 17.2 FEET GRAY AND BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE. 0° AND 90° t- 5 14 67 10 1--80 80 10 t- 10 1-85 15 58 17 85 ARTESIAN 16 47 FLOW ESTIMATED FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 30" .60°, 87.3*89.7 FEET 15 t- 15 5GPM 90

                                                                                                                                                              "    100  7.

SOFT DARK GRA Y CLAY BONDED BY TWO 60° FRACTURES, f-90 88.9 *89.6 FEET 93 42 LIGHT GRAY OENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL. VUGS ""'" 10%, 1/32 *1/8 INCH, 87.3*95.6 FEET lIGHTGRAVISH - BLUE STREAKED DOLOMITE. FRACTURES HEALED, WIDE. 20 VERTICAL. MEDIUM GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE - MODERATELY ARTESIAN 1-. 20 97 52 f- 95 97 25 CLOSE, HORIZONTAL, VUGS 5%,1/16*1/4 INCH. FLOW 2 GPM 95 liNCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER ARTESIAN FRACTURES VERTICAL, 21.3 FEET ~I OW 30 GPM THIN VERTICAL SOFT GRAY CLAY LAYERS, 21.4 21.9 FEET DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE. FRAGMENTED.

                 .5     13                                                                                   ARTESIAN flOW BLACK ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE 25                                           1 INCH VERTICAL GRAY CLAY LAYER, 22.9*23.9 FEET 51NCH DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER, 24.0 FEET 4T05GPM H S ODOR                         t- 25           19   100  62                                                                         ARTESIAN                     1--100 2                                                                                                                                   FLOW 100    17                  FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, HEALED, 0'-', 27.7*29.5 FEET                                                 100                                                                                        ESTIMATED 40 GPM THIN, VERY CLOSE ARGILLACEOUS l.t>Jv1INAE. 27.7*33.2 FEET                                                                                                                                                                                                NOTES:

BROWN DOLOMITIC SHALE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE,a ,27.7*32.9 FEET 30 98 10 t- 30 20 5. 10 DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0*90° 1--105 ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 FRACTURE HEALED, VERTICAL, 32.1 *32.9 FEET

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ~ INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES lINCH DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER, 32.9 FEET H S ODOR 105                                                                                                                                           'JNOER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE 2                                                                                                                                                                                     NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, LIGHT GRAY OOLITIC DOLOMITE [MARKER BED]. FRACTURES                                                                       21  80 0..       MODERATELY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL VUGS 80%, ~1/32 1/16 INCH                                                                                                                                                                                                        WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE

J r- 35 100 B1 FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES.

35 0 FRAGMENTED ZONE,l09.5 113.9 FEET 1--110 a:: (!) ARTESIAN 110 o INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 22 64 en FLOW4T05 100% ]NDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE GPM 100 0 z LIGHT GRAY BRECCIATED DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0 AND 90 RUN RECOVERED. <10 <I; GRAY AND BROWN DENSE DOLOMITE WITH VERY CLOSE DARK GRAY f- 40 FRACTURES CLOSE,O TO 90°. 113.9'119.0 FEET 1-115 ALL CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. 75 24

                            ...J         ARGILLACEOUS LAMINAE. FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, 0.90~
                            ~                       FRACTURES IRREGULAR, 4 INCHES LONG                                                                  115 B1       !a<I;                                                                                                                               23  39 CO 45                                                                                                                                             ~    45                                                                                                                           f-120 1/2 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER                                                                                                      FRAGMENTED ZONE, 119.0

• 126.3 FEET 10 56 120 24 2.

VUGS< 10%,""'" 1/32*1/8 INCH, 49.0*50.8 FEET ARTESIAN 50 l- 50 HOW 36 GPM I- 125 11 91 71 LIGHT GRAY BRECCIATED OOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE, 60 AND 90'" 125 25 21 VUGS<= 10%,1/32 *1/8 INCH. liNCH SOFT OARK GRAY CLAY LAYER BORING COMPLETED AT 126.3 fEET LIGHT GRAY DENSE DOLOMiTE WITH VERY CLOSE DARK GRAY SHALE PARTINGS. ON 11/20/69 55 FRACTURES CLOSE,O, 90 AND 60° [FRACTURES ARE ALONG SHALE LAYERS] I- 55 CASING USED TO 123,0 FEET ~----L--L--L-----L-130 130-114 INCH DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER 60 H/2INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER I-- 60 8R~vg.I ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO WIDE, O. 30~' AND 12 .3 56 65 1/2 INCH HARD BLACK SHALE LA YER, 64.0 FEET

                                                                                                                                              ~      65 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-34 LOG OF BORING 202

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.12 AND 2.5-22.13

CORING WATER DATA (MEASURED) BORING 203 CONTINUED i= en W

                                                                                                                    ..J     I-    )-                  w i=   a:        0                           BORING 203                                                  Z         a..

(J) w I- w - 65 W W I-w a: Q (!)(!) :E I-  :::i..., 65 w III za: <<en w -a: ~ 112 SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER 66.5 FEET

i: WW 0 wl-z~

a: 111)- J:

    ~    :J    u> CJ                                                                                    I-<<-..J                   <<-.                I-J:   Z     a:0 a:                                                                                   <<>a:..J     a:      :J    w                  a..

I- z wU SURFACE ELEVATION 565.4 ~a::J-woa: w ~ :i:t;: w GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES MODERATEL Y CLOSE, HORIZONTAL. VUGS a.. I- w a:-

                                                                                                                                                                                    <10%,< 1/32 TO 1/16 INCH.

W 0

J a:

o..W a: 13 0 << a: w a.. 0 70 9 94 1 INCH HARD GRAY SHALE LAYER 69.3 FEET I - 70 LITHOLOGY 0 ~ a.. THIN DARK GRAY SHALE PARTINGS 69.3 TO 75.1 FEET o FRACTURES 60° AT 70.7 FEET 0 HARD DARK GRAY SHALE LAYER, 73.2 FEET SROWN SILTY SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL [TILL] FRACTURES CLOSE, HORIZONTAL AND 600 .goo , 72.7 TO 79.5 FEET 210 I - 75 75 l- 5 10 90 48 FRACTURES CLOSE 60°.90° ,SOME WITH DRUSY DOLOMITE, 75.7*82.9 FEET 5

                                                                                                                                                              -                                                                                                                                              ~     80 GRAY SILTY SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL AND                                                                                      80                                                                                                                                             884 BOULDER ITILLl I- 10                                   1/4 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER 81.0 FEET 10                                                                                                    ARTESIAN                                                 11 18   16 FLOW 1/2GPM ARTESIAN GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE FRACTURES CLOSE, NEAR HORIZONTAL AND VERY CLOSE,                                                            85                            ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE INTERBEDDED WITH DARK GRAY SHALE GRADING FLOW 12 GPM                                        '"""" 85 NEAR VERTICAL, 15                                     INTO ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE,84.2 TO 84.6 FEET DARK GRAY SHALE LENSES,84.7 TO 84.9 FEET
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          ~O~:HUR ODOR 15         I    98     20 12 100 61 1/2 INCH LAVER OF SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY AT 17.7 FEET                                                                                                                                                                                                                B4!J
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              -    90 BLUE STREAKED DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, VERTICAL AND 0°.30°, VUGS<10%,< 1/32 TO 1/4 INCH                                                                                          90                      GRAY AND BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, VEIITICAL, SOME CLAY FILLED. VUGS ... l0%, 1/161NCH 2     100    56 1380                 20                                3 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY 90.8 FEET 20                        GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE TO MODERATELY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL AND 60° .90°.19.1 TO 26B FEET VUGS 10%. 1/16 TO 1/2 INCH 22.4 TO 24,1 FEET, FISSURES WIDE, VERTICAL, 1/16 TO 1/4 INCH                                                                                                      SOME FRACTURES HEALED WITH SHALE I- 95 95  - 13 66  11              1 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY, 94.0 FEET ARTESIAN 3     100   61                                                                                                                       I- 25                                                                                                      FLOW 17 GPM 1540 25                        FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, HORIZONTAL, 27.7 - 31.5 FEET SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY AND HARD GRAY SHALE INTERBEDDED WITH H S ODOR 2

ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE, 96.5 TO 97.7 FEET 845 FRAGMENTED ZONE, 96.5 TO 97.7 FEET LIGHT GRAY DOLOMITE. THINL Y BEDDED WITH ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              -    100 100 30 30                                                                                                                                            '""""

liNCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER,31.1 FEET 14 55 32 I- t-GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE. FRAGMENTED. FISSURES WIDE,Oo 30 0 ,1/16 INCH. LIGHT GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE ALYER, 31.2*31.5 FEET VUGS 30%, 1/16 TO 1/4 INCH

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             . - 105 FISSURES WIDE, VERTICAL, 1116 TO 1/8 INCH,30.7* 31.1 FEET 105 96    36   GRAY DENSE OOLITIC DOLOMITE [MARKER BEDI FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, VERTICAL 31.7*32.2 AND 35.9*36.6 FEET FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE,33.0* 35.2 FEET 60°                                             63,            l - 35 0.

35 VUGS 80%,<1/32 TO 1/16 INCH  ;) 0 a: 616 I-- 110 (!) 110 << LIGHT GRAY BRECCIATED DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE,OO*ZOo ALONG DARK GRAY I-- 40 SHALE PARTINGS LIGHT TO MEDIUM GRA Y DENSE DOLOMITE. THINLY BEDDED WITH ARGILLACEOUS ~ 40 100 62 16 ..J STARTED LAMINAE AND ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE [BEDDING 00 TO 30°1. FRACTURES 2' WIDE NEAR HORIZONTAL. LOSING ARTESIAN f- 115

                                                                                                                                                                           .1 VJ FRACTURES VERY CLOSE,Oo. 90°, 41.2-41.7 FEET                                                                                                                                                                             CIRCULATION FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL,42.1 *42.7 FEET FLOW3GPM ARTESIAN   ,1 SULPHUR 115 1

114 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY LAYER,42.1 FEET FLOW 22 GPM 1/4 INCH ANHYDRITE CRYSTALS IN VUGS ODOR 1370 I- 45 L -____ L-~ __L -_ _ ~ BORING COMPLETED AT 116.5 FEET 45 6 94 18 ON 11*14-69 CASING USED TO 12.7 FEET _120

                                                                                                                                               -     50 120 -

GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE 50 SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER IN VERTICAL FRACTURE,48.S TO 49.1 FEET 41NCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER, 50.3 FEET NOTES 1 98 61 ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 404 ~ INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE 55 1/2 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY lAYER 60° DIP 63.0 FEET NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER. MEDIUM GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE 55 FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. o INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 60 - 8 93 66 1/2 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY LAYER, 58.1 FEET HARD BLACK SHALE LAYER, 59.S TO 60.' FEET

                                                                                                                                               ~     60                                                                                                  100%

I INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. All CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE, 0°.30° 250 SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY lAYER,600

                                                                                                                                               ..... 65 DIP,AT61.S FEET liNCH SOFT ':"ARK GRAY CLAY LAYER 63.7 FEET 65  -

Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-35 LOG OF BORING 203 REFER ENCE: DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.14 AND 2.5-22.15

CORING WATER DATA (MEASURED) a: BORING 204 V) W

                                                                                                                                ...J I-en   >-

l-i= w I-W Cl Z I-a: 2 (!)(!) W w III 0.

I-

:i-; W w  ::; WW Za: w -a: W

u. c wl-zi!: <t lIl>- U.

x:

z e.>> o SURFACE ELEVATION 564.9 I-<t-...J

                                                                                                                 <t>a:...J en a:

a:

> ~..., :x:

I- z a:O we.> a: s:a::::>a: w V)  ::;t;: I-0.

> o.W ~CCl I-V) w a:- 0.

w BORING 204 CONTINUED W a: a: III <t a: w 0 C "'- LITHOLOGY 0 $: 0. r-- 65 o -+---1--4 0 65 .7 46 GRADING TO BUFF.S5.a FEET ARTESIAN FLOW 3-1/2 GPM FRACTURES MODERATELY CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE,Co .90°. 60.6 - 67_0 FEET FRACTURES CLOSE TO MODERATEL Y CLOSE, 30°,67.0 -70.0 FEET I-- 70

                                                                                                                                                   ~      5  70 5

GRADING TO GRAY, 71.0 FEET GRAY DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH HARD SHALE LAMINAE 0° TO IRREGULAR. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 00 _900.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             ~      75
                                                                                                                                                   ~     10 10                                                                                                                                                            75 98 36 LIGHT GRAY* BUFF ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE         FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE,O*900                                                                                                                                                                                             I-- 80 VUGS~10%, 1116 TO 1/4 INCH I- 15     80                         SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY AND FRAGMENTED SHALE, 79.1 *79.6 FEET 15               62 SHALE PARTINGS FROM 18.0 TO 23.0 FEET                                                                                                                DOLOMITE GRADING DARK GRAY AND BACK TO LIGHT ARTESIAN                                                                  GRAYISH* BROWN, 79.6 *90.0 FEET FLOW 1 GPM WITH H S 2

FRACTURES MODERATEL Y CLOSE TO WIDE, 0°.30°,82.9 91.2 FEET I - 85 ODOR I-- 20 85 99 72 20 52 14 FRACTURES MODERATELY CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, 0°-60° AND 90° FROM 23.0 TO 30.0 FEET ARTESIAN ~ 90 VUGS 30%, 1/8 TO 11/2INCH, 23.0*27.0 FEET FLOW 2-V2 GRAYISH* BROWN DENSE SLIGHTL Y BRECCIATED ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. VUG COMPLETELY THROUGH CORe WITH CELESTITE (1J CRYSTAL, 24.3 FEET GPM I- 25 90 -;'--11--+--1 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO MODERATEL Y CLOSE, 0° _90° 25 THIN DARK GRAY SHALE PARTINGS,90') _92.0 FEET 10 .7 33 DRUSY DOLOMITE LINING SOME FRACTURES, 91.2 *92.7 FEET 96 55 VUGS-5%, 1/16 TO 1 INCH, 27.0*34.0 FEET I-- 95

                                                                                                                                                   ~     30 30                                                                                                                                                            95 11  91 21 DARK GRAY BRECCIATED ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH THIN SHALE LAYERS.

41NCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY,3J.8* 34.1 FEET FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0°, 30° AND 90° -100 I-- 35 1 INCH LAYER SOFT GRAY CLAY, 98.1 FEET 35 6 INCH LIGHT GRAY OENSE BLUE STREAKED DOLOMITE,lA.1 *34.5 FEET LIGHT BUFF OOLITIC DOLOMITE [MARKER BEDI. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE,O~ 100 a. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 0°

• 20°,100.5 - 105.0 FEET 60°, AND 90°, VUGS 60%, 1/32 TO 1/4 INCH  :::J

0. 0 95 37  :::> a:

0 LIGHT GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE, IRREGULAR SHAle LAMINAE. FRACTURES CLOSE (!) LIGHT GRAY DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE -105 a: TO VERY CLOSE, 0° .90°, ~.~~~ , (!) I - 40 12 73 29 <t 40 V) liNCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER, 38.0 FEET 105 ~ C 1 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAVER, 40.0 FEET DARK GRAYISH* BLACK DOLOMITIC SHALE INTERBEDDED WITH DARK ORAY Z SINCH SECTION OF SOFT LIGHT GRAY CLAY 40.2 *40.6 FEET SHALE. FRAGMENTED

                         <t    LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. THIN SHALE BEDDING. VERY
                         ...J
                         !!?

CLOSE, DIPPING 0°

• 20°. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE. 0° .90° .

2 INCH LAYER SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY, 107.6 FEET -110 45 45 ~ 110 13 48 GRADING LIGHTER GRAY AT 110,0 FEET ARTESIAN

                         <t                                                                                                                                                              SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY INTERMIXED WITH SHALE FRAGMENTS, FLOW 10 GPM III         1/2 INCH SOFT GRAY CLAY LAYER. 45.6 FEET 100   47                                                                                                                                                                     111.0 *112.0 FEET 115 50 GRADING MORE BROWN.4S.0 *61.2 FEET FRACTURES VERY WIDE, 50.0*59.0 FEET
                                                                                                                                                   -     50 115-BORING COMPLETED AT 112.5 FEET ON 12-12-69 5 INCH DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER BOUNDED BY 60° FRACTURES 51.2 FEET 55                                    FEW STYLOLITES AND SLIGHT BRECCIATlON,55'o *60.0 FEET
                                                                                                                                                   -     55 NOTES:

ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      ~ INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES 100    90 UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES.

FRACTURES AND FISSURES. VERY CLOSE.900,1It6 TO 1/4 INCH, 60 60 58.9 *60.6 o INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY, I ARTESIAN FLOW 3-1/2 GPM 1000/... TINDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE

                                                                                                                 ~~g~T H 2S                                                                                                                                                            ~RUN RECOVERED.

61NCH DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER GRADING TO HARD BLACK SHALE,63.S 64.3 65 ALL CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. FEET 65 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-36 LOG OF BORING 204

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.16 AND 2.5-22.17

WATER DATA w ... C/) Z tI)

                                                                   ...'"w
                                                           ..J a:  Q (!)(!) c..
                                                           ;;;            :::ii w ... Z~     <{             -a:
                                             ... <{-..J                   OJ>
                                              <{>a:..J
                                              ~a::l-wOa:
                                                           '"wa:   a:

l C/)

                                                                          <{-

w . C/) 0 .... C/) w

                                                                          ;;;1;:

a:- BORING 205 CONTINUED OJ <{ a: w 0 ~ c.. c.. 65 o 65 ARTESIAN 10 93 44 FLOW 1/6 aPM VUGS 70%, 1/16 *'*1I2INCH,69,7*70.1 FEET SULPHUR f- 70 5 70 TWO FRACTURES, 20° AND 45°, 70.3*70.7 FEET ODOR THIN IRREGULAR SHALE BEDDING, 70.3*76.0 FEET 11 100 7.

                                                                                 -   10   75 liNCH DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER 75.8 FEET MEDIUM GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 30° gOO f- 75 70.1*80.9 FEET ARTESIAN flOW 1/2 GPM 12     10                                                                            ARTESIAN                       ~ 80 f- 15    80                                                                                        FLOW 22GPM FRACTURES CLOSE, 60° .90°,80.8 *83.6 fEET ARTESIAN FLOW 30 GPM FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0°.20°,84.5 -87.5 FEET                INCREASED                     ~      85 LOSING                              f- 20    85                                                                                        SULPHUR CIACULATION                                                                                                                            ODOR 13 89  66                  1/2 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY lAYER AT 70°, 87.0 FEET VUGS 10%, 1/6*3/4 INCH, 87.1 - 8B.5 FEET i--    90 25   90 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 0 AND 90°, 90.9*92.4 FEET f-- 95
                                                                                 ~ 30     95
                                                                                               ,. 80   '7             FRAGMENTED ZONE, 95.2 *96.9 FEET FISSURE. VERTICAL, 3 INCHES LONG, 114 INCH WIDE, 97.3 FEEl MEDIUM TO DARK GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CI_OSE, 30°.

FRAGMENTED ZONES 2 TO 4 INCHES THICK, ON APPROXIMATEL Y 12 INCH CENTERS, 97.0 *102.0 FEET 1--100 f- 35 ARTESIAN 100

                                                                                               ,. 58  10 FLOW 30 GPM H S ODOR 2

FRAGMENTED ZONE FROM 102.1 TO 104.8 FEET VUGS 30-60%, 1/16 *,*1/4 INCH, 102.1 *104,8 FEET ARTESIAN

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   -105 LOSING                              f- 40         16 69                      FRACTURES CLOSE, 0,20°, 104.8 *105.6 FEET FLOW 30 GPM CIRCULATION                                 105                                                                                        H S ODOR 2

21NCH SOFT DARK DRAY CLAY LAYER, 105.9 FEET ARTESIAN FLOW 50 GPM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY H S ODOR 17 43 2

                                                                                                                                                                                                                   -110 f- 45   110 ARTESIAN FLOW2GPM                                                    <{c.. MEDIUM GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0*90°.

z=> VUGS 30%, 1/16 *l*1/2INCH, 114.0 *115.0 FEET

                                                                                                          -0          GRADING TO ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE
                                                                                                          ..Ja:
                                                                                                          ~(!)                                                                                                     '-115 f- 50         18 60 115                                                                                        ARTESIAN FLOW 50 GPM
                                                                                                          ~                             BORING COMPLETED AT 117.1 FEET
                                                                                                                                                                                    ~~~~NG   H2S
                                                                                 - 55        -

ON 11-21-69 CASING USED TO 63.0 FEET 120 120 ARTESIAN FLOW3GPM

                                                                                 -,  60                                     NOTES:

ARTESIAN All ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 flOW 9 GPM tllNDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE i..- 65 NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. o I INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 100% INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE Fermi 2 RUN RECOVERED. All CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-37 LOG OF BORING 205

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.18 AND 2.5-22.19

CORING WATER DATA (MEASURED) 1= W er: W 0 (/) Z W

                                                                                                                   ...J    ,nt- >

t- 1= W III t- W zer: BORING 206 er:Q(!J(!J 0.. t-  ::::i-: w w

  ~            WW 0                                                                                    wt-Z~       <t      w    -er:          u..

J:  ::> Z u> 0 t-<t-...J (/) er: Ill> t- er:O er: <t>er:...J er:  ::> ~~ J: 0.. z wU SURFACE ELEVATION 567.2  :!:er:::>- wOer: w (/) en  ::;t;: t-w  ::> o..W t- w er:- o.. 0 er: er: (/) 0

                                                                                                                   <t           w w                                                               BORING 206 III et:

a. o LITHOLOGY 0 0..

0 LIMESTONE CRUSHED ROCK FILL o 65 r-65 FRACTURES ALONG SHALE PARTINGS FROM 66.0 TO 71.5 FEET BROWN Sil TV SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL ITllLJ AND 73.1 TO 73.7 FEET 100 5' VERTICAL HEALED fRACTURES, 69.0 - 69.8 FEET 5 l- 5 70 VUGS <5%, 1/32 TO 1/16,70.5-74.0 FEET 1-70 OTHER NODULE FROM 73,3 to 73.5 FEET SHALE BEDDING 0° - 10° AND IRREGULAR, 73.1 - 75.3 FEET 10 100 58 GRAY SIL TV SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL [TILL] 75 f-75 10 I - 10 11 80 32 WEATHERED LIMESTONE 15 GRAY - BUFF DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH STYLOLITES. LOSING CIRCULATION I - 15 80 FRACTURES CLOSE,0"-900, 81.5 - 83.6 FEET 1-80 FRAGMENTED ZONE 16.0 - 17.0 FEET 75 37 12 90 '5 LIGHT GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES WIDE AT 50° TO 90" VUGS <10%.1/32 *1/8 INCH FRAGMENTED ZONE, 84.0 TO 85.5 FEET

8. 29 85 1-85 20 f- 20 13 97 53 SUGHTL Y BRECCIATED FROM 85,8-98,3 FEET ARTESIAN fLOW 1/2 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, [SHATTERED ZONE] 20.0* 21.0 FEET GPM VUG 1 INCH WIDE AND 112 INCH DEEP, 86.6 FEET VUGS ..:;:30%, 1*1/2 INCH WITH DRUSY LINING 21.0*22.0 FEET FRACTURE 70°, 86.5 TO 87,5 FEET LIGHT GRAY DENSE BLUE STREAKED DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE, HORIZONTAL VUGS <:30%, 1/32*112 INCH, 83 53 1/4 INCH HARD BLACK SHALE LAYER, 24.6 FEET ORA YISH

• BROWN DENSE DOLOMITE WITH OCCASIONAL THIN SHALE PARTINGS l - 25 90 1--90 25 0 AT 0°. 5°, FRACTURES WIDE, 60 _SOo. VUGS <30%,1/32 - 1/2 INCH FRACTURES HEALED, 0_90° WITH DOLOMITE CRYSTALS 1/4 INCH HARD BLACK SHALE LAYER, 24.6 FEET

                                                                                                                                                       "    98     '2 100                                                                                                                     I-- 30     95                                                                                                                                     1-95 30                   100           1/4 INCH OF SHALE DIPPING 45°,30.5 FEET LIGHT GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES HEALED WITH DENSE SHALE 1/8-1/4 INCH VUGS <5%, 1/16 - 1/4 INCH 3*1/2 INCH LAYER SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY BOUNDED BY 45° FRACTU RES, 98.3 - 98,9 FEET 100 15   80      25 f-l00 35            100     85 ANHYDRITE FILLING SOME VUGS, 34.3 FEET l - 35                                                                                                               ARTESIAN FLOW 2 GPM 1-1/2 INCH LAYER SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY, 100.4 FEET 1 INCH SEAM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY, 36.3 FEET LIGHT GRAY OOLITIC DOLOMITE (MARKER BED]. VUGS, 20%, <:: 1/32 - 1/4 INCH DARK GRAY BRECCIATED INTERBEDDED SHALE AND ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE 16   85      21 LIGHT GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE, 0" TO 20° AND 90°.                                                                                                                                                                                                f-l05 40                                                                                                                                    I - 40    105                                   LIGHT BROWN DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE.

ARTESIAN FLOW3GPM GRAYISH - BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. VUGS 10%, 1/16 TO 1{8INCH, 106.5 - 108.0 FEET 100 50 DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE. 112 INCH SOFT GRAY CLAY LAYER,41.0 FEET GRAYISH-BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE 1/4 INCH SOFT GRAY CLAY,41.4 AND41.6 FEET 17 75 13 DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE, 110 GRAY MEDIUM SOFT CLAY, 110.9 - 111.3 FEET f-110 45 1-1/2 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY LAYER, 44.6 FEET l- 45 MEDIUM GRAY DENSE ARGILLACEIOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE, 20 0 _JOo ARTESIAN NEAR 47.0 FEET. VUGS<5%,oo::1/32-1/2 INCH FLOW3GPM BORING COMPLETED AT 111.3 FEET 115 100 72 t-- 50 115- ON 12-3-69 50 FRACTURE 80°, 51.0 TO 52.0 FEET LOST DRILLING WATER ON ALL RUNS IN THIS HOLE l - 55 55 SLIGHTLY BRECCIATED, 55.6 - 58.8 FEET ANHYDRITE LINING FRACTURE AT 56,2 FEET NOTES: 100 75 ALL ElEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 I - 60 FEW STYLOLITES, 58.8 - 60.7 FEET 13 INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST, FIGURES 60 fRACTURES VERTICAL, HEALED WITH CLAY AND SOME WITH ANHYDRITE, 55.8-60.4 FEET UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. 41NCH LAYER SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY GRADING TOSHALE,63.4 -63.7 FEET

                                                                                                                                        "-- 65                   o  INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY.

65 ANHYDRITE LINING VERTICAL FRACTURE,64.9 - 65.3 FEET 100%I INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. Fermi 2 ALL CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-38 LOG OF BORING 206

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.20 AND 2.5-22.21

CORING WATER DATA (MEASUREDI (I) Z W

                                                                                                                               ...J I-(ft        >-

I-W 1= a:: w Q BORING 207 a::Q(!J(!J 0.

E I-  ::i-: 1=

w w CD I-W W ... z~ << W -a: w W

     !:    :!E   Za::                                                                                       1-<<-..1           (I)           a::         CD>

l WW Q 0 <<>a:...J a: :l w'

t Z u> SURFACE ELEVATION 566,8  ;:a::l- W ~  :!Eli: :t I- Z a:O II: wQa:: I- w a:- t-

0. WU (I) Q << a: w o.

W Q

l a: o.w CD 0

                                                                                                                              ;:            0.          l'-          w a::                                   LITHOLOGY                                                                                                 Q 0                                            BROWN CLAYEY TILL WITH COBBLES AND BOULDERS (TILLI o

jo. 5 l-10 GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0_90°. I-15

                  .. 15 BLUE STREAKED DOLOMITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0-900,)

19 112 INCH HARD DARK GRAY SHALE LAYER, 'B,8 FEET 20l..,jI..._...._...L-..... - ........"'"" GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE, VERTICAL, VUaS<10", 20 1111-118 INCH BORING ABANDONED AT 20.0 FEET NOTES* All ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE 1935

                                                                                                                ~ INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST       FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER WITH AN ourSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FODTWITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FA.LlING 30 INCHES o   INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY 100% ]NDICATES DEPTH., LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED ALL CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-39 LOG OF BORING 207

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURE 2.5-22.22

CORING (MEASURED) WATER DATA VI w I-Z ...J  ;>- j:

   ~    a:        e          ~                         BORING 207A (n

I- w a: 9 (!)(!) Q. 1iJ w w I-W Z :i: I-  :::i~ w w III za:  :::l wl-Z~ <t w -a: u.

u. :i: WW e I-<t-...J 8 a:

VI 1Il;>-

r  :::l U>

a:O o VI W

                        ...J                SURFACE ELEVATION 566.8                                           <<>a:...J    a:      :::l <t w ......

J: l-l- Z a: s:a::::l- w VI BORING 207A CONTINUED wU I>. s: wea: :i:~ I>. I>. Z

l I>.W :i: o gj e f-VI w a:- W e

a: ...J s: W e a: <t a: w VI III LITHOLOGY 0 I>. c.. o BROWN SilTY CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEl (TILL] o 65 ARTESIAN FLOW 14 GPM 11 75 112 t~CH HARD BLACK SHALE SEAM AT 67.0 FEE:T FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE,Oo. 20°,68.9.74.6 FEET ARTESIAN 100 45 VERTICAL FRACTURES WIDE TO MODERATELY CLOSE, 69.9*74.& FEET 12 FLOW 16 GPM BROWN SILTY SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL (TILL) SOME DRUSY DOLOMITE LINING IN VERTICAL FRACTURES I - 70 5 l- 5 70 MOTTLED SROWN AND GRAY SilTY SANOY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVel [TILL! 13 95 10 NO FLOW AFTER SETTING BX CASING TO I-- 75 10 GRAY SILTY SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEl [TtlLl i - 10 75 NEAR HORIZONTAL FRACTURES CLOSE, 74.6 82.3 FEET, ALONG THIN HARD DARK GRAY SHALE SEAMS 69.4' 14 7' 11 ARTESIAN FLOW 1 GPM I - 80 15 LIGHT GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE. lIS INCH HARD DARK GRAY SHALE SEAM AT 15.1 FEET 15 80 LOSING CIRCULATION FRAGMENTED ZONE, 14.6 TO 16.9 FEET LOST FRACTURES 30°. 60° AND 90°. VERY CLOSE,Sl.G* 82.3 FEET 73 ARTESIAN FRACTURES 0°.30°. CLOSE, 82.7*84.1 FEET LIGHT GRAY DENSE BLUE STREAKED DOLOMITE. FLOW HORIZONTAL FRACTURES CLOSE. 16.9 ~ 21.1 FEET ALONG THIN SHALE SEAMS 15 79 41 r-

                                                                                                                                                -                                                                                                                                                                    85 VERTICAL FRACTURES CLOSE, 16.9 - 22.4 FEET                                                                                                           FRAGMENTED ZONE, 84.1*84.8 FEET ARTESIAN 91                                                                                                                                   20    85                               FRACTURES 30°, VERY CLOSE. 85.0*85.3 FEET FLOWS GPM 20                  39           MEDIUM GRAY. DENSE DOLOMITE.

VUGS-; 10%, 1/16 - 3/8 INCH LOSING CIRCULATION FEW THIN HORIZONTAL SHALE SEAMS (-=1/8 INCH] 16 j6 21 FRACTURES CLOSE, 0°

• 30°,87.4.88.7 FEET r-31NCH BAND LIGHT GRAY BLUE STREAKED DOLOMITE, 22.8 - 23.0 FEET VUGS 20%, 1/16 TO 1/2 INCH, 24.0 ~ 25.2 FEET FRAGMENTED ZONE, 89.5 *90.0 FEET 90 25 91 41 FRACTURES HORIZONTAL,CLOSE 22.7 ~ 24.0 FEET WITH SHALE FILL IN SOME FRACTURES l - 25 90 GRAYISH* BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN BRECCIATED ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL FRACTURES VERY CLOSE 26.1*27.4 FEET AND VUGS""'10%, 1/16*3/4 INCH, 91.5 *96.4 FEET 100 15 17 74 20 28.1* 29.4 FEET FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 91.4*96.8 FEET 1/2 INCH LIGHT GRAY CLAY AT 27.0 FEET ~ 95 i - 30 FRACTURES 30°.90° VERY CLOSE ALONG SHALE PARTINGS 29.4 31.2 FEET 30 INTERBEDDED SHALEY DOLOMITE AND BLUE STREAKED DOLOMITE.

93 SINCH SEAM MODERATELY STIFF DARK GRAY CLAY.96.7* 97.1 rEET LIGHT GRAY OOLITIC DOLOMITE [MARKER BEDI LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH THIN BROWNISH DARK VUGS 50%,""'1/32*3/4 INCH GRAY HARD SHALE SEAMS FRACTURES 0°.5°, VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE ~100 HORIZONTAL FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 97.3 102.3 FEET 35 21NCH SEAM STIFF BLACK SHALE AT 34.8 FEET LIGHT GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. I- 35 Q. GRADING TO GRAYISH* BROWN. VERY CLOSE SHALE PARTINGS, 34.9*52.0 FEET 0  :::l 59 o 96 FRACTURES 10°* 30 ,MODERATEL Y CLOSE. 34.9*36.1 FEET AND CLOSE 36.1 18 37

                                           *36.9 FEET AND 38.0*41.3 FEET CHERT BLEB 1!2INCH AT 36.6 FEET                                                                                                           a:

FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE,Oo. 90°, 40.4*43.0 FEET (!) FRAGMENTED ZONE 102.3*107.0 FEET

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                              ~105 40 VUGS<10%,1/16 1/2 INCH 41.3*51.9 FEET
                                                                                                                                                ~ 40       105                    <t z
                                                                                                                                                                                  ...J 1

ARTESIAN FLOW 36 GPM

                                                                                                                                                                                  ~         1 112 INCH SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY SEAM AT 107.0 FEET MEDIUM GRAY SEMI*HARD SHALE FRAGMENTED ZONE 107.1*112.0 FEET                                                                                  ~110
                                                                                                                                                                  '9 45                                                                                                                                             i - 45     110            '            GRAY SEMI.sOFT SHALE STILL LOSING                                       1---01.-3--'----1 91  71                                                                                      CIRCULATION

____~____~~__~____~115 BORING COMPLETED AT 112.0 FEET ~ ON 11*2S~9 50 115- 41NCH CASING USED TO 15.0 FEET 50 ex CASING USED TO 69.5 FEET FRAGMENTED ZONE 51.4*58.4 WITH DRUSY DOLOMITE NOTES: OPEN OR PARTIALL Y OPEN VUG, 52.1 *52.4 FEET LINED WITH DRUSY DOLOMITE ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 55 ~ INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES 55 68 ARTESIAN UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, flOW 8 GPM WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. FRACTURES 60°, CLOSE, 58.4 *59.0 FEET 60 o INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. VUGS-l0%, 1/16 *1/2 INCH, 58.4*59.9 60 67 17 21NCH SEAM FRACTURED DARK GRAY SHALE AT, 59.9 FEET 100%IINDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. ARTESIAN

                                                                                                                                                ..... 65 LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE                                  flOW 7 GPM                                                                                                                                                          ALL CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED.

FRAGMENTED ZONE, 60.0 *62.1 FEET 10 61 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 30°.90°,62.1 *63.9 FEET FRAGMENTED ZONE, 63.9*68.6 FEET 65 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-40 LOG OF BORING 207A

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.23 AND 2.5-22.24

CORING (MEASURED) WATER DATA 0- w f-i= W 0 V) Z ..J (II

                                                                                                                                  )-

f- i= W w ttl f-w Q. UJ

..., w

i! zO:

0 BORING 208 o:Q(!)(!)  ::i! f-

                                                                                                                                  -0:           W
     ~    :J     WW                                                                                      wf-Z~        <t      W ttI)-         IL J:   Z      (>>     0                                                                                f-<t-..J     V)      0:  <t_                                                       BORING 208 CONTINUED f-         0:0    0:                                                                               <t>0:..J     0:      :J  W

• J:

Z W() SURFACE ELEVATION 566.9 ~O::J- w V)

i!t f-Q.

J Q.W wOO: f- V) 0:- Q.

W 0: 0: V) 0 w W 0 ttl <t 0: W

                                                                                                                                  <>.            o LITHOLOGY                                            0         ~       Q.

0 0 65 - 65 MOTTlED SROWN AND GRAY Sil TV CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEL [TILLl SROWN SILTY SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL (TILL] 100 52 ARTESIAN GRADING LESS ARGILLACEOUS AND FROM BROWN TO LIGHT GRAY DCLOMITE. FLOW<,1/2 5 70 69.6*72.1 FEET - 70 l- 5 GPM 2(1/16 INCH) HARD BLACK SHALESEAMS,1*1/4 INCH APART AT 71.9 FEET GRAY DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH DARK GRAY SHALE PARTINGS DIPPING GRAY SIL TV SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL ITILl) 0°.10°, FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0° AND goO ARTESIAN - 75 10 f- 10 75 FLOW<1I2 100 21 GPM GRAY DENSE ARGillACEOUS DOLOMITE GRADING TO GRAYISH BROWN 100 40 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE,Oo .90°,11.8.78.4 FEET LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN ARGillACEOUS DOLOMITE FRACTURES MaDERA TEL Y CLOSE 0° 78.4 -79.3 FEET ,.... 80 15 VUGS<10%, 1/16 *1/2INCH,SOME FILLED WITH CLAY, 12.7 -17.7 FEET FRACTURES CLOSE TO MOOERATEL Y CLOSE,ao. 20°, 12.5*24.5 FEET I- 15 80 FRACTURES CLOSE, 0° AND 90°,79.3

• 80.0 FEET 100 30 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 0° - 90°,80.0.87.0 FEET VUGSc:;10%, 1/16 TO 3/4 INCH, 17.5*24.5 FEET ARTESIAN 10 90 36 FLOW<1I2 85 OPM f-- 85 20 ~ 20 GRAYISH - BROWN DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE.

100 50 FRACTURES VERTICAL, 86.9*87.7 FEET, FRACTURES VeRY CLOSE, 0° AND 90°, 24.5*30.0 FEET FRACTURES 60°. 88.2 FEET TO 89.0 FEET WITH DRUSY DOLOMITE LINIf>lG 25 ARTESIAN 90 - 90 FLOW<'!/2 25 GPM 11 100 50 ANHYDRITE CRYSTALS ALONG fRACTURES FROM 27.3 TO 32.4 FEET 30 30 95 MEDIUM GRAY DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. GRADING TO DARK GRAY - 95 ARGillACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH MANY SHALE PARTINGS FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 0° _90° 100 21 LIGHT GRAYISH .BROWN OOLITIC DOLOMITE [MARKER BED), FRACTURES veRY CLOSE TO CLOSE,aO .90° DARK GRAY SUGHTL Y BRECCIATED ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH MANY VERY THIN FRAGMENTED ZONE, 33.3 *34.1 FEET BLACK SHALE LAMINAE PARTINGS. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0°.90°,97.6.103.3 FEET FRACTURES MODERATELY CLOSE, 60° AND 90°, 34.1*35.9 FEET AND 104.6 -106.2 FEET -100 35 VUGS 20%,<1/32 -1/4 INCH 35 100 MEDIUM GRAY STREAKED DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE FRAGMENTED ZONE 36.0

• 36.8 FEET, FRACTURES CLOSE, 0°
• 90° 12 91 2.

21NCH SEAM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY, 36.8 - 31.0 FEET ARTESIAN FLOW 10 GPM 6 INCH SEAM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY INTERBEODED

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    ~~I~~;HT'i WITH THIN LAYERS OF HARD BLACK SHALE, 104.8*105.2 FEET                                                                 -105 40                                                                                                                                                40 105                 6 INCH SEAM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY, 105.6 *106,1 FEET 90        BROWN ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH THINL Y BEDDED SHALE PARTINGS DIPPING                                                                   DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE WITH LAYERS OF SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY 28 0° . :zoo. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0°-90°.40.6.43.3 FEET                                                                                  TO HARD SHALE 13
                                                                                                                                                                **          FRAGMENTED ZONE 106.1 *110.4 FEET 8 INCH SEAM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY, 109.2*11().0 FEET
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                      -110 45                                                                                                      ARTESIAN FLOW<ll2 45 110                                                                                          ARTESIAN 1 VERTICAL FRACTURE, 46.7 49.2 FEET                                       GPM                                               I. 70          FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 00 _30°, 110.4 -112.7 FEET               FLOW 21 GPM BORING COMPLETED AT 112.7 FEET 50 100    .5     61NCH SEAM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY BOUNDED BY 46° FRACTURES, 50.5-51.2 FEET ARTESIAN FLOW<1I2 GPM                               I - 50     115-ON 12-8--69                                             L-____       ~ ____    ~~~~             ____-L_115 NOTES:

ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 55 FRACTURES CLOSE, 0°

• 30°,55.2.58.7 FEET I- 55 (J INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, 100 58 WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALliNG 30 INCHES.

o I FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE,Oo. 90°. 58.7 *62.7 FEET ARTESIAN 60 FLOW<lf2 60 INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 1 INCH SEAM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY,58.2 FEET GPM 100% INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE RUN RECOVERED. DARK GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE GRADING TO MODERATElY HARD SHALE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, 0° _90° ALL CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED.

                                                                                                                                            ...... 65 3/4 INCH SEAM SOFT DARK GRAY CLAY,62.6 FEET BR~~~6gJ=NSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE FRACTURES CLOSE TO MODERATelY CLOSE, 65 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-41 LOG OF BORING 208

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.25 AND 2.5-22.26

BORING 209 CONTINUED

          'CORING                                                                                                          WATER DATA                         70 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, 0°

• 90° (MEASURED) FRACTURES CLOSE TO MODERATEL Y CLOSE,NEAR HORIZONTAL 95 36 VUGS--CS%, 1/4 INCH FROM 72.0 TO 74,0 FEET C/) UJ f- > 1= GRAY DOLOMITE, THINLY BEDDED WITH SHALE PARTINGS.

1= a: ~ ...J f- w a Z (n L!J 75 FRACTURES HEALED, VERY CLOSE, NEAR HORIZONTAL WITH ARTES:AN ** 5 W Z Q, f- ...J-: W DOLOMITE CRYSTAL LININGS, FlOW3GPM W W CIl f-w za: a a C/)~

                         ~                                   BORING 209                                        a:Q(,?Ci     ::E          -a:             LL.                    GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE DOLOMITE. DENSE, MASSIVE TO POORLY DEVELOPED
  !:!o  ::E                                                                                                    wf-z~

f-q;-...J <l: W a: CIl> WIDE BEDDING, FRACTURES MODERATEl Y CLOSE TO WIDE WITH DRUSY WW u> 0a: ~ U wa <l:>a:...J C/) q;-* 1: f-92 DOLOMITE LININGS. VUGS<l%, TO 1/32 INCH

                             ;;! CIl
        ~

1: f- z a:O SURFACE ELEVATION 567.0 a: ~ W Q, wU o  ::E::E ~a:~- waa: UJ ~  ::Et;: Q, Z ...J q; > a f- w a:- UJ a 80 W a ~ Q,W a: CIl C/) C/) LITHOLOGY C/) CIl <l: a: w a: c.. 0 0 ~ Q, o 10 96 .3 ARTESIAN 3 INCH SHALE LAYER FROM 83.4 TO 83.6 FEET FLOW4GPM GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEL [TILL! 85 VUGS-=l%, UP TO 1/4 INCH USING REVERT BROWN SILTY SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL [TILL) 5 AND SALT FOR DRILLING I- 5 11 100 92 FLUID GRAY SIL TV SANDY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL ITILL) 90 GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. MASSIVE. FRACTURES OPEN, WIDE, NEAR HORIZONTAL ARTESIAN I FLOW <112 52. l- 10 VUGS 10%, UP TO 1/4 INCH ANHYDRITE FILLED FROM 92.6 TO 92.8 FEET 10 VUGS 20 - 30%, UP to 1/21NCH GPM FRAGMENTED ZONE FROM 92.8 TO 94.5 FEET GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE SHALEY DOLOMITE. VERY THINL Y BEDDED WITH SHALE PARTINGS FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 45° VUGS<5%, UP TO 1/16 INCH GRAY TO BLUISH -GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. I- 15 DENSE MASSIVE FRACTURES CLOSE TO MODERATEL Y CLOSE,60% ILOSING OPEN ~ARTINGS'WITH CLAY FILLING [FISSURES} ,0°.90°,1/32 *1/SINCH. CIRCULATION VUGS"'l%, TO 1/8 INCH GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE. DENSE. THINLY TO MODERATEL Y THINLY BEDDED. POORLY lOSING I VUGS OPEN, 90°, 1/32 INCH DEVelOPED. FRAGMENTED CIRCULI,TION 20 71 50 I- 20 ARTESIAN FLOW2GPM

                                                                                                             'LOST                                                I. 40 CIRCULATION                                    105                GRAY ARGIllACEOUS DOLOMITE, MASSIVE.

AT 23.0 FEET FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 60° 69 25 Jo-I--I--I GRAY FINE.cRYSTALLINE DOLOMITE,DENSE,MASSIVE. l- 25 VUGS <10%, UP TO 1/4 INCH PYRITIZEDWITH CRYSTALS <1/32 INCH,<5%

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          !LOSING ICIRCULATION FRACTUAES CLOSE, 10° AND 90°, eLA Y FILLED WITH SOME OPEN.                                                                  89  12 17 VUGS 10%, 1/2 TO 1 INCH 110 92.

30 36 11 I- 30 30 NOTES: ARTESIAN All ElEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 IFLOW 1/2 GPM fg INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES 35 -+--II--+-oool LIGHT GRAY OOLITIC DOLOMITE (MARKER BEDI MASSIVE WITH SHALE PARTINGS 0°.20° MODERATELY CLOSE l - 35 UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE FRACTURES CLOSE, 0°

• 20°. NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, VUGS 10%, TO 1/32 INCH WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE, DENSE THINL Y BEDDED, GRADING TO CLAYEY FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES.

o IRREGULAR SHALE PARTINGS, NEAR HORIZONTAL. 100'1 FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE,600. goo, CLAY FILLED INDICATES A SAMpLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY 40 63 28 I- 40 VERY ARGillACEOUS DOLOMITE. MASSIVE TO POORL Y DEVELOPED BEDDING. FRACTURES OPEN,CLOSE TO MODERATEl Y CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 20°. INDICATES DEPTH,LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE 810 VUGS-(l%, UP TO 1/4 INCH. CLAYEY ZONE NEAR 122.0 FEET. PYRITIZED,<l% 125 o RUN RECOVERED, GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE, NEAR HORIZONTAL BEDDING SOME STIFF ZONES. FRACTURES WIDE, CLOSE TO MODERATelY CLOSE, NEAR HORIZONTAl. All CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. 454-4-4-1 GRAO'ING TO VUGS-10%, TO 1/4 INCH I- 45 VUGS IN MORE DOLOMITIC ZONES,<1%, UP TO 1/4 INCH FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO MODERATELY CLOSE WITH DRUSY 845 DOLOMITE LINING FRAGMENTED ZONE 128.3 TO 128.6 FEET ARTESIAN 130 FLOW 3 GPM 1340 FRAGMENTED ZONE 131.6 TO 132.0 FEET l- 50 50 26 BRECCIATED ZONE, HEALED, FROM 134.0 TO 135.7 FEET. DOLOMITE 135 FRAGMENTS UP TO 4 INCHES WITH DOLOMITIC AND CLAY MATRIX VUGS 10% - 20%, TO 1-1/2 INCH FRACTURES VERY CLOSE, VERTICAL, OPEN WITH DRUSY CALCITE I- 55 790 55 -I-~-+--I LINING MASSIVE DOLOMITE ZONE fROM 135B TO 136.2 FEET 100 31. FRACTURES OPEN, WIDE, HORIZONTAL TO 60° ILOSING 140 CIRCULATION VUGS 10%, UP TO 1/2 INCH, 132.0 TO 138.0 FEET I- 60 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO (;0° GRAY MEDIUM-CRYSTALLINE DOLOMITEMASSIVE. 60 FRACTURES MODERATEL Y CLOSE TO WIDE, 0° - 90° ARTESIAN GRADING TO MORE DOLOMITE 100 67 VUGS-40%, TO 1/8 INCH FLOW 2GPM GR~~T~OGL~:~Tcig~~~~~~AC~!~';!~i-~~LOMITE FRAGMENTS UP TO 3 INCHES ~~TESIAN M 145 6 INCH DARK GRAY MEDIUM STIFF CLAY LAYER AT 60.4 FEET 145 T GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. DENSE,MASSIVE. FRACTURES OPEN AND CLOSED, CLOSE, IRREGULAR HORIZONTAL, CALCITE FILLINGS OW 5 GP FRACTURES AND SHALE PARTINGS, 0° - 90°, CLOSE TO WIDE. 500 VUG9-<S%, to 1 INCH 1-'65 65 SOME ANHYDRITE ALONG FRACTURES AND PARTINGS

              .2    24 VUG ZONE 64.6 - 64.7 FEET                                                                            685                                                                                                                                  150
                                                                                                                                                    ..... 70 150 70 Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-42, SHEET 1 LOG OF BORING 209

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.27 AND 2.5-22.28

150 ,- BORING 209 CONTINUED 150 230) - BORING 209 CONTINUED 230 FRACTURES OPEN. CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, 20° AND 80° ARTESIAN !OPEN 30 96 33 GRADING TO MORE SHALE PARTiNGS ARTESIAN DOLOMITE FRAGMENTS UP TO 4 INCHES WITH DOLOMITIC CLAY MATRIX. 47 90 0 GRAY SHALEY DOLOMITE. THINLY TO MODERATELY THIN BEDDED. INTER LAYERED FLOW 5 GPM VUGS IN DOLOMITE 10

• 20% UP TO 1 INCH POORLY DEVElOPED FLOW 4 GPM END WITH BUFF DOLOMITE. MASSIVE TO THICKLY BEDDE:;D. FRACTURES OPEN,CLOSE 155i -

BEDDING WITH 30° TO 70° DIP 155 23 5- TO VERY CLOSE, NEAR HORIZONTAL AND 80° 235 GRADING TO SHALEV WITH SHALE PARTINGS 31 20 0 48 32 160 ARTESIAN FlOW3 GPM 160 2401- LOSING 60*70 GA1I10 240 FOOT 32 31 0 GRADING TO GRAY SHALEY DOLOMITE GRAY VERY FINELY-CRYSTALLINE ARGILLACEOUS SHALEY DOLOMITE. THINLY GRAY FINEl Y-CRYSTALLINE DOLOMITE. FRAGMENTED. LOSING 165 24 5- BEDDED WITH SHALE PARTINGS, HORIZONTAL. FRACTURES OPEN, CLOSE, 245 165 VUGS 20%, UP TO 112 INCH CIRCULATION

4. 100 19 HORIZONTAL 33 46

• BUFF TO TAN MICROCRYSTALLINE DOLOMITE. MASSIVE.

FRACTURES HEALED, CLOSE, DOLOMITE CRYSTAL FILLINGS HORIZONTAL TO 100 AND 80° FROM 249.2 TO 251.4 FEET, 10% ANHYDRITE FILLING ALONG LOST VUGS< 1%, UP TO 1/32 INCH 170 2501- 50 7 0 BEDDING AND REFILLED VUGS UP TO 1 INCH CIRCULATION 250 1701-I TAN TO GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE DOLOMITE. MASSIVE. FRACTURES OPEN,CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 60° ARTESIAN 34 .0 14 VUGS 1(}'-20% UP TO 1 INCH FLOW10GPM FROM 251.4 TO 252.2 FEET, PROBABLE VUGGY ZONE INO CORE RECOVERED] GRAY SIL TV SHALE. POORLY DEVELOPED NEAR HORIZONTAL BEDDING. VERY STIFF GRAY AND TAN BRECCIA. HEALED WITH DOLOMITIC CLAY MATRIX. DOLOMITE 51 4 0 175i_ FRAGMENTS UP TO 3 INCHES. FRACTURES CLOSE. HORIZONTAL TO 90 0 175 255i - GRADING TO LESSSHALEY ARTESIAN 255 FLOW 60 GPM GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. MASSIVE TO THINLY BEDDED WITH SHALE PARTINGS HORIZONTAL T0300. FRACTURES OPEN, 35 66 CLOSE, ALONG HORIZONTAL TO 30° SHALE PARTINGS. 0 180 - BUFF TO TAN MICROCRYSTALLINE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. THICKLY BEDDED

                         ~6T~~~~~E:'~~1J~~S ::'~;T~;~~4 ~~~~: ~~~~ ~~O:~I~~ ~~~~~'NHOR IZONTAL ARTESIAN FLOW 20 GPM 180  260I - 52  100  '4                                                                                                 260 AX*HEAD DOLOMITE CRYSTALS,o("5%.

36 59 0 FRACTURES OPEN, VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 30° FROM 185 185 265i - 264.6 TO 264.9 FEET 265 VERTICAL FRACTURES, 265.3 TO 265.7 FEET AND 266.3 TO 266.7 FEET 37 46 0 GRADING TO GRAY OOLOMITE WITH VUGS 20*30%, UP TO 1/2 INCH MEDIUM GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. THINLY BEDDED WITH IRREGULAR FRACTURES CLOSED,CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 80° 53 100 SHALE PARTINGS VUGS<5%, UP TO 1116 INCH. FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL LOST 190 270 0-270 190 CIRCULATION

l 0 LIGHT GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE FRACTURES OPEN, VERY CLOSE TO MODERATEL Y CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 38 75 VUGS 20*30%, UP TO 112 INCH FROM 192.0 TO 194.0 FEET 0:: 30° ALONG SHALE PARTINGS

                                                                                                                                            <.:l
                                                                                                                                            <t 195  275i -              ~

GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE WITH liNCH GYPSUM LAYER AT 275.5 FEET 275 195,- GRADING TO SHALEY NOTES:

3. B9 22 GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE WITH ZONES OF ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. FRACTURES

                                                                                                                                            <t    LIGHT GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE WITH THIN GYPSUM AND ANHYDRITE

(/) LAYERS AND VUG FILLINGS OPEN CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 45° ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE, 1935 54 100 75 rJ INDICATES STANDARD PENETRATION TEST. FIGURES 280I - 280 UNDER THE BLOW COUNT COLUMN INDICATE THE 200 200 GRADING TO MORE SHALEY WITH HARD GRAY SHALE LAYER FROM 279.0 *279,5 FEET NUMBER OF BLOWS REQUIRED TO DRIVE A SAMPLER, 40 27 9 WITH AN OUTSIDE DIAMETER OF TWO INCHES, ONE WHITE GYPSUM.FRACTURES OPEN, VERY CLOSE TO MODERATEl Y CLOSE, GRADING TO CLAYEY AND STIFF FROM HORIZONTAL TO 90°, WIDE FROM 281.3 TO 282.3 HORIZONTAL FOOT WITH A 140 POUND WEIGHT FALLING 30 INCHES. o TO 30° INDICATES A SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH NO RECOVERY. 205 205 285i - IRREGULAR SHALE LAYERS FROM 283.5 TO 285.0 FEET 285 1000!J INDICATES DEPTH, LENGTH, AND PERCENT OF CORE GRADING TO MORE DOLOMITIC LOST MEDIUM GRAY ARGillACEOUS DOLOMITE. MANY IRREGULAR LAYERS AND l RUN RECOVERED. I CIRCULATION GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE ZONE FROM 205.0 TO 206.0 FEET VUG FILLINGS OF GYPSUM AND ANHYDRITE. FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO 41 59 32 MODERATEL Y CLOSE,O* 30° AND 90° ALL CORE WAS MX SIZE EXCEPT WHERE NOTED. 55 100 75 210 LOST 210 290 290 GRAY TO BUFF DOLOMITE.MASSIVE TO ZONES OF THINLY BEDDED SHALE PARTINGS CIRCULATION FRACTURES CLOSED TO OPEN, VERY CLOSE TOCLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 80° 42 74 9 VUGS<5% UP TO 1116 INCH [SOLUTION OFAX-HEAD DOLOMITE CRYSTALS] 10% AX*HEAD DOLOMITE CRYSTALS FROM 210.0 TO 211.0 FEET 215 295,- 295 215 MEDIUM GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE GRADING TO DARK GRAY SHALE ARTESIAN 43 54 0 I FLOW 15 GPM WHITE GYPSUM AND ANHYDRITE. BRECCIATED SHALE. FRACTURES MODERATEl Y CLOSE, 20° 55 100 92 LOST 300 220 220 3001 - VUGS<.10%UPTO 1/16 INCH 44 92 43 FRAGMENTED ZONE FROM 220.B TO 221.7 FEET  :':::LATIOj DARK GRAY SHALE

     -                                                                                                             225  305 -                                                                                                              305 I

225 45 16 0 CHERT MODULES UP TO 3 INCHES AT 224.0 FEET CIRCULATION MEDIUM GRAY SHALE WITH VERY CLOSEL Y SPACED LAYERS OF GYPSUM. FRACTURES OPEN, MODERATEl Y CLOSE TO CLOSE, HORIZONTAL GRADING TO MORE GRAY AND SHALEY 8 INCH VUGGY ZONE INDICATED AT 227.0 FEET LOST 57

'230    46  71   0 CIRCULATION 230 310 100   '4 ARTESIAN         310 I

FLOW 60 GPM MEDIUM GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE FROM 312.6 T0313.9 FEET PIEZMETRIC 315 315- BORING COMPLETED AT 313.9 FEET SURFACE El, 573.9 FT. ON 11*28-69 NX WIRE LINE CASING USED FOR ENTIRE DEPTH Fermi 2 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FIGURE 2.5-42, SHEET 2 LOG OF BORING 209

REFERENCE:

DAMES & MOORE FIGURES 2.5-22.29 AND 2.5-22.30

_ 65 65 BORING 210 CONTINUED LOSING 1 OPEN B88 _ 70 CIRCULATION END FRACTURES CLOSE TO MODERATEl Y CLOSE, HEALED. BOo .90°, CORING WATER DATA 66.2*70.5 FEET. CLAY FILLED (MEASUREDI BORING 210 _ 75

                                                                                                                                    §                       70         GRADING TO MORE THICKLY BEDDED

~ i10 VUGS-l0%, 1/32 TO 1/16 INCH. 71.0*74.5 FEET LOSING

           ~

Z

                 " "'g CIRCULATION
                                                                                                                             ~
     ~        0  0 J SURFACE ELEVATION                                                                            ~~       ~       ~

0: VUGGY ZONE NEAR 74.5 FEET 888

                                                                                                                                            ...10 U

0

                                                                                                                                     "~
                                                                                                                    ~>

Z 0 0: 75

                                                                                                                             ...                                                                                                                                                             I-0: ~ ~
                                                                                                                    ~~                                           GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. THINLY BEDDED WITH SHALE PARTINGS DIPPING                                                              80
     " ~         ~

Z 0:

                   ~                                                                                                 :g      ~

00 TO 20°. FRACTURES WIDE,Oo AND 90° SOME DRUSY DOLOMITE LININGS. LITHOLOGY 0 ~ ~ VUGS 10%, 1/32 . 1/2 INCH BO SOLUTION ENLARGED VERTICAL FRACTURES [HEALED WITH ANHYDRITE f-MOTTLED BROWN AND GRAY Sil TY CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEL [TILL) 79.4.83.0 FEETI FROM 1/8 TO 1 INCH WIDE,B2B* 83.5 FEET 85 845 DARK GRAY VERY DOLOMITIC SHALE. THINL Y BEDDED, DIPPING 30°. FRACTURES CLOSE. 300 AND 50° .80°. BROWN SILTY SANOY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVel [Tilli B5 _ 90 GRAY SHALEY DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE. 30° ALONG SHALE PARTINGS. LOSING CIRCULATION I ANHYDRITE CRYSTALS ALONG FRACTURES. 10 DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC SHALE. FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE. 0° 60° 10 90 VUGS 10%,1/32 TO 1/16 INCH FROM 90.6 TO 91.0 FEET _ 95 GRAY SILTY SANOY CLAY WITH SOME GRAVEL LOSING FRAGMENTED ZONE, 91.5 *92.6 FEET CIRCULATION 21NCH WEATHERED LIMESTONE I- 15 BUFF DOLOMITE LAYER. 92.5 TO 93.0 FEET I ,,4 15 GRAY MICROCRYSTALLINE DOlOMITE.SHAlE PARTINGS AT 30° ALONG POORL Y 95 LOSING DEVELOPED THICK BEDDING. FRACTURES CLOSE, HORIZONTAL TO 80° 2220 CIRCULATION _ 100 VUGS .... ,0% UP TO 1/16 INCH LOS ING CIRC ULATION 20 VUGS 10*20%,118 *1/2 INCH, 19.6 FEET

                                                                                                                            -,...                   I-  20 100 LOSING FRACTURES CLOSE, 80° ANa 60° . BOO, HEALED WITH DARK GRA Y SHALE                                                                                                                                                 CIRCULATION f-HARD TO SOFT LIGHT GRAY CLAY LA YER, 102.0 . 103.0 FEET                                                                        105 FRAGMENTED ZONES FROM 20.9 TO 21.4 FEET AND 22.5 TO 23.0 FEET FORMATION SWelLING AT 103.0 FEET GRADING TO FINELY CRYSTALLINE                                                                                              25       GRAY DENSE DOLOMITE, PYRITIZED 103.0 *104.7 FEET. FRAGMENTED, WITH 25                                                                                                                                                         105      DRUSY DOLOMITE. VUGS 10%,<1/4 INCH                                                                                         _      110 LIGHT GRA Y OOLITIC DOLOMITE (MARKER BEDI. FRACTURES CLOSE, NEAR 90°. SOME                                                               BLUISH .GRAY CLAYEY SHALE. NEAR HORIZONTAL BEDDING POORLY DEVELOPED.

DRUSY DOLOMITE LININGS. VUGS""10%. 1/32 TO 1/2 INCH 1020 FRACTURES CLOSE TO FRAGMENTED, 0° .90° GRADING TO DENSE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE 30 BLUISH. GRAY CLAYEY MICROCRYSTALLINE BRECCIATED DOLOMITE INTERLAYEREO VIITH ARTESIAN DOLOMITIC CLAY. FRAGMENTED 112.0 *113.5 FEET FLOW 2.5 GPM I 30 GRAYISH. BLUE MICROCRYSTALLINE DOLOMITE. FRACTURES CLOSE TO VERY CLOSE, 110 _ 115 HORIZONTAL ALONG SHALE PARTINGS. VUGS"" 5%.~1/32 INCH, STYLOLITES 30.0 *32.0 FEET FRACTURES CLOSE. NEAR 0°, 113.5 *123.0 FEET GRAY MICROCRYSTAlliNE ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. THINL Y BEDDED WITH SHALE LOS ING CIRC ULATION 35 I PARTINGS AT 10.15°, FRACTURES CLOSE, 10*15° FROM 33.7 TO 35.6 FEET 35 AND WIDE TO VERY WIDE FROM 35,6 TO 43.7 FEET. VUGS .. 10% ...... 1/32 INCH REQUIRES 100 115 GAL.DRILLING _ 120 VUGGY ZONE FROM 35.0 TO 35.5 FEET FLUID/FOOT OF LOSI NG

                                                                                                                                                    -   40             VUGS-QO%,""'1/2INCH HOLE AT 400 PSI LOSING I

40 CIRC ULATION I VUGS 10*20%. 1/8 *1/2 INCH FROM 41.7-42.0 FEET 120 CIRCULATION

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               !-      125 45 BRECCIATED ZONES, HEALED, FROM 43.7 TO 45.5 AND 46.3 TO 47.0 FEET FRACTURES MODERATelY CLOSE TO WIDE. NEAR HORIZONTAL FROM 43.7 TO 49.5 FEET LOSI NG
                                                                                                                                                    -   45 125 FRAGMENTED TO VERY CLOSE, 0°.90°,123.0 *138.0 FEET LOSING CIRCULATION                                      _      130 I

STYLOLITES FROM 47.0 TO 47.8 FEET CIRC ULATION 50 FRACTURES CLOSE, 0*200 FROM 49.5 TO 52.1 FEET STIFF DARK GRAY TO BLACK CARBONACEOUS CLAY LAYER, 50.8 FEET I 48' - 50 130 GRADING TO MORE DOLOMITIC LOSING CIRCULATION _ 135 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE.Oo AND 70°,52.0 63.4 FEET A RTESIAN ARTESIAN FRAGMENTED ZONE, 53.4

• 63.7 FEET F LOW 1/2 FLOW..:: 1 GPM 55 55 G PM [EST.]

C LOUDY 135 CLOUDY I- 140 I LOSING CIRCULATION I FRAGMENTED ZONE, 59.2*63.7 FEET ARTE SIAN '97 I- 60 GRADING TO MORE CLAYEY FLOW 3GPM 60 FRAGMENTED DOLOMITIC BRECCIA WITH CLAY MATRIX _ 145 140 r CLEA R LOSI NG VUGS"""10% UP TO 1/2INCH,140.0 FEET ARTESIAN HORIZONTAL BEDDING WITH SHALE PARTINGS. FRACTURES CLOSE. FLOW<-1 GPM CIRC ULATION ALONG SHALE PARTINGS I 65 65 145 I- 150 FRACTURES VERY CLOSE TO CLOSE, NEAR HORIZONTAL _ 155 150 GRADING TO MORE CLAYEY

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  -      160 155 GRADING TO DARKER GRAY AND CARBONACEOUS ARTESIAN FLOW 3GPM AT COMPLETION 160   BUFF TO GRAY ARGILLACEOUS DOLOMITE. MASSIVE WITH SHALE PARTINGS.

FRACTURES CLOSE TO FRAGMENTED, 0° .90°. _ _ 165 AX.HEAD DOLOMITE CRYSTALS, 10% OF CORE. VUGGY ZONE, 161.0 *163.0 FEET BORING COMPLETED AT 163.0 FEET 165_ NOTES; ON 12-8-69 4 INCH CASING USED TO 13.8 FEET NX WIRE LINE CASING USED TO 163.0 FEET ALL ELEVATIONS REFER TO NEW YORK MEAN TIDE 1935

                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                ~ INDICATES STAND}}