ML21095A228: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 17: Line 17:


=Text=
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:SITE CHARACTERISTICS TABLE OF CONTENTS tion                                          Title                                                                  Page GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY .................................................................. 2.1-1 2.1.1      SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION .............................................. 2.1-1 2.1.2      POPULATION DISTRIBUTION .......................................................... 2.1-2 NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES ...... 2.2-1 2.2.1      LOCATIONS AND ROUTES .............................................................. 2.2-1 2.2.2      AIR TRAFFIC ..................................................................................... 2.2-4 2.2.3      ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL ACCIDENTS AT FACILITIES ............... 2.2-9 METEOROLOGY ................................................................................................. 2.3-1 2.3.1      GENERAL AND LOCAL CLIMATE .................................................... 2.3-1 2.3.2      SITE METEOROLOGY .................................................................... 2.3-18 HYDROLOGY ...................................................................................................... 2.4-1 2.4.1      HYDROLOGICAL DESCRIPTION ..................................................... 2.4-1 2.4.2      FLOODS ............................................................................................. 2.4-5 2.4.3      PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD ON STREAMS AND RIVERS ....... 2.4-10 2.4.4      POTENTIAL DAM FAILURES .......................................................... 2.4-12 2.4.5      PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGE AND SEICHE FLOODING ........... 2.4-14 2.4.6      PROBABLE MAXIMUM TSUNAMI HAZARDS ................................ 2.4-14 2.4.7      ICE EFFECTS .................................................................................. 2.4-15 2.4.8      COOLING WATER CANALS AND RESERVOIRS .......................... 2.4-16 2.4.9      CHANNEL DIVERSIONS ................................................................. 2.4-16 NE Medical Technologies                        2-i                                                                Rev. 0
{{#Wiki_filter:}}
 
SITE CHARACTERISTICS TABLE OF CONTENTS tion                                          Title                                                                  Page 2.4.10    GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION CONSIDERATIONS ............ 2.4-16 2.4.11    ACCIDENTAL RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVE LIQUID EFFLUENTS IN GROUND AND SURFACE WATERS .................... 2.4-16 GEOLOGY, SEISMOLOGY, AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ................ 2.5-1 2.5.1      REGIONAL GEOLOGY ...................................................................... 2.5-1 2.5.2      SITE GEOLOGY ............................................................................... 2.5-13 2.5.3      SEISMICITY ..................................................................................... 2.5-15 2.5.4      MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKE POTENTIAL ......................................... 2.5-18 2.5.5      VIBRATORY GROUND MOTION .................................................... 2.5-19 2.5.6      SURFACE FAULTING ...................................................................... 2.5-21 2.5.7      LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL .......................................................... 2.5-22 2.
 
==5.8      CONCLUSION==
S ............................................................................... 2.5-23 REFERENCES...................................................................................................... 2.6-1 2.6.1      GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY.................................................. 2.6-1 2.6.2      NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES ......................................................................................... 2.6-2 2.6.3      METEOROLOGY ................................................................................ 2.6-4 2.6.4      HYDROLOGY.................................................................................... 2.6-15 2.6.5      GEOLOGY, SEISMOLOGY, AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ................................................................................. 2.6-17 NE Medical Technologies                        2-ii                                                                Rev. 0
 
1    Approximate Distance between the SHINE Site and the Nearest Buildings Taller than 67 ft. within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE Site 2    Shortest Distance between Release Point and the Site Boundary in each of the 16 Compass Directions 3    Approximate Distance between the SHINE Site Center and the Nearest Residence in each of the 16 Compass Directions 4    Resident Population Distribution within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site 5    Transient Population Data for Major Employers within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site 6    Transient Population Data for Schools within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site 7    Transient Population Data for Recreation Areas within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site 8    Transient Population Data for Medical Facilities within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site 9    Transient Population Data for Lodging Facilities within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site 10  Weighted Transient Population Distribution within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site 1    Significant Industrial Facilities within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site 2    Pipelines within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site 3    Airports and Heliport Operations Located within 10 mi. (16 km) of the Site 4    Federal Airways within 10 mi. (16 km) of the Site 5    Hazardous Chemicals Potentially Transported on Highways within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site 6    Holding Patterns near the SHINE Facility 7    Maximum CONUS Values for Crashers per Year for Commercial and Military Aviation Nonairport Operations 8    Calculated Effective Areas of Safety-Related Structure 9    Total Crash Probability 10  Maximum Number of Operations per Year at Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 11  Aircraft Operations by Aircraft Type on Each Runway NE Medical Technologies                    2-iii                                    Rev. 1
 
12  Distance from Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport to SHINE Facility 13  Crash Probability (x 10-8) by Aircraft and Distance from the Site 14  Maximum Operations at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for the Years 2019 through 2045 and Projected Operations from a Future Air Show 15  Bounding Explosive Chemical Hazards within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Site 16  Stationary Explosion Analysis 17  Flammable Vapor Cloud Explosion Analysis 18  On-Site Pipeline Analysis 19  Bounding Toxic Chemical Hazards within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site 20  Bounding On-Site Chemical Hazards for Control Room Impact 21  Heat Flux Analysis 1    Selected Characteristics of Wisconsin Physiographic Provinces 2    Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes 3    Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes 4    Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes 5    List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region 6    List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries and Updates are Available 7    Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts 8    Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin 9    Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding Counties Adjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin 10  Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region 11  Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin NE Medical Technologies                  2-iv                                    Rev. 1
 
12  Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin 13  Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin 14  Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures 15  Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB Coincident with the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT 16  Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region 17  Nearest Class I Areas to the Project Site 18  Mean Temperature and Precipitation Climate Parameters for Available Normal (30-year) Periods and Extreme Precipitation, Temperature, and Tornado Occurrence Climate Parameters for Historic (10-year) Periods 19  FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations 20  Table Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 21  Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 22  Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 23  Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-2010 24  Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A) 25  Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B) 26  Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C) 27  Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D)
NE Medical Technologies                  2-v                                        Rev. 1
 
28  Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E) 29  Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F) 30  Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G) 1    Water Table in the Boreholes Drilled at the Site 2    Monitoring Results in SM-GW-1A, SM-GW-2A, SM-GW-3A and SM-GW-4A Wells 3    Summary of Slug Tests for Monitoring Wells SM-GW-1A, SM-GW-2A, and SM-GW-3A 4    Permeabilities Evaluated from Bouwer and Rice (1976) Method, AQTESOLV, and the Average, Standard Deviation of the Results for All of the Tests and Slug-in, Slug-out Tests 5    Summary of FEMA Flood Information for the Rock River 6    Summary of FEMA Flood Information for the Unnamed Tributary to the Rock River 7    100-Year Rainfall Event Values and Intensities at the SHINE Site 8    Design Precipitation 24-Hour Storm Accumulations 9    Summary of PMF Estimates for the SHINE Site 10  Parameters for PMF Calculations 11  Dams Near the SHINE Site 12  Summary of Parameters Used for Advective Travel Time Estimations 13  Thickness of Vadose Zone 14  Vadose Zone Advective Travel Time 1    Historic Earthquake Epicenters Located Within Approximately 200 Miles (322 km) of the SHINE Site 2    Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale 3    Recorded Earthquake Intensities (Modified Mercalli Intensity - MMI) for Earthquakes Within Approximately 200 Miles (322 km) of the SHINE Site NE Medical Technologies                2-vi                                        Rev. 1
 
4    Recorded Earthquake Intensities (Modified Mercalli Intensity - MMI) for Earthquakes with Epicenters farther than 200 Miles (322 km) of the SHINE Site 5    Probabilistic Estimates of PGA for Selected Return Periods at the SHINE Site for an Average Shear Wave Velocity (760 m/s) Site Class B 6    IBC-ASCE 7-05 Seismic Parameters for the SHINE Site NE Medical Technologies                2-vii                                      Rev. 1
 
1    SHINE Site Location 2    Topography and Prominent Features in Site Area 3    Boundary and Zones Associated with the Facility 4    Resident Population Distribution - 2019 5    Resident Population Distribution - 2024 6    Resident Population Distribution - 2051 1    Facilities and Transportation within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site 2    Airports/Heliports and Airway Centerlines within 10 mi. (16 km) of the Facility 1    Principal Tracks of Winter Synoptic Cyclones that Potentially Affect Wisconsin Weather 2    Physiographic Provinces in Wisconsin 3    Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Temperature 4    Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Temperature 5    Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Temperature 6    Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Temperature 7    Mean Wisconsin Winter Month Precipitation 8    Mean Wisconsin Spring Month Precipitation 9    Mean Wisconsin Summer Month Precipitation 10  Mean Wisconsin Autumn Month Precipitation 11  NOAA COOP Network Climate Divisions of Wisconsin 12  Outline of Climate Region Representative of the Site 13  Illinois Annual Mean Water Equivalent Precipitation 14  Illinois Annual Mean Snowfall 15  Illinois Annual Mean Dry Bulb Temperatures NE Medical Technologies                  2-viii                                      Rev. 1
 
16  NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region 17  NOAA COOP Stations Located within the Site Climate Region 18  Wisconsin and Illinois Counties within Site Climate Region Selected for Investigation of Severe Weather Phenomena 19  Annual Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 20  January Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 21  February Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 22  March Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 23  April Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 24  May Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 25  June Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 26  July Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 27  August Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 28  September Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 29  October Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 30  November Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 31  December Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 32  Winter Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 33  Spring Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 34  Summer Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 35  Autumn Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (2005-2010) 36  Annual Wind Rose Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Janesville, WI) and Regional Stations 1    SHINE Site in Relation to Rock River 2    Schematic of the Flow System in Rock County NE Medical Technologies                  2-ix                                        Rev. 1
 
3    SHINE Site Groundwater Monitoring Wells 4    Simplified Groundwater Table Contours Based on Measured Groundwater Elevations in Monitoring Wells 5    SHINE Site Monitored Hydraulic Gradients 6    Piezometric Water Table Surface from 1958 7    Groundwater Elevation Contours (Static State) 8    Groundwater Elevation Contours (Pumping State) 9    SHINE Site Vicinity Hydraulic Features 10  Rainfall Intensity - Duration - Frequency Curve 11  Site Drainage Area 12  100-Year Event Facility Drainage 13  Rock River Cross-Section Used in PMF Calculation 14  Dam Locations in Vicinity of SHINE Site 1    Site Vicinity Map 2    Map of Physiographic Sections 3    Tectonic Provinces Map 4    Generalized Regional Structural Geologic Map 5    Generalized Regional Geologic Map 6    Regional Magnetic Anomaly Map and Structural Interpretation 7    Regional Magnetic Anomaly Map and Structural Interpretation 8    Regional Bouguer Gravity Anomaly Map 9    Bouguer Gravity Anomaly Map of Wisconsin and Northern Illinois 10  Composite Aeromagnetic Anomalies and Main Geological Structures, Southern Wisconsin 11  Bouguer Gravity Anomalies and Main Geological Structures, Southern Wisconsin NE Medical Technologies                  2-x                                Rev. 1
 
12  Regional Surficial Geology Map 13  Unconsolidated and Drift Thicknesses Map of Wisconsin and Northern Illinois 14  Historical Earthquake Epicenters 15  Isoseismal Map December 16, 1811 Earthquake 16  Isoseismal Map September 01, 1866 Earthquake 17  Isoseismal Map September 27, 1891 Earthquake 18  Isoseismal Map October 31, 1895 Earthquake 19  Isoseismal Map May 26, 1909 Earthquake 20  Isoseismal Map November 09, 1968 Earthquake 21  Deaggregation of USGS 2008 PSHA Model for 475-Year Return Period PGA 22  Deaggregation of USGS 2008 PSHA Model for 2,475-Year Return Period PGA 23  Deaggregation of USGS 2008 PSHA Model for 4,975-Year Return Period PGA 24  Deaggregation of USGS 2008 PSHA Model for 9,950-Year Return Period PGA 25  Deaggregation of USGS 2008 PSHA Model for 19,900-Year Return Period PGA NE Medical Technologies                2-xi                                      Rev. 1
 
onym/Abbreviation      Definition per year degrees Celsius degrees Fahrenheit degrees north (latitude) degrees west (longitude)
CFR                      Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations relative atmospheric concentration acre t                        acre-feet American Concrete Institute CC                      Air Force Combat Climatology Center HA                      Area Locations and Hazardous Atmospheres SI/ANS                    American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society SS                        Advanced National Seismic System O                        Federal Aviation Administration Office of Aviation Policy and Plans NE Medical Technologies 2-xii                                      Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation        Definition TESOLV                    Advanced Aquifer Test Analysis Software CE                        American Society of Civil Engineers HRAE                      American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc.
OS                        automated surface observing station DS                        Air Traffic Activity System OS                        automated weather observing station below ground surface VE                        boiling liquid expansion vapor explosion
/hr-ft2                    British thermal units per hour per square foot AS                        criticality accident alarm system US-SSC                    Central Eastern United States-Seismic Source Characterization R                          Code of Federal Regulations cubic feet per second AR-CSI                    Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research-Consortium for Spatial Information
-20                      Climatography of the United States No. 20 NE Medical Technologies 2-xiii                                      Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation      Definition centimeter yr                        centimeters per year NUS                      continental United States OP                        (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) cooperative observing station
/in.                    cubic feet per second per square mile per inch T                        dry bulb temperature degrees R                        Department of Natural Resources A                        Wisconsin Department of Administration E                        U.S. Department of Energy T                        Wisconsin Department of Transportation C                        Dairyland Power Cooperative east
]                        expected moment magnitude S                        Environmental Data Service E                        east-northeast NE Medical Technologies 2-xiv                                      Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation        Definition RI                        Electric Power Research Institute PG                        Emergency Response Planning Guideline E                          east-southeast RI                        company name - not an acronym east-west (direction) site coefficient for 0.2 second period Federal Aviation Administration T                          Fire Dynamics Tools MA                        Federal Emergency Management Agency MS                        Flight Standards Information Management System R                        facility structure foot ay                        feet per day ec                        feet per second cubic feet site coefficient for 1-second period NE Medical Technologies 2-xv                                    Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation      Definition gravitational acceleration billion years glacial isostatic adjustment geographic information system PE                        ground motion prediction equations S                        Global Positioning System hectares y                        highway
/39                      Interstate 90/39 A                        International Atomic Energy Agency International Building Code H                        immediately dangerous to life and health inch Hg                        inches of mercury r                        inches per year NE Medical Technologies 2-xvi                                      Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation      Definition CS                        international station meteorological climate summary irradiation unit joint frequency distribution hydraulic conductivity kilogram m2                        kilograms per square meter L                        meteorological station identifier for Janesville, Wisconsin kilometer LI                        meteorological station identifier for Moline, Illinois SN                        meteorological station identifier for Madison, Wisconsin kilopascal g                        kilopascal gauge FD                        meteorological station identifier for Rockford, Illinois NE Medical Technologies 2-xvii                                        Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation        Definition PI                          meteorological station identifier for Springfield, Illinois m2                        kilowatts per square meter pound 2                          pounds per square foot D                          local climatological data lower explosive limit liquid limit moment magnitude meter ay                        meters per day meters per second cubic meters sec                        cubic meters per second million years body-wave magnitude E                          maximum considered earthquake NE Medical Technologies 2-xviii                                        Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation        Definition R                          Mid-Continent Rift WB                        mean coincident wet bulb temperature body-wave magnitude calculated from earthquake felt area mile square miles minute RA                        Major Land Resource Area
/yr                      millimeters per year I                        Modified Mercalli Intensity h                          miles per hour L                          above mean sea level north alues                      standard penetrometer test blow counts AQS                        National Ambient Air Quality Standard MAG                        North American Magnetic Anomaly Group VD 88                      North American Vertical Datum of 1988 NE Medical Technologies 2-xix                                    Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation      Definition DC                        National Climatic Data Center EER                      National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research northeast C                        National Earthquake Information Center D                        National Earthquake Intensity Database DC                        National Geophysical Data Center SH                      National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health I                        National Lightning Safety Institute E                        north-northeast W                        north-northwest AA                        National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration S                        National Park Service C                        U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission north-south (direction) northwest NE Medical Technologies 2-xx                                        Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation      Definition E                        operating basis earthquake C                        Protective Action Criteria E                        Preliminary Determination of Epicenters Catalog A                        peak ground acceleration plastic limit F                        probable maximum flood H                        probable maximum hurricane P                        probable maximum precipitation T                        probable maximum tsunami WS                        probable maximum wind storm parts per billion HA                        probabilistic seismic hazard analysis pounds per square inch differential pressure pounds per square inch gauge A                        radiologically controlled area GIS                      Rock County Geographic Information System NE Medical Technologies 2-xxi                                      Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation        Definition S                          radioactive drain system SE                          root mean square error south maximum considered earthquake 1-second spectral response acceleration spectral acceleration L                          Saint Charles Lineament S                          Soil Conservation Service design spectral response acceleration coefficient at 1-second period design spectral response acceleration coefficient at short periods southeast
.                          second 11                        State Highway 11 26                        State Highway 26 maximum considered earthquake spectral response for 1-second period modified for soil Site Class NE Medical Technologies 2-xxii                                      Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation        Definition maximum considered earthquake spectral response for 0.2 seconds modified for soil Site Class T                          standard penetrometer test km                          square kilometer mi                          square mile P                          Standard Review Plan maximum considered earthquake 0.2 second spectral acceleration E                          south-southeast W                          south-southwest southwest RA                          Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport Terminal Area Forecast long-period transition period T                          trinitrotoluene tritium purification system target solution vessel NE Medical Technologies 2-xxiii                                      Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation        Definition C                          Uniform Building Code L                          upper explosive limit 14                        U.S. Highway 14 51                        U.S. Highway 51 ACE                        U.S. Army Corps of Engineers AF                          U.S. Air Force CB                          U.S. Census Bureau DA                          U.S. Department of Agriculture DA SCS                      U.S. Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Service DOC                        U.S. Department of Commerce EPA                        U.S. Environmental Protection Agency GS                          U.S. Geological Survey HIS                        U.S. Earthquakes MC                          U.S. Marine Corps N                          U.S. Navy C                          Universal Time, Coordinated NE Medical Technologies 2-xxiv                                  Rev. 0
 
onym/Abbreviation      Definition west AN                        Weather Bureau Army Navy T                          wet bulb temperature NR                        Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources NHS                        Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey W                          west-northwest W                          west-southwest yard year NE Medical Technologies 2-xxv                                      Rev. 0
 
GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY 1      SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION subsection describes the location and important features of the SHINE site.
1.1        Specification and Location SHINE site is located on previously undeveloped property in the City of Janesville, Rock nty, Wisconsin. Figure 2.1-1 shows the location of the site in the state, county, and city.
site boundary encompasses approximately 91 acres (36.8 hectares) of land. All safety-ted structures are located within a square area located near the center of the property to ximize the distance to the site boundary. The center point of this safety-related area has the wing coordinates:
tude and Longitude (degrees, minutes, seconds)
Latitude: 42º 37 26.8 Longitude: 89º 01 29.7 versal Transverse Mercator Coordinates, Zone 16T (meters [m])
Northing: 4721061N Easting: 333946E consin State Plane Coordinates - Zone 4803 South Northing: 69801.619N Easting: 679992.268E SHINE site is located on the south side of the City of Janesville corporate boundaries, and densely populated parts of the city are more than 1 mile (mi.) (1.6 kilometers [km]) to the
: h. Figure 2.1-2 shows prominent natural and man-made features in the vicinity of the project
. The distance and direction from the center point of the safety-related area to major nearby ures are as follows:
* U.S. Highway 51 (US 51): <0.1 mi. (<0.2 km) west
* Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport: 0.4 mi. (0.6 km) west
* Union Pacific Railroad: 1.7 mi. (2.7 km) northeast
* Rock River: 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) west
* Interstate 39/90 (I-39/I-90): 2.1 mi. (3.4 km) east 1.2        Boundary and Zone Area Maps hways, railways, and waterways that traverse or are in close proximity to the SHINE site are wn in Figure 2.1-2. This figure and all figures referenced in this section have an arrow cating true north.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.1-1                                        Rev. 0
 
American National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society (ANSI/ANS) 15.16-2015 SI/ANS, 2015). All safety-related structures, systems, and components of the SHINE facility located in this central area. The Emergency Planning Zone is encompassed by the rations boundary in accordance with the Emergency Plan.
site boundary corresponds to the property line around the perimeter of the SHINE site in ordance with ANSI/ANS-15.16-2015. The owner controlled area is the area within the site ndary in accordance with 10 CFR 20.1003. The area directly under the facility operating nse is delineated by the site boundary.
ure 2.1-2 shows the topography within the vicinity of the SHINE site. The finished site grade ation is approximately 825 feet (ft.) (251.46 m) North American Vertical Datum of 1988 VD 88). The project site and adjacent ground within a radius of approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) ughly flat. Within a 5 mi. (8 km) radius from the SHINE site, topographic elevations range approximately 750 ft. (228.6 m) NAVD 88 along the Rock River, to approximately 950 ft.
0 m) NAVD 88 to the east of the site (USGS, 1980). Therefore, the topography within a 5 mi.
m) radius ranges from approximately 75 ft. (22.9 m) below to approximately 125 ft. (38.1 m) ve the SHINE site grade elevation.
tallest building on the SHINE site is the main production facility, which at its highest point is roximately 57 ft. (17.4 m) above the site grade level. The main production facility has an cent free-standing exhaust stack that is at 67 ft. (20.4 m) above the site grade level. Eight dings higher than 67 ft. (20.4 m) above ground level have been identified within 5 mi. (8 km) he project site. These are listed in Table 2.1-1. These buildings are greater than 3.8 mi.
km) north or northeast of the SHINE site. Given their distance from the site, none of these dings are expected to affect diffusion or dispersion of airborne effluents.
distance from a release point to the site boundary in each of the 16 compass directions is vided in Table 2.1-2. Distances are calculated from a circle (radius of 70 m) that envelopes radiologically controlled area (RCA) of the main production facility, since a release point ld be anywhere in the RCA.
2        POPULATION DISTRIBUTION subsection describes the population distribution within 8 km (5.0 mi.) of the center point of safety-related area at the SHINE site. The information includes estimates of the resident and sient populations for the most recent census year (2010) and projections of the resident and sient populations for the years 2019, 2024, and 2051.
mates and projections of resident and transient populations around the project site are ded into five distance bands, represented as concentric circles at 0 to 1 km (0 to 0.6 mi.), 1 to m (0.6 to 1.2 mi.), 2 to 4 km (1.2 to 2.5 mi.), 4 to 6 km (2.5 to 3.7 mi.), and 6 to 8 km (3.7 to mi.) from the center point of the safety-related area. For each distance band the resident ulation was estimated using U.S. Census Bureau (USCB) 2017 census data. The transient ulation was estimated using the best available data for major employers, schools, recreation as, medical facilities, and lodging facilities. Transient population was obtained in 2012 and been updated where new or different information was available, and is assumed to represent 9 population levels.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.1-2                                        Rev. 0
 
anesville, in the City of Beloit, or in other parts of Rock County. The specific growth rates d in these areas are explained in the following paragraphs.
Wisconsin Department of Administration (DOA) provides state and county population ections that were developed by the DOA in December 2013 (DOA, 2013). The DOA ulated future population growth rates using the cohort-component method, which involves review of recent historical patterns to determine age- and sex-specific rates of fertility, tality, and migration. The estimated 2010 resident in each distance segment that is located rely outside of the city boundaries was increased by 0.534 percent each year from 2011 ugh 2020, by 0.587 percent each year from 2021 through 2030, and by 0.193 percent each r from 2031 through 2051.
City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, adopted March 9, 2009 (City of Janesville, 2009),
sents projections of the citys future population calculated using several possible population wth rates. The Comprehensive Plan states that the growth rate identified as 15-Year Rate jection (Compounded) is considered the most reasonable basis for estimating the citys re population. According to the Comprehensive Plan, this growth rate was calculated by ermining the average annual rate of growth of the city population over the 15 year period from 0 to 2005, resulting in an average growth rate of 1.15 percent per year. This growth rate was d to project future populations for the areas around the SHINE site that are within the City of esville corporate boundaries. The estimated 2010 resident population in each distance/
ction segment that is located partially or entirely within the city boundaries was increased by 5 percent each year from 2011 through 2051.
City of Beloit Comprehensive Plan, adopted March 17, 2008 and updated November 5, 2018 y of Beloit, 2018), presents projections of the city's future population from 2017 to 2035. The 8 Comprehensive Plan update provides population projections based on the DOA population ections for 2017, 2020, 2025, and 2030. The DOA population projections for the City of Beloit 2010 to 2040 were used to estimate growth rates from 2035 to 2051. The estimated 2017 ulation of Beloit increased 1.54 percent each year from 2017 through 2020, by 0.399 percent h year from 2021 through 2025, by 0.33 percent each year from 2026 through 2030, by 96 percent each year from 2031 through 2035 and by -0.136 percent each year from 2036 ugh 2051.
following subsections describe the resident and transient population distribution surrounding SHINE site.
2.1        Resident Population permanent residence nearest to the SHINE site was identified through field reconnaissance examination of aerial photographs. The nearest permanent residence is a house located roximately 0.50 mi. (0.80 km) northwest of the center point of the safety-related area. There permanent residences in two other directions that are only slightly farther from the center t: a house located approximately 0.54 mi. (0.86 km) north-northwest of the center point and a se located approximately 0.59 mi. (0.94 km) south-southwest of the center point. The roximate distances between the center point of the SHINE safety-related area and the rest residences in the 16 compass directions are provided in Table 2.1-3.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.1-3                                        Rev. 0
 
012 and examination of aerial photographs from 2017) and the average number of people per sehold (as reported by the USCB in 2017). USCB data indicate that Rock County has an rage of 2.45 people per household (USCB, 2017). Therefore, the 2019 resident population estimated by multiplying the number of occupied houses by 2.45 people per house and nding to the nearest whole number. The estimate was then extrapolated to the years 2019, 4, and 2051 using the population projection methodologies described above. The total 2019 dent population estimated in this manner is 101 people at a distance of 0 to 1 km (0 to mi.) from the SHINE center point, and 210 people at a distance of 1 to 2 km (0.6 to 1.2 mi.)
2019. These population estimates are shown in Table 2.1-4 along with the estimates for other ances and years.
CB 2010 census block and tract data (USCB, 2012) was used to estimate the resident ulation within the 4 km (2.5 mi.), 6 km (3.7 mi.), and 8 km (5.0 mi.) distance bands. For each ment formed by the distance bands, the percentage of each census tract's land area that
, either partially or entirely, within that segment was calculated using the geographic rmation system (GIS) software known as ArcMap9.3.1 (ESRI, 2019). The equivalent portion of each census tract's population was then assigned to that segment. If portions of two ore census tracts fall within the same segment, the proportional population estimates for the sus tracts were summed to obtain the population estimate for that segment.
ng the population projection methodologies described above, the 2010 resident population mates within the distance bands were extrapolated to the years 2019, 2024, and 2051.
le 2.1-4 shows the total projected resident population for these years within the distance ds, and Figures 2.1-4 through 2.1-6 show the population projections for these years divided the distance bands.
2.2          Transient Population ddition to the permanent residents around the project site, there are people who enter this a temporarily for activities such as employment, education, recreation, medical care, and ing. These transient populations are estimated based on data obtained from publicly ilable sources of employment and population data, such as from local officials and ernment agency websites for major employers, schools, recreation areas, medical facilities, lodging facilities within 8 km (5.0 mi.) of the center point of the safety-related area.
le 2.1-5 lists the major employers identified within 8 km (5.0 mi.) of the SHINE center point, direction and distance band within which each employer is located, and the best available mate of the total number of people employed at that location. People using the Southern consin Regional Airport in Janesville were included in the Table 2.1-5. The transient ulation at the airport are employees of the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, employees arious companies at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, passengers, or crew. Based nformation provided by the airport, an average of 560 passengers and crew fly into or out of airport each day, and 100 employees of various companies are on-site. None of these panies are considered major employers in the area.
st airport buildings, including the terminal, restaurant, and pilots lounge, are located at the thwestern corner of the airport, which is between 1 and 2 km (0.6 and 1.2 mi.) from the NE center point in the southwest directional sector. Therefore, passengers, crew, and most NE Medical Technologies                        2.1-4                                      Rev. 0
 
NE center point in the west-southwest sector. This location was assumed for 15 percent of employees.
le 2.1-6 lists the schools identified within 8 km (5.0 mi.) of the SHINE center point, the ction and distance band within which each school is located, and the best available estimate he total number of students at that location. Table 2.1-7 lists the recreation areas identified in 8 km (5.0 mi.) of the SHINE center point, the direction and distance band within which h area is located, and the best available estimate of the average number of daily visitors at location. Table 2.1-8 lists the medical facilities (hospitals and nursing homes) identified in 8 km (5.0 mi.) of the SHINE center point, the direction and distance band within which h facility is located, and the best available estimate of the total in-patient capacity (number of s) at that location. Table 2.1-9 lists the lodging facilities (hotels and motels) identified within m (5.0 mi.) of the SHINE center point, the direction and distance band within which each lity is located, and the best available estimate of the lodging capacity (number of rooms) at location. The transient population estimates shown in Tables 2.1-5 through 2.1-9 were ained in 2011 and updated in 2019 where new information was available.
rder to obtain a more accurate representation of the transient population around the project
, Tables 2.1-5 through 2.1-9 also include values that are weighted according to the length of people could be expected to stay at each facility, assuming typical use patterns for the icular type of facility. Therefore, the estimates for employers and schools (Tables 2.1-5 and
: 6) were multiplied by a weighting factor of 0.27, which assumes that each employee or ent is present at the facility 9 hours per day and 5 days per week. The estimates for eation areas (Table 2.1-7) were multiplied by a weighting factor of 0.33, which assumes that h daily visitor is present at the recreation area 8 hours per day. The estimates for medical lities (Table 2.1-8) were not multiplied by any weighting factor, effectively assuming that each at each facility is occupied 24 hours per day and 7 days per week. The estimates for lodging lities (Table 2.1-9) were not multiplied by any weighting factor, effectively assuming that each m at each facility is occupied 24 hours per day and 7 days per week.
weighted 2019 transient population estimates calculated for each type of facility in each ance band are summarized in Table 2.1-10.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.1-5                                          Rev. 0
 
Distance from Site Center to Height      Facility Facility        Direction  (ft.)        (mi.)
M St. Marys Health            NE      79          3.8 Parker Place                  N      98          4.0 spect 101                        N      84          4.0 esville City Hall                N      96          4.0 k County Courthouse            N      85          4.1 esville Garden Apartments        N      77          4.2 cy Hospital                    N      93          4.4 W. Grainger Corporate Office    NE      90          4.5 NE Medical Technologies          2.1-6                        Rev. 0
 
the 16 Compass Directions Distance from Release Point to Site Boundary Direction                              (ft)
N                              761.79 NNE                              776.51 NE                              943.49 ENE                              772.85 E                              755.96 ESE                              777.88 SE                              788.03 SSE                              782.17 S                              790.32 SSW                              794.91 SW                              793.89 WSW                              1013.04 W                              1031.77 WNW                                845.74 NW                              815.62 NNW                              786.62 NE Medical Technologies              2.1-7                                Rev. 0
 
ble 2.1 Approximate Distance between the SHINE Site Center and the Nearest Residence in each of the 16 Compass Directions Distance from Site Center to Nearest Residence Direction                                        (mi)
N                                            0.66 NNE                                            0.76 NE                                            0.90 ENE                                            0.78 E                                            0.71 ESE                                            0.73 SE                                            0.95 SSE                                          >1.24*
S                                          >1.24*
SSW                                            0.59 SW                                          >1.24*
WSW                                          >1.24*
W                                            0.86 WNW                                            0.77 NW                                            0.50 NNW                                            0.54
*No occupied residence within 2 km (1.24 mi) of the site center.
NE Medical Technologies                2.1-8                                Rev. 0
 
Table 2.1 Resident Population Distribution within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site Distance Band (km)
Year          0-1        1-2          2-4          4-6          6-8          Total 0-8 2019          101        210          10,454      12,613      29,289      52,667 2024          107        221          11,045      13,287      30,861      55,521 2051          146        296          14,795      17,418      40,139      72,795 NE Medical Technologies                2.1-9                                    Rev. 0
 
able 2.1 Transient Population Data for Major Employers within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site Directional  Distance Name of Facility              Sector    Band (km)    Employment llar General Distribution Center                NE        0 to 1          400 uthern Wisconsin Regional Airport              SW        0 to 1            15 uthern Wisconsin Regional Airport              SW        1 to 2          645 neca Foods Corporation                          N        2 to 4          700 ckhawk Technical College Janesville            SSE        2 to 4          517 ntral Campus mmons                                            N        2 to 4          359 nesville School District                        N        4 to 6          1,515 P. Cullen & Sons                                NNE        6 to 8          350 in Supply Co.                                  NE        6 to 8          490 y of Janesville                                  N        6 to 8          436 ck County                                        N        6 to 8          1,189 an Health System                                N        6 to 8          447 I Technologies Inc.                            NNE        6 to 8          560 rcy Health System                              N        6 to 8          2,635 rcy Hospital and Trauma Center tec Corporation                              NE        6 to 8          300 W. Grainger                                    NE        6 to 8          910 al                                              -          -          11,468 ighted Total                                    -          -          3,096
 
==References:==
 
Rock County Wisconsin Economic Development Alliance, 2019.
NE Medical Technologies                2.1-10                                    Rev. 0
 
ble 2.1 Transient Population Data for Schools within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site (Sheet 1 of 2)
Directional Distance Band Name of Facility                  Sector        (km)        Enrollment ckhawk Technical College Janesville            SW          1 to 2            34 ation Center ck County Christian School                      SSW          2 to 4          107 ckson Elementary School                          N          2 to 4          319 coln Elementary School                        NNW          2 to 4          368 ison Middle School                              NNW          2 to 4          583 khill Christian School                        NNW          2 to 4            75 ckhawk Technical College Janesville            SSE          2 to 4          3,408 ntral Campus iversity of Wisconsin Rock County Center        NW          2 to 4          1,303 adstart Janesville                                N          4 to 6          127 nesvilles Montessori                          NNW          4 to 6          100 n Buren Elementary School                      NNW          4 to 6          386 sconsin Center for the Blind and Visually      NNW          4 to 6            75 paired lson Elementary School                            N          4 to 6          263 John Vianney Catholic School                  NNE          4 to 6          368 ck River Charter School                          N          6 to 8          211 Mary School                                      N          6 to 8          227
. Craig High School                            NNE          6 to 8          1,688 Pauls Lutheran Church and School                N          6 to 8          361 osevelt Elementary School                        N          6 to 8          368 ams Elementary School                            N          6 to 8          312 William Catholic School                        NNW          6 to 8          219 dison Elementary School                        NNW          6 to 8          447 nklin Middle School                            NNW          6 to 8          638 shington Elementary School                    NNW          6 to 8          335 rker High School                                NNW          6 to 8          1,311 wers Elementary                                  S          6 to 8          385 NE Medical Technologies                  2.1-11                                  Rev. 0
 
Directional Distance Band Name of Facility      Sector        (km)    Enrollment rner Middle School                  S          6 to 8      365 rner High School                    S          6 to 8      451 al                                -              -      14,834 ighted Total                                              4,005
 
==References:==
 
Greatschools, 2019 Schooltree, 2019 WDPI, 2018 NE Medical Technologies    2.1-12                              Rev. 0
 
able 2.1 Transient Population Data for Recreation Areas within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site (Sheet 1 of 3)
Distance Directional  Band Name of Facility                  Sector      (km)      Daily Visitors ort Park                                        NW      0 to 1            6 n Erin Golf Club                                SW      1 to 2            60 irie Knoll Park and Dog Exercise Area          NNW      1 to 2            40 bank Park                                        N      2 to 4            10 thgate Park                                    NNW      2 to 4            5 py Hollow Park                                SSW      2 to 4            5 py Hollow Boat Launch                          SSW      2 to 4            1 ey Park                                          NW      2 to 4            5 shing Park                                      NW      4 to 6            5 quette Park                                      N      4 to 6            5 h Lommond Park                                    W      4 to 6            5 hmore Park                                    NNW      4 to 6            1 tig Park and Disc Golf Course                  NNW      4 to 6            40 rairie Park, Pistol Range, and Trap            NNE      4 to 6            20 ge ris Park and Dawson Softball Fields              N      4 to 6            25 nterey Park and Monterey Stadium                  N      4 to 6            75 n Road Boat Launch                            NNW      4 to 6            2 s Park, Beach, and Rotary Gardens              NNE      4 to 6            75 s Park Boat Launch                            NNE      4 to 6            5 anis Pond Boat Launch                          NNE      4 to 6            5 NE Medical Technologies                2.1-13                                  Rev. 0
 
(Sheet 2 of 3)
Distance Directional  Band Name of Facility          Sector      (km)  Daily Visitors rth Ward Park                            N      4 to 6        15 ce Park                                NNW      4 to 6        40 kport Park                            NNW      4 to 6        50 k River Park                          SSW      4 to 6        20 a Park                                    N      4 to 6        5 ckhawk Golf Course                      NNE      4 to 6        55 rthouse Park                            N      4 to 6        25 erson Park                                N      6 to 8        10 d Park                                NNW      6 to 8        20 mer Park                                NNE      6 to 8      200 ker Park                                  N      6 to 8        1 shington Park                            N      6 to 8        5 veland Park                            NNW      6 to 8        5 er Park                                NNE      6 to 8        5 ms Park                                  N      6 to 8        5 xler Park                                N      6 to 8      125 xler Park Central Boat Launch            N      6 to 8        10 xler Park North Boat Launch              N      6 to 8        10 mpshire Park                            NNE      6 to 8        5 on Park                                NNE      6 to 8        5 Hill Memorial Park                    SSW      6 to 8        50 NE Medical Technologies          2.1-14                              Rev. 0
 
(Sheet 3 of 3)
Distance Directional  Band Name of Facility          Sector      (km)  Daily Visitors k County Fairgrounds                  N      6 to 8      300 irie Park                              N      6 to 8        5 l                                      -        -        1366 ghted Total                            -        -        451
 
==References:==
 
City of Beloit, 2006.
City of Janesville, 2008.
NE Medical Technologies      2.1-15                              Rev. 0
 
able 2.1 Transient Population Data for Medical Facilities within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site (Sheet 1 of 2)
Distance Directional    Band Name of Facility                  Sector      (km)        Capacity pont                                                N        2 to 4            7 llogg                                              N        2 to 4            8 ndu Industries (services for people with            N        2 to 4          40 abilities) ck Valley Community Programs (Caravilla            SSE        2 to 4          115 ucation and Rehab Center) e Lane                                            NNW        2 to 4            6 more                                                N        2 to 4            3 M Grant                                          NNW        2 to 4            3 erfront Inc. Afton House                        WNW        2 to 4            4 dar Crest Waterford Place Apartments              NW        4 to 6          107 dar Crest Assisted Living                          NW        4 to 6          68 erfront Inc. Center House                          N        4 to 6            4 d Road House                                        N        4 to 6            4 M Jonathon                                      NNW        6 to 8            6 rcy Health System                                  N        6 to 8          244 rcy Hospital and Trauma Center M Bond                                          NNW        6 to 8          4 zy Lil Acre Inc                                  NNW        6 to 8          12 M Cantebury                                      NNE        6 to 8          6 erside Terrace                                    S        6 to 8          45 M Health St. Marys Hospital-Janesville            NE        6 to 8          50 k Park Place                                      NNE        6 to 8          86 echwood                                          NNW        6 to 8            7 khill Adult Family Home                          NNW        6 to 8            4 NE Medical Technologies                  2.1-16                                  Rev. 0
 
(Sheet 2 of 2)
Distance Directional  Band Name of Facility                  Sector    (km)  Capacity al                                              -          -      833 ighted Total                                    -          -      833
 
==References:==
 
Mercy Health System, 2011.
Wisconsin Department of Health Services, 2019.
NE Medical Technologies                2.1-17                          Rev. 0
 
able 2.1 Transient Population Data for Lodging Facilities within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site Directional Distance Band Name of Facility                  Sector          (km)          Capacity rthern Town Motel                              N            4 to 6            13 bblestone Hotel & Suites                      N            4 to 6            53 nnon Stone Motel                            NNE            6 to 8            29 ymont Inn                                    NNE            6 to 8            105 al                                            -              -              200 ighted Total                                  -              -              200
 
==References:==
 
Janesville Area Convention & Visitors Bureau, 2011.
Janesville Area Convention & Visitors Bureau, 2019.
NE Medical Technologies                2.1-18                                    Rev. 0
 
Table 2.1 Weighted Transient Population Distribution within 8 Km (5 Mi.) of the SHINE Site 2019 Population Estimate by Source Distance      Major                Recreation    Medical Band (km)    Employers    Schools      Areas      Facilities Lodging      Totals 0-1        112        0            2            0          0          114 1-2        174        9          33            0          0          216 2-4        426      1,664        9          186        0          2,285 4-6        409        356        156          183        66        1,170 6-8        1,976      1,976        251          464        134        4,801 0-8        3,097      4,005        451          833        200        8,586 NE Medical Technologies              2.1-19                                      Rev. 0
 
NE Medical Technologies 2.1-20 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.1-21 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.1-22 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.1-23 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.1-24 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.1-25 Rev. 0 section identifies and evaluates present and projected future industrial, transportation, and tary installations and operations in the area around the site. NUREG-1537, Part 1, Guidelines Preparing and Reviewing Applications for Licensing of Non-Power Reactors, Format and tent, states that all facilities and activities within 8 kilometers (km) (5 miles [mi.]) of the facility uld be considered (USNRC, 1996). This section identifies all facilities and activities within m (5 mi.) of the boundaries of the safety-related area. This ensures that all facilities and vities within 8 km (5 mi.) of any of the IUs are considered in the evaluation of potential ards. In addition, facilities and activities at greater distances are considered as appropriate to r significance.
1        LOCATIONS AND ROUTES nvestigation of industrial, transportation, and military facilities within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site performed. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agencys Envirofacts Database was initially d to identify potential facilities within 8 km (5 mi.). The Wisconsin Emergency Management ncy supplied Tier II Chemical Inventory Reports for facilities in Janesville and Beloit, consin that submitted a 2010 report (Wisconsin Emergency Management, 2011). The lities identified through the above sources were also verified through field reconnaissance.
d reconnaissance consisted of driving major public roads within an 8 km (5 mi.) radius of the and noting the location of industrial and transportation facilities and their relevant features
., chemical storage tanks). Information on future industrial growth was obtained from local munity comprehensive plans (City of Beloit, 2018, City of Janesville, 2009). The Director of nomic Development for the City of Janesville was also contacted in regard to future industrial wth (City of Janesville, 2012).
following significant facilities were identified within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site:
* Industrial Facilities
      - Abitec Corporation
      - Crop Production Services
      - Evonik Goldschmidt Corporation
      - Janesville Jet Center
      - School District of Beloit Turner
      - United Parcel Service
      - Dollar General Distribution Center
* Pipelines
      - Alliant Energy Natural Gas pipelines
      - ANR Natural Gas pipeline
* Waterways
      - Rock River
* Highways
      - Interstate I-90/39
      - U.S. Highway 51 (US 51)
      - U.S. Highway 14 (US 14)
      - Wisconsin State Highway 11 (SH 11)
      - Wisconsin State Highway 26 (SH 26)
NE Medical Technologies                        2.2-1                                            Rev. 2
 
    - Canadian Pacific Railroad
    - Wisconsin & Southern Railroad
* Airports and Heliports
    - Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport
    - Omniflight Helicopters Heliport
    - Mercy Hospital Heliport
    - St. Marys Janesville Hospital Heliport
* Airways
    - Low Altitude Airway V9-177
    - Low Altitude Airway V63
    - Jetway Route J90
    - Low Altitude Airway V177
    - Low Altitude Airway V216 ddition, an investigation of industrial, military, and transportation facilities beyond 8 km (5 mi.)
the site identified the following transportation facilities and routes for further evaluation:
* Airports and Heliports
    - Beloit Memorial Hospital Heliport
    - Hacklander Airport
    - Melin Farms Airport
    - Archies Seaplane Base
    - Beloit Airport
    - Miller Airport
* Airways
    - Low Altitude Airway V228
    - Low Altitude Airway V24-97
    - Low Altitude Airway V9-63-128
    - Low Altitude Airway V246
    - Low Altitude Airway V24
    - Low Altitude Airway V97
    - Jetway Route J105
    - Jetway Route J84-94
    - Jetway Route J100-128
    - Jetway Route J30
    - Jetway Route J16-36
    - Jetway Route J89-101 le 2.2-1 shows the significant industrial facilities within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site and le 2.2-2 shows pipelines within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site. Table 2.2-3 shows airports and ports within 16 km (10 mi.) of the site and Table 2.2-4 shows federal airways within 16 km mi.) of the site. Figure 2.2-1 shows the location of industrial and transportation facilities, with exception of airways, identified within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site. Figure 2.2-2 illustrates the tion of airports, heliports, and airway routes identified within 10 mi. of the site.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.2-2                                          Rev. 2
 
Security-Related Information - Withheld under 10 CFR 2.390(d)
Chapter 2 - Site Characteristics              Nearby Industrial, Transportation, and Military Facilities 2.2.1.1        Descriptions Descriptions of the industrial and transportation facilities, with the exception of airports and airways, identified within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site are provided in the following subsections.
Airports and airways are described in Subsection 2.2.2.
2.2.1.1.1      Industrial Facilities Seven nearby industrial facilities are identified in Subsection 2.2.1. Table 2.2-1 provides a concise description of these facilities, including their primary functions and major products.
In addition, a detailed analysis of the potential hazards to the facility due to chemical storage both on and off the site is presented in Subsection 2.2.3.
2.2.1.1.2      Pipelines Several natural gas distribution pipelines are located within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site, as depicted in Figure 2.2-1. Available information about these pipelines is provided in Table 2.2-2 and summarized below.
Alliant Energy operates two main natural gas pipelines near the site. The closest main pipeline is located approximately 2.6 mi. (4.2 km) east of the site at the nearest approach. The other pipeline is located 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) south of the site at the nearest approach. The closest feeder line is a [          ]SRI natural gas feeder line that is located just west of US 51 (Alliant Energy, 2012). ANR Natural Gas operates a natural gas distribution pipeline approximately 3.6 mi.
(5.8 km) northeast of the site at the nearest approach.
2.2.1.1.3      Description of Waterways The Rock River is located approximately 1.7 mi. (2.7 km) west of the site at the nearest approach. The water level of the river is too low to allow for navigation of any watercraft other than recreational watercraft.
2.2.1.1.4      Highways US 51, a north-south highway, runs directly west of the site. Currently, the site can only be accessed from US 51 and the closest approach to the facility safety-related area is 0.22 mi.
Other highways within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site are I-90/39, US 14, SH 11, and SH 26. The closest approach of I-90/39 is approximately 2.1 mi. (3.4 km) to the east. The closest approach of US 14 is approximately 3.3 mi. (5.3 km) to the north. The closest approach of SH 11 is approximately 0.6 mi. (1.0 km) to the north. The closest approach of SH 26 is 4.1 mi. (6.6 km) to the north.
Information is not available about the materials transported on the roads in the vicinity of the site; therefore, Tier III reports for industrial facilities within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site were reviewed to determine chemicals that may be transported on nearby roads. The Wisconsin Department of Transportation guide for truckers (Wisconsin DOT, 2007) provided the maximum allowable tonnage a truck could carry on Wisconsin highways. Table 2.2-5 summarizes the chemicals that are present at the industrial facilities that could pose a hazard when transported. In addition, bounding chemicals that were not identified as being used within 8 km (5 mi.) of the facility, but SHINE Medical Technologies                          2.2-3                                        Rev. 2
 
ential impacts of hazardous chemical transportation on the facility is provided in section 2.2.3.
1.1.5          Railroads re are three railroad lines located within 8 km (5 mi.) of the site. The railroads transport ardous and non-hazardous material (Rock County, 2012). A single railroad tank car has a ximum capacity of 30,000 gallons.
Union Pacific line, approximately 1.4 mi. (2.3 km) east of the site, is the nearest railroad line he site. The Canadian Pacific line is located on the west bank of the Rock River and its est approach to the site is approximately 2.0 mi. (3.2 km) to the west. The Wisconsin &
thern Railroad Company is located on the west bank of the Rock River and its closest roach to the site is approximately 2.7 mi. (4.3 km) to the north. The chemicals transported on nearest railroad are analyzed in Subsection 2.2.3.
1.1.6          Projections of Industrial Growth rall, a small percentage of Rock County is industrial, with the majority of industries in the er cities of Janesville and Beloit. The only planned industrial growth identified within 8 km i.) of the site is expansion of the Alliant Energy generation facility and the construction of a pet food processing plant. The generation facility operations are not expected to grow ificantly. The cumulative impacts of these projects and activities have been evaluated and ult in small to moderate impact to land use and visual resources, air quality and noise, logic environment, water resources, ecological resources, historical and cultural resources, ioeconomic environment, human health, waste management, and environmental justice. The esville and Beloit Comprehensive Plans do not provide details of any planned industrial wth (City of Beloit, 2012; City of Janesville, 2009).
2          AIR TRAFFIC 2.1            Airports le 2.2-3 provides a list of airports within 10 mi. (16 km) of the site. Four airports or heliports within 5 mi. (8 km) and six airports or heliports are between 5 mi. (8 km) and 10 mi. (16 km) he site. The majority of the airport/heliports have only sporadic activity. Figure 2.2-2 identifies airports within 10 mi. (16 km) of the facility.
2.2            Airways re are 10 low altitude airways and one jetway located within 10 mi. (16 km) of the facility tance from the center of the facility to the nearest edge of the airway). These airways are tified in Table 2.2-4. NUREG-1537, Part 1, states that "Factors such as frequency and type ircraft movement, flight patterns, local meteorology, and topography should be considered" NRC, 1996). However, the document does not provide a screening criterion for the distance he airways from the facility. Therefore, NUREG-0800, Standard Review Plan for the Review afety Analysis for Nuclear Power Plants (SRP), Section 3.5.1.6, Aircraft Hazards, was used rovide guidance in evaluating airways near the facility (USNRC, 2010). For airways where the NE Medical Technologies                        2.2-4                                        Rev. 2
 
one jetway located within 10 mi. (16 km) of the facility were identified as having an edge of airway within two statute miles of the facility (see Table 2.2-4). The hazards associated with e airways are evaluated in Subsection 2.2.2.5.1. Figure 2.2-2 identifies the centerline of eral airways within 10 mi. (16 km) of the facility.
2.3          Military Airports and Training Routes REG-1537, Part 1, does not provide screening criteria for military training routes (USNRC, 6). SRP Section 3.5.1.6, SRP Acceptance Criteria Item 1.B, determines the hazard to be w a probability of 1E-7 if the site is at a distance greater than 5 mi. from the edge of the ning route (USNRC, 2010). There are no military airports or training routes located within mi. (16 km) of the facility. The closest military training route is SR771. The centerline of this ning route is greater than 25 mi. (40 km) from the facility. This distance is greater than the
: i. (8 km) screening criteria in SRP Section 3.5.1.6, and therefore is not evaluated further.
2.4          Approach and Holding Patterns near the Facility ee airports have holding patterns near the facility. Table 2.2-6 provides a list of holding erns in the vicinity of the facility.
REG-1537, Part 1, does not provide screening criteria for approach and holding patterns NRC, 1996). SRP Section 3.5.1.6, SRP Acceptance Criteria Item 1.C, determines the hazard y be screened out if the site is at a distance greater than 2 statute miles from the nearest edge n approach or holding pattern (USNRC, 2010).
distance from the edge of each holding pattern to the facility is greater than the 2 mi.
ening criterion in SRP Section 3.5.1.6. This hazard screens out, and no further evaluation is ormed on approach or holding patterns.
2.5          Evaluation of the Aircraft Hazard 2.5.1        Evaluation of Airways U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) provides a method for estimating the probability per year n aircraft crashing into the facility. The methodology is outlined in DOE Standard E-STD-3014-96 (DOE, 2006) and utilizes crash rates for non-airport operations. The non-ort crash impact frequency evaluation is determined from using the following "four factor ula" (DOE, 2006):
F j = N j  Pj  f j  x, y  Aj          (Equation 2.2-1) ere:
* Fj is the crash impact frequency
* j is each type of aircraft suggested in the DOE Standard
* NjPj is the expected number of in-flight crashes per year NE Medical Technologies                          2.2-5                                    Rev. 2
* Aj is the effective plant area les B-14 and B-15 of DOE-STD-3014-96 (DOE, 2006) provide NjPjfj values for general tion aircraft, air carriers, air taxis, and small military aircraft applicable for specific DOE sites.
les B-14 and B-15 of DOE-STD-3014-96 (DOE, 2006) also provide crash probabilities for pecified locations in the continental United States (CONUS), and Table B-43 of E-STD-3014-96 (DOE, 2006) provides a generic crash frequency for helicopters. Therefore, NUS maximum values and generic helicopter values are used for the facility and are provided able 2.2-7 (DOE, 2006).
effective plant area (Aj) for the safety-related structures of the facility depends on the length, h, and height of the facility, as well as the aircrafts wingspan, skid distance, and impact le as explained below (DOE, 2006):
Aj = Af + As                                                          (Equation 2.2-2) ere 2LwW A f =  W sj + R  H  cot  j + ------------------------------------------sj- + L + w : (Equation 2.2-3)
R As = (Wsj + R) x Sj                                                      (Equation 2.2-4) ere:
* Af is the effective fly-in area
* As is the effective skid area
* Wsj is the aircraft wingspan (Table 2.2-7)
* R is the length of the diagonal of the facility = (L2 + W2)
* H is the facility height
* cot is the mean of the cotangent of the aircraft impact angle (Table 2.2-7)
* L is the length of facility, facility-specific
* W is the width of facility, facility-specific
* Sj is the aircraft skid distance (mean value) (Table 2.2-7) total effective area (Aj) for the safety-related structure facility was calculated. Dimensions of main production facility used in the analysis include a length of 212 feet (ft.)-6 inches (in.), a h of 158 ft.-2 in., and a height of 56 ft.-0 in. Plan and elevation views of the main production lity structure (FSTR) are provided in Figure 1.3-1 and Figure 1.3-2.
calculated effective area for the five aircraft types is provided in Table 2.2-8.
crash impact probabilities for small non-military aircraft (i.e., general aviation and air taxi),
e non-military aircraft (i.e., air carriers), and military aircraft (i.e., small aircraft and helicopter) airways are provided in Table 2.2-9.
NE Medical Technologies                              2.2-6                                                                      Rev. 2
 
S structure is located along the east wall of the FSTR while the off-site electrical power rce is routed along the south and west walls of the FSTR. An aircraft impact into portions of FSTR that would interrupt the supply of off-site power would not impact the N2PS structure, the N2PS would remain operational.
2.5.2        Evaluation of Airports ort screening criteria are obtained from NUREG-1537, Part 1, Section 2.2.2, which directs an airport can be screened out from probabilistic evaluation depending on the number of rations per year in relation to its distance from the site (USNRC, 1996). Factors such as uency and type of aircraft movement are considered for airports at distances within 8 km. For orts located between 8 and 16 km from the site, airports can be screened out if they have than 200 x d2 aircraft movements per year, where d is the distance in km. For private orts within this distance where operations are classified as sporadic, the Southern Wisconsin ional Airport (SWRA) and infrequent nature of operation is used to consider the hazard eptable.
SWRA and three heliports are within 5 mi. (8 km) of the facility. A probabilistic hazard lysis was performed for SWRA. The three heliports within 5 mi. (8 km) screened out as they e sporadic air activity and their evaluation would be bounded by the evaluation performed for RA.
airports and heliports between 5 mi. (8 km) and 10 mi. (16 km) from the facility were ened out based on their annual operations being less than the screening criteria. Based on screening criteria, only the SWRA is evaluated for the potential hazard posed by aircraft.
P Section 3.5.1.6 (USNRC, 2010) provides a method for estimating the probability of an raft crashing into the site from the operations at nearby airports. The probability per year of an raft crashing into the site due to airport operations at nearby airports is:
L    M P
A
                                        =          CN A j ij j (Equation 2.2-5) i=1 j=1 ere:
* PA is the probability of crash per year
* L is the number of flight trajectories affecting the site
* M is the number of different types of aircraft
* Cj is the probability per square mile of a crash per aircraft movement, for the jth aircraft
* Nij is the number (per year) of movements by the jth aircraft along the ith flight path
* Aj is the effective plant area (in square miles) for the jth aircraft calculated effective area for the five aircraft types is provided in Table 2.2-8.
total operations at the SWRA used in the evaluation of the airport are based on the Federal ation Administration (FAA) Office of Aviation Policy and Plans (APO) Terminal Area Forecast NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-7                                        Rev. 2
 
rant and local operations. The values provided in Table 2.2-10 are obtained from the ximum forecasted number of operations from 2019 through 2045 for non-military aircraft. A orical average of military operations from 1990 through 2018 is used to calculate crash act probabilities from military operations. The historical average of military operations is ater than the forecasted values provided in the Terminal Area Forecast Detail Report and efore is a more conservative value to use.
ed on communication with the SWRA and the Janesville Air Traffic Control Tower, the rations on each runway, by type of aircraft, are provided in Table 2.2-11. The distance from end of each runway to the facility center point is provided in Table 2.2-12. The probability of a sh by aircraft type and in relation to distance from the site is provided in Table 2.2-13.
total crash impact probabilities for small non-military aircraft (i.e., general aviation itinerant rations, local civil operations, and air taxi itinerant operations), large non-military aircraft (i.e.,
carriers), and military aircraft (i.e., small aircraft and helicopter) from airports are provided in le 2.2-9, including consideration of effects from increased traffic due to future potential air ws (see Subsection 2.2.2.5.3).
2.5.3      Evaluation of Non-Frequent Airport Events SWRA has infrequently held air shows and aviation events at their facility. FAA Order 8900.1 lume 3, Chapter 6, Section 1) describes aviation events to include air shows, closed course aces, parachute demonstration jumps, balloon meets, and fly-ins conducted before an invited embly of persons, for which the FAA issues a Certificate of Waiver or Authorization (USDOT, 7). An FAA Certificate of Waiver or Authorization permit temporary relief from certain ignated low altitude aviation regulations but under conditions ensuring the equivalent level of ty. During air shows, the ingress and egress routes are confined to an aerobatic box which early defined. The aerobatic box is required to be sterile per the FAA regulations.
FAA National Aviation Events specialists have committed to consider the safety of the facility n granting waivers for future air shows. The aviation event specialists assert that if the facility e not in the aerobatic box or within the ingress or egress routes defined for the planes orming at the air shows, the risk to the facility would be reduced similar to the risk due to mal flight operations in the vicinity.
conservatively address increased traffic from future air shows, flight and display data was n from a larger air show held at the nearby Chicago Rockford International Airport. The kford Airfest was a two-day event with an estimated attendance of 130,000 spectators. The 1 Rockford AirFest included more than 50 static display aircraft, consisting of an assortment ommercial aircraft and current and historical military aircraft of various sizes. Assuming that h aircraft flew into and out of the airport, 50 static display aircraft would result in operations. The 2014 Rockford AirFest included 14 aerial performances, each act typically sisting of one or more small commercial or military aircraft, for an estimated 50 total aircraft icipating in aerial performances. It was conservatively estimated that each of these 50 aerial ormance aircraft:
: 1) landed at the airport the day before the air show;
: 2) took off from the airport to perform in their act twice; NE Medical Technologies                        2.2-8                                          Rev. 2
 
refore, the addition of a future airshow at the SWRA could add an estimated 400 operations, ights, either into or out of the SWRA. These additional 400 operations are added to the ard evaluation to address the increased activity due to air shows. The classification of each of e operations (e.g., air carriers and military) were based on the aircraft on display at the 4 Rockford Airfest.
le 2.2-3 lists the number of operations in 2018 at the SWRA as 37,674, and a projected ber of operations in 2045 as 46,443. Table 2.2-10 lists the maximum operations at the RA for the years 2019 through 2045. As shown in Table 2.2-14, the addition of operations at the SWRA to support a future air show is bounded by the maximum number of rations between 2019 and 2045.
refore, the addition of a future air show at the SWRA is bounded by the current analysis.
2.5.4        Results of Evaluation of Airways and Airports REG-1537, Part 1, does not provide acceptance criteria to be used to evaluate the aircraft ident probability posed by nearby airports and airways (USNRC, 1996). DOE-STD-3014-96 E, 2006) provides a screening value of 1E-6 per year, where the risk of an aircraft accident is sidered acceptable if the frequency of occurrence is less than 1E-6 per year. The calculated sh probability for small non-military aircraft does not meet this criterion (3.92E-4); therefore, safety-related structures of the facility credited to prevent release in excess of regulatory ts are designed to withstand the impact of a small non-military aircraft (see Section 3.4). The bined probability of all other aircraft crashes does meet this criterion (3.09E-7).
3        ANALYSIS OF POTENTIAL ACCIDENTS AT FACILITIES the basis of the information provided in Subsection 2.2.1 and Subsection 2.2.2, the potential idents to be considered as design-basis events and the potential effects of those accidents on facility, in terms of design parameters (e.g., overpressure, missile energies) or physical nomena (e.g., impact, flammable or toxic clouds) were identified in accordance with REG-1537, Part 1 (USNRC, 1996). The events are discussed in the following subsections.
3.1          Determination of Design Basis Events ign basis events, internal and external to the facility, are defined as those accidents that have obability of radiological release to the public on the order of magnitude of 1E-6 per year, or ater. The following accident categories were considered in selecting design-basis events:
losions, flammable vapor clouds (delayed ignition), toxic chemicals, and fires. The postulated idents that would result in a chemical release were analyzed at the following locations:
* Nearby transportation routes such as US 51 and I-90/39, the Union Pacific Railway, and nearby natural gas pipelines.
* Nearby chemical and fuel storage facilities (industry in the towns of Janesville and Beloit, Wisconsin).
* Chemicals stored or used at the facility.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.2-9                                        Rev. 2
 
idents involving detonations of high explosives, munitions, chemicals, or liquid and gaseous s were considered for facilities and activities in the vicinity of the plant or on-site where such erials are processed, stored, used, or transported in quantity. The effects of explosions are a cern in analyzing structural response to blast pressures. The effects of blast pressure from losions from nearby railways, highways, or facilities to critical plant structures were evaluated etermine if the explosion would have an adverse effect on plant operation or would prevent a shutdown.
allowable (i.e., standoff) and actual distances of hazardous chemicals transported or stored e determined in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.91, Revision 1, Evaluations of losions Postulated to Occur on Transportation Routes Near Nuclear Power Plants (USNRC, 8). Regulatory Guide 1.91 cites 1 pound per square inch differential pressure (psid) kilopascal [kPa]) as a conservative value of peak positive incident overpressure, below ch no significant damage would be expected. Regulatory Guide 1.91 defines this standoff ance by the relationship R kW1/3 where R is the distance in feet from an exploding charge pounds of trinitrotoluene (TNT); and the value k is a constant. The TNT mass equivalent, W, determined by comparing the heat of combustion of the chemical to the heat of combustion NT.
those chemicals where the standoff distance using the NUREG-1805, Fire Dynamics Tools Ts) (USNRC, 2004), methods are greater than the actual distance from the chemical to the rest safety-related building, a probabilistic analysis is used. The probabilistic analysis must w that the rate of exposure to a peak positive incident overpressure in excess of 1 psid kPa) is less than 1E-6 per year, when based on conservative assumptions, or 1E-7 per year n based on realistic assumptions.
servative assumptions were used to determine a standoff distance, or minimum separation ance, required for an explosion to have less than 1 psid (6.9 kPa) peak incident pressure. In h of the explosion scenario analyses, conservative yield factors were chosen. The yield factor n estimation of the available combustion energy released during the explosion as well as a asure of the explosion confinement. For confined explosions, a yield factor of 100 percent was lied to account for an in-vessel confined explosion. This is a conservative assumption ause a 100 percent yield factor is not achievable:
* For some atmospheric liquids (e.g., diesel) the entire storage vessel volume was assumed to contain fuel vapors at the upper explosive limit. This is conservative because the upper explosive limit produces the maximum explosive mass, given that it is the fuel vapor, not the liquid fuel that explodes. These assumptions are consistent with those used in Chapter 15 of NUREG-1805, Fire Dynamics Tools (FDTs) (USNRC, 2004).
* For unconfined explosions of compressed or liquefied gases (i.e., propane, hydrogen), it was conservatively assumed that the entire content of the storage vessel is between the upper and lower explosive limits, given that the instantaneous depressurization of the vessel would result in vapor concentrations throughout the explosive range at varying pressures and temperatures that could not be assumed. Therefore, the entire content of the storage vessel was considered in determining the explosive mass with a yield factor of 3 percent.
* For confined explosions, an in-vessel explosion of compressed or liquified gases could not occur until stoichiometric conditions are met. A tank filled with compressed gas is NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-10                                        Rev. 2
 
required for a confined explosion to occur within the tank. Therefore, the vapor mass for a confined explosion is that contained in the tank at atmospheric pressure with a yield factor of 100 percent.
unconfined explosions of propane or hydrogen, the yield factor is 3 percent from the dbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures (FEMA, 1989).
ddition, the site has a liquid nitrogen storage tank located outside the facility buildings. The and its associated process piping are designed in accordance with applicable codes, uding overpressure protection.
ome cases, chemicals are screened as being bounded by other chemicals. Three properties he chemical hazard are used to determine if one of the hazards is bounded by another. First, micals that are gases at standard conditions will be more volatile and have a larger explosive ss per storage mass than chemicals that are liquids at standard conditions. Second, micals with a smaller lower explosive limit (LEL) and a greater upper explosive limit (UEL) will more explosive. A larger flammable or explosive range will make an explosion more likely and ease the explosive mass per storage mass. Third, chemicals with a greater heat of bustion will have a larger amount of energy released in an explosion. In addition, the mass of chemical and the distance from the chemical to the facility are screening factors. Where micals exhibit similar properties, those chemicals that are closer to the site and in larger tanks chosen as bounding over chemicals that are farther or smaller.
on-site and off-site chemicals in Table 2.2-15 are evaluated to ascertain which hazardous erials have the potential to explode, thereby requiring further analysis. The effects of selected losion events are summarized in Table 2.2-16 and in the following subsections relative to the ase source.
3.1.1.1          Pipelines ationary explosion of a pipeline is bounded by the delayed ignition explosion of a pipeline.
is because the constant mass release rate from the pipe results in a much larger total losive mass, and because the wind is assumed to blow the release towards the site. The ance from the point of the explosion to the facility is therefore much smaller for flammable or clouds than for pipeline explosions at the release point.
3.1.1.2          Waterway Traffic re is no navigable waterway within 5 mi. (8 km) of the facility.
3.1.1.3          Highways le 2.2-15 includes the hazardous materials potentially transported on US 51 and I-90/39. The erials that were identified as the bounding chemicals for explosive potential were diesel, ylene oxide, gasoline, and propane on US 51, and hydrogen on I-90/39. The remaining micals are either non-explosive or are bounded based on the comparison method discussed ubsection 2.2.3.1.1 (ammonia, propylene oxide, and styrene).The maximum quantity of the tified chemicals assumed to be transported on the roadway was 50,000 pounds (lb.)
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-11                                        Rev. 2
 
le 2.2-16 provides the results of an analysis of the identified chemicals using the TNT ivalency methodologies, as described in Subsection 2.2.3.1.1. The results identify the eptable instance for each identified chemical. The acceptable instance represents the lyzed condition that bounds the stationary explosion hazard in both distance and mass for h chemical. It demonstrates a liquid mass of chemical that, if located at the nearest point to NE safety-related structures, would not exceed a 1 psid overpressure. The nearest safety-ted SHINE area is located approximately 0.22 mi. (0.35 km) from US 51.
propane truck was also analyzed for a boiling liquid expansion vapor explosion (BLEVE) rpressure. The standoff distance to a 1 psid (6.9 kPa) overpressure is 332 ft. (101 meters
. This is much less than the actual distance from US 51 to the facility (0.22 mi. [0.35 km]).
nk containing 18,196 lb. (8253 kg) of hydrogen is acceptable at a distance of 0.22 mi.
5 km). The closest safety-related SHINE area is 2.1 mi. (3.4 km) from I-90/39.
limiting stationary explosions are shown in Table 2.2-16.
ed on the above, an explosion involving potentially transported hazardous materials on 51 or I-90/39, would not adversely affect operation of SHINE.
3.1.1.4          On-Site Chemicals site stationary chemicals were analyzed using the TNT equivalency methodologies, as cribed in Subsection 2.2.3.1.1. One chemical was identified as being a potential explosive ard on-site: deuterium/tritium.
deuterium and tritium are used in the main production facility and are treated for this analysis ydrogen gas. The maximum expected mass in one container is 0.39 lbs (0.18 kg) of terium and 0.25 lbs (0.10 kg) of tritium. These maximum expected masses are very low; ever, because these chemicals are used in production, there is no separation between the ard and the SHINE safety-related area. The deuterium and tritium gas systems and cesses are designed to minimize the probability of an explosion. With safety features, and the y small mass of each chemical, the probability of an explosion causing enough damage to the lity to cause a radiological release to the public is low.
refore, an explosion of any of these chemicals would not adversely affect operation of NE.
3.1.1.5          Nearby Facilities and Railways re are three additional off-site facilities and railways that have explosive chemicals that are tified as the bounding instances of explosion analysis. The hazardous materials stored at rby facilities that were identified for further analysis with regard to explosive potential are lene oxide stored at Abitec and gasoline at Janesville Jet Center. The ethylene oxide is lyzed as a bounding instance between the stationary tank at the facility and the tank sported by rail. In addition, bounding instances of diesel fuel and jet fuel (kerosene) are lyzed. All other nearby chemicals or chemicals transported by railway were dispositioned as NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-12                                        Rev. 2
 
onservative analysis using TNT equivalency methods as described in Subsection 2.2.3.1 was d to determine standoff distances for the storage of the identified hazardous materials.
largest diesel tank, containing 1,258,091 lb. (570,660 kg) of liquid, corresponding to 668 lb.
3 kg) of vapor, would be acceptable at a distance of 0.22 mi. (0.35 km). The nearest tank of el is greater than 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) from the facility.
largest ethylene oxide tank, containing 440,000 lb. (199,580 kg) of liquid, corresponding to lb. (406 kg) of vapor, would be acceptable at a distance of 0.22 mi. (0.35 km). The nearest ance (transportation via the railroad) of ethylene oxide is 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) from the facility.
largest gasoline tank, containing 133,946 lb. (60,756 kg) of liquid, corresponding to 69 lb.
kg) of vapor, would be acceptable at a distance of 0.22 mi. (0.35 km). The nearest tank of oline is 0.9 mi. (1.45 km) from the facility.
00,000 lb. jet fuel tank was analyzed at 0.22 mi. (0.35 km) and found to be acceptable. The est jet fuel (kerosene) tank contains 79,968 lb. (36,272 kg) of liquid, corresponding to 27 lb.
kg) of vapor, and is therefore acceptable with margin. The nearest instance of jet fuel (truck US 51) is 0.22 mi. (0.35 km) from SHINE.
results using this methodology indicate that the minimum separation distances (i.e., safe doff distances) are less than the shortest distance from a SHINE safety-related area to the age location of the identified chemicals. Therefore, an explosion of any of these chemicals ld not adversely affect operation of SHINE.
3.1.1.6          Explosion-Related Impacts Affecting the Design cility is acceptable when the calculated rate of occurrence of severe consequences from any rnal accident is less than 1E-6 occurrences per year and reasonable qualitative arguments demonstrate that the realistic probability is lower. Regulatory Guide 1.91 (USNRC, 1978) s 1 psid (6.9 kPa) as a conservative value of peak positive incident overpressure, below ch no significant damage would be expected. SHINE safety-related areas are designed to stand a peak positive overpressure of at least 1 psid (6.9 kPa) without loss of tion/significant damage.
analyses presented in this subsection demonstrate that a 1 psid (6.9 kPa) peak positive rpressure will not be exceeded at a safety-related structure for any of the postulated losion event scenarios. As a result, postulated explosion event scenarios will not result in ere consequences.
3.1.2        Flammable Vapor Clouds (Delayed Ignition) mmable gases in the liquid or gaseous state can form an unconfined vapor cloud that could toward the plant before ignition occurs. When a flammable chemical is released into the osphere and forms a vapor cloud, it disperses as it travels downwind. The parts of the cloud re the concentration is within the flammable range, between the lower and upper flammability ts, may burn if the cloud encounters an ignition source. The speed at which the flame front NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-13                                      Rev. 2
 
site and off-site chemicals are shown in Table 2.2-15. These chemicals were evaluated to ertain which hazardous materials had the potential to form a flammable vapor cloud or vapor d explosion. For those chemicals with an identified flammability range, the Areal Locations of ardous Atmospheres (ALOHA) air dispersion model was used to determine the distances re the vapor cloud may exist between the UEL and the LEL, presenting the possibility of tion and potential thermal radiation effects (ALOHA, 2008).
identified chemicals were also evaluated to determine the possible effects of a flammable or cloud explosion. ALOHA was used to model the worst case accidental vapor cloud losion, including the standoff distances and overpressure effects at the nearest SHINE ty-related area. To model the worst case in ALOHA, ignition by detonation was chosen for ignition source. The standoff distance was measured as the distance from the spill site to the tion where the pressure wave is at 1 psid (6.9 kPa) overpressure.
servative assumptions were used in both ALOHA analyses with regard to meteorological ts and identified scenarios. The following meteorological assumptions were used as inputs to computer model, ALOHA: Pasquill Stability Class F (stable), with a wind speed of 1 meter per ond (m/s) (3.3 feet per second [fps]); ambient temperature of 81&deg;F (27&deg;C); relative humidity percent; cloud cover 50 percent; and an atmospheric pressure of 1 atmosphere. Pasquill bility Class F was selected based on local weather data. Class F represents the 5 percent st case weather conditions at the facility. For each of the identified liquid chemicals, it was servatively assumed that the entire contents of the vessel leaked forming a 1 cm (0.4 in.)
k puddle. For gaseous chemicals the entire contents were released instantaneously as a gas.
provides a significant surface area to maximize evaporation and the formation of a vapor d in the case of liquid releases and maximizes the peak concentration in the case of gas ases.
analyzed effects of flammable vapor clouds and vapor cloud explosions from internal and rnal sources are summarized in Table 2.2-17 and are described in the following subsections tive to the release source.
3.1.2.1          Pipelines re are three bounding pipelines within 5 mi. (8 km) of the facility. The nearest feeder line runs h-south along the west side of US 51. The nearest approach of the feeder line is 0.28 mi.
5 km). The nearest transmission line is roughly a half mile east of I-90/39. The nearest roach of the transmission line is 2.5 mi. (4.0 km). The third pipeline feeds the facility. The line is pressurized upstream of a pressure reducing station that is roughly 100 yards (yd.)
4 m) from the nearest safety-related building. Downstream of the pressure reducing facility, line supplies many site buildings. These bounding three pipelines are depicted in ure 2.2-1. More information is shown about these bounding pipelines in Table 2.2-2. The two ting off-site pipelines were analyzed using the methods detailed above. The distance from the smission pipeline to where the concentration drops below the LEL is 2.2 mi. (3.5 km).
refore, the concentration of natural gas will always be below the LEL at SHINE. The distance the feeder pipeline to where the concentration drops below the LEL is 427 yd. (390 m), or 4 mi. (0.39 km). Therefore, the concentration of natural gas will always be below the LEL at NE. Because the concentrations are below the LEL, a delayed flammable vapor cloud NE Medical Technologies                    2.2-14                                          Rev. 2
 
on-site natural gas pipeline was analyzed probabilistically. Accident data was taken from REG/CR-6624, Recommendations for Revision of Regulatory Guide 1.78 (USNRC, 1999) the Handbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures (FEMA, 1989). The accident rate for lines is 1.5E-3 accidents per year. Only 20 percent of these accidents involve a complete line rupture, the other 80 percent of releases are modeled as released from a 1-in. (2.54 cm)
  . An additional probability factor was applied to account for the fact that few pipeline ases, especially releases of low mass, result in an explosion. Available data show a nection between the hydrocarbon release rate and the probability of ignition.
probabilistic analysis involved four cases:
* Case 1 determined that small releases from 1-in. (2.54 cm) diameter holes in the pipe are potentially damaging within the pressure reducing station distance. A 1-in. (2.54 cm) pipeline break would release only 26 lb. (12 kg) of natural gas in 5 minutes. The probability of ignition of this small amount of natural gas is less than 0.1 percent. All explosions within the pressure reducing station distance are assumed to damage a SHINE safety-related structure.
* Case 2 is for releases outside the pressure reducing station that occur when the Pasquill stability class is Class G. A complete break in the 3-in. (7.62 cm) diameter pipe releases 500 lb. (227 kg) of natural gas in 5 minutes. The probability of ignition of this amount of natural gas is 0.2 percent; however, 0.5 percent was conservatively used to model this pipeline.
* Case 3 is similar to Case 2 except that the release occurs when the Pasquill stability class is Class F. It was determined that when the stability class is Class E to Class A, a release upstream of the pressure regulating station is not a hazard to SHINE.
* Case 4 is for a complete release downstream of the pressure regulating station. Any ignition downstream of the pressure regulating station is conservatively assumed to damage a SHINE safety-related structure.
results of the probability analysis are in Table 2.2-18. The probability of a hazard to the site
.7E-7 hazards per year. This analysis is very conservative for four reasons. First, all ignitions nstream of the pressure regulating station are considered hazards. Second, prevailing wind ction is not accounted for. For each release, at least half of the wind directions would blow release away from the facility. Third, plume rise is not modeled. Natural gas is lighter than air would rise. Fourth, the pipeline accident rate is higher by an order of magnitude than some hose found in other sources. Therefore, the site natural gas pipeline is not a threat to the lity.
3.1.2.2          Waterway Traffic re is no navigable waterway within 5 mi. (8 km) of the facility.
3.1.2.3          Highways closest SHINE safety-related area is located approximately 0.22 mi. (0.35 km) from US 51.
hazardous materials potentially transported on US 51 that were identified for further analysis diesel, ethylene oxide, gasoline, and propane. The closest SHINE safety-related area is NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-15                                        Rev. 2
 
methodology presented previously in Subsection 2.2.3.1.2 was used for determining the doff distance for vapor cloud ignition and delayed vapor cloud explosion. Consistent with ulatory Guide 1.91 (USNRC, 1978), it was conservatively estimated that at most, tanker ks carry and release 50,000 lb. (22,679 kg) of the identified chemical. The largest amount of rogen on a truck that was analyzed was 3300 lb. (1496 kg).
distance to the LEL for a gasoline release from a truck on US 51 is 376 yd. (344 m), or 14 mi. (0.344 km). This is less than the distance from US 51 to SHINE, 0.22 mi. (0.35 km).
distance to the LEL for the hydrogen release from a truck on I-90/39 is 1351 yd. (1235 m), or 7 mi. (1.24 km). This is less than the distance from I-90/39 to SHINE, 2.1 mi. (3.4 km).
ethylene oxide trucks were analyzed using a probabilistic analysis. Accident data was taken NUREG/CR-6624 and the Handbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures (USNRC, 9; FEMA, 1989). The accident frequency used was 2E-6 accidents per truck mile, where percent of accidents result in a spill. When a spill occurs, 20 percent of spills are of between percent and 30 percent of the contents, and 20 percent of spills are complete releases. The lysis showed that a release is acceptable at 0.5 mi. (0.8 km) for all stability classes, and that ill of only 10 percent of the contents is acceptable at 0.22 mi. (0.35 km). There are a total of allowable shipments per year of ethylene oxide on US 51 past SHINE.
h of the ethylene oxide users within 5 mi. (8 km) of the facility were contacted with regard to ylene oxide shipments. Both facilities stated that they get ethylene oxide by rail. Therefore, number of shipments of ethylene oxide past the site will be much less than 99 shipments per r.
propane trucks were analyzed using a probabilistic analysis. Again, the accident frequency d was 2E-6 accidents per truck mile, where 20 percent of accidents result in a spill. When a occurs, 20 percent of spills are greater than 30 percent of the contents. The analysis showed a release is acceptable for Class F and lower at 0.3 mi. (0.5 km), is acceptable for Class G at mi. (0.8 km), and is always acceptable for releases of 30 percent or less of the contents.
re are a total of 404 allowable shipments per year of propane on US 51 past SHINE.
ugh the annual number of shipments is unknown, this expected shipment frequency is eptable for several reasons. First, there are no instances of propane listed in the Tier II orts for any facility within 5 mi. (8 km) of the facility. This implies that nearby industrial inesses are not receiving shipments of propane, and that trucks are supplying propane to dences or farms, which are less likely to require a 50,000 lb. (22,679 kg) truck delivery.
ond, there are large propane facilities that service the surrounding area facility in Janesville, on, and Beloit, Wisconsin. These facilities are likely to distribute to locations nearer to them, ch limits the expected number of trucks that travel between Janesville and Beloit, Wisconsin.
se facilities are also expected to get their deliveries from I-90/39, as opposed to US 51.
pane trucks on I-90/39 (distance of 2.1 mi. [3.4 km]) are acceptable based on the results sented above. Therefore, it is expected that the number of shipments of 50,000 lb.
679 kg) of propane down US 51 is less than 404 per year.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-16                                          Rev. 2
 
3.1.2.4            On-Site Chemicals site chemicals are also analyzed for flammable vapor cloud explosions. The only on-site micals analyzed for a flammable vapor cloud are the deuterium and tritium used in the facility.
bounding volume of deuterium at risk in one IU cell is roughly 1000 standard liters, which tains 0.39 lbs (0.18 kg) of deuterium. At the LEL for hydrogen, 4 percent, this corresponds to lume of 883 ft3 (25 cubic meters [m3]). The IU cells containing these gases are larger than e volumes; therefore, a deuterium detonation explosion is not expected. The tritium fication system (TPS) contains the largest inventory of tritium gases in a single location in the lity. The volume of the tritium purification system is larger than the volume required for to stay w the 4 percent LEL for hydrogen. Therefore, a tritium detonation explosion is not expected.
results of flammable vapor cloud ignition and explosion analyses are summarized in le 2.2-17.
3.1.2.5            Nearby Facilities and Railways re are three additional off-site facilities and railways that store explosive chemicals that are tified for further analysis. The hazardous materials stored at nearby facilities that were tified for further analysis with regard to explosive potential are gasoline stored at Janesville Center, ethylene oxide at Abitec, and methyl chloride and n-butyl alcohol at Evonik dschmidt. In addition, the methyl chloride and ethylene oxide are transported on the Union ific Railway. The methodology presented previously in Subsection 2.2.3.1.2 was used for ermining the standoff distance for vapor cloud ignition and delayed vapor cloud explosion.
133,946 lb. (60,756 kg) tank of gasoline at Janesville Jet Center has a standoff distance to re the concentration falls below the LEL of 628 yd. (574 m), 0.36 mi. (0.57 km). The esville Jet Center is 0.9 mi. (1.45 km) from the facility.
40,000 lb. (199,580 kg) tank of ethylene oxide has a standoff distance to where the centration falls below the LEL of 947 yd. (866 m), 0.54 mi. (0.87 km). The nearest instance of rge tank of ethylene oxide is the potential travel of such a tank via the Union Pacific Railway, mi. (2.6 km) from the facility.
20,000 lb. (145,149 kg) tank of methyl chloride has a standoff distance to where the centration falls below the LEL of 425 yd. (388 m), 0.24 mi. (0.39 km). The nearest instance of rge tank of methyl chloride is the Union Pacific Railway, 1.6 mi. (2.6 km) from the facility.
ALOHA model shows that the vapor pressure of n-butyl alcohol at the analysis temperature 1&deg;F (27&deg;C) is less than the LEL. Therefore, n-butyl alcohol cannot support a vapor cloud losion at a distance of 3 mi. from the facility and a quantity of 25,160 lb.
results of flammable vapor cloud ignition and explosion analyses are summarized in le 2.2-17.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-17                                      Rev. 2
 
cility is acceptable when the calculated rate of occurrence of severe consequences from any rnal accident is less than 1E-6 occurrences per year and reasonable qualitative arguments demonstrate that the realistic probability is lower. Regulatory Guide 1.91 (USNRC, 1978) s 1 psid (6.9 kPa) as a conservative value of peak positive incident overpressure, below ch no significant damage would be expected. The facilitys safety-related areas are designed ithstand a peak positive overpressure of at least 1 psid (6.9 kPa) without loss of function.
analyses presented in this subsection demonstrate that a 1 psid (6.9 kPa) peak positive rpressure is not exceeded at a safety-related structure for any of the postulated flammable or cloud, delayed ignition event scenarios.
3.1.3        Toxic Chemicals idents involving the release of chemicals in the vicinity of the plant or on-site were considered heir potential toxicity and ability to affect personnel in the facility control room.
site chemical releases are evaluated using the methodology described in section 2.2.3.1.3.4. Off-site chemical releases are evaluated in this subsection.
potential for an off-site toxic gas release was evaluated within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site.
NE considered stationary sources and mobile sources expected to be transported on US 51,
/39, or on local railroads. The effects of a chemical release from a pipeline were considered nded by the delayed ignition explosion of a pipeline.
micals are screened in several ways. Only chemicals with vapor pressures greater than Torr at 100&deg;F were considered for further evaluation. Mobile sources were not considered if r shipment was not frequent (i.e., less than 10 shipments per year for truck traffic or hipments per year for rail traffic).
ome cases, chemicals are screened as being bounded by other chemicals. A chemical ermined to not present a toxic hazard to the site can be considered bounding to other micals that meet these four criteria: (1) have similar or lower vapor pressure; (2) have similar wer toxicity; (3) are located similar or a farther distance away; and (4) are present in a similar ower quantity. Additionally, to bound some chemicals, it was assumed that given identical eorological conditions, initial chemical inventories, and travel distances:
: a. A chemical that exists as a gas or vapor will result in higher downwind concentrations than one that exists as a liquid.
: b. Volatile liquids, liquids with higher vapor pressures, or liquids with low boiling points near ambient temperatures will result in higher downwind concentrations than non-volatile liquids, liquids with lower vapor pressures, and liquids with high boiling points.
: c. A spill or leak of a solid chemical will not result in significant atmospheric concentrations capable of incapacitating an operator at the site, regardless of the chemical. This is because solids typically have very low vapor pressures, and solid particulates are heavier than vapor or gas molecules, and are therefore much less widely dispersed in air.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-18                                        Rev. 2
 
these chemicals, airborne dispersion was evaluated deterministically, using worst-case wind ctions, and a temperature and wind speed with an annual exceedance probability of ercent. Only maximum concentration accidents were evaluated based on releases of the ximum expected amounts of chemicals. These deterministic evaluations were performed g ALOHA, Version 5.4.4 (ALOHA, 2013) or through comparative analysis for chemicals that ld not be directly modeled.
facility control room in this evaluation was assumed to have an air-exchange rate of exchanges per hour.
o-minute exposure to National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) ediately Dangerous to Life and Health (IDLH) concentrations is considered the threshold for habitability. For chemicals with no defined IDLH limit, Protective Action Criteria (PAC) el 2 limits were used, or the chemical was screened against qualitative toxicity information if quantitative limits were available. An on-site toxic gas release will not cause an accident or pacitate operators. An off-site toxic gas release impacting the plant during normal operations s not initiate a design basis accident. This is because the target solution and related process ducts are contained within robust systems or within confinement barriers that would be ffected by a toxic gas release. Therefore, an off-site toxic gas release will not adversely act safety-related systems, structures, and components.
ough the automatic safety systems are designed to protect the public and maintain the plant afe shutdown without operator intervention, and these safety systems would operate even if operators are incapacitated, such operation would not be required in the event of a toxic gas ase because an accident would not be initiated as a result of the release.
3.1.3.1          Pipelines discussed in Subsection 2.2.3.1.2.1, there are three bounding natural gas pipelines within
: i. (8 km) of the facility. Natural gas is predominantly methane. The toxicity hazard from hane is that of a simple asphyxiant, and there are no defined IDLH or Emergency Response nning Guideline (ERPG) levels for methane. A cloud of methane would reach potentially losive concentrations before displacing enough oxygen to cause asphyxiation. Therefore, the nding hazard from natural gas is a potential explosion or fire, which was addressed in section 2.2.3.1.2.1 and determined to not be a threat to the facility.
3.1.3.2          Waterway Traffic re is no navigable waterway within 5 mi. (8 km) of the facility.
3.1.3.3          Highways le 2.2-19 provides a bounding list of toxic materials that may be transported on US 51 and
/39.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-19                                      Rev. 2
 
d as the distance from US 51 and I-90/39, respectively, to the facility control room.
hazardous chemicals evaluated were primarily based on those chemicals identified in 2010 II reports in Rock County, Wisconsin (Wisconsin Emergency Management, 2011). The ction of mobile sources for an analysis of potential impact to the facility control room was ed on: (1) the mobile sources of hazardous chemicals described in Table 2.2-5; (2) stationary rces within 5 mi. (8 km) where deliveries or shipments could be transported on local roads; arge quantities of stationary sources elsewhere in the county where deliveries or shipments ld be transported on major roads or rail lines; and (4) direct communication with facilities arding their types, quantities, and frequencies of shipments.
chemical is known to be in a tank (i.e., chemicals transported by rail or on US 51 or I-90/39),
dispersion is modeled in ALOHA as a tank source, with the tank volume set to accommodate entire mass of the chemical. A hole in the bottom of the tank is sized so that the entire tank ntory is released in one minute (minimum release time for ALOHA), and if the chemical is a id, forms a puddle that spreads to a maximum area that can be modeled, as determined by HA. Ground type is the ALOHA default soil and ground temperatures are set to ambient ditions.
micals transported by truck were modeled as release of 50,000 lbs of the chemical except for rine and sodium bisulfite.
orine is shipped in 150-lb cylinders, one-ton containers, cargo tankers (15 to 22 tons), and up 0-ton rail cars. The only users of chlorine within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site are the City of esville and the City of Beloit water utilities. The chlorine used is obtained in standard 150-lb nders (City of Beloit, 2015 and City of Janesville, 2015a). The maximum amount of chlorine at one site is 900 lb. Therefore, a release of chlorine on US 51 is considered only for the case he failure of one 150-lb cylinder. Chlorine releases on I-90/39 were considered for standard-shipment containers (one ton containers (2,000 lbs) and 22 ton cargo tankers (44,000 lbs)).
ium bisulfite (which could generate sulfur dioxide) was modeled as a 15,000 lb release from 51, since 15,000 lbs is the maximum inventory size of any current stationary location of ium bisulfite (City of Janesville, 2015b).
he releases analyzed deterministically, only the following were found to be a potential hazard he facility control room:
* Ammonia (50,000 lbs) from US 51
* Chlorine (44,000 lbs) from I-90/39
* Ethylene oxide (50,000 lbs) from US 51
* Propylene oxide (50,000 lbs) from I-90/39
* Sodium bisulfite (15,000 lbs) from US 51 se mobile sources of chemicals were evaluated using a simple probabilistic model, based on ment or inventory information from local users of those chemicals. The acceptance criteria eleases evaluated in this manner is 1E-6 releases per year because the resultant low levels adiological risk are considered acceptable.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-20                                        Rev. 2
 
Rhaz = Pspill x Raccident x Pweather x Dtrip        (Equation 2.2-6) ere:
* Rhaz is the rate of hazards per vehicle trip near the site (hazardous spills/trip)
* Pspill is the probability of the spill size (spills/accident)
* Raccident is the rate of accidents (accidents/vehicle mile)
* Pweather is the adverse wind direction probability (hazardous weather conditions at the site)
* Dtrip is the hazardous trip length, the total number of miles that a vehicle travels past the site each trip where an accident could result in a hazardous condition (vehicle miles/trip) orine, ethylene oxide, propylene oxide, and sodium bisulfite were eliminated as a hazard to facility control room using this probabilistic method.
chlorine, 53 cargo tanker shipments per year on I-90/39 past the site are required to exceed lease frequency of 1E-6. Without large producers or users of chlorine in the county, there are ected to be fewer than 53 cargo tanker shipments per year, and this release scenario efore is not considered a hazard to the facility control room.
ethylene oxide, 28 truck shipments per year on US 51 are required to exceed a release uency of 1E-6. Since the local industrial users receive their shipments by rail, exceeding this uency is not considered credible. Ethylene oxide is therefore not considered a hazard to the lity control room.
propylene oxide, 58 truck shipments per year on US 51 are required to exceed a release uency of 1E-6. Since the only user of propylene oxide within 5 mi. (Abitec Corporation) that eives shipments via truck has 6 shipments per year (Abitec Corporation, 2015), propylene e is not considered a hazard to the facility control room.
sodium bisulfite, 553 truck shipments per year on US 51 are required to exceed a release uency of 1E-6. Since the only current user of sodium bisulfite within 5 mi. has a reported age quantity of 15,000 lbs, it is very unlikely they send or receive 553 shipments per year.
ium bisulfite is therefore not considered a hazard to the facility control room.
mple probabilistic analysis is not sufficient to eliminate ammonia from consideration as a ard to the site. However, in the most limiting case of the closest, maximum inventory release, st case wind directions, and 5 percent annual exceedance maximum wind speeds and ospheric stability classes, the indoor toxicity limit is approached approximately one minute r the release, and outdoor concentrations begin to rise about 20 seconds after the release.
ough there are only approximately 40 seconds between potential detection on-site and ching the IDLH limit in the facility control room, the IDLH limit can be tolerated for 2 minutes out physical incapacitation. Therefore, the operators will be able to place the facility in a safe dition prior to the need to use personal protective equipment.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.2-21                                    Rev. 2
 
k chemical storage is provided in the storage building, as described in Subsection 9b.7.10.
location of the storage building relative to the main production facility is identified in ure 1.3-3. The distance from the north side of the storage building to the ventilation air intake he main production facility is approximately 233 ft. (71 m). Chemicals that are stored in bulk e storage building are identified in Table 2.2-20.
analysis for the impact of an on-site chemical release on control room habitability follows the licable methodology, as described in Subsection 2.2.3.1.3, using ALOHA, Version 5.4.7 OHA, 2016). Chemicals that are stored in the storage building are evaluated for postulated ases. Only chemicals with vapor pressures greater than 10 Torr at 100&deg;F were considered for her evaluation. Liquid solutions are assumed to form a pool with a depth of approximately m to maximize vaporization. No credit is taken for the storage building retention or deposition ny chemical.
meteorological conditions assume a Pasquill Stability Class F (stable), a wind speed of eter per second, an ambient temperature of 81&deg;F, a relative humidity of 50 percent, and a d cover of 50 percent.
control room was assumed to have an air-exchange rate of 1.2 exchanges per hour. Toxicity ts for this analysis are based on the IDLH exposure levels, as described in section 2.2.3.1.3.
following chemicals that are stored in the storage building were determined to pose a ential hazard to exceed toxicity limits for the control room:
* Acetone
* Ammonium hydroxide
* Chloroform
* Ethyl acetate
* Hydrochloric acid
* Hydrogen peroxide
* Isopropanol
* Methanol
* Nitric acid analysis determined the limiting quantity of a solution spill that could result in exceeding the city limits in the control room. The limiting quantity of each chemical determined to pose a ential hazard to control room habitability is provided in Table 2.2-20. The maximum container used for the storage of each of these chemicals in the storage building is lower than the ermined limiting quantities.
3.1.3.5          Nearby Facilities and Railways le 2.2-19 provides stationary sources of bounding toxic chemicals located within 5 mi. (8 km) he site and bounding toxic chemicals potentially transported by rail near the facility.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.2-22                                          Rev. 2
 
ment the stationary source information identified in the Tier II reports.
eases from rail lines are set at 1.6 mi. (2.6 km), which is the distance of the nearest approach he Union Pacific Railway to the facility. Chemicals stored or situated at distances greater than
: i. (8 km) from the plant need not be considered because, if a release occurs at such a ance, atmospheric dispersion will dilute and disperse the incoming plume to such a degree either toxic limits will never be reached or there would be sufficient time for the control room rators to take appropriate action.
Tier II Report was reviewed for other chemicals used within in the region, not necessarily in 5 mi. (8 km) of the site, in a significant quantity (i.e., over 50,000 lbs), such that they may requently shipped by rail near the site. Chemicals already determined to not be hazardous ed on vapor pressure or toxicity were not included.
ed on this review, acrylonitrile, which is used by a chemical manufacturer located greater n 5 mi. (8 km) from the site, was also considered for analysis based on the large amounts d by this manufacturer.
umptions for a rail line tank release were the same as used for highway tank release, as cribed in Subsection 2.2.3.1.3.3. The tank size for a rail line release was set to 000 gallons, and converted to an equivalent mass based on the estimated density of each erial.
release from a stationary source was determined to be a hazard to the facility control room, hown in Table 2.2-19. For rail line releases, only ammonia had the potential to exceed city levels in the facility control room under 5 percent annual exceedance probability worst e meteorological conditions. A probabilistic evaluation was not undertaken for rail shipments mmonia, since this release was bounded by a postulated tanker truck release, as discussed ubsection 2.2.3.1.3.3.
3.1.3.6          Toxic Chemical Related Impacts Affecting the Design he chemicals evaluated, only an ammonia release could have a greater than 1E-6 per year ential to result in an uninhabitable control room, based on a simple probabilistic analysis. For closest ammonia release, the evaluation shows that the control room operators would be to shut down the facility (i.e., have at least two minutes) by manually tripping the target tion vessels (TSVs) prior to needing to use personal protective equipment. This single action ures:
* Target solution is drained to the criticality-safe TSV dump tank(s);
* Decay heat from the target solution is removed via conduction through the dump tank(s) walls to the light water pool; and
* Hydrogen buildup in the primary system boundary is controlled via the target solution vessel off-gas system.
se actions will maintain the target solution in a safe shutdown condition. There are no ological consequences to the workers or the public due to an off-site toxic gas release that cts the facility.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-23                                          Rev. 2
 
idents leading to high heat fluxes in the vicinity of the plant were considered. Fires in adjacent strial plants and storage facilities, oil and gas pipelines, and fires from transportation idents were evaluated as events that could lead to high heat fluxes.
ee types of fires are analyzed for high heat flux: BLEVE fireballs, pool fires, and jet fires. A VE fireball occurs when a tank containing a flammable liquefied gas bursts. Similar to a VE overpressure, the liquefied gas flashes. The energy released causes the flammable gas nite causing a large fireball. A BLEVE fireball typically has a high heat flux, but a short ation. Pool fires occur when a chemical that is liquid at standard conditions spills and catches A jet fire occurs when a pipeline ruptures or pressurized tank has a hole causing the tinuous release of flammable gas. Pool fires and jet fires can have much longer durations.
limiting BLEVE fireball for the facility is the rupture of the propane truck. The truck contains 000 lb. (22,679 kg) of liquefied propane and is 0.22 mi. (0.35 km) from the facility. The puter program ALOHA was used to calculate the heat flux and duration of the fireball. The ults show that the heat flux on the facility is 3424 British thermal units per hour per square foot
  /hr-ft2) (10.8 kilowatts per square meter [kW/m2])and that the duration of the fireball is econds (sec.). This would cause a temperature rise on a concrete wall surface of 32.4&deg;F
&deg;C). This is not a significant temperature rise when compared to ACI 349-13, Code uirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures and Commentary (ACI, 2014) dards for short- and long-term maximum concrete temperatures.
limiting pool fire would come from a gasoline truck on US 51. The truck contains 50,000 lb.
679 kg) of gasoline and is 0.22 mi. (0.35 km) from the facility. The computer program ALOHA used to calculate the heat flux for the pool fire. The results show that the maximum heat flux 26 Btu/hr-ft2 (2.92 kW/m2) and that the fire lasts for 53 s. This would cause a temperature rise a concrete wall surface of 43.2&deg;F (24&deg;C). This is not a significant temperature rise when pared to ACI 349-13 (ACI, 2014) standards for short- and long-term maximum concrete peratures.
limiting off-site jet fire is from the feeder pipeline 0.28 mi. (0.45 km) from the facility. The puter program ALOHA was used to calculate the heat flux for the jet fire. The results show the maximum heat flux is 3.5 Btu/hr-ft2 (0.011 kW/m2). This heat flux is negligible compared the solar heat flux (approximately 317 Btu/hr-ft2 [1 kW/m2]). Therefore, the pipeline jet fire is considered a threat to the facility.
limiting on-site jet fire is from the 3-in. pipeline that feeds the facility. The pressure is pounds per square inch gauge (psig) (793 kilopascal [kPa] gauge) upstream of a pressure ucing station, and 54 psig (372 kPag) downstream of the pressure reducing station. The ssure reducing station is roughly 100 yd. (91.4 m) from the nearest safety-related area. The puter program ALOHA was used to calculate the heat flux for the jet fire. The results show the maximum heat flux from a fire upstream of the pressure reducing station is 9 Btu/hr-ft2 (0.0565 kW/m2). This heat flux is negligible compared with the solar heat flux proximately 317 Btu/hr-ft2 [1 kW/m2]).
wnstream of the pressure reducing station, the safe standoff distance to a 317 Btu/hr-ft2 W/m2) is 20 yd. (18 m). The accident rate, release rate and ignition rate apply here as they do e vapor cloud explosion analysis. Because the standoff distance for a jet fire is substantially NE Medical Technologies                        2.2-24                                          Rev. 2
 
line is modeled as a failure for both explosion and fire analysis and would not be counted e in the total probability.
limiting heat fluxes due to chemical hazards are shown in Table 2.2-21.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.2-25                                      Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Significant Industrial Facilities within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site Primary                Major Products Produced Facility                      Function                          or Stored Personal care, Abitec Corporation          Chemical manufacturing        pharmaceutical, and chemical manufacturing products Agricultural products, rop Production Services        Agricultural retail supplier including fertilizers Manufactures surfactants, specialty cleaning compounds, industrial organic Evonik Goldschmidt                                            chemicals and shampoo Chemical manufacturing Corporation                                                additives, alkyl sulfates, betaines, ether sulfates, quaternaries, sultaines, anti-foaming agents Janesville Jet Center              Jet fuel supplier                    Jet fuel School District of Beloit Facilities for school              Diesel oil storage Turner United Parcel Service                Distribution                  Parcel distribution Dollar General                                              Household products and Distribution Distribution Center                                                  consumables ferences:
itec Corporation, 2012.
op Production Services, 2012.
onik Industries, 2012.
nta, 2012(a-c)
NE Medical Technologies                    2.2-26                                        Rev. 2
 
Security-Related Information - Withheld under 10 CFR 2.390(d)
Chapter 2 - Site Characteristics        Nearby Industrial, Transportation, and Military Facilities Table 2.2 Pipelines within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site Closest        Nominal        Operating Pipeline            Fluid          Approach            Size      Pressure Owner            Carried            (mi.)        (inches)          (psig)        Line Type Alliant        Natural Gas          0.3            [ ]SRI      [    ]SRI        Feeder Alliant        Natural Gas          2.6          [ ]SRI        [    ]SRI      Main Line Alliant        Natural Gas          2.8          [  ]SRI      [    ]SRI      Main Line Alliant        Natural Gas          3.8            [ ]SRI      [      ]SRI        Feeder Alliant        Natural Gas          3.9            [ ]SRI      [      ]SRI        Feeder Alliant        Natural Gas          4.0            [ ]SRI      [      ]SRI        Feeder Alliant        Natural Gas          4.4          [  ]SRI    [      ]SRI        Feeder ANR            Natural Gas          3.6          [  ]SRI    [      ]SRI      Main Line
 
==References:==
 
Alliant Energy, 2012 NPMS, 2019 SHINE Medical Technologies                    2.2-27                                      Rev. 2
 
ble 2.2 Airports and Heliport Operations Located within 10 mi. (16 km) of the Site 200d2 Distance from                            Projected        Screening SHINE Facility        Number of          Number of        Criterion(a)
Center Point in      Operations          Operations        Screen Out Airport                  Statute (km)          in 2018            in 2045          (Yes/No)
Southern Wisconsin 0.63                37,674            46,443          N/A(b) (No)
Regional Airport Omniflight Heliport                0.63            Sporadic(c)        Sporadic(c)      N/A(d) (Yes)
Mary's Hospital Heliport            6.44                N/A(e)          Sporadic(c)      N/A(d) (Yes)
Mercy Hospital Heliport              7.24            Sporadic(c)        Sporadic(c)      N/A(d) (Yes)
Beloit Hospital Heliport              8.53            Sporadic(c)        Sporadic(c)      14,550 (Yes)
(c)    Sporadic(c)      31,515 (Yes)
Hacklander Airport                12.55            Sporadic Melin Farms Airport                14.00            Sporadic(c)        Sporadic(c)      39,207 (Yes) rchies Seaplane Base(f)            13.16            Sporadic(c)        Sporadic(c)      34,660 (Yes)
Beloit Airport                14.81              19,710(g)          19,710(g)      43,843 (Yes)
(c)    Sporadic(c)      44,801 (Yes)
Miller Airport                14.97            Sporadic Airports considered in analysis if the airport is within 5 mi. (8 km) of the SHINE site, or if, for airports located a distance between 5 mi. (8 km) and 10 mi. (16 km) from the SHINE site, an airport has annual operations of more than 200d2 (where d is the distance to the SHINE facility in kilometers).
Probabilistic hazard analysis needed because the distance is less than 5 mi. (8 km).
Operations of private airports or those with no aircraft stationed at the airport are considered sporadic.
Within 5 mi. (8 km), however, screens out. The subject heliports do not require separate analysis as they would be bounded by the analysis performed for the SWRA which utilizes larger aircraft, has significantly greater number of operations and is closer in distance to the facility.
Heliport was established in 2014.
This private airport does not appear to be in operation since operational data for the airport dates from 1991. It is, however, listed for completeness.
Based on 54 operations per day.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.2-28                                                Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Federal Airways within 10 mi. (16 km) of the Site Distance from Distance from                          Airway Edge to Airway Centerline to    Airway Width        Center of SHINE Airway                  SHINE Site (mi.)(a)        (mi.)(a)        Facility (mi.)(a)
V177                            5.8                  9.2                1.2 V24-97                          10.5                  9.2                5.9 V216                            6.9                  9.2                2.3 V63                            5.3                  9.2                0.7 V9-177                          4.8                  9.2                0.2 V97                          12.4                  9.2                7.8 V24                          11.6                  9.2                  7 V9-63-128                        10.9                  9.2                6.3 V228                            9.8                  9.2                5.2 V246                          11.6                  9.2                  7 J90                            5.5                11.5                  (b)
Statute miles.
The site is within the airway width.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-29                                  Rev. 2
 
able 2.2 Hazardous Chemicals Potentially Transported on Highways within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site Distance Chemical                    Quantity (lbs.) Highway      to Site (mi.)
Ammonia                          50,000      US 51          0.22 Asphyxiant Model (Nitrogen)              50,000      US 51          0.22 Bounding Amide (Formamide)                50,000      US 51          0.22 Chlorine                          150        US 51          0.22 Diesel                        50,000      US 51          0.22 Ethylene Oxide                      50,000      US 51          0.22 Gasoline                        50,000      US 51          0.22 Jet Fuel (Kerosene)                  50,000      US 51          0.22 Hydrogen Peroxide                    50,000      US 51          0.22 Isopropanol                      50,000      US 51          0.22 n-Butyl Alcohol                    50,000      US 51          0.22 Propane                        50,000      US 51          0.22 Propylene Oxide                    50,000      US 51          0.22 Sodium Bisulfite (Sulfur Dioxide)          15,000      US 51          0.22 Styrene                        50,000      US 51          0.22 Acetone                        50,000      I-90/39          2.1 Chlorine                        44,000      I-90/39          2.1 Hydrogen                          3,300      I-90/39          2.1 Methyl Acetate                    50,000      I-90/39          2.1 n-Heptane                        50,000      I-90/39          2.1 Nitric Acid                      50,000      I-90/39          2.1 Sodium Bisulfate (Sulfur Dioxide)            50,000      I-90/39          2.1 Sodium Hypochlorite (Chlorine)              50,000      I-90/39          2.1 NE Medical Technologies                  2.2-30                              Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Holding Patterns near the SHINE Facility Distance from Holding Pattern to SHINE Facility Airport                Holding Pattern          Runway        Center Point (mi.)
CULMO                  4                15.0 Southern Wisconsin              TAYOR                  14                14.4 Regional Airport                OTLEE                  22                12.6 TIRRO                32                12.4 Beloit Airport              Unnamed                  7                6.7 Poplar Grove Airport            Unnamed                17                23.0 NE Medical Technologies                2.2-31                                    Rev. 2
 
ble 2.2 Maximum CONUS Values for Crashers per Year for Commercial and Military Aviation Nonairport Operations NjPjf(x,y) Value(a) (1/mi2)
Air Carrier                    2E-06 Air Taxi                      8E-06 General Aviation                  3E-03 Small Military                    6E-06 Military Helicopter                3.3E-07 Effective Area Skid Wingspan(b)                                          Distance(d)
(ft.)                    cot()(c)                (ft.)
Air Carrier                      98                        10.2                  1440 Air Taxi                        59                        10.2                  1440 General Aviation                      50                          8.2                    60 Small Military                    110                        10.4                  447 (e)
Military Helicopter                57.25                          0.58                    0 Reference (DOE, 2006), Tables B-14, B-15, and B-43 Reference (DOE, 2006), Table B-16 Reference (DOE, 2006), Table B-17 Reference (DOE, 2006), Table B-18 Wingspan noted is the helicopter length for the Bell UH-1 helicopter. The Bell UH-1 length is greater than its wingspan.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.2-32                                          Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Calculated Effective Areas of Safety-Related Structure Effective Area Aircraft Type                                    (mi2)
Air Carrier                                  2.8E-02 Air Taxi                                  2.5 E-02 General Aviation                                7.5 E-023 Small Military                                1.6 E-02 Military Helicopter                              2.1 E-03 NE Medical Technologies              2.2-33                              Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Total Crash Probability Large Non-Military            Small Non-Military              Military Aircraft                      Aircraft                  Aircraft Total Probability                  1.10E-7                      3.92E-4                  1.99E-7 Total Probability onsidering Air Shows 1.90E-7                        N/A(a)                  5.37E-7(b)
Small non-military aircraft increased air traffic is within 1 percent of total operations assumed in the total crash probability and is therefore excluded from evaluation.
All military aircraft are assumed to be large military aircraft for a bounding evaluation.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.2-34                                              Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Maximum Number of Operations per Year at Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport Aircraft Type                          Number of Operations Air Carrier (itinerant)                            17 Air Taxi (itinerant)                            11,245 General Aviation (itinerant)                        17,407 Military (itinerant)                              343 Civil (local)                              23,500 Military (local)                                553 erences:
OT, 2019a OT, 2019b NE Medical Technologies                2.2-35                              Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Aircraft Operations(a) by Aircraft Type on Each Runway Air            Air          General      Small      Military Runway          Carrier          Taxi          Aviation    Military  Helicopter 14                2            1574            5727          1          124 32                4            2361            8590        2          186 4                5            3374            12272        3          266 22                3            2249            8181        2          177 18                1            843            3068        1          67 36                1            843            3068        1          67 Number (per year) of movements by each aircraft NE Medical Technologies                  2.2-36                                Rev. 2
 
able 2.2 Distance from Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport to SHINE Facility Distance Runway Number                                (mi.)(a) 14                                    1.57 32                                    0.87 4                                    1.54 22                                    0.44 18                                    0.64 36                                    0.89 Distance from each runway end to the facility center point NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-37                        Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Crash Probability(a) (x 10-8) by Aircraft and Distance from the Site istance rom site                                              General      USN/
(mi.)      Runway      Air Carrier    Air Taxi      Aviation    USMC(b)      USAF(c) 1.57          14            4            26            15          1            2 0.87          32            17          109          84          8            5 1.54            4            4            26            15          1            2 0.44          22            17          109          84          8            5 0.64          18            17          109          84          8            5 0.89          36            17          109          84          8            5 Probability per square mile of a crash per aircraft movement U.S. Navy/U.S. Marine Corps U.S. Air Force NE Medical Technologies                  2.2-38                                    Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Maximum Operations at the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for the Years 2019 through 2045 and Projected Operations from a Future Air Show Maximum Operations        Projected Operations Aircraft Type              2019 through 2045        from Future Air Show Air Carrier                      17                        15 Air Taxi                    11,245                      77 General Aviation                  17,407                      77 Civil                      23,500                      77 Military (itinerant)                343                        77 Military (local)                  503                        77 NE Medical Technologies              2.2-39                                  Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Bounding Explosive Chemical Hazards within 5 mi. (8 km) of the Site Explosion Chemical                Location            DIstance    Quantity        Type Diesel Fuel          Bounding Instance        0.5 mi. 1,258,091 lbs. Stationary Ethylene Oxide            Abitec / Rail        1.6 mi. 440,000 lbs. Stationary, Vapor Cloud Gasoline          Janesville Jet Center      0.9 mi. 133,946 lbs. Stationary, Vapor Cloud t Fuel (Kerosene)      Bounding Instance        0.22 mi. 79,968 lbs. Stationary Methylchloride            Evonik / Rail        1.6 mi. 320,000 lbs. Vapor Cloud n-Butyl Alcohol      Evonik Goldschmidt          3 mi. 25,160 lbs. Vapor Cloud euterium/Tritium            On-site              N/A        280 g      Stationary, Vapor Cloud Diesel Fuel          Truck (Highway 51)      0.22 mi. 50,000 lbs. Stationary Ethylene Oxide        Truck (Highway 51)      0.22 mi. 50.000 lbs. Stationary, Vapor Cloud Gasoline          Truck (Highway 51)      0.22 mi. 50,000 lbs. Stationary, Vapor Cloud Propane            Truck (Highway 51)      0.22 mi. 50,000 lbs. Stationary, Vapor Cloud, BLEVE Hydrogen              Truck (I-90/39)        2.1 mi. 3,300 lbs. Stationary, Vapor Cloud Natural Gas                Pipeline          0.28 mi.      NA      Vapor Cloud (Methane)            (West of Hwy 51)
Natural Gas                Pipeline            2.5 mi.      NA      Vapor Cloud (Methane)            (East of I-90/39)
Natural Gas            On-site service          NA          NA      Vapor Cloud (Methane)
 
==References:==
 
Abitec Corporation, 2012.
Crop Production Services, 2012.
Evonik Industries, 2012.
Manta, 2012(a-c).
Rock County, 2012.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.2-40                              Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Stationary Explosion Analysis Acceptable Chemical                Location              Distance        Quantity            Instance(a) 1,258,091 lbs. at Diesel Fuel          Bounding Instance          0.5 mi.      1,258,091 lbs.
0.22 mi.
440,000 lbs. at Ethylene Oxide            Abitec / Rail            1.6 mi.      440,000 lbs.
0.22 mi.
133,946 lbs. at Gasoline          Janesville Jet Center        0.9 mi.      133,946 lbs.
0.22 mi.
500,000 lbs. at t Fuel (Kerosene)      Bounding Instance          0.22 mi.        79,968 lbs.
0.22 mi.
Low probability; Safety features euterium/Tritium            On-site                N/A          280 grams designed into systems 1,258,091 lbs. at Diesel Fuel          Truck (Highway 51)        0.22 mi.        50,000 lbs.
0.22 mi.
50,000 lbs. at Ethylene Oxide        Truck (Highway 51)        0.22 mi.        50,000 lbs.
0.22 mi.
Truck (Highway 51)                                            133,946 lbs. at Gasoline                                      0.22 mi.        50,000 lbs.
bounding                                                      0.22 mi.
55,724 lbs. at Propane            Truck (Highway 51)        0.22 mi.        50,000 lbs.
0.22 mi.
50,000 lbs. at ropane BLEVE          Truck (Highway 51)        0.22 mi.        50,000 lbs.
0.22 mi.
18,196 lbs. at Hydrogen              Truck (I-90/39)          2.1 mi.        3300 lbs.
0.22 mi.
The Acceptable Instance shows the analyzed condition that bounds the stationary explosion hazard in both distance and mass. It demonstrates a liquid mass of chemical that, if located at the nearest point to SHINE safety-related structures, would not exceed a 1 psi overpressure.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.2-41                                            Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Flammable Vapor Cloud Explosion Analysis Acceptable Mass/          (Standoff Chemical              Location          Distance    Volume          Distance) thylene Oxide          Abitec / Rail        1.6 mi. 440,000 lbs.          0.54 mi.
Gasoline        Janesville Jet Center    0.9 mi. 133,946 lbs.          0.36 mi.
Methylchloride          Evonik / Rail        1.6 mi. 320,000 lbs.          0.24 mi.
Vapor Pressure
                                                                          < LEL, no
-Butyl Alcohol    Evonik Goldschmidt        3 mi. 25,160 lbs.
flammable vapor cloud Vapor Volume at LEL < volume uterium/Tritium          On-site            N/A    280 grams of room, not confined 99 allowable thylene Oxide      Truck (Highway 51)      0.22 mi. 50,000 lbs. shipments, few expected Gasoline        Truck (Highway 51)      0.22 mi. 50,000 lbs.        0.214 mi.
404 allowable Propane          Truck (Highway 51)      0.22 mi. 50,000 lbs.
shipments Hydrogen            Truck (I-90/39)      2.1 mi. 3300 lbs.          0.77 mi.
Natural Gas              Pipeline 0.28 mi.      NA              0.24 mi.
(Methane)          (West of Hwy 51)
Natural Gas              Pipeline 2.5 mi.      NA                2.2 mi.
(Methane)          (East of I-90/39)
Natural Gas                                                            Probability On-site service        NA        NA (Methane)                                                              < 1.1E-6/yr NE Medical Technologies                2.2-42                                    Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 On-Site Pipeline Analysis Case 2:          Case 3:
Upstream          Upstream of Regulator    of Regulator  Case 4:
Case 1:      Class G Big      Class F Big  On-site Parameter              Small Break        Break            Break    Big Break cident Rate (breaks per 1.5E-3          1.5E-3          1.5E-3    1.5E-3 pipeline-mi. per year)
Break Size Probability            0.8              0.2              0.2        0.2 Explosion Probability Given Release                1E-3            5E-3            5E-3      5E-3 explosions per break)
Probability of Adverse 1            0.11349          0.10080        1 Weather Exposure Distance 0.27            0.17            0.08      0.27 (pipeline-mi.)
Explosions (/yr)            3.2E-7          2.9E-8          1.2E-8    4.1E-7 otal for four cases (/yr)                                7.7E-7 NE Medical Technologies                    2.2-43                                Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Bounding Toxic Chemical Hazards within 8 km (5 mi.) of the Site (Sheet 1 of 3)
Distance  Mass Chemical              Location              (mi.)    (lbs.)    Disposition Polymer dispersion Humane Manufacturing          1    58,800        No Hazard (1,3-butadiene)
Polymer dispersion Humane Manufacturing          1    58,800        No Hazard (benzene)
Asphyxiant Model          Linde Merchant 2    5,000,000      No Hazard (nitrogen)            Production Abitec Corporation and Bounding Amide Evonik Goldschmidt          2    640,000      No Hazard (Formamide)
(Bounding Case)
Abitec Corporation and Bounding Amine Evonik Goldschmidt          2    640,000      No Hazard (diethylamine)
(Bounding Case)
Abitec Corporation and Bounding Amine Evonik Goldschmidt          2    640,000      No Hazard (n-Butylamine)
(Bounding Case)
Ethylene Oxide        Abitec Corporation          2    440,000      No Hazard Isopropanol        Abitec Corporation          2    185,800      No Hazard Linde Merchant Oxygen                                        2    2,150,000      No Hazard Production Volatile Amine        WI School for the 2        300        No Hazard (cyclohexylamine)      Visually Handicapped Benzyl acetate        Evonik Goldschmidt          3      12,321      No Hazard Janesville Pump Chlorine                                      3        900        No Hazard Station #12 Ethyl Alcohol      Evonik Goldschmidt          3    168,000      No Hazard Hydrogen Peroxide      Evonik Goldschmidt          3      60,000      No Hazard Methyl Chloride        Evonik Goldschmidt          3    320,000      No Hazard n-Heptane        Evonik Goldschmidt          3    125,000      No Hazard Sodium Bisulfite Evonik Goldschmidt          3      15,000      No Hazard (as sulfur dioxide)
Sodium Chlorite Evonik Goldschmidt          3      14,000      No Hazard as chlorine dioxide)
Styrene            Monterey Mills            3    225,280      No Hazard Volatile Amine Evonik Goldschmidt          3      12,045      No Hazard (DMAPA)
NE Medical Technologies                  2.2-44                                Rev. 2
 
Distance  Mass Chemical              Location            (mi.)    (lbs.) Disposition Evonik Goldschmidt and Propylene Oxide            Rail                1.6  360,000  No Hazard (Bounding Case)
Acrylonitrile            Rail                1.6  199,852  No Hazard Additional Ammonia                Rail                1.6  150,054 Evaluation Bounding Amide Rail                1.6  282,214  No Hazard (Formamide)
Bounding Amine Rail                1.6  175,391  No Hazard (diethylamine)
Bounding Amine Rail                1.6  183,538  No Hazard (n-Butylamine)
Ethylene Oxide              Rail                1.6  216,317  No Hazard Methyl Chloride            Rail                1.6  227,428  No Hazard Vinylidene Chloride          Rail                1.6  300,966  No Hazard Additional Ammonia            Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000 Evaluation Asphyxiant Model Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard (nitrogen)
Bounding Amide Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard (Formamide)
Chlorine          Truck (US 51)          0.22      150  No Hazard Ethyl Alcohol        Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard Additional Ethylene Oxide        Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000 Evaluation asoline (as butane)    Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard asoline (as toluene)    Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard Hydrogen Peroxide        Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard Isopropanol        Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard n-Butyl Alcohol      Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard Propane          Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard Additional Propylene Oxide        Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000 Evaluation Sodium Bisulfite                                                Additional Truck (US 51)          0.22    15,000 (as sulfur dioxide)                                              Evaluation Styrene          Truck (US 51)          0.22    50,000  No Hazard NE Medical Technologies                2.2-45                            Rev. 2
 
Distance Mass Chemical              Location              (mi.)  (lbs.) Disposition Acetone            Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  50,000  No Hazard Chlorine          Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  2,000  No Hazard Additional Chlorine          Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  44,000 Evaluation Hydrogen            Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  50,000  No Hazard Methyl Acetate        Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  50,000  No Hazard n-Heptane          Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  50,000  No Hazard Nitric Acid        Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  50,000  No Hazard Sodium Bisulfite Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  50,000  No Hazard (as sulfur dioxide) odium Hypochlorite Truck (I-90/39)          2.1  50,000  No Hazard (as chlorine)
NE Medical Technologies                2.2-46                          Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Bounding On-Site Chemical Hazards for Control Room Impact Chemical                  Disposition        Limiting Quantity (Liters)
Acetone              Additional evaluation            500 Ammonium hydroxide (30 wt.%)      Additional evaluation            25 Chloroform              Additional evaluation            250 Ethyl acetate            Additional evaluation            2000 Hydrochloric acid (37 wt.%)    Additional evaluation            50 Hydrogen peroxide (30 wt.%)      Additional evaluation            1000 Isopropanol            Additional evaluation            1000 Methanol              Additional evaluation            1000 Nitric acid (70 wt.%)        Additional evaluation            100 Sodium hydroxide (50 wt.%)            No hazard                  N/A Sulfuric acid (98 wt.%)            No hazard                  N/A NE Medical Technologies            2.2-47                                    Rev. 2
 
Table 2.2 Heat Flux Analysis Distance                                                                Concrete Wall Chemical              Location            (mi.)          Mass/Volume            Heat Flux      Duration          Heat Up(a)
Truck Gasoline                                  0.22              50,000 lbs          2.92 kW/m2        53 sec.              43&deg;F (Highway 51)
Truck Propane                                  0.22              50,000 lbs          10.8 kW/m2        11 sec.              32&deg;F (Highway 51)
Pipeline Natural Gas (West of          0.28                  N/A            0.011 kW/m2      Indefinite          Indefinite (Methane)
Highway 51)
Bounded by Natural Gas On-site service        N/A                  N/A            VCE analysis      Indefinite          Indefinite (Methane)
(Table 2.2-18) rom ACI standard 349-13, temporary concrete temperatures of up to 350&deg;F and long-term concrete temperatures of 150&deg;F are acceptable. The 3&deg;F temperature increase above ambient temperature does not exceed the ACI limits.
NE Medical Technologies                                      2.2-48                                                              Rev. 2
 
NE Medical Technologies 2.2-49 Rev. 2 NE Medical Technologies 2.2-50 Rev. 2 1        GENERAL AND LOCAL CLIMATE 1.1        Introduction ate is a statistical description of the weather conditions that occur during a long period of
  , usually several decades. Weather refers to short term variations (minutes to months) in the osphere.
rces of data typically used to analyze the climate at a site include weather maps (depictions real weather phenomena at one instant of time), atlas maps summarizing long term climate, ords of weather at specific monitoring stations at single instants of time, and long term climatic istics at specific monitoring stations.
purpose of analysis of regional climate is to understand the local climate at the SHINE site in context of the climate of the surrounding area. Climate phenomena are then analyzed at gressively smaller scales and within progressively smaller areas. As the area being analyzed reases, some monitoring stations that are considered initially in the broad analysis are luded because these stations are found to be unrepresentative of the site climate. The end ult is a documented, systematic approach that defines local climate within a context that udes a broad surrounding region.
1.2        Regional Climate SHINE site is located in south-central Wisconsin. The following discussion summarizes a ety of information that describes the general region in which the site is located. Because the rmation is derived from a variety of sources, the geographic area implied by the term "region" omewhat variable in this introductory discussion. Subsection 2.3.1.2.1 defines a more specific on considered to have a climate representative of the site, and the subsequent subsections sent detailed climatological data for that specific region.
SHINE site is located in a region with the Keppen classification "Daf", which is a humid tinental climate with warm summers, snowy winters, and humid conditions (Trewartha, 1954).
climate features a large annual temperature range and frequent short duration temperature nges (NCDC, 2019a). Although there are no pronounced dry seasons, most of the annual cipitation falls during the summer. During the autumn, winter, and spring, strong synoptic le surface cyclones and anticyclones frequently move across the site region. During the mer, synoptic scale cyclones are usually weaker and pass north of the site region. Most air sses that affect the site region are generally of polar origin. However, air masses occasionally inate from arctic regions, or the Gulf of Mexico. Air masses originating from the Gulf of xico generally do not reach the site region during winter months. There are occasional odes of extreme heat or high humidity in the summer. The windiest months generally occur ng the spring and autumn. The annual average number of days with thunderstorms varies approximately 45 at the southwest corner of the state of Wisconsin, to approximately 35 at northeast corner of the state (Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002). Hail is most frequent in southwestern and west central portions of the state, and is most common during summer nths, peaking in late July. Tornadoes are relatively infrequent. Winter storms that affect the on generally follow one of three tracks shown in Figure 2.3-1: Alberta, Panhandle, and Gulf NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-1                                        Rev. 0
 
ional land use is primarily cropland (corn and beans) and dairying (Rand McNally, 1982 and 5). The natural vegetation includes broadleaf deciduous trees (oak and hickory), evergreen s, and medium height prairie grass. There are also several urban areas. The soil at the site is
-drained silt loam.
landforms of Wisconsin are described by the five physiographic provinces plotted on the p in Figure 2.3-2. Details of vegetation, topography, and elevations for those provinces are cribed in Table 2.3-1 (Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002). Most of the surface water oundments in Wisconsin are located in the Northern Highland and Eastern Ridges and lands physiographic provinces. Water also flows through extensive wetlands in the form of shes and swamps. The Northern Highland province has the highest elevations, from which er drains northward to Lake Superior; eastward to Lake Michigan via the Menominee and f Rivers; and westward to the Mississippi River via the St. Croix, Chippewa, Black, and consin Rivers. The Western Uplands province, which comprises most of the western border he state with Minnesota, escaped recent glaciation. This allowed streams and rivers to form ply incised valleys over geologic time. Portions of the uplands are referred to as the "driftless a" due to the lack of glacial debris, or "drift".
e breeze phenomena occur near the shorelines of large bodies of water, such as Lake higan, which borders Wisconsin on the east (Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002). These nomena feature a circulation system in which air rises over the land and descends over the er, flows from the water toward the land near the ground surface, and flows from land toward lake aloft. At the surface, the lake breeze appears as a relatively cool and humid wind that eps inland. The leading edge of a lake breeze is a miniature cold front and is referred to as lake breeze front. As the lake breeze front moves inland, it lifts warmer air upward, etimes causing clouds or showers. The inland penetration of the lake breeze front varies a few hundred yards to as much as 25 miles (mi.) (40.2 kilometers [km]) (Moran, J. M. and
. Hopkins, 2002). Since the site is located approximately 60 mi. (96.6 km) west of Lake higan, it is located too far from the lake be affected by lake breezes. Inland lakes that are ted in the SHINE site region are too small to be associated with lake breeze circulations.
refore, lake breeze circulations are not expected to affect the project site.
local radiation balance and winds determine temperatures across the state. Movement of air sses, synoptic scale fronts, and synoptic scale cyclones and anticyclones strongly influence l temperature and precipitation. Seasonal changes in the intensity and movements of air sses and synoptic-scale weather systems, plus changes in radiation exposure at the ground g about seasonal changes in temperature and precipitation. North and northwest winds erally bring cold, dry air. South and southeast winds typically bring warm, humid air. Calm d conditions allow pooling of colder, denser air at locations with lower elevations such as eys. Unequal rates of diurnal heating of the ground cause some local valley and hillside ows.
ps of monthly mean dry bulb temperatures in Wisconsin are presented in Figure 2.3-3 through ure 2.3-6 (Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002). Mean monthly temperatures for winter ure 2.3-3) show cooler temperatures at the northern end of the state, warmer temperatures r Lake Michigan, and slightly warmer temperatures near Lake Superior. Figure 2.3-4 sents mean monthly temperatures in the spring. The springtime monthly temperature pattern NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-2                                      Rev. 0
 
peratures during spring, since the water warms at a slower rate than the land and thereby ls the air near the shorelines.
an monthly temperatures for summer (Figure 2.3-5) show a pattern similar to springtime nthly mean temperatures in Figure 2.3-4, with warmer interior temperatures in the south.
nties adjacent to Lakes Michigan and Superior are slightly cooler because the lake surfaces relatively cooler than the land during the summer.
an monthly temperatures for autumn (Figure 2.3-6) show warmer conditions in the southern rior. The temperatures show a pattern similar to those in the winter, with warmer peratures at counties near the lake, since the land cools more quickly than the water.
consin counties that border Lakes Michigan and Superior experience somewhat cooler mers, milder winters, and longer agricultural growing seasons than those counties at greater ances from the lakes. The lakes also occasionally produce lake effect snow during late umn through winter.
ps of monthly mean liquid-equivalent precipitation in Wisconsin are presented in Figure 2.3-7 ugh Figure 2.3-10 (Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002). Generally, the average annual cipitation is higher in southern portions of the Midwest due to the proximity of the Gulf of xico, which is a major source of moisture (EDS, 1968). That same general pattern is observed r the state of Wisconsin. Superimposed over that general pattern is a local pattern of periodic effect precipitation. During lake effect precipitation events, Lakes Superior and Michigan are l sources of moisture that can cause precipitation adjacent to and downwind of the lake relines. Those periods of precipitation enhancement tend to occur when the lake water is mer than the air, which is generally in winter. For example, the winter month precipitation in ure 2.3-7 shows higher monthly water equivalent precipitation totals (approximately 1.2 to in. [3.0 to 5.6 cm]) near the north and east boundary counties, caused by lake effect snow Lakes Michigan and Superior.
Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration AA) weather observing stations from Madison, WI and Rockford, IL were used (NCDC, 9b, NCDC, 2019c). "First-order" stations are defined as those on a 24-hour per day, r-round observing schedule with trained, certified observers. The weather stations are ted approximately 40 mi. (64.4 km) north-northwest and 30 mi. (48.3 km) south-southwest of site, respectively.
atic statistics for Madison presented in Table 2.3-2 (NCDC, 2019b) show that monthly mean d speeds range from 6.4 miles per hour (mph) (2.9 meters per second [m/s]) during the month ugust to 9.9 mph (4.4 m/s) during the month of April. The annual mean wind speed is mph (3.7 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are from the south-southwest during all nths except the winter months of January and February, when the monthly prevailing winds all from the northwest. The annual prevailing wind is from the south-southwest.
atic statistics for Rockford presented in Table 2.3-3 (NCDC, 2019c) show that monthly mean d speeds are similar to those for Madison and range from 6.8 mph (3.0 m/s) during the month ugust, to 11.1 mph (5.0 m/s) during the month of April. The annual mean wind speed is mph (4.1 m/s). Monthly prevailing wind directions are similar to Madison and blow from the NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-3                                      Rev. 0
 
th-southwest.
nthly mean relative humidities for Madison range from 66 percent during April and May, to percent during December (Table 2.3-2). Rockford monthly mean relative humidities presented similar to those from Madison, ranging from 66 percent during April and May, to 80 percent ng December (Table 2.3-3).
an monthly water equivalent precipitation and snowfall for Madison and Rockford (Table 2.3-2 Table 2.3-3) are similar. Water equivalent precipitation ranges from minima of 1.23 in.
2 cm) during January in Madison and 1.37 in. (3.48 cm) during January in Rockford, to xima during June of 4.54 in. (11.53 cm) at Madison, and during June of 4.65 in. (11.81 cm) in kford.
an monthly snowfall is limited to the months October through April at Rockford and October ugh May at Madison. Snowfall ranges from a minimum of 0.1 in. (0.25 cm) during October at kford to a maximum of 13.5 in. (34.29 cm) during December at Madison. Annual snowfall is 9 in. (129.29 cm) at Madison and 36.7 in. (93.22 cm) at Rockford.
le 2.3-4 presents the mean numbers of days per month and per year of rain or drizzle, zing rain or drizzle, snow, and hail or sleet at Madison and Rockford. Those parameters have y similar values for the two stations. Snow typically occurs during 75 days per year at dison, and 68 days per year at Rockford. Hail or sleet typically occurs during 2 days per year oth Madison and Rockford. Freezing rain or drizzle typically occurs during 2 days per year at h Madison and Rockford.
1.2.1        Identification of Region with Climate Representative of the Site process of comparison of local (site) and regional climates requires a determination of which on is considered "representative" of climate at the SHINE site. That determination is cribed in this subsection.
SHINE site is located in central Rock County, Wisconsin which is at the south-central edge he state. It is located near the boundary of two Wisconsin physiographic provinces as sented in Figure 2.3-2; the Western Uplands and the Eastern Ridges and Lowlands. It is ted in NOAA Cooperative Observer Network (COOP) Climate Division 8 South Central ure 2.3-11). The finished site grade elevation is approximately 825 ft. (252 m) NAVD 88. The use in the site area is rural.
mmarizing, the site location is defined by the following characteristics:
* Located in south-central Wisconsin, on rural prairie silt-loam soil.
* Located within till plains glacial deposits on the Central Lowland Province of the Interior Plains Division of the United States. It is on the border between the state of Wisconsin Eastern Ridge/Lowland and Western Upland Terrain, and most like the ridge/lowland to the east because the local topography is relatively gently rolling.
* Located outside the zone of influence of Lake Michigan lake breeze circulation systems.
* Located within the zone of influence of Lake Michigan effects on temperature and precipitation, including the following: added local warmth during winter and autumn, NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-4                                      Rev. 0
 
ed on the above summary characteristics, the perimeter of a surrounding geographic region, ch is characterized as having the same climate as the site, is plotted on the regional map in ure 2.3-12. That perimeter is bounded as follows:
* Bounded on the east by the 25-mi. (40.2 km) distance of maximum inland penetration of lake breeze circulations from Lake Michigan.
* Bounded on the south by the approximate southward limit of Lake Michigan's effects on the local climate of north-central Illinois, as presented in the mean precipitation and snowfall patterns in Figure 2.3-13 and as described by local climatological data summaries for major Illinois monitoring stations. Annual isohyets and lines of equal snowfall are oriented northwest to southeast at the northeast corner of Illinois as shown in Figure 2.3-13 and Figure 2.3-14, illustrating the effects of Lake Michigan on northern Illinois precipitation. Increased clouds and cooling effects due to Lake Michigan (Figure 2.3-15) are described in the climatological summary for Rockford, Illinois (NCDC, 2019c), but are not described in the climatological summaries for Springfield, Illinois farther to the south (NCDC, 2019d), or Moline, Illinois farther to the southwest (NCDC, 2019e).
* Bounded on the west by the approximate westward limit of Lake Michigans effects on the local climate of southern Wisconsin, as presented in the mean monthly temperature and precipitation, maps in Figure 2.3-3 through Figure 2.3-10.
* Bounded on the north by the approximate northward limit of Lake Michigans effects on the local climate of central Wisconsin, as presented in the mean temperature and precipitation maps in Figure 2.3-3 through Figure 2.3-10.
* Bounded on the north by the approximate mean southern boundary of the Wisconsin Central Plain, as presented in Figure 2.3-2.
site climate region is then used to identify regional weather monitoring stations and consin and Illinois counties that can be used for comparisons in the analysis of local and onal climate.
1.2.2          Regional Data Sources site climate region is identified in Identification of Region with Climate Representative of the
. Meteorological parameters from weather stations in the site climate region are available a number of published data sources. Those data sources are described below.
* Climatography of the United States No. 20 (Clim-20) statistical summaries from the National Climatic Data Center (NCDC).
Clim-20 publications are typically available for cooperative (COOP) daily weather monitoring stations located within the site climate region. Those publications are of particular interest to agriculture, industry, and engineering applications. The publications include a variety of climate statistics useful for regional climate analysis. Those parameters include dry bulb temperature, daily precipitation, and snow fall. Descriptive statistics of those parameters include: mean, extremes, and mean number of days exceeding threshold values. After 2000, the Clim-20 publications were replaced with summaries in digital format (NCDC, 2019f-aa).
NE Medical Technologies                        2.3-5                                        Rev. 0
 
coincident with extreme dry bulb temperatures, which are of interest in regional climate analysis, are generally not available for COOP stations. Therefore, for COOP stations, it is often necessary to estimate coincident wet bulb temperatures using wet bulb temperatures recorded at other stations.
* Climatological statistics available from Local Climatological Data (LCD) summaries published by NCDC.
LCD annual summaries are typically available for meteorological stations located at major airports. Those summaries include climatic normals, averages and extremes. Thirty-year monthly histories are provided for the following parameters: mean temperature, total precipitation, total snowfall, and heating/cooling degree days. The summaries also include a narrative description of the local climate.
* Statistical summaries available from the International Station Meteorological Climate Summary (ISMCS) (NCDC, 1996a).
Those summaries are available for many domestic and international airports and military installations. The summaries include tabulations of statistics for several parameters of interest in regional climate analysis. The summaries also include a narrative description of local climate. Particularly useful and unique statistics available in the ISMCS are joint-frequency tables of dry bulb and wet bulb (MCWB) temperature depression, and single-parameter frequency distributions of dry bulb and wet bulb temperatures.
* Statistical summaries published by the American Society of Heating, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc. (ASHRAE) (ASHRAE, 2017).
ASHRAE climatic percentile information is available for worldwide locations including many U.S. airports with hourly surface weather observing stations. Parameters include dry bulb, wet bulb and dew point temperatures. Also included are: statistical design values of dry bulb with mean coincident wet bulb temperature, design wet bulb temperature with mean coincident dry bulb temperature, and design dew point with mean coincident dry bulb temperature.
* Statistical summaries published by the U.S. Air Force Combat Climatology Center (AFCCC) (AFCCC, 1999). The AFCCC statistical summaries include values for dry and wet bulb temperatures and wind speed parameters.
* American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) structural design standards for the site climate region (ASCE, 2006).
* The ASCE standards provide minimum load requirements for the design of buildings and other structures that are subject to building code requirements. Particularly useful and unique statistics of interest for climate analysis are values of basic wind speed on a map of the U.S. The basic speed is required by standards for determination of design wind loads. Also included are various adjustments and supplementary information dependent on site and structure characteristics. ASCE also provides maps of 50-year return interval NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-6                                      Rev. 0
* 48-hour probable maximum precipitation (PMP).
The 48-hour probable maximum precipitation (PMP) is available from a study published by the U.S. Department of Commerce (USDOC) (USDOC, 1978). The study contains maps of estimated maximum probable precipitation amounts for a number of time periods (USDOC, 1978).
* Tornado, waterspout, and other weather event statistics for counties in the site climate region from the NCDC online Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2011a and NCDC, 2018a) and Storm Data publications.
The Storm Events Database contains a chronological listing, by state, of climate statistics of interest for climate analysis. Those statistics include: tornadoes, thunderstorms, hail, lightning, high winds, snow, temperature extremes, and other weather phenomena. Also included are statistics on personal injuries and property damage estimates.
The Storm Data publications are monthly summaries of severe weather events published by NCDC. These publications provide supplemental information about specific severe weather events.
* Maps of climatological parameters from the Climate Atlas of the United States (NCDC, 2002a).
This digital atlas provides color maps of climatic elements for the U.S., such as:
temperature, precipitation, snow, wind, and pressure. The period of record for most maps is 1961-1990. The user extracts data from the atlas by selecting a parameter (e.g., dry bulb temperature), a statistical measure (e.g., mean), and a state.
* Hourly meteorological data files in digital TD3505 (NCDC, 2006a; NCDC, 2011b and NCDC, 2011c) and TD3280 (NCDC, 2005a; NCDC, 2011d and NCDC, 2011e) formats.
The data were used to develop a meteorological data to support relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) and radiological dose assessments. The surface meteorological data set covered the 2005-2010 period.
TD3280 is an older data file format that has been replaced by the TD3505 format. Hourly meteorological data files are available in TD3280 format through December, 2009. Digital data files are available for worldwide locations from NCDC. These data sets contain hourly values of dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind speed/direction and cloud cover.
These data sets allow analysis of coincident meteorological conditions. TD3505 data sets are available from NCDC, 2018b.
1.2.3        Identification and Selection for Analysis of Weather Monitoring Stations Located within the Site Climate Region ure 2.3-16 and Figure 2.3-17 present maps of the site climate region (identified in ure 2.3-12), with additional annotations of locations within that region of NOAA Automated face Observing Stations (ASOS stations) (Figure 2.3-16), and NOAA COOP stations NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-7                                      Rev. 0
 
le 2.3-5 and Table 2.3-6 present lists of the ASOS and COOP stations that are identified in ure 2.3-16 and Figure 2.3-17. It should be noted that the ground elevations shown in le 2.3-5 and Table 2.3-6 are given in ft. MSL (above Mean Sea Level) because that is the inology used by NOAA in describing the ASOS and COOP stations (NCDC, 2001a-x; and DC, 2019ab). However, the MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 ations used elsewhere in this section.
ubset of the ASOS stations presented in Figure 2.3-16 is selected for analysis. The following ria were used to select that subset of stations. The two first-order stations Rockford and dison are selected because of the extra statistical summaries in the form of NOAA annual mary LCD publications available for them. They also represent the geographical center of site climate region. Four additional stations located approximately near the four corners of the climate region are also selected to geographically bracket that region and avoid duplicate esentation of similar areas. Those four additional stations are: Baraboo (at the northwest ner of the region), Fond du Lac (at the northeast corner of the region), Freeport (at the thwest corner of the region), and DuPage County (at the southeast corner of the region).
of the COOP stations presented in Figure 2.3-17 and Table 2.3-6 are analyzed. Input rmation for that analysis includes statistics in the NOAA Clim-20 documents and updates for h station, that summarize climatic conditions during the 30-year period 1971 through 2000 DC, 2001a-x) and subsequent updates through 2018 (NCDC, 2019f-aa).
1.2.4      Extreme Wind atistic known as the "basic" wind speed is used for design and operating bases. Basic wind eds are 50 year recurrence interval nominal design 3-second gust wind speeds (mph) at
: t. (10.1 m) above ground for Exposure C category in Chapter 6 of ASCE, 2006.
eral sources are considered to determine the wind speeds for the SHINE site. The basic wind ed for the SHINE site is 90 mph (40.2 m/s), based on the plot of basic wind speeds in ure 6-1 of ASCE, 2006. Basic wind speeds reported in AFCCC, 1999 for hourly weather ions in the site climate region are as follows: 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for Madison, Wisconsin, and mph (40.2 m/s) for DuPage County Airport, West Chicago, Illinois. Consistency of the three es confirms the basis for selecting a value of 90 mph (40.2 m/s) for the project site. That e applies to a recurrence interval of 50 years.
tion C6.5.5 of ASCE, 2006 provides a method to calculate wind speeds for other recurrence rvals. Based on that method, a 100 year return period value is calculated by multiplying the ear return-period value (90 mph [40.2 m/s]) by a factor of 1.07. That approach produces a year return period three second gust wind speed for the project site area of 96.3 mph 0 m/s) (96.3 mph = 90 mph x 1.07).
ign of the facility structure (FSTR) against extreme wind is discussed in Subsection 3.2.1.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.3-8                                        Rev. 0
 
NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2018a) provides information on historic storm nts on a county basis. To use that database, 30 regional counties that are at least partially uded within the site climate region are selected and presented on the map in Figure 2.3-18.
se counties approximate the representative climate region defined above in Identification of ion with Climate Representative of the Site, and have a combined area of 21,056 square s (sq. mi.) (54,534 square kilometers [sq. km]). The 30 counties are listed in Table 2.3-7 S. Census Bureau, 2007).
NCDC Storm Events Database (NCDC, 2018a) was accessed to extract statistics on onal tornadoes and waterspouts. Information is extracted for the 30 counties that are either lly or partially included within the site climate region. Those tornado and waterspout istics, for the 68-year period May, 1950 through November, 2018, are presented in le 2.3-7. As presented in Table 2.3-7, total tornadoes and waterspouts reported in the county area during the 68-year period are 794 and 3, respectively.
ngest tornadoes in the database for Rock County (in which the site is located) are reviewed are found to be of intensity F2. Table 2.3-8 (NCDC, 2018a) provides additional details on the st intense Rock County tornadoes.
strongest tornadoes found in the database for the seven counties adjacent to Rock County:
e, Jefferson, Walworth, Boone, Winnebago, Stephenson, and Green counties, were ewed and found to be F3 and F4 storms in Boone County, Illinois, and F3 storms in Dane nty, Green County, and Jefferson County, Wisconsin. Table 2.3-9 (NCDC, 2018a) presents itional details on the strongest tornadoes in counties adjacent to Rock County.
A guidance for siting research reactors (IAEA, 1987) was reviewed. This guidance requires ign tornado information to be based on the maximum historical intensity within a radius of ut 100 km (62 mi.) from the site. For the SHINE site, a 100 km (62 mi.) radius partially nds outside of the representative site climate region included within the 30-county region cribed above. An F5 intensity tornado was recorded on 8 June 1984 in Iowa County, consin, at the town of Barneveld, which is located approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west hwest of the SHINE site (NCDC, 1984a).
1.2.6        Water Equivalent Precipitation Extremes subsection examines and compares water equivalent precipitation extremes within the site ate region, and locally near the site. Daily total water equivalent precipitation is measured at local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, Wisconsin, and several regional COOP ions within the site climate region.
MP value for the site is presented in Snowpack and Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP).
le 2.3-10 presents maximum recorded 24-hour and monthly water equivalent precipitation es for the local COOP station at Beloit, and the COOP stations located within the site climate on defined on the map in Figure 2.3-17.
regional historic maximum recorded 24-hour liquid-equivalent precipitation from the local oit station or for regional stations is 9.62 in. (24.43 cm) at Charmany Farm, Wisconsin. The NE Medical Technologies                        2.3-9                                      Rev. 0
 
86 cm) to 15 in. (38.10 cm) and flash flooding from the west side of Madison to Mazomanie, south to Belleville (NCDC, 2018a).
regional historic maximum monthly liquid-equivalent precipitation from records for either the l Beloit station or for regional stations is 18.27 in. (46.41 cm) at Portage, Wisconsin in June
: 8. The regional recorded maximum 24-hour snowfall is (21.0 in.) (53.34 cm) at Dalton, consin and the regional recorded maximum monthly snowfall is (50.4 in.) (128.0 cm) at ertown, Wisconsin in January 1979.
1.2.7        Hail, Snowstorms and Ice Storms an hail or sleet frequencies during winter, spring, summer, autumn, and annual periods for kford and Madison are listed in Table 2.3-11. Mean hail frequencies are less than one day season at both stations. Statistics are very similar at Rockford and Madison, verifying some sistency across the site climate region.
events that are either severe (with hail size exceeding 0.75 in. [1.91 cm] in diameter) or large h hail exceeding 1.00 in. [2.54 cm] in diameter) are reported to have occurred in Rock nty, Wisconsin on 11 occasions during the period 1961 - 1990, or with a frequency of roximately 0.37 occurrences per year (NCDC, 2002a).
Storm Events Database through December 31, 2018 lists the largest hailstones that Rock nty has experienced as follows: of diameter 3.00 in. (7.62 cm) on one occasion during June 5; of diameter 2.50 in. (6.35 cm) on one occasion during August 2006; of diameter 2.25 in.
2 cm) in August 2011; of diameter 2.00 in. (5.08 cm) on one occasion during June 1975 and occasion during June 1998 and one occasion in July 2012. The largest hailstone observed in k County remains at 3.00 in. (7.62 cm) in diameter observed in June 1975.
y total snowfall amounts are measured at the local NOAA COOP monitoring station at Beloit, consin, as well as at several regional COOP stations within the site climate region.
ximum recorded 24-hour snowfall for either the local Beloit station or for regional stations is 0 in. (53.34 cm) at Dalton, Wisconsin (Table 2.3-10). That event occurred on 2 January 1999.
as due to a major winter synoptic cyclone (the "Blizzard of 1999") that developed in Colorado, ved northeast through the Great Lakes, then entered Canada (NCDC, 1999a and NCDC, 0a). On 2 January 1999 the synoptic surface low was centered at the southern tip of Illinois. A m maritime tropical air mass with temperatures in the 80s&deg;F was present to the south, and a tinental arctic air mass with temperatures primarily in the teens &deg;F was present to the north.
area of heavy snow covered the site climate region. This blizzard paralyzed south central and theast Wisconsin. Ten to 21 in. (25.40 to 53.34 cm) of snow were deposited and wind gusts 5 to 63 mph (20.1 to 28.2 m/s) occurred. Nearly all cities and villages declared snow ergencies, and airports were closed. Visibility in blowing snow was typically 0.5 mi. (0.8 km).
ctural damage to buildings and power lines was reported.
rall historic maximum monthly snowfall from records for either the local Beloit station or for onal stations is 50.4 in. (128.0 cm) at Watertown, Wisconsin. That month was January 1979.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.3-10                                      Rev. 0
 
clusions regarding climate region representativeness.
now pack value for the site is presented in Snowpack and Probable Maximum Precipitation P).
mean number of days with freezing rain or drizzle is 2 days per year at both Madison, consin and Rockford, Illinois (Table 2.3-4). A summary of 14 ice storms that affected Rock nty, Wisconsin during the period 1995-2011 is presented in Table 2.3-12 (NCDC, 2011a).
t summary indicates the following.
: a. Several ice storms, as many as two or three, can occur per year.
: b. Ice can accumulate periodically or during a consecutive period of anywhere from approximately 2 hours to 11 hours.
: c. Ice accumulations typically range from one-tenth to one-quarter inch, but can reach one-half inch.
: d. Hazardous driving conditions are a typical result of the storms.
ates to the NCDC Storm Events Database through December 31, 2018 (NCDC, 2018a) did show additional records of heavy snow and ice storms in Rock County since 2011 through ember 31, 2018.
0-year return-interval atmospheric ice load due to freezing rain is estimated to be 0.75 in.
1 cm) for the site (ASCE, 2006). The estimated concurrent three-second wind gust is 40 mph 9 m/s). A 500-year return-interval atmospheric ice load due to freezing rain is estimated to be in. (3.81 cm) for the site (ASCE, 2006). The estimated concurrent three-second wind gust ASCE, 2006 is 40 mph (17.9 m/s).
1.2.8      Thunderstorms and Lightning nderstorm statistics for the regional NOAA first order weather stations at Rockford, Illinois Madison, Wisconsin are published and available for the site climate region (NCDC, 2019b; NCDC, 2019c). Thunderstorms occur during an average of 43.1 days per year at Rockford, 39.5 days per year at Madison. Mean seasonal thunderstorm frequencies for Rockford and dison are listed in Table 2.3-13 (NCDC, 2019c and NCDC, 2019b). Thunderstorms are most uent in summer and least frequent in winter at both stations.
mean frequency of lightning strikes to earth is calculated via a method from the Electric er Research Institute (EPRI), per the U. S. Department of Agriculture Rural Utilities Service DA, 1998). The method assumes a relationship between the average number of nderstorm days per year (T), and the number of lightning strikes to earth per square mile per r (N). The mathematical relationship is as follows:
N = [0.31][T]                          (Equation 2.3-1) ed on the average number of thunderstorm days per year at Rockford during the 63-year od 1955-2018 (43.1, which is slightly higher than the value of 39.5 days for Madison and is efore used here), the frequency of lightning strikes to earth per square mile per year is 13.4 strikes per square km per year) for the site and surrounding area. For comparison, based on NE Medical Technologies                    2.3-11                                        Rev. 0
 
e therefore is shown to be a reasonable indicator.
1.2.9        Snowpack and Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP)
CE 7-05 (ASCE, 2006) provides site-specific estimates of the 50-year snow load. Based on location of the SHINE facility, the 50-year ground snow load is 30 pounds per square foot t2). A factor of 1.22 is used to account for the 100-year recurrence interval. The resulting
-year ground snow load as 36.6 lb/ft2 (178.7 kilograms per square meter [kg/m2]).
weight of the 48-hour PMP for the site vicinity was derived by multiplying the 48-hour PMP nches) from Figure 21 of USDOC, 1978 by the weight of one inch of water (one inch of water ering one square foot weighs 5.2 lb [2.4 kg]).The estimated 48-hour PMP for the site from ure 21 of USDOC, 1978 is 34 in. (86.4 cm). The resulting estimated weight of the 48-hour P for the site is 176.8 lb/ft2 (863.2 kg/m2).
1.2.10      Design Dry Bulb and Wet Bulb Temperatures design basis dry bulb temperatures (DBTs) and wet bulb temperatures (WBTs) are defined he site and its climate area. Those include the following statistics:
: a. Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent
: b. Mean coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBT
: c. Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent
: d. MCWB at the 2.0 percent DBT
: e. Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent
: f. Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent
: g. Maximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent
: h. Maximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent
: i. Minimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent
: j. 100-year return maximum annual DBT
: k. MCWB at the 100-year return maximum annual DBT
: l. 100-year return maximum annual WBT
: m. 100-year return minimum annual DBT tistics for (a)-(g) are readily available from ASHRAE, 2017. Since those statistics are available a well-known reference, no additional data analysis is required. ASHRAE, 2017 includes es for the following stations in the site climate region: Fond du Lac, Wisconsin; Madison, consin; Rockford, Illinois; and DuPage County Airport, Illinois. These stations represent atic conditions in the northern, central and southern portions of the climate region, pectively (Figure 2.3-16). Worst-case (bounding) values for (a)-(g) are selected from those stations. To maintain thermodynamic consistency between DBT and coincident WBTs, T/ MCWB pairs are retained for a single station. The resulting statistics are listed in le 2.3-14.
tistics for the maximum and minimum DBT with an annual exceedance probability of ercent (items [h] and [i] above) are not available from ASHRAE, 2017. In lieu of values from er sources, values are extracted from published DBT and wet-bulb depression joint-frequency NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-12                                      Rev. 0
 
100-year return interval maximum annual DBTs and WBTs (items [j], [l] and [m] above) were mated using a technique described in ASHRAE, 2017. The technique estimates the n-year rn-interval extreme temperature from a series of annual maximum and minimum peratures. The ASHRAE technique uses the following equation:
Tn = M + I Fs                    (Equation 2.3-2) ere:
* Tn is the n-year return period value of the extreme temperature computed, in years
* M is the mean annual extreme maximum or minimum temperature
* I is +1 if the maximum temperature is computed; -1 if the minimum temperature is computed
* s is the standard deviation of the annual extreme maximum or minimum temperatures
* n is the return period in years (n =100 for a 100-year return interval).
6                          n F = - ------  0.5772 + ln ln  ------------  (Equation 2.3-3) n - 1 ere:
* F is a function that converts the standard deviation of annual extreme temperature parameter s (such as the annual extreme temperature in &deg;F) to a new variable that is linearly related to the n-year return-interval extreme temperature Tn.
ce the MCWB coincident with the 100-year return interval maximum DBT is required (item [k]
ve), this technique is only applied at meteorological stations in the climate region which had:
digital records of hourly DBT and coincident WBT and (2) published annual extreme DBTs
, NOAA annual summary LCD publications, such as NCDC 2011f). The published annual eme DBTs are required to check annual extreme DBTs extracted from the digital records.
re were only two stations in the climate region which meet these requirements: Rockford, ois and Madison, Wisconsin.
ASHRAE technique is applied to hourly TD3280 and TD3505 digital datasets (NCDC, 1b-e; NCDC, 2011g) for each of these stations. The extreme DBT and WBT are first tified for each year which has at least 90 percent of possible hourly coverage of DBT and T. This produces a time-series of annual maximum and minimum DBTs and WBTs for ears for Madison and 30 years for Rockford through 2010. Each time-series is then input into ASHRAE technique. The resulting estimated 100-year return period annual DBTs and WBTs ms [j], [l] and [m] above) are listed in Table 2.3-15.
estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford (104.8&deg;F [40.4&#xba;C];
le 2.3-15) is only 0.8&deg;F (0.44&#xba;C) above the record maximum DBT at Rockford (104&deg;F 0&#xba;C]) (NCDC, 2011h). Instead of attempting to derive a statistical relationship between the T and WBT useful over the short DBT interval of 104&deg;F (40.0&#xba;C) to 104.8&deg;F (40.4&#xba;C), the WB coincident with the estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford 4.8&deg;F [40.4&#xba;C]) are taken to be the WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT at NE Medical Technologies                            2.3-13                                Rev. 0
 
the 100-year return maximum annual DBT at Rockford is 80&deg;F (26.7&#xba;C).
milar approach is taken for the 100-year return maximum annual DBT for Madison. The
-year return maximum annual DBT for Madison (104.3&deg;F [40.2&#xba;C]; Table 2.3-15) is only 0.3&deg;F 7&#xba;C) above the record maximum DBT for Madison (104&deg;F [40.0&#xba;C]) (NCDC, 2011f).
refore, the MCWB coincident with the estimated 100-year return maximum annual DBT is n to be the WBT coincident with the record maximum DBT for Madison. The WBT coincident the record maximum DBT at Madison is 75&deg;F (23.9&#xba;C) (NCDC, 2011d and NCDC, 2011b).
refore, the estimated MCWB coincident with the 100-year return maximum annual DBT for dison is 75&deg;F (23.9&#xba;C). The 100 year maximum annual DBT and MCWB pairs (items [j] and [k]
ve) for Rockford and Madison are listed in Table 2.3-15.
estimated 100-year return maximum and minimum annual DBTs described above were ved from 53 years of data from Madison and 30 years from Rockford using data through
: 0. Subsequent updates to the climatological data show that the record maximum DBT at kford has increased by 1&deg;F (0.55 &#xba;C) from 104&deg;F (40.0&#xba;C) to 105&deg;F (40.6&#xba;C) in July 2012 DC, 2011h and NCDC, 2019c). The record maximum DBT for Madison (104&deg;F [40.0&#xba;C]) set 976 tied in July 2012, and thus is unchanged (NCDC, 2011f and NCDC, 2019b). The record imum temperatures at Rockford (-27&deg;F [-32.8&#xba;C] set in 1982 [NCDC, 2019c]) and Madison
&deg;F [-38.3&#xba;C] set in 1951 [NCDC, 2019b]) are also both unchanged. The subsequent minor nges in temperature extremes represent no significant changes to the estimated 100-year rn maximum and minimum annual DBTs and extreme WBTs derived from data through 2010 1.2.11        Extreme Dry Bulb Temperatures additional review of regional extreme DBTs is done using NOAA COOP climate monitoring ions in the site climate region. The locations of those stations are shown in Figure 2.3-17.
COOP climate monitoring stations do not measure WBT and do not record hourly DBTs.
se stations only record maximum and minimum daily DBTs and daily precipitation totals.
refore, it is not possible to identify WBTs coincident with the extreme DBTs recorded at those ions.
le 2.3-16 presents extreme DBTs recorded at the climate monitoring stations (NCDC, 1a-x; NCDC, 2019f-aa). For completeness, Table 2.3-16 also includes the extreme DBTs orded at the two first-order stations in the site climate region (Madison, Wisconsin and kford, Illinois) from NCDC, 2019b and NCDC, 2019c.
arding the climate region, the overall extreme DBTs for the climate region are: a maximum of
&deg;F (42.8&#xba;C) recorded on 14 July 1936 at Marengo in Boone County, Illinois, and a minimum 45&deg;F (-42.8&#xba;C) recorded on 30 January 1951 at Baraboo in Sauk County, Wisconsin.
ce Marengo is a COOP station, the WBT coincident with the extreme DBT at Marengo (109&deg;F 8&#xba;C]) is not available. Further, DBT and coincident WBT data in digital format that are ilable for stations in the climate region do not extend as far back as 1936 (Table 2.3-5).
refore, it is necessary to estimate a WBT coincident with the overall extreme DBT.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-14                                    Rev. 0
: a. A simple graphical approach is appropriate because at the extreme high end of the DBT range there are only a small number of observations. Use of an objective numerical technique to project larger DBT values using a small population as input is unjustified because it is effectively no less subjective than a graphical approach.
: b. The requirement is only for a mean coincident WBT value. A mean WBT value is simply identified for any DBT value on the graph, therefore a set of such means is easily plotted, and form the basis of an extrapolation line.
: c. Published DBT/WBT depression joint frequency distribution (JFD) tables are available for Madison and Rockford (NCDC, 1996a). The tables are suitable for use in sketching the graphical relationship between regional DBT and WBT during conditions of the peak DBT.
closest first-order station to Marengo is Rockford, Illinois which is located approximately mi. (40.2 km) west of Marengo (Figure 2.3-17). Therefore, the DBT/WBT depression JFD e from Rockford is used to estimate the WBT coincident with an overall extreme DBT of
&deg;F (42.8&#xba;C) recorded at Marengo. The upper DBT limit of the DBT/WBT depression JFD table Rockford is 103&deg;F (39.4&#xba;C). Therefore, it is necessary to extrapolate the upper end of the table to the observed DBT of 109&deg;F (42.8&#xba;C). Graphical extrapolation of the DBT/WBT ression relationship to a DBT of 109&deg;F (42.8&#xba;C) results in an estimated WBT depression of F (16.7&#xba;C), which corresponds to a MCWB of 79&deg;F (26.1&#xba;C) (109&deg;F - 30&deg;F = 79&deg;F). Therefore, estimated MCWB coincident with the overall extreme DBT of 109&deg;F (42.8&#xba;C) at Marengo is F (26.1&#xba;C).
1.2.12        Restrictive Dispersion Conditions or air pollution episodes are typically a result of persistent surface high pressure weather tems that cause light and variable surface winds and stagnant meteorological conditions for or more consecutive days. Estimates of the stagnation frequency are provided in (NOAA, 9; Figures 1 and 2). Those estimates indicate that, on average, the site location experiences than 10 days with stagnation per year. When stagnation occurs, stagnation lasts, on rage, less than two days.
1.2.13        Air Quality site is located in Rock County, Wisconsin which is part of the Rockford-Janesville-Beloit rstate Air Quality Control Region (WDNR, 2013). This air quality control region combines cultural activities with the Beloit-Janesville, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois urban-industrial as. The Wisconsin portion of the air quality control region, Rock County, is mostly flat to gently ng farmland. Industry in the region consists of manufacturing, foundry operations and trical power plants (WDNR, 2013). Rock County is currently in attainment for criteria utants (ozone, particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxide, and lead EPA, 2019).
ntenance areas are those geographic areas with a history of non-attainment but are currently eting the National Ambient Air Quality Standards. In April 2004, the EPA designated the wing 10 counties in eastern Wisconsin as being in non-attainment with the 8-hour ozone air lity standard: Door, Kewaunee, Manitowoc, Sheyboygan, Washington, Ozaukee, Waukesha, NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-15                                        Rev. 0
 
EPA, 2019). Sheboygan county is situated to the east of the Rockford Janesville Beloit rstate Air Quality Control Region, along the western shore of Lake Michigan.
ctober 2015, the USEPA strengthened the 8-hour National Ambient Air Quality Standard AQS) for ground-level ozone by decreasing the standard from 75 parts per billion (ppb) to ppb. The new standard became effective on December 28, 2015 (USEPA, 2015).
May 1, 2018 the USEPA published the list of counties that are not in attainment with the ppb standard based on ozone monitoring data. This was in advance of the Final Rule that the EPA issued on June 4, 2018 (USEPA, 2018). A number of counties in the vicinity of the NE facility are out of compliance with the 2015 revised ozone standard: Door, Kenosha, nitowoc, Milwaukee, Ozaukee and Sheboygan. Rock County, Wisconsin is in compliance with strengthened ozone standard.
EPA guidance (USEPA, 1990) states that a Class I visibility impact analysis is necessary for a or source locating within 100 km (62 mi.) of a Federal Class I area. Class I areas are national ks and wilderness areas that are potentially sensitive to visibility impairment. Table 2.3-17 the nearest Class I areas to the SHINE site (NPS, 2011). The table shows that the closest eral Class I area is the Rainbow Lake Wilderness Area, Wisconsin which is located roximately 455 km (approximately 283 mi.) northwest of the site in far northern Wisconsin.
1.2.14      Climate Change nds in global climatic conditions are currently the subject of considerable discussion in the ntific community and in the media. There are differences of opinion regarding the nature and ses of such trends. There is also controversy regarding the reliability of projections.
erally, projections of climatic changes have been done at global scales. Attempts to predict nges at regional scales, for example for the Midwestern U.S., have been problematic. And, ainly, predictions of changes at a single station or at a relatively small area, such as the site ate region, are not reliable.
not appropriate to attempt to predict climate changes in the site climate region because of above uncertainties. It is also not appropriate to try to use such predictions to enhance, or ace, the standard approach of identifying historical extreme climatic conditions in the site ate region. Plant design is most reliably based on a standard approach of projecting via ntifically defensible statistical methods, using historic statistics as input.
nevertheless valid to examine historic records for indications of long-term trends for rmational purposes. Trends of interest are those of climate elements such as temperature, ssure, or winds that are sustained over periods of several decades or longer (AMS, 2012).
nds of the following parameters are examined, for the climate region within which the SHINE is located:
: a. Values, for six separate 30-year division normal periods, of mean annual dry bulb temperature and mean annual precipitation. Division normals are climate normals for 30-year periods within a climate division. Climate divisions are segments of individual states that the NOAA has identified as being climatologically homogeneous. By definition, NE Medical Technologies                    2.3-16                                        Rev. 0
 
labeled WI-08 South Central Wisconsin (NCDC, 2002b and NCDC, 2002c). The normals for the most recent period (1981-2010) were taken from the NOAA dataset (Arguez et al., 2012). Variation of mean annual dry bulb temperature and mean annual precipitation from division normal data are identified in the top half of Table 2.3-18.
: b. During six separate single-decade periods of record, extremes at Madison, Wisconsin of hourly dry bulb temperature, one-day liquid-equivalent precipitation, one-day snowfall, and strongest tornadoes. Variations of those historic meteorological parameters are identified in the bottom half of Table 2.3-18. The ending years of the time periods are selected to match those of the normal periods in the top half of Table 2.3-18, but without overlaps of the beginning years of the time periods, and with time period lengths of 10 years instead of the 30-year length of the normal periods.
statistics in Table 2.3-18 show the following:
: a. State climate division temperature State division normal temperature fell by 1.7 percent (0.8&#xba;F) (0.4&#xba;C) from 46.7 to 45.9&#xba;F (8.2 to 7.7&#xba;C) during the first three division normal periods combined, then fell and rose by 0.4 percent (0.2&#xba;F) (0.1&#xba;C) during the fourth and fifth periods respectively. The normal temperature rose by 1.1 percent (0.5&#xba;F) (0.3&#xba;C) in the most recent sixth period. The maximum value (46.7&#xba;F) (8.2&#xba;C) occurred during the first period (1931 to 1960).
: b. Division normal precipitation State climate division precipitation fell by 0.35 percent (0.11 in.) (0.28 cm) from 31.24 to 31.13 in. (79.35 to 79.07 cm) during the first two division normal periods, then rose by 9.5 percent (2.98 in.) (7.57 cm) from 31.13 to 34.11 in. (79.07 to 86.64 cm) during the third through fifth division normal periods. The normal precipitation rose by 1.1 percent (0.37 in.) (0.94 cm) from 34.11 in. to 34.48 in. (86.64 cm to 87.58 cm) during the most recent sixth period. The maximum value (34.48 in.) (87.58 cm) occurred during the sixth and most recent period (1981 to 2010).
: c. Maximum daily precipitation Maximum daily precipitation at Madison fell during the second (30 percent) and fourth (5 percent) periods, and rose during the third (6 percent), fifth (23 percent), and sixth (17 percent) periods. The historical period maximum (5.28 in.) (13.41 cm) occurred during the most recent (sixth) period (2001 to 2010).
: d. Extreme high daily snowfall Maximum 24-hour snowfall at Madison fell during periods three (15 percent), five (18 percent), and six (16 percent), and rose during periods two (48 percent) and four (27 percent). Maximum occurred during the fourth period (17.3 in.) (43.94 cm).
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-17                                        Rev. 0
 
The historical period extreme high dry bulb temperature (104&#xba;F) (40.0&#xba;C) occurred during the third climate period (1971 to 1980). The lowest extreme high (97&#xba;F) (36.1&#xba;C) occurred during the second climate period (1961 to 1970). Otherwise, this parameter value was relatively constant at 101 or 102&#xba;F (38.3 or 38.9&#xba;C), with exception of the second and most recent periods, during which the parameter was 97&#xba;F (36.1&#xba;C) and 98&#xba;F (36.7&#xba;C),
respectively.
: f. Extreme low dry bulb temperature The historical period extreme low dry bulb temperature (-37&#xba;F) (-38.3&#xba;C) occurred in 1951 during the first climate period (1951 to 1960). Warmest extreme low (-19&#xba;F) (-28.3&#xba;C) occurred during the most recent period (2001 to 2010). Otherwise, this parameter value was relatively constant at around -29&#xba;F (-33.9&#xba;C).
: g. Strongest tornadoes The strongest tornado recorded within the site climate region was an F4 tornado (Table 2.3-9) observed in 1967 during the second climate period (1961 to 1970).
Otherwise, strongest tornado intensity values within the site climate region were relatively constant at F2 or F3 (Table 2.3-8 and Table 2.3-9). In order to satisfy IAEA guidance (IAEA, 1987) tornado intensity within approximately 100 km (62 mi.) of the site also was considered. An F5 tornado occurred during the fourth climate period (1981 to 1990) at the town of Barneveld, Wisconsin (NCDC, 1984a), which is outside of the site climate region but within 100 km (62 mi.) of the site.
rall, changes in state division normal (30-year period) mean precipitation and temperature ng the 79-year historical period 1931 to 2010 do not indicate consistent trends of rate of ease, or decrease, with time. Between-decade changes of short-term extremes of daily cipitation and extreme high and low temperatures during the 79-year historical period 1931 to 0 do not indicate consistent trends, or increase in severity, with time. The highest 30-year an annual precipitation (34.48 in.) (87.58 cm) and daily (5.28 in.) (13.41 cm) extreme liquid-ivalent precipitation occurred during the most recent available periods, but those values are part of consistent long-term trends.
year 2010 marks the end of the most recent 30-year climate period. Recent climatological a for Madison through the end of 2018 (NCDC, 2019b) show that the values for the extreme DBT (104&#xba;F) (40.0&#xba;C); extreme low DBT (-37&#xba;F) (-38.3&#xba;C); extreme high daily precipitation 8 in.) (13.41 cm) and the extreme high daily snowfall (17.3 in.) (43.94 cm) in Table 2.3-18 e not changed.
2        SITE METEOROLOGY purpose of this local climate analysis is to understand dispersion conditions in the vicinity of site. That characterization is input to, and provides a context for, assessment of atmospheric act of the facility on the environment.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-18                                      Rev. 0
 
es, and atmospheric stability distribution.
2.1          Topography site is located approximately at the center of Rock County, Wisconsin, about 13 mi.
9 km) north of the Illinois/Wisconsin border, and 2.5 mi. (4.0 km) east of the Rock River. The is located within till plains glacial deposits on the Central Lowland Province of the Interior ns Division of the United States. Within a radial distance from the site of approximately 10 mi.
1 km), additional ground surface features include the following:
: a. There is terminal kettle-moraine topography in the central, north, and east sections, which represent effects of the last advance of the continental glacier, including uneven hills and ridges, varying drainage patterns, and gently rolling terrain (WISDOT, 2017).
: b. There is dissected upland with isolated bluffs in the west and southwest sections, part of the driftless area (Regional Climate) which was not overrun by ice during the last continental glaciation (Moran and Hopkins, 2002).
: c. The Rock River watershed, the main waterway, bisects the county from north to south (Rock County, 2012). The Rock River valley is typically less than 1 mi. (1.6 km) wide, with minor slopes at the edges of the river floodplain with heights of approximately 50 ft (15.2 m).
: d. Most land is used for agriculture, including corn and soybean farming (Rand McNally, 1982 and 2005).
: e. The main urban centers of Janesville and Beloit are located along the Rock River.
: f. The finished site grade elevation is approximately 825 ft. (251 m) NAVD 88. The project site and adjacent ground within a radius of approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) is flat farmland.
Within a 10 mi. (16.1 km) radius from the site, topographic elevations range from approximately 750 ft. (230 m) NAVD 88 along the Rock River, to approximately 1033 ft.
(315 m) NAVD 88 at the highest bluffs (USGS, 1980). Therefore, the topography within a 10 mi. (16.1 km) radius ranges from approximately 72 ft. (21.9 m) below the site elevation, to 206 ft. (62.8 m) NAVD 88 above the site elevation.
2.2          Local Data Sources support relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) and radiological dose assessments, a ace meteorological data set covering the period of 2005-2010 was developed as described w.
face meteorological data were available from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport RA) in Janesville, Wisconsin (NOAA station identifier KJVL). That airport is located roximately 0.25 mi. (0.40 km) west of the site. The SWRA meteorological monitoring station n automated weather observation station (AWOS) with precipitation sensors installed OS IIIP). The FAA describes the specifications of an AWOS system in an Advisory Circular A, 2017). Specifications from this Advisory Circular are listed in Table 2.3-19. The AWOS mometer height at SWRA for the period of interest in this study (2005 to 2010) is 26 ft.
m) above ground level (NCDC, 2012).
FAA Advisory Circular (FAA, 2017) describes the FAA standard for procurement, struction, installation, activation, and maintenance of non-Federal AWOS systems. That NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-19                                      Rev. 0
 
ss more frequent calibration is specified by the FAA region. Calibrations are required to be e by a qualified technician with FAA verification authority and witnessed by a qualified FAA
-Federal inspector. Facilities Maintenance Log and Technical Performance Record forms are ntained. In addition, NCDC subjects surface meteorological data collected at AWOS stations h as SWRA to documented quality assurance and analysis procedures (Del Greco et al.,
6).
w meteorological data from SWRA are obtained from NCDC (NCDC, 2011g). Hourly dry bulb perature, humidity, wind speed, and wind direction data are extracted from the raw data.
le 2.3-20 shows the annual data recovery rates for dry bulb temperature, humidity, wind ed, and wind direction. The table shows that the annual data recovery rate for each variable eeded 90 percent for 2005, 2006, 2008 to 2010, and that the recovery rate was approximately percent for each variable in 2007. Data from 2005 through 2010 are chosen for analysis in er to produce a data set with the most recent contiguous 5 years of data, and with 5 years of a having recovery rates better than 90 percent. Table 2.3-21 presents a summary of eorological parameter statistics from the SWRA during the 2005 to 2010 period.
2.3        Plans to Access Local Meteorological Data during License Period eorological measurements will be available for use in responding to accidental radiological ases or other emergencies, and other routine purposes that require access to meteorological rmation during the licensing period. That meteorological information will be obtained for local ernment weather monitoring stations that observe wind and other surface meteorological ameters on an hourly basis.
en needed during an emergency, real-time hourly surface meteorological measurements of d direction, wind speed, air temperature, and weather type will be accessed by SHINE ugh government data sources. Access will be attempted during the emergency in the wing sequence, until reliable data are obtained, as follows:
: a. Internet access to hourly surface weather observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at URL: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KJVL.html.
: b. Telephone access to an automated synthesized voice recording of the most recent hourly surface observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at number: (608) 758-1723.
: c. If weather observations are not available from the SWRA AWOS, then weather information from another station with hourly meteorological data in the Site Climate Region will be used. The following stations will be used, in the order listed below. The stations are listed in order of increasing distance from Janesville, Wisconsin:
: 1. Rockford, Illinois: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KRFD.html
: 2. Monroe, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KEFT.html
: 3. Burlington, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KBUU.html
: 4. Madison, Wisconsin: http://www.weather.gov/data/obhistory/KMSN.html ing normal operations, hourly data will be obtained by internet access to hourly surface ther observations recorded at the SWRA AWOS, at URL: https://w1.weather.gov/data/
istory/KJVL.html.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-20                                      Rev. 0
 
al Data Sources describes the meteorological monitoring system at the SWRA in Janesville, consin. As described in that subsection, wind speed and direction measurements are ected at the 26 ft. (7.9 m) level. Wind speed and direction from the 26 ft. (7.9 m) level are d to determine JFDs that are input to relative atmospheric concentration (/Q) and ological dose assessments in this report.
ure 2.3-19 through Figure 2.3-35 show the annual, monthly, and seasonal wind roses from RA. The period of record on which those plots are based is the six years from January 1, 5 through December 31, 2010 (Local Data Sources). That period of record is also used for input to /Q and radiological dose assessments in this report.
annual wind rose (Figure 2.3-19) shows dominant wind frequencies from the west proximately 8 percent of the period) and from the south (approximately 7.5 percent of the od). The remaining directions include a group (N, E, SSW, SW, WNW, and NW) with uencies of occurrence that range from approximately 5 to 7 percent of the period, and ther group (NNE, NE, ENE, ESE, SE, SSE, WSW, and NNW) with frequencies of occurrence range from approximately 3.5 to 5 percent of the period. The multi-modal nature of the ual wind rose reflects airflows associated with seasonal shifts of mean North American ace pressure belts and centers, seasonal changes in paths and frequencies of synoptic-scale ace cyclones and anticyclones that move across the area, and seasonal changes in uency of development of synoptic surface fronts (Trewartha, 1954; Trewartha, 1961; Rand Nally, 2005; and EDS, 1968). The corresponding monthly wind roses are provided for rence in Figure 2.3 Figure 2.3-31).
winter season wind rose (Figure 2.3-32) shows most frequent wind directions during that son from the west, northwest and north. This is a reflection of polar and arctic air masses that from Canada that are dominant during the winter. The large Icelandic low pressure center intensifies during Northern Hemisphere winter causes a pressure gradient pattern that is nted in a northwest to southeast direction over Canada and the U.S. that guides surface high ssure systems that contain the polar and arctic air masses in a southeast direction from ada to the Midwest and eastern U.S. Upper air meridional flow (relatively parallel to lines of itude) is more prevalent than zonal flow (relatively parallel to lines of latitude), and surface onic storms more frequently occupy the Alberta storm track that extends from southwest ada into the central U.S.
spring season wind rose (Figure 2.3-33) shows dominant wind direction frequencies from east, south, and west. During spring, the Icelandic low weakens, the southwest U.S. surface mal low intensifies, and the north Atlantic Azores high pressure cell intensifies. Because of northward shift of the subtropical high pressure belt (including the Azores high), storm tems and Canadian air masses are not always pushed towards the southeast, but rather stay her north during their movement over the Midwest and eastern U.S. Intensification of the thwest U.S. thermal low increases winds from the south over the central U.S. Warm and ionary fronts form more frequently over the Midwest U.S. at the boundaries between northern southern air masses. Surface pressure troughs at those fronts draw moist modified maritime ical air from the south that results in surface convergence, lifting, and formation of cipitation at the fronts. The combined results of these changes are increased frequencies of t, south, and east winds as air masses converge on the area from more locations in the thwest, south, and southeast U.S. than during winter.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-21                                          Rev. 0
 
ction behind weak cold fronts as they move eastward. Surface lows and precipitation are ely suppressed. The summer season wind rose (Figure 2.3-34) shows dominant wind ction frequencies from the south and southwest, reflecting flow out of the relatively slow-ving surface high pressure centers.
autumn wind rose (Figure 2.3-35) reverts back to some cool season circulation patterns, ch are also characteristic of the spring season. It shows dominant wind direction frequencies the south and west, but east winds occur less frequently than during the spring season.
t winds are less frequent because the subtropical surface pressure ridge extends westward the north Atlantic to the central U.S. during autumn, whereas it is strongest off the Atlantic stline during Spring. Airflow therefore moves north out of surface anticyclones that are forced by the mean autumn subtropical ridge position across the east central U.S., and ow relatively infrequently moves towards the west.
d roses were generated for regional climate stations from TD-3505 hourly surface dataset through 2010 (NCDC, 2018b). The climate stations (Baraboo, Wisconsin; Madison, consin; Fond du Lac, Wisconsin; Freeport, Illinois; Rockford, Illinois; and Du Page County ort, Illinois) were identified in Subsection 2.3.1.2.3. Rockford and Madison represent the graphical center of the site climate region. Baraboo, Fond du Lac, Freeport and Du Page nty represent the northwest, northeast, southwest and southeast corners of the climate on, respectively.
ure 2.3-36 shows a comparison of annual wind roses for the SWRA in Janesville and the six onal stations. The wind roses are arranged in the figure to match the approximate physical tions of the stations relative to Janesville, Wisconsin. The annual wind rose from Fond du shows a bimodal southwest and northeast wind direction distribution. The northeast winds ear to be local effects of nearby Lake Winnebago, which is located approximately three miles heast of the Fond du Lac airport (Figure 2.3-16). However, the annual wind roses at the other regional stations (Baraboo, Madison, Freeport, Rockford, and Du Page County Airport) show rall multi-modal patterns similar to the annual wind rose from Janesville. This consistency fies the representativeness of wind measurements from the SWRA in Janesville for purposes ispersion modeling.
2.5            Atmospheric Stability quill stability class is derived from hourly wind speed, ceiling height, and sky cover asurements from the AWOS at the SWRA in Janesville, Wisconsin (Local Data Sources). The quill stability class is derived using computer code from USEPA, 1999 which implements the hod described by Turner, 1964. Table 2.3-22 shows the joint data recovery of wind speed, d direction, and the computed Pasquill stability class. Joint data recovery exceeds 90 percent 2005, 2006, and 2008 to 2010 and is 86 percent for 2007.
le 2.3-23 presents the annual Pasquill class frequency distributions for the combined local a period 2005 to 2010, and each individual year in the combined period. This table shows that Pasquill class "D" stability class is the most frequently occurring stability class for each year for the combined period. The Pasquill "A" class is the least frequently occurring class. Both hese results are consistent with generally observed stability class climatologies. A similar ribution is also presented, for example, in Stern et al. (1984).
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-22                                        Rev. 0
 
/Q and radiological dose calculations presented later in this report.
udy of historical wind data from SWRA was conducted in 2018 to assess historical changes ind speed/direction. The study compared data from SWRA from January 2000 through ember 2010 with data from January 2007 through December 2017. The datasets jointly esent an 18-year (inclusive) period with some overlap that includes the data from SWRA cribed in Table 2.3-20 through Table 2.3-30 and Figure 2.3-19 through Figure 2.3-35. The y documented small and insignificant differences between the distributions of wind speeds/
ctions and Pasquill stability classes between the two data sets. Therefore, the JFDs sented in Table 2.3-24 through Table 2.3-30 based on 2005-2010 data represent atmospheric sport and dispersion characteristics at the SHINE site.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.3-23                                    Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Selected Characteristics of Wisconsin Physiographic Provinces Characteristics are based on Moran and Hopkins (2002) and Rand McNally (2005).
Eastern Ridges and Lake Superior Lowlands          Northern Highlands                Central Plain              Lowlands              Western Uplands Vegetation    Broadleaf deciduous and      Agriculture is limited by      Marginally suited for  Broadleaf deciduous and      Broadleaf deciduous needleleaf evergreen trees  lakes, swamps, and short        agriculture. Irrigation  needleleaf evergreen                  trees growing season          required. Tamarack bogs                trees occur above impervious lake clays.
Topography    Gently sloping plains with  The southernmost portion      Relatively flat or gently      Numerous glacial            Escaped recent steep escarpments at the    of the Canadian Shield of      rolling topography with      landforms, lowest        glaciation, allowing southern shore of Lake        crystalline bedrock.        occasional sandstone    elevations of Wisconsin. streams and rivers to Superior.            Weathering and erosion      mesas, buttes, pinnacles.      Lake Winnebago is          form steep valleys.
have reduced terrain to                                    remnant of a larger    Portion of the uplands are nearly a plain. Scattered                                  glacial lake. Niagara        referred to as the hills of resistant bedrock                              cuesta is a rock ridge in driftless area due to the remain. Lake and swamp                                  the northeast in Door and  lack of glacial debris or terrain.                                        Waukesha Counties.                  drift.
Elevations      Several hundred feet          1,400 to 1.650 feet      750 to 850 feet NAVD 88    Topographic relief of 100  Approximately 1,000 to above elevation of the              NAVD 88                                        to 200 feet above the      1,200 feet NAVD 88, Great Lakes                                                                        elevation of Lake            including some Michigan (mean lake          topographic relief elevation is        approaching 500 feet.
approximately 600 ft.      Rock bluffs, mounds NAVD 88).          (highest approximately 1,716 ft. NAVD 88).
NE Medical Technologies                                              2.3-24                                                                        Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Madison, Wisconsin Climatic Means and Extremes (Sheet 1 of 2)
NE Medical Technologies                            2.3-25                          Rev. 0
 
ferences:
DC, 2019b NE Medical Technologies 2.3-26 Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Rockford, Illinois Climatic Means and Extremes (Sheet 1 of 2)
NE Medical Technologies                              2.3-27                          Rev. 0
 
ferences:
DC, 2019c NE Medical Technologies 2.3-28 Rev. 0
 
able 2.3 Madison, Wisconsin and Rockford, Illinois Additional Climatic Means and Extremes (Sheet 1 of 2)
Parameter                Period            Madison            Rockford an number of days with rain January                      5                  6 drizzle February                    5                  5 CDC, 1996a)
March                      10                  11 April                      15                15 May                        16                16 June                        15                14 July                        15                14 August                      14                13 September                  13                13 October                    13                13 November                    10                  11 December                    7                  8 Annual                      138                139 an number of days with      January                      1                  1 ezing rain or drizzle February                  < 0.5              < 0.5 CDC, 1996a)
March                      < 0.5              < 0.5 April                      < 0.5              < 0.5 May                          0                  0 June                        0                  0 July                        0                  0 August                      0                  0 September                    0                  0 October                    < 0.5                0 November                  < 0.5              < 0.5 December                    1                  1 Annual                      2                  2 NE Medical Technologies              2.3-29                                    Rev. 0
 
(Sheet 2 of 2)
Parameter                    Period        Madison Rockford an number of days with      January                18      17 ow February              14      13 CDC, 1996a)
March                  13      11 April                  4        3 May                  < 0.5    <0.5 June                    0        0 July                    0        0 August                  0        0 September            < 0.5      0 October                1        1 November                9        8 December              16      15 Annual                75      68 an number of days with hail January                0      < 0.5 sleet February                0      < 0.5 CDC, 1996a)
March                < 0.5    < 0.5 April                < 0.5    < 0.5 May                  < 0.5    < 0.5 June                  < 0.5    < 0.5 July                  < 0.5    < 0.5 August                < 0.5    < 0.5 September            < 0.5    < 0.5 October              < 0.5    < 0.5 November              < 0.5    < 0.5 December              < 0.5      0 Annual                  2        2 NE Medical Technologies                2.3-30                      Rev. 0
 
ble 2.3 List of NOAA ASOS Stations Located within the Site Climate Region(a)(b)(c)
Approximate North        West                Available USAF      WBAN                                  Latitude    Longitude  Ground      DS 3505 ID          ID                                    (deg      (deg min  Elev.      Period of Name              No.        No.      St.        County        min sec)        sec)  (ft. MSL) Record (years)
Baraboo            726503      54833        WI          Sauk          43 31 19    89 46 26    976  1997-2018 (22)
Burlington          722059      04866        WI        Racine        42 41 24    88 18 14    779  1945-2018 (74)
De Kalb Taylor        722075      04871        WI        De Kalb        41 55 55    88 42 29    915  1973-2018 (46)
Municipal Airport Juneau            726509      04898        WI        Dodge          43 25 34    88 42 11    936  1997-2018 (22)
Dodge County Du Page County        725305      94892        IL        Du Page        41 54 50    88 14 46    754  1973-2018 (46) nd du Lac County      726506      04840        WI      Fond du Lac      43 46 8    88 29 28    807  1997-2018 (22)
Airport reeport Albertus      722082      04876        IL      Stephenson      42 14 46    89 34 55    859  2004-2018 (15)
Airport nesville Southern    726415      94854        WI          Rock          42 37 1      89 1 59    808  1973-2018 (46) isconsin Regional Madison Dane          726410      14837        WI          Dane          43 8 28      89 20 42    866  1948-2018 (71) ounty Truax Field ddleton Municipal      720656        n/a      WI          Dane          43 6 50      89 31 55    928    2009-2013 (5)
Morey Field onroe Municipal      726414      04873        WI          Green        42 36 54    89 35 28    1085  2001-2018 (18) ochelle Municipal      722182      04890        IL          Ogle          41 53 35      89 4 41    781  2004-2018 (15) irport Koritz Field hicago Rockford      725430      94822        IL      Winnebago        42 11 35      89 5 35    730  1973-2018 (46)
Intl Airport Watertown          726464      54834        WI        Jefferson        43 10 1      88 43 1    820  1995-2018 (24)
Municipal Airport
: a. The site climate region and station locations are defined via the map in Figure 2.3-16.
: b. Extracted from NCDC 2019ab.
: c. MSL elevations are functionally equivalent to the NAVD 88 elevations in this table.
NE Medical Technologies                                  2.3-31                                                  Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 List of NOAA COOP Stations in the Site Climate Region for which Clim-20 Summaries and Updates are Available Approx.
North    West      Ground    Period of Latitude Longitude    Elev. Available Name            St. County    (deg min) (deg min)  (ft. MSL) Digital Record oretum Univ of WI      WI      Dane        43 3    89 24        865    1971-2018 ngton Univ Farm        WI    Columbia      43 18    89 21      1080    1962-2018 aboo                  WI      Sauk        43 27    89 44        823    1948-2018 aver Dam                WI      Dodge        43 27    88 51        840    1948-2018 oit                    WI      Rock        42 30      89 2        780    1948-2018 dhead                  WI      Green      42 37    89 23        790    1948-2018 armany Farm            WI      Dane        43 4    89 29        910    1959-2018 ton                    WI    Green Lake    43 39    89 12        860    1948-2007 Kalb                    IL    De Kalb      41 56    88 47        873    1966-2018 nd du Lac              WI    Fond du Lac    43 48    88 27        760    1948-2018 Atkinson                WI    Jefferson    42 54    88 51        800    1948-2018 rtford 2 W              WI    Washington    43 20    88 25        980    1948-2018 ricon                  WI      Dodge        43 26    88 38        880    1970-2018 e Geneva              WI    Walworth      42 36    88 26        880    1948-2018 e Mills              WI    Jefferson      43 5    88 55        852    1948-2018 dison Dane Co AP        WI      Dane        43 8    89 21        858    1948-2018 rengo                    IL    McHenry      42 15    88 36        810    1901-2018 onomowoc                WI    Waukesha      43 6    88 30        856    1948-2018 tage                  WI    Columbia      43 32    89 26        775    1948-2018 irie du Sac 2 N        WI      Sauk        43 19    89 44        780    1947-2008 ckford AP                IL  Winnebago      42 12      89 6        733    1951-2018 ughton                WI      Dane        42 37    89 45        840    1948-2018 tertown                WI    Jefferson    43 11    88 44        825    1924-2018 sconsin Dells          WI    Columbia      43 37    89 46        835    1948-2018 NE Medical Technologies                  2.3-32                                    Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Regional Tornadoes and Waterspouts(a)(b)(c)
Number of tate          County          Area (mi.2)      Tornadoes      Number of Waterspouts IL            Boone              282              14                    0 IL            Carroll            466              18                    0 IL              Cook              1635              53                    0 IL            De Kalb            635              14                    0 IL            Du Page              337              26                    0 IL              Kane              524              20                    0 IL              Lake              1368              17                    1 IL              Lee              729              29                    0 IL            McHenry              611              19                    0 IL              Ogle              763              22                    0 IL          Stephenson            565              15                    0 IL          Whiteside            697              30                    0 IL      Winnebago County          519              16                    1 WI            Adams              689              17                    0 WI            Columbia            796              36                    0 WI              Dane              1238              64                    0 WI            Dodge              907              58                    0 WI        Fond du Lac            766              44                    0 WI              Green              585              25                    0 WI          Green Lake            380              30                    0 WI            Jefferson            583              33                    0 WI            Juneau              804              23                    0 WI            Kenosha              754                9                    0 WI          Marquette            464              20                    0 WI            Racine              792              20                    1 WI              Rock              726              25                    0 WI              Sauk              848              23                    0 WI            Walworth            577              26                    0 WI          Washington            436              18                    0 WI          Waukesha              580              30                    0 Totals            21,056            794                    3
: a. Period of record is May, 1950 through November, 2018.
: b. NCDC, 2018a.
: c. Additionally, an F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 at Barneveld in Iowa County, Wisconsin, which is located approximately 50 miles (80 km) west-northwest of the site (NCDC, 1984a).
NE Medical Technologies                  2.3-33                                      Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Rock County, Wisconsin(a)(b)
Path        Path      Property rnado                      Length      Width      Damage ensity        Date          (mi.)        (yd.)        ($)          Additional Description F2      15 Nov 1960          2        Narrow      500 -    Occurred 1.5 mi (2.4 km) north of 5,000    Union, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to farm buildings, an abandoned restaurant, and a school roof.
F2      22 Sep 1961          5        Narrow      50,000 -  Occurred 1 mi. (1.6 km) south of 500,000    Whitewater, Wisconsin. Damage occurred to at least 15 farms.
There was 1 injury.
F2        9 Oct 1970        15            50      50,000 -  The tornado moved NNW from 500,000    the banks of the Rock River just north of Riverside Park (NW of Janesville) and 5 mi. (8.0 km) west of Edgerton toward Stoughton. An outbuilding was damaged. There was 1 injury.
F2        1 Nov 1971          3          100      50,000 -  A small tornado moved northeast 500,000    in a mostly residential area along a line from 2.5 mi. (4.0 km) NNW to about 4 mi NNE of downtown Beloit. Several homes and garages were severely damaged.
There was 1 injury.
F2        8 May 1988        27          175      50,000 -  Tornado affected Rock, Dane, and 500,000    Jefferson counties. Many farm buildings and two homes were damaged.
F2      27 Mar 1991        35          440      5 million - Tornado affected Green, Rock, 50 million  Dane, and Jefferson counties.
There were 5 injuries and 1 fatality.
F2      25 Jun 1998        2.5          100      845,000    Tornado moved from 2.3 mi.
(3.7 km) WNW of Leyden to 1 mi.
(1.6 km) NNE of Leyden.
: a. Period of record is May, 1950 through November, 2018.
: b. Based on NCDC, 1960a; NCDC, 1961a; NCDC, 1970a; NCDC, 1971a; NCDC, 1988a; NCDC, 1991a; NCDC, 1998a; and NCDC, 2018a.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-34                                          Rev. 0
 
ble 2.3 Details of Strongest Tornadoes in Surrounding Counties Adjacent to Rock County, Wisconsin(a)(b)(c)(d)(e)(f) (Sheet 1 of 2)
Path  Path      Property rnado                        Length Width      Damage ensity      Date    County    (mi.)  (yd.)        ($)              Additional Description F4    21 Apr 1967  Boone    28    600-      5 million -  Tornado moved near 50 mph (22.4 m/s) 1200      50 million  towards ENE to E, from 2 mi. (3.2 km)
SE of Cherry Valley to 2 mi. (3.2 km) north of Woodstock. Numerous reports of multiple funnel sightings were substantiated by damage. Almost complete destruction directly in path with major wind damage on either side.
Many farm homes completely destroyed. Woods were stripped with large trees uprooted or snapped off.
About 5% of the path was through an urban area, which was the SE corner of Belvidere, where a high school was hit.
There were 450 injuries and 24 fatalities.
F3      7 Jan 2008  Boone    6.9    100      2.0 million  Tornado traveled from about 1.2 mi.
(1.9 km) N of Poplar Grove in Boone County, to about 3.2 mi (5.1 km) NE of Harvard in McHenry County. A large barn and farmhouse were destroyed, and other buildings severely damaged.
Damage also occurred to power lines.
Large trees were snapped, uprooted, and stripped of branches. There were 4 injuries.
F3    2 Aug 1967    Dane      1    100      5,000 -    Tornado moved SE on the N shore of 50,000    Lake Mendota in the town of Westport, about 100 yards (0.1 km) inland. Three cottages were destroyed and several homes slightly damaged. There were 5 injuries and 2 fatalities.
F3    4 Jun 1975    Dane      4      33      5,000 -    Tornado touched down 3 mil. (4.8 km) 50,000    north of Sun Prairie and moved towards the east. Two farms had extensive damage and one home was destroyed.
F3    17 Jun 1992  Dane      16    400      5 million -  Tornado skipped along a path from 50 million  2 mi. (3.2 km) north of Belleville to 1 mi.
(1.6 km) east of McFarland, injuring 30 people.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.3-35                                                Rev. 0
 
Path    Path      Property rnado                            Length  Width      Damage ensity      Date        County    (mi.)  (yd.)          ($)              Additional Description F3      18 Aug 2005      Dane      17      600          34.3    Strong and destructive tornado started million    about 2.8 mi. (4.5 km) SE of Fitchburg and moved slowly ESE to the southern edge of Lake Kegonsa through residential neighborhoods including Dunn, Pleasant Springs, and Stoughton. There was extensive damage to homes, businesses, farm buildings, vehicles, power lines, and trees. There were 23 injuries and 1 fatality.
F3      16 Jun 2014      Dane    0.96    100    14.0 million  2 mi. (3.2 km) NW of Verona. A tornado severely damaged the Country View Elementary school, which will have to be rebuilt. At least 30 homes sustained major damage, 19 of which were rendered uninhabitable. Estimated winds up to 140 mph. No injuries or fatalities.
F3      24 Jan 1967      Green    25      25      50,000 -    Severe thunderstorms caused 500,000    widespread wind damage across Green, Rock, Jefferson, Waukesha, Washington, and Ozaukee counties.
One tornado destroyed several farm buildings from near Brodhead in Green County to northwest of Janesville.
Janesville Country Club was extensively damaged. No injuries or fatalities.
F3      5 Jun 1980    Jefferson    4      n/a        5,000 -    Tornado formed near Rock River at 50,000    0.25 mi. (0.4 km) E of Watertown, lifted and moved SE where it touched down a second time 1 mi. (1.6 km) SE of Pipersville. No injuries or fatalities.
: a. The project site is in Rock County, WI.
: b. Counties adjacent to Rock County include: Green (WI), Dane (WI), Jefferson (WI), Walworth (WI),
Boone (IL), Winnebago (IL), and Stephenson (IL).
: c. Period of record is May, 1950 through November, 2018.
: d. Based on NCDC, 1967a-c; NCDC, 1975a; NCDC, 1980a; NCDC, 1992a; NCDC, 2005b; NCDC, 2008a; NCDC, 2014; and NCDC, 2018a.
: e. "n/a" means information not available in the respective Storm Report.
: f. An F5 tornado occurred on 8 June 1984 at Barneveld in Iowa County, Wisconsin, approximately 50 mi. (80 km) west-northwest of the SHINE site (NCDC, 1984a).
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-36                                                  Rev. 0
 
ble 2.3 Precipitation Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region(a)(b)(c)
Maximum      Maximum      Maximum  Maximum Recorded    Recorded      Recorded Recorded 24-Hour      Monthly      24-Hour  Monthly Rainfall    Rainfall    Snowfall Snowfall Station Name        State          County          (in.)        (in.)        (in.)  (in.)
oretum Univ of WI    WI          Dane                6.01        13.49          13.5    31.7 ngton Univ Farm      WI          Columbia            5.10        13.66          14.0    31.0 aboo                WI          Sauk                7.78        17.17          12.0    45.9 ver Dam            WI          Dodge                4.41        15.73          14.4    45.6 oit                  WI          Rock                5.77        14.39          15.0    37.6 dhead                WI          Green                6.62        15.57          14.0    35.4 armany Farm          WI          Dane                9.62        14.62          14.0    31.1 ton                  WI          Green Lake          5.90        13.77          21.0    37.1 Kalb                IL          De Kalb              8.09        14.23          15.7    34.5 d du Lac          WI          Fond du Lac          6.83        13.47          14.0    45.2 tkinson            WI          Jefferson            4.47        11.26          15.2    39.0 tford 2 W          WI          Washington          5.20        14.09          13.0    44.0 icon                WI          Dodge                5.94        14.72          16.0    40.0 e Geneva            WI          Walworth            3.88        11.30          13.2    38.5 e Mills            WI          Jefferson            5.59        17.75          12.0    37.5 dison Dane Co AP    WI          Dane                5.28        15.18          17.3    40.4 rengo                IL          McHenry              8.20        14.19          18.0    28.0 onomowoc            WI          Waukesha            5.38        11.56          11.5    42.4 tage                WI          Columbia            6.29        18.27          12.5    41.9 irie du Sac 2 N      WI          Sauk                5.73        11.41          11.6    23.5 kford AP          IL          Winnebago            6.42        14.23          11.7    30.2 ughton              WI          Dane                6.03        16.40          14.0    42.6 tertown              WI          Jefferson            6.65        14.82          13.0    50.4 consin Dells        WI          Columbia            7.67        14.13          14.0    38.6
: a. The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 2.3-17.
: b. Based on 1971 - 2000 data in NCDC, 2001a-x with updates through 2018 from NCDC, 2019a-c and NCDC, 2019f-aa.
: c. Maximum regional values of the respective parameter are in bold font.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-37                                        Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Mean Seasonal and Annual Hail or Sleet Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin Station        Winter        Spring        Summer        Autumn          Annual ckford          <0.3        <0.5              <0.5        <0.5            2 adison            <0.2        <0.5              <0.5        <0.5            2 erence:
DC, 1996a NE Medical Technologies              2.3-38                                      Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Ice Storms that have Affected Rock County, Wisconsin(a)
Date of Storm                                  Description of Ice Storm 26 Feb 1995        Freezing rain and freezing drizzle. Coating of ice up to one-quarter inch.
26 Nov 1995        Two to six-hour period of sleet and/or freezing rain glazed road surfaces.
13 Dec 1995        Ice accumulations of one-quarter to one-half inch on top of one to five inches of snow. A glazing of less than one-quarter inch of freezing rain or freezing drizzle.
4 Feb 1997        Several hours of freezing rain, accumulated to one-quarter inch. Sheets of ice on roads and sidewalks, especially rural 3 Feb 2003        Periodic light freezing drizzle of light freezing rain glazed roads and sidewalks.
7 Apr 2003        Freezing drizzle left crusty layers.
16 Jan 2004        Freezing rain caused road surfaces to become very slippery due to initial ice glazing of one-sixteenth to one-eighth inch.
7 Mar 2004        Freezing drizzle/rain generated a thin layer of ice on road surfaces.
18 Dec 2004        Light freezing drizzle coated roads and bridges during morning hours.
1 Jan 2005        Pockets of freezing rain or drizzle resulted in a light glaze of ice on many road surfaces and sidewalks.
17 Feb 2008        Ice storm affected a 25 to 30 mile-wide area stretching from Janesville to Ft. Atkinson to Delafield to West Bend to Port Washington, with about 11 hours of freezing rain. Ice accumulations ranged from one-quarter to one-half inch. Roads were icy.
8 Dec 2008        Freezing rain produced ice accumulations of one-tenth to two-tenths inch near the Illinois border.
28 Mar 2009        Mixture of sleet, rain, freezing rain, and snow caused very hazardous driving conditions. Ice accumulations were one-tenth inch.
23 Dec 2009        Freezing rain during afternoon hours resulted in a low-end ice storm with ice accumulations of one-quarter to one-half inch. Trees and power lines were coated, causing them to break.
: a. Based on 1995 - 2011 data in NCDC, 2011a.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-39                                          Rev. 0
 
able 2.3 Mean Seasonal Thunderstorm Frequencies at Rockford, Illinois and Madison, Wisconsin(a)
Station        Winter              Spring      Summer            Autumn ckford            0.3                4.0            7.4              2.6 adison              0.3                3.6            7.0              2.3
: a. From NCDC, 2019b and NCDC, 2019c.
NE Medical Technologies              2.3-40                                  Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Design Wet and Dry Bulb Temperatures Statistic                              Bounding Value ximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent    90.9&deg;F (Rockford) an coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 0.4 percent DBT                74.4&deg;F (Rockford) ximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 2.0 percent    85.4&deg;F (Rockford) an coincident WBT (MCWB) at the 2.0 percent DBT                71.6&deg;F (Rockford)
                                                              -6.3&deg;F (Madison and nimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent        Fond du Lac) nimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 1.0 percent      -1.2&deg;F (Madison) ximum WBT with annual exceedance probability of 0.4 percent 77.9&deg;F (Du Page County Airport) ximum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent        81&deg;F (Rockford) nimum DBT with annual exceedance probability of 5 percent          9&deg;F (Madison) erence:
HRAE, 2017 NE Medical Technologies                2.3-41                                  Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Estimated 100-Year Return Maximum and Minimum DBT, MCWB Coincident th the 100-Year Return Maximum DBT, Historic Maximum WBT and Estimated 100-Year Annual Maximum Return WBT MCWB Estimated    coincident                  Estimated  Estimated 100-yr    with 100-yr        Historic    100-yr      100-yr maximum      maximum          maximum    maximum    minimum Station      DBT (oF)      DBT (oF)        WBT (oF)    WBT (oF)    DBT (oF) ockford        104.8          80          83.6            85.9      -35.1 adison        104.3          75          85.0            86.0      -33.4 ounding        104.8          80          85.0            86.0      -35.1 alue NE Medical Technologies              2.3-42                              Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Dry Bulb Temperature Extremes at Local and Regional NOAA COOP Meteorological Monitoring Stations within the Site Climate Region(a)(b)(c)
Maximum Dry Minimum Dry Bulb      Bulb Temperature Temperature tion Name                        State                County                (oF)      (oF) oretum Univ of WI                  WI                  Dane                  108        -38 ngton Univ Farm                      WI                Columbia                103        -36 aboo                                WI                  Sauk                  103        -45 ver Dam                            WI                  Dodge                102        -36 oit                                  WI                  Rock                  102        -26 dhead                                WI                  Green                103        -36 armany Farm                          WI                  Dane                  103        -34 ton                                  WI              Green Lake              104        -39 Kalb                                IL                De Kalb                103        -27 d du Lac                          WI              Fond du Lac              103        -41 tkinson                            WI                Jefferson              103        -39 tford 2 W                          WI              Washington              105        -35 icon                                WI                  Dodge                102        -36 e Geneva                            WI                Walworth                106        -27 e Mills                            WI                Jefferson              104        -33 dison Dane Co AP                    WI                  Dane                  104        -37 engo                                IL                McHenry                109        -29 nomowoc                            WI                Waukesha                103        -33 tage                                WI                Columbia                103        -35 irie du Sac 2N                      WI                  Sauk                  103        -42 kford AP                          IL              Winnebago                105        -27 ughton                              WI                  Dane                  103        -35 tertown                              WI                Jefferson              103        -33 consin Dells                        WI                Columbia                102        -43
: a. The site climate region and station locations are defined in Figure 2.3-17.
: b. Based on 1971 - 2000 data in NCDC, 2001a-x with updates through 2018 from NCDC, 2019b-c and NCDC, 2019f-aa.
: c. The highest and lowest dry bulb temperatures in the region are in bold font.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.3-43                                        Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Nearest Class I Areas to the Project Site(a)
Distance      Distance from Project from Project        Direction from ass I Area                                Site (km)      Site (mi.)      Project Site inbow Lake Wilderness Area, WI              455            283            Northwest ney Wilderness Area, MI                      475            295          North-northwest e Royale National Park, MI                  610            379              North mmoth Cave National Park, KY                630            391        South-southeast undary Waters Canoe Area, MN                640            398          North-northwest ngo Wilderness Area, MO                      645            401              South yageurs National Park, MN                    730            454              North
: a. Based on NSPS, 2011.
NE Medical Technologies              2.3-44                                        Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Mean Temperature and Precipitation Climate Parameters for Available Normal (30-year) Periods and Extreme Precipitation, Temperature, and Tornado Occurrence Climate Parameters for Historic (10-year) Periods(a)
Normal Period Period                1          2              3          4            5            6 1931 - 1960 1941 - 1970    1951 - 1980 1961 - 1990  1971 - 2000  1981 - 2010 Wisconsin South            46.7        46.3          45.9        45.7        45.9          46.4 Central Climate ision Temperature
(&deg;F)
Wisconsin South          31.24      31.13          31.75      32.27        34.11        34.48 Central Climate ision Precipitation (in.)
Historic Period Period                1          2              3          4            5            6 1951 - 1960 1961 - 1970    1971 - 1980 1981 - 1990  1991 - 2000  2001 - 2010 adison Wisconsin          5.25        3.67          3.89        3.68        4.51          5.28 xtreme high daily precipitation (in.)
adison Wisconsin          10.8        16.0          13.6        17.3        14.2          11.9 xtreme high daily snow (in.)
adison Wisconsin          102          97            104        102          101            98 extreme high emperature (&deg;F) adison Wisconsin          -37        -30            -28        -28          -29          -19 extreme low emperature (&deg;F) ock County and            F2          F4            F3          F2            F3          F3 jacent counties WI trongest tornado
: a. Data extracted from NCDC, 1952; NCDC, 1953; NCDC, 1954; NCDC, 1955; NCDC, 1956; NCDC, 1957; NCDC,1958; NCDC, 1959; NCDC, 1960b; NCDC, 1961b; NCDC, 1962; NCDC, 1963; NCDC, 1964; NCDC, 1965; NCDC, 1966; NCDC, 1967d; NCDC, 1968; NCDC, 1969; NCDC, 1970b; NCDC, 1971b; NCDC, 1972; NCDC, 1973; NCDC,1974; NCDC, 1975b; NCDC, 1976; NCDC, 1977; NCDC, 1978; NCDC, 1979; NCDC, 1980b; NCDC, 1981; NCDC, 1982; NCDC, 1983; NCDC, 1984b; NCDC, 1985; NCDC, 1986; NCDC, 1987; NCDC, 1988b; NCDC, 1989; NCDC,1990; NCDC, 1991b; NCDC, 1992b; NCDC, 1993; NCDC, 1994; NCDC, 1995; NCDC, 1996b; NCDC, 1997; NCDC, 1998b; NCDC, 1999b; NCDC, 2000b; NCDC, 2001y; NCDC, 2002b; NCDC, 2002c; NCDC, 2002d; NCDC, 2003; NCDC, 2004; NCDC, 2005c; NCDC, 2006b; NCDC, 2007; NCDC, 2008b; NCDC, 2009; NCDC, 2010; NCDC, 2011f; and NCDC, 2019b NE Medical Technologies                        2.3-45                                        Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 FAA Specifications for Automated Weather Observing Stations(a)
Parameter            Range                        Accuracy                        Resolution                            Other bulb        -30&deg; - +130&deg;F      1&deg;F RMSE over entire range with        1&deg;F                          time constant 2 min perature    (-35&deg; - +55&deg;C)      maximum error of 2&deg;F ative        5 - 100%            5%                                    1&deg;%                          time constant < 2 min midity nd speed      2 - 85 knots        a) +/- 2 knots up to 40 knots          1 knot                          a) distance constant < 10 m b) RMSE +/- 5% above 40 knots                                            b) 2 knot threshold nd direction  1&deg;- 360&deg; azimuth    +/- 5% RMSE                              1&deg;                              a) time constant < 2 seconds b) 2 knot threshold ssure        17.58 - 31.53 in. Hg a) +/- 0.02 in. Hg RMSE;                0.001 in. Hg                    drift +/- 0.02 in. RMSE Hg for b) maximum error 0.02 in. Hg                                          period not less than 6 months ibility      < 1/4 - 10 mi.      a) 1/4 1/4 mi.: +/- 1/4 mi.        < 1/4, 1/4, 1/2, 3/4,          time constant 3 min b) 1-1/2 3/4 mi.: + 1/4, -1/2 mi. 1, 1-1/4, 1-1/2, 2, c) 2 1/2 mi.: +/- 1/2 mi.          2-1/2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 10, d) 3 1/2 mi.: +1/2, -1 mi.        and > 10 mi.
e)  4 mi.: +/- 1 mi.
cipitation  0.01 - 5 in./hr      0.002 in./hr RMSE or 4%, whichever is  in.
greater ud height    0 to  12,500 ft    100 ft. or 5%, whichever is greater    a) 0 - 5,500 ft.: 50 ft.      a) sampling rate at least once b) 5,501 - 10,000 ft.: 250 ft. every 30 seconds c) > 10,000 ft.: 500 ft.        b) at least three cloud layers when visibility  1/4 mi.
e            0000 - 2359 UTC      within 15 seconds each month          1 second
: a. from FAA, 2017.
NE Medical Technologies                                            2.3-46                                                              Rev. 0
 
ble 2.3 Table Annual Data Recovery Rates (in Percent) of Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, Wind Speed, and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 Dry Bulb      Relative          Wind              Wind Year          Temperature    Humidity          Speed            Direction 2005              95.9          95.8            94.0              94.0 2006              93.0          92.9            91.1              91.1 2007              87.7          87.6            87.3              87.3 2008              92.6          92.6            91.2              91.2 2009              93.9          93.6            92.7              92.6 2010              93.8          93.7            92.4              92.4 NE Medical Technologies                2.3-47                                    Rev. 0
 
ble 2.3 Historical Dry Bulb Temperatures, Relative Humidity, and Wind Speed from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 Relative Humidity Dry Bulb Temperature (oF)          (%)        Wind Speed (mph)
Month        Maximum      Minimum    Average      Average    Maximum    Average January          61          -20      22.6          79.2        35          9.2 February          59          -17      24.2          76.0        49          8.7 March            77          7        36.8          72.7        33          8.9 April          84          19      49.7          63.2        40        10.4 May            93          30      59.2          65.5        31          8.8 June            93          43      69.0          71.3        48          7.0 July          97          46      71.9          74.7        31          6.1 August          93          45      71.9          73.3        38          5.8 September          95          34      64.0          72.8        30          6.5 October          90          23      51.5          72.4        38          8.0 November          77          12      40.1          73.1        33          9.2 December          55          -8      24.0          82.4        44          8.6 Average          81          18        48.7          73.1        38          8.1 NE Medical Technologies                2.3-48                                    Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Annual Joint Data Recovery Rates of Wind Speed, Wind Direction, and Computed Pasquill Stability Class from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport for 2005-2010 Joint Data Recovery Year                                        (%)
2005                                      93.6 2006                                      90.5 2007                                      86.0 2008                                      90.6 2009                                      91.7 2010                                      91.7 NE Medical Technologies                2.3-49                                Rev. 0
 
Table 2.3 Pasquill Stability Class Frequency Distributions from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport (Percent) 2005-2010 Frequency of Occurrence (Percent)
Pasquill                                                                      2005-Class      2005        2006        2007        2008    2009      2010      2010 A          0.78      0.67        0.86        0.68    1.18      1.16      0.89 B          5.00      3.43        3.61        3.64    5.24      5.39      4.40 C        11.88      11.31        10.15        11.18  10.67      11.98    11.21 D        52.90      56.45        56.67        55.44  54.00      50.19    54.24 E          8.83      8.24        8.15        7.41    7.31      7.08      7.83 F        10.10      10.28        10.35        9.69    9.59      10.48    10.08 G        10.51      9.62      10.21        11.96  12.01      13.72    11.35 Total      100.00    100.00      100.00      100.00  100.00    100.00    100.00 NE Medical Technologies                  2.3-50                                  Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class A)
Speed (m/s)      N    NNE  NE  ENE    E    ESE    SE  SSE    S    SSW  SW  WSW  W  WNW    NW    NNW    Total Calm                                                                                                        323
.00 < WS < 1.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    1    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        1
.00 < WS < 2.00    0    0    1    1    2    1    0    2    0      0    0    0    2    0    0    0        9
.00 < WS < 3.00    6    2    3    9    5    7    9    6    9      5    5    3    9    5    5    4      92
.00 < WS < 4.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0
.00 < WS < 5.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0
.00 < WS < 6.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
.00 < WS < 8.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0 00 < WS < 10.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
    > 10.00        0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0 Totals        6    2    4    10    7    8    10    8    9      5    5    3  11    5    5    4      425 Speed (m/s)
Calm                                                                                                        0.68
.00 < WS < 1.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 2.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.02
.00 < WS < 3.00  0.01  0.00 0.01  0.02  0.01  0.01  0.02  0.01  0.02  0.01  0.01 0.01 0.02  0.01  0.01  0.01    0.19
.00 < WS < 4.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 5.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 6.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 8.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 00 < WS < 10.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
    > 10.00      0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 Totals      0.01  0.00 0.01  0.02  0.01  0.02  0.02  0.02  0.02  0.01  0.01 0.01 0.02  0.01  0.01  0.01    0.89 NE Medical Technologies                                  2.3-51                                                  Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class B)
Speed (m/s)      N    NNE  NE  ENE    E    ESE    SE  SSE    S    SSW  SW  WSW  W  WNW    NW    NNW    Total Calm                                                                                                        697
.00 < WS < 1.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
.00 < WS < 2.00    5    10  12    8    11    11    5    4    8    13    8    7  12    5    13    4      136
.00 < WS < 3.00  31    25  27    23    29    23    21    22    21    28    40  27  35    33    23    19      427
.00 < WS < 4.00  47    39  34    29    38    31    37    47    45    56    61  43  62    61    31    37      698
.00 < WS < 5.00    3    5    9    10    6    2    5    3    13    21    8    5  19    12    8    9      138
.00 < WS < 6.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
.00 < WS < 8.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0 00 < WS < 10.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
    > 10.00        0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0 Totals      86    79  82    70    84    67    68    76    87    118  117  82  128  111    75    69    2096 Speed (m/s)
Calm                                                                                                        1.46
.00 < WS < 1.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 2.00  0.01  0.02 0.03  0.02  0.02  0.02  0.01  0.01  0.02  0.03  0.02 0.01 0.03  0.01  0.03  0.01    0.29
.00 < WS < 3.00  0.07  0.05 0.06  0.05  0.06  0.05  0.04  0.05  0.04  0.06  0.08 0.06 0.07  0.07  0.05  0.04    0.90
.00 < WS < 4.00  0.10  0.08 0.07  0.06  0.08  0.07  0.08  0.10  0.09  0.12  0.13 0.09 0.13  0.13  0.07  0.08    1.46
.00 < WS < 5.00  0.01  0.01 0.02  0.02  0.01  0.00  0.01  0.01  0.03  0.04  0.02 0.01 0.04  0.03  0.02  0.02    0.29
.00 < WS < 6.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 8.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 00 < WS < 10.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
    > 10.00      0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 Totals      0.18  0.17 0.17  0.15  0.18  0.14  0.14  0.16  0.18  0.25  0.25 0.17 0.27  0.23  0.16  0.14    4.40 NE Medical Technologies                                  2.3-52                                                  Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class C)
Speed (m/s)      N    NNE  NE  ENE    E    ESE    SE  SSE    S    SSW  SW  WSW  W  WNW    NW    NNW    Total Calm                                                                                                        1118
.00 < WS < 1.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0      0
.00 < WS < 2.00  15    2    5      7  15    6    7    3    15    15    16    6  18    14    14      9    167
.00 < WS < 3.00  34    24  27    34  25    19    25    28    37    38    57  35  59    53    58    30    583
.00 < WS < 4.00  52    39  39    39  24    39    24    56    65    83    72  72  105    94    60    59    922
.00 < WS < 5.00  71    72  49    57    54    45    45    81  111    136  148  114  159  150  120    101    1513
.00 < WS < 6.00  42    29  31    27    36    26    17    45    81    105    87  65  61    91    53    56    852
.00 < WS < 8.00    0    5    5      6    4    5    6    5    12    12    21  18  23    8    10      2    142 00 < WS < 10.00    0    0    0      1    3    0    0    0    4      3    6    3  11    1    0      0      32
    > 10.00        0    0    0      0    1    1    0    2    2      0    3    0    5    0    1    0      15 Totals      214  171  156    171  162  141  124  220  327    392  410  313  441  411  316    257    5344 Speed (m/s)
Calm                                                                                                        2.35
.00 < WS < 1.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 2.00  0.03  0.00 0.01  0.01  0.03  0.01  0.01  0.01  0.03  0.03  0.03 0.01 0.04  0.03  0.03  0.02    0.35
.00 < WS < 3.00  0.07  0.05 0.06  0.07  0.05  0.04  0.05  0.06  0.08  0.08  0.12 0.07 0.12  0.11  0.12  0.06    1.22
.00 < WS < 4.00  0.11  0.08 0.08  0.08  0.05  0.08  0.05  0.12  0.14  0.17  0.15 0.15 0.22  0.20  0.13  0.12    1.93
.00 < WS < 5.00  0.15  0.15 0.10  0.12  0.11  0.09  0.09  0.17  0.23  0.29  0.31 0.24 0.33  0.31  0.25  0.21    3.17
.00 < WS < 6.00  0.09  0.06 0.07  0.06  0.08  0.05  0.04  0.09  0.17  0.22  0.18 0.14 0.13  0.19  0.11  0.12    1.79
.00 < WS < 8.00  0.00  0.01 0.01  0.01  0.01  0.01  0.01  0.01  0.03  0.03  0.04 0.04 0.05  0.02  0.02  0.00    0.30 00 < WS < 10.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.01  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.01  0.01  0.01 0.01 0.02  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.07
    > 10.00      0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.01 0.00 0.01  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.03 Totals      0.45  0.36 0.33  0.36  0.34  0.30  0.26  0.46  0.69  0.82  0.86 0.66 0.93  0.86  0.66  0.54    11.21 NE Medical Technologies                                  2.3-53                                                  Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class D)
Speed (m/s)      N  NNE  NE  ENE    E    ESE    SE  SSE    S    SSW    SW  WSW    W  WNW  NW    NNW    Total Calm                                                                                                        1353
.00 < WS < 1.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0      0    0    0  0    0    0      0      0
.00 < WS < 2.00    39  31    40    36    45    32    25    18    31    27    24  30  47  35  28    40      528
.00 < WS < 3.00  241  168  165  158  204  164  154    137  183    185  180  140  254  201  212    150    2896
.00 < WS < 4.00  323  205  205    224  271    220  203    213  342    282  237  240  331 239  260    236    4031
.00 < WS < 5.00  326  189  186    200  274    190  161  202  382    250  182  203  319  235  267    241    3807
.00 < WS < 6.00  374  229  248    263  297    205  194    256  468    476  321  253  486  344  381    326    5121
.00 < WS < 8.00  259  151  201  291  346  218  174    227  617    488  381  334  605  448  471    379    5590 00 < WS < 10.00    63  28    61    90  148    59    31    53  139    170  112  112  239  144  166    115    1730
    > 10.00        27    6    8    27  68    25    14    21    72    67    81  96  120  74    55    39      800 Totals      1652 1007  1114  1289  1653  1113  956  1127  2234  1945  1518 1408 2401 1720 1840  1526    25856 Speed (m/s)
Calm                                                                                                        2.84
.00 < WS < 1.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 2.00  0.08  0.07 0.08  0.08  0.09  0.07  0.05  0.04  0.07  0.06  0.05 0.06 0.10 0.07  0.06  0.08    1.11
.00 < WS < 3.00  0.51  0.35 0.35  0.33  0.43  0.34  0.32  0.29  0.38  0.39  0.38 0.29 0.53 0.42  0.44  0.31    6.07
.00 < WS < 4.00  0.68  0.43 0.43  0.47  0.57  0.46  0.43  0.45  0.72  0.59  0.50 0.50 0.69 0.50  0.55  0.50    8.46
.00 < WS < 5.00  0.68  0.40 0.39  0.42  0.57  0.40  0.34  0.42  0.80  0.52  0.38 0.43 0.67 0.49  0.56  0.51    7.99
.00 < WS < 6.00  0.78  0.48 0.52  0.55  0.62  0.43  0.41  0.54  0.98  1.00  0.67 0.53 1.02 0.72  0.80  0.68    10.74
.00 < WS < 8.00  0.54  0.32 0.42  0.61  0.73  0.46  0.37  0.48  1.29  1.02  0.80 0.70 1.27 0.94  0.99  0.80    11.73 00 < WS < 10.00  0.13  0.06 0.13  0.19  0.31  0.12  0.07  0.11  0.29  0.36  0.23 0.23 0.50 0.30  0.35  0.24    3.63
    > 10.00      0.06  0.01 0.02  0.06  0.14  0.05  0.03  0.04  0.15  0.14  0.17 0.20 0.25 0.16  0.12  0.08    1.68 Totals      3.47  2.11 2.34  2.70  3.47  2.33  2.01  2.36  4.69  4.08  3.18 2.95 5.04 3.61  3.86  3.20    54.24 NE Medical Technologies                                  2.3-54                                                Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class E)
Speed (m/s)      N    NNE  NE  ENE    E    ESE    SE  SSE    S    SSW  SW  WSW  W  WNW    NW    NNW    Total Calm                                                                                                          0
.00 < WS < 1.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0      0
.00 < WS < 2.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0      0
.00 < WS < 3.00  59    35  48    49  77    82    76    70    91    85    75  44  75    50    53    38    1007
.00 < WS < 4.00  51    35  54    52  90    84    82    94  167    115    68  61  136    81    73    36    1279
.00 < WS < 5.00  42    21  37    32    64    31    18    58  150    127    73  54  126    76    76    54    1039
.00 < WS < 6.00  23    9  11    16    17    16    6    30    65    44    16  26  62    23    27    19    410
.00 < WS < 8.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0      0 00 < WS < 10.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0      0
    > 10.00        0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0 Totals      175  100  150    149  248  213  182  252  473    371  232  185  399  230  229    147    3735 Speed (m/s)
Calm                                                                                                        0.00
.00 < WS < 1.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 2.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 3.00  0.12  0.07 0.10  0.10  0.16  0.17  0.16  0.15  0.19  0.18  0.16 0.09 0.16  0.10  0.11  0.08    2.11
.00 < WS < 4.00  0.11  0.07 0.11  0.11  0.19  0.18  0.17  0.20  0.35  0.24  0.14 0.13 0.29  0.17  0.15  0.08    2.68
.00 < WS < 5.00  0.09  0.04 0.08  0.07  0.13  0.07  0.04  0.12  0.31  0.27  0.15 0.11 0.26  0.16  0.16  0.11    2.18
.00 < WS < 6.00  0.05  0.02 0.02  0.03  0.04  0.03  0.01  0.06  0.14  0.09  0.03 0.05 0.13  0.05  0.06  0.04    0.86
.00 < WS < 8.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 00 < WS < 10.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
    > 10.00      0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 Totals      0.37  0.21 0.31  0.31  0.52  0.45  0.38  0.53  0.99  0.78  0.49 0.39 0.84  0.48  0.48  0.31    7.83 NE Medical Technologies                                  2.3-55                                                  Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class F)
Speed (m/s)      N    NNE  NE  ENE    E    ESE    SE  SSE    S    SSW  SW  WSW  W  WNW    NW    NNW    Total Calm                                                                                                        975
.00 < WS < 1.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0      0
.00 < WS < 2.00  26    14  21    18  41    31    21    19    28    32    18  26  36    15    23    19    388
.00 < WS < 3.00  117    74  90    111  158  153  148  164  196    176  164  131  265  192  204    101    2444
.00 < WS < 4.00  37    26  53    32  51    49    50    82  100    85    84  60  109    71    71    38    998
.00 < WS < 5.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0
.00 < WS < 6.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0      0
.00 < WS < 8.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0      0 00 < WS < 10.00    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
    > 10.00        0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0 Totals      180  114  164    161  250  233  219  265  324    293  266  217  410  278  298    158    4805 Speed (m/s)
Calm                                                                                                        2.05
.00 < WS < 1.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 2.00  0.05  0.03 0.04  0.04  0.09  0.07  0.04  0.04  0.06  0.07  0.04 0.05 0.08  0.03  0.05  0.04    0.81
.00 < WS < 3.00  0.25  0.16 0.19  0.23  0.33  0.32  0.31  0.34  0.41  0.37  0.34 0.27 0.56  0.40  0.43  0.21    5.13
.00 < WS < 4.00  0.08  0.05 0.11  0.07  0.11  0.10  0.10  0.17  0.21  0.18  0.18 0.13 0.23  0.15  0.15  0.08    2.09
.00 < WS < 5.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 6.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 8.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 00 < WS < 10.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
    > 10.00      0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 Totals      0.38  0.24 0.34  0.34  0.52  0.49  0.46  0.56  0.68  0.61  0.56 0.46 0.86  0.58  0.63  0.33    10.08 NE Medical Technologies                                  2.3-56                                                  Rev. 0
 
le 2.3 Joint Frequency Distribution of Wind Speed and Wind Direction from the Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport 2005-2010 (Pasquill Stability Class G)
Speed (m/s)      N    NNE  NE  ENE    E    ESE    SE  SSE    S    SSW  SW  WSW  W  WNW    NW    NNW    Total Calm                                                                                                        4053
.00 < WS < 1.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
.00 < WS < 2.00  77    35  38    62  113  106    95    61  101    74    55  72  183  126    92    67    1357
.00 < WS < 3.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
.00 < WS < 4.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
.00 < WS < 5.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0
.00 < WS < 6.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
.00 < WS < 8.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0 00 < WS < 10.00    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0
    > 10.00        0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0    0      0    0    0    0    0    0    0        0 Totals      77    35  38    62  113  106    95    61  101    74    55  72  183  126    92    67    5410 Speed (m/s)
Calm                                                                                                        8.50
.00 < WS < 1.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 2.00  0.16  0.07 0.08  0.13  0.24  0.22  0.20  0.13  0.21  0.16  0.12 0.15 0.38  0.26  0.19  0.14    2.85
.00 < WS < 3.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 4.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 5.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 6.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
.00 < WS < 8.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 00 < WS < 10.00  0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00
    > 10.00      0.00  0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00 0.00 0.00  0.00  0.00  0.00    0.00 Totals      0.16  0.07 0.08  0.13  0.24  0.22  0.20  0.13  0.21  0.16  0.12 0.15 0.38  0.26  0.19  0.14    11.35 NE Medical Technologies                                  2.3-57                                                  Rev. 0
: a. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.3-58 Rev. 0
: a. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.3-59 Rev. 0
: a. Dry bulb temperatures in oF. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.3-60                        Rev. 0
: a. Dry bulb temperatures in oF. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.3-61                        Rev. 0
: a. Dry bulb temperatures in oF. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.3-62                        Rev. 0
: a. Dry bulb temperatures in oF. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.3-63                        Rev. 0
: 1. Water equivalent precipitation in inches. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                            2.3-64                                  Rev. 0
: a. Water equivalent precipitation in inches. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                            2.3-65                                  Rev. 0
: a. Water equivalent precipitation in inches. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                            2.3-66                                  Rev. 0
: a. Water equivalent precipitation in inches. Based on Moran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002.
NE Medical Technologies                            2.3-67                                  Rev. 0
: a. Based on NCDC, 2011j.
NE Medical Technologies  2.3-68 Rev. 0
 
NE Medical Technologies 2.3-69 Rev. 0
: a. Precipitation in inches. Based on Changnon et al., 2004; NCDC, 2011i; and NCDC, 2011j.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.3-70                                        Rev. 0
: a. Snowfall in inches. Based on Changnon et al., 2004; NCDC, 2011i; and NCDC, 2011j.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.3-71                                    Rev. 0
: a. Dry bulb temperature in oF. Based on Changnon et al., 2004; NCDC, 2011i; and NCDC, 2011j.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.3-72                                      Rev. 0
 
NE Medical Technologies 2.3-73 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-74 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-75 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-76 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-77 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-78 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-79 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-80 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-81 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-82 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-83 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-84 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-85 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-86 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-87 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-88 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-89 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-90 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-91 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-92 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.3-93 Rev. 0 REG-1537 requires an assessment of applicable hydrologic, hydrogeologic, and solute sport risks to nuclear facilities, both during operation and post-closure. Surface water (i.e.,
rologic flows) related to rivers and streams that may impact the site are addressed herein.
rmwater runoff at the site scale is addressed under separate studies. The purpose of this pter is to identify hydrological processes that could contribute to radioactive releases, and to racterize the parameters that describe those processes.
section was prepared using available information including 12 months of groundwater ation data. The elevations in this section are reported according to the North American tical Datum of 1988 (NAVD 88).
REG-1537 states that the facility design must consider leakage or loss of primary coolant to undwater. The light water pool (LWP) provides decay heat removal from the target solution in the target solution vessel (TSV) dump tank during normal operations and extended ods of shutdown.
LWP is designed to mitigate the potential for leakage. The LWP stainless steel liner is ely inspected and monitored during fabrication and installation. Liner welds are inspected to ure leak-tightness of the LWP. Liner materials are selected for corrosion resistance. There no failure mechanisms that would degrade the liner welds in the future as there is no ificant thermal cycling/fatigue, corrosion, or pressure that could initiate a leak.
itionally, leakage of primary cooling water is credible from the primary closed loop cooling tem (PCLS). Instrumentation identifies and quantifies leakage rates, including very small s, from the PCLS. The facility structure (FSTR) provides barriers at ground level exits, steel rs and drip pans in vaults and trenches, and water stops in construction joints below grade to vent the release of potentially contaminated water to the environment and groundwater.
refore, leaks in the PCLS do not result a release of primary cooling water outside of the ologically controlled area.
facility design provides for confinement of radioactive materials, as described in Chapter 6, Chapter 13 describes the mitigation of loss of system integrity events. Additionally, the lity has a sanitary drains water management system that confines the postulated maximum harge of water in the radiologically controlled area (RCA), such as from a fire system harge, which prevents potentially contaminated water from reaching the groundwater. A oactive drain system (RDS) also provides capture and confinement of radioactive liquids from tulated leakage or overflow events. Therefore, the required spill scenario would consider the cts of accidental releases of unspecified liquid effluents in groundwater.
1        HYDROLOGICAL DESCRIPTION subsection identifies the site surface water, groundwater aquifers, types of on-site undwater use, sources of recharge, present known withdrawals and likely future withdrawals, rates, travel time, gradients, and other properties that affect movement of accidental taminants in groundwater, groundwater levels beneath the site, seasonal and climatic tuations, monitoring and protection requirements, and man-made changes that have the ential to cause long-term changes in local groundwater regime.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-1                                      Rev. 2
 
k County is drained entirely by the Rock River and its tributaries (see Figure 2.4-1). The site cated approximately 172 river miles (mi.) (272 kilometers [km]) (FEMA, 2008) upstream from mouth of the Rock River where it joins with the Mississippi River. The Rock River is located roximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) west of the site and flows generally north to south from Janesville ated just to the north), around the site. The Rock River has a contributing drainage area of roximately 3340 square miles (sq. mi.) (8650 square kilometers [sq. km]) at the Afton
. Geological Survey (USGS) Gauge located just southwest of the site (FEMA, 2008) ure 2.4-1). Water surface elevations along the Rock River channel during normal flow ditions range from approximately 760 feet (ft.) (232 meters [m]) at Janesville, directly north of site, to approximately 750 ft. (229 m) to the west and south of the site.
or tributaries to the Rock River include the Yahara River, the Sugar River, Raccoon Creek, Turtle Creek. Turtle Creek drains the southeastern portion of Rock County, to its confluence the Rock River near South Beloit, located approximately 8 mi. (13 km) south of the site. An amed creek is located approximately 1 mi. (1.6 km) southeast of the site and is referred to as unnamed tributary in this section. This tributary stream flows east-to-west to where it meets Rock River approximately 2 mi. (3.2 km) south of the site. The stream has a tributary area of roximately 18.4 sq. mi. (47.7 sq. km) (FEMA, 2008).
central and southeastern portions of Rock County are characterized as flat glacial outwash ns. The majority of the County's rivers and stream valleys are filled with thick deposits of vial sand and gravel. The alluvial sediments and upland plains are the result of glacial activity.
face soils include silt loam which are underlain by glacial till or stratified sand and gravel wash units, which then serve as the source sediments to rivers and streams (FEMA, 2008).
site was originally an agricultural field with a center-pivot irrigation system. The fields were ivated with corn and soybeans. Generalized surface topography of the area sloped gently to southwest. In 2012, the ground surface across the proposed site area sloped gently to the hwest with grades dropping about 7 ft. (2 m) from the southeast to the northwest (i.e., from ner-to-corner). In 2012, the ground elevation at the site ranged from approximately 819 ft. to ft. (250 m to 252 m) NAVD 88.
climatology is discussed in Section 2.3.
1.2          General Setting - Groundwater site is located in a glacial deposition subjected to post-glacial erosional and depositional cesses. The topsoil is under-drained by a relatively clean, fine to coarse grained sand nding to depths of 180 to 185 ft. (55 to 56 m). Occasional gravel layers may occur. Below this layer of sandy silt that is 10 to 18 ft. (3 to 5.5 m) deep, which is underlain by silty sand to the ehole termination depth of 221 ft. (64 m). Bedrock was not encountered during drilling, ough soil sampling equipment hit firm surfaces in the three deep boreholes at depths ween 170 and 180 ft. (52 to 55 m). Depth to bedrock at the site may be as deep as 300 ft.
m) (Subsection 2.5.2.1) and it consists of Cambrian and Ordovician sedimentary bedrock nglomerate, dolomite, limestone, sandstone, shale). The carbonate bedrock is susceptible to olution (WGNHS, 2009). The Rock County Hazard Mitigation Plan (Vierbicher, 2010) cates a potential for karst features to form in the county, particularly in the eastern third of the nty, which is east of the site.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.4-2                                        Rev. 2
 
ountered in the deeper boreholes.
monitoring well and remaining geotechnical boreholes were terminated at depths between and 71 ft. (18 and 22 m). Groundwater was encountered in the boreholes during drilling at ations ranging from about 754 to 766 ft. (230 to 233 m), which is about 60 to 65 ft. (18 to m) below grade. Groundwater levels are expected to fluctuate seasonally and annually with nges in precipitation patterns. Apart from the exploration holes, there is no man-made activity he site which affects natural groundwater conditions. However, there are irrigation wells rated on properties in the vicinity that have the potential to influence groundwater levels.
groundwater is expected to be recharged through precipitation (infiltration) and underground from the background domains. Underground water flow is assumed to occur within the aturated zone (the thickness of this zone is about 50 to 60 ft. [15 to 18 m]) and the saturated
: e. The ultimate discharge of the flow system is represented by the Rock River and its utaries.
l data was obtained from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR) database provided information on wells established since 1988. While historic well construction reports ld be obtained from the Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS, 2009),
WDNR database was determined to provide a better basis for evaluation of current flow rates flow directions for site characterization as the well data was more recent and more accurate.
licly available information from the WDNR included well locations, pumping rates, and ened intervals. The well coordinates were estimated using the street address reported from WDNR database. From this data set, potentiometric surfaces within four square miles of the were generated for analysis. Figure 2.4-7 and Figure 2.4-8 provide four mile by four mile le potentiometric surfaces based on these wells using non-pumped (static) and pumped ditions, respectively. These surfaces were created by using the Kriging process on the wells.
groundwater flow direction on the site is towards the Rock River for both the pumped and
-pumped conditions. Consequently, withdrawals from wells within a five mile radius of the site not expected to change the flow direction of groundwater on the site. During a review of the listing, well UJ792, which is located about 2,000 ft. from the site, was determined to have the est pumping head of the wells closest to the site. Using Darcys Law, the advective travel s for well UJ792 was calculated to be 0.1 years, using expected permeability and porosity umptions, and 0.01 years, using conservative permeability and porosity assumptions ble 2.4-12).
1.3          Present Withdrawals and Known and Likely Future Withdrawals facility design does not include groundwater withdrawal or injection, and no planned future ction or withdrawal is expected to have a significant impact on facility operation or safety.
1.4          Groundwater Flow following paragraphs describe the local and regional groundwater flow conditions. The flow tem contains the following steps as shown in Figure 2.4-2 (Gaffield et al., 2002):
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-3                                        Rev. 2
 
      - Underground recharge
* Underground flow
      - Unsaturated flow
      - Saturated flow
* Discharge order of steps follows the evolution of the flow system and can be used to track potential taminant pathways. NUREG-1537 requires the consideration and assessment of risks related ydrologic, hydrogeologic and solute transport processes. To meet this requirement at each
  , potential hazards and safety factors are discussed in detail.
he regional scale, there is a large body of literature on the groundwater system (LeRoux, 3 and Gaffield et al., 2002); however, at the scale of the site, the available information is ed primarily on drilling, testing and geotechnical analyses at the site.
depicted in Figure 2.4-2, recharge of the flow system may occur in two ways:
* Precipitation and infiltration through the ground surface
* Underground flow from background domains site-specific information is available to estimate infiltration rates. Gaffield et al. used a bration procedure for their model to get the best fit between measured and simulated undwater levels and streamflows in Rock County (Gaffield et al., 2002). This study considered 457 feet per day (ft./day) (139 meters per day [m/day]) hydraulic conductivity for sand and vel layers close to the surface (Figure 2.4-2) and determined that the corresponding recharge for these layers would be 12.7 inches per year (in./yr) (32.3 centimeters per year [cm/yr]).
ther groundwater recharge mechanism at the site is flow from the surrounding upland areas higher groundwater levels. Evidence for this process is provided by the site monitoring tem (Figure 2.4-3), which reveals that flow direction is NNE-SSW year-round (Figure 2.4-4). A manent recharge from upland areas is expected under the site because groundwater moves higher to lower potentials.
part of the precipitation infiltrates into the soil layers, water moves first through the aturated zone, then reaches the water table and travels through the saturated zone to the ential discharge regions. The highest conductivity values can be measured in the saturated on; in the unsaturated zone the migration of water is relatively slow compared to the rated zone (assuming the same material in both zones, which is the case at the site).
water table was encountered in the boreholes at elevations ranging from 754 to 766 ft.
0 to 233 m) (Table 2.4-1; Figure 2.4-5). Table 2.4-1 only presents estimates of the water e, which indicate local variability but no trends. However, the longer term monitoring data vides additional information about the water table (Table 2.4-2). Based on this long term nitoring data, the groundwater flow direction is dominantly NNE-SSW (Figure 2.4-4) below the
, indicating that the flow regime is relatively stable. The water table fluctuation was a ximum of 2.2 ft. (0.67 m) during the monitoring period. This observation was corroborated by er table estimations from 1958 (Figure 2.4-6) at larger time scales. The consistency in water NE Medical Technologies                        2.4-4                                        Rev. 2
 
characterize the hydraulic conductivity of the sandy layers at the site, in-situ hydraulic slug s were performed in the monitoring wells. Both falling and rising head tests were conducted.
tests are summarized in Table 2.4-3. The results of Advanced Aquifer Test Analysis tware (AQTESOLV) (Hydrosolve, 2011) hydraulic conductivity evaluations are presented in le 2.4-4. The average conductivity was 0.0045 feet per second (ft./sec) (0.00137 m/s) based he empirical/analytical method of Bouwer and Rice (Bouwer and Rice, 1976). The arithmetic an of the AQTESOLV hydraulic conductivity values from on-site slug tests is 0.0045 ft./sec.
geometric mean of the AQTESOLV hydraulic conductivity values from on-site slug tests is 041 ft./sec. Since the calculated arithmetic mean of the hydraulic conductivity values was nd to be more conservative than the calculated geometric mean of the hydraulic conductivity es, the arithmetic mean of the hydraulic conductivity values was used to calculate the ected advective travel times provided in Table 2.4-12.
ause the density of sand increases with depth, it is likely that results of well test rpretations are upper bounds for lower sand layers. A hydraulic conductivity of 0.004 ft./sec 0122 m/s) is considered to be an appropriate estimate for the sand deposits. This value is y close to the value reported by Gaffield et al. based on the calibration procedure of their lytic element model (457 ft./day=0.0052 ft./sec) (Gaffield et al., 2002). Based on this ductivity estimate and the hydraulic gradients, the Darcy flux is 2.06 x 10-6 ft./sec and 7 x 10-6 ft./sec (6.28 x 10-7 and 9.36 x 10-7 m/s) in east-west (EW) and north-south (NS) ction, respectively (hydraulic conductivity [k] =0.004 ft./sec [0.0012 m/s]; gradient is ulated as the average hydraulic gradient presented in Figure 2.4-5). This flux rate is two ers of magnitude higher than that assumed by Gaffield et al. (Gaffield et al., 2002) for tration (12.7 in/yr = 3.35 x 10-8 ft./sec [1.02 x 10-8 m/s]). The higher flux rate indicates that a ificant part of the recharge to the groundwater beneath the site is coming from off site.
ce groundwater moves from higher groundwater level areas to low level areas, groundwater ally discharges to surface water (lake, river, etc.). The Janesville area is drained entirely by Rock River and its tributaries. Based on long-term monitoring data, the groundwater flow ction is dominantly NNE-SSW (Figure 2.4-4) below the site.
2        FLOODS subsection identifies historical flooding (defined as occurrences of abnormally high water e or overflow from a stream, floodway, lake, or coastal area) at the site.
2.1          Rock River Flows Rock River and the unnamed tributary stream are subject to flooding throughout the year; ever, the largest potential for flooding occurs during the spring runoff. These floods are the ult of combined precipitation and rain-on-snow events. Peak flows occurring during winter nths when temperatures are low can also result in ice jam events. A USGS gauge on the k River is located approximately 2.5 mi. (4.0 km) to the west of the site (Figure 2.4-1). The ion of the Rock River basin contributing to the site is approximately the same as the basin tributing to the USGS gauge site (i.e., the site is not significantly upstream or downstream of gauge location relative to the basin area). Flows recorded at the gauge are therefore licable and closely represent analogous conditions at the site and do not need to be scaled NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-5                                          Rev. 2
 
USGS web-based flow data were reviewed for the gauge site near Afton, located just across river from the airport and just southwest of the site. This site has a period of record of nearly years dating back to 1914 and is an applicable flow record of the Rock River near the site.
asurements at the USGS gauge show a flow rate of about 10,000 to 13,000 cubic feet per ond (cfs) (283 to 368 cubic meters per second [m3/sec]) for the peak historical flood events, the maximum flow rate being 16,700 cfs (473 m3/sec) observed in June 2008. Based on this ord, the flows of 10,000 to 13,000 cfs (283 to 368 m3/sec) correspond approximately to the year to 50-year events (FEMA, 2008). The peak flow of 16,700 cfs (473 m3/sec) is generally sistent with the 100-year flood levels along the Rock River (Janesville, 2008 and FEMA, 8). The flood level at the USGS gauge at Afton during the 2008 flood was approximately ft. (230 m) in elevation (FEMA, 2008).
2.2          Flood Record Details and Elevations Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) completed a flood hazard assessment for k County in August 2008 that looked at existence and severity of flood-related hazards, uding the areas around the site. The study included the Rock River where it passes by the (at approximately river mile 172 upstream from the confluence with the Mississippi River) the unnamed tributary stream located just to the south of the site (Figure 2.4-1).
MA completed hydrologic and hydraulic analyses for the Rock River and the unnamed utary stream to estimate flow magnitudes for various recurrence interval flood events and to mate the water surface elevations for corresponding flood events. Table 2.4-5 provides a mary of flows for the Rock River for the reach from Janesville (river mile 178) to Afton near USGS gauge (river mile 172), located just across the river from the site and the airport.
vations are reported as an approximate range, based on the FEMA 2008 flood profiles, with higher elevation corresponding to the upstream end of the reach at Janesville and the lower ation at the downstream end near the USGS gauge at Afton. Table 2.4-6 provides a similar mary for the unnamed tributary to the Rock River for the reach between US 51 and Prairie d just to the south of the site. The range of reported elevations is similarly derived from the MA 2008 flood profiles. Channel bottom elevations are based on surveys that supported the MA 2008 studies.
MA estimated the 100-year flood level as approximately 755 ft. (230 m) for the location of the GS gauge at Afton (Table 2.4-5), which correlates well with the gauge flows and esponding observed flood levels during the 2008 flood at the same location (FEMA, 2008).
estimated 500-year flood level is 756 ft. (230.4 m) (FEMA, 2008) (Table 2.4-5). The results w that the 100-year and 500-year floodwater surface elevations for the Rock River are well w the 825 ft. ground floor elevation of the main production facility and the material staging ding for the full reach of the Rock River extending from Janesville downstream and around site through Afton (Table 2.4-5). Similarly, the 100-year and 500-year floodwater surface ations for the unnamed tributary to the Rock River, for the reach just south of the site ble 2.4-6), are well below the facility ground floor elevation.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-6                                        Rev. 2
 
effect of the design basis rainfall event on the areas adjacent to safety-related structures of facility, including the drainage from the roofs of the structures, was evaluated. The maximum er levels due to the design basis rainfall event were estimated near the safety-related ctures of the facility based on the site topographic survey map.
elevations in this subsection are referenced to the NAVD 88.
rainage system designed to carry runoff from the site up to a 100-year rainfall event consists onveying water from roofs, as well as runoff from the site and adjacent areas, to peripheral hes. The facility is surrounded by berms with interior ditches along the berms. The plant site raded such that the high point of grade is set at Elevation 827 ft. (252.1 m). The grade around structures slopes towards the peripheral ditches. The storm water drains into the peripheral hes. A plan showing the delineated off-site drainage area is presented in Figure 2.4-11.
ipheral diversion swales and berms north and east of the site are provided to divert the off-runoff around the facility area. During a 100-year rainfall event, the storm water drainage tem is conservatively assumed to be not functional. No active surface water drainage erway exists which flows towards the site. Runoff from the off-site area northeast of the site s towards the site. The off-site area is relatively flat.
finished site grade elevation is approximately 825 ft. (251.46 m), and the top of the finished ndation elevation is at least 4 inches (in.) above grade; therefore, water will not infiltrate the r openings in the case of a design basis rainfall event.
site is designed to withstand the effects of a design basis rainfall event, defined as the fall values and intensities associated with a 1-in-100-year rainfall event. The values and nsities associated with a 1-in-100-year rainfall event are provided in Table 2.4-7. The values intensities were determined from the 100-year rainfall intensity-duration-frequency curve for dison, Wisconsin (WDOT, 1979) (Figure 2.4-10).
site is protected from flooding by a developed drainage channel on the north and east sides he site and an existing drainage channel east and southeast of the site (Figure 2.4-11) ure 2.4-12). Off-site runoff approaches the site from the north or northeast (Figure 2.4-11).
developed drainage channel on the north and east sides of the facility directs off-site runoff y from the facility. Off-site runoff that flows from the north towards the site is captured by the nnel which directs flow to an uncontrolled sub-basin on the west side of the site ure 2.4-11). The runoff flow rate was calculated as 42 cfs. The upstream bank elevation of channel is 827 ft. The channel is approximately 1100 ft. long with a 0.8% slope. In the event 100-year storm, the water surface elevation at the upstream end of the channel reaches a ximum height of 826.3 ft., which is below the bank height.
site runoff that flows from the northeast towards the site is captured by an existing channel theast of the site that flows to an unnamed tributary approximately one mile south of the site ure 2.4-1) (Table 2.4-6). The unnamed tributary flows east-to-west and meets the Rock River roximately two miles south of the site. To determine the maximum water depth in the existing nnel from the 100-year rainfall event drainage, runoff from the entire 91 acre site was servatively evaluated as conveyed by the existing channel. The runoff flow rate was ulated as 197 cfs. The maximum surface water elevation in the existing channel from a NE Medical Technologies                        2.4-7                                        Rev. 2
 
ts downstream end (south of the site), below its downstream bank elevation of 819.5 ft.
rmwater inside the site boundary (e.g., paved areas) is directed to a stormwater management em (Figure 2.4-11). The facility design includes two infiltration cells that collect site runoff for purpose of controlling total suspended solids (Figure 2.4-11). Infiltration cell #1 collects nage, and at 810 ft. elevation, flows via a spillway to infiltration cell #2. The infiltration cells e a peak water surface elevation of 810 ft. during a 100-year storm event and will not pose a flooding concern.
low points surrounding the main production facility were conservatively analyzed for ximum flood depth from the 100-year rainfall event (Figure 2.4-12). The maximum depth in all points from impounded water is below the ground floor elevations of the main production lity and material staging building, with margin.
off flow rates for channel drainage were calculated using the Soil Conservation Service S) methodology. Runoff, Qin, for the 100-year storm event:
2 P - 0.2S Q in = ----------------------------        Equation 2.4-1 P + 0.0S ere:
* Q is the Runoff (in.)
* P is the Rainfall (in., 24-hour period)
* S is the Potential maximum retention after runoff beings (in.)
1000 S = ------------- - 10                      Equation 2.4-2 CN ere:
* CN is the Runoff Curve Number q p = qu  A m  Q in  Fp                      Equation 2.4-3 ere:
* qp is the Peak Discharge (cfs)
* qu is the Unit Peak Discharge (csm/in.)
* Am is the Drainage area (mi2)
* Qin is the Runoff (inches)
* Fp is the Pond and Swamp Adjustment Factor off flow rates for evaluating site impounded areas were calculated using the Rational Dekalb hod:
Q 100 = C  I  A                            Equation 2.4-4 NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-8                                            Rev. 2
* C is the Runoff coefficient
* I is the Intensity in inches/hour (in./hr)
* A is the Area, in acres 2.4          River or Stream Flooding PMF is calculated in Subsection 2.4.3 and corresponds to a flow of 133,000 cfs 66 m3/sec) on the Rock River. The main production facility ground elevation is at roximately 825 ft. (251 m) NAVD 88, which is approximately 51 ft. (15 m) above the ulated PMF shown in Table 2.4-9. The vertical separation between the PMF water level and facility ground elevation precludes potential inundation at the site and provides sufficient gin to prevent wind generated waves from reaching the site. Inundation and wind induced es are not a credible threat to the facility.
discussed in Subsection 2.4.2.8, seismically induced dam failure is not a credible risk for ating flooding greater than that calculated for the PMF.
jams were considered as part of the PMF. Given the substantial vertical margin between the elevation and the PMF elevation, ice jams are not a credible threat to the facility.
2.5          Surges site is not adjacent to a sea coast subject to hurricanes. Consequently, surge due to bable maximum hurricane (PMH) is not a credible threat to the facility. Similarly, PMH wind maximum windstorm-induced (non-hurricane) wave action is also not applicable to the site.
en the substantial margin that exists between the facility ground floor and the PMF elevation, ges due to wave action on the Rock River are not a credible threat.
2.6          Seiches site is approximately 63 mi. (101 km) from the nearest large body of water (Lake Michigan)
GS, 1971). Consequently, meteorologically induced seiches in inland lakes, coastal harbors, embayments are not a credible threat to the facility. The maximum seiche reported for Lake higan (Hughes, 1965) is approximately 2 to 4 ft. (0.6 to 1.2 m) high.
2.7          Tsunami nami hazards would theoretically originate from Lake Michigan, located approximately 63 mi.
1 km) to the east of the site. The elevation of the lake in the Kenosha area is approximately ft. (177 m) (USGS, 2012b), which is approximately 245 ft. (75 m) below the ground floor ation of the facility. While large waves may be generated in Lake Michigan, it is not a credible nario that this wave would be greater than 245 ft. and then maintain any appreciable height r the more than 60 mi. (96 km) to the site. Therefore, the risk of tsunami is not credible, uding seismic, hillslope failure, and submarine landslide generated tsunami-like waves.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.4-9                                      Rev. 2
 
ential dam failures affecting the site are addressed in Subsection 2.4.4. Seismic risks for the are covered in Section 2.5. As described in Subsection 2.4.4, dam failures induced by any rce (including operating basis earthquake [OBE]) will not cause flooding that would reach the und floor elevation. Failure of dam structures coincident with runoff, surge, or seiche floods ld also not reach the site elevation, even considering a 25-year flood event.
2.9          Flooding Caused by Landslides smically induced flooding typically is the result of landslides (above or below water) that cause d waves. As discussed in Section 2.5, the site is not subject to significant seismic hazards.
site is also not adjacent to a body of water subject to flooding caused by landslides. Dams tream of the site that could be affected by landslides are addressed in Subsection 2.4.4. Dam res induced by landslides will not cause flooding that could reach the facility ground floor ation. Similarly, landslide-induced dam failure or overtopping would not produce runoff, ge, or seiche floods that could reach the site.
2.10        Effects of Ice Formation in Water Bodies large vertical separation between the PMF elevation and the ground elevation at the site is umed to preclude the potential for impacts from ice jams at the site. Ice effects on water ies are described in more detail in Subsection 2.4.7.
estimation of the PMF at the site incorporates the assumed magnitude of the probable ximum flood event, which includes consideration of the occurrence of historical ice jam ved flood events along with all other historical flood events. As such, the estimated PMF flood ation includes the maximum estimated water level from ice jam events. The PMF elevation is
: t. (15 m) below the facility ground floor elevation, and therefore there is not a credible nario under which an ice jam derived flood event would impact the site.
2.11        Combined Events Criteria PMF (133,000 cfs [3766 m3/sec]) is seven times greater than the 500-year flood as stated by MA (Table 2.4-9). This indicates that the PMF based on the NRC Regulatory Guide 3.40 and 9 approach considers multiple combined events with an effective probability of less than 00 (0.2 percent) (USNRC, 1977a; USNRC, 1977b).
n for this extreme event, however, the river elevation would only reach 774 ft. (235 m), which 1 ft. (15 m) below the site ground elevation of approximately 825 ft. (251 m) (Table 2.4-9).
3        PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD ON STREAMS AND RIVERS subsection defines the probable maximum flood (PMF) that will be used to establish the ign basis flood level, and determine if any structures, systems, and components require flood ection.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.4-10                                        Rev. 2
 
PMF for the site is estimated using procedures developed by the NRC in Regulatory des 3.40 and 1.59, and by referencing U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data (USNRC, 1977a; NRC, 1977b; USACE, 1984). The NRC provides alternative and simplified methods for mating PMF events to address planning studies, to provide an initial basis for understanding order of magnitude for the PMF at a given site, for smaller scale sites, and for sites where information is available.
second revision to Regulatory Guide 1.59, Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants NRC, 1977a), was used to estimate the PMF for a given site based on the corresponding nage area, for sites in the eastern portion of the United States. The NRC guidelines provide nes that are enveloped PMF estimates for the eastern United States based on PMF mates in identified river basins (with known drainage basin area, runoff, and PMF peak harges) to estimate the PMF in a targeted basin by using Creager curves (Regulatory de 1.59, USNRC, 1977a). Creager curves were developed based on estimated PMF peak s based on basin size and historical flood data from around the world. Furthermore, the NRC ument includes PMF estimates for the Rock River at a location downstream of the site gulatory Guide 1.59, USNRC, 1977a).
following comparisons of available PMF information were considered in the review of the F at the site:
* Direct-Ratio Area-Adjusted PMF
    - Uses the ratio of drainage areas at Janesville (Afton Gage), 3340 sq. mi.
(8651 sq. km) to the drainage area published in Regulatory Guide 1.59 at Byron, Illinois, 8000 sq. mi. (20,720 sq. km).
* Area-Adjusted PMF for Area Downstream of Indianford Dam plus Indianford Dam Spillway Capacity
    - Uses the Creager formula to estimate the PMF of the contributing drainage area downstream of Indianford Dam by using the 'C' value estimated from the PMF at Byron, Illinois published in Regulatory Guide 1.59.
    - Assumes discharge from Indianford is the maximum spillway capacity of 8000 cfs (227 m3/sec), as published by the WDNR (WDNR, 2012a), but does not consider the effects of dam overtopping and/or failure.
    - This method attempts to account for the impact of Lake Koshkonong.
* Area-Adjusted PMF using Creager Formula with Total Drainage Area
    - Uses the Creager formula to estimate the PMF of the total contributing drainage area at Janesville (Afton Gage) by using the 'C' value estimated from the PMF at Byron, Illinois published in Regulatory Guide 1.59.
    - This method neglects the effects of Lake Koshkonong.
* Downstream PMF at Byron, Illinois
    - Does not adjust for drainage area and uses the PMF flow for a contributing drainage area over twice the size as represented for Janesville.
    - This method is highly conservative.
ed on the NRC simplified approach for estimating the PMF, and by using only the isolines the nomographs provided in the guidelines, the envelope for the PMF for the drainage area esponding to the site and location would be between approximately 250,000 and 500,000 cfs 79 and 14,158 m3/sec) (Regulatory Guide 1.59). The NRC document also publishes the peak NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-11                                      Rev. 2
 
on, Illinois (located downstream of the site) is published with a peak discharge of 308,000 cfs 21 m3/sec) for a contributing drainage area of 8000 sq. mi. [20,719 sq. km]. Therefore, this mate of PMF is considered more representative of the contributing basin characteristics than g the isolines. Considering that the contributing basin area to the site (i.e., 3340 sq. mi.
50 sq. km]) is less than the contributing basin area on the Rock River at Byron, Illinois (i.e.,
0 sq. mi. [20,719 sq. km]), the PMF peak flow for the Rock River near the site should be less n the 308,000 cfs (8721 m3/sec) estimated at Byron. The estimated PMF for the site is
,000 cfs (3766 m3/sec). The PMF value was calculated based on the methods as described ve and as summarized in Table 2.4-9 and Table 2.4-10.
PMF estimates, using the methods as outlined above, are provided in Table 2.4-9.
ameters used in these calculations are summarized in Table 2.4-10.
PMF flows (Table 2.4-9) were used in a hydraulic calculation at a cross-section of the Rock er and adjacent floodplain at the USGS Afton gauging station, located adjacent the site and renced previously in this subsection (Figure 2.4-13). The calculation estimated water surface ations for the 100- and 500-year recurrence interval flows, as well as the established PMF values. The corresponding water surface elevations correlated closely to the FEMA blished flood levels for the 100- and 500-year flood events.
3.2          Design Bases for Flooding in Streams and Rivers estimated PMF for the site corresponds to a flow of 133,000 cfs (3766 m3/sec) on the Rock er. The PMF value was calculated based on the methods as described in Subsection 2.4.3.1 as summarized in Tables 2.4-9 and 2.4-10. The corresponding flood elevation on the Rock er is 774 ft. (235 m), which is below the ground floor elevation of the facility. Therefore, the is not affected by this flood. The flood design basis for the facility is discussed in Section 3.3.
4        POTENTIAL DAM FAILURES Rock River has two dams located upstream of the site (Table 2.4-11). The Centerway Dam cated in the city of Janesville (Figure 2.4-9) (Figure 2.4-14). The dam is not designed or rated as a flood control structure, and therefore, it has limited impoundment (FEMA, 2008).
such, the dam does not represent a potential hazard to downstream reaches of the river nnel from increased release or modification to flood flow or in response to planned or lanned operational flow.
Indianford Dam is located approximately 25 river mi. (40 km) upstream of the site and roximately 20 river mi. (32 km) upstream of Janesville (Figure 2.4-9) (Figure 2.4-14). The anford Dam impounds Lake Koshkonong, which is a naturally occurring lake that has been icially increased in level and size by the Indianford Dam, creating a lake with a surface area bout 16.3 sq. mi. (42.2 sq. km). The maximum depth of Lake Koshkonong is 7 ft. (2.1 m)
NR, 2012b). The contributing drainage area upstream of the lake outlet at the Indianford m is approximately 2560 sq. mi. (6630 sq. km), or approximately 77 percent of the contributing nage area of the Rock River basin at the site location. The Indianford Dam is run-of-river, increases the lake level by 5 to 6 ft. (1.5 to 1.8 m), and is tailwater controlled. The available age capacity of the lake could be a significant mitigating factor during any flood event. As h, the size of Lake Koshkonong is expected to produce an attenuating effect on potential NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-12                                        Rev. 2
 
nuation benefits on the lake itself.
4.1          Flood Waves from Severe Breaching of an Upstream Dam ed on the potential dam failure discussed in Subsection 2.4.4, there is no credible scenario in ch flood waves resulting from a dam breach or failure, including those due to hydrologic re as a result of overtopping for any reason, would be routed to the site and would result in a er surface elevation that may result in flooding of safety-related structures, systems and ponents.
dams upstream of the site on the Rock River are low, small and tail-water controlled, ctively mitigating the potential for causing flood waves in the event they were breached.
4.2          Domino-Type or Cascading Dam Failures ed on the discussion in Subsection 2.4.4, there is no credible scenario in which successive res of several dams in the path to the plant site caused by failure of an upstream dam due to sible reasons, such as probable maximum flood, landslide-induced severe flood, hquakes, or volcanic activity, would affect the highest water surface elevation at the site er the cascading failure conditions.
4.3          Dynamic Effects on Structures ed on the discussion in Subsection 2.4.4, dynamic effects of dam failure-induced flood waves afety-related structures, systems and components is not a credible scenario.
4.4          Loss of Water Supply Due to Failure of a Downstream Dam to facility design, a safety-related water supply is not required. Therefore, the facility would be influenced by failure of a downstream dam. All water for facility operation is supplied by City of Janesville public water supply system. Therefore, low water considerations are not licable.
4.5          Effects of Sediment Deposition and Erosion to the facility design, the effects of sediment deposition or erosion during dam failure-ced flood waves that may result in blockage or loss would not influence the function of ty-related structures, systems and components.
4.6          Failure of On-site Water Control or Storage Structures significant levees, dikes, or engineered water storage facilities are required for this facility ch could induce flooding at the site.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-13                                        Rev. 2
 
5.1          Probable Maximum Hurricane site is not adjacent to a sea coast subject to hurricanes. Consequently, surge due to bable maximum hurricane (PMH) is not a credible threat to the facility.
5.2            Seiche and Resonance che and surge flooding are related to the oscillation of the water surface in an enclosed or i-enclosed body of water that is initiated by an external cause (USNRC, 2011). These flood ards pertain to sites along the edge of lakes and large bodies of water. The site is not cent to open bodies of water or lakes. The site is 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the Rock River, and mi. (101 km) from the nearest large body of water (Lake Michigan). The record high seiche on e Michigan occurred on June 26, 1954 (at Chicago). This wave was 2 to 4 ft. (0.6 to 1.2 m)
(Hughes, 1965), significantly less than the difference in elevation between the Rock River the site. Thus, no hazards are expected to exist from seiche or surge flooding.
itionally, the likelihood that a flood wave could be generated in the Rock River that is greater n the flood conditions addressed in the previous discussion of the PMF is highly unlikely. As h, and in the event that a seiche or surge or seismically induced flood event could occur, its d characteristics would be far smaller in size and nature than what was estimated for the PMF would not impact the site.
5.3          Wave Runup site is not located near a large body of open water. As such, wind-induced wave runup under H or probable maximum wind storm (PMWS) winds are expected to be less than those for the F. As such, the PMH and PMWS induced wave runup is not considered a credible hazard.
only body of water near the site is the Rock River. Even during a peak event of flooding, h as the PMF, the river is located at least 2 mi. (3.2 km) laterally away from the site and has roximately 38 to 64 ft. (12 to 20 m) of vertical separation between the PMF water level and ground floor elevation at the site (Table 2.4-9). As such, wave runup that may originate from PMF inundated area is not expected to pose a threat to the site.
5.4          Effects of Sediment Erosion and Deposition iment erosion and deposition during storm surge and seiche-induced waves that may result lockage or loss of function of safety-related structures, systems and components is not a dible scenario.
6        PROBABLE MAXIMUM TSUNAMI HAZARDS subsection provides the geohydrological design basis developed to ensure that any ential hazards to the safety-related structures, systems and components due to effects of a bable maximum tsunami are considered in the plant design.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-14                                      Rev. 2
 
orical tsunami data, including paleotsunami mappings and interpretations, regional records eyewitness reports, and more recently available tide gauge and real-time bottom pressure ge data, are not available for the site. The site has not been subjected to tsunami forces due s inland location.
6.2          Probable Maximum Tsunami noted in Subsection 2.4.2.7, tsunami hazards would originate from Lake Michigan, located roximately 63 mi. (101 km) to the east of the site. While a large wave generated in Lake higan is possible, it is not a credible scenario that it would be greater than 230 ft. (670 m) in ht and maintain any appreciable height over the more than 60 mi. (97 km) to the site. This gests the risk of tsunami is correspondingly not credible. The probable maximum tsunami T) is, therefore, not applicable to this site.
7        ICE EFFECTS hydrometeorological design basis is developed in this subsection to ensure that safety-ted facilities and water supply are not affected by ice-induced hazards.
7.1          Historical Ice Accumulation orical ice accumulations (e.g., ice jams, wind-driven ice ridges, floes, frazil ice formation, etc.)
he Rock River are reported in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Ice Jam Database (USACE, 2). A total of 133 events are recorded for the Rock River.
7.2          High and Low Water Levels potential effects of ice-induced high or low flow levels are assumed to be addressed within bounds of the PMF estimates provided in Subsection 2.4.3.1. Ice effects on high water levels not considered to present a threat to the site. Ice-induced high flow levels would be less than
.1 ft. (235 m) (Table 2.4-9). This is 51 ft. (15 m) below the site ground elevation of 825.1 ft.
1 m). The separation of 51 ft. (15 m) ensures that ice-induced high flow levels or low flow ls do not represent a credible threat to the facility.
7.3          Ice Sheet Formation potential of a surface ice-sheet reducing the volume of available liquid water in safety-related er reservoirs is not applicable to the facility because safety-related water requirements do not ude a surface water reservoir that is exposed to the environment.
7.4          Ice-Induced Forces and Blockages potential for ice-produced forces on, or blockage of, safety-related facilities is minimal at the
, due to its location 2 mi. (3.2 km) from the Rock River and 63 mi. (101 km) from the nearest e body of water (Lake Michigan).
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-15                                          Rev. 2
 
als and reservoirs used to transport and impound water supplied to the safety-related ctures, systems and components are not included in the design of the facility.
9        CHANNEL DIVERSIONS river channel diversions are included in the design of the facility.
10      GROUNDWATER CONTAMINATION CONSIDERATIONS subsection describes groundwater conditions as they pertain to potential contamination at site.
10.1        Contamination Effects on Local and Regional Groundwater er level maps (Figure 2.4-4) indicate that groundwater flow directions are NNE-SSW.
11      ACCIDENTAL RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVE LIQUID EFFLUENTS IN GROUND AND SURFACE WATERS hydrogeological characteristics of the site are evaluated in this subsection to support safety lyses described in Chapter 13.
11.1        Alternate Conceptual Models yer et al. defined the conceptual model as "a hypothesis or interpretation about the behavior he system to be modeled and of the connection between the components of the system" NRC, 2004). The site is underlain by simple alluvial and glacial geology. No alternative ceptual model is applicable.
11.2        Pathways discussed in Subsection 2.4.1.4, accidentally released radioactive contaminants are assumed igrate along the following pathway:
: a. Unsaturated zone
: b. Saturated zone
: c. Discharge at Rock River and its tributaries he unsaturated zone the dominant direction of contaminant migration is downward, driven by vity and capillary forces.
liminary estimates can be made on advective particle travel times between the site and the ential discharge points, based on field measurements and available field information. The city of groundwater can be calculated by using the well-known Darcy Law (Bear, 1972):
h q = k  -------                          Equation 2.4-5 l
NE Medical Technologies                    2.4-16                                        Rev. 2
* k is the Hydraulic conductivity Rainfall (in., 24-hour period)
* h is the Difference of head
* I is the Distance wever, water moves only through a portion of space (between the grains of the soil); therefore, as to be divided by porosity to get water velocity:
q v = ---                              Equation 2.4-6 n
ere:
* n is the Porosity
* v is the Velocity knowing the distance between the source and the discharge point, an estimate can be made.
calculation is conservative in the following ways:
* Particles were released at the groundwater table, so the unsaturated zone had not been considered in the calculations due to the limited information available.
* The model is one-dimensional, so three-dimensional development of contaminant plume had not been modeled; pathways run straight from the site to the discharge points or areas.
* Important transport processes (adsorption, dispersion, diffusion, decay, dilution) were not involved in the calculations - only advective travel times have been estimated.
* Homogeneous, high conductivity values have been assigned to the model, no parameter heterogeneity has been considered.
* No dilution is considered along the bed of the Rock River and within the groundwater system.
ed on these assumptions, the calculation travel times and concentrations bound those that ld be involved in an actual event.
ummary of parameters used for advective travel time estimations in the saturated zone is sented in Table 2.4-12. The calculations have been carried out for assumed release locations t and south to the Rock River, and to water supply wells MF461 and UJ792, identified as the rest off-site features applicable for groundwater pathways. Using Equations 2.4-5 and 2.4-6, le 2.4-12 provides advective groundwater travel times for two conservative cases: Expected raulic conductivity and porosity, and Conservative hydraulic conductivity and porosity.
ercent effective transport porosity is used for the Expected cases. Typical 20 percent osity in Rock County, WI, stated by Gaffield et al. (Gaffield et al., 2002) is not consistent with
-specific soil conditions described in Subsection 2.5.2.3. Yu C., et al., Data Collection dbook to Support Modeling Impacts of Radioactive Material in Soil (USDOE, 1993), provided hmetic mean effective porosity values of 30 percent, 32 percent, and 33 percent for coarse, dium, and fine sand, respectively, which are more typical of the subsurface conditions at the
; therefore, 30 percent porosity is used to calculate expected advective travel times. The servative cases utilize a 10 percent porosity value. Note that all cases use very conservative NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-17                                        Rev. 2
 
nding estimates for travel time through the unsaturated zone, or vadose zone, were ermined based on the estimated travel distance (thickness) of the vadose zone and the mated velocity of groundwater travel through the vadose zone. For vertical flow, the travel ance is calculated as the thickness of the vadose zone. The thickness of the vadose zone can estimated as the difference between the surface and water elevations in boreholes drilled at site, provided in Table 2.4-1. Estimates of vadose zone thickness are provided in le 2.4-13. A reasonable representative vadose zone thickness for travel time calculations can aken as the minimum measured vadose zone thickness of 50 ft. As described in section 2.4.1.4, water table fluctuation at the site can be estimated to be two feet. A lower nd vadose zone thickness was estimated as the minimum measured vadose zone thickness ft.) minus three times the estimated water table fluctuation (two feet), or 44 ft. An upper nd vadose zone thickness was estimated as the maximum measured thickness (65 ft.) plus e times the estimated water table fluctuation (two feet), or 71 ft. As described above, the city of groundwater can be calculated using Darcys Law. The effective hydraulic conductivity vadose zone transport was derived by applying a characteristic curve to the measured raulic conductivity values provided in Table 2.4-12 to adjust for the effect of water saturation.
effective gradient of 100 percent for vadose zone transport was assumed. Bounding mates for travel time through the vadose zone are provided in Table 2.4-14.
re are four test wells within the property boundary for the facility which were used for nitoring groundwater in support of the initial hydrological assessment of the site. During the selection characterization, some preliminary analysis of advective travel times in undwater were performed, as described in Subsection 2.4.11.2 and Table 2.4-12.
id effluent is not routinely discharged from the RCA. Liquid radioactive wastes generated at facility are generally solidified and shipped to a disposal facility. Radioactive liquid discharges the SHINE facility to the sanitary sewer are infrequent and made in accordance with CFR 20.2003 and 10 CFR 20.2007. There are no piped liquid effluent pathways from the RCA he sanitary sewer. Sampling is used to determine suitability for release. Ramps at the ances to the RCA limit the release of unplanned water discharges in the RCA, such as from a ling water system rupture or firefighting hose discharge. Therefore, accident radioactive ases from the facility are limited to releases via the airborne pathway.
re are no accidental radioactive liquid discharges from the RCA. Groundwater monitoring is ducted by the radiological environmental monitoring program at test wells south and west of site (see Subsection 11.1.7).
11.3        Characteristics that Affect Transport ansport calculations, the following processes are considered:
* Advective transport
* Dispersion
* Dilution
* Sorption
* Decay
* Diffusion NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-18                                          Rev. 2
 
umed that advective travel times at the site will not change significantly with water level tuation.
d characteristics or targeted measurements on dispersion are not available. Based on the ature the longitudinal dispersivity and transversal dispersivity can be assumed to be percent and 1 percent of the model dimension, respectively (Kinzelbach, 1986). Although the elation between the model extension and longitudinal dispersivity is not linear, the above os are frequently used in hydrogeological models. Assuming about 10,000 ft. (3048 m) ween source and sink, the longitudinal and transversal dispersivity are 1000 and 100 ft.
5 and 30 m). Note that the rate of dispersion depends also on the variations in groundwater city; a variation in hydraulic gradient (seasonal, climatic), hydraulic conductivity erogeneity, grain size, etc.) or porosity (gradation, heterogeneity, grain size, etc.). Two types ilution must be considered at the site: dilution in the groundwater, and dilution in the Rock er and other discharge points. It is important to note that dilution is highly dependent on the er balance. Increased precipitation may result in temporarily intensified flow either below the und or on the ground.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.4-19                                        Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Water Table in the Boreholes Drilled at the Site(a)
Surface            Surface          Water              Water Borehole            Elevation          Elevation      Elevation          Elevation Number                  (ft.)                (m)            (ft.)              (m)
G11-01              818.90              249.60          753.9              229.8 G11-02              822.09              250.57          763.6              232.8 G11-03              824.69              251.37          765.7              233.4 G11-04              821.65              250.44          763.2              232.6 G11-05              824.33              251.37            (b)                (b)
G11-06              825.65              251.66            (b)                (b)
G11-07              826.13              251.80          761.2              232.0 G11-08              824.52              251.31          765.5              233.3 G11-09              824.77              251.39            (b)                (b)
G11-10              825.96              251.75          761.0              232.0 SM-GW 1A              825.56              251.63          763.6              232.8 SM-GW 2A              819.01              249.63          762.0              232.3 SM-GW 3A              827.09              252.10          764.6              233.1 SM-GW 4A                811.50              247.35          761.5              232.1 a) Elevations are in NAVD 88.
b) Measurements are obscured by drilling fluids.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-20                                  Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Monitoring Results in SM-GW-1A, SM-GW-2A, SM-GW-3A and SM-GW-4A Wells SM-GW-1A      SM-GW-2A        SM-GW-3A    SM-GW-4A    Hydraulic Hydraulic ollection    elevation    elevation in    elevation in elevation in gradient  gradient date          ft. (m)                      ft. (m)      ft. (m)    E-W      N-S ft. (m) 765.50        764.20        765.22      764.42
/26/2011      (233.32)                      (233.24)    (233.00)    0.05%    0.08%
(232.93) 765.38        764.09        765.09      764.32
/16/2011      (233.29)                      (233.20)    (232.96)    0.05%    0.08%
(232.89) 765.24        764.00        764.97      764.18
/13/2011      (233.25)                      (233.16)    (232.92)    0.05%    0.08%
(232.87) 765.16        763.91        764.88      764.80
/9/2012      (233.22)                      (233.14)    (233.11)    0.05%    0.08%
(232.84) 764.96        763.74        (msmt.      763.90
/13/2012      (233.16)                    unreliable)  (232.84)    N/A      0.08%
(232.79) 764.85        763.63        764.59      763.80
/12/2012      (233.13)                      (233.05)    (232.81)    0.05%    0.08%
(232.75) 764.71        763.51        764.42      763.66
/16/2012      (233.08)                      (233.00)    (232.76)    0.05%    0.08%
(232.72) 764.43        763.28        764.12      763.51
/22/2012      (233.00)                      (232.90)    (232.72)    0.04%    0.07%
(232.65) 764.20        763.02        763.84      763.07
/12/2012      (232.93)                      (232.82)    (232.58)    0.05%    0.07%
(232.57) 763.52        762.25        762.97      762.64
/16/2012      (232.72)                      (232.55)    (232.45)    0.02%    0.08%
(232.33) 763.30        762.00        762.90      762.31
/15/2012      (232.65)                      (232.53)    (232.35)    0.04%    0.08%
(232.26) 763.01        761.74        762.62      762.04
/18/2012      (232.57)                      (232.45)    (232.27)    0.04%    0.08%
(232.18)
NE Medical Technologies                    2.4-21                                  Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Summary of Slug Tests for Monitoring Wells SM-GW-1A, SM-GW-2A, and SM-GW-3A Depth to    Length Test          Initial        Well            Well          Aquifer      top of well  of well Head(a)Ho    Head(b) H  Coordinate(c)    Coordinate(c)  Thickness(c),(d)  screen(c)  screen(e) Transducer ell    Test        (ft.)        (ft.)    Easting (ft.)  Northing (ft.)        (ft.)        (ft.)        (ft.)  Depth (ft.)
Slug In                                    W                                                            20
-1A                7.540        7.110                      N 248568.86        100+            50                    69
        #1                                  492655.35                                                      (6.94)
Slug                                      W                                                            20
-1A                6.866        7.110                      N 248568.86        100+            50                    69 Out #1                                492655.35                                                      (6.94)
Slug In                                    W                                                            20
-1A                7.610        7.110                      N 248568.86        100+            50                    69
        #2                                  492655.35                                                      (6.94)
Slug                                      W                                                            20
-1A                6.857        7.110                      N 248568.86        100+            50                    69 Out #2                                492655.35                                                      (6.94)
Slug In                                    W                                                            15
-2A                6.539        5.695                      N 246973.23        100+            50                    66
        #1                                  492635.32                                                      (8.51)
Slug                                      W                                                            15
-2A                5.284        5.695                      N 246973.23        100+            50                    66 Out #1                                492635.32                                                      (8.51)
Slug In                                    W                                                            15
-2A                6.467        5.695                      N 246973.23        100+            50                    66
        #2                                  492635.32                                                      (8.51)
Slug                                      W                                                            15
-2A                5.151        5.695                      N 246973.23        100+            50                    66 Out #2                                492635.32                                                      (8.51)
Slug In                                    W                                                            15
-2A                6.662        5.695                      N 246973.23        100+            50                    66
        #3                                  492635.32                                                      (8.51)
Slug                                      W                                                            15
-2A                5.335        5.695                      N 246973.23        100+            50                    66 Out #3                                492635.32                                                      (8.51)
Slug In                                    W                                                            15
-3A                5.843        5.346                      N 247753.86        100+            55                    70
        #1                                  493372.93                                                      (5.50)
Slug                                      W                                                            15
-3A                5.108        5.346                      N 247753.86        100+            55                    70 Out #1                                493372.93                                                      (5.50)
Slug In                                    W                                                            15
-3A                6.188        5.346                      N 247753.86        100+            55                    70
        #2                                  493372.93                                                      (5.50)
Slug                                      W                                                            15
-3A                5.092        5.346                      N 247753.86        100+            55                    70 Out #2                                493372.93                                                      (5.50) a) Head measured in Troll data logger during test conducted on 12/22/11. Test head Ho is the disturbed head due to slug insertion or removal.
b) Head measured in Troll data logger during slug test conducted on 12/22/11. Initial Head H is the head before testing, and also depth from the phreatic surface to piezometer.
c) Well coordinates, aquifer thickness, depth to top of well screen and length of well screen were determined from well completion records.
d) Total thickness of aquifer is expected to be over 100 ft. (30 m), including aquifer below bottom of well.
e) Length of well screen: Total Length (Saturated Length).
NE Medical Technologies                                    2.4-22                                                      Rev. 2
 
ble 2.4 Permeabilities Evaluated from Bouwer and Rice (1976) Method, AQTESOLV, and the Average, Standard Deviation of the Results for All of the Tests and Slug-in, Slug-out Tests k                  k Borehole          Test Number        Test Type        (ft/sec)            (m/sec)
GW-1A                1                In            0.0029              .0009 GW-1A                1                Out            0.0037              .0011 GW-1A                2                In            0.0037              .0011 GW-1A                2                Out            0.0027              .0008 GW-2A                1                In            0.0078              .0024 GW-2A                1                Out            0.0034              .0010 GW-2A                2                In            0.0041              .0012 GW-2A                2                Out            0.0030              .0009 GW-2A                3                In            0.0038              .0012 GW-2A                3                Out            0.0020              .0006 GW-3A                1                In            0.0053              .0016 GW-3A                1                Out            0.0081              .0025 GW-3A                2                In            0.0083              .0025 GW-3A                2                Out            0.0043              .0013 Average                                  In            0.0051              .0016 Standard In            0.0021              .0001 Deviation Average                                Out            0.0039              .0012 Standard Out            0.0020              .0006 Deviation Average                                                0.0045              .0014 Standard 0.0021              .0006 Deviation Median                                                0.0037              .0011 NE Medical Technologies                2.4-23                                    Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Summary of FEMA Flood Information for the Rock River Water Surface Elevation in Bottom of          from Janesville to Afton, Peak Discharge in          Channel in                Respectively(c)
R(a)          P(b)          (cfs [m3/sec])              (ft. [m])                  (ft. [m])
10,900          Approx. 738 to 748          Approx. 758.5 to 752 10          0.10 (308.7)            (224.9 to 228.0)            (231.2 to 229.2) 14,500                                      Approx. 760 to 754 50          0.02 (410.6)                                        (231.6 to 229.8) 16,000                                      Approx. 761 to 755 100          0.01 (453.1)                                        (232.0 to 231.1) 19,000                                      Approx. 762 to 756 500        0.002 (538)                                        (232.3 to 230.4) a) R = Recurrence interval.
b) P = Annual probability.
c) Elevations are approximate, in NAVD 88. Channel bottom elevations are based on FEMA (2008). Results reported for the reach from Janesville to Afton near the USGS gauge.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-24                                          Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Summary of FEMA Flood Information for the Unnamed Tributary to the Rock River Water Surface Elevation from Highway 51 to Peak Discharge in    Bottom of Channel            Prairie Road(c)
R(a)        P(b)          (cfs [m3/sec])            (ft. [m])                  (ft. [m])
2,255          Approx. 753 to 770      Approx. 758.5 to 774.5 10          0.10 (63.9)          (229.5 to 234.7)            (231.1 to 236.0) 3,473                                  Approx. 759.5 to 775.5 50          0.02 (98.3)                                      (231.4 to 236.3) 4,205                                    Approx. 760 to 776 100          0.01 (119.1)                                      (231.6 to 233.5) 5,813                                    Approx. 761 to 777 500        0.002 (164.6)                                      (232.0 to 236.8) a) R = Recurrence interval.
b) P = Annual probability.
c) Elevations are approximate, in NAVD 88. Channel bottom elevations are based on FEMA (2008).
NE Medical Technologies                    2.4-25                                        Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 100-Year Rainfall Event Values and Intensities at the SHINE Site(a)
Rainfall Duration          5        15        30      60        120        180    360        720    1440 minutes)
Rainfall Value          0.67        1.5      2.25      3        3.8      4.5    4.8        5.4      6 (inches)
Rainfall ntensity          8          6        4.5      3        1.9      1.5    0.8      0.45    0.25 nches/hr) a) The values presented in this table are used for determination of water levels at the safety-related structure resulting from the design basis rainfall event.
 
==Reference:==
Figure 2.4-10, Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curve.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.4-26                                          Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Design Precipitation 24-Hour Storm Accumulations Precipitation                  Precipitation Accumulation                  Accumulation Return Interval                  (in.)                      (centimeters) 2-Year                        2.9                            7.4 10-Year                        4.1                          10.4 100-Year                        6.0                          15.2
 
==Reference:==
Rock County, 2004 NE Medical Technologies                  2.4-27                            Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Summary of PMF Estimates for the SHINE Site(a)
River Elevation ft. (m)
Flow in cfs Event                              Source                (m3/sec)    FEMA(b)      Golder(b) 16,000      761        760.6 100-year                          FEMA 2008 (453)      (232)      (231.8) 19,000      762        761.3 500-year                          FEMA 2008 (538)      (232)      (232.0) 129,000                  774.0 rect-Ratio Area-Adjusted PMF            Regulatory Guide 1.59                        --
(3,653)                  (235.9)
Area-Adjusted PMF for Area ownstream of Indianford Dam            Regulatory Guide 1.59/        133,000                  774.3 plus Indianford Dam Spillway                WDNR, 2012b              (3,766)                  (236.0)
Capacity Area-Adjusted PMF using 227,000                  782.4 Creager Formula with Total            Regulatory Guide 1.59                        --
(6,427)                  (238.5)
Drainage Area 308,000                  786.7 Downstream PMF at Byron                Regulatory Guide 1.59                        --
(8,721)                  (239.8) a) The elevation of the facility site is approximately 825 ft. (251 m). Assuming a PMF peak flow of about 130,000 cfs, over approximately 38-64 ft. (1-20m) of freeboard is available at the site location.
b) Elevation data are in NAVD 88.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.4-28                                          Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Parameters for PMF Calculations Parameter                    Value      Units              Basis Drainage Area at Janesville          3,340      sq. mi.
FEMA, 2008 (Afton Gauge)                (8,650)    (sq. km) 8,000      sq. mi.
Drainage Area at Byron                                        USNRC, 1977b (20,720)    (sq. km) 2,560      sq. mi.
rainage Area at Indianford Dam                                    FEMA, 2008 (6,630)    (sq. km) rainage Area at Indianford Dam        780        sq. mi.
FEMA, 2008 (downstream)                (2,020)    (sq. km) 308,000        cfs PMF at Byron                                            USNRC, 1977b (8,721)    (m3/sec)
Back calculated from PMF at C-Max for Craeger Formula            36.4          -
Byron Craeger Formula and PMF USNRC, 1977b Equations NE Medical Technologies                  2.4-29                                Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Dams Near the SHINE Site Total Upstream    Discharge      Discharge Normal    Max. Drainage      Through        Through                          Primary          WI Hydraulic    Structure                  Storage  Storage      Area        Primary          All        Date of  Crest    Spillway      State Ref                                height      height  Impoundment        Vol    Col      (sq. mi      Spillway      Spillways      Last    Length    Width        Hazard Name      No.      Owner      (Lat/Long)  (ft. [m])    (ft. [m]) Area (ac. [ha])  (ac-ft)  (ac-ft)  [sq. km])  (cfsm3/sec])  (cfs [m3/sec]) Inspection (ft. [m]) (ft. [m]) Classification(a)
Rock Indian      60    Koshkonong                                13      10460(b)      53,000  107,000      2,597        8,000        8,000                    500      277 89.089076,  6 (1.8)                                  (b)    (b)                                              3-May-11                          LOW Ford        8      Statutory                              (4.0)      (4,233)                          (6,718)        (226)          (226)                  (152)      (84) 42.803356 Lake District North 73      American                                  14          800                            3,235        12,150        12,150                  325      273 Centerway                          89.026121,  9 (2.7)                                1,900  6,000                                              9-Oct-09                          LOW 3    Hydro Utility                            (4.3)        (323)                          (9,379)        (344)          (344)                  (99)      (83) 42.684865 Company a) Definitions of dam hazards: "High Hazard Dams" mean a large dam the failure of which would probably cause loss of human life. "Low Hazard Dam" means a large dam the failure of which would probably not cause significant property damage or loss of human life.
b) Controls the outlet from Lake Koshkonong, which is essentially the impoundment for the dam.
 
==Reference:==
WDNR, 2012a.
NE Medical Technologies                                                                      2.4-30                                                                                        Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Summary of Parameters Used for Advective Travel Time Estimations (Sheet 1 of 2)
Coordinates of                                Head at Coordinates for Source    Assumed Release                    Head at    Assumed at SHINE Facility(a)          Location(b)                  Assumed      Release    Effective                  Adjective Permeability                                                                Source(c)  Location(d) Transport      Hydraulic    Travel and Porosity  Easting(h)  Northing(h)  Easting(h)    Northing(h) Distance    (ft. [m])  (ft. [m]) Porosity(e) Conductivity(f)  Time(g) odel Version  Assumptions      (ft.)        (ft.)      (ft.)          (ft.)    (ft. [m]) NAVD-88)    NAVD-88)      (%)    (ft./sec [m/s])  (yrs) thway to Rock                                                                    10,927      766        738                    0.0045 Expected  2,230,850.4  229,066.1  2,219,924.1    228,944.5                                        30                        9.0 River (West)                                                                    (3,331)    (233.5)    (224.9)                  (0.0014) thway to Rock                                                                    10,927      766        738                    0.0083 Conservative 2,230,850.4  229,066.1  2,219,924.1    228,944.5                                        10                        1.6 River (West)                                                                    (3,331)    (233.5)    (224.9)                  (0.0025) thway to Rock 12,605      766        753                    0.0045 iver Tributary  Expected  2,230,850.4  229,066.1  2,230,990.7    216,461.9                                        30                        26 (3,842)    (233.5)    (229.5)                  (0.0014)
(South) thway to Rock 12,605      766        753                    0.0083 iver Tributary Conservative 2,230,850.4  229,066.1  2,230,990.7    216,461.9                                        10                        4.7 (3,842)    (233.5)    (229.5)                  (0.0025)
(South)
Pathway to earest Well                                                                      2,816      766        754                    0.0045 Expected  2,230,850.4  229,066.1  2,228,697.7    230,882.0                                        30                        1.4 Receptor                                                                        (858)    (233.5)    (229.8)                  (0.0014)
(MF461)
Pathway to earest Well                                                                    2,816        766        754                    0.0083 Conservative 2,230,850.4  229,066.1  2,228,697.7    230,882.0                                        10                        0.3 Receptor                                                                        (858)    (233.5)    (229.8)                  (0.0025)
(MF461) thway to Low ad DNR Well                                                                      1,967        766        660                    0.0045 Expected  2,230,850.4  229,066.1  2,229,329.0    227,819.4                                        30                        0.1 Receptor                                                                        (600)    (233.5)      (201)                  (0.0014)
(UJ792) thway to Low ad DNR Well                                                                      1,967        766        660                    0.0083 Conservative 2,230,850.4  229,066.1  2,229,329.0    227,819.4                                        10                      0.01 Receptor                                                                        (600)    (233.5)      (201)                  (0.0025)
(UJ792)
NE Medical Technologies                                                2.4-31                                                                  Rev. 2
 
Coordinates of                                        Head at Coordinates for Source          Assumed Release                          Head at      Assumed at SHINE Facility(a)              Location(b)                        Assumed        Release      Effective                        Adjective Permeability                                                                              Source(c)    Location(d)  Transport          Hydraulic      Travel and Porosity      Easting(h)    Northing(h)    Easting(h)    Northing(h)    Distance        (ft. [m])    (ft. [m])  Porosity(e)    Conductivity(f)    Time(g) odel Version        Assumptions          (ft.)          (ft.)        (ft.)          (ft.)      (ft. [m])    NAVD-88)      NAVD-88)        (%)        (ft./sec [m/s])    (yrs)
Pathway to arest Pre-1988                                                                                    1,127            766          761 Expected      2,230,338.0      228,321.4    2,229,329.0    227,819.4                                                    30              0.0045          0.5 ell "Receptor"                                                                                      (343)        (233.5)      (232.0)
(RO3284)
Pathway to arest Pre-1988                                                                                    1,127            766          761 Conservative    2,230,338.0      228,321.4    2,229,329.0    227,819.4                                                    10              0.0083          0.1 ell "Receptor"                                                                                      (343)        (233.5)      (232.0)
(RO3284) a)  SHINE source coordinate calculated as center of site.
b)  Release coordinates for Rock River (West) and South) are calculated assuming a straight line from the SHINE facility.
c)  Head at SHINE facility based on maximum head measured during monitoring period (Figure 2.4-5).
d)  Head at Rock River (West) and Rock River Tributary (South) release locations based on channel bottom (Table 2.4-1 and 2.4-2). Head at Well MF461 calculated based on minimum head reported in WDNR, 2012b.
e)  Low (Conservative) transport porosity value from Gaffield et al, 2002. High (Expected) transport velocity from US DOE, April 1993, Table 3.2 (see Subsection 2.4.11.2).
f)  Hydraulic conductivity based on the average hydraulic conductivity from slug tests (Table 2.4-4). Conservative case is highest hydraulic conductivity from slug tests. Note that arithmetic average hydraulic conductivity is more conservative than geometric mean hydraulic conductivity.
g)  Advective travel time calculated from Darcy's Law (Bear, 1972).
: h. WI State Plane South Zone NAD83 (HARN)
NE Medical Technologies                                                              2.4-32                                                                                    Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Thickness of Vadose Zone Surface                  Water      Thickness of Borehole                Elevation(a)            Elevation(a) Vadose Zone Number                    (ft.)                    (ft.)        (ft.)
G11-01                  818.90                    753.9        65.00 G11-02                  822.09                    763.6        58.49 G11-03                  824.69                    765.7        58.99 G11-04                  821.65                    763.2        58.45 G11-05                  824.33                      (b)          (b)
G11-06                  825.65                      (b)          (b)
G11-07                  826.13                    761.2        64.93 G11-08                  824.52                    765.5        59.02 G11-09                  824.77                      (b)          (b)
G11-10                  825.96                    761.0        64.96 SM-GW 1A                  825.56                    763.6        61.96 SM-GW 2A                  819.01                    762.0        57.01 SM-GW 3A                  827.09                    764.6        62.49 SM-GW 4A                    811.50                  761.5        50.00 ximum Thickness of Vadose Zone                                      65.00 nimum Thickness of Vadose Zone                                      50.00 erage Thickness of Vadose Zone                                      60.12 a) Elevations are NAVD 88.
b) Measurements obscured by drilling fluids.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.4-33                        Rev. 2
 
Table 2.4 Vadose Zone Advective Travel Time Unsaturated                        Effective Soil Hydraulic        Water          Relative      Transport                Advective dose Zone                      Conductivity(a)    Content(b)      Permeability    Porosity(c)  Gradient    Travel Time ickness ft. Assumption        ft./s (m/s)          (%)            (%)            (%)        (%)        (years)
Upper Bound 44              [Less            0.002            20%              1%            40%        100%        2.8E-2 Conservative]
Expected 44                              0.0045            40%            10%            30%        100%        9.3E-4
[Mean]
Lower Bound 44            [More            0.0083            70%            40%            10%        100%        4.2E-5 Conservative]
Upper Bound 50              [Less            0.002            20%              1%            40%        100%        3.2E-2 Conservative]
Expected 50                              0.0045            40%            10%            30%        100%        1.1E-3
[Mean]
Lower Bound 50            [More            0.0083            70%            40%            10%        100%        4.8E-5 Conservative]
Upper Bound 71              [Less            0.002            20%              1%            40%        100%        4.5E-2 Conservative]
Expected 71                              0.0045            40%            10%            30%        100%        1.5E-3
[Mean]
Lower Bound 71            [More            0.0083            70%            40%            10%        100%        6.8E-5 Conservative]
a) Expected and lower bound values are based on the values from Table 2.4-13. The upper bound value was approximated as 50% of the mean value.
b) Estimated from values reported in Domenico and Schwartz (1997).
c) Expected and lower bound values are based on values provided in Table 2.4-13. The upper bound value was estimated based on maximum values anticipated for sandy soils.
NE Medical Technologies                                2.4-34                                                    Rev. 2
 
UNNAMED TRIBUTARY U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY (USGS) 05430500 ROCK RIVER GAUGE AT AFTON, WI NE Medical Technologies              2.4-35                    Rev. 2
 
NOTES
: 1) Arrows indicate the potential flow directions
: 2) Arrow size indicates the relative magnitude of flow Gaffield, et. al., 2002 NE Medical Technologies                  2.4-36          Rev. 2
 
es Borehole and well locations as surveyed by Ayers Associates on November 11, 2011.
NE Medical Technologies                2.4-37                                    Rev. 2
 
NE Medical Technologies 2.4-38 Rev. 2 NE Medical Technologies 2.4-39 Rev. 2 NE Medical Technologies 2.4-40 Rev. 2 NE Medical Technologies 2.4-41 Rev. 2 NE Medical Technologies 2.4-42 Rev. 2 NE Medical Technologies 2.4-43 Rev. 2 State of Wisconsin Department of Transportation, Facilities Development Manual, Chapter 13, Drainage, Attachment 5.4, Rainfall Intensity-Duration-Frequency Curves NE Medical Technologies                2.4-44                                      Rev. 2
 
Ts c
Ts WaA Ts WaB h
Tc WaB WaA WaA WaB h
Tc                                              WaB Tsc N. R IV SOU ERSID TH  E US DRIVE Tsc HW Y5 -
1 WaB WaA WaA WaB Tch Tch WaA EXISTING POI 1                                                                                                                                              CHANNEL WaB WaB                                                                                          WaA LoC2 LoC2 WaA LoC2 Tch WaB            LoC2 NE Medical Technologies                                                          2.4-45                                                                                                                Rev. 2
 
Chapter 2 - Site Characteristics                                                                                                                                                                                            Hydrology Figure 2.4 100-Year Event Facility Drainagea 820.66 821.10 12 824.10 818.61  819.10 823.60 6
9 822.19 824.30 3A 823.00 823.30 822.70 8
: a. Six localized low points (inlets 3A, 6, 12, and 13 and trench drains 8 and 9) are subject to impoundment if drainage is assumed blocked. Surface elevation of impounded areas during a 100-year rainfall event remains below the ground floor elevation of the main production facility and material staging building.
SHINE Medical Technologies                                                                                            2.4-46                                                                                                    Rev. 2
 
NE Medical Technologies 2.4-47 Rev. 2 NE Medical Technologies 2.4-48 Rev. 2 section provides information on the geology, seismology, and geotechnical characteristics he site.
site is located in Rock County, on the south side of the city of Janesville, Wisconsin as wn on Figure 2.5-1. The site has historically been cultivated for agricultural crops. The ace topography of the site area slopes gently to the southwest towards the north-south ing Rock River located 2 mi. (3.2 km) to the west. The ground surface across the 91.27 acre decreases in elevation by about 23 ft. (7 m) from the northeast to the southwest. Surveyed ls indicate grades ranging from elevation 827 to 804 ft. (252.1 to 245.1 m) NAVD 88.
1        REGIONAL GEOLOGY subsection provides summary descriptions of the geologic units, their origins, structure, and onic development in the region surrounding the site. The regional geology descriptions are ed on a review of relevant, readily available, peer reviewed, published reports and maps, and re available, records and unpublished reports from federal and state agencies. Several ublished reports and student theses, local field trip guides, and conference papers have also n reviewed. Information on the site conditions has been acquired from these same sources from site specific geotechnical field investigations.
regional summary includes a description of the following major geologic characteristics in about 200 mi. (322 km) of the site (Figure 2.5-2):
* Regional physiography and geomorphology.
* Tectonic provinces and structures within the basement rocks.
* Bedrock geology including stratigraphy, lithology, and structure.
* Magnetic and gravity geophysical anomalies.
* Surficial geology and glacial history.
evaluation of regional geology and tectonics does not focus strongly on the regional tectonic vinces because in this part of North America they are based largely on basement terranes elated to the present tectonic setting of a geologically-stable continental interior. Rather, this onal geological analysis focuses on identifying the major geologic and geophysical structures he region, and an evaluation of any evidence that these structures may represent potential mogenic sources and/or capable faults that have been the source of historical earthquakes ould generate future large earthquakes. In Subsection 2.5.2, the geologic setting, structural logy, geologic history and soil conditions of the site are described in greater detail.
geologic units and structures that comprise the regional geology of Wisconsin preserve a ord of several phases of continental accretion and deformation, sedimentary erosion and osition, and in the Quaternary period (last 1.8 million years), glacial and post-glacial cesses that have resulted in the present-day landscape. These are described in further detail w.
this section, the SHINE region is defined as the area within a 200 mi. (322 km) radius of the
. For the assessment of the capability of the mapped faults, the definition of capable as set in Appendix A of 10 CFR 100: a capable fault is a fault with at least one of the following:
NE Medical Technologies                    2.5-1                                        Rev. 0
: b. Macro seismicity instrumentally determined with records of sufficient precision to demonstrate a direct relationship with the fault.
: c. A structural relationship to a capable fault according to characteristics noted in a. and b.
above such that movement on one could be reasonably expected to be accompanied by movement on the other.
10 CFR 100 definition of capable identifies faults that are considered capable of being the rce of moderate to large earthquakes in the future. Evidence for the existence of capable ts is based on a geomorphic expression of surface fault rupture in surficial sediments that ge in age from present day to 35,000 and/or 500,000 years old, instrumental evidence for the nment of hypocenters that could indicate a subsurface fault; and in the case where these s of evidence are lacking, a structural relationship with a known capable fault (i.e., a fault is allel or offsets similarly aged rocks by the same amount as the capable fault).
1.1          Physiography and Geomorphology thern and central Wisconsin are located within the Central Lowland Province of the Interior ns Division of the United States (USGS, 2003), one of many geomorphic or physiographic ons of the United States as defined by the general texture of the surface terrain, rock type, geologic structure and history. The regions represent a three-tiered classification of the ted States by division, province, and section.
ure 2.5-2 shows the boundaries of the three physiographic sections of the Central Lowland vince that surround and include the site. The south central portion of Wisconsin is located in the Till Plains  a region of predominantly Illinoian age glacial deposits (formed 310,000 28,000 years ago). To the west is the Wisconsin Driftless section  a region of unglaciated ain. To the east is the Eastern Lake section that contains the most recent topography formed ssociation with the deposition of glacial advance deposits that surround present-day Lake higan.
present day physiography of the Central Lowland Province and the three sections described ve have been influenced by processes associated with Pleistocene (1.8 million years to 000 years ago) glacial erosion and deposition, and the subsequent post glacial erosional and osition as described by Fullerton et al. and Attig et al. (Fullerton et al., 2003 and Attig et al.,
1). Glacial processes in this part of Wisconsin were part of the widespread glaciations that cted the entire northern portion of the continent. Although the most recent episode of espread glacial advance in Wisconsin (late Wisconsin Glaciation) occurred from roximately 31,000 years ago to about 11,000 years ago, and covered much of the state, the ediate area of the site was not covered by glacial ice during this most recent glaciation ode.
1.2          Tectonic Provinces, Basement Rocks and Major Geologic Structures major tectonic provinces and geologic structures surrounding the site preserve a record of or geologic events occurring over about the last 2.6 billion years (Ga) of geologic history.
ure 2.5-3 (left) is a generalized summary of the major older (Archean and Paleoproterozoic-to 1.6 Ga) geologic provinces, structures and phases of major crustal deformation (orogens).
ure 2.5-3 (right) summarizes the same information but for the relatively younger Meso- to NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-2                                          Rev. 0
 
., and Carter, L.M.H. (1996); Braschayko, S.M. (2005); Sims et al. (2005); Schulz, K.J., and non, W.F. (2007); Whitmeyer, S.J., and Karlstrom, K.E. (2007); Cannon et al. (2008); Garrity,
., and Soller, D.R. (2009); and Hammer et al. (2011).
isconsin and the surrounding region, the geologic age of the tectonic provinces and ctures generally decrease from north to south. The geologic provinces are inferred to esent several stages of continental expansion that occurred by processes of continental retion and intrusions of igneous rock (e.g., granite); and continental rifting related to partial tinental breakup.
Superior or Southern Province of the Canadian Shield in northern Wisconsin forms part of Archean craton that preserves rocks ranging in age from approximately 2.6 to 2.75 Ga. In the hern Wisconsin and Lake Superior region, the Superior Province (Figure 2.5-3) consists of iss, amphibolites, granite, and metavolcanic rock types.
Penokean Orogen (Figure 2.5-3) in northern Wisconsin represents two phases of accretion he southern margin of the Canadian Shield in this part of North America. Approximately 6 to 1.84 Ga ago, the Pembrine-Wausau terrane, a volcanic arc, accreted to the Canadian eld along an east-northeast-trending suture zone. Then approximately 1.84 to 1.82 Ga, the shfield terrane, composed of Archean crust, accreted to the Pembrine-Wausau terrane.
processes of continental accretion continued as the Yavapai Province, included in the tral Plains Orogen (Figure 2.5-3) of southern Wisconsin, accreted to the Penokean Orogen anes at approximately 1.76 to 1.72 Ga. The Yavapai Province represents an assemblage of anic volcanic arc rocks as inferred by the abundance of rhyolite and granite rocks preserved in the Province. In southern Wisconsin, quartzite deposits with an approximate age of 1.7 Ga e deposited as the siliceous rhyolite and granite rocks were eroded and deposited in local imentary basins.
owing the accretion of the Yavapai Province, the Mazatzal Province of southern Wisconsin northern Illinois accreted to the Yavapai Province at approximately 1.69 to 1.65 Ga.
retion occurred along a northeast-striking (northwest vergent) suture zone (Figure 2.5-3). The zatzal Province rocks, included in the Central Plains Orogen, represent volcanic and related imentary rocks that formed at the then active continental margin. Intrusion of granite-rhyolite ks into the Penokean Orogen terranes, and Yavapai and Mazatzal Provinces along the thern Wisconsin border region and in northern Wisconsin, occurred at approximately 1.48 to 5 Ga.
pproximately 1.1 to 1.2 Ga, a period of continental breakup resulted in the development of Mid-Continent Rift (Figure 2.5-3). While the rifting ultimately failed to fully break up this part of North American continent, it left a major geologic and geophysical region known as the Mid tinent Rift (MCR). The MCR can be traced north from Michigan up through Lake Superior, n southwest through northern Wisconsin and the Midwest of the United States (Figure 2.5-3).
ks associated with the MCR include flood basalt, rhyolite, sandstone, and gabbroic emblages. In addition, several northeast-striking normal faults developed in southern consin as part of intracontinental extension within the Marshfield terrane, Yavapai and zatzal Provinces, 1 Ga old quartzite deposits, and 1.48 to 1.35 Ga old granite-rhyolite rocks.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.5-3                                            Rev. 0
 
higan Basin is one of several basins in the Midwest of North America that contain dominantly Paleozoic sedimentary rocks underlain by Precambrian basement rock units.
dels for the formation of the Michigan Basin include post-rifting thermal subsidence, tectonic ctivation of pre-existing crustal structures, and regional subsidence influenced by the active alachian Orogeny farther east. As shown on Figure 2.5-4, three major structures that trolled the western margin of the Michigan Basin are present in Wisconsin - the Wisconsin me in northern Wisconsin, the north-trending Wisconsin Arch in the southern portion of the e and trending into northern Illinois, and the northwest-trending Kankakee Arch in northern ois and Indiana.
1.3          Bedrock Geology regional Proterozoic basement rocks are parts of the Marshfield, Penokean, Yavapai, and atzal Provinces/terranes (Figure 2.5-3), as well as local quartzite and granite-rhyolite usive rocks that, in general, are overlain by Paleozoic marine sedimentary rocks. The wing discussion of regional bedrock for the project region, including stratigraphy and logy, is based on geological maps prepared by Mudrey et al. (Muedry et al., 1982) and rity and Soller (Garrity, C.P. and Soller, D.R., 2009). Figure 2.5-5 shows the mapped bedrock logy of the project region.
oldest rocks in the project region occur in the north (Figure 2.5-5), consisting of isolated ly Proterozoic quartzite and felsic volcanic rocks, and the Middle Proterozoic Wolf River holith. The oldest Phanerozoic sedimentary rocks generally occur in the northwest, but are locally present where younger bedrock units have been eroded away, or where the older rock has been locally uplifted along major faults. Cambrian sedimentary rocks composed of dstone, dolomite, and shale represent the oldest Phanerozoic bedrock units. Flanking the tern and southern margins of the Cambrian bedrock units are Ordovician shale, dolomite, and dstone, with additional limestone and conglomerate units. The Ordovician units are in turn ked to the south and east by Silurian dolomite. Along the southern portion of the project area, er Devonian and Pennsylvanian limestone, sandstone, and clay rocks have been mapped.
er Devonian and Lower Mississippian carbonate, sandstone, and shale rocks are preserved g the eastern portion of the project area.
1.4          Structural Geology subsection provides a summary of the regional structural geology in terms of known and/or pped major faults and folds within approximately 200 miles of the site. To assist in the erstanding of the summary, the description commences with structures mapped in Wisconsin then continues clockwise through Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, Missouri, Iowa, and Minnesota.
itionally, the development of regional structural basins and arches is described. Basement ts mapped in Rock County are discussed separately in Subsection 2.5.6, where they are luated in terms of being capable faults per 10 CFR 100, Appendix A.
amount and quality of information on the precise fault locations are variable. Information on history of structural development and the time since last displacement is also highly variable.
ause most of the mapped faults are covered by glacial and glacial outwash sediments osited during multiple continental ice sheet advances and retreats, fault locations and offsets e typically been evaluated from subsurface investigations (e.g., groundwater borehole logs, NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-4                                        Rev. 0
 
capable faults. This consensus is based on:
* Published interpretations of the structural geologic development that indicates that most of the basement and bedrock faults formed and accumulated displacement during the Paleozoic Era;
* Regional and fault-specific studies for groundwater exploration that indicate that the larger faults (e.g., Waukesha fault) have no evidence for offset of the Quaternary glacial sediments;
* Paleoliquefaction features that appear limited to the Wabash Valley and New Madrid areas having possible sources located more than about 200 miles from the site; and
* Similar studies of faults and fault activity undertaken for two nuclear safety analyses in Wisconsin and Illinois completed in the last 10 years (Exelon, 2006a).
st of the fault and fold structures in geologic maps appear to have been active during the early iddle Paleozoic Era, as judged by the varying vertical offsets of the Paleozoic bedrock units.
w of the mapped faults (e.g., Northern Wisconsin faults) appear to have been active in Paleozoic time because they affect only the older basement rocks. In the absence of a eozoic sedimentary cover, however, these basement faults may also be similar in age to e that offset the Paleozoic sedimentary rocks farther south.
ause much of eastern Wisconsin and Illinois were ice-covered (glaciated) until late into the consin glaciation period, only those faults that have ruptured to the ground surface in the last 000 years have the potential to preserve surface traces. Similarly, in southeast Wisconsin and tern Illinois, much of the land surface was ice-covered from Illinoian glaciation, so only those ts that have moved since the last glaciation period have the potential to preserve surface es. Only those faults mapped within the driftless section of western Wisconsin, southeast nesota, and northeast Iowa that have not been glaciated in the Quaternary Period have the ential to preserve faults scarps showing surface evidence for repeated movement in the last
,000 years.
efaction features within the Wabash Valley suggest at least seven Holocene earthquakes one late Pleistocene earthquake have occurred. Individual earthquakes are recognized from timing of liquefaction features, the regional pattern of liquefaction effects, and geotechnical ing results. Although the fault or faults that may have generated the Wabash Valley efaction features have not been identified, the liquefaction features appear to have originated earthquakes centered in southern Indiana and Illinois, more than 200 miles from the SHINE ordingly, with the exception of unidentified possible faults beneath the Wabash Valley, the ts mapped within 200 miles of the site are not capable faults. The fault or fault sources of the tiple earthquakes that generated the Wabash Valley liquefaction features are yet to be tified. Once identified, however, these fault(s) would be considered as capable as defined in CFR 100.
1.4.1        Northern Wisconsin Faults orthern Wisconsin, several faults are associated with the Archean and Proterozoic magmatic anes and Penokean Orogen (Figure 2.5-4) (Sims, P.K., and Schultz, K.J., 1996). The NE Medical Technologies                        2.5-5                                      Rev. 0
 
holith is bounded by high-angle normal faults along the western and southern boundaries -
western boundary fault is approximately 61 mi. (98 km) long, has a northeast strike, and a tern downthrown block; the southern boundary fault is approximately 34 mi. (54 km) long, a northeast strike, with the southern block downthrown. The location of the March 14, 1900
] 2.32 earthquake epicenter may have been located on or near a fault in the magmatic anes or Penokean Orogen. Based on the lack of confirmed Quaternary movement, that faults in the Archean and Proterozoic magmatic terranes and Penokean Orogen are not sidered to be capable faults.
1.4.2        Waukesha Fault Waukesha fault of southeastern Wisconsin is a northeast-striking normal fault (southeast down) mapped within the Silurian and possibly Ordovician sedimentary rock units (Mudrey l., 1982) (Figure 2.5-4). Fault length estimates range from 38.5 mi. (62 km) to 133 mi.
4 km), with multiple strands or splays possible (Braschayko, S.M., 2005). There is no known ence that the Waukesha fault or associated minor faults have Pleistocene or post-stocene displacement (Exelon, 2006a). The Waukesha fault and associated faults have no ence that they are capable faults.
1.4.3        Madison Fault Madison fault is mapped as an east-striking, approximately 8-mi. long (13 km) fault by drey et al. (Mudrey et al., 1982) (Figure 2.5-4). From Exelon (Exelon, 2006a), two fault ments of the Madison fault are inferred: a northern segment with north side downthrown 40 to
: t. (12.2 to 23 m), and a southern segment with south side downthrown 85 to 125 ft. (26 to m). Both fault segments lack evidence for Pleistocene or post-Pleistocene displacement.
lt segments associated with the Madison fault show no evidence that they are capable faults.
1.4.4        Structures Associated with the Mineral Point and Meekers Grove Anticlines ated in the southwestern corner of Wisconsin, plus adjacent portions of Iowa and Illinois, the er Mississippi Valley mining district contains folds with southeast-, east- and northeast ding fold axes. These folds include the Mineral Point and Meekers Grove anticlines, and ena syncline (Exelon, 2006a and Exelon, 2006b) (Figure 2.5-4). The northeast striking Mifflin t is approximately 10 mi. (16 km) long and is located on the northeast limb of the Mineral nt anticline (DPC, 2010). The Mifflin fault has at least 65 ft. (20 m) of vertical separation theast side down) and about 1000 ft. (305 m) of strike-slip separation, with the most recent t movement estimated to have occurred from 330 Ma to 240 Ma (DPC, 2010). The last vement on the Mineral Point and Meekers Grove anticlines is estimated by Exelon as Late eozoic in age (Exelon, 2006a). The Mifflin fault, and Mineral Point and Meekers Grove clines are, therefore, not considered to be capable faults.
or faults within the bedrock of Michigan have not been identified by Garrity and Soller rrity, C.P. and Soller, D.R., 2009). The potential for capable faults in these areas is not sidered further.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-6                                          Rev. 0
 
Royal Center fault in northwestern Indiana is an approximately 57-mi. (92 km) long fault ure 2.5-4). The fault has a northeast strike, and the southeast block is downthrown roximately 100 ft. (Exelon, 2006a and Exelon, 2006b). Estimates for the timing of most recent vement include Post-Middle Devonian and Pre-Pleistocene (Exelon, 2006a). The Royal ter fault is, therefore, not considered to be a capable fault.
1.4.6        Saint Charles Lineament (SCL)
Saint Charles Lineament (SCL) is a northeast-trending structure that can be traced for more n 932 mi. (1500 km). The SCL has been interpreted from geochemical and geophysical atures that extend from southwest Ontario, Canada to southeast Oklahoma (Harrison, R.W.,
Schultz, A., 2002 and Exelon, 2006a). While there are several structural interpretations for SCL, it is generally characterized as forming a boundary between Proterozoic basement rock units. Paleozoic bedrock strata appear not to be disrupted by the SCL.
lton, Illinois, about 15 miles (24 km) north of St. Louis, Missouri, a set of conjugate strike-slip ts of probable Late Mississippian to Early Pennsylvanian age occur in association with the L. The faults do not displace the overlying Pleistocene loess unit. Harrison and Schultz marize two lines of "weak and non-definitive" evidence for possible neotectonic activity along SCL: (a) structural control of the Missouri River that could be related to the presence of faults ther bedrock structures, and (b) tilting of possible Miocene-age gravels above the nsylvanian bedrock that could have been caused by differential displacements along the SCL rrison, R.W., and Schultz, A., 2002).
ce 1974, seven earthquakes of magnitude 2.5 or less have been recorded in regions ounding the SCL. Four epicenters appear to be located near the SCL and three additional enters could possibly be related to the SCL. Based on the lack of confirmed Quaternary vement and the limited evidence of historic earthquake activity, the SCL is not considered to a capable fault. Four of the earthquakes have magnitudes less than body-wave gnitude (mb) 2.0, and three are between mb 2.0 and mb 2.5.
e of the seven earthquakes are listed in the composite earthquake catalog developed for the tral and Eastern United States Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear Facilities US-SSC). Since the seven earthquakes are not in the CEUS-SSC catalog, they were sidered not of a large enough magnitude or well enough located to indicate neotectonic vity along the SCL. The seven referenced earthquakes do not suggest ongoing activity on the L and are not listed in Table 2.5-1. Additionally, because there is no evidence that any of e earthquakes were felt, they are not included Table 2.5-3.
1.4.7        Faults in the Chicago area and Cook County Faults ortheastern Illinois (Figure 2.5-4), a northwest-striking fault zone with Precambrian basement n thrown to the southwest by 900 ft. (274 m) has been mapped in the Chicago area by lon and DPC (Exelon, 2006a and DPC, 2010). The most recent fault offset may be middle Ordovician in age. An additional interpretation by DPC suggests that the Precambrian ement is not offset and a fault may not be present (DPC, 2010). An additional 25 minor faults e been identified in the subsurface rocks of Cook County. The location and existence of these ts is based on the interpretation of subsurface seismic reflection data. The interpretations NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-7                                          Rev. 0
 
lacement of the present-day ground surface. Available evidence indicates that the Chicago a and Cook County faults are not capable faults.
1.4.8      The Sandwich Fault Zone Sandwich fault zone in northern Illinois is a northwest-striking, approximately 85-mi. long 7 km), normal fault system with a generally down-to-the-northeast sense of vertical lacement, and up to approximately 330 ft. (100 m) of vertical separation (Kolata et al., 2005 DPC, 2010) (Figure 2.5-4). There are also anticlines mapped with fold axes parallel to the t system (Exelon, 2006b). The most recent fault movement is constrained to post-Silurian and pre-Pleistocene (DPC, 2010), or post-Pennsylvanian and pre-Pleistocene (Exelon, 6a). Based on felt intensities, the earthquakes of May 26, 1909 and January 2, 1912 might be ted to the Sandwich fault zone within the Precambrian basement (Larson, T.H., 2002 and lon, 2006a). However, the lack of surface rupture in the last 35,000 years, and lack of roearthquake activity associated with the fault suggests that the Sandwich fault is not a able fault.
1.4.9      La Salle Anticlinorium La Salle anticlinorium is a northwest-trending series of open folds in northern Illinois that nd for 230 mi. (370 km) along the eastern flank of the Illinois Basin (DPC, 2010) ure 2.5-4). Faults may be present on the west flank of the anticlinorium and exhibit pre--
taceous movement (DPC, 2010). The major movement of the fold belt is post-Mississippian elon, 2006a). Larson suggested that three historic earthquakes in 1881, 1972, and 1999 may e been generated on faults associated with the northwest-trending Peru monocline that is of the La Salle anticlinorium (Larson, T.H., 2002). Larson suggests that these moderate hquakes may indicate that some faults within this larger Paleozoic structure could be in the cess of reactivation within the present-day stress field (Larson, T.H., 2002). The lack of ace rupture in the last 35,000 years, however, and a lack of microearthquake activity ociated with the faults related to the folds suggest that the faults associated with the La Salle clinorium are not capable faults.
1.4.10      Wabash Valley Liquefaction Features northern boundary of the Wabash Valley liquefaction features region is located roximately 170 mi. (274 km) south of the site (Figure 2.5-4). Studies of paleoliquefaction ures indicate that at least seven Holocene earthquakes and one late Pleistocene earthquake y have generated on the order of M 7.5 earthquakes (Obermeier, S.F., and Crone, A.J.,
pilers, 1994). Faults associated with the Wabash Valley liquefaction features are capable ts.
1.4.11      Peoria Folds ated in central Illinois, the Peoria folds (Figure 2.5-4) include a series of 16 synclines and clines that generally trend to the east-northeast (Nelson, W.J., 1995; Exelon, 2006a and lon, 2006b). The anticlines include the Astoria, Farmington, Littleton, Bardolph, Brereton, David, Sciota, Seville, and Versailles folds. The synclines include the Bryant, Bushnell, ton, Elmwood, Fairview, Ripley, and Table Grove folds. These folds range in length from NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-8                                        Rev. 0
 
or movement and development age for the fold system is estimated as Mississippian and nsylvanian (Exelon, 2006a). Based on the lack of confirmed Quaternary movement, the ria folds are not related to capable faults.
1.4.12      Southeast Iowa Folds outheastern Iowa, near the state borders with Missouri and Illinois (Figure 2.5-4), a series of northwest-trending anticlines that range in length from 42 mi. (67 km) to 68 mi. (109 km) e been mapped by Exelon (Exelon, 2006a and Exelon, 2006b). The folds are the Oquawka, rry, Burlington, Skunk River, and Bentonsport anticlines. The folds appear to have formed in Mississippian Epoch of the Carboniferous Period more than 320 Ma (Exelon, 2006a). Based he lack of any evidence for fold development into the Quaternary Period, these five anticlines outheast Iowa are not related to capable faults.
1.4.13      Plum River Fault Zone orthern Illinois and eastern Iowa, the Plum River fault zone is an approximately 150-mi. long 1 km), east-northeast-striking fault and fold system (DPC, 2010 and Witzke et al., 2010) ure 2.5-4). The faults have en echelon segments with 100 to 400 ft. (30 to 122 m) of vertical, n-to-the-north separation. Exelon recognizes synclines and anticlines that are parallel to the t system (Exelon, 2006b). The last movement on the fault zone is constrained to have urred between post-middle Silurian and pre-middle Illinoian time (DPC, 2010). No evidence of ternary activity has been identified on the Plum River fault zone by Exelon (Exelon, 2006a).
ed on the lack of confirmed Quaternary movements, the faults associated with the Plum er fault zone are not considered to be capable faults.
1.4.14      Amana Fault Zone he west of the Plum River fault zone, the Amana fault zone is a northeast-trending fault pped for a length of approximately 20 mi. (32 km) (Figure 2.5-4). Witzke et al. (2010) indicate the Amana fault zone is a continuation of the Plum River fault zone, but with an opposite se of vertical separation (south-side block down). Exelon designates the Amana fault zone as parate fault segment from the Plum River fault zone (Exelon, 2006b). Based on the similarity trike and geologic setting with the Plum River fault zone, the Amana fault zone is not sidered a capable fault.
1.4.15      Iowa City-Clinton Fault Zone he south of the Plum River fault zone, the Iowa City-Clinton fault zone follows a similar east-heast strike to that of the Plum River fault zone (Witzke et al., 2010) (Figure 2.5-4). The Iowa
-Clinton fault zone has a south-side-down sense of vertical separation. The Iowa City-Clinton t zone has not been mapped in Illinois (Kolata et al., 2005). There is no known evidence for lacement during the Quaternary Period along mapped traces of the Iowa City-Clinton fault
: e. Based on similar geometries and physiographic settings for both fault zones, the faults ociated with the Iowa City-Clinton fault zone are not considered to be capable faults.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-9                                        Rev. 0
 
a et al. mapped several faults in the southeast corner of Minnesota (Figure 2.5-4) (Jirsa et al.,
1). In Wabasha and Goodhue Counties, northwest-, northeast-, and north-trending faults nd up to 10 mi. (16 km) in length. The faults are located in the Minnesota River Valley province  a region of the Archean southern Superior Province. The faults offset Upper mbrian and Lower Ordovician sedimentary rocks. In Houston County, northwest-, northeast-,
east-trending faults extend up to 9 mi. (14 km) in length. The faults are located within the apai Province and displace Middle and Upper Cambrian and Lower Ordovician sedimentary ks. In Mower County, north to northwest-trending faults extend up to 11 mi. (18 km) in length.
faults are located within the MCR and displace Middle and Upper Devonian sedimentary ks. DPC completed a study of facility site characteristics at a boiling water reactor south of oa, Wisconsin (DPC, 2010). They concluded that faults within a 200 mi. (322 km) radius of site are at least pre-Pleistocene in age and, therefore, are not capable faults. They note that closest mapped fault to the Genoa project site of any size is the Mifflin fault. While faults in basha, Goodhue, Houston and Counties in Minnesota from Jirsa et al. (2011) are not cifically mentioned in DPC (2010), the faults in the southeast corner of Minnesota are not sidered to be capable faults.
1.4.17      Michigan Basin faults and folds described above have developed during the formation and development of a es of regional basins, arches, and domes (Figure 2.5-4). The Michigan Basin contains mbrian to Pennsylvanian sedimentary deposits (540 Ma to 300 Ma). The Illinois Basin is ted to the southwest of the site. The last known major tectonic movements occurred in the higan Basin in the early to late Proterozoic (Exelon, 2006a). The Wisconsin Dome is located e northern portion of Wisconsin, to the west of the Michigan Basin (Heyl et al., 1978).
arating the basins and domes are several structural arches. The Wisconsin Arch trends th from the Wisconsin Dome and had its last major tectonic movements in the early to late eozoic (Exelon, 2006a). The Kankakee Arch in northern Illinois forms the southwestern gin of the Michigan Basin (Howell, P.D., and van der Pluijm, B., 1990), and had its last major onic movements in the Ordovician to Pennsylvanian (Exelon, 2006a). The Mississippi River h to the west of the Illinois Basin had its last major tectonic movements in the post-early nsylvanian (Exelon, 2006a). Faults within the Michigan Basin are not considered to be able.
1.5          Regional Magnetic and Gravity Geophysical Anomalies ps and interpretations of geophysical magnetic and gravity anomalies have been used by ers to summarize the geologic interpretations of the regional geological history and structure.
ch of the published literature focuses on areas in central and northern Wisconsin, such as the R, Penokean fold belt, and Wolf River Batholith (e.g., Klasner et al., 1985 and ndler, V.W., 1996). In this section, the regional patterns of two major potential field physical anomalies are evaluated for additional information on the location and seismic ential of major regional structures.
principal sources of magnetic anomaly data are available for review: the magnetic anomaly p of North America (NAMAG, 2002); subsequent interpretation of Precambrian basement ms et al., 2005); the Earth magnetic anomaly grid (Maus et al., 2009); the Wisconsin NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-10                                        Rev. 0
 
ure 2.5-6 is the magnetic anomaly map from Maus et al., 2009 with interpretation of cambrian basement structures from Sims et al., 2005. The magnetic anomalies have been rpreted by Sims et al. to illustrate the major tectonic features such as the MCR and major ement faults (Sims et al., 2005). Sims et al. also infer several northeast-striking ductile shear es (faults in the mid to lower crust) and northwest-striking high-angle faults (Sims et al.,
5). They suggest that these basement structures are of late Paleoproterozoic-soproterozoic age (1.76 to 1.70 Ga), and were the result of northwest-southeast shortening of crust at that time. These shear zones probably bound the 1.76 to 1.65 Ga belt of rhyolite rtz arenite to the north of the site. To the south of this belt of siliceous rocks, the Eastern nite-rhyolite province (1.5 to 1.4 Ga) is preserved and continues into Illinois. The site is ted within the Eastern granite rhyolite province. Figure 2.5-7 is a large-scale map of terpreted magnetic anomalies of Wisconsin and northern Illinois (Maus et al., 2009).
ee principal sources of gravity anomaly data are available for the region: the Bouguer gravity maly map of the conterminous United States presented by Kucks, R.P. (1999), the Bouguer vity anomaly map of Wisconsin prepared by Daniels, D.L. and Snyder, S.L. (2002), and a guer gravity anomaly map of Illinois (Daniels et al., 2008). Interpretation of the gravity maps gests that the southern margin of the central Wisconsin gravity low is possibly the northeast-ding shear zone that marks the boundary between the rhyolite-quartz arenite belt and tern granite-rhyolite province. Figures 2.5-8 and 2.5-9 are uninterpreted regional Bouguer vity anomaly maps, and cover most of Wisconsin and northern Illinois, respectively. These ps show the MCR as a strong positive anomaly because it is a region of dense volcanic and ous rocks surrounded by lower-density sedimentary rocks. The Wolf River Batholith is rpreted by Chandler (1996) to be the source of the large negative gravity anomaly in central consin.
ails of the composite aeromagnetic and Bouguer gravity anomalies in southern Wisconsin are vided in Figure 2.5-10 and Figure 2.5-11 respectively, to expand the discussion of regional physical anomalies and to include an evaluation of potential karst features at the site.
major structure observed from the geophysical anomalies provided in Figure 2.5-10 and ure 2.5-11 is the northeast-striking Waukesha fault, identified from structural contours of the cambrian basement rocks. Structural contours indicate up to 1500 ft. of vertical separation oss the Waukesha fault. Based on three-dimensional modeling of aeromagnetic and gravity malies, a total vertical separation of approximately 500 to 1100 m at the Waukesha fault is rred.
view of the geophysical anomaly maps for southern Wisconsin indicates the following:
* Smaller faults and folds within the Paleozoic Era are not resolvable in the aeromagnetic anomaly map (Figure 2.5-10).
* The offset across the basement rocks at the Waukesha fault can reasonably be resolved in the Bouguer gravity anomaly map (Figure 2.5-11).
* Smaller faults and folds within both the basement and bedrock rocks are not readily apparent in the Bouguer gravity anomaly map (Figure 2.5-11).
NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-11                                          Rev. 0
 
e vertical separations.
st features are a hazard to development because it not only presents a pathway for rapid vement of groundwater, but also it may cause surface subsidence as overlying soils collapse open fractures. In addition to surface observations that indicate the presence of karst ures, geophysical imaging techniques are used to detect the presence of existing subsurface s with the potential for collapse. Electrical resistivity tomography has proven to be an ctive method to detect past or incipient sinkholes.
Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey (WGNHS) do not have electrical resistivity ography data or interpretations for the site. While the WGNHS have reports of small holes (less than five ft in diameter and less than five ft in depth) in parts of Rock County, they not aware of property damage or significant issues surrounding the presence of these holes. WGNHS do not have any reports of sinkholes at the SHINE site. Because the site is in Rock River Valley and has several hundred feet of sediment overlying the bedrock, it is very kely that a sinkhole will form near the site.
site has little topographic relief and lacks any geomorphic evidence of differential sidence that may indicate past or ongoing solution of any subsurface carbonate rocks and ation of karst features.
ed on the available evidence, there is a very low probability that karst features are present in the carbonate bedrock below the site.
1.6          Surficial Geology and Glacial History surficial geology of the region is controlled principally by processes associated with the ance and retreat of Pleistocene glaciers, and processes such as erosion and sedimentation followed the retreat of glacial ice (post-glacial). Several major periods of Pleistocene ice ance are recognized in northern North America. These Pleistocene glaciations are known as pre-Illinoian, Illinoian (also referred to as pre-Wisconsin), and Wisconsin (Roy et al., 2004) iations. Figure 2.5-12 is a map of the surficial geology of the region as modified from erton et al., 2003. Figure 2.5-13 indicates the estimated thickness of overburden and drift for consin and northern Illinois (Piskin, K., and Bergstrom, R.E., 1975 and WGNHS, 1983). The wing summary is based on physiographic divisions from the USGS (2003), and summaries of surficial geology and glacial history described by USDA SCS (1974); Fullerton et al. (2003);
NHS (2004); Clayton, L. and Attig, J.W. (1997); and MLRA (2012).
oldest known landform in the project region is the unglaciated Wisconsin Driftless section of Central Lowland Province. The Wisconsin Driftless section contains relatively rugged, ially-dissected topography with about 600 ft. (180 m) of topographic relief. Based on its morphology and lack of preserved glacial deposits, the Wisconsin Driftless section has not n glaciated. In Dane County, Wisconsin, the Driftless section comprises near-horizontal eozoic sedimentary rocks that are locally mantled by Pleistocene deposits of windblown ian) and hillslope sediments.
dforms composed of glacial deposits that formed during the Illinoian and Wisconsin ciations are present within the region. During the Wisconsin Glaciations, the Laurentide Ice NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-12                                        Rev. 0
 
end moraines. Sand and gravel were transported from the edges of the glacial ice across the ounding region to form extensive glacial outwash fan surfaces. Fine-grained sediments (silt clay) were deposited within proglacial lakes near the ice margins and within the outwash
: n. The maximum extent of the Wisconsin Glaciation ice occurred approximately 30,000 years
. Ice was absent from the area of the state of Wisconsin beginning around 11,000 years ago ig et al., 2011). Alluvial and wind processes reworked the glacial deposits during the ocene Epoch (last 10,000 years) during and following ice retreat.
h the retreat and almost complete melting of the Laurentide ice sheet, land surfaces of North erica experienced a period of adjustment (known as glacial isostatic adjustment [GIA]) that tinues to the present day. In GIA, slow movements occur in the highly viscous mantle in ponse to the loading and unloading of the Earth's surface. In North America, GIA is still sing vertical movements of the land surface because of the removal of significant volumes of more than 10,000 years ago. Based on Global Positioning System (GPS) measurements, a et al. established a hinge line in the Great Lakes vicinity; north of the line, uplift from GIA is occurring (e.g., 10 millimeters per year [mm/yr] of present day uplift at Hudson Bay, Canada),
e south of the line subsidence of up to 2 mm/yr is continuing at present (Sella et al., 2007).
site is located to the south of the hinge line. Based on the GIA model of Sella et al. (2007),
consin has 0 to 2 mm/yr of ongoing subsidence caused by the melting of ice more than 000 years ago. This subsidence is, however, regional in nature and not expected to result in differential movements at the site.
2        SITE GEOLOGY subsection is a summary of the geologic setting, stratigraphy and structure within about a
: i. (8 km) radius of the site.
2.1          Stratigraphy and Depth to Bedrock described in Subsection 2.5.1, the Precambrian basement rocks form geologic terranes that e accreted to the North American continent prior to about 1.48 to 1.35 Ga. During the eozoic Era, the site region was part of a large continental marine basin, the Michigan Basin, re deposits of shallow marine sediments accumulated over many millions of years. The elopment of the Wisconsin Arch within the Michigan Basin formed long wavelength, open onal folds within the Cambrian through Ordovician sedimentary rocks.
bedrock geology units mapped in the vicinity of the project site (Figure 2.5-5) are the ovician Period Prairie du Chien Group (dolomite with some sandstone and shale), Ancell up (sandstone with minor limestone, shale, and conglomerate), and Sinnippee Group omite with some limestone and shale). From Mudrey et al., the Ordovician sedimentary rock uence is approximately 200 ft. (60 m) thick, and underlain by an estimated 1000 ft. (300 m) of mbrian age sedimentary rock, that in turn overlies the Precambrian basement rocks (Mudrey l., 1982).
surficial geology of Rock County (Figure 2.5-12) consists of the Wisconsin-age Jonestown aine to the north. This moraine was formed at the margins of the Green Bay ice lobe. The ainder of the county contains Illinoian-age ground moraine deposits that in places were ected by southward flowing Late Wisconsin outwash streams. The stream valleys now NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-13                                          Rev. 0
 
ppernong with outflow that extended through the Rock River drainage basin (Clayton, L., and g, J.W., 1997).
ed on the geologic maps of Mudrey et al. and Cannon et al., the bedrock beneath the site is mbrian-age sandstone that contains some dolomite and shale beds (Figure 2.5-5) (Mudrey l., 1982 and Cannon et al., 1999). These sedimentary rocks were deposited in the Michigan in and then were gently deformed within the Wisconsin Arch. Bedrock units overlie Archean Proterozoic volcanic and associated basement rocks that were intruded by a 1.48 to 1.35 Ga nite-rhyolite intrusive episode (Whitmeyer, S.J., and Karlstrom, K.E., 2007). The basement k units are part of the Yavapai or Mazatzal Province/terrane (Figure 2.5-3).
estimates of depth to bedrock at the site are available: an estimate of 200 to 300 ft. (60 to m) from WGNHS, 1983, and an estimate of 100 to 300 ft. (30 to 90 m) from Mudrey et al.,
: 2. Site geotechnical drilling investigations extended to a maximum depth of 221 ft. (67.4 m) w ground surface (bgs) and did not encounter bedrock. Accordingly, the depth to bedrock at site is more than 221 ft. (67.4 m) bgs.
2.2            Structural Geology site is located near the axis of the Wisconsin Arch (Charpentier, R.R., 1987) (Figure 2.5-4).
pite the presence of the Arch, cross sections from Mudrey et al. (1982), suggest that the mbrian and Ordovician sedimentary rock units beneath the site probably have very shallow to zontal dips. These observations indicate little or no net deformation beneath the site over ut the last 500 million years.
2.3            Site Soil Conditions mapping at and surrounding the site shows that it is located on the Warsaw and Lorenzo
-drained, loamy soils. Topsoil layers of the Warsaw and Lorenzo soil units are underlain by tified sand and gravel at depths of approximately 10 to 40 in. (0.25 to1 m) (USDA SCS, 1974 RCGIS, 2012). The sand and gravel units are inferred to result from deposition of fluvio-ial sediments on glacial outwash plains and deposition during the construction and erosion of l fluvial terraces.
subsurface conditions encountered at the site were evaluated by extending 15 boreholes eath the site. In general terms, the site soil conditions comprise about 1 ft. (0.3 m) of topsoil crop residue overlying relatively clean, fine- to coarse-grained sand with occasional gravel rs. Based on three deeper boreholes, these soil conditions extend to 180 to 185 ft. (54.9 to 4 m) bgs. Below the sand is a 10 to 18 ft. (3.0 to 5.5 m) thick layer of clayey silt that is erlain by sand or silty sand to the borehole termination depth of 221 ft. (67.4 m) bgs. Bedrock not encountered beneath the site.
2.4            Non-Seismic Geological Hazards ilable reports and maps that describe geologic hazards associated with landslides, land sidence, karst features, and swelling clays were reviewed for the site and its surrounding on in Rock County, Wisconsin.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.5-14                                          Rev. 0
 
slide incidence that is defined as less than 1.5 percent of area subjected to the effects of slides. The Rock County Hazard Mitigation Plan (Vierbicher, 2010) indicates that "no ificant landslides have been reported in Rock County in recent years." The lack of landslide ential is consistent with the low gradient (less than 7 ft. [2.1 m] elevation change) of the site, the unsaturated nature of the poorly-graded sands within 50 ft. (15.2 m) of the ground ace.
Rock County Hazard Mitigation Plan also indicates that "subsidence has not been an issue ock County" and that the subsidence hazard is low (Vierbicher, 2010). The plan notes that er some conditions of agricultural tilling and pumping of groundwater a localized settlement subsidence hazard may occur (Vierbicher, 2010).
k County contains carbonate bedrock susceptible to dissolution or karst formation (WGNHS, 9). The Rock County Hazard Mitigation Plan (Vierbicher, 2010) indicates that no significant holes have been reported in Rock County in recent years. The plan indicates a potential for st features to form in the county, particularly in the eastern third of the county that lies to the t of the site. No evidence for karst or karst-related subsidence was observed at the site.
swelling clays map of the conterminous United States prepared by Olive et al. has the site ted in a unit identified as containing little or no swelling clay (Olive et al., 1989). The Rock nty Hazard Mitigation Plan (Vierbicher, 2010) provides no information on the presence of s with high shrink-swell potential, expansive soils, or swelling clays. Geotechnical stigations found no evidence of highly-plastic clays in any of the samples obtained during the surface investigation. Hazards from swelling or expansive clays are considered to be minimal he site.
3        SEISMICITY subsection describes the history of recorded and felt earthquakes in southern Wisconsin-hern Illinois based on online earthquake catalogs and databases, and peer-reviewed lications on specific earthquake events.
3.1          Historic Earthquakes oject-specific catalog of historic earthquakes was developed for the site by searching several hquake databases and published references on the location and intensity of historic hquakes. The following earthquake databases and references were reviewed in the initial se of catalog development:
* Worldwide Advanced National Seismic System (ANSS) Composite Catalog (ANSS, 2012): The catalog is created by merging the master earthquake catalogs from contributing ANSS institutions and then removing duplicate solutions for the same event.
* USGS/NEIC 1973 to Present Preliminary Determination of Epicenters Catalog (PDE)
(USGS, 2012d): The catalog includes earthquakes located by the U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Information Center (NEIC).
* Significant U.S. Earthquakes (USHIS) 1568-1989 (USGS, 2012d): The catalog is from the NEIC based on Stover, C.W. and Coffman, J.L. (1993).
NE Medical Technologies                        2.5-15                                        Rev. 0
* National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research (NCEER) Group (NCEER, 2012):
Catalog of central and eastern United States earthquakes from 1627 to 1985 (Armbruster, J. and Seeber, L., 1992).
* U.S. Geological Survey reports on central United States earthquakes and earthquake information by state: Bakun, W.H. and Hopper, M.G. (2004); Dart, R.L., and Volpi, C.M.
(2010); Stover, C.W. and Coffman, J.L. (1993); Wheeler, R.L. (2003); Wheeler et al.
(2003) and USGS (2012f).
* Review of significant Canadian earthquakes from 1600 to 2006 (Lamontagne et al., 2008) and Natural Resources Canada earthquake information (Natural Resources Canada, 2012).
* Centennial Catalog (Engdahl, E.R.,and Villasenor, A.,2002): A global catalog of earthquakes from 1900 to 2008.
ause of numerous inconsistencies within and between various earthquake databases and rences (e.g., different epicenter locations for a given earthquake), a second phase of review undertaken based on the Central Eastern United States earthquake catalog (CEUS-SSC)
US-SSC, 2012). This earthquake catalog was compiled as part of studies to develop a new mic source characterization model for the Central and Eastern United States. The catalog tains records of earthquakes documented from 1568 to 2008.
regional earthquake catalogs which make up the CEUS-SSSC catalog may individually w epicenters for additional events not covered in Table 2.5-1. While some of these events y be real, they are unreliably recorded earthquakes, and others may result from mine losions, earthquakes triggered by deep fluid injection and/or hydraulic fracturing of near-ace rocks, or other non-tectonic processes. In the development of this section, SHINE relied n the analysis of earthquake records used to create the comprehensive earthquake catalog he CEUS-SSC project. Therefore, while the U.S. Geological Survey-hosted database udes additional earthquake epicenters, SHINE included only those earthquakes that have sed the robust screening process used to prepare the CEUS-SSC catalog in Table 2.5-1.
thquakes from various magnitude scales were recalculated to a uniform magnitude scale g moment magnitude (M). Based on the uncertainty of assessment, the recalculated gnitudes for historic earthquakes are termed expected moment magnitude (E[M]) in the US-SSC catalog (CEUS SSC, 2012). The primary benefits of using the CEUS-SSC (2012) log to develop the project-specific SHINE catalog include: a) using a single earthquake abase that has been compiled and reviewed under uniform procedures; and b) obtaining orm earthquake magnitudes for the project-specific database with E[M] values (CEUS-SSC, 2).
project-specific catalog was developed based on the CEUS-SSC catalog that contains ecords of historic earthquakes with epicenters located within about 200 mi. (322 km) of the (CEUS-SSC, 2012 and 2015). The project-specific catalog is listed in Table 2.5-1 and udes earthquake magnitudes ranging from E[M] 2.32 to 5.15. Four earthquake events are igned depths of 5 km (3.1 mi.) or 10 km (6.2 mi.), with the remaining depths assigned a depth km (0 mi.). The October 22, 1909 and October 17, 1913 earthquake epicenters have the e latitude and longitude coordinates.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.5-16                                      Rev. 0
 
0s is the June 28, 2004 E[M] 4.13 event located approximately 82 mi. (132 km) south of the
. The closest earthquake epicenter to the site is the December 7, 1933 E[M] 3.03 event ted approximately 21 mi. (34 km) to the northwest.
project-specific catalog indicates that in general, the region surrounding the site has a oric record of relatively infrequent, small to moderate earthquakes that is typical of much of central and eastern United States.
3.2          Felt Intensities ddition to recorded earthquake epicenters, information is also available on how earthquake king has been experienced by people located in Janesville and other communities near the
. The experience of earthquake shaking and a qualitative assessment of damage is asured on the Modified Mercalli Intensity scale (MMI). Table 2.5-2 provides a description of I levels of intensity, referenced from USGS, 2000. While the quality of the measurements is ly variable depending on the skills of the observer and the quality of local engineered and
-engineered structures, the MMI scale nevertheless provides a reasonable estimate of the urrence of moderate and large earthquakes that occurred before the development of a work of earthquake recording instruments.
National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) of the NOAA developed the National Earthquake nsity Database (NEID), which is a collection of records of damage and felt reports from more n 23,000 U.S. earthquakes (NEID, 2012). The database contains information regarding the rdinates of earthquake epicenters, estimated magnitudes, and focal depths, names and rdinates of reporting cities (or localities), reported intensities, and the distance from a city (or lity) to the epicenter. Earthquakes listed in the NGDC database date from 1638 to 1985.
m 1985 onward, the reports of earthquake shaking are maintained by the USGS.
king intensity records from NEID of earthquakes within approximately 200 mi. (322 km) of the contain reports from 12 earthquakes that occurred from 1928 to 1985 (NEID, 2012). A posite dataset is listed in Table 2.5-3, and consists of the earthquake location and expected ment magnitude from the CEUS-SSC database, plus the event MMI values from the NEID abase and other sources cited in Table 2.5-3 (CEUS-SSC, 2012 and NEID, 2012). The earthquakes listed in Table 2.5-3 are shown in Figure 2.5-14. An estimated MMI value of V at site accompanied the 1909 E[M] 5.15 earthquake located approximately 85 mi. (137 km) to southeast, and accompanied the 1972 E[M] 4.08 earthquake located approximately 70 mi.
3 km) to south-southwest (Table 2.5-3).
oric earthquake reports and isoseismal maps were reviewed for the central United States 1568 to 1989 (Stover, C.W. and Coffman, J.L., 1993), 1827 to 1952 (Bakun, W.H. and per, M.G., 2004), and United States earthquake information by state and territory (USGS, 2f). In addition, a summary of significant Canadian earthquakes from 1600 to 2006 montagne et al., 2008 and Natural Resources Canada, 2012) was also reviewed. Table 2.5-4 historic earthquakes with epicenters located more than 200 mi. (322 km) from the site where hquake shaking was reported as felt or inferred to have been felt in the site area. As in le 2.5-3, the composite dataset listed in Table 2.5-4 lists event location and estimated ment magnitude from the CEUS-SSC database, earthquake MMI values from Stover and fman, and estimated MMI values at the site from sources cited in the Table 2.5-4 NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-17                                        Rev. 0
 
hquakes because only general felt intensity information for other earthquakes could be tified (e.g., "Felt in Wisconsin"). Figures 2.5-15 through 2.5-20 provide isoseismal maps from ver and Coffman (Stover, C.W. and Coffman, J.L., 1993) and Bakun and Hopper (Bakun,
  . and Hopper, M.G., 2004) for the more significant earthquakes listed in Table 2.5-4.
MMI values for historic earthquakes within an approximate 200 mi. (322 km) radius of the range from MMI II to MMI VII (Table 2.5-3). The largest MMI value (VII) recorded in the on was during the May 26, 1909 E[M] 5.15 earthquake. Figure 2.5-19 shows the isoseismal p from a detailed study of the 1909 earthquake by Bakun, W.H. and Hopper, M.G. (2004). The tion of the estimated earthquake epicenter depends on the reference. For example, the 9 event is located approximately 85 mi. (137 km) southeast of the site in CEUS-SSC, 2012 Stover, C.W. and Coffman, J.L. (1993); and 68 mi. (109 km) south of the site according to study of Bakun, W.H. and Hopper, M.G. (2004); and as depicted on Figure 2.5-19. For this ort, the CEUS-SSC (2012) dataset is the primary dataset for epicenter locations for reasons ussed in Subsection 2.5.3.1. Thus, Figure 2.5-19 displays the felt intensity epicenter of the y 26, 1909 earthquake based on the location provided in CEUS-SSC (2012) and Stover, C.W.
Coffman, J.L. (1993).
ed on the review of felt intensity records for historic earthquakes (up to 1985), regional hquakes have developed MMI values ranging from III to VII within approximately 200 mi.
2 km) of the site. At distances greater than 200 mi. (322 km) from the site, felt intensities of oric earthquakes (up to 1989) developed MMI values estimated at MMI I to V at the site. The ximum felt intensity experienced at the site in historical times corresponds only to moderate king (MMI V). MMI V intensity may have occurred at the site four times in approximately the 200 years during earthquakes that occurred in 1811, 1886, 1909, and 1972.
4        MAXIMUM EARTHQUAKE POTENTIAL review of the regional geological stratigraphy, structure, and tectonics presented in section 2.5.1 indicates that major geologic structures mapped in the region appear to have eloped within a tectonic regime different from the present day. The long-term geologic history he emplacement and metamorphism of regional basement rocks, analysis of the stratigraphy, geologic structures mapped or inferred within the local sedimentary bedrock provide no itive evidence that they have experienced any significant tectonic movements in Quaternary (over the last 1.8 million years). Most of the major geologic and geophysical structures are served in the pre-Phanerozoic basement rocks and appear related to major episodes of tinental accretion and breakup before about 500 million years ago.
eral regional geologic structures appear to deform the Paleozoic rocks in the region: the dwich fault zone, the La Salle anticlinorium, several small and limited-length faults, and the onal Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches. The Wisconsin and Kankakee Arches are regional-le, long wavelength tectonic features that appear related to crustal adjustment during and wing the filling and development of the Michigan Basin more than 300 million years ago.
bedrock faults, such as the Sandwich and Plum River fault zones, appear to have generated ical offset of the Paleozoic rocks, indicating that the fault movements post-date the filling of Michigan Basin. No evidence, however, is available to indicate that either of these faults has pagated upward into the Late Wisconsin sediments and/or to the ground surface. The lack of NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-18                                      Rev. 0
 
ature and data, including NRC documents for other sites, the closest known capable faults to site are part of the Wabash Valley liquefaction features located about 170 mi. (274 km) south he site.
pattern of historical seismicity for the region does not demonstrate a positive alignment of few known epicenters that might indicate ongoing seismic activity and reactivation of these r structures by the present-day stress field. The epicenter of the E[M] 5.15 earthquake in 9 estimated by Bakun and Hopper is, however, close to the mapped trace of the Sandwich t that is mapped to offset the Paleozoic rocks of northern Illinois (Figure 2.5-5) (Bakun, W.H.
Hopper, M.G., 2004). It is not clear, however, whether this single, moderate-magnitude hquake indicates Holocene reactivation of the Sandwich fault zone, or if the earthquake was erated by localized strain release on some other small-scale fault.
review of historical earthquake records indicates that the maximum earthquake that has urred during the last 200 years within 200 mi. (322 km) of the site is the E[M] 5.15 event.
l-studied historic earthquakes suggest that the strongest shaking experienced at the site is I V, with a maximum in the region of MMI VII. These values are typical for geologically stable, tinental interior regions such as the central United States where infrequent, moderate gnitude earthquakes occur without a clear association with known geologic structures.
00-year historic earthquake record is generally considered too short a time period to estimate longer term earthquake potential, particularly in regions where the larger earthquakes occur equently. To estimate the longer term earthquake shaking potential, the results of the ggregation of the 2008 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model (Petersen et al., 2008) were ulated for return periods of 4975 to 19,900 years. Figures 2.5-21 through 2.5-25 show ggregation results for 4975, 9950, and 19,900 years, respectively. The deaggregation plots he longer return periods all indicate that the major contributor to seismic hazard are hquakes with magnitudes between about M 5 and M 6. The PGA values for the longer return ods increase because the source earthquake has a higher probability of being closer to the assess the potential maximum magnitude that may impact the site and its immediate oundings, the mean earthquake magnitude was estimated from the disaggregation of the 8 USGS National Seismic Hazard Model (Petersen et al., 2008) for return periods of 4975, 0 and 19,900 years, and a site located at 89.025 degrees west longitude and 42.624 degrees h latitude. The mean earthquake magnitudes for these long return period disaggregations are narrow range of about M 5.7 to 5.8. This magnitude range is about 0.5 to 0.6 magnitude units ater than the E[M] 5.15 maximum that is the largest historic earthquake magnitude to have urred in the last 200 years within about 200 mi. (322 km) of the site. An M 5.8 earthquake can sonably be regarded as the maximum potential earthquake magnitude to occur within the on.
5        VIBRATORY GROUND MOTION subsection presents an evaluation of the earthquake ground shaking expected at the site.
ause most of the mapped faults, folds, and major known geological structures within 200 mi.
2 km) of the site are not considered to be seismically capable, the analysis of earthquake und shaking at the site is based on interpolation of the national seismic hazard model. The NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-19                                      Rev. 0
 
5.1          Earthquake Shaking Hazard Evaluation babilistic seismic hazard analysis (PSHA) is commonly used to estimate expected levels of hquake ground shaking for regions and for sites (e.g., McGuire, 2004). The PSHA method vides a probabilistic estimate (annual frequency of exceedance) for specified levels of hquake ground motion. The earthquake ground motions can be reported as peak horizontal und acceleration (PGA) estimates, as often required for foundation or slope stability analyses, pectral accelerations (Sa = accelerations at a specified frequency), as commonly used in dern building codes and structural standards.
USGS developed national probabilistic seismic hazard models in 1996, 2002, and 2008 h minor updates in 2010), which all include Wisconsin (e.g., Petersen et al. 2008). Each ate of the national probabilistic model and associated hazard maps has incorporated the st information on fault locations and fault characteristics; historical earthquake locations, gnitudes and effects; and a range of ground motion prediction equations (GMPE) developed earthquake records from the United States and around the world. The seismic hazard dels can be used to estimate PGA and Sa values for any site in the conterminous United tes (USGS, 2012e).
5.2          Earthquake Shaking Hazard Estimates babilistic PGA estimates were acquired for the site based on the USGS 2008 national hazard del (USGS, 2012a) (Figures 2.5-21 through 2.5-25). For the site, the USGS 2008 model is ted to the estimation of hazard for outcropping, weak rock and hard rock sites with average ar-wave velocity profiles in the upper 100 ft. (30 m) of 760 m/s (2493 ft/sec) (soft rock and/or y stiff soil) or 2000 m/s (6562 ft/sec) (hard rock), respectively. The 760 m/s (2493 ft/sec) value used to obtain PGA estimates for five return periods from 475 years to 19,900 years as d in Table 2.5-5. The PGA values listed in Table 2.5-5 indicate a low to very low level of hquake shaking hazard at the site.
5.3          2015 International Building Code Seismic Design Ground Motion Parameters Final ISG Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 2, Section 6b.3 (USNRC, 2012) requires that the cality accident alarm system (CAAS) be designed to remain operational during credible nts, such as a seismic shock equivalent to the site-specific, design-basis earthquake or the ivalent value specified by the Uniform Building Code. In Wisconsin, the Uniform Building e (UBC) has been superseded by the 2015 International Building Code (IBC) (IBC, 2015).
s, seismic design parameters are discussed in terms of the 2015 IBC and associated dards rather than in terms of the UBC.
smic provisions within the 2015 IBC Chapter 16, Section 13, Earthquake Loads (IBC, 2015) the ASCE 7-05 Standard, Chapter 11 (ASCE, 2005) are based on five-percent damped ctral accelerations for a maximum considered earthquake (MCE) with a return period of 5 years (equivalent to a ground motion with a 2 percent probability of exceedance in ears). Spectral acceleration values for the MCE are for soil Site Class B (rock) site conditions erage shear wave velocity in the top 100 feet [30 m] between 2500 and 5000 ft/sec [760 to 0 m/s]). For most sites, the short- (SS) and long- (S1) period spectral accelerations for rock NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-20                                        Rev. 0
 
lication (USGS, 2012b).
BC, Site Class B soil conditions require modification for other soil site classes (Site Classes A,
  , E, and F) by the application of the site coefficients Fa (site coefficient for 0.2 second period)
Fv (site coefficient for 1 second period). Soil-modified SS becomes SMS (maximum sidered earthquake spectral response for 0.2 seconds modified for soil Site Class) and soil-dified S1 become SM1 (maximum considered earthquake spectral response for 1 second od modified for soil Site Class) where SMS = SS x Fa and SM1 = S1 x Fv (Equations 16-36 and 37 in IBC, 2009). The U.S. Seismic "Design Maps" web application (USGS, 2012b) indicates and S1 values of 0.129 g (gravitational acceleration) and 0.050 g, respectively (Fa and Fv = 1) he MCE at the site. These values are slightly different than those obtained from the USGS 8 national hazard maps because the 2009 IBC-ASCE 7-05 MCE values are based on the ier 2002 USGS national hazard maps.
site is a soil Site Class D site. When modified for a Site Class D site by application of the site fficients Fa and FVv SMS and SM1 values of 0.206 g and 0.119 g, respectively (Fa = 1.6 and 2.4) are obtained. The SMS and SM1 values represent the MCE acceleration response ctral accelerations for the site as modified for the site soil conditions. These modified spectral eleration values are then multiplied by two-thirds to develop the design acceleration response ctrum values of SDS (design spectral response acceleration coefficient at short periods) and (design spectral response acceleration coefficient at 1-second period) for where SDS =
x 2/3 and SD1 = SM1 x 2/3 (Equations 16-38 and 16-39 from IBC, 2009). The SDS and SD1 es are used to develop the design acceleration response spectrum suitable for structural lysis and design for the requirements of IBC 2015 and ASCE 7-05. Key parameters for the elopment of seismic design ground motions from the 2015 IBC-ASCE 7-05 seismic design cedures are listed in Table 2.5-6.
6        SURFACE FAULTING USGS Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, (USGS, 2012c) contains rmation on the location and activity of known or mapped Quaternary faults and folds in the ted States. The database contains no record of Quaternary faults or folds within an roximate 200 mile (322 km) radius of the site. A review of site aerial photographs and Google th' images found no evidence for geomorphic features that might indicate the presence of a t with demonstrated surface rupture in the Quaternary within 5 mi. (8 km) of the site.
east-striking faults mapped within the Cambrian to Ordovician sedimentary bedrock have n identified in the subsurface of Rock County by Mudrey et al. (Mudrey et al., 1982). The esville fault (also named the Evansville fault) consists of an approximately 19-mi. long km), east-striking fault with the north side downthrown (DPC, 2010), and located roximately 6 mi. (10 km) north of Janesville (Figure 2.5-5). This fault is identified as the dominant fault segment, with a second segment striking to the north (DPC, 2010). It is umed that the estimated 70 ft. (21.3 m) of displacement for the downthrown side (Exelon, 6a) of the Janesville fault is associated with the primary east-striking fault segment. There is evidence of Pleistocene or post-Pleistocene activity on the Janesville fault (Exelon, 2006a).
Janesville fault is not considered to be a capable fault.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-21                                          Rev. 0
 
l., 1982) (Figure 2.5-5). The type or amount of fault displacement has not been determined his unnamed fault. Based on the unnamed fault's similar orientation and location with respect he Janesville fault, the unnamed fault is also not considered to be a capable fault.
m the USGS Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States (USGS, 2012c), the hern boundary of the Wabash Valley liquefaction features region is located approximately mi. (274 km) south of the site (Figure 2.5-4). Liquefaction studies indicate that at least seven ocene (10,000 years ago to present day) up to M 7.5 earthquakes and one late Pleistocene 0,000 years to 10,000 years) earthquake may have occurred in this region (Obermeier, S.F.,
Crone, A.J., compilers, 1994). Surface faulting associated with future earthquakes is not cipated to affect the site.
7        LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL 7.1          Site Soil Conditions technical engineering characteristics of the site were evaluated by a series of field stigations. Based on standard penetrometer test (SPT) blow counts (N-values) measured in boreholes extended at the site, the density of the sand beneath the site increases with depth.
eneral, the sandy soils observed down to a depth of approximately 60 to 80 ft. (18.3 to 4 m) can be classified as "compact to dense" except close to the level of the water table ountered in the boreholes. Although no soil heave was observed during drilling operations, of the 14 borings included one SPT classified as loose at or just below the observed water
: l. Below approximately 80 ft. (24.4 m), sandy soils are classified as dense to very dense.
10 to 18 ft. thick (3.1 to 5.5 m) stratum of clayey silt encountered at approximately 180 to ft. (54.9 to 56.4 m) bgs in the three deeper borings can be classified as hard. Results from etrometer tests measured by hand corroborate the SPT results.
oratory tests of the distribution of soil grain sizes for samples selected from the boreholes cate that the soils can be geotechnically classified as poorly-graded sand, with gravel and
" Soil moisture contents in the upper 50 ft. (15.2 m) ranged from 2.0 to 11.3 percent, and sture contents below this depth ranged from 9.5 to 25.4 percent. Soluble-sulfate in soil at ple depths between 10 and 40 ft. (3.0 to 12.2 m) bgs exhibited "negligible sulfate exposure" ls (less than 0.10 percent by mass). Other laboratory testing indicated that the clayey silt had id limits (LL) of 18 to 19, and plastic limits (PL) of 13 to 14.
7.2          Groundwater Level undwater was encountered at the time of drilling in the boreholes extended at the site.
asured groundwater level elevations ranged from about 754 to 766 ft. (230 to 233 m), about o 65 ft. (18.3 to 19.8 m) bgs. Groundwater levels can generally be expected to fluctuate sonally and annually with changes in local and regional precipitation patterns. Analyses of the undwater flow direction and gradient are provided in Subsection 2.4.1.4.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-22                                        Rev. 0
 
potential for soil liquefaction at the site was reviewed in accordance with Regulatory de 1.198, Procedures and Criteria for Assessing Seismic Soil Liquefaction at Nuclear Power nt Sites (USNRC, 2003).
ualitative review of the potential for soil liquefaction indicates that the soils at the site pose no ential liquefaction hazard to the project because:
: a. Liquefaction occurs only in saturated or near-saturated soils. The soils at the site are unsaturated to a depth of about 58 to 65 ft. (17.7 to 19.8 m) below the ground surface and thus are not liquefiable. Soils below these depths are generally considered non-liquefiable (even under higher seismic loads) due to the high effective stress confining the soil.
: b. Liquefaction occurs generally in loose soils. The relative densities of the sandy soils in the upper 100 ft. (30 m) are generally compact to dense, and are, therefore, considered non-liquefiable under the design seismic ground motions.
: c. The seismic design ground motions associated with this low seismic hazard are of insufficient scale and duration; the resulting seismic cyclic stresses are not considered capable of producing excess pore water pressure and thus insufficient to trigger liquefaction.
confirm the qualitative analysis, a deterministic liquefaction analysis was undertaken to ess the liquefaction hazard potential for the site soil conditions, and to evaluate the potential surface settlement due to liquefaction. The analysis was based on the SPT N-values that e acquired during geotechnical field investigations in 14 boreholes advanced at the site.
efaction triggering analysis was performed at a PGA value of 0.13 g. This PGA value was ved by scaling the 4975-year return period PGA from the national seismic hazard model by to account for the soil Site Class D site soil condition. An M 5.8 earthquake was selected as maximum potential earthquake. The depth to highest groundwater level was estimated at
: t. (9.1 m) bgs to represent conservatively the groundwater levels higher than measured at the and estimated to exist during the 500-year flood event.
ults of both the qualitative and quantitative liquefaction analysis demonstrate that there is no ential for liquefaction to occur within the soils underlying the site. The factor of safety against efaction ranges from 2 to 30, and in most cases exceeds 3. The median factor of safety inst liquefaction is 5.3. Factors of safety greater than 1.4 are considered high, and in those es soil elements would suffer relatively minor cyclic pore pressure generation REG/CR-5741) (USNRC, 2000).
8        CONCLUSIONS lysis of the long-term geologic history of the emplacement, metamorphism, and structural lution of regional basement rocks; the stratigraphy and structure of the local sedimentary rock units, the glacial geology and geomorphology; and regional magnetic and gravity malies all indicate that the site is located within a region characterized by long-term tectonic ility. Analysis of the development and displacement history of 17 mapped fault and fault ctures within 200 mi. (322 km) of the site found no evidence to indicate that these structures capable faults as defined in Appendix A of 10 CFR 100. The closest known capable faults are NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-23                                          Rev. 0
 
USGS Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, including the 2010 update GS, 2012c) contains no record of Quaternary faults or folds within an approximate 200 mi.
2 km) radius of the site. The Janesville fault, an approximately 19 mi. long (31 km) fault ted approximately 6 mi. (10 km) north of Janesville (Figure 2.5-5), has no evidence of stocene or post-Pleistocene activity. An unnamed, approximately 1.6 mi. long (2.6 km), east ding fault in the bedrock approximately 1.9 mi. (3.1 km) north of Janesville has a similar ntation to the Janesville fault, and is also considered not to be a capable fault. Surface ting associated with future earthquakes is not anticipated to affect the site.
technical data collected from site-specific subsurface investigations show that the site has a y gentle gradient, and is underlain by more than 200 ft. (61.0 m) of dense to very dense sand, dy silt and silty sand. The water table at the time of investigation was more than 50 ft.
2 m) bgs. Results of both a qualitative and quantitative liquefaction analysis demonstrate that e is no potential for liquefaction to occur within the soils underlying the site. The median or of safety against liquefaction is 5.3, and ranges from 2 to 30. Geological hazards related to slide occurrence, and other subsidence, karst formation and swelling clays are all sidered to be insignificant at the site.
roject-specific earthquake catalog extracted from the CEUS-SSC (2012) catalog contains ecords of historic earthquakes with epicenters located within about 200 mi. (322 km) of the
. Earthquake magnitudes range from E[M] 2.32 to 5.15. The largest recorded earthquake in 200 mi. (322 km) was the May 26, 1909 E[M] 5.15 event located approximately 85 mi.
7 km) southeast of the site. The closest earthquake epicenter to the site is the December 7, 3 E[M] 3.03 event located approximately 21 mi. (34 km) to the northwest of the site. The MMI es from historic earthquakes within an approximate 200 mi. (322 km) radius of the site range MMI III to MMI VII. The maximum felt intensity experienced at the site in historical times esponds only to a moderate level shaking (MMI V). MMI V intensity may have occurred at the four times in approximately the last 200 years during earthquakes that occurred in 1811, 6, 1909, and 1972. The historical earthquake catalog indicates that in general, the region ounding the site has an historic record of relatively infrequent, small to moderate hquakes that is typical of much of the central and eastern United States.
ional seismic hazard maps (USGS, 2012e) indicate that the site is located within one of the est seismic hazard regions in the conterminous United States. For example, a low hazard is trated by a PGA value of 0.19 g having a return period of more than 19,900 years. The low ard is also reflected in the seismic parameters required for application of the 2009 IBC-ASCE 5 seismic design procedures. The site SMS and SM1 values of 0.206 g and 0.119 g, pectively represent the MCE acceleration response spectral accelerations with a two percent bability of exceedance in the next 50 years (2475-year return period) for the site soil ditions. Regional earthquake hazard estimates, an estimated maximum potential earthquake 5.8 earthquake, and site-specific spectral accelerations required for application of the 5 IBC-ASCE 7-05 seismic design procedures suggest that earthquake shaking should not be ajor constraint for the development of facilities at the site.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-24                                        Rev. 0
 
able 2.5 Historic Earthquake Epicenters Located Within Approximately 200 Miles (322 km) of the SHINE Site (Sheet 1 of 3)
Expected Moment    Distance to Latitude  Longitude            Magnitude      Site ar(a) Month(a) Day(a)(b)    (oN)(a)    (oW)(a)    Depth(a)  (E[M])(a)    (km)(c) 804      8        20        42.0      87.8        0        4.18        122 804      8        24        42        89          0        4.12          69 833      2          4        42.3      85.6        0        3.83        284 861      12        23      42.09      87.98        0        2.98        105 869      8        17      41.56      90.60        0        2.32        176 876      5        22      41.29      89.51        0        3.31        154 881      4        20        41.6      85.8        0        2.65        290 881      5        27        41.3      89.1        0        4.44        147 883      2          4        40.5      89.0        0        4.52        236 883      2          4        42.3      85.6        0        4.73        284 887      2        11      40.37      91.39        0        2.98        319 889      3          3        40.5      89.0        0        2.65        236 892      8          4      42.68      88.28        0        2.79          61 893      12        20      41.62      85.95        0        3.96        278 894      2        27      42.12      86.46        0        2.65        219 894      11          9      42.12      86.46        0        2.65        219 895      10          7        41.1      89.0        0        3.31        169 897      6          6      43.33      91.51        0        3.01        217 897      12          3      43.1        89.8        0        3.92          83 897      12          3        42.4      90.4        0        3.31        116 899      2        11        41.6      86.8        0        4.11        216 899      2        11      43.35      85.40        0        2.67        306 899      10        11        42.1      86.5        0        3.15        216 900      3        14        45.5      89.5        0        2.32        322 907      11        28        42.3      89.8        0        2.77          73 909      5        26        41.6      88.1        0        5.15        137 NE Medical Technologies                2.5-25                                  Rev. 0
 
(Sheet 2 of 3)
Expected Moment    Distance to Latitude  Longitude            Magnitude      Site ar(a) Month(a) Day(a)(b)  (oN)(a)    (oW)(a)    Depth(a)  (E[M])(a)  (km)(c) 909    7        19      40.3        90.7        0        4.35        294 909    10        22      41.8        89.7        0        2.98        107 911      7        29      41.8        87.6        0        2.98        149 912      1        2      42.3        89.0        0        4.38        36 912      9        25      42.3        89.1        0        2.32        37 913    10        17      41.8        89.7        0        3.38        107 914    10        7      43.1        89.4        0        2.65        61 921      2        26      39.85      88.93        0        2.32        308 921      3        14        40        88          0        4.11        304 922      7        7      43.8        88.5        0        4.1        137 923    11        10      40.0        89.9        0        3.21        301 925      1        26      42.5        92.4        0        2.62        277 928      1        23        42        90          0        3.00        106 933    12        7      42.9        89.2        0        3.03        34 934    11        12        41.5      90.5        0        3.73        175 938      2        12        41.6      87.0        0        3.69        202 942      3        1        41.2      89.7        0        3.48        168 944    3        16      42.0        88.3        0        2.61        92 947      3        16      42.1        88.3        0        2.65        83 947      5        6      43.0        87.9        0        3.53        101 948      1        15      43.1        89.7        0        2.65        76 948      4        20      41.7        91.8        0        2.65        251 956      3        13        40.5      90.4        0        3.31        262 956      7        18        43.6      87.7        0        2.65        153 956    10        13        42.9      87.9        0        2.65        97 957      1        8        43.5      88.8        0        2.32        99 972      9        15      41.64      89.37        10        4.08        113 978      2        16      39.80      88.23        5        2.38        321 NE Medical Technologies              2.5-26                                  Rev. 0
 
(Sheet 3 of 3)
Expected Moment            Distance to Latitude    Longitude                  Magnitude              Site ar(a) Month(a) Day(a)(b)          (oN)(a)    (oW)(a)      Depth(a)    (E[M])(a)          (km)(c) 981          6          12          43.9        89.9            0          2.65              159 985          9          9      41.848      88.014            5          2.91              120 999          9          2        41.72      89.43            5          3.41              106 004          6          28        41.44      88.94            5          4.13              132
: a. Data from CEUS-SSC (2012).
: b. Day is based on time with respect to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), not local time.
: c. Approximate Distance (ellipsoidal) earthquake epicenter to SHINE Janesville site estimated based on site location at 42.624136&deg; N, 89.024875&deg; W.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-27                                              Rev. 0
 
Table 2.5 Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale Level                                    Abbreviated Description I      Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable conditions.
II      Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings. Delicately suspended objects may swing.
III      Felt quite noticeably by persons indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings.
Many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly. Vibration similar to the passing of a truck. Duration estimated.
IV      Felt indoors by many, outdoors by a few during the day. At night, some awakened.
Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make cracking sound. Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably.
V      Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows broken.
Unstable objects overturned. Pendulum clocks may stop.
VI      Felt by all, many frightened. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster. Damage slight.
VII      Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable damage in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken.
VIII    Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable damage in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse. Damage great in poorly built structures.
Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned.
IX      Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb. Damage great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations.
X      Some well-built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations. Rail bent.
XI      Few, if any (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed. Rails bent greatly.
XII      Damage total. Lines of sight and level are distorted. Objects thrown into the air.
 
==Reference:==
USGS (2000).
NE Medical Technologies                      2.5-28                                        Rev. 0
 
Table 2.5 Recorded Earthquake Intensities (Modified Mercalli Intensity - MMI) for Earthquakes Within Approximately 200 Miles (322 km) of the SHINE Site Earthquake MMI at SHINE Expected                      Janesville Moment      Distance to          Site Lat      Long            Magnitude        Site      (Reported or ar(a)  Month(a) Day(a)(b)    (oN)(a)    (oW)(a)  MMI(c)  (E[M])(a)      (km)(d)        Estimated) 804        8          24        42        89      VI      4.12            69        -
883        2          4      42.3      85.6      VI      4.73          284        -
909        5          26      41.6      88.1      VII    5.15          137        V(e) 909        7          19      40.3      90.7      VII    4.35          294        -
912        1          2      42.3      89.0      III    4.38            36        Felt in Madison, Milwaukee(f) 923        11          10      40.0      89.9      V      3.21          301        -
928        1          23        42        90      IV      3.00          106        -
942        3          1      41.2      89.7      IV      3.48          168        -
972        9          15      41.64      89.37      VI      4.08          113        V(g) 974        11          25      40.3      87.4        II      -            292        -
985        9          9    41.848      88.014      V      2.91          120        -
985        11          12      41.85      88.01      V        -            120        -
: a. Data from CEUS-SSC (2012) source file; except 11/25/1974 and 11/12/1985 data from NEID (2012).
: b. Day is based on time with respect to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), not local time.
: c. Maximum MMI for earthquake from NEID (2012) data.
: d. Approximate distance (ellipsoidal) from earthquake epicenter to SHINE site estimated based on site location at 42.624136&deg; N, 89.024875&deg; W.
: e. From Bakun and Hopper (2004).
: f. From (USGS, 2012f), Wisconsin Earthquake History.
: g. From NEID (2012) data for Janesville, Wisconsin (42.68&deg; N, 89.02&deg; W).
NE Medical Technologies                        2.5-29                                          Rev. 0
 
Table 2.5 Recorded Earthquake Intensities (Modified Mercalli Intensity - MMI) for Earthquakes with Epicenters farther than 200 Miles (322 km) of the SHINE Site Earthquake Distance to                MMI at Site Lat      Long                                      Site                (Reported or r(b)  Month(a)  Day(a)(c)  Location    (oN)(a)    (oW)(a)      MMI(d)    (E[M])(a)        (km)(a)                  Estimated) 11        12        16      Arkansas        36        90          X          7.17            740                        V(c) 77        11        15      Nebraska        41        97          VII        5.50            686            Felt in Wisconsin(c)
South 86        9          1                      33.0      80.2          X          6.90            1319                II-III to IV(c); V(f)
Carolina I-III(e) (site is may 91        9        27        Illinois      38.3      88.5        VII        5.52            482                be outside this iso-seismal) 95        10        31      Missouri      37.82      89.32        VIII        6.00            534                        IV(c) 17        4          9        Illinois      37        90          VII        4.86            630              Felt in Wisconsin(c)
III in Milwaukee 25        3          1        Quebec        47.8      69.8          -          6.18            1611              and LaCrosse(g) 35        11          1        Quebec      46.78      79.07        -          6.06            913                          III(f) 37        3          2        Ohio      40.488    84.273        VII        5.0Mfa            462            Felt in Milwaukee(g)
Felt in Milwaukee 37        3          9        Ohio        40.4      84.2        VIII        5.11            472                and Madison(g) 39        11        23        Illinois    38.18      90.14        V          4.75            502                          III(f) 44        9          5      New York      45.0      74.7        VIII        5.71            1181            Felt in Wisconsin(g) 68        11          9        Illinois    37.91      88.37        VII        5.32            526                    I-III(c); IV(f)
I-III in southern 74        4          3        Illinois    38.549    88.072        VI        4.29            460                  Wisconsin(g)
Felt in 87        6        10        Illinois    38.713    87.954        VI        4.95            444 Wisconsin(c)
: a. Data from CEUS-SSC (2012) source file: CEUS_EQ_Catalog_R0.shp; except 3/2/1937 data from Stover and Coffman(1993), Mfa (body-wave magnitude calculated from earthquake felt area).
: b. Day is based on time with respect to Coordinated Universal Time (UTC), not local time.
: c. From Stover and Coffman (1993).
: d. Approximate distance (ellipsoidal) from earthquake epicenter to SHINE Site estimated based on site location at 42.624136&deg; N, 89.024875&deg; W.
: e. From Bakun and Hopper (2004).
: f. From NEID (2012) for Janesville, Wisconsin (42.68&deg; N, 89.02&deg; W).
: g. From (USGS, 2012f), Wisconsin Earthquake History.
NE Medical Technologies                                  2.5-30                                                                    Rev. 0
 
ble 2.5 Probabilistic Estimates of PGA for Selected Return Periods at the SHINE Site for an Average Shear Wave Velocity (760 m/s) Site Class B(a)
Return Period (years)                                  PGA (g) 475                                            0.017 2,475                                          0.050 4,975                                          0.079 9,950                                          0.124 19,900                                          0.194
: a. Parameters based on SHINE site location of 42.624&deg;N, 89.025&deg;W.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.5-31                                Rev. 0
 
Table 2.5 IBC-ASCE 7-05 Seismic Parameters for the SHINE Site(a)(b)(c)
Parameter                                                    Value SS                                                          0.129 g S1                                                          0.050 g Site Class                                                    D SMS                                                        0.206 g SM1                                                        0.119 g Fa                                                            1.6 Fv                                                            2.4 TL                                                        12 seconds
: a. Parameters based on SHINE site location of 42.624136&deg;N, 89.024875&deg;W.
: b. Parameters include the following: short period spectral response acceleration (SS); 1-second spectral response acceleration (S1); maximum considered earthquake spectral response for short period (SMS); maximum considered earthquake spectral response for 1-second period (SM1); site coefficient for short period (Fa); site coefficient for 1- second period (Fv) (IBC, 2015);
and long-period transition period (TL) (ASCE, 2005).
: c. SS and S1 are for Site Class B; SMS and SM1 are for Site Class D.
NE Medical Technologies                          2.5-32                                              Rev. 0
 
NE Medical Technologies 2.5-33 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-34 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-35 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-36 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-37 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-38 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-39 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-40 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-41 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-42 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-43 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-44 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-45 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-46 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-47 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-48 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-49 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-50 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-51 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-52 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-53 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-54 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-55 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-56 Rev. 0 NE Medical Technologies 2.5-57 Rev. 0 1        GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY SI/ANS, 2015. Emergency Planning for Research Reactors, ANSI/ANS 15.16-2015, erican National Standards Institute/American Nuclear Society, 2015.
of Beloit, 2006. City of Beloit Parks and Open Space Plan, City of Beloit, 2006.
of Beloit, 2018. City of Beloit Comprehensive Plan, City of Beloit. 2018.
of Janesville, 2008. City of Janesville Park and Open Space Plan, City of Janesville, 2008.
of Janesville, 2009. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, City of Janesville, 2009.
A, 2013. Projections for Wisconsin Counties, Components of Change by Decade: 2010-2040, consin Department of Administration (DOA), 2013.
RI, 2018. ArcGIS Pro version 2.2.12813 atschools, 2019. Data on Janesville Schools enrollment, Website:
://www.greatschools.org/, Date accessed: April 4, 2019.
esville Area Convention & Visitors Bureau, 2011. Website: http://www.janesvillecvb.com/,
e accessed: December 12, 2011.
esville Area Convention & Visitors Bureau, 2019. Website: http://www.janesvillecvb.com/,
e accessed: April 5, 2019.
cy Health System, 2011. Website, http://www.mercyhealthsystem.org/body.cfm?id=7, Date essed: December 2, 2011.
P, 2010. USDA NAIP Imagery, Website:
://www.fsa.usda.gov/FSA/apfoapp?area=home&subject=prog&topic=nai, Date accessed:
ust 15, 2012.
k County Wisconsin Economic Development Alliance, 2019. Listing of Largest ployers, Website: https://www.rockcountyalliance.com/market-data/workforce/major-employers, Date essed: April 4, 2019.
ooltree, 2019. Data on Janesville Schools enrollment, Website:
://wisconsin.schooltree.org, Date accessed: April 4, 2019.
CB, 2012. Census 2010 Summary File 1, Website:
://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml, Date accessed: February 1, 2012.
CB, 2017. Rock County Quick Facts, United States Census Bureau, Website:
s://www.census.gov/quickfacts/rockcountywisconsin, Date accessed: January 15, 2019 NE Medical Technologies                      2.6-1                                      Rev. 1
://www.census.gov/geo/www/tiger/tgrshp2010/tgrshp2010.html, Date accessed: August 15, 2.
GS, 1980. Rockford, Illinois; Wisconsin (Eastern U.S.) 1:250,000 Series (Topographic) Map,
. Geological Survey (USGS), Reston, Virginia 1980.
PI, 2018. 2017-2018 School Report Card Data Download File, Wisconsin Department of lic Instruction, 2018, Website: https://apps2.dpi.wi.gov/reportcards/, Date accessed:
ember 14, 2018.
consin Department of Health Services, 2019. Wisconsin Assisted Living Facilities, bsite: https://www.dhs.wisconsin.gov/guide/rock.htm, Date accessed: April 3, 2019.
2        NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES tec Corporation, 2012. Website: http://www.abiteccorp.com/, Date accessed: April 9, 2012.
tec Corporation, 2015. Correspondence from Jay Gasser, Abitec Corporation Health and ety Manager, to Catherine Kolb, SHINE Medical Technologies, January 23, 2015.
, 2014. Code Requirements for Nuclear Safety-Related Concrete Structures & Commentary, 349-13, American Concrete Institute, 2014.
ant Energy, 2012. Correspondence from Jesse OBrien, Alliant Energy, to Max Ross, gent & Lundy, June 21, 2012.
OHA, 2008. Computer Program: Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres Version 5.4.1, eloped by EPA and NOAA, 2008.
OHA, 2013. Computer Program: Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres Version 5.4.4, eloped by EPA and NOAA, 2013.
OHA, 2016. Computer Program: Areal Locations of Hazardous Atmospheres Version 5.4.7, eloped by EPA and NOAA, 2016.
O, 2019. Terminal Area Forecast Detail Report, Federal Aviation Administration, Office of ation Policy and Plans, 2019.
of Beloit, 2015. Correspondence from Mike Tinder, City of Beloit Water Utility Supervisor, to herine Kolb, SHINE Medical Technologies, January 14, 2015.
of Beloit, 2018. City of Beloit Comprehensive Plan, City of Beloit, 2018.
of Janesville, 2009. City of Janesville Comprehensive Plan, City of Janesville, 2009.
of Janesville, 2012. Correspondence from Vic Grassman, Economic Development ctor, to Timothy Krause, Sargent & Lundy, April 13, 2012.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.6-2                                      Rev. 1
 
of Janesville, 2015b. Correspondence from Joe Zakovec, City of Janesville Wastewater erintendent, to Catherine Kolb, SHINE Medical Technologies, January 21, 2015.
p Production Services, 2012. Crop Production Services Home, Website:
://www.cpsagu.com, Date accessed: April 9, 2012.
E, 2006. Accident Analysis for Aircraft Crash into Hazardous Facilities, DOE-STD-3014-96,
. Department of Energy, October 1996, Reaffirmed May 2006.
nik Industries, 2012. Evonik Industries - Specialty Chemicals, Website:
://corporate.evonik.com/en/Pages/default.aspx, Date accessed: April 2012.
MA, 1989. Handbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures, Federal Emergency nagement Agency, U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 9-626-095-10575.
nta, 2012a. Crop Production Services, Website: http://www.manta.com/c/mmd2gbb/crop-duction-service-inc, Date accessed: April 9, 2012.
nta, 2012b. Janesville Jet Center, Website: http://www.manta.com/c/mmssbpk/janesville-jet-ter, Date accessed: April 9, 2012.
nta, 2012c. School District of Beloit Turner, Website:
://www.manta.com/c/mm7lwfm/school-district-beloit-turner, Date accessed: April 9, 2012.
MS, 2019. National Pipeline Mapping System. Website: https://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/,
e accessed: May 30, 2019.
k County, 2012. Correspondence from Shirley Connors, Rock County Emergency nagement Agency, to Daniel Laubenthal, Sargent & Lundy, February 14, 2012.
DOT, 2007. Flight Standards Information Management System (FSIMS), U.S. Department of nsportation (DOT), Federal Aviation Administration, Order 8900.1, Effective Date:
13/2007.
DOT 2019a. Terminal Area Forecast (TAF) Report, U.S. Department of Transportation, eral Aviation Administration, February 2019.
DOT 2019b. Air Traffic Activity System (ATADS) Tower Operations Report, U.S. Department ransportation, Federal Aviation Administration, April 2019.
NRC, 1978. Evaluation of Explosions Postulated to Occur at Nearby Facilities and on nsportation Routes Near Nuclear Power Plants, Regulatory Guide 1.91, Revision 1,
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1978.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.6-3                                    Rev. 1
 
mmission, 1996.
NRC, 1999. Recommendations for Revision of Regulatory Guide 1.78, NUREG/CR-6624,
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1999.
NRC, 2004. Fire Dynamics Tools: Quantitative Fire Hazard Analysis Methods for the
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Fire Protection Inspection Program, NUREG-1805,
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2004.
NRC, 2010. Aircraft Hazards, NUREG-0800, Subsection 3.5.1.6, Revision 4, U.S. Nuclear ulatory Commission, 2010.
consin DOT, 2007. Wisconsin Truckers Guide, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, 7.
consin Emergency Management, 2011. Correspondence from Rebecca Slater, EPCRA mpliance Officer, to Bernie Mount, Sargent & Lundy, November 3, 2011.
3        METEOROLOGY CCC, 1999. Engineering Weather Data, 2000 Interactive Edition, Air Force Combat atology Center, National Climatic Data Center, 1999.
S, 2012. Glossary of Meteorology, American Meteorological Society, 2012.
uez et al., 2012. A.A. Arguez and collaborators, NOAA's 1981-2010 U.S. Climate Normals Overview. Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society, Vol. 93, No. 11, pp 1687-1697, 2.
CE, 2006. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE Standard CE/SEI 7-05 Including Supplement No. 1, American Society of Civil Engineers, 2006.
HRAE, 2017. 2017 ASHRAE Handbook - Fundamentals, American Society of Heating, rigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., IP edition. Chapter 14, American Society of ting, Refrigerating and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Inc., 2017.
ngnon et al., 2004. Changnon, S. A., J. R. Angel, K. E. Kunkel, C. M. B. Lehmann, Climate s of Illinois, Illinois State Water Survey, 2004.
Greco et al., 2006. S. A. Del Greco and collaborators, Surface Data Integration at NOAAs ional Climatic Data Center: Data Format, Processing, QC and Product Generation, 86th AMS ual Meeting, 29 January - 2 February, 2006.
S, 1968. Climatic Atlas of the United States, Environmental Data Service, U.S. Superintendent ocuments, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1968.
A, 1992. Non-Federal Navigational Aids and Air Traffic Control Facilities, Order 6700.20A, eral Aviation Administration, 1992.
NE Medical Technologies                        2.6-4                                    Rev. 1
 
A, 1987. Siting of Research Reactors, Report IAEA-TECDOC-403, International Atomic rgy Agency, 1987.
ran, J. M. and E. J. Hopkins, 2002. Wisconsins Weather and Climate, The University of consin Press, 2002.
DC, 1952. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1951, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1952.
DC, 1953. Local Climatological Data with Comparative Data, 1952, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1953.
DC, 1954. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1953, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1954.
DC, 1955. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1954, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1955.
DC, 1956. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1955, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1956.
DC, 1957. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1956, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1957.
DC, 1958. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1957, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1958.
DC, 1959. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1958 Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1959.
DC, 1960a. Storm Data, November 1960, Volume 2 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, 0.
DC, 1960b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1959, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1960.
DC, 1961a. Storm Data, September 1961, Volume 3 No. 9, National Climatic Data Center, 1.
DC, 1961b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1960, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1961.
DC, 1962. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1961, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1962.
DC, 1963. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1962, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1963.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-5                                    Rev. 1
 
DC, 1965. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1964, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1965.
DC, 1966. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1965, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1966.
DC, 1967a. Storm Data, April 1967, Volume 9 No. 4, National Climatic Data Center, 1967.
DC, 1967b. Storm Data, August 1967, Volume 9 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, 1967.
DC, 1967c. Storm Data, January 1967, Volume 9 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, 1967.
DC, 1967d. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1966, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1967.
DC, 1968. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1967, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1968.
DC, 1969. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1968, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1969.
DC, 1970a. Storm Data, October 1970, Volume 12 No. 10, National Climatic Data Center, 0.
DC, 1970b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1969, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1970.
DC, 1971a. Storm Data, November 1971, Volume 13 No. 11, National Climatic Data Center, 1.
DC, 1971b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1970, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1971.
DC, 1972. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1971, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1972.
DC, 1973. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1972, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1973.
DC, 1974. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1973, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1974.
DC, 1975a. Storm Data, June 1975 Volume 17 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, 1975.
DC, 1975b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1974, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1975.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-6                                    Rev. 1
 
DC, 1977. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1976, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1977.
DC, 1978. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1977, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1978.
DC, 1979. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1978, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1979.
DC, 1980a. Storm Data, June 1980, Volume 22 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, 1980.
DC, 1980b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1979, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1980.
DC, 1981. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1980, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1981.
DC, 1982. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1981, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1982.
DC, 1983. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1982, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1983.
DC, 1984a. Storm Data, June 1984 Volume 26 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, 1984.
DC, 1984b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1983, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1984.
DC, 1985. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1984, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1985.
DC, 1986. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1985, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1986.
DC, 1987. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1986, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1987.
DC, 1988a. Storm Data, May 1988, Volume 30 No. 5, National Climatic Data Center, 1988.
DC, 1988b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1987, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1988.
DC, 1989. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1988, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1989.
DC, 1990. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1989, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1990.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-7                                    Rev. 1
 
DC, 1991b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1990, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1991.
DC, 1992a. Storm Data, June 1992, Volume 34 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, 1992.
DC, 1992b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1991, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1992.
DC, 1993. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1992, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1993.
DC, 1994. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1993, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1994.
DC, 1995. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1994, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1995.
DC, 1996a. International Station Meteorological Climate Summary, Ver. 4.0, National Climatic a Center, 1996.
DC, 1996b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1995, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1996.
DC, 1997. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1996, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 1997.
DC, 1998a. Storm Data, June 1998, Volume 40 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, 1998.
DC, 1998b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1997, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1998.
DC, 1999a. Daily Weather Maps, Weekly Series, December 28 1998 - January 3, 1999, ional Climatic Data Center, 1999.
DC, 1999b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1998, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 1999.
DC, 2000a. Storm Data, January 1999, Volume 41 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, 0.
DC, 2000b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 1999, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 2000.
DC, 2001a. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arboretum Univ Wis, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001b. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Arlington Univ Farm, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2001.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-8                                      Rev. 1
 
DC, 2001d. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beaver Dam, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001e. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Beloit, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001f. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Brodhead, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001g. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Charmany Farm, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001h. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Dalton, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001i. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, DeKalb, IL, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001j. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fond du Lac, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001k. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Fort Atkinson, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001l. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Hartford 2 W, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001m. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Horicon, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001n. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Geneva, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001o. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Lake Mills, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001p. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Madison Dane Co AP, National Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001q. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Marengo, IL, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001r. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Oconomowoc, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001s. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Portage, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
NE Medical Technologies                2.6-9                                      Rev. 1
 
DC, 2001u. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Rockford, IL, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001v. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Stoughton, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001w. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Watertown, WI, National atic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001x. Climatography of the United States No. 20, 1971-2000, Wisconsin Dells, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2001y. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2000, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 2001.
DC, 2002a. Climate Atlas of the United States, Version 2.0 CD, National Climatic Data ter, 2002.
DC, 2002b. Division Normals and Standard Deviations of Temperature, Precipitation, and ting and Cooling Degree Days, 1971-2000 (and previous normals periods), Section 1:
perature, Climatography of the United States No. 85, National Climatic Data Center, 2002.
DC, 2002c. Division Normals and Standard Deviations of Temperature, Precipitation, and ting and Cooling Degree Days, 1971-2000 (and previous normals periods), Section 2:
cipitation, Climatography of the United States No. 85, National Climatic Data Center, 2002.
DC, 2002d. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2001, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 2002.
DC, 2003. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2002, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 2003.
DC, 2004. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2003, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 2004.
DC, 2005a. Data Documentation for Data Set 3280 (DSI-3280) Surface Airways Hourly, ional Climatic Data Center, 2005.
DC, 2005b. Storm Data, August 2005, Volume 47 No. 8, National Climatic Data Center, 2005.
DC, 2005c. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2004, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 2005.
DC, 2006a. Federal Climate Complex Data Documentation for Integrated Surface Data, ional Climatic Data Center Air Force Combat Climatology Center Fleet Numerical eorology and Oceanography Detachment, 2006.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-10                                      Rev. 1
 
DC, 2007. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2006, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 2007.
DC, 2008a. Storm Data, January 2008 Volume 50 No. 1, National Climatic Data Center, 2008.
DC, 2008b. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2007, Madison, consin, National Climatic Data Center, 2008.
DC, 2009. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2008, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 2009.
DC, 2010. Local Climatological Summary with Comparative Data, 2009, Madison, Wisconsin, ional Climatic Data Center, 2010.
DC, 2011a. NCDC Storm Event Database, National Climatic Data Center, Website:
://www4.ncdc.noaa.gov/cgi-win/wwcgi.dll?wwEvent~Storms, Date accessed: November 1.
DC, 2011b. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center DC), data purchased from NCDC, 2011.
DC, 2011c. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center DC), data purchased from NCDC, 2011.
DC, 2011d. TD3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in 3280 digital format from 1948-2009, for NWS-Madison, WI. National Climatic Data Center DC), data purchased from NCDC, 2011.
DC, 2011e. TD 3280 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in 3280 digital format from 1973-2009, for NWS-Rockford, IL. National Climatic Data Center DC), data purchased from NCDC, 2011.
DC, 2011f. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, dison, Wisconsin (KMSN), National Climatic Data Center, 2011.
DC, 2011g. TD3505 - Airways Surface Observations, Surface weather observations in 3505 digital format from 2005-2010, for Southern Wisconsin Regional Airport, Janesville, WI.
ional Climatic Data Center (NCDC), data purchased from NCDC, 2011.
DC, 2011h. 2010 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, kford, Illinois (KRFD), National Climatic Data Center, 2011.
DC, 2011i. Climatological Data Annual Summary Illinois 2010, Volume 115, Number 13, ional Climatic Data Center, 2011.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.6-11                                    Rev. 1
 
DC, 2012. Data File "anem_elev_inf" Referenced in Data Documentation for Data Set 6421 I-6421) Enhanced Hourly Wind Station Data for the Contiguous United States National atic Data Center, 2012.
DC, 2014. Storm Data, June 2014, Volume 56 No. 6, National Climatic Data Center, 2014.
DC, 2018a. NCDC Storm Event Database, National Climatic Data Center, website:
s://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/stormevents/, Date accessed: November 21, 2018.
DC, 2018b. TD3505 - Archive Data Server, National Climatic Data Center, data purchased NCDC, 2018.
DC, 2019a. NCDC Summary of Monthly Normals 1981-2010. Madison Dane Co, Regional ort. National Climatic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019b. 2018 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, dison, Wisconsin (KMSN), National Climatic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019c. 2018 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, kford, Illinois (KRFD), National Climatic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019e. 2018 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, ine, Illinois (KMLI), National Climatic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019d. 2018 Local Climatological Data, Annual Summary with Comparative Data, ingfield, Illinois (KSPI), National Climatic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019f. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Arboretum Univ Wis, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019g. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Arlington Univ Farm, WI, ional Climatic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019h. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Baraboo, WI, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019i. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Beaver Dam, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019j. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Beloit, WI, National Climatic Data ter, 2019.
DC, 2019k. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Brodhead, WI, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019l. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Charmany Farm, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.6-12                                  Rev. 1
 
DC, 2019n. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, DeKalb, IL, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019o. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Fond du Lac, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019p. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Fort Atkinson, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019q. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Hartford 2 W, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019r. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Horicon, WI, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019s. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Lake Geneva, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019t. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Lake Mills, WI, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019u. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Marengo, IL, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019v. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Oconomowoc, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019w. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Portage, WI, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019x. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2008, Prairie du Sac 2 N, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019y. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Stoughton, WI, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019z. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Watertown, WI, National Climatic a Center, 2019.
DC, 2019aa. Climatography of the United States, 2000-2018, Wisconsin Dells, WI, National atic Data Center, 2019.
DC, 2019ab. Data file "ISH-HISTORY.TXT" Integrated Surface Database Station History, il, 2019, National Climatic Data Center, 2019.
SI, 2014. Vaisala 10-Year Flash Density Map - U.S. (2005-2014), National Lightning Safety itute, 2014.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-13                                    Rev. 1
 
oratory, Environmental Research Laboratories, Office of Oceanic and Atmospheric Research, 9.
S, 2011. Class I Area Locations, National Park Service, U.S. Department of Interior, 2011.
d McNally, 1982. Goodes World Atlas, 16th edition, Rand McNally & Company, 1982.
d McNally, 2005. Goodes World Atlas, 21st edition, Rand McNally & Company, 2005.
k County, 2012. County Facts, Rock County, Wisconsin, 2012.
rn, et al. 1984. Stern, A.C., R.W. Boubel, D.B. Turner, D.L. Fox, Fundamentals of Air ution, Academic Press, 1984.
wartha, G. T., 1954. An Introduction to Climate, McGraw-Hill Book Company, 1954.
wartha, G. T., 1961. The Earths Problem Climates, The University of Wisconsin Press, 1961.
ner, D.B, 1964. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area, Journal of Applied Meteorology, Vol. 3, 83-91, 1964.
. Census Bureau, 2007. County and City Data Book: 2007, U.S. Census Bureau, 2007.
DA, 1998. Rural Utilities Service Summary of Items of Engineering Interest, U.S. Department of iculture (USDA), 1998.
DOC, 1978. Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, United States East of the 105th idian, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of the Army Corps ngineers, U.S. Department of Commerce, Hydrometeorological Report No. 51, 1978.
EPA, 1990. Prevention of Significant Deterioration Workshop Manual, Prevention of nificant Deterioration and Nonattainment Area Permitting, U.S. Environmental Protection ncy, Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards, 1990.
EPA, 1999. PCRAMMET.FOR, FORTRAN program, version 99169. U.S. Environmental tection Agency, Technology Transfer Networks Support Center for Regulatory Atmospheric deling, 1999.
EPA, 2015. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 - Parts 50, 51, 52, 53 and 58 National bient Air Quality Standards for Ozone, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2015.
EPA, 2018. Environmental Protection Agency - Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40 -
t 81 - Additional Air Quality Designations for the 2015 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality ndards, 2018.
EPA, 2019. Non-Attainment Status for Each County by year in Wisconsin as of March 31, 9, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2019.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-14                                      Rev. 1
 
NR, 2013. Air Monitoring Network Plan 2013, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 3.
DOT, 2017. Geotechnical Manual, Chapter 2 Geology of Wisconsin, Section 3 Glacial logy, Wisconsin Department of Transportation, March 1, 2017.
4        HYDROLOGY r, 1972. Dynamics of Fluids in Porous Media, Elsevier, 1972.
uwer, H. and R.C. Rice, 1976. A Slug Test Method for Determining Hydraulic Conductivity of onfined Aquifers with Completely or Partially Penetrating Wells, Water Resources Research, 12, No. 3, pp. 423-428, 1976.
menico and Schwartz, 1997. Physical and Chemical Hydrogeology, 2nd Edition, John ey & Sons, 1997.
MA, 2008. Flood Insurance Study: Rock County, Wisconsin and Incorporated Areas, Flood rance Study Number 55105CV001A, Two volumes, Federal Emergency Management ncy, 2008.
field et. al., 2002. Delineation of Zones of Contribution for Municipal Wells in Rock County, consin: Final report - Madison, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, 2002.
ghes, 1965. The Prediction of Surges in the Southern Basin of Lake Michigan, Monthly ather Review, Vol. 93, No. 5, pg. 292-296, 1965.
rosolve, 2011. AQTESOLV User Documentation, Hydrosolve, Inc., 2011.
zelbach, 1986. Groundwater Modeling (An introduction with sample programs in BASIC),
evier, 1986.
oux, 1963. Geology and Ground-Water Resources of Rock County Wisconsin, Geological vey Water-Supply Paper 1619-X, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1963.
k County, 2004. Rock County Storm Water Management Ordinance, Chapter 28 of the Rock nty Code of Ordinances, 2004.
ACE, 1984. Probable Maximum Flood Estimation - Eastern United States, TP-100, U.S. Army ps of Engineers, Hydrologic Engineering Center, 1984.
ACE, 2012. CRREL Ice Jam Database, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Website:
s://rsgis.crrel.usace.army.mil/icejam, Date accessed: September 10, 2012.
DOE, 1993. Data Collection Handbook to Support Modeling Impacts of Radioactive Material in
, U.S. Department of Energy, 1993.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.6-15                                      Rev. 1
 
GS, 2012a. Stormwater Data, U.S. Geological Survey, Website:
://waterdata.usgs.gov/nwis/sw, Date accessed: 2012.
GS, 2012b. Elevation Data, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://www.usgs.gov/pubprod, e accessed: 2012.
NRC, 1977a. Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants, Regulatory Guide 1.59, ision 2, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1977.
NRC, 1977b. Design Basis Floods for Fuel Reprocessing Plants and for Plutonium cessing and Fuel Fabrication Plants, Regulatory Guide 3.40, Revision 1, U.S. Nuclear ulatory Commission, 1977.
NRC, 1996. Guidelines for Preparing and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of
-Power Reactors, Format and Content, NUREG-1537, Part 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory mmission, 1996.
NRC, 2004. Combined Estimation of Hydrogeologic Conceptual Model and Parameter ertainty, NUREG/CR-6843 (PNNL-14534), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2004.
NRC, 2011. Design-Basis Flood Estimation for Site Characterization at Nuclear Power Plants e United States of America, NUREG/CR-7046 (PNNL-20091), U.S. Nuclear Regulatory mmission, 2011.
rbicher, 2010. Rock County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update. Prepared by Vierbicher in peration with the Rock County Emergency Management and Rock County Planning Economic Community Development Agency, 2010.
NR, 2012a. Dam Safety database, Wisconsin Office of Dam Safety, Wisconsin Department of ural Resources, Website: http://dnr/wi.gov/topic/dams/, Date accessed: 2012.
NR, 2012b. Well Inventory, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, Website:
://prodoasext.dnr.wi.gov/inter1/spinvent$.startup, Date accessed: August 8, 2012.
NR, 2012c. Lake Koshkonong, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (WDNR),
bsite: http://dnr.wi.gov/lakes/lakepages/LakeDetail.aspx?wbic=808700, Date accessed:
ember 19, 2012.
OT, 1979. Facilities Development Manual, Chapter 13, Drainage, Attachment 5.4, Rainfall nsity-Duration-Frequency Curves, Madison, WI (1905-1951), Wisconsin Department of nsportation, 1979.
NHS, 2009. Map data, University of Wisconsin-Extension Geological and Natural History vey, Website: https://wgnhs.wisc.edu/maps-data/maps/, Date accessed: 2009.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.6-16                                    Rev. 1
 
SS, 2012. Advanced National Seismic System ANSS Catalog Search, Northern California thquake Data Center, Website: http://quake.geo.berkeley.edu/cnss/catalog-search.html, Date essed: January 9, 2012.
bruster, J. and Seeber, L., 1992. NCEER-91 Earthquake Catalog for the United States, ional Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, Website:
://folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu/catalogs/html/cat_nceer.html, Date accessed: January 27, 2.
CE, 2005. Minimum Design Loads for Buildings and Other Structures (7-05), American Society ivil Engineers, 2005.
g, J.W., Bricknell, M., Carson, E.C., Clayton, L., Johnson, M.D., Mickelson, D.M., and erson, K.M., 2011. Glaciation of Wisconsin, Educational Series 36 [fourth edition], Wisconsin logical and Natural History Survey, 2011.
un, W.H. and Hopper, M.G., 2004. Catalog of Significant Historical Earthquakes in the tral United States, Open-File Report 2004-1086, U.S. Geological Survey, 2004.
schayko, S.M., 2005. The Waukesha Fault and Its Relationship to the Michigan Basin: A rature Compilation, Open-File Report 2005-05, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History vey, 2005.
non, W.F., LaBerge, G.L., Klasner, J.S., and Schulz, K.J., 2008. The Gogebic Iron Range -
ample of the Northern Margin of the Penokean Fold and Thrust Belt, Professional Paper 1730,
. Geological Survey, 2008.
non, W.F., Kress, T.H., and Sutphin, D.M., 1999. Digital Geologic Map and Mineral osits of the Lake Superior Region, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Open File Report 97-455 rsion 3), U.S. Geological Survey, 1999.
US-SSC, 2012. Central Eastern United States - Seismic Source Characterization for Nuclear ilities, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, U.S. Department of Energy, Electric Power earch Institute, 2012.
AR-CSI, 2012. STRM 90 m Digital Elevation Database V4.1, Consortium for Spatial rmation, Website: http://www.cgiar-csi.org/data/elevation/item/45-srtm-90m-digital-elevation-abase-v41, Date accessed: April 27, 2012.
ndler, V.W., 1996. Gravity and Magnetic Studies Conducted Recently, in: Sims, P.K., and ter, L.M.H, (eds.), Archean and Proterozoic Geology of the Lake Superior Region, U.S.A.,
fessional Paper 1556, U.S. Geological Survey, 1996.
rpentier, R.R., 1987. A summary of petroleum plays and characteristics of the Michigan in, Open File Report 87-450R, U.S. Geological Survey, 1987.
yton, L., and Attig, J.W., 1997. Pleistocene Geology of Dane County, Wisconsin, Bulletin 95, consin Geological and Natural History Survey, 1997.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-17                                        Rev. 1
 
ed States, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults, Date essed: April 23, 2012.
iels, D.L., and Snyder, S.L., 2002. Wisconsin Aeromagnetic and Gravity Maps and Data, n-File Report 02-493, U.S. Geological Survey, 2002.
iels, D.L., Kucks, R.P., and Hill, P.L., 2008. Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio Magnetic and Gravity ps and Data, U.S. Geological Survey, 2008.
t, R.L., and Volpi, C.M., 2010. Earthquakes in the Central United States, 1699-2010, General rmation Product 115, scale 1:250,000, U.S. Geological Survey, 2010.
C, 2010. La Crosse Boiling Water Reactor - Decommissioning Plan Revision, November 2010, ryland Power Cooperative, 2010 (ML110190592).
dahl, E.R., and Villasenor, A., 2002. Global Seismicity: 1900-1999, in: Lee, W.H.K.,
amori, H., Jennings, P.C., Kisslinger, C., (eds.), International Handbook of Earthquake and ineering Seismology, Part A, Chapter 41, Academic Press, 2012.
lon, 2006a. Site Safety Analysis Report for Exelon Generation Company, LLC Clinton Early Permit, Appendix B - Seismic Hazards Report, Cover to Chapter 2, Revision 4, U.S. Nuclear ulatory Commission Accession Number ML061100308, Exelon Generation Co, LLC.
lon, 2006b. Site Safety Analysis Report for Exelon Generation Company, LLC Clinton Early Permit, Appendix B - Seismic Hazards Report. Chapter 4 Figure 4.2-1 to Chapter 6, ision 4, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Accession Number ML061100310, Exelon eration Co, LLC.
erton, D.S., Bush, C.A., and Pennell, J.N., 2003. Map of surficial deposits and materials in eastern and central United States (east of 102 degrees West longitude), Geologic stigation Series I-2789, Version 1.0, U.S. Geological Survey, 2003.
rity, C.P., and Soller, D.R., 2009. Database of Geologic Map of North America - adapted the map by J.C. Reed, Jr. and others 2005, U.S. Geological Survey, 2009.
dt, J.W., and Radbruch-Hall, D.H., 1997. Landslide Overview Map of the Conterminous ted States, Digital Compilation of Landslide Overview Map of the Conterminous United States, othy H. Radbruch-Hall, Roger B. Colton, William E. Davies, Ivo Lucchitta, Betty A. Skipp, and id J. Varnes, 1982, Open-File Report 97-289, U.S. Geological Survey, 1997.
mmer, P.T.C., Clowes, R.M., Cook, F.A., Vasudevan, K., and van der Velden, A.J., 2011.
big picture: A lithospheric cross-section of the North American continent, 10.1130/GSATG95A.1, GSA Today, 2011.
rison, R.W., and Schultz, A., 2002. Tectonic Framework of the Southwestern Margin of the ois Basin and Its Influence on Neotectonism and Seismicity, Seismological Research Letters, 2.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.6-18                                        Rev. 1
 
logical and Natural History Survey, 1970 (Revised 1978).
well, P.D., and van der Pluijm, B., 1990. Early history of the Michigan basin: Subsidence and alachian tectonics, Geology, 1990.
, 2015. International Building Code, International Code Council, Inc., 2015.
a, M.A., Boerboom, T.J., Chandler, V.W., Mossler, J.H., Runkel, A.C., Setterholm, D.R.,
: 1. Geologic Map of Minnesota-Bedrock Geology, State Map Series S-21, scale 1:500,000, nesota Geological Survey, 2011.
sner, J.S., King, E.R., and Jones, W.J., 1985. Chapter 21, Geologic Interpretation of Gravity Magnetic Data for Northern Michigan and Wisconsin, in: Hinze, W.J., (ed.), The Utility of ional Gravity and Magnetic Anomaly Maps, doi: 10.1190/1.0931830346.ch21, Society of loration Geophysicists, 1985.
ata, D.R., Denny, F.B., Devera, J.A., Hansel, A.K., Jacobson, R.J., Lasemi, Z., McGarry,
., Nelson, W.J., Norby, R.D., Treworgy, C.G., and Weibel, C.P., 2005. Bedrock Geology of ois, Illinois Map 14, scale 1:500,000, Illinois State Geological Survey, 2005.
ks, R.P., 1999. Isostatic gravity anomaly grid for the conterminous US, Mineral Resource Line Spatial Data, Digital Data Series DDS-9, U.S. Geological Survey, Website:
://tin.er.usgs.gov/gravity/isostatic, Date accessed: December 18, 2011.
ontagne, M., Halchuk, S., Cassidy, J.F., and Rogers, G.C., 2008. Significant Canadian thquakes of the Period 1600-2006, doi: 10.1785/gssrl.79.2.211, Seismological Research ers, 2008.
son, T.H., 2002. The Earthquake of 2 September 1999 in Northern Illinois: Intensities and sible Neotectonism, Seismological Research Letters, 2002.
us, S., Barckhausen, U., et al., 2009. EMAG2: Earth Magnetic Anomaly Grid (2-arc-minute olution), Website: http://geomag.org/models/emag2.html, Date accessed: April 23, 2012.
Guire, 2004. Seismic Hazard and Risk Analysis, Earthquake Engineering Research Institute, O-10, 2004.
RA, 2012. Land Resource Regions and Major Land Resource Areas of the United States, the ibbean, and the Pacific Basin, MLRA Explorer Custom Report K - Northern Lake State Forest Forage Region, 95B - Southern Wisconsin and Northern Illinois Drift Plain, United States artment of Agriculture Natural Resources Conservation Service, Website:
://www.cei.psu.edu/mlra, Date accessed: January 16, 2012.
drey, Jr., M.G., Brown, B.A., and Greenberg, J.K., 1982. Bedrock Geologic Map of consin, scale 1:1,000,000, University of Wisconsin-Extension Geological and Natural History vey, 1982.
NE Medical Technologies                      2.6-19                                    Rev. 1
 
st, W., Rystrom, V., Shearer, S., Snyder, S., Sweeney, R., and Velez, J., Magnetic Anomaly p of North America, Version 1.0, U.S. Geological Survey, 2002.
ural Resources Canada, 2012. Important Canadian Earthquakes, Natural Resources ada, Website: http://earthquakescanada.nrcan.gc.ca/historic-historique/map-carte-eng.php, e accessed: January 16, 2012.
EER, 2012. NCEER Catalog Search, National Center for Earthquake Engineering Research, ter for Earthquake Research and Information, University of Memphis, Website:
://folkworm.ceri.memphis.edu/catalogs/html/cat_nceer.html, Date accessed: April 5, 2012.
D, 2012. Earthquake Intensity Database Search 1638-1985, National Geophysical Data ter, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, Website:
://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hazard/int_srch.shtml#eqcoord, Date accessed: January 10, 2012.
son, W.J., 1995. Structural Features in Illinois, Department of Natural Resources, Illinois State logical Survey, 1995.
ermeier, S.F., and Crone, A.J., compilers, 1994. Fault number 1024, Wabash Valley efaction features, Quaternary fault and fold database of the United States, U.S. Geological vey, Website: http://earthquakes.usgs.gov/regional/qfaults, Date accessed: April 23, 2012.
e, W.W., Chleborad, A.F., Frahme, C.W., Schlocker, J., Schneider, R.R., and Schuster,
., 1989. Swelling Clays Map of the Conterminous United States, Miscellaneous Investigations ies Map I-1940, 1 sheet, scale 1:7,500,000, U.S. Geological Survey, 1989.
ersen, M., Frankel, A., Harmsen, S., Mueller, C., Haller, K., Wheeler, R., Wesson, R.,
g, Y., Boyd, O., Perkins, D., Luco, N., Field, E., Wills, C., and Rukstales, K., 2008.
umentation for the 2008 Update of the United States National Seismic Hazard Maps, n-File Report 2008-1128, U.S. Geological Survey, 2008.
kin, K., and Bergstrom, R.E., 1975. Glacial Drift in Illinois: Thickness and Character, Illinois te Geological Survey, 1975.
bruch-Hall, D.H., Colton, R.B., Davies, W.E., Lucchitta, I., Skipp, B.A., and Varnes, D.J.,
: 2. Landslide Overview Map of the Conterminous United States, Professional Paper 1183,
. Geological Survey, 1982.
GIS, 2012. Rock County Geographic Information System, Rock County, State of Wisconsin, bsite:
://68.249.68.135/Rock/viewer.htm?Title=Rock%20County%20GIS%20Map%20Viewer, Date essed: January 16, 2012.
  , M., Clark, P.U., Barendregt, R.W., Glassman, J.R., and Enkin, R.J., 2004. Glacial tigraphy and paleomagnetism of late Cenozoic deposits of the north-central United States, 10.1130/ B25325.1, Geological Society of America Bulletin, 2004.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.6-20                                        Rev. 1
 
la, G.F., Stein, S., Dixon, T.H., Craymer, M., James, T.S., Mazzotti, S., and Dokka, R.K.,
: 7. Observation of glacial isostatic adjustment in stable North America with GPS, 10.1029/2006GL027081, Geophysical Research Letters, 2007.
s, P.K., and Carter, L.M.H., 1996. Archean and Proterozoic Geology of the Lake Superior ion, U.S.A., 1993, Professional Paper 1556, U.S. Geological Survey, 1996.
s, P.K., and Schulz, K.J., 1996. Wisconsin Magmatic Terranes, in: Sims, P.K., and Carter,
.H, (eds.), Archean and Proterozoic Geology of the Lake Superior Region, U.S.A., 1993, fessional Paper 1556, U.S. Geological Survey, 1996.
s, P.K., Saltus, R.W., and Anderson, E.D., 2005. Preliminary Precambrian basement cture map of the continental United States - an interpretation of geologic and aeromagnetic a, Open-File Report 2005-1029, Version 1.0, U.S. Geological Survey, 2005.
ver, C.W. and Coffman, J.L., 1993. Seismicity of the United States, 1568-1989 (Revised),
fessional Paper 1527, U.S. Geological Survey, 1993.
ver, C.W., Reagor, B.G., and Algermissen, S.T., 1984. United States Earthquake Data File, n-File Report 84-225, U.S. Geological Survey, 1984.
DA SCS, 1974. Soil Survey of Rock County, Wisconsin, United States Department of iculture Soil Conservation Service, in cooperation with University of Wisconsin Department of Science, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, and the Wisconsin Agricultural eriment Station, 1974.
GS, 2000. The Severity of an Earthquake, United States Geological Survey Unnumbered ies, General Interest Publication, U.S. Geological Survey, 2000.
GS, 2003. A Tapestry of Time and Terrain: The Union of Two Maps - Geology and ography, U.S. Geological Survey, 2003.
GS, 2010. Physiographic divisions of the conterminous U.S., U.S. Geological Survey, Website:
://water.usgs.gov/GIS/metadata/usgswrd/XML/physio.xml, Date accessed: April 25, 2012.
GS, 2012a. 2008 Interactive Deaggregations (Beta), U.S. Geological Survey, Website:
s://geohazards.usgs.gov/deaggint/2008, Date accessed: April 5, 2012.
GS, 2012b. Java Ground Motion Parameter Calculator, U.S. Geological Survey, Website:
://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps/javacalc.php, Date accessed: April 5, 2012.
GS, 2012c. Quaternary Fault and Fold Database of the United States, 3 November 2010 ate, United States Geological Survey, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/qfaults, e accessed: April 5, 2012.
NE Medical Technologies                    2.6-21                                      Rev. 1
 
3), Significant United States Earthquakes (1568 - 1989), and Eastern, Central and Mountain tes of United States (1350 - 1986) catalogs, U.S. Geological Survey, Website:
://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eqarchives/epic/ epic_rect.php, Date accessed:
uary 9, 2012.
GS, 2012e. Seismic Design Maps and Tools for Engineers, U.S. Geological Survey, Website:
://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/designmaps, Date accessed: April 5, 2012.
GS, 2012f. United States Earthquake Information by State/Territory, Wisconsin Earthquake ory, U.S. Geological Survey, Website: http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/states, Date essed: January 26, 2012.
NRC, 2000. Technical Bases for Regulatory Guide for Soil Liquefaction, NUREG/CR-5741,
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2000.
NRC, 2003. Procedures and Criteria for Assessing Seismic Soil Liquefaction at Nuclear er Plant Sites, Regulatory Guide 1.198, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2003.
NRC, 2012. Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 2, "Guidelines for paring and Reviewing Applications for the Licensing of Non-Power Reactors: Standard iew Plan and Acceptance Criteria," for Licensing Radioisotope Production Facilities and eous Homogeneous Reactors, Interim Staff Guidance Augmenting NUREG-1537, Part 2,
. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 2012.
rbicher, 2010. Rock County Hazard Mitigation Plan Update, prepared by Vierbicher in peration with the Rock County Emergency Management and Rock County Planning Economic Community Development Agency, 2010.
NHS, 1983. Thickness of Unconsolidated Material in Wisconsin, University of Wisconsin-ension Geological and Natural History Survey, 1983.
NHS, 2004. Landscapes of Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and Natural History Survey, 4.
NHS, 2009. Karst and Shallow Carbonate Bedrock in Wisconsin, Wisconsin Geological and ural History Survey, 2009.
eeler, R.L., 2003. Earthquakes of the Central United States, 1795-2002 - Construction of the hquake catalog for an outreach map, Open-File Report 03-232, U.S. Geological Survey, 2003.
eeler, R.L., Omdahl, E.M., Dart, R.L., Wilkerson, G.D., and Bradford, R.H., 2003.
thquakes in the Central United States 1699-2002, Geologic Investigations Series I-2812, sion 1.0, 1 sheet, scale 1:250,000, U.S. Geological Survey, 2003.
itmeyer, S.J., and Karlstrom, K.E., 2007. Tectonic model for the Proterozoic growth of North erica, doi: 10.1130/GES00055.1, Geosphere, 2007.
NE Medical Technologies                  2.6-22                                      Rev. 1
 
zke, B.J., Anderson, R.R., and Pope, J.P., 2010. Bedrock Geologic map of Iowa, Open File p 2010-01, scale 1:500,000, Iowa Geological and Water Survey, 2010.
NE Medical Technologies                2.6-23                                    Rev. 1}}

Revision as of 20:24, 8 September 2021

Shine Medical Technologies, LLC, Revisions to Final Safety Analysis Report, Chapter 2, Site Characteristics
ML21095A228
Person / Time
Site: SHINE Medical Technologies
Issue date: 03/23/2021
From:
SHINE Medical Technologies
To:
Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML21095A241 List:
References
2021-SMT-0032
Download: ML21095A228 (321)
v • d • e


Text

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML21095A228&oldid=3284049"