ML19322B265

Forwards Comments on Geologic & Hydrologic Aspects of Application for Licenses in Response to AEC 661221 Request

ML19322B265
Person / Time
Site:	Oconee
Issue date:	06/19/1967
From:	Pecora W INTERIOR, DEPT. OF, GEOLOGICAL SURVEY
To:	Price H US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 7912020116
Download: ML19322B265 (4)

Text

"

"-- 6 D. C. ( g TO: ORIG.: CC: QTHER:

gg 1 1 9 eys. repudtmed

ACTION NECESSARY ] CONCURRENCE ] DATE ANSWERED

NO ACTCN NECESSAtY O COMMENT ] BY4 CLA554r.: POST OFFICE Fil.E CCCE:

g REG. NO:

I gg k C E5C RIPTION: (Muss ae Vaciose.hes) REFERRED TO DATE RECElvED By DAT2 Ltr. trans. the fo11M== in response to Case's 12-21-66 regnests >11 : 6-2:n w/1 gr. - FCE 2 TION  ;

I ENCLOSURE 5:

n ro cania. to e r-1asy and artrology aspeets or tm.

11oems appi. or the nahe power a w he 8 W it Compsar ooonee Meelear Staticut L pria a sher ased RE M ARKS:

w- t-nistridation: .1-empel. tile ar. (reprodneed er. w'a cri.

.m %.u=_=m -3

< 20 NOT REMOVE 2o^

U. S. ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION MAIL CONTROL FORM roam AEc-sass.

W U. S. GOVERNMENT 7#1NTING OFFICE: 1964 - 235 519 88 605 l

gmm%

Js i [

. .., m ,. o"

^)

y

. ~ < .. s. e -

f 4 l 4" UNITED STATES

=

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

• • - GEOLOGICAL SURVEY WASHINGTON. O.C. 20242 JUN 191967 Mr. Harold L. Price Director of Regulations U. S. Atomic Energy Comission 4915 St. Elmo Avenue Bethesda, Maryland 205h5

Dear Mr. Price:

Transnitted herewith in respcnse to the request of Edson G. Case, dated December 21, 1966, is a review of the geologie and hydrologic aspects of the license application of the Du':e Power and Light Ccrapany Oconee Nuclear Station.

This review prepared by Henry W. Coulter and Eric L. Meyer of the U. S. Geol 0gical Survey has been discussed with nerbers of your staff and we have no ob.jections to your making it a part of the public record.

Sincerely yours, L

Director Enclosure i

D 2048

.: m a

.) -

' Ocenee Nuclear Statica, Duke Pcwer Ccmpany Units 1, 2, and 3 Ocenee County, Scuth Carclina AEC Deckets 50-269, 50-270 HYDROICGY This reviev is based cn information provided by the applicant in the Preliminary Safety Analysis Repcrt and Supplements 1 thcugh 4.

The prepcsed plant is approximately half a =ile vest of the Keevee River at an altitude of 794 feet abcve =ean sea level (ms1), and 129 feet abcve the fleed pcci elevatica of the Hartvell Reservoir, pended by a dam abcut 35 =11es dcynstream frcm the site. Cccling water fcr the nuclear plant vill be taken frca Keevee Reservoir to be pcaded by Keevee Dam (prcpcsed) en the Keevee River and another dam en the Little River. This pool vill ecver the drain-a6e divide between the two streams at cne pcint upstream frcm the plant site; ncr=al pccl level is 8C0 feet =sl. The icy peint cf the ridge that separates Kecvee Reservcir and the site is shevn en topo6raphic =aps tc be between 620 to 827 feet ms1. The sur-char 6e ca the reservoir due to a =aximum prcbable ficcd en Keevee River is 61ven as 808 feet msl. Flceding cf the site either by tcpping the ridge or by a rise of the river belev Keovee ram dces not appear to be possible. .

Liquid radicactive vastes frcm the reacter are to be discharged into the tailrace of the preposed Keevee Dam hydre-pcver units.

Ccncentraticas cf vaste radienuclides are.cc=puted in sectica 11 cf the Preliminary Safety Analysis Repcrt assuming dilutica by the average discharge past Keevee dam. In determinin6 the radio-active effluent limits set by 10 CFR 20, credit for this dilutica shculd be alleved caly if ccmplete mixin6 cf the vastes and river water cccurs prier to entry of the ccmbined discharge inte unre-stricted areas. Ccasiderstica shculd also be given to avciding radicactive vaste releases durin6 pericds when flew ir 1cv, as it vculd be when the hydrc-pcVer units are net in use.

2048

'] .. ] ]

GE0IDGY The tQplicants geologic analysis of the Oconee IInclear Station site presented in the Atomic Energy Co==ission Docket (50-269-270) was examined and compared with the available literature.

Because little is known concerning geological details of structural elements within the piedmont crystalline zone and most epicentral locations there are ine: met, attempts to relate individual seismic events to specific structures within the zone cannot be made with any great degree of confidence. Hence it must be assumed that an earthquake equal in intensity to the largest earthquake that has been recorded anywhere throughout the zone may occur at any given locality within the zone.

In general, when dealing with weathered crystalline rocks throughout the Piedmont Province the following considerations apply. Where the inter-locking texture of the saprolite is undisturbed it will stand in steep slopes in cut faces and will strpport considerable leads. However, when saprolite is reworked and used as fill it may be subject to failure even in toderate slopes. Thus any saprolite fill should be so located as to avoid the possibility of i=pinge=ent on critical structures in the event of slope failure and the location of structures across a saprolite cut-fill interface should be avoided.

Boring data indicate that adequate foundation conditions on firm bedrock beneath the plant cite should be encountered at anticipated elevations.

Because of the irregularity of the weathered zone, the requirement for detailed modifications of footing design as is usual in atandard engineer-ing practice to ensure bearing on sound rock at all localities may be anticipated.

The applicants responses to questions 12.1 and 12.2 contained in amendment

$4 to Docket IIcs. 50-269, 50-270,and 30-267 '.ndicate that foundation investigations and stability analyses co= parable to those undertaken for other critical plant co=ponents have been, or will be, undertaken for the dans and intake structures necessary to provide cooling water supply to the plant.

2048

-_ _ _ .. . _ _ . _ ._ _ _ _ . _ _ . _ . _