NG-17-0111, Redacted - Duane Arnold Energy Center, Revision 24 to Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Chapter 2, Site Characteristics (2024)

{{#Wiki_filter:UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY ....................................................................... 2.1-1 2.1.1 Site Location and Description ................................................................................... 2.1-1 2.1.1.1 Specification of Location ....................................................................................... 2.1-1 2.1.1.2 Site Area Map ......................................................................................................... 2.1-1 2.1.1.3 Boundaries for Establishing Effluent Release Limits............................................. 2.1-2 2.1.2 Exclusion Area Authority and Control ...................................................................... 2.1-2 2.1.2.1 Authority ................................................................................................................ 2.1-2 2.1.2.2 Control of Activities Unrelated to Plant Operation ................................................ 2.1-2 2.1.2.3 Arrangements for Traffic Control .......................................................................... 2.1-3 2.1.2.4 Abandonment or Relocation of Roads ................................................................... 2.1-3 2.1.3 Population Distribution and Land Use ...................................................................... 2.1-3 2.1.3.1 Population Within 10 Miles ................................................................................. 2.1-4 2.1.3.2 Population Between 10 and 50 Miles ................................................................... 2.1-5 2.1.3.3 Transient Population............................................................................................... 2.1-6 2.1.3.4 Low-Population Zone ............................................................................................. 2.1-7 2.1.3.4.1 Public Facilities ................................................................................................... 2.1-8 2.1.3.4.2 Agriculture......................................................................................................... 2.1-10 2.1.3.4.3 Recreational Activities ...................................................................................... 2.1-10 2.1.3.5 Population Center ................................................................................................. 2.1-12 2.1.3.6 Population Density ............................................................................................... 2.1-12 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.1 ................................................................................. 2.1-13 2.2 NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES .. 2.2-1 2.2.1 Locations and Routes ................................................................................................ 2.2-1 2.2.2 Descriptions ............................................................................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.2.1 Description of Facilities ......................................................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.2.2 Description of Products and Materials ................................................................... 2.2-1 2.2.2.3 Pipelines ................................................................................................................. 2.2-2 2.2.2.4 Waterways .............................................................................................................. 2.2-2 2.2.2.5 Airports................................................................................................................... 2.2-3 2.2.2.5.1 Military Aviation ................................................................................................. 2.2-3 2.2.2.5.2 Federal Airway .................................................................................................... 2.2-4 2.2.2.6 Projections of Industrial Growth ............................................................................ 2.2-4 2.2.3 Evaluation of Potential Accidents ............................................................................. 2.2-4 2.2.3.1 Determination of Design Basis Events ................................................................... 2.2-4 2.2.3.2 Effects of Design Basis Events............................................................................... 2.2-4 2.2.3.2.1 Commercial Rail Line ......................................................................................... 2.2-4 2.2.3.2.2 LPG Distribution Facility .................................................................................... 2.2-4 2.2.3.2.3 Chlorine ............................................................................................................... 2.2-4 2.2.3.2.4 Liquid Spills ........................................................................................................ 2.2-5 2.2.3.2.5 Aircraft Accidents ............................................................................................... 2.2-5 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.2 ................................................................................... 2.2-7 2-i Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)Section Title Page 2.3 METEOROLOGY........................................................................................................ 2.3-1 2.3.1 Regional Climatology................................................................................................ 2.3-1 2.3.1.1 General ................................................................................................................... 2.3-1 2.3.1.1.1 Temperature and Precipitation ............................................................................ 2.3-1 2.3.1.1.1.1 Temperature...................................................................................................... 2.3-1 2.3.1.1.1.2 Precipitation...................................................................................................... 2.3-1 2.3.1.1.2 Severe Weather.................................................................................................... 2.3-2 2.3.1.1.2.1 Thunderstorms .................................................................................................. 2.3-2 2.3.1.1.2.2 Tornados ........................................................................................................... 2.3-3 2.3.1.1.3 Winds .................................................................................................................. 2.3-3 2.3.1.2 Regional Meteorological Conditions for Design and Operating Bases .................. 2.3-3 2.3.1.2.1 Severe Weather Phenomena ................................................................................ 2.3-3 2.3.1.2.2 Frequency of Occurrence and Intensity of Hail, Ice Storms, and Fog ................ 2.3-4 2.3.1.2.3 Ultimate Heat Sink .............................................................................................. 2.3-8 2.3.2 Local Meteorology .................................................................................................... 2.3-9 2.3.3 Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program ........................................................ 2.3-9 2.3.4 Short-Term Diffusion Estimates.............................................................................. 2.3-12 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.3 ................................................................................. 2.3-14 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING ................................................................................ 2.4-1 2.4.1 Hydrologic Description ............................................................................................ 2.4-1 2.4.2 Floods ........................................................................................................................ 2.4-2 2.4.2.1 Flood History .......................................................................................................... 2.4-2 2.4.2.2 Flood Design Considerations ................................................................................. 2.4-2 2.4.2.3 Effects of Local Intense Precipitation .................................................................... 2.4-2 2.4.3 Probable Maximum Flood on Streams and Rivers .................................................... 2.4-2 2.4.3.1 Probable Maximum Precipitation ........................................................................... 2.4-2 2.4.3.2 Precipitation Losses ................................................................................................ 2.4-4 2.4.3.3 Runoff and Stream Course ..................................................................................... 2.4-4 2.4.3.4 Probable Maximum Flood Flow ............................................................................. 2.4-5 2.4.3.5 Water Level Determinations................................................................................... 2.4-5 2.4.3.6 Coincident Wind Wave Activity ............................................................................ 2.4-5 2.4.4 Potential Dam Failures, Seismically Induced ............................................................ 2.4-6 2.4.5 Probable Maximum Surge and Seiche Flooding ....................................................... 2.4-6 2.4.6 Probable Maximum Tsunami Flooding ..................................................................... 2.4-6 2.4.7 Ice Effects .................................................................................................................. 2.4-6 2.4.8 Cooling Water Canals and Reservoirs ....................................................................... 2.4-6 2.4.9 Channel Diversions ................................................................................................... 2.4-6 2-ii Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)Section Title Page 2.4.10 Flooding Protection Requirements .......................................................................... 2.4-6 2.4.11 Low-Water Considerations ...................................................................................... 2.4-6 2.4.12 Dispersion, Dilution, and Travel Times of Accidental Releases of Liquid Effluents in Surface Waters ......................................................................... 2.4-7 2.4.13 Ground Water .......................................................................................................... 2.4-8 2.4.13.1 Description and Onsite Use .................................................................................. 2.4-8 2.4.13.2 Sources ............................................................................................................... 2.4-11 2.4.13.3 Accident Effects ................................................................................................. 2.4-13 2.4.13.4 Monitoring or Safeguard Requirements ............................................................. 2.4-13 2.4.13.5 Design Bases for Subsurface Hydrostatic Loading ............................................ 2.4-14 2.4.14 Technical Specification and Emergency Operation Requirements ....................... 2.4-14 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.4 ................................................................................ 2.4-15 2.5 GEOLOGY, SEISMOLOGY, AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING ................. 2.5-1 2.5.1 Basic Geologic and Seismic Information .................................................................. 2.5-1 2.5.1.1 Regional Geology ................................................................................................... 2.5-2 2.5.1.1.1 General ................................................................................................................ 2.5-2 2.5.1.1.2 Stratigraphy ......................................................................................................... 2.5-3 2.5.1.1.3 Tectonics and Structural Pattern Conclusions ..................................................... 2.5-3 2.5.1.2 Site Geology ........................................................................................................... 2.5-5 2.5.1.2.1 Bedrock ............................................................................................................... 2.5-5 2.5.1.2.2 Soil Conditions .................................................................................................... 2.5-7 2.5.2 Vibratory Ground Motion ......................................................................................... 2.5-7 2.5.2.1 Seismicity ............................................................................................................... 2.5-9 2.5.2.2 Geologic Structures and Technology' Activity..................................................... 2.5-12 2.5.2.3 Correlation of Earthquake Activity with Geologic Structures or Tectonic Provinces ........................................................................................... 2.5-13 2.5.2.4 Maximum Earthquake Potential ........................................................................... 2.5-13 2.5.2.5 Seismic Wave Transmission Characteristics of the Site....................................... 2.5-14 2.5.2.6 Design-Basis Earthquake...................................................................................... 2.5-14 2.5.2.7 Operating-Basis Earthquake ................................................................................. 2.5-16 2.5.3 Surface Faulting ...................................................................................................... 2.5-16 2.5.4 Geologic Features .................................................................................................... 2.5-16 2.5.4.1 Geologic Features ................................................................................................. 2.5-17 2.5.4.2 Properties of Subsurface Materials ....................................................................... 2.5-18 2.5.4.3 Explorations.......................................................................................................... 2.5-18 2.5.4.3.1 General I ............................................................................................................ 2.5-18 2.5.4.3.2 Geologic Reconnaissance .................................................................................. 2.5-19 2.5.4.3.3 Test-Boring Program ......................................................................................... 2.5-19 2.5.4.3.4 Geophysical Explorations.................................................................................. 2.5-20 2-iii Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)Section Title Page 2.5.4.3.4.1 Seismic Refraction Surveys ............................................................................ 2.5-20 2.5.4.3.4.2 Seismic Measurements and Resistivity Survey .............................................. 2.5-21 2.5.4.3.4.3 Uphole Velocity Survey ................................................................................. 2.5-22 2.5.4.3.4.4 Micromotion Observations ............................................................................. 2.5-23 2.5.4.3.5 Laboratory Tests ................................................................................................ 2.5-23 2.5.4.3.5.1 Static Tests ..................................................................................................... 2.5-25 2.5.4.3.5.2 Dynamic Tests ................................................................................................ 2.5-25 2.5.4.3.5.3 Other Physical Tests ....................................................................................... 2.5-26 2.5.4.3.5.4 Sandfill ........................................................................................................... 2.5-27 2.5.4.4 Geophysical Surveys ............................................................................................ 2.5-27 2.5.4.5 Excavations and Backfill ...................................................................................... 2.5-27 2.5.4.5.1 General .............................................................................................................. 2.5-27 2.5.4.5.2 Dewatering ........................................................................................................ 2.5-27 2.5.4.5.3 Excavation ......................................................................................................... 2.5-28 2.5.4.5.4 Sources of Fill Materials ................................................................................... 2.5-29 2.5.4.5.5 Filling and Backfilling....................................................................................... 2.5-30 2.5.4.6 Ground-Water ....................................................................................................... 2.5-30 2.5.4.7 Response of Soil and Rock to Dynamic Loading .................................................. 2.5-31 2.5.4.8 Liquefaction Potential .......................................................................................... 2.5-31 2.5.4.9 Earthquake Design Basis ...................................................................................... 2.5-31 2.5.4.10 Static Stability .................................................................................................... 2.5-31 2.5.4.11 Design Criteria ................................................................................................... 2.5-32 2.5.4.12 Techniques to Improve Subsurface Conditions .................................................. 2.5-34 2.5.4.12.1 Rock Exploration ............................................................................................. 2.5-34 2.5.4.12.2 Remedial Treatment of Rock........................................................................... 2.5-35 2.5.4.12.3 Mat Foundations .............................................................................................. 2.5-36 2.5.4.12.4 Spread Foundations ......................................................................................... 2.5-37 2.5.4.12.5 Settlement ........................................................................................................ 2.5-37 2.5.4.13 Subsurface Instrumentation .............................................................................. 2.5-38 2.5.5 Stability of Slopes ................................................................................................... 2.5-38 2.5.6 Embankments and Dams ......................................................................................... 2.5-40 2.5.7 LLRPSF-Foundation Investigation ......................................................................... 2.5-40 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.5 ................................................................................ 2.5-41 BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR SECTION 2.5 ............................................................................. 2.5-42 AGENCIES INTERVIEWED FOR SECTION 2.5 ......................................................... 2.5-46 2-iv Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF TABLES Table Title Page 2.1-1 1970 Population ................................................................................................. T2.1-1 2.1-2 1980 Population ................................................................................................. T2.1-3 2.1-3 1990 Population ................................................................................................. T2.1-5 2.1-4 2000 Population ................................................................................................. T2.1-7 2.1-5 2010 Population ................................................................................................. T2.1-9 2.1-6 Principal Sources of Data for Geography and Demography ............................ T2.1-11 2.1-7 Local Land Use ................................................................................................ T2.1-12 2.1-8 Agricultural Data.............................................................................................. T2.1-13 2.1-9 1970 Iowa Farm Census ................................................................................... T2.1-14 2.3-1 Frequency of Maximum Rainfall by Various Time Intervals at Cedar Rapids, Iowa ........................................................................................... T2.3-1 2.3-2 Observed Hours of Fog Occurrence by Month and Year for the Des Moines Municipal Airport .......................................................................... T2.3-1 2.3-3 Annual Frequency of Occurrence of Atmospheric Stability Conditions for the Des Moines Municipal Airport............................................. T2.3-2 2.3-4 Frequency Distribution of Stability Categories for All Wind Directions ................................................................................................. T2.3-2 2.3-5 Annual Winds Equal to Stated Values (33-Ft Level) ......................................... T2.3-3 2.3-6 Maximum Persistence (Hr) by Wind Direction (22.5* Sector)All Stability Categories ...................................................................................... T2.3-4 2.3-7 Average Wind Speed (156-Ft Level) by Stability Category .............................. T2.3-5 2.3-8 Annual Winds Equal to Stated Values (156-Ft Level) ....................................... T2.3-6 2.4-1 Flood Flow-Return Frequencies ......................................................................... T2.4-1 2.4-2 Surface Water Users ........................................................................................... T2.4-2 2.4-3 Ground-Water Levels ....................................................................................... T2.4-22 2.5-1 Modified Mercalli Intensity Scale of 1931 ........................................................ T2.5-1 2.5-la Earthquake Epicenters Within 200 Miles of the Site ......................................... T2.5-3 2.5-2 Moduli and Damping Values ............................................................................. T2.5-4 2.5-3 Foundation Level Accelerations for the design of Seismic Category I Structures ........................................................................................................... T2.5-5 2.5-4 Summary of Design Data ................................................................................... T2.5-6 2.5-5 Principal Soil and Rock...................................................................................... T2.5-7 2-v Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF TABLES (Continued)Table Title Page 2.5-6 Summary of Auger Borings ............................................................................... T2.5-8 2.5-7 Micromotion Observations................................................................................. T2.5-9 2.-5-8 Static Strength Tests for Borings P11, P12, and P13....................................... T2.5-10 2.5-9 Rock Compression Test Results....................................................................... T2.5-11 2.5-10 Shockscope Test Results ................................................................................. T2.5-13 2.5-11 Resonant Column Test Results ....................................................................... T2.5-14 2.5-12 Atterberg Limit Determinations ...................................................................... T2.5-15 2.5-13 Sandfill Laboratory Test ................................................................................. T2.5-16 2.5-14 Soil Compaction Requirements....................................................................... T2.5-17 2.5-15 Ultimate Bearing Capacities for Seismic Category I and Nonseismic Structures .................................................................................... T2.5-18 2.5-16 Bearing Pressure versus Factors of Safety ...................................................... T2.5-19 2.5-17 Estimated Settlement ....................................................................................... T2.5-20 2.5-18 Allowable Net Bearing Pressures for Spread Foundations ............................. T2.5-21 2.5-19 Time-Settlement Relationship ......................................................................... T2.5-22 2-vi Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 2.1-1 Site Aerial Photo 2.1-2 Site Topographic Map 2.1-3 Site Location 2.1-4 Regional Map Showing Population Centers Bases on 1970 U.S. Census 2.1-5 Site Vicinity Map Showing Present and Future Population Distribution 0-10 Miles 2.1-6 Regional Map Showing Present and Future Population Distribution 0-50 Miles 2.1-7 Site Planimetric Map Showing 6-Mile LPZ, 2-Mile EPZ, and Population Center Distance 2.1-7a DAEC Plume Exposure Emergency Planning Zone 2.1-8 Site Vicinity Map Showing Land Use 2.1-9 Site Vicinity Map Showing Present and Future Population Density 0-10 Miles 2.1-10 Regional Map Showing Present and Future Population Density 0-50 Miles 2.1-11 Deleted 2.1-12 Deleted 2.1-13 Deleted 2.4-1 Cedar River Basin Map 2.4-2 Flow Occurrence, Cedar River at Cedar Rapids 2.4-3 Monthly Average Discharges, Cedar River at Cedar Rapids 2.4-3a Existing Dams and Lakes in the Cedar River Basin 2.4-4 Cedar River Valley Cross Section at the DAEC-River-Mile Point 133.36 2.4-5 Cedar River Valley Cross Section At valley Constriction Upstream of DAEC-Mile Point 135.13 2.4-6 Cedar River Water Profile at DAEC Site 2-vii Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)Figure Title 2.4-7 Drought Flow Cedar River at Cedar Rapids 2.4-8 Location of Wells Within 3 Miles of DAEC Site, Sheets I and 2 2.4-9 Water Table Map 2.4-10 Location of DAEC Observation Wells 2.4-11 Water Table Map - Linn County 2.4-12 Piezometric Surface - Silurian-Devonian Aquifer-1959 2.5-1 Regional Geologic Map 2.5-2 Generalized Stratigraphic Column of Eastern Iowa 2.5-3 Pleistocene Deposits in Eastern Iowa 2.5-4 Regional Tectonic Map 2.5-5 Regional Bouguer Gravity Map 2.5-6 Site Plan Showing Bedrock Topography 2.5-7 Geologic Profiles 2.5-8 Foundation Level Response Spectra 2.5-9 Stratigraphic Section Showing Geophysical Data 2.5-10 Epicenter Map 2.5-11 Plot Plan Boring Locations in Plant Area 2.5-12 Generalized Subsurface Section A-A 2.5-13 Generalized Subsurface Section B-B 2.5-14 Generalized Subsurface Section C-C 2.5-15 Reactor and Turbine Buildings Rock Boring Plan 2.5-16 Pump House and Intake Structure Rock Boring Plan 2-viii Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)Figure Title 2.5-17 Log of Borings - Numbers P-1 and P-2 2.5-18 Log of Borings - Numbers P-3 and P-4 2.5-19 Log of Borings - Numbers P-6 and P-7 2.5-20 Log of Borings - Numbers P-9 and P-10 2.5-21 Log of Borings - Numbers P-11 and P-12 2.5-22 Log of Borings -Boring 1 2.5-23 Log of Borings -Boring 2 2.5-24 Log of Borings - Boring 3 2.5-25 Log of Borings - Boring 4 2.5-26 Log of Borings - Boring 5 2.5-27 Log of Borings - Boring 6 2.5-28 Log of Borings - Boring 7 2.5-29 Log of Borings - Boring 8 2.5-30 Log of Borings - Boring 9 2.5-31 Log of Borings - Boring 10 2.5-32 Log of Borings - Boring 11 2.5-33 Log of Borings - Boring 12 2.5-34 Log of Borings - Boring 13 2.5-35 Log of Borings - Boring 14 2.5-36 Log of Borings - Boring 15 2.5-37 Log of Borings - Boring 16 2.5-38 Log of Borings - Boring 17 2-ix Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)Figure Title 2.5-39 Log of Borings - Boring 18 2.5-40 Log of Borings - Boring 19 2.5-41 Log of Borings - Boring 20 2.5-42 Log of Borings - Boring 21 2.5-43 Log of Borings - Boring 21A 2.5-44 Log of Borings - Boring 21B 2.5-45 Log of Borings - Boring 21C 2.5-46 Log of Borings - Boring 21D 2.5-47 Log of Borings - Boring 21E 2.5-48 Log of Borings - Boring 21F 2.5-49 Log of Borings - Boring 21G 2.5-50 Log of Borings - Boring 21H 2.5-51 Log of Borings - Boring 21I 2.5-52 Log of Borings - Boring 22 2.5-53 Log of Borings - Boring 23 2.5-54 Log of Borings - Boring 24 2.5-55 Log of Borings - Boring 25 2.5-56 Log of Borings - Boring 26 2.5-57 Log of Borings - Boring 27 2.5-58 Log of Borings - Boring 28 2.5-59 Log of Borings - Boring 29 2.5-60 Log of Borings - Boring 30 2-x Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)Figure Title 2.5-61 Log of Borings - Boring 31 2.5-62 Log of Borings - Boring 32 2.5-63 Loq of Borings - Boring 33 2.5-64 Log of Borings - Boring 34 2.5-65 Log of Borings - Boring 35 2.5-66 Log of Borings - Boring 36 2.5-67 Log of Borings - Boring 37 2.5-68 Log of Borings - Boring 38 2.5-69 Log of Borings - Boring 39 2.5-70 Log of Borings - Boring 40 2.5-71 Log of Borings - Boring 41 2.5-72 Log of Borings -Boring 42 2.5-73 Log of Borings -Boring 43 2.5-74 Log of Borings -Boring 44 2.5-75 Log of Borings -Boring 45 2.5-76 Log of Borings -Boring 46 2.5-77 Log of Borings -Boring 47 2.5-78 Log of Borings -Boring 48 2.5-79 Log of Borings -Boring 49 2.5-80 Log of Borings -Boring 50 2.5-81 Log of Borings -Boring 51 2.5-82 Log of Borings -Boring 52 2-xi Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)Figure Title 2.5-83 Unified Soil Classification System 2.5-84 Soil Sampler Type U 2.5-85 Seismic Refraction Line 2.5-86 Seismic Lines and Resistivity Survey 2.5-87 Resistivity Survey 2.5-88 Resistivity Survey 2.5-89 Uphole Velocity Survey Boring 12 2.5-90 Method of Performing Direct Shear and Friction Tests 2.5-91 Method of Performing Unconfined Compression and Triaxial Compression Tests 2.5-92 Method of Performing Consolidation Tests 2.5-93 Consolidation Test Data 2.5-94 Consolidation Test Data 2.5-95 Consolidation Test Data 2.5-96 Particle Size Analyses 2.5-97 Particle Size Analyses 2.5-98 Particle Size Analyses 2.5-99 Particle Size Analyses 2.5-100 Particle Size Analyses 2.5-101 Typical Probing Log 2.5-102 Log of Borings - Boring RW-1 2.5-103 Log of Borings - Boring RW-2 2.5-104 Log of Borings - Boring RW-3 2-xii Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 CHAPTER 2: SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)Figure Title 2.5-105 Log of Borings - Boring RW-4 2.5-106 Log of Borings - Boring B-1 2.5-107 Log of Borings - Boring B-2 2.5-108 Log of Borings - Boring B-3 2.5-109 Log of Borings - Boring B-4 2-xiii Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Chapter 2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS This section provides information on the DAEC site and environs and summarizes site evaluation efforts performed. This information was used to demonstrate the acceptability of the DAEC location. Information related to Emergency Planning will be updated as required per 10CFR50 Appendix E.2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY 2.1.1 SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 2.1.1.1 Specification of Location The DAEC site is located on the western side of a north-south reach of the Cedar River, approximately 2.5 miles north-northeast of the Village of Palo, Iowa, in Linn County (T-84N, R-8W, Sections 9 and 10). The closest city is Cedar Rapids with its outer boundary being 8 miles to the southeast.The site is approximately 500 acres on a flat strip of land running northeast and parallel to the Cedar River.Site boundaries are shown in Figures 2.1-1 and 2.1-2. The site location is shown in Figure 2.1-3.2.1.1.2 Site Area Map A paved county highway provides access to the site. Figures 2.1-2 and 2.1-3 indicate the access route to the site.The topography of the site varies as indicated in Figure 2.1-2. A relatively flat plain at approximate elevation 750 ft above mean sea level (msl) extends from the site toward the Village of Palo on the southwest, and most of this land is now being farmed. At Palo, the elevation is 747 to 750 ft.Across the river from the site, the land rises from an elevation of 750 ft to an elevation of about 900 ft within a horizontal distance of approximately 2000 ft. These slopes are rather heavily wooded with only an occasional field or pasture dotting the landscape. Beyond this rise, the land is gently rolling farmland.To the northwest, the land rises to an elevation of 850 ft.2.1-1 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Immediately adjacent to the east is another heavily wooded low area that constitutes the current flood plain. This area is very flat and extends approximately 1500 ft to the west bank of the river.The general topographical features in this portion of the Cedar River consist of broad valleys with relatively narrow flood plains. In many places, these broad valleys merge almost imperceptibly into the adjacent uplands. Away from the immediate vicinity of the river, the land is gently rolling farmland.2.1.1.3 Boundaries for Establishing Effluent Release Limits Figure 1.2-1 is not a topographic map; however, Figure 2.1-2 shows the same boundary on a topographic map.2.1.2 EXCLUSION AREA AUTHORITY AND CONTROL 2.1.2.1 Authority 2.1.2.2 Control of Activities Unrelated to Plant Operation The site, which consists of approximately 500 acres owned byNextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, is bordered on the east by the Cedar River. The land immediately adjacent to the river is forest covered, whereas the remainder of the area is divided between flood plain and land under cultivation. All site activities are under the control of NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC.These farmsteads were subsequently acquired by Iowa Electric and a formal vacation of this road was effected by the Linn County Board of Supervisors after public hearings held July 21, 1970, and October 12, 1971.2.1-2 Revision 20 - 8/09

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.1.2.3 Arrangements for Traffic Control 2.1.2.4 Abandonment or Relocation of Roads See Section 2.1.2.3.2.1.3 POPULATION DISTRIBUTION AND LAND USE This section presents the results of a population and land-use study performed by Dames& Moore for the area surrounding the DAEC. The plant is near the Village of Palo in Linn County, Iowa. The site is adjacent to and west of the Cedar River, and is located between two metropolitan centers; Waterloo, 40 miles to the northwest, and Cedar Rapids, 8 miles to the southeast. The location of the site is shown in relation to surrounding cultural features in Figure 2.1-4.The Dames and Moore study provided data for the year 1970 and projected data for the year 2010. Population data to support the Dames and Moore study is provided in Figures 2.1-5 through 2.1-8 and in Tables 2.1-1 through 2.1-5.The population and land-use program included the following:

1. A review of available pertinent literature and applicable census data.

2. Interviews with local, county, and state officials and discussions with local residents.

3. A review of maps and aerial photographs and a reconnaissance of the site and surrounding area.

The population estimates were based on data available from the 1970 Census. The method of projecting the population growth was to superimpose a radial coordinate system on an assumed area distribution of the 1970 population of townships and cities. Statistical analysis of past population growth was coupled with various population forecasts issued by Federal, state, and county agencies. An appraisal and review of the principal factors and conditions that have induced past population growth and those deemed most likely to affect future trends were assimilated into the study. Two separate projections were selected to reflect the expected differential rural and urban growth. These projections were linearly extrapolated to develop population estimates through the year 2010.2.1-3 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Continuing urban and industrial expansion is expected to increase both the population density and the amount of land used for residential and commercial purposes in the area. It is anticipated that the urban population in the region will double by the year 2014 and that the rural population will experience only a small increase. Although the amount of land devoted to farming is decreasing, agriculture is expected to continue to be the primary land use in the area during the life of the plant.Based on data collected to renew the operating license to 2034, the urban population near Cedar Rapids did not double, as originally predicted, but only increased by about 12%. During the period of extended operation the population of Linn County is expected to increase by about 20%.The greatest concentration of population, within 50 miles of the site, will continue to be along an axis connecting Waterloo, Cedar Rapids, and Iowa City. It is estimated that virtually two-thirds of the almost 1 million residents of the 50-mile region will be located in the southeast and northwest sectors by the year 2010.The future population estimates indicate that the greatest concentrations of population will continue to be in the southeast and south-southeast sectors, at distances of 5 to 10 miles from the site. Approximately three-quarters of the total population within 10 miles of the site will be located within this area in the year 2010. This area is principally northern and northwestern suburban Cedar Rapids.There is no reason to believe the present rural character of the area within 5 miles of the site will change during the life of the plant. In general, rural and farm population has declined both in magnitude and in proportion to the total population in recent years. Only a small increase is envisioned in this segment of the population by the year 2010.The Cedar Rapids Municipal Airport is on the south side of Cedar Rapids, 15 miles from the plant.2.1.3.1 Population Within 10 Miles Population estimates for the DAEC emergency planning zone (EPZ) were updated as part of Evacuation Time Estimate (ETE) studies prepared by KLD Associates, Inc. in 1992 and by TOM COD Data Systems in 2003.The estimates in both the 1992 and 2003 ETE updates were based on U.S. Census data, data from the Greater Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce, and from telephone surveys.Census block and tract data was superimposed on maps of the EPZ and estimates were developed for the 2-mile, 5-mile, and 10-mile segments as well as for the entire EPZ.The population estimates included the permanent residents within the EPZ and the transient population, which was comprised of employees commuting to work from outside the EPZ and other visitors from outside the EPZ.2.1-4 Revision 21 - 5/11

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The projected population for 2010 for all increments from zero to 10 miles was extrapolated from the population forecasts available for the area. The termination dates for these population forecasts varied; however, the longest forecast had a termination date of 1999.Figure 2.1-5 is a site vicinity map showing the 1970 and the estimated 2010 population distributions between zero and 10 miles. 1970 population data and projected population data within 10 miles of the DAEC are given in Tables 2.1-1 through 2.1-5. A discussion of the method used to interpolate beyond the 1970 data is given in Section 2.1.3.2.The population data indicated that the area within 5 miles of the site was sparsely populated. The 1990 census showed a very slight increase in population. There are three farm dwellings within 1 mile of the plant. The closest farm dwelling is 2900 ft from the plant. The area between 5 and 10 miles of the site is also sparsely populated with the exception of the southeast sector, which includes Cedar Rapids (estimate from 1994 census update: 113,438) and Marion (estimate from 1995 special census: 23,105). The boundaries of metropolitan Cedar Rapids range from approximately 8 to 14 miles from the site. Marion is 10 miles from the site.Sixty-nine percent of the total population between 5 and 10 miles of the site occurs in southeast and south-southeast sectors.Land-use data for the counties and townships in the area were developed from the 1964 Census of Agriculture and from data provided by the Iowa State Department of Agriculture and the Bureau of Statistics, respectively. Projections of future land use were predicated on the rate of change from 1959 to 1964.References 1 through 10 are the publications reviewed. Table 2.1-6 presents the organizations and individuals interviewed to obtain the information presented here.2.1.3.2 Population Between 10 and 50 Miles Independence (population 5972), which is 27 miles from the site, and Vinton (population 5103), approximately 13 miles from the site, are the only population centers other than Cedar Rapids within 30 miles of the site. Other more distant population centers, between 30 and 50 miles of the site, are Iowa City (population 59,700), Evansdale (population 4638), Waterloo (population 65,800), Oelwein (population 6493), and Cedar Falls (population 34,900). These population figures are based on the 1990 Census.The basis and references for the 50-mile radial population projections for the year 2010 are discussed in this section. Elements used in the projection technique were as follows:

1. Graphical analysis of the past population growth for the encompassed counties and large cities.

2. Graphical extensions of the available future population estimates.1-5 2.1-5 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1

3. Discussion with local officials and authors of the population forecasts in regard to the principal factors and conditions that had or would affect population changes.

4. Selection and extrapolation of the appropriate population projections to the year 2010.

5. Determination of the ratio of 2010 to 1970 population numbers per county and city.

(The Linn County Regional Planning Commission provided separate population estimates for approximately 100 areas within the Cedar Rapids metropolitan area to the year 1999.)

6. Multiplication of the 1970 population polar coordinate grid numbers by the above-mentioned appropriate county and city ratios.

The method of interpolating the 1980, 1990, and 2000 population numbers presented in Tables 2.1-2, 2.1-3, and 2.1-4 was based on the following:

1. Selection of Series I-C, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census Population Projection for Iowa11 as a representative indicator of the rate of population change.

2. Extrapolation of the Iowa Population Projection I-C to the year 2010 by determining the rate of population change, that is, the first- and second-order finite differences were determined from the provided 5-year interval projections and then the 1990 population estimate was extrapolated to the years 2000 and 2010.

3. The rate of population increase was determined by decade and applied to the base 1970 polar coordinate segmented population grid by the following equations (S.P. is the specific segmented population grid number):

1980 S.P. = (2010 S.P. - 1970 S.P.) 17.35% + 1970 S.P.1990 S.P. = (2010 S.P. - 1970 S.P.) 43.75% + 1970 S.P.2000 S.P. = (2010 S.P. - 1970 S.P.) 71.98% + 1970 S.P.2010 S.P. = (2010 S.P. - 1970 S.P.) 100.00% + 1970 S.P.Figure 2.1-6 is a site vicinity map showing the 1970 and the estimated 2010 population distributions between 10 and 50 miles. 1970 population data and projected population data from 10 to 50 miles from the DAEC are given in Tables 2.1-1 through 2.1-5. A discussion of the method used to interpolate beyond the 1970 data was given above.2.1.3.3 Transient Population There is no indication that the present or future population of the region will be influenced by seasonal variations. The regional population is stable.2.1-6 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Any noticeable population variations in the region will be of very short duration and can be associated primarily with recreational activities. Typical recreational activities that may temporarily influence the regional population are the following:

1. Athletic activities at the University of Iowa stadium in Iowa City. The stadium has a seating capacity of 89,000 and is 31 miles southeast of the site.

2. The All Iowa Fair in Cedar Rapids during July of each year. Approximately 75,0000-85,000 people per year visit the fair (approximately 13,000 per day).

3. Attendance at the various county parks within the region, as described in Section 2.1.3.4.3.

4. The Cedar Rapids Freedom Festival running from the last week in June through July 4 annually. Total festival attendance in 1996 was estimated to be 341,000, averaging a daily attendance of 46,625. In 1996, many of the major activities were moved to Kirkwood Community College. The fireworks display was held in downtown Cedar Rapids with an estimated attendance of 100,000 people.

5. The Taste of Iowa festival is held on the Labor Day weekend in downtown Cedar Rapids.

Estimated total attendance of 55,000 averaging a daily attendance of 13,750.2.1.3.4 Low-Population Zone The nearest population center is the city of Cedar Rapids, 8 miles from the site (Section 2.1.3.5). Since the population center must be at least 1-1/3 times the distance to the outer boundary of the low-population zone (LPZ), the LPZ outer boundary was initially chosen to be 6 miles. The LPZ boundary distance was based on the DAEC population analysis (Section 2.1.3),the required distance relationship between the nearest population center and the LPZ (the 1-1/3 relationship described above), and the possibility of warning and evacuation within the LPZ.The LPZ boundary distance and the Cedar Rapids population center distance are shown in Figure 2.1-7. In 1984 the offsite radiological consequences of the loss-of-coolant accident and the control rod drop accident were calculated to evaluate the radiological effects of the power uprate.The outer boundary was chosen to be 2 miles for these calculations to coincide with the 2-mile radius zone used for emergency planning for the DAEC. In 1987 the EPZ was expanded from a 10 mile radius zone to a 10 mile radius zone plus the part of the Cedar Rapids/Marion metropolitan area that is beyond that radius. In 1992, the DAEC EPZ was redefined to utilize landmarks (roads, highways, river) as boundary descriptors for individual emergency planning subareas. The DAEC EPZ includes the area within these boundaries around an approximate 10-mile radius from the DAEC. This area includes Cedar Rapids, Marion, Hiawatha, Center Point, Alburnett, Palo, and Robins in Linn County, and Shellsburg, Atkins, and Urbana in Benton County. The DAEC EPZ is shown in Figure 2.1-7a.In 2000, the DAEC reperformed a radiological consequences analysis for all design basis accidents using the methods of RG 1.183 as part of adopting the Alternative Source Term under 2.1-7 Revision 21 - 5/11

UFSAR/DAEC-1 10 CFR 50.67. This analysis determined the offsite dose consequences for the limiting 2-hr dose at the Exclusion Area Boundary (936 meters NW of the offgas stack) and at the 2 mile LPZ (9218 meters). This analysis is described in Chapter 15 and was adopted as Amendments 237 and 240. This analysis was updated later and approved as Amendment 261.2.1.3.4.1 Public Facilities There are no hospitals located in the low-population zone.The emergency plans for the DAEC include the notification of local law enforcement agencies and schools when any conditions exist at the plant that could endanger the health and safety of the faculty and students at any of the schools. There is one school in the low-population zone: Shellsburg - Kindergarten through 6th grade, approximately 340 students, 5 miles west of the DAEC.The enrollment at the remainder of the schools and the number of people using the public facilities within the Emergency Planning Zone, which includes the 6-mile LPZ, are included in either the permanent population count or the transient population count, as shown in the chart below.The 10-mile Emergency Planning Zone was expanded in 1987 to include the entire Cedar Rapids/Marion metropolitan area; the population figures in the chart below reflect that expansion.2.1-8 Revision 19 - 9/07

UFSAR/DAEC-1 ESTIMATED 2000 POPULATION WITHIN 10 MILE RADIUS (Based on 2003 Evacuation Time Estimate Study)Permanent Transient EPZ Subarea Population Population 1 (0-2 miles) 1134 313 2 (0-5 miles) 316 25 3 (0-5 miles) 703 25 4 (0-5 miles) 2504 5 (0-5 miles) 3953 397 6 (0-5 miles) 70 7 (0-5 miles) 1468 8 (0-5 miles) 243 9 (0-10 miles) 2260 35 10 (0-10 miles) 405 25 11 (0-10 miles) 132 12 (0-10 miles) 854 25 13 (0-10 miles) 706 25 14 (0-10 miles) 34960 188 15 (0-10 miles) 29820 3558 16 (0-10 miles) 31540 652 17 (0-10 miles) 1991 100 18 (0-10 miles) 1488 10 19 (0-10 miles) 218 20 (0-10 miles) 368 21 (0-10 miles) 740 105 22 (0-10 miles) 1353 25 23 Beyond 10 miles 35074 993 24 Beyond 10 miles 22140 3878 Totals 174,440 10,378 Note: For subareas, please refer to Figure 2.1-7a.2.1-9 Revision 17 - 10/03

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.1.3.4.2 Agriculture The area within 10 miles of the site is in two counties: two-thirds in Linn County and one-third in Benton County. Linn County, although it includes the Cedar Rapids metropolitan area, is predominantly rural. Benton County remains a typical agricultural area. A trend toward fewer farms of increasing size is evident in both Linn and Benton Counties.Available statistics indicate that the area surrounding the site is used primarily for agricultural purposes. The major harvested crop is corn, with secondary crops of oats and soybeans. The major livestock animals are cattle and hogs. Poultry is also a significant farm product.Pertinent data relative to the area surrounding the plant are presented in Table 2.1-7. Data pertaining to the agricultural uses of the land surrounding the site are presented in Table 2.1-8.The distribution and use of the land area by township are shown in Figure 2.1-8.Table 2.1-9 provides the acreage, yields per acre, and production of farm crops for Benton and Linn Counties during the year 1970.16 The two counties represent an area in excess of the 10-mile radius around the plant site.2.1.3.4.3 Recreational Activities Recreational activities within the vicinity are associated primarily with parks and similar public property. Principal conservation and recreational areas are described below and are shown in Figure 2.1-8.Directly east of the site and adjacent to the eastern bank of the Cedar River lies the Wickiup Hills Natural Area. This is a 563-acre unit that is generally undeveloped and used principally for hiking, wilderness camping, nature study, and hunting. The Waltonian Archery League has developed a range in this area complete with lodge and pavilion.The Palo Marsh Natural Area is 2 miles south of the site in the Cedar River floodplain. It is a migratory bird refuge and game preserve 144 acres in area.Chain Lakes Natural Area is 5 miles south of the site on an island and south bank of the Cedar River. This is a popular 373-acre picnic and boat-launching area.Morgan Creek Park consists of a 230-acre tract about 10 miles south of the site along the western boundary of Cedar Rapids. It is not adjacent to the river and is largely undeveloped.Seminole Valley Park and Campground is a large, well-developed park of 409 acres located on the north bank of the Cedar River 2 miles northwest of Cedar Rapids. It has facilities for camping and picnicking and contains playground equipment.2.1-10 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Ellis Park is 396 acres in area and is located on the Cedar River along the northwestern edge of Cedar Rapids. It has wading and swimming pools, picnic areas, pavilions, a duck pond, a golf course, softball, ice skating, and fishing.Twin Pines Park has an 18-hole golf course and consists of 150 acres located 1 mile north of Ellis Park.There are two nearby parks in Benton County. Wildcat Bluff is 119 acres of parkland situated 2 miles south of Urbana, and the Benton City-Fry Access is 40 acres located 5 miles east of Vinton.The Sac and Fox Trail is located approximately 14 miles southwest of the site, bordering the Cedar River on both north and south banks. The trail is primarily used for biking and walking.Squaw Creek Park is located approximately 12 miles east-southeast of the site. This is a 663 acre park used primarily for camping, picnicking, hiking, and cross country skiing.The Cedar Valley Nature Trail is a multipurpose trail used for biking, walking, and running. It originates in Hiawatha, approximately 5 miles east of the site and angles north and west through Center Point and Urbana.Pleasant Creek Recreation Area is a state park located 1 mile northwest of the site.Pleasant Creek was developed for use by the DAEC if river flow was not sufficient for the operation of the plant. The 1927 acre area is used for camping, boating, fishing and hiking.The North Cedar Area is located approximately 4 miles northwest of the site. The 56 acre area includes a boat ramp.Wakema Park is located in northwest Center Point and is approximately 6.5 miles north of the site. This 5 acre area is used primarily for picnicking and recreation.The Coralville Dam and Reservoir Project is located along the Iowa River 26 to 30 miles southeast of the site. Within this region are found the Hawkeye Wildlife Area and Lake Macbride State Park. The reservoir conservation pool at the summer elevation of 680 ft covers an area of 4900 acres. The reservoir project boundaries enclose approximately 25,000 acres.Recreational activities include fishing, swimming, picnicking, camping, hunting, and boating.2.1-11 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.1.3.5 Population Center Metropolitan centers closest to the site are Cedar Rapids, approximately 8 miles to the southeast; Waterloo, approximately 40 miles to the northwest; Iowa City, approximately 35 miles to the southeast; and Davenport, approximately 75 miles to the southeast. Aside from these urban centers, the area is sparsely populated and used primarily for agricultural purposes.The nearest boundary of the Cedar Rapids metropolitan area, which is the nearest boundary of a population center containing more than approximately 25,000 persons, is about 8 miles from the plant site. Therefore, the population center distance for the DAEC is considered to be 8 miles.2.1.3.6 Population Density Figure 2.1-9 is a site vicinity map giving the 1970 and projected 2010 population densities within 10 miles of the DAEC. Figure 2.1-10 is a regional map providing similar information out to 50 miles.2.1-12 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.1

1. Department of Commerce, Current Population Reports, United States Census of Population, 1970, Iowa, Bureau of Census, 1970.

2. Doerflinger, J., Iowa's Population: Recent Trends, Future Prospects, Iowa State University, Special Report No. 47, 1966.

3. Hartman, J., Characteristics and Structure of Iowa's Population, Iowa State University, Special Report No. 57, 1968.

4. Hartman, J., Trends and Changing Structure of Iowa's Population, reprint from Iowa Farm Science, Vol. 22, No. 8, pp. 7-10, 1968.

5. Howard, Needles, Tammen, and Bergendorff, Linn County Regional Planning Commission, Transportation Study, Part 1, Population and Part 2, Economy, 1967.

6. Office for Planning and Programming, Iowa Trend, Actual and Projected, 1960-1980, State Capital, Des Moines, Iowa, 1968.

7. Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce, Liveability Data and Information on Cedar Rapids, Iowa, Research Department, Iowa.

8. Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce, Manufacturing Data for Cedar Rapids, Research Department, Iowa.

9. State Conservation Commission, Outdoor Recreation in Iowa, Planning and Coordination Section, 1968.

10. Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce, Population Project and Economic Growth Indicators, Research Department, Iowa.

11. Department of Commerce, Population Estimates and Projections, Series P-25, No. 477, Social and Economic Statistics Administration, U.S. Bureau of Census, 1972.

12. Discussion with representative of St. Lukes Hospital, April 1972.

2.1-13 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1

13. Discussion with representatives of:

Mt. Mercy College Coe College Benton County School Districts Linn County School Districts Catholic School District Private schools Cedar Rapids School District

14. Discussion with the Commissioner of Public Parks for Cedar Rapids.

15. Modified list of parks from FSAR Figure 2.1-9.

16. Iowa Annual Farm Census 1970, Iowa Department of Agricultural Statistics Bulletin No. 92-AF.

17. Final Report for the Duane Arnold Energy Center Evacuation Time Estimate, December, 1992.

18. Final Report for the DAEC ETE, 2003.

2.1-14 Revision 17 - 10/03

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-1 Sheet 1 of 2 1970 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 0-1 12 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-10 N 0 5 35 55 50 330 1,560 NNE 0 15 30 45 40 40 260 NE 0 15 30 40 40 40 250 ENE 0 15 35 50 50 110 560 E 0 20 65 40 60 60 350 ESE 0 15 20 40 65 1,180 5,400 SE 0 50 50 50 90 5,120 31,700 SSE 0 25 85 20 60 3,410 22,050 S 0 20 20 35 15 100 570 SSW 0 10 240 185 20 130 790 SW 3 10 20 25 25 115 200 WSW 4 15 15 20 90 40 250 W 2 20 30 40 330 90 390 WNW 0 20 20 25 35 40 250 NW 5 5 35 25 20 40 260 NNW 1 0 0 20 25 125 770 Totals 15 260 730 715 1,015 10,970 65,610 Cummulative totals 15 275 1,005 1,720 2,735 13,705 79,315 T2.1-1 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-1 Sheet 2 of 2 1970 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 Totals N 1,366 2,360 1,488 13,069 20,318 NNE 1,429 2,018 7,260 5,895 17,032 NE 1,492 1,676 3,750 7,331 14,664 ENE 2,913 1,846 6,770 7,876 20,225 E 2,102 6,405 2,772 3,914 15,788 ESE 10,741 2,384 5,439 4,338 29,622 SE 45,361 7,099 9,338 7,639 106,497 SSE 15,481 2,936 51,958 5,149 101,174 S 2,020 3,120 2,110 5,536 13,546 SSW 805 1,964 4,092 4,283 12,519 SW 1,486 3,043 2,986 3,030 10,943 WSW 962 4,214 2,380 6,130 14,120 W 438 2,000 1,774 5,591 10,705 WNW 6,027 1,836 3,475 6,978 18,706 NW 1,926 3,928 27,443 91,987 125,674 NNW 1,646 7,926 1,650 6,319 18,482 Totals 96,195 54,755 134,685 185,065 550,015 Cummulative totals 175,510 230,265 364,950 550,015 550,015 T2.1-2 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-2 Sheet 1 of 2 1980 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-10 N 0 5 38 61 55 368 1,649 NNE 0 17 33 49 44 44 282 NE 0 17 33 44 44 44 273 ENE 0 17 38 55 55 121 613 E 0 22 72 44 73 73 419 ESE 0 17 30 61 100 2,060 9,017 SE 0 55 76 85 126 6,339 37,557 SSE 0 28 114 30 102 4,790 28,328 S 0 22 22 38 18 287 1,394 SSW 0 11 268 204 22 146 869 SW 3 11 22 28 28 127 216 WSW 4 16 16 22 106 44 273 W 3 22 33 47 386 96 428 WNW 1 22 22 28 45 44 273 NW 5 6 38 28 23 44 283 NNW 2 0 1 22 28 141 844 Totals 18 285 858 846 1,253 14,770 82,720 Cummulative totals 18 303 1,161 2,007 3,260 18,029 100,749 T2.1-3 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-2 Sheet 2 of 2 1980 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 Totals N 1,395 3,072 2,052 12,412 21,109 NNE 1,626 2,438 7,050 6,454 18,037 NE 1,856 1,803 4,375 7,613 16,104 ENE 3,510 2,257 6,822 7,929 21,418 E 3,320 6,338 3,469 4,519 18,348 ESE 15,801 3,115 8,026 4,870 43,097 SE 49,755 7,113 13,602 7,599 122,308 SSE 19,340 3,563 47,239 5,475 109,009 S 2,495 3,605 4,451 5,729 18,061 SSW 1,228 2,509 5,046 4,398 14,700 SW 1,528 3,259 3,090 3,068 11,380 WSW 1,205 4,060 2,523 5,900 14,169 W 882 2,064 1,957 5,724 11,641 WNW 5,417 2,002 5,244 14,274 27,371 NW 1,944 3,804 26,935 91,937 125,046 NNW 1,670 7,390 3,902 13,982 27,980 Totals 112,971 58,392 145,783 201,882 619,778 Cummulative totals 213,720 272,113 417,896 619,778 619,778 T2.1-4 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-3 Sheet 1 of 2 1990 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-10 N 0 5 44 70 63 426 1,785 NNE 0 19 39 56 51 51 315 NE 0 19 39 51 51 51 309 ENE 0 19 44 63 63 138 693 E 0 24 82 51 93 93 523 ESE 0 19 46 92 152 3,398 14,522 SE 0 63 116 137 182 8,193 46,470 SSE 0 32 159 46 165 6,890 37,881 S 0 24 24 44 22 572 2,648 SSW 0 12 310 233 24 169 989 SW 4 12 24 32 32 146 242 WSW 4 17 17 24 129 51 309 W 3 24 39 57 470 105 486 WNW 2 24 24 32 59 51 309 NW 5 7 44 32 27 51 317 NNW 3 0 2 24 32 164 956 Totals 22 323 1,054 1,045 1,614 20,551 108,754 Cummulative totals 22 345 1,399 2,444 4,058 24,610 133,364 T2.1-5 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-3 Sheet 2 of 2 1990 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 Totals N 1,440 4,155 2,911 11,411 22,312 NNE 1,925 3,076 6,730 7,305 19,567 NE 2,409 1,997 5,327 8,043 18,296 ENE 4,419 2,882 6,902 8,009 23,233 E 5,174 6,236 4,529 5,439 22,244 ESE 23,500 4,228 11,963 5,679 63,602 SE 56,441 7,134 20,091 7,538 146,365 SSE 25,211 4,517 40,058 5,971 120,930 S 3,217 4,344 8,013 6,022 24,931 SSW 1,872 3,337 6,499 4,573 18,019 SW 1,593 3,588 3,248 3,125 12,044 WSW 1,575 3,826 2,741 5,549 14,244 W 1,557 2,161 2,234 5,927 13,064 WNW 4,489 2,254 7,935 25,375 40,555 NW 1,971 3,616 26,162 91,861 124,090 NNW 1,705 6,575 7,327 25,643 42,433 Totals 138,498 63,927 162,670 227,471 725,930 Cummulative totals 271,862 335,789 498,459 725,930 725,930 T2.1-6 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-4 Sheet 1 of 2 2000 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-10 N 0 5 49 80 72 488 1,931 NNE 0 22 44 63 58 58 350 NE 0 22 44 58 58 58 347 ENE 0 22 49 72 72 157 780 E 0 27 94 58 114 114 634 ESE 0 22 63 126 209 4,829 20,408 SE 0 72 158 194 241 10,177 56,000 SSE 0 36 207 63 233 9,136 48,096 S 0 27 27 49 26 877 3,989 SSW 0 14 355 264 27 195 1,118 SW 4 14 27 36 36 165 268 WSW 5 19 19 27 155 58 347 W 4 27 44 69 560 115 548 WNW 4 27 27 36 75 58 347 NW 5 9 49 36 31 58 354 NNW 4 0 4 27 36 190 1,076 Totals 26 364 1,263 1,258 2,001 26,734 136,593 Cumulative totals 26 390 1,653 2,911 4,912 31,646 168,239 T2.1-7 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-4 Sheet 2 of 2 2000 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 Totals N 1,488 5,314 3,829 10,342 23,598 NNE 2,245 3,759 6,388 8,216 21,203 NE 3,001 2,204 6,345 8,502 20,640 ENE 5,391 3,550 6,987 8,094 25,174 E 7,156 6,126 5,663 6,423 26,410 ESE 31,733 5,418 16,173 6,545 85,527 SE 63,590 7,157 27,029 7,473 172,091 SSE 31,489 5,537 32,380 6,501 133,678 S 3,989 5,134 11,822 6,335 32,277 SSW 2,560 4,223 8,052 4,761 21,568 SW 1,662 3,939 3,416 3,187 12,755 WSW 1,970 3,576 2,974 5,175 14,324 W 2,279 2,265 2,531 6,143 14,587 WNW 3,497 2,523 10,813 37,246 54,653 NW 1,999 3,414 25,335 91,779 123,068 NNW 1,744 5,704 10,991 38,113 57,887 Totals 165,795 69,846 180,728 254,833 839,440 Cummulative totals 334,034 403,879 584,607 839,440 839,440 T2.1-8 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-5 Sheet 1 of 2 2010 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-10 N 0 5 55 90 80 550 2,075 NNE 0 25 50 70 65 65 385 NE 0 25 50 65 65 65 385 ENE 0 25 55 80 80 175 865 E 0 30 105 65 135 135 745 ESE 0 25 80 160 265 6,250 26,250 SE 0 80 200 250 300 12,145 65,460 SSE 0 40 255 80 300 11,365 58,235 S 0 30 30 55 30 1,180 5,320 SSW 0 15 400 295 30 220 1,245 SW 5 15 30 40 40 185 295 WSW 5 20 20 30 180 65 385 W 5 30 50 80 650 125 610 WNW 5 30 30 40 90 65 385 NW 5 10 55 40 35 65 390 NNW 5 0 5 30 40 215 1,195 Totals 30 405 1,470 1,470 2,385 32,870 164,225 Cummulative totals 30 35 1,905 3,375 5,760 38,630 202,855 T2.1-9 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-5 Sheet 2 of 2 2010 POPULATION Miles from Plant Site Direction 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 Totals N 1,536 6,464 4,740 9,280 24,875 NNE 2,562 4,437 6,048 9,119 22,826 NE 3,588 2,410 7,355 8,958 22,966 ENE 6,356 4,214 7,071 8,179 27,100 E 9,124 6,018 6,788 7,400 30,545 ESE 39,905 6,599 20,352 7,404 107,290 SE 70,686 7,180 33,916 7,408 197,625 SSE 37,721 6,549 24,759 7,027 146,331 S 4,756 5,918 15,603 6,646 39,568 SSW 3,243 5,103 9,593 4,947 25,091 SW 1,730 4,288 3,584 3,248 13,460 WSW 2,363 3,328 3,205 4,803 14,404 W 2,996 2,368 2,826 6,358 16,098 WNW 2,512 2,791 13,670 49,028 68,646 NW 2,028 3,214 24,514 91,698 122,054 NNW 1,782 4,839 14,627 50,489 73,227 Totals 192,888 75,720 198,651 281,992 952,106 Cummulative totals 395,743 471,463 670,114 952,106 952,106 T2.1-10 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-6 PRINCIPLE SOURCES OF DATA FOR GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY A bibliography is included a the end of Section 2.1, which lists the publications and reference material. The individuals and agencies interviewed are as follows:Mr. Harold F. Ewoldt, Cedar Rapids Chamber of Commerce, Iowa.Mr. C. Miller, Linn County Regional Planning Office, Iowa.Mr. David Hammond, Iowa State University, Extension Office.Messrs. W. Harrington and W. Bethrani, Linn County Engineering Office, Iowa.Mr. Forest Holveck, Linn County Assessors Office, Iowa.Mr. Charles Mullenix, Green Engineering.Mr. James Mollingshead, Iowa State Planning Department, Des Moines, Iowa.Mr. John Flaming, Iowa State Conservation Department.Mr. G. Anderson, Iowa State Highway Commission, Ames, Iowa.Dr. John Hartman, Assistant Professor of Sociology, Iowa State University, Iowa.Mr. D. Lunberg, Iowa Urban Planning Department, Iowa City, Iowa.Dr. Orville Van Eck, Assistant State Geologist, Iowa Geological Survey, Iowa City, Iowa.Mr. Rex Myres, Farmer, Palo, Iowa.Mr. Norman Pint, Waltonian Archery League, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.Mr. Robert Brooks, KCRG Radio, Sports Department, Cedar Rapids, Iowa.Cedar Rapids Parks Department and Water Department, Iowa.Iowa City Chamber of Commerce, County Assessor, County Engineer, and Recreation Department, Iowa.Iowa State Department of Agriculture, Highway Commission, and Natural Resources Council.Linn County Chamber of Commerce, Conservation Board and Bureau, Iowa.U. S. Department of Agriculture.U. S. Corps of Engineers, Coralville Dam Project.T2.1-11 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-7 LOCAL LAND USE Linn County Benton County 1964 1969 1964 1969 Total area Square miles 713 717 718 718 Acres 456,320 458,752 459,520 459,264 Farm area Square miles 622 596 700 699 Acres 398,080 391,732 488,485 447,198 Cedar Rapids metropolitan Area Square miles 50 50 -- --Acres 32,000 32,000 -- --Area remaining (forests, water urban, industrial, commercial)Square miles 41 71 18 19 Acres 25,725 45,020 11,035 12,066 Area devoted to Farming,% 87.3 83.2 97.5 97.4 Total Farms 2343 2118 1991 1827 Average farm size, acres 170.1 180.2 225.3 244.7 T2.1-12 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-8 AGRICULTURAL DATA Linn County Benton County Farm Types Dairy 206 (8.8%)a 189 (8.8%) 94 (4.7%) 82 (4.7%)Poultry 7 (0.3%) 6 (0.3%) 11 (0.5%) 9 (0.5%)Livestock other than dairy and poultry (beef cattle, hogs, sheep, etc.) 913 (38.9%) 834 (38.9%) 1193 (59.9%) 1049 (59.9%)Vegetable 5 (0.2%) 4 (0.2%) -- --Fruit and nut 4 (0.2%) 4 (0.2%) -- --Other field crops (corn, soybeans, oats, etc.) 560 (23.9%) 513 (23.9%) 402 (20.2%) 354 (20.2%)General farms 201 (8.5%) 182 (8.5%) 146 (7.3%) 128 (7.3%)Unclassified 447 (19.2%) 412 (19.2%) 145 (7.3%) 128 (7.3%)a Percentage of total farms.T2.1-13 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-9 Page 1 of 2 1970 IOWA FARM CENSUS Crop Linn County Benton County Corn Field corn harvested for all purposes, acres 152,050 135,403 Harvested for grain Acres 144,910 127,931 Yield per acre, bushel 94.1 92.5 Production, bushel 13,632,306 11,833,381 Harvested for silage Acres 6,936 4,088 Yield per acres, ton 15.6 15.1 Production, ton 108,363 61,541 Harvested for all other purposes, acres 204 384 Oats Acres harvested 30,480 25,167 Yield per acre, bushel 59.0 51.7 Production, bushel 1,798,370 1,302,357 Soybeans for beans Acres harvested 76,096 53,469 Yield per acre, bushel 37.7 35.0 Production, bushel 2,865,102 1,872,072 Sorghum Acres harvested for grain 46 7 Yield per acres, bushel 68.0 42.9 Production, bushel 3,130 300 Acres harvested for all other purposes 171 1,624 All wheat Acres harvested -- 13 Yield per acre, bushel -- 23.1 Production, bushel -- 300 T2.1-14 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.1-9 Page 2 of 2 1970 IOWA FARM CENSUS Crop Linn County Benton County Barely Acres harvested -- 52 Yield per acre, bushel -- 40.0 Production, bushel -- 2,080 Rye Acres harvested 27 26 Yield per acre, bushel 33.3 34.5 Production, bushel 900 898 Timothy seed Acres harvested -- 7 Yield per acre, lb -- 157 Production, lb -- 1,100 Red clover seed Acres harvested 4 40 Yield per acre, lb 52 73 Production, lb 210 2,940 Popcorn Acres harvested 88 1 Yield per acres, lb 3,379 1,000 Production, lb 297,360 1,000 T2.1-15 Revision 13 - 5/97

<\-;~::::.,

 ,,~/:;

~:':DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT o 1000 2000 iiiiiiiI Site Aerial Photo SCALE IN FEET Figure 2.1-1 Revision 3 - 6/85

 ~

I ': * -: I Highway and Transportation Map BUCHANAN CO. DELAWARE CO DELAWARE CO BUCHANAN CO R-7W R-5W , .:.. ,I

 ~~;~~;~~

LINN COUNTY

 '( '. ~""::," ,

IOWA II

 --L:M"YETTE--

UC_UIUOTT"CRUI<T.'.

 !>ILARGU.T'"

f:t.... Iowa Department of Transportation Prepared By z z

8 lS

 >'- ,!. """"", Phone (515) 239-1289 In Cooperation With United States Department of Transportation

_ _ _ _ ..J o I 2 1 4 T.'.1.-- ..... _ _ * '110.'0 "",".I" ....... CIO.T'....I oI I ,I , i t I nc.,~"~ull,;;~O T."_ I 2 1 4 ,

• r_u*" R-'-.

I"L"RGIO'TI.SCALE IN ICllOMETEl:S 1984

 --0 ~

1 * :: :~1

 --- . LEGEND TROY nC.']"'R,,,.eRO'"

IoIILLS T.'.

 , P... R..... TA slc.I'LI""T.,

T"I_.. R_._.l"IL"RC:&O.T' .. " ,I BlTUUINOU, SURFACED ROAD LEGAL ROAD NOT OPEN(RURAL) 10 TRAFFIC __

 ~ ** * .~=~=~=!-!-~=~=~=~=~~--~=

I UNllo'IPROVED ROAD

• 1j I GAAOED AND DRAIN£D ROAD
• _

z SOIL SURFACED ROAD ** _n... LLT

 ~..:::;,:~~

GRAV£L ROAO **

• _

 ~ I J

Flli,VED ROAD *** _

 >'- 1------ COUNTY LINE- ** __ ** -.-._. _ ,-n---:r J 1r I CIVIL TOWNSHIP * ** _ ********* _ *** __ . - - _

i-- nn -------..: ,m

 ;:~;r.--cv' ""'00" " ... I -*jWt!~~!l1J~!~!~!l'!~Z~~~

J3j CORPORATION SECTION L1NE. LlNE------------.-__ ** _. __ A ** ------------- ****I ._ * *

• _

i HIGHWAY BRIDGE SU LL. __ n nu _h nmu ::

 ., , I HIGHWAY I!RIDGE LARGE .. _ *** _ . . _ u_uuu : E I , ,, I INTERMITTENT STRE ... M._ **** _._._ **** __ * * * .__ .. _.'. _ _ . _ ...

l

===.==:::

NARROW !oTREAU. ***** . . ___

 -------,._-] ¥4 I. ----=z J 4 ISlen .lllR.. . T.,.

WIDE STAEAUuu n n __ n_n _u m ..IV[RNON VIEW

 ! [ n::~';:::~;~:I:*,

t R... ILROAD SINGLE OPERATING COMP NY iU'LAReIO. T, .. I. RAILROAD STATION .. **** __ ._ *** _**. _

'~:~ ~:~;: ~!:'::~:~~J:::::::.:-:.::::.:.:::::.::.:.::::::

I II

.---.-- J I

_J "<c. IN'Ot ,.,PIPE LINE GA!. - ..* .* _ .* ** , .*. _.. __ ._._. __ ..*_G -0_N

 ~._

I

 ,~.1t1~ --~~'~'

C[O... R NO' If'( USE FARM UNIT...* . __ . __

• __ .. _ . __ * **** _ ** _.

 ~ ": =::;~<~ ; ".:~-:~-::=tl :::~:.~;:~:-;-- -i DWELLING OTHER THAN F... RM *..

ROWS OR GROUPS or DWELLJ-IGS __z I : **I

 . . ' ..' TOWN HALL OR COMl.4UNITY HALL t

o

 ,. : ,),.:.'

STOR[ OR SMALL I!UStNESS E.5TABiUSHMENT_ *. (!,CD

>'- :_::.t-':

CRESTWOOD ACRES POST OrrICE.TOURIST CAl.4P.HIGHWAY GARAGE.____I 8

 --"~~~:.~-:;- -;.~:{,;;,::::~:~{,.~.: "*

uc .-, ....,~ TJrr, FACTORY OR INDUSTRIAL PL .... NT_ .* _ .6

 ~ o ~

I-';:--!

 - SCHOO.. OR OTHER EDUCATIONAL IN'TrTU'TlON ill ,\

r-- ---l CI-lJACH OR OTHER REU~IOUS IN!oTlTUTlON_

 1' I

• I

 ~~~~:~~~EO~R~~~~~:~ ~~~L:_:~~~~~~:)_-:~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 0- §] . ; .--'b :

1_- _I A TRIANGULATION STATION . __ *. _ .*. _. , .

 ~.* i~':',

I II*:

 , m1f~.~::T.'- COUNTY HOl.4E ._ *** * * ._ *** en ~\~~~~~~;£],i;tm ~' .~

L * ..J

 ~

L JI HIL.CS I & TAAPY's -4

 ...C.Z 'A1R'AJI"- ' .... N, . . . . "'.:~.:,:":::: m QUARR'l" .* * ** * ** _ ..

GRAVEL PIT -- __ A -- - - - - - - ** --- -- -- - -------- -.- ------ A ** -. TlllT

 ~E~~~=~,~fi::L~~:~:~::~~:.::;~:::*:-:~~~~~~:~~~:* *~-.~~~.,~~~~. ~~A 'tEj: --------.- - - - - - - - - - --'--1 z z iii iii ~I.. .... . .. :

POItn"S 8E1W£EN 'NI-IICH DISTANCES ARE ME:ASURED_.t..EGAL ROAD NOT OPEN TO TRAFFIC

,!. ,!. ===-==~=:;;==.=_; ~~ ~: .......:'-! ~ :~C;T:W~YU:~T~A~"OR~I~_L_~~~~~_~F_~~_C~~~:-_-~:._-~:::~:-.:-:~Emt- iIiil NURSE:RY ** -.----- ~________ II ," ibm-*--:;*--,-*----*1 ~~R:~LR: ~rIlM7::u~;~;\~T~:~E-) ~~-_-_-~ _-_-_-_-_-_-_- _-_~~ ~ ~_.~_*_9~

1I00STER ST... TION R ~ ** .00 8Em 4;. ~ ~J,q iii "h ~~~ . r_... - _-_- ~0 O"'UGING OR PU*tPING STATION *

 ----~.~:O~'-~ :R~ ~~~"-

[@ '~-J i-,'>/t U-J bl~

 . "I" TWIN III'<<ll..L5, 0.0.11 VALLEY; HOL'-4ES, ....OASE nc.' - CUN'O" ,,,,_ '-UN u.L... Glo.TO....

_...J "

 ~

L I ~::ID~N;L::A~:RO:_S_T_R~:~~ ~ ~~.~-_-_~ ~~~-_~=~:~-_-_:.~l!&J

 'UN, .-1 .. J ' .......""IT'... IlIf'U RAMCr. -.-------- --- - - - - - - - - - - --- - - - - - -- - -

WUTERN COlJ,.EGE n:!~:;;~~~w~

 ,//r-.i\-------:

Ii

 ---j I' ,I [-

I DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER

 ,,I ,

I ........

. I l"

 "-_'A~ _ ___ ..JI ." :~**::':~:: no Ole TODDVIL.. E J ~~~,...~"::**-: . , .

IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY

 *uci UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT UOUAN , **

Site Location

 ~ /

g ,... -0'

' ". J"!' ,

 ~ .~t~"':,_CO.

R-8W R-7W R-6W R-5W

 .JO..-.sON //,.....:_.

COVINGTON -'.___ue--It:~~:TR~::.:'*

 ' AHUHY I, ItI, "_

Figure 2.1-3 Revision 4 - 6/86

9:?" $~~ 9rc.

 ~ >: ... '.~'" .~: ~ .. *i.......,t.** ; I y ...:. . *':.f:,.'

c~l;~~'i,~~~t~~;

y: ::.

 \tV . .*.. () ~~ ~~.. \: . CHARt.ES,'CITY <~:. E . ~ ~: <> ",',~~i~~) C H <> ./~:. ~'.') ......'7-.

43?*.. * ::>" :, .

 /1 , .... , \ \ ... .. ..... t~: ... . '~i '~r' j" t; .'!.~ -'.j:;' ,<"' f.:. ~ .' ~ :.

s

 .~'.".,

v<:\ t- ~ W' u E.' f~~

 ',"e /" " ....:~., ... " /.~.,~:~: '.\ '.:,>-::.1 WEBSTtR CITY .'/DUBUQUE ..,.(62,308)**

(8,488) IOWA'FALlS f ,~;;, ~:;:::'~. -.... ..(6;454),+

 .... ,; H /' M :": ... :..... /~ r<:", .," "~",,

-\ K, St.'; !"-j "\. ",

 ; ./ ,."..... e:'**,,"*'*'* '.~

4?" ..BOOME~(12,468]'

 '.' ""e' . AMES" ~.~ ;.> ,;""~:'.,.*;;~.}I, MARSHALLTOWN. ,,' ;' 128,219).... ..JotAQUQKETA.,,, "w.. .'. I 5,677,1 "'> .>~

(;~~;505) ,

 . .J..

()

",~

 , ~"'.~tLINTON

.:"V** ..........;

 . :: /' ,134,719)

':;~~.;:::

 ...::' .:..~;>./,F ~.;~> . "., ,;.:": . . . ,,-.~.,.~.: ." 9

~:~ :::~ /

l~ ~',..:. .p L..~ ;.-( .....

 .' .~~ ... ,.> . .; ,.: ) ... - .. ~. <': . . , ..... '. ';.:':;~~' ",~~~r ;"., <> f;:f"{,:,,,, . . . ,.' . *.**,I:,:~,::~~~:,~~~~~~f§(' ,"~I ':f:~~~~;;'RF

~: ~{U' ~::~ ~.":( ~.. ',

 , .. ~'1 ::>: ~.::';' ',. .:;':.~

r.lf l';~ ~:. i:t1it:*.;:'i,

 . . . ,:"U~,""J..... " . .....wEST PES MOINES ..... ... l..:,;.~:::: ...\ ...... i\. STATUTE MILES o . "~~~~:~'~:t:"~>?';"~:~':*<;">' '" . 10 10 20 ',",:",., PELLA q

t~,668)

INDIANOLA ,'~e .. N ~

 . (8,852) ,.)~~;405) L ." j I .. j":~:':::"j ..... l..... ~ .. ~ ~l . . *r 't:/ .~. -~.<~ , ...:' L.' i''; ;-, <:*...*::.~~::.;';::.,;; . DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY 'Ci~I(ALOOSA .~, ~

fll,224)" , ,..,.... -:-:-. ();)" ~" ~::i .-"v.UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

 .:.::*.:.'*:.'r,:"" .....

i:'v "~' \ ...

 ".".~ .. .. Regional Map Showing Population ;.\ ~:~ I.. . i~<<f~<>>\:~ '"

Centers Based on 1970 U.S. Census

 ,,/~:~<":'~; ! :." ..:~.::>"'~" ~~,f~ '.~.:~ :HENJ:.zY, ,:

4!~""~ *ofTUMWA",:; ,.. F4tRFlttt> " ' " .

• MOUNT ,PL<£ASANT CHARlTQN., ,o,~>,;,

 /t5,OO9r'- .. ," "(29,filOl>, ..~: ... ...' J.,..7un . '" , "'(1001) t~ ..~, Figure 2.1-4

N

 ..... \

JACK~<~N

 /" /' ....,. 0~FR~N G GROV'F" rP P~?-~S()N "~"""'W~"""'- * .,,_.... RADIUS CUMULATIVE TOTAL /

L IN

 '"~ , ~ .......~ MILES 1970 2010 L~","j . " ...... I 15 35

/ 2 275 440

 '/( MAiNE 3 IP05 1,910 T.LY:~"OR . ( 4 1,720 3,380 II 5 2;735 5;7611 6 13,705 38,635'.'. 10 79,315 202,860 SECTOR 1970 2010 DISTRIBUTION N 2035 2,855 /".

NNE 430 660 NE 415 655 ENE. 820 \,280 E 595 1,215 I ESE 6,720 33P30 "J-

 ,'. _ 1-"" , I SE SSE 37,060 25,650 784'135 70,275 " I ./".

S 760 6,645 iSSW 1,375 2,210 SW 398 ,610 EWN °1 Ol-6 C,:'\NTU\\ WSW 434 705 tW 902 1,550 WNW 390 645 NW 390 600 NNW 94\ 1,490

 ,KEY*

400

• 1970 POPULATION 800 ESTIMATED 2010 POPULATION Et.OO*;!%DO STATUTE MILES I 0 123 I 1 I 1 -----.1 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY 570 /"",

 ~.20* UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

...I;;";~;:> "iTi--

 <>1""' !"'~~}-,~.0J_:~:~;-L,* .J I

8ERTRAM Site Vicinity Map Showing Present and Future Population

 ~ ....... n , ...

AA

 \':j Distribution 0-10 Miles '/

i I 10 MILES s Figure 2.1-5

 .. ~, tf.,.... ,'t" $3'" sr /,~,o st*;::::.***

w

,,::./

 .:.:.~ '. ,i:, \,,,. , ~:"::.~::~{ } c --,

w

 ~ .~".:,.::'"

S 1 N

 . ,~"'~,;1fI':;:)~~?:;~:~ .: ~;:'~ <.: N . "/" "" .:;..,.~ .. .~,~:~ :4~ .... -' \.; / ' '1.,..' . \ " -' :~.,: .:.~:;;.:~.;;~>~:...;., '~'

C E ~~).~.:.?.('?;,,: F; 1~}.~~. ~L2.(; I C,K "'

 ~.;; .f>: .. ' . ~ ",'{'( . ............................... ......J H /;y" N C C) C;:K " . -":' ".,-:--:-,-" . ./

f

.,.,,:.~:

 ,'/~.~.".... .l ();,v D*~~t>" ~j "" 'YO.,....

I)

 /.".,:.. )",

c,,~.;;43 ....* </ :.. ~: ,.... ,:;

 "*;c*.. ",*.y: .'\

j'

.J""'"' \c;,.:

 ~ .":.,,.: ..:~, .. ~,,,,,,. J : "c.:. ." ~." ,.~>. ! ~, " , --.~>>." +....- : '1;.*.. .~~ .... ~.~, ,>,~,,:{ '",:y:>::: ~: : "r )." _:.1'.;." .~: ">.:.",. ~ C~;'A.':. .~. 'i T ",; r~:. ~:i ~': ..... ~. f \{."." .. \":.::\. '\ .. / ; .....w . .,. ,{ ~

r:3 J~};( ;'{)r~t\~Z'~;;~;'iW\;';~~:c~;t~*\; f*f< "

 ,~.:-;:." .,It~~ ~Y'~:{,\,

N lK L.-,: N

 .£}~. U T L :.'.':.

SECTOR DISTRIBUTION N NE E SE S SW W NW

 . . "i . . ~~\:~~:.,. ".: ~y. '., ....\

'..">~' .. '

 **** >*** ~,. ",,:~:~'\ ;, . /170 2010 38,150 47,930 34,480 46,2/0 40,300 ~025 185,270 368,535 57,130 108,725 23,110 2~71O a,700 31,315 141,120 244,570 ~. .,~.-'::-..~~,<~:.~::~ . .~~ '- ';" . ***:::*.. .V:-::** .... - ..,~ .- ..-,. _ ..

RADIUS IN MILES 10 20 30 40 50

 . 11970 79,310 175,510 230,260 364,geO 5llO,010 " CUMULATIVE TOTAL ./ :, 12010 202,860 395,735 471,445 670,085 "2,070

'i

 '.:~.:.~- ... .~.: ~.:::~. .// ':~(' <:.:.~> \k. ~} .....

....~ K <~ o N KEY'

 ~

• 1970 POPULATION 14,800 ESTIMATED 2010 POPULATION

 .<\* >,

j 42;'"

 ,:::~~ ," .~.:~ ~.~~~:***~':::i: ;>/

i"";.

 **{

Y.

 \,) ,u:-:-'.:i

(.} T

r. ~. E:( {.: H c,"'f'i,,~;,:~:~=~;"","':~~4f';?:!- ..

)1\ ,<.;~ ~<~ ~~ ~':-.

 ~:'i :':J::i> ~;\~ ;"<::);";.t~~*,; :::.z0!-,:;.. . n,;j.l;" :01,;' **F ~:.:-;~~;,:~. Ff";"jA ::'V<~E ~*!r:,}~. :~:(,(.?:l':niO~L STATUTE MILES 10 0 10 20 I I I! I I ; '; *:'; -~ ...,: ...:$'

zt

 ~ , i LJ K= ,'i V ...., (, ,:~ '~':"") ;1~;.~""r ,;,,~t'1,>0 ";' ~>':P"'(:*~ '-:.. . f.. . 1. "**.. ,.t;_.. ,.~:;" ~ ~ :::.,;.;,.: ~

H 'I>.

 ~:"> {> q ':<:./ '-fy t.... F/~ Y'=r~ E N )'y, ,:::x : :,.,~~' * ~- ~.: **:., '< ~ , DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER " ~. :q f:>*:~;: v " ..... ~ ......

.- *1 '- , U'l

 ;.\

IOWA EL ECTR I C LIGHT & POWER COMPANY

 ,~ .:~~:. ,. , \ .:;".-, '~~~~~':-<f-:' ~~

J >:,**;,*t~: ',';. S !~.: \<.

 ':"'~(".: '"

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

 . *.':.*\r"::. ~- .. +......... . ~ ..:.... ...f,:.::;;';; '.~: .., ':.J:-:;..:~~ ~ ..;. ,,' ..J\ .:~:.:.~ .~\ \

~~:

 '. ,:,*::;;2;~;~f2P;E:t;:~?~~:~~f:~;;;* /

'....::.!t::., /~.i;.~

 ".('->:. . '? Regional Map Showing Present L ('\ F~ J-{ E' C A ~~>

y .....,'!' and Future Population

 .: . J'.~:"" .,. '\:>"" " >.i;':.,~

Distribution 0-50 Miles

 '.'.",: .;;,~l>

41~ ~ ,.~<~.,. " .:;

 '. ~l"~Tt';Y:'**" .. 'i:-. * 'f:-:' !:. /: Figure 2.1-:-6 "~ ./ '" ....>**:~

• Jo.-dam Grove

 "'~. Ii I I / '\~-, '\1 ~ I-r \1 I .. I -= 273 31 36 6 ,...~

Strip ipopu~~:~~~g:NTER-1tln.. 1 271

 -----1-.--__ ----1---. ... Ie; O' .0 I ) g.

1 _ _ ;1= I ;

 ,$' I i r ~,,_. \\d~ . I I "" 0 8 2-MILE EPZ 36 31 ~t 6

lOW 2 4250001 FEET 59 R9W 12450 60 R8 W 247I 7 R W 12500 Site Planimetric Map Showing 6-Mile LPZ, 2-Mile EPZ, and Population Center Distance KILOMETERS 1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 . 16 17 18 19 20 B:::::E3:::E£ ~ F===t t======t I t======t I [ _ t======t I Figure 2.1-7 MILES r '=' ""'0 ; ~ 3 ~ ~ 6 ~ ~ 9 70- il 12 13 Revision 4 - 6/86

TO I"deo_once _ W......

 --.J...-I----.... r----n0661----l DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IES UTILITIES, INC.

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT DAEC Plume Exposure Emergency Planning Zone Figure 2.1-7a Revision 13 - 5/97

HARRISON II f '--. ... /

 ~

I SPRING GROVE JACKSON

 *~

I I

1 I

FL: . ,

 ~- I FL-'5 SL: s~ "- \

I \001 . ---. '~ 0 _ I \II V * ;~'f" o - 517 I

• _ 10 II l' ,-

Fl-.S- ;.;

• _. IS .: N _
• I OL* 7 ~ N - 14

 ~. 41 ".

g: ~~P - S5 Me- &80 ' *-I I

• it eM-4..

Me- SIO I' CY-I.Ut

 ~-l------ \ _~ _ - -\ ' \ :

I I - 10 Ql!..!,4e... -+.--_ __ __ . I* ........."'- ....

'L _ _ -, I ~:4b D

Me' 620 1..-__ cu- 1.555 .-'-__ * ...J 1- CM-tlP7I 1 /ir

 ;f -.6 OTTER CREEK MAINE I~~

TAYLOR .

 .J\:

Fl-93 Fl-83 OL- 17 t:r' 0-6

 - 4 - 37 OL' 7 C

• 37

~"O - 27 BENTON -

 . B - 17 N -_ 28 P 12 0- 7 B - 12 I

J B - .. ~ N

• II N-I p -4 ~__ Fl'83 Ol- 17 Me- 291 P
• 33

 ,. CM-I 99 UC* 740 we- 3 0 C - 22 ..;,. CH - !f,235 I CM- ~400 CM-I . 0'3 ~.

CH- 4,435 CH- 4,2271 B -.N 6

 - 10 ei I

P

• 59 ~, 1;!":::~;n uc- 203 ~~ """",:,,,

I .-I /CM*470 CH* 2,300 Fl' 95 j \______.1- _ --- --------------- ----***OL' 5 C - 27

 --L----**r--

I 0-6 1. E GEM 0:P _ M!AS B - 10 A'

• vtO::IUP Hlu,-CONSnVATION A'UA N - 8 I
• PALO MRSM V'IlJ)Lln JtEFUGE

(P - 49

 ! f O** .

C

• LIllIS PRESEIl""

Me-105 CM-I,401

 / ....--V. ,-r-'

E

• ClfAIN lAKES ISlAND PAU

 'I CM' 1,116 F

• 1V1N PINES GOLF COUUt:

0:0 It' C

• SEMINOLE VALLEY 'AU 6. CAHPCIOUND

 .0 i ( ,'. H

• EU.IS 'AU SITE

 ~

MARION Z I I

• HOJtCAN C1l£!J: PAn o*Z ~i I I J .. WILDCAT IWFF

 \

EDEN

 -~

It

• BENTON CITY-P'KY ACCESS I;

 \. J-:Z ~

Z. I Al3tCllLT1lUL USAGI 1AJ.-1 Fl- 94 \Fl" 94 I ) Fl'919 10: OL- 6 FL

• PERCENT TCIlIfSHlP IN FAlKlAND I

OL- 6 OLe OL

• PERCENt ALL 0'n4!J. LAND - 1lJ)C. Sitts. LOn. 1OlDI. WOI:*. I'IC.

C

• 42 C
• 39 ;:;: : C - 42 i

C

• PERCENT FAJUtlAHD IN coax c.

O. 7 o: IT !@I f" .O' 8 .~ o

• PERCENT FAIIlHLA.ND IN 01\ TS B - 17 I :" B
• 10 I * 'ERCENT FA~ND IN saUEANS
• 8 N- 9 N' 7 ,. N
• PEIlCEHT FAIU'fU,ND NEITHER HA.lVE$'ttD 01. 'ASTUUD uc--24 P 169 CM- 4.819 ,::.1

 ..:',' we* 37 .

P - 181 CU* 5708 ~.

 @ I -S2 Me-I,008 eN- 5,121 ,) P * 'ERCENT FA~ND 'ASTUlED .

He

• NtlMIER OF "IU CWS 0(
• WEI OF CA. TTU MaanD IN 1966 CH - 10,372 I. . CH- 1~,550 /

C~eM -, HtI1I!R or CHICIENS

 ~ I / !~, ~ - / I : ".:c/ ' 7  / / -" J/

I, I

 .y~v .y' I;:

IIPIIINCI, rRIS lIAP WAS PlEPAUD PIlI! All IlIlLUIlID PlaTlCll

 .1 ------7~~:---------.,.~._l '" ml POLLllWtIlC Dsas TOPOl:UPIllC IIAPS JIglJQUI, IOW'A, WISCONSIN AND Xw.ItOIS It.~62. MID QAftICP<II'I'

I I

• _ ~~ .,!l Ji)~; IOWA, tUIltOIS 1962.

ELDORADO ! / FREMONT d ~ CLINTON II . *

 / FL:9: ~'42 /" : I I I ~

t 1_'0 STATUTE MILES II 23

 ~/ 0"0 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER "..- , c"';

IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY oJ .;-. }:. I. ,.i Nl!llH.LL * * :.;,-:.-:::.,.:*:-1---I.::;,:.:;;,;.;;;;:..=:;:.;t-~-- 1....

 . I.---.-J

1DII.r'

 /

__ r~ \ \V ~ I-----r::::-'PT UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT t

 'V ..- ' - -

L' .,.f'* !79 ~ .~~I * "~' I BERTRAM Site Vicinity Map Showing Land Use~

-fiO\

64:I ~:

r=~~

 @)-~- ~ .

U?l_.I

 ~

I G ,,'-/ I Figure 2.1-8 I ; i 1 Revision 11 - 4/94

 ,. \. .. , /".

HARRISON SPRING GROVE JACKSON

 * ('~')~k- "

I, I

 +,. .. -!-- _-_. , I*L. _ _ , ........ _

RADIUS CUMULATIVE TOTAL t _.J IN MILES 1970 2010 I 5 II 2 22 35(TAYLOR 3 36 68 4 34 67 5 35 73

 ',. I 6

10 121 Z5Z 342 Q9 SECTOR DENSITY 1970 2010 N 104 145

 /' NNE 22 30 NE 21 33 ENE 42 65 E 30 62 ESE 342 1,682 SE 1,887 3,993 .. t---...

SSE 1,306 3,578 S 39 338 SSw 70 113

 /

Sw 20 31 JWSW 22 36 E W 46 79 WNW 20 33('f)NW 20 31 NNW 48 76 KEY'

 .> .u. 1970 POPULATION ! 70 ESTIMATED 2010 POPULATION /

r~~:~i:.~~(

 ~

t. ... DORADO STATUTE MILES 012 3 I DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER

 "'***:':"'t-::,:* **r-.. **** . . _- I IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY i UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

(

 /.M' \ . ~.: ~"/ ",;.<.~

BERTRAM Site Vicinity Map Showing-,:;;~, ,~"', I :"(">','," f"> ("'\

 ",.:.;)_L\.~;;__ :::-....:::::::~,; \:-:r-{?: )'"'-\~~f * £ I \ _~ ,._",- Present and Future Population 10 MILES ~ Density 0-10 Miles Figure 2.1-9 s

91" 91"

 .. "'\:"...,.~, .. .-.~~""';::> / ' ) " / oj;::;" /.~:;;~ "~':,::\{j

~:

i Vv '3 CON S ! N

 ..:.,s-,. ""'1 ~ ~,~,.,>" " <:::L .".::;' '._.

43'L*;: /

 )'"*1 ; .~; ...~ '~:.">:~:.:.~t=i'~:' ,C;~~~,~!:".'i; ..",.~ .. '

I

 ,:'".<< , ,. ., i\0": j\ \. ,':-:- ~~ ..:~:' /: : .,,,>.~.,,' "-'>="

,,-,, ~ .:".<

 / ,,'" ~;/.:~ ~~.-:<,,: s..* i ~ . . ,- ...,... ,.. . ,< \ /, '. ~ ".", . ~~:.~"-: ~*~*t~, .~ **tf" .-.- "' *.......... "\: . .~:" >'\{"'" ; '.'.I,~~ ..+ . *~*;CJ.:+;'"* ..* -i ."..." ' :",,,,,** >.... ~i f 1,: .......... ~~ -. ~ :*:l>* .... *.,i,\ .. Y, 't~ ....,i,:~~':~ ":- ~

o:~,i\t\

 'i... W *** '.". ?

B I.

 /::...>>."

r~;~i:~;i4"

 ..::~,-::.~ ..*:'ii:._~"

h,'~ F f;; N '0\ uT SEClOR DISTRIBUTION NINE E IE s SW W NW

 /' ':"',.,~.,.: <. IWO 39 I 15 41 lS8 l!4 30 144 j . .. r 2010 49 I 47 78 378 III 28 II! 241 RADIUS IN MILES 10 20 30 40 50

':~"'; . ~:.~~~~;

11970 252 140 81 n' 70 l '> CUMULATIVE TOTAL 1:2010 6311 313 166 I" 121

 ...; ~ ..:, . ,- ,- .)-\~ ...:= ~0,,~~

( ... K s /.,

 ...~:" ; -.~ " ........ , ... ... KEYI .,<\ 26 1970 POPULATION PER SQUARE MILE 'j42"

• ESTIMATED 2010 POPULATION PER SQUARE MILE 42":"'::'

. ~

N

 /

l;i<.:::.:.-: >~~ ;~Ert:~C-:;'ti-':;;",; :-":1::" ,:,:.tr-;-.-::. .'-'*r:~l v:~t,:.., ~~;'::-::f .N:M". ~",~~, ~:~;~1':~n.c<-

 *.N,"" .." .... .. ...."".~ -~.

STATUTE MILES(;,

 ~ ~ <, !. 10 o 10 20 ,,~, "-"':.,-.,.. , . ... .... L....J- I J-T- I ;~ " .. '\. ,~ ~' ..,:,

i.,.. N t,J ~)

 * .: '<~:" ..,.-:=-:>> ;;','.;'

5 \.) N/J/ \V; '<;~;";i~, F DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER r:>'~/ , '" ..;

(

 ~

IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY

 .!~>.: ."-,,

u -,~ .~~ [~ .....UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

 '.,~ / ......,.~! .,,:.~"-:-",

1"='**.. . **:..;Regional Map Showing Present s4!~"- $:"L. ,,:"'::>'~:~"'~ ,.L,;;:'\L>~~:'.,~_.",/o ,.. . >.

 ~ >

and Future Population Density 0-50 Miles Figure 2.1-10

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 2.2 NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES 2.2.1 LOCATIONS AND ROUTES General information on the locations and routes of nearby industrial and transportation facilities is given below. There are no nearby military facilities.2.

2.2 DESCRIPTION

S The industrial activities within 10 miles of the site are confined principally to the Cedar Rapids metropolitan area. The smaller communities in the vicinity of the site have little or no industry and consist of small retail business establishments.2012-018 Immediately to the south of the DAEC site, is the Croell Sand Extraction Plant which began operation in 2012. Areas not under sand excavation will remain in crop production.There are several quarries within 5 miles of the DAEC site as shown on the General Highway and Transportation Maps for Linn and Benton Counties. However, discussions with Linn and Benton County Engineers indicated that only one of these quarries was operational at the time of the initial FSAR. The other quarries had been inoperative for a number of years.2.2.2.1 Description of Facilities Facility descriptions are included in Section 2.2.2.2 below.2.2.2.2 Description of Products and Materials Industry in Cedar Rapids is typical of a progressive midwestern city of its size.Industrial density is greatest in the central and southern metropolitan areas.Manufacturing is the largest employer in Linn County. Manufacturing firms account approximately 17% of the total employment in the county.The operational quarry currently is owned and operated by Aggregates, Inc., and is approximately 3 miles southwest of the DAEC site.Communication with Aggregates revealed that quarry operations may involve some blasting with dynamite. Although Aggregates personnel are responsible for blasting operations, all dynamite associated with such blasting is individually ordered and is delivered to the quarry by the dynamite company. This method of operation eliminates onsite storage of dynamite at the quarry except for small quantities (5 to 10 lb) that are kept on hand for routine daily use (fracturing large boulders, etc). Although the frequency of blasting at the quarry varies considerably depending on business factors, the maximum frequency is estimated to be four times per week with an average frequency of once or twice per week.2.2-1 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 The maximum weight of dynamite used is approximately 18,000 lb, whereas the average weight of dynamite used is approximately 10,000 lb.John Blume & Associates, Iowa Electric's seismic consultant, evaluated the potential impact of these offsite blasting operations on the DAEC. Blume's analysis made assumptions regarding shot emplacement and soil and foundation conditions that would produce the maximum possible effect at the plant site. Based on the data presented by Johnson,1 it was determined that the maximum particle acceleration of seismic waves experienced at the site would not exceed 0.002g. The capability exists to confirm the conservatism of the Blume analysis as the containment base slab strong-motion accelerograph is triggered at a vertical acceleration of 0.01g. The absence of SMA-2 triggering due to blasting operations at the Aggregates quarry will in effect confirm the insignificance of such operations relative to plant safety considerations.The nature of the operation at this quarry together with Blume's analysis of effects at the DAEC site and the fact that the quarry had operated for approximately 25 years without incident (at the time of the initial FSAR) would indicate that the potential hazard from this source is insignificant.2.2.2.3 Pipelines There are no known mineral mines or petroleum wells located within 5 miles of the plant site.There are two 4 diameter natural gas mains belonging to Alliant Energy located no less than 2 miles from DAEC at their closest points. A 12 diameter natural gas main belonging to MidAmerican Energy Company is located approximately 8 miles from the DAEC at its closest point. The hazard analysis contained in Reference 2 determined the gas pipelines around the DAEC site present negligible risk to the safe operation of DAEC.2.2.2.4 Waterways In the vicinity of the site, the Cedar River is not navigable. The closest boat landing is at the Chain Lakes public access, approximately 3 miles downstream of the site.2.2-2 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 2.2.2.5 Airports The nearest airfield used for commercial traffic is the Cedar Rapids Municipal Airport located 15 miles south-southeast of the site, in accordance with Standard Review Plan Section 3.5.1.6, airports which have fewer than 1000d2 flight operations per year, where d is the distance in miles from the site, are screened from further analysis. At a distance of 15 miles this equates to 225,000 flight operations per year. This number is more than twice the estimate of annual flight operations from the Cedar Rapids Municipal Airport. Therefore, the Cedar Rapids Municipal Airport is justifiably screened from further analysis.A small private landing strip located 4.5 miles southeast of the site is no longer active. Other airports in the vicinity can also be screened from further analysis as they are encompassed by the potential hazard posed by the Cedar Rapids Municipal Airport.At the time of the initial FSAR, the private airport near Shellsburg was designated on the most recent edition of the Dubuque Sectional Aeronautical Chart and also on the 1968 USGS topographical map, Shellsburg Quadrangle. Investigation and discussion with Cedar Rapids area aviation organizations indicated that a private restricted airstrip was operated at one time at the above mentioned location by an individual who owned a single light airplane, but the owner had dismantled the hangar and later died. The airstrip was no longer in use, but was still designated on the aeronautical charts because apparently no cancellation had been initiated. During the course of the investigation, it was determined that another small landing strip not shown on the most recent aeronautical charts existed at a location approximately four miles southeast of the plant.Discussion with the airfield manager indicated that approximately 10 single engine light airplanes were stationed at the strip. The maximum gross weight of these aircraft was estimated to be 3000 lb. Runway orientation was north-south (3000 ft turf) and east-west (2600 ft turf) according to the Iowa Airport Directory 1972-73, published by the Iowa Aeronautical Commission. The facility was an uncontrolled field and accordingly there was no record kept of the number of takeoffs and landings. An estimate of the number of takeoffs and landings was made based upon the assumption that between May 1 and November 1 each of the 10 planes averaged four movements per weekend. During the winter months it was estimated that four of the planes were active on six weekends, again at an average of four movements per weekend. These assumptions were felt to be conservative and were based upon discussions held with the owner. Accordingly, it was conservatively estimated that there were less than 1500 movements per year from this airfield. The airfield owner indicated that there were no plans for significantly expanding the scope of operations at this facility. At the time of initial FSAR, no other airfields were known to exist within 5 miles of the DAEC.2.2.2.5.1 Military Aviation There are no nearby military facilities. In addition, the closest military operations areas is more than 100 miles distant from the site. Military air activity does not represent a significant hazard to the plant.2.2-3 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 2.2.2.6 Projections of Industrial Growth See Section 2.4.11.2.2.3 EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL ACCIDENTS 2.2.3.1 Determination of Design Basis Events Design basis events are discussed in Section 2.2.3.2 below.2.2.3.2 Effects of Design Basis Events Rail, chlorine, river, and aircraft hazards are discussed in the following subsections.2.2.3.2.1 Commercial Rail Line The closest commercial rail line to the DAEC that could conceivably carry hazardous material on a routine basis is approximately 3.5 miles west of the DAEC site.The potential consequences of incidents involving such material are not felt to be significant in terms of plant safety. No such hazardous material is manufactured in the vicinity of the site.2.2.3.2.2 LPG Distribution Facility An LPG storage and distribution facility is located on the west edge of the town of Palo approximately 3.5 miles from the site. Potential consequences of incidents at this facility are felt to be insignificant in terms of plant safety.2.2.3.2.3 Chlorine Chlorine, primarily in liquid form, was used in the condenser cooling system and was stored in twelve 1-ton containers in the onsite pump house. In 1982, this chlorine was removed from the site in order to eliminate the potential hazard of a chlorine spill to control room personnel. Sodium hypochlorite was substituted for circulating water treatment. See Sections 10.4.5.2 and 9.2.4.2.2-4 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 2.2.3.2.4 Liquid Spills The nearest location upstream that could be the source of significant amounts of corrosive liquids or oil is the City of Vinton, which is about 30 river miles upstream. The City of Vinton stores diesel oil for its electric power generating station in three 15,000-gal tanks. A dike surrounds these three tanks and is designed to retain the contents of any one tank. Therefore, for oil to be released into the river, more than one tank or one tank and a fault to the dike would be required.An interview with local personnel from the U.S. Geological Survey indicates that the time required for material to transit the river from Vinton to the plant site would not be less than 24 hr. Therefore, any significant discharge into the river would be accompanied by a significant amount of time in which to take necessary action to mitigate the consequences of any discharge. Discharges upstream of Vinton would be accompanied by more time in which to take action.If an upstream discharge were to take place, it can be assumed that cognizant authorities would be mobilized to take action to mitigate the ecological consequences.These actions would tend to lessen the concentrations in the site vicinity.The action to be taken on the receipt of warning that an upstream discharge had taken place would be to reduce plant power to hot standby. This would reduce evaporative losses to essentially zero deleting the requirement for makeup or blowdown.With no river input, there will be no effects to the plant cooling systems. This condition can be maintained until long after river water with contaminants has passed the intake structure.2.2.3.2.5 Aircraft Accidents At the time of the initial FSAR the potential for aircraft accidents at the facility was considered extremely improbable due to the relatively small number of airplane movements at the small landing strip described in Section 2.2.2.5.2.2-5 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 2.2-6 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.2

1. U. S. Army Engineer Nuclear Cratering Group, NCG Technical Report No. 31, Explosive Excavation Technology, TID-4500, UC-35, Livermore, California, 1971.

2. IES Utilities Inc., Individual Plant Examination of External Events, Transportation and Nearby Facility Hazards Evaluation of the DAEC Site, December 1995.

2.2-7 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 2.3 METEOROLOGY 2.3.1 REGIONAL CLIMATOLOGY General climatology for the area has been evaluated from National Weather Service (formerly U.S. Department of Commerce, or more recently, ESSA, Weather Bureau) sources.2.3.1.1 General Climate 2.3.1.1.1 Temperature and Precipitation 2.3.1.1.1.1 Temperature Based on a 30-year summary of records1 for the period 1931-1960, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, experienced the following temperature regimes:Highest daily maximum 109°F, July 1936 Lowest daily minimum -25°F, January 1936 Mean number of days January 6 0°F and below (per month) February 4 March 1 November + (less than 1/2 day)December 3 The normal daily maximum temperature for the year is 59.7°F, and the normal daily minimum temperature is 38.7°F for the year. The average temperature is 49.2°F.The maximum temperature of record occurred on July 5, 1911, and was 110°F. The minimum temperature of record occurred in January 1883 and was -36°F.2.3.1.1.1.2 Precipitation About 70% of Cedar Rapids' annual precipitation of 33.27 in. falls between April and September. The greatest daily precipitation fell on September 15, 1914 when 7.78 in. fell. In a 24-hr period, July 16 and 17, 1968, 9.31 in. of rain fell at Waterloo, Iowa, which is about 50 miles northwest of the site. Table 2.3-1 indicates the frequency of maximum rainfall by various time intervals at Cedar Rapids, Iowa. Maximum monthly rainfall is on the order of 12 to 13 in.Snowfall averages about 31 in. per season. It has varied from 8.1 in. in 1921-1922 to as much as 62.4 in. in the 1959-1960 season. Previously, the snowfall was above 60 in. in the 1904-1905 winter period. The heaviest daily snowfall since 1930 was 16.7 in., which occurred on February 26, 1954.2.3-1 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 In January and February of 1929, snow accumulation reached a record depth of 16 in.However, during most winters the maximum depth does not exceed 8 in. The ground is snow covered an average of 63 days per year.The maximum rainfall rates2 for the site vicinity are as follows:Amount of Rain Time (in.)5 min 0.72*10 min 1.15 15 min 1.46 30 min 2.05 1 hr 2.28 2 hr 3.00 3 hr 4.06 6 hr 4.85 12 hr 5.33 2.3.1.1.2 Severe Weather 2.3.1.1.2.1 Thunderstorms Reference 1 states that there are normally about 48 thunderstorms per year, about half of which occur in the 4 months between May and August.Thunderstorm frequency per month3 is as follows:Thunderstorm Month per Month January +**February +**March 2 April 4 May 7 June 9 July 8 August 7 September 5 October 3 November 1 December +**

• Average of maxima for Dubuque and Davenport, Iowa. Some of these records are in excess of those cited in Table 2.3-1.
  • The symbol + indicates a mean value less than 1.

2.3-2 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 The statistics above are based on approximately 70 years of record and are the higher of the two closest stations summarized, Dubuque and Davenport, Iowa.2.3.1.1.2.2 Tornados.There are about 20 tornados per year that are observed in Iowa on approximately 10 tornado days. The mean annual frequency of tornados in 1953-1962 for the 1-degree latitude-longitude square containing the site was 1.1.4 On the basis of the technique shown,4 the probability of occurrence of a tornado in the site vicinity is 8.5 x 10-4, and the recurrence frequency interval is one tornado every 1171 years.There has been a slight tendency for increasing tornado frequency in the most recent 5years. Sufficient data have not been obtained as yet to establish any statistically significant trend from the long-term normals.2.3.1.1.3 Winds Preliminary estimates of wind speeds and directional persistence were presented in the PSAR from National Weather Service Observations at Cedar Rapids and Waterloo, Iowa. Since these data are of primary interest in determining atmospheric diffusion, they are now covered by Section 2.3.4, where special attention is given to the 12 months onsite data.2.3.1.2 Regional Meteorological Conditions for Design and Operating Bases 2.3.1.2.1 Severe Weather Phenomena The occurrence of fog, hail, and ice storms in the vicinity of the DAEC site was investigated using hourly meteorological data collected at the Des Moines Municipal Airport.The Des Moines Municipal Airport is located south of the city, about 100 miles west-southwest of the plant site. Meteorological data from Des Moines were used because these observations are the most comprehensive set of long-term data that are generally representative of the plant site meteorology. (The FAA Station at the Cedar Rapids Municipal Airport does not provide a complete tabulation of the meteorological parameters required for this climatological study.)The Des Moines data used consist of observations made during a 5-year period (December 1959 through November 1964). The selection of the particular period to be used is normally arbitrary, since anomalous meteorological occurrences would tend to be averaged out in a climatological record of a 5-year duration. The 1959-1964 period was chosen because after January 1965, meteorological observations at Weather Bureau stations began to be tabulated for 3-hour intervals; for a study of this nature, it is preferable to use hourly meteorological observations. The data were reported in accordance with the Weather Bureau standard WBAN form and were obtained on magnetic tape. An extensive computer reduction of data was therefore possible. Approximately 43,000 hourly data records were obtained.2.3-3 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 2.3.1.2.2 Frequency of Occurrence and Intensity of Hail, Ice Storms, and Fog

1. Hail. Hail is reported on the WBAN forms using the following categories:

a. Light and moderate hail.

b. Light and moderate small hail.

c. Heavy hail.

d. Heavy small hail.

To facilitate the data search, the hail categories were broken up into two intensity groups as follows:Group I Light and moderate hail Light and moderate small hail Group II Heavy hail Heavy small hail For the Group I category, only three cases were recorded for the 5-year period as follows:Pasquill Average Wind Case Stability Class Speed (knots) 1 D 10 2 D 20 3 D 24 All cases occurred in the spring season.For the Group II category, there were no occurrences during the 5-year period.An additional source of information on Iowa hail is contained in Reference 6, as follows:Number of Days with Hail Based on Dubuque, Iowa Data (40 years)Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec Total 0 1 12 29 25 18 6 7 5 5 4 0 112 2.3-4 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Probable hail size distribution is the following:Size Percentage Grain 3.0 Currant 22.1 Pea 44.5 Grape 19.4 Walnut 6.1 Golf ball 4.3 Tennis ball 0.6 100.0

2. Ice Storms. Ice storms are reported on the WBAN forms using the following categories:

a. Light and moderate freezing rain.

b. Freezing drizzle.

c. Sleet or sleet showers.

d. Heavy freezing drizzle.

e. Heavy freezing rain.

To facilitate the data search, the ice storm categories were broken up into two intensity groups as follows:Group I Light and moderate freezing rain Light and moderate freezing drizzle Sleet or sleet showers Group II Heavy freezing drizzle Heavy freezing rain For the Group I category, seasonal data for the 5-year period are as follows:Spring Number of Pasquill Average Wind Occurrences Stability Class Speed (knots) 28 D 12.8 1 E 5.0 2.3-5 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 The dominant wind direction for the 29 occurrences was east-northeast with 8 cases. The lowest wind speed observed was 5 knots.Summer No occurrences Fall Number of Pasquill Average Wind Occurrences Stability Class Speed (knots) 13 D 16.6 The dominant wind direction was from the northwest.Winter Number of Pasquill Average Wind Occurrences Stability Class Speed (knots) 13 C 2.7 155 D 10.0 36 E 4.9 21 F 2.8 225 Summary (all seasons)Number of Pasquill Average Wind Occurrences Stability Class Speed (knots) 13 C 2.7 196 D 10.9 37 E 4.9 21 F 2.8 267 2.3-6 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Of the 225 winter occurrences, only 15 occurrences during the 5-year interval were of greater duration than 2 hours. The persistence associated with these 15 occurrences is as follows:Number of Persistence Occurrences (hr) 6 3 7 4 1 5 1 10 15 For the single 10-hr persistence recording, the associated average wind speed was 7.3 knots.Pasquill stability classes in all cases were D and E.For Group II (heavy freezing drizzle, heavy freezing rain), there was only a single occurrence during the 5-year period. This was a winter occurrence and was associated with Pasquill Stability Class D and 15-knot winds.Additional data on ice storms are contained in Reference 7, as follows:Number of Days with Freezing Precipitation (1939-1948 Data)Dubuque Des Moines Nov 1 8 Dec 13 35 Jan 6 20 Feb 7 16 Mar 11 12 38 91 It should be noted that the frequency data associated with this report are expressed in number of days with freezing precipitation whereas the Des Moines Municipal Airport data are expressed in number of hourly occurrences; hence the results cannot be directly compared.The significantly lower frequency at Dubuque appears to be associated with a trend to a progressively lower frequency of occurrence of ice storms at locations eastward from Des Moines. Accordingly, the Des Moines data should be conservative for application to the Palo site.2.3-7 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1

3. Fog The total hours of observed fog at the Des Moines Airport Weather Station are summarized by month in Table 2.3-2 for the 5 years of data examined. On the average, about 50% of all the hours of natural fog occurrence will occur during the winter third of the year (December through March). Table 2.3-2 also shows that fog is least likely to occur during the warmer months of the year. The average frequency of occurrence of fog is 961 hr/yr or 10.9%.

The dependence of fog occurrence on stability category is illustrated by the annual summary presented in Table 2.3-3. For the data shown in Table 2.3-3, it is seen that fog tends to occur most frequently during neutral conditions (Stability Class D), and is least likely to occur during unstable conditions (Stability Class B). For those cases where fog was recorded, 85.6%occurred under neutral conditions.Average wind speeds associated with each stability class shown in Table 2.3-3 are as follows:Pasquill Average Wind Stability Class Speed (knots)A --B 3.5 C 5.2 D 9.0*E 5.9 F 4.5 G 2.8 In order to evaluate fog intensity, a separate computer search was conducted for fog hours associated with less than 1/8-mile visibility. Out of the total 43,000-hr record, only 223 hr were associated with visibility less than 1/8 mile for a probability of 5.2 x 10-3. Stability classes associated with these low-visibility fogs were skewed to more stable conditions--23.8% Pasquill Stability Class E with 5.2-knot average wind speeds and 16.1% Pasquill Stability Class F with 2.8-knot average wind speeds. The dominant stability regime was again neutral with 60% of low-visibility fog hr associated with Pasquill Stability Classes C and D.2.3.1.2.3 Ultimate Heat Sink See Section 1.8.27 for a discussion of this topic.

• Average of daytime and nighttime values.

2.3-8 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 2.3.2 LOCAL METEOROLOGY An examination of weather records from nearby weather stations indicates that the climatology of the site is continental in nature. Average annual rainfall is 33.27 in., with 70% of the rainfall occurring during the months of April through September. Maximum monthly rainfall is 12 to 13 in. Snowfall averages 31 in. per season.Severe weather is characterized by thunderstorms, which occur predominantly in the months of May through August, and tornados. There are about 20 tornados per year observed in Iowa. Seismic Category I structures are designed to withstand a tornado with a maximum tangential wind velocity of 300 mph, a transverse velocity of 60 mph, and an external vacuum of 3.0-psi gauge developed within 3 sec.The mean wind speed at the site, based on 12-month data, is 3.6 m/sec at 33 ft and 5.3 m/sec at 156 ft. Based on the same 12-month data, the most frequent winds are from the south at both levels with a secondary maximum from north-northwest.Condensed meteorological summaries are shown in Tables 2.3-4 through 2.3-8 for the period January 8, 1971, to January 7, 1972. Onsite data recovery for the year was equal to or greater than 92.8% for all parameters.From these tables, it would appear that a Pasquill F stability category and a 1 m/sec wind are conservative meteorological parameters to use as input to accident analyses.In support of conversion to the 10 CFR 50.67 Alternate Source Term, DAEC performed a new meteorological data assessment using two years of data collected from January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1999. This assessment is described in the Reference 8 amendment request. The assessment included use of the PAVAN and ARCON96 codes to derive new X/Q values. In Reference 9, the NRC granted a partial scope amendment approving the use of the alternate source term for the fuel handling accident. In Reference 10, the NRC granted the full scope implementation for the alternate source term methods for Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA), Main Steam Line Break (MSLB) and Control Rod Drop Accident (CRDA). The CRDA analysis was updated later and approved in Reference 11.2.3.3 ONSITE METEOROLOGICAL MEASUREMENTS PROGRAM An instrumented meteorological tower 1700 ft south-southeast of the reactor building (1125 ft southeast of the offgas stack) has been in operation since January 10, 1971.The meteorological system was upgraded in 1985 with redundant instrumentation to make meteorological measurements with more reliability and provide meteorological data input to the emergency response plume model. Meteorological variables that are measured and/or calculated are displayed in the control room on a paperless recorder for use during plant operation and are input to the safety parameter display system (SPDS) computer system for input to the emergency response plume model and for historical data recording. The meteorological system is powered from two separate power sources through an automatic transfer switch.Primary power is supplied from an essential bus, and backup power is supplied from a lighting 2.3-9 Revision 20 - 8/09

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 distribution panel. System performance requirements are such as to ensure at least an annual 90% joint data recovery for the individual meteorological parameters.Redundant (primary and backup) parameters measured are wind speed, wind direction, temperature, and wind directional variability at both 156 and 33 ft above grade, and temperature difference between 156 and 33 ft. Additional variables include dewpoint at 33 ft and precipitation at grade level. Plant grade (base of reactor building) has been raised by fill to a level of 12 ft higher than the base of the meteorological tower. This fill does not interfere aerodynamically with flow around the lower wind sensor because of the distances involved (fill is 700 ft from base of tower). It does mean the wind sensor is 21 ft higher than reactor grade but 33 ft above the base of the tower and flood plain.In 1987, the method of mounting the wind speed and direction sensors was modified.The modification consisted of providing separate booms, 180 degrees apart, for the redundant instruments. The primary instrument boom is oriented to the west and the backup boom is to the east. Tower wake effects are thereby minimized for the most prevalent wind directions.For the meteorological system, specific ranges and system accuracies of time-averaged values by parameter are

1. Wind speed.

 +/-0.5 mph (+/-0.22 m/sec) for speeds less than or equal to 25 mph (11.13 m/sec) and +/-1.0 mph (+/-0.44 m/sec) for speeds greater than 25 mph. Range 0 to 100 mph.

2. Wind direction.

 +/-5 degrees of azimuth. Range 0 to 540 degrees.

3. Air temperature.

 +/-0.9°F (+/-0.5°C). Range -40°F to 120°F (accuracy maintained from -40°F to 107.6°F).

4. Temperature difference.

 +/-0.22°F for the 37.5-m height difference of the DAEC meteorological tower levels.

Range -9°F to 18°F relative to temperature at the 33-ft level.

5. Dewpoint.

 +/-2.7°F (+/-1.5°C) for relative humidity greater than 60% and temperature between -22°F and 86°F (-30°C and 30°C) and +/-4.5°F (+/-2.5°C) for conditions outside of the above range. Range -40°F to 120°F (accuracy maintained from -40°F to 107.6°F).

2.3-10 Revision 19 - 9/07

UFSAR/DAEC - 1

6. Precipitation.

Measured by recording rain gauge with an accuracy of recorded value +/-10% of total catch. Resolution of 0.01 in. Handles rainfall rates up to 2 in./hr.

7. Other characteristics include

1. Wind speed sensor starting threshold.

 <1 mph (0.45 m/sec).

2. Wind direction sensor starting threshold.

 <1 mph (0.45 m/sec).

3. Wind direction sensor damping ratio.

0.4 to 0.6 inclusive with deflection of 15 degrees and delay distance not to exceed 2m.(The delay distance is defined as the distance that air flowing past a wind vane moves while the vane is responding to 50% of the step change in wind direction.)

4. Wind direction variability, sigma theta (), the standard deviation of the horizontal wind direction fluctuations, is provided and is calculated from 180 instantaneous values of lateral wind direction during the 15-min recording period. The standard deviation calculator is able to accept wind direction input of 0 to 540 degrees and produces an output proportional to standard deviations of 0 to 100 degrees.

Observations are averaged and recorded on a digital recorder located in the reactor control room and on the computer disk storage associated with the plume model software.From previous average half-hourly (one per hour) observations, seasonal and annual summaries have been prepared for both the 33- and 156-foot levels as follows.Joint frequency distribution of wind speed and direction by stability class was determined by the 33- to 156-ft temperature difference (T) in accordance with the table, given below:2.3-11 Revision 16 - 11/01

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 TPasquill Class (°C/100 m)A T -1.9 B -1.9 < T -1.7 C -1.7 < T -1.5 D -1.5 < T -0.5 E -0.5 < T +1.5 F +1.5 < T +4.0 G* +4.0 < T Joint frequency distribution of wind speed and direction by stability class was determined by directional variability () in accordance with the table below:Pasquill Class A 22.5 B 17.5 < 22.5 C 12.5 < 17.5 D 7.5 < 12.5 E 3.8 < 7.5 F 2.1 < 3.8 G < 2.1 Wind directional persistence is by 22.5-degree sectors.2.3.4 SHORT-TERM DIFFUSION ESTIMATES The radiological effects of design-basis accidents are considered in Chapter 15. The Gaussian diffusion model used in these calculations is also described in Chapter 15, as are the meteorological diffusion evaluation methods.In addition, the radiological effects calculations are repeated using the assumptions of AEC-DRL embodied in AEC Safety Guide 3 and Safety Guide 5. The meteorological diffusion assumptions inherent in these safety guides are listed in Section 1.8 for the loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) and steam-line-break accident.The field meteorological program has been designed to provide data to confirm that the diffusion parameters inherent in the assumptions used in these meteorological models are conservative.It is Iowa Electrics opinion that a G stability classification is made arbitrarily simply to reflect a category worse than F when F has a high frequency of occurrence. Iowa Electric knows of no sound technical basis or experimental data that would justify the assignment of smaller values to G than to F. In reality, a G classification determined by T greater than 4.0°C/100 m, is more apt to produce a y value similar to an A category because of plume meander. The G category is, therefore, included only to facilitate regulatory review.2.3-12 Revision 16 - 11/01

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Frequency distributions of annual X/Q values have been compiled by computing X/Q each hour for 1 year using a "split-sigma" approach (i.e., y was determined from and z was determined from the concurrent T between 156 and 33 ft. For the steam-line break, the 33-ft wind readings were used, and for the LOCA and other elevated releases, the 156-ft wind readings were employed. Since the offgas stack is twice the height of the meteorology tower, the 156-ft wind and the 156- to 33-ft temperature difference will be conservative, showing a higher frequency of low wind speeds and stable atmospheric conditions than probably actually occurs at the stack release point.In support of conversion to the 10 CFR 50.67 Alternate Source Term, DAEC performed a new meteorological data assessment using two years of data collected from January 1, 1997 through December 31, 1999. This assessment is described in the Reference 8 amendment request. The assessment included use of the PAVAN and ARCON96 codes to derive new X/Q values. In Reference 9, the NRC granted a partial scope amendment approving the use of the alternate source term for the fuel handling accident. In Reference 10, the NRC granted full scope amendment implementing alternate source term methodology for Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA), Main Steam Line Break (MSLB) and Control Rod Drop Accident (CRDA).The CRDA analysis was updated later and approved in Reference 11.2.3-13 Revision 19 - 9/07

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.3

1. U. S. Department of Commerce, "Climatological Summary, Cedar Rapids, Iowa,"

Climatography of the United States, No. 20-30, Weather Bureau.

2. U. S. Department of Commerce, Maximum Recorded United States Point Rainfall, Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. 2, Washington, D.C., 1947.

3. U. S. Department of Commerce, Mean Number of Thunderstorm Days in the United States, Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. 19, Washington, D.C., 1952.

4. H. C. S. Thom, "Tornado Probabilities," Monthly Weather Review, October-December, 1963.

5. U. S. Department of Commerce, Tornado Occurrences in the United States, Weather Bureau Technical Paper No. 20, Washington, D. C., revised 1960 (Supplements 1960, 1961, 1962, 1963, 1964, and 1965).

6. U. S. Army, Hail Size and Distribution, Technical Report EP-83, Quartermaster Research and Engineering Command, 1958.

7. U. S. Army, Glaze, It's Meteorology and Climatology, Geographical Distribution, and Economic Effects, Technical Report EP-105, Quartermaster Research and Engineering Command, 1959.

8. Letter from Gary Van Middlesworth (NMC DAEC) to Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation Technical Specification Change Request (TSCR-037): Alternative Source Term dated October 19, 2000.

9. Letter from Darl S. Hood (NRC) to Gary Van Middlesworth (NMC DAEC) Duane Arnold Energy Center - Issuance of Amendment Regarding Secondary Containment Operability During Movement Irradiated Fuel and Core Alternations (TAC No. MB1569) dated April 16, 2001.

10. Letter from Brenda Mozafari (NRC) to Gary VanMiddlesworth (NMC DAEC) Duane Arnold Energy Center - Issuance of Amendment Regarding Alternative Source Term (TAC No. MB0347) dated July 31, 2001.

11. Letter from Richard Ennis (USNRC) to Gary Van Middlesworth (FPL Energy), Duane Arnold Energy Center - Issuance of Amendment Regarding Elimination of Main Steam Line Radiation Monitor Trip Function (TAC NO. MC8883), November 15, 2006.

2.3-14 Revision 19 - 9/07

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.3-1 FREQUENCY (Years) OF MAXIMUM RAINFALL (In.)BY VARIOUS TIME INTERVALS AT CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA Return Period (years) 30 Min 1Hr 2 Hr 3 Hr 6 Hr 12 Hr 24 Hr 1 1.0 1.3 1.6 1.7 2.0 2.3 2.7 2 1.3 1.6 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.8 3.2 5 1.6 2.0 2.3 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 10 1.8 2.2 2.7 2.9 3.4 4.0 4.7 25 2.0 2.6 3.0 3.3 3.9 4.5 5.2 50 2.2 2.8 3.3 3.7 4.3 5.0 5.9 100 2.5 3.1 3.8 4.0 4.9 5.8 6.6 Table 2.3-2 OBSERVED HOURS OF FOG OCCURRENCE BY MONTH AND YEAR FOR THE DES MOINES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT Month 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 Avg.Jan -- 242 61 33 139 60 107 Feb -- 103 140 212 149 78 136 Mar -- 138 134 194 170 30 133 Apr -- 43 58 54 53 59 53 May -- 37 65 57 110 30 60 June -- 106 42 59 10 44 52 July -- 46 55 80 49 37 53 Aug -- 26 80 50 76 19 50 Sept -- 63 89 24 121 99 79 Oct -- 72 45 117 20 42 59 Nov -- 52 113 50 69 71 71 Dec 238 33 189 38 41 -- 108 Total --- 961 1071 968 1007 --- 961 T2.3-1 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.3-3 ANNUAL FREQUENCY OF OCCURRENCE OF ATMOSPHERIC STABILITY CONDITIONS FOR THE DES MOINES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT (Fog Observations)Stability Index A B C D E F G Day 0.02 0.73 3.16 45.34 Night 40.25 4.35 4.20 1.95 Table 2.3-4 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF STABILITY CATEGORIES FOR ALL WIND DIRECTIONS (January 8, 1971-January 7, 1972)Stability Frequency as determined by:Class T (156-33 ft) (33 ft) (156 ft)A 3.2 7.9 2.2 B 2.7 7.6 3.4 C 5.1 18.2 12.3 D 42.5 32.5 31.2 E 29.7 21.1 28.4 F 7.2 9.2 15.5 G 9.6 4.0 7.0 T2.3-2 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.3-5 ANNUAL WINDS EQUAL TO STATED VALUES (33-ft Level)(January 8, 1971-January 7, 1972)Stability m/sec( category) 0.1-0.5 0.6-1.0 1.1-1.5 1.6-2.0 A 60 124 95 77 B 25 61 80 73 C 43 103 124 161 D 45 112 158 210 E 40 72 112 146 F 33 66 72 69 G 88 87 62 22 Total observations = 8347 5% = 417 Summation of occurrences within lower left corner = 376, hence worst condition is equal to or better than F stability and 1.0 m/sec.T2.3-3 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.3-6 MAXIMUM PERSISTENCE (Hr) BY WIND DIRECTION (22.5 Sector) ALL STABILITY CATEGORIES (January 8, 1971-January 7, 1972)Direction 33 Ft 156 Ft NNE 9 13 NE 7 5 ENE 6 8 E 7 5 ESE 9 8 SE 8 8 SSE 13 15 S 16 16 SSW 6 7 SW 8 8 WSW 5 4 W 10 10 WNW 11 9 NW 10 14 NNW 12 11 N 11 14 T2.3-4 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.3-7 AVERAGE WIND SPEED (156-ft Level) BY STABILITY CATEGORY (Determined by T)(January 8, 1971-January 7, 1972) m/sec Category Spring Summer Fall Winter Annual A 8.7 5.0 5.3 6.4 5.9 B 5.8 4.7 5.3 9.8a 5.2 C 5.4 4.4 5.1 5.4a 4.9 D 5.7 4.1 5.2 5.1 5.5 E 6.5 3.8 4.9 5.4 5.1 F 3.2 3.0 3.4 4.6 3.5 G 2.3 2.1 2.3 3.1 2.3 aLess than obs.T2.3-5 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.3-8 ANNUAL WINDS EQUAL TO STATED VALUES (156-ft Level)(January 8, 1971-January 7, 1972)Stability m/sec (T category) 0.1-0.5 0.6-1.0 1.1-1.5 1.6-2.0 A 1 3 2 3 B 0 2 2 4 C 0 5 11 21 D 25 48 111 139 E 28 49 56 112 F 18 28 39 49 G 73 80 87 114 Total observations = 8134 5% = 407 Summation of occurrences within lower left corner of matrix = 314. Hence 5% worst value is equivalent or slightly better than F stability and 1.0 m/sec wind speed.T2.3-6 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING 2.4.1 HYDROLOGIC DESCRIPTION The site is on the west bank of the Cedar River, 133.5 river miles above its confluence with the Iowa River. Figure 2.4-1 depicts the site location relative to the drainage basin above Cedar Rapids and also shows the location of stream gauging stations pertinent to hydrologic studies.The Cedar River is the largest tributary of the Iowa River. Drainage area at the mouth is 7819 mi2, 1024 of which are in Minnesota. Drainage area above the plant site is approximately 6250 mi2. Basin topography is variable and typical of central Iowa farm country. The Cedar River flood plain is also variable but in general ranges from relatively narrow valley slopes to broad plains 3 to 4 miles wide. These topographic characteristics have a marked effect on flood peaks, with valley storage tending to reduce flood waves as they proceed from the upper regions of the valley.Average flow of the Cedar River at Cedar Rapids is 3301 cfs computed from a period of continuous records dating back to 1902. Records at this gauge, which is only 20.8 river miles downstream from the site, can be considered as representative of site discharges as there is little additional inflow or outflow between the two points. The flow occurrence curve for the Cedar Rapids gauge is shown in Figure 2.4-2, which indicates that the flow exceeds 620 cfs 90% of the time and 6600 cfs 10% of the time.Flow occurrence is based on mean daily discharges. Figure 2.4-3 illustrates the seasonal variation of monthly average and extreme flows.At the time of the initial FSAR, the maximum flood of record at Cedar Rapids had occurred on March 31, 1961, and had reached a peak of 73,000 cfs. This flood reached a stage of 746.5 ft at the plant site. Table 2.4-1 outlines the discharge expected at Cedar Rapids for various return frequencies and the corresponding stage at the site.Agricultural withdrawals of water are made at a few locations for irrigation purposes. Such withdrawals are regulated by permit from the Iowa Conservation Commission. At the time of the initial FSAR (1972), communication with the Iowa Conservation Commission revealed that only one permit had been issued for withdrawal between the DAEC site and the City of Cedar Rapids. This permit holder was Mr. Alfred Frantz, who farmed 198 acres immediately to the south of the DAEC site. The potential for irrigation at the Frantz farm was recognized in the establishment of the DAEC environmental radiation monitoring program described in Section 11.5, and the Frantz farm is designated as sampling location 74 in original FSAR Table 2.7-1. An interview with the owner established that the irrigation system associated with this farm had not been operative for a number of years. In addition, there were no plans for use except in case of severe drought. The acreage subject to irrigation was 40 acres, and the crops grown were corn and soybeans. The irrigation pump capacity was 600 gpm.2.4-1 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 For the stretch of river between Cedar Rapids and the junction of the Iowa and Cedar Rivers, the Iowa Conservation Commission advised that only one irrigation permit had been issued. This was for the Bulichek farm located just outside Cedar Rapids.According to Iowa Conservation Commission records, the Bulichek farm had not made an irrigation withdrawal since 1968. Subsequent communication with the owner revealed that this permit had recently been canceled as the land formerly subject to irrigation had been sold to the City of Cedar Rapids for use as a park.For irrigation withdrawals at less than 500 gpm, no permit is required. Local, state, and federal agricultural agencies were queried to determine if any additional withdrawals occur. Other than the possibility of irrigation by a few bluegrass sod farms, irrigation without permit does not take place.2.4.2 FLOODS 2.4.2.1 Flood History Flood data are contained in Appendix H of the DAEC PSAR.The estimated peak discharge associated with the standard project flood at the DAEC site is 166,000 cfs as derived from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Plain Information Study of Linn County and referenced in Appendix H of the DAEC PSAR.2.4.2.2 Flood Design Considerations Flood protection measures for seismic structures are discussed in Section 3.4.1.2.4.2.3 Effects of Local Intense Precipitation The probable maximum precipitation storm will not cause the failure of any safety-related structures or equipment either because of local flooding or failure of roof structures and their appurtenances. This is discussed further in Section 3.4.1.1.5.2.4.3 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD ON STREAMS AND RIVERS 2.4.3.1 Probable Maximum Precipitation Complete data on probable maximum precipitation characteristics and distribution are presented in Appendix H, "Maximum Probable Flood," of the DAEC PSAR.Establishing the probable maximum flood (PMF) level at the plant site was necessary to properly design and locate critical components and to provide the necessary protective measures against such a remote occurrence. The site natural grade level in the vicinity of the plant varies from above elevation 746 ft to elevation 750 ft. As noted in Section 2.4.1, the maximum flood of record at the site occurred in 1961 and rose to 2.4-2 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 elevation 746.5 ft. The standard project flood as determined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers would flood the plant site to elevation 754.5 ft. Consequently, the plant site finished grade is at elevation 757.0 ft. The computed maximum probable flood would have a discharge of 316,000 cfs and would reach an elevation of 764.1 ft at the site.In addition, a possible wave height of 2.8 ft, including runup, was computed as caused by a sustained wind of 45 mph acting over a maximum fetch of 1.5 miles. Thus, the facility was designed during the construction permit period of review to resist flood waters to an elevation of 767.0 feet. Further review of the wave action and runup caused by winds resulted in additional requirements accepted by the DAEC for additional flood protection. The details are discussed in Section 3.4.1. The Cedar River reached a peak stage of 751 feet with an approximate discharge flow of 110,000 CFS on June 13, 2008.Due to the gentle topography existing in the river valley, a landslide could not occur of a magnitude that would result in a water level at the site that would approach that of the probable maximum flood.Figure 2.4-3a shows existing dams and lakes in the basin surrounding the site.Two combined overbank and channel cross sections are shown in Figures 2.4-4 and 2.4-5. Figure 2.4-4 represents the valley cross section in the immediate vicinity of the safety-related facilities and is the cross section used for final determination of the maximum probable flood at the site as described in Appendix H of the DAEC PSAR.Figure 2.4-5 represents the valley cross section at the next significant point of change in upstream valley characteristics.The water-level estimate for the probable maximum flood in the vicinity of safety-related facilities is discussed in detail in Appendix H of the PSAR. Supplemental information is shown in Figure 2.4-6, which outlines the water-surface profile expected within the plant property boundaries for the following:

1. The historical flood of record, March 1961.

2. The intermediate regional flood.

3. The standard project flood.

4. The probable maximum flood.

Information pertaining to items 1 through 4 was obtained from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Flood Plain Information Study of Linn County. The PMF profile was derived from the studies described in Appendix H of the PSAR. The coefficients used in the derivation of PMF levels are indicated in Figures 2.4-4 and 2.4-5. These coefficients were determined through combined considerations of onsite field inspections and aerial photograph analysis. Verification was made by comparisons with coefficients derived by the Corps of Engineers for similar types of ground cover as a part of their flood plain studies.2.4-3 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.4.3.2 Precipitation Losses See Appendix H of the DAEC PSAR and Section 2.4.3.3.2.4.3.3 Runoff and Stream Course Models The hydrologic response characteristics and model verification are discussed in detail in Appendix H of the DAEC PSAR.To develop hydrographs of flood flows from the main tributaries under maximum probable storm conditions, unit hydrographs were first developed at main gauging stations on each of the five tributaries, using storms and recorded floods on these tributaries for this purpose.To develop a unit hydrograph suitable for application to a maximum probable storm, theory requires that some storm and flood of record be found that satisfies the following two principal criteria:

1. The storm rainfall should be fairly evenly distributed over the drainage area and intense enough to produce surface runoff.

2. The flood hydrograph recorded at the gauging station should have a well-defined peak corresponding with the above rainfall.

Storms and recorded floods on the Cedar River basin that satisfy these two criteria have been extremely rare. This is because the travel paths of summer storms (the type producing a probable maximum flood) are generally from west to east, while the long and narrow subbasins are oriented in a north to south direction. A large number of the flood hydrographs produced by summer storms were considered inappropriate because the rainfall fell on only the lower or upper part of the subbasin. These conditions produce flood hydrographs that are either long and delayed or inordinately high and quick in developing. Neither of these conditions are satisfactory for unit hydrograph development (or verification).Of the few storms and recorded floods that most appropriately met the criteria, the best were chosen and used to develop the unit hydrographs for each of the subbasins. It is noteworthy that no single storm was found that could be applied over the entire upbasin drainage area.Herein lies the problem of unit hydrograph verification for the subbasins of the Cedar River. Because the best storms were used to develop the unit hydrographs, any computations using these as a basis for reproducing the flood hydrograph of another storm would be meaningless. It can be expected that the recorded and generated flood hydrographs would not be in agreement. The differences between the two would be due to the differences in storm pattern and intensity from which they were derived. There 2.4-4 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 would be no basis for changing the original unit hydrograph unless a suitable storm had occurred since the analysis was conducted. A review of the records has revealed no such storm.The flood routing from the upstream subareas to the DAEC plant site was broken up in two parts: (1) the short river reaches from the junction of the Cedar River with Beaver Creek up to the gauging stations above this point, and (2) the 70-mile reach from this junction down to the plant site.The flood routing in the reaches above the Beaver Creek junction was accomplished using a time-displacement approach based on recorded flood experience.More specifically, the flood peak velocities for the Cedar and Shell Rock Rivers were assumed to be 1.4 and 2.8 mph, respectively. These velocities are based on recorded flood experience for the storm of August 29-31, 1962, for Cedar River at Waterloo and the upstream gauging stations. The flood peak velocities for the other tributaries were then computed by assuming identical channel characteristics and by using the ratio of the square root of the channel slopes. On the basis of these velocities and the respective distances, travel times for the flood peaks were computed. The subbasin flood hydrographs were combined into a total flood hydrograph at the Beaver Creek junction by offsetting each one by the appropriate time differential and summing. This approach, although not based on a mathematical relationship of channel storage, yields an appropriate definition of the total flood discharge hydrograph over the short reaches involved at the upstream confluence point above Waterloo.This total flood hydrograph was then routed, as explained in Appendix H (DAEC PSAR), through the 70-mile reach to the plant site. For this reach, an effort was made to apply the commonly used Muskingrum flood-routing method of using recorded floods to develop routing coefficients. This method was found to be inappropriate because of the nonhom*ogeniety of the channel characteristics and if applied to the probable maximum flood would lead to uncertain results. The Muskingrum method was therefore abandoned and the more tedious Graves method of measuring channel volumes and computing stage-discharge relationships was employed. The Graves method does not use routing coefficients as such.1 2.4.3.4 Probable Maximum Flood Flow Flood flow is discussed in Section 2.4.3.3 above.2.4.3.5 Water Level Determinations See Section 2.4.3.1.2.4.3.6 Coincident Wind Wave Activity See Section 2.4.3.1.2.4-5 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.4.4 POTENTIAL DAM FAILURES, SEISMICALLY INDUCED There are 12 low-head dams on streams within the Cedar River basin that have been built primarily for power purposes, either as hydroelectric facilities or as a source of water for thermal plant cooling. These dams all have small impoundments and do not affect either peak discharge during large floods or stream flow regulation during low-flow periods. They would be submerged under PMF levels and failure would not affect the flood level at the plant site. There are also four natural and five artificial lakes located in the headwater areas of tributaries; they are used primarily for recreational purposes. Figure 2.4-3a shows dams and lakes in the Cedar River basin.2.4.5 PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGE AND SEICHE FLOODING Not applicable to DAEC site.2.4.6 PROBABLE MAXIMUM TSUNAMI FLOODING Not applicable to DAEC site.2.4.7 ICE EFFECTS Consideration was given to the possibility of ice jams creating a higher flood level, but an inspection of valley topography reveals that at no point could ice create a flood wave approaching that of the probable maximum flood. As a result of the above indications, all essential structures have been designed for flood protection to elevation 767.0 ft.2.4.8 COOLING WATER CANALS AND RESERVOIRS See Section 9.2.2.2.4.9 CHANNEL DIVERSIONS See Sections 2.4.7 and 9.2.2.2.4.10 FLOODING PROTECTION REQUIREMENTS Flood protection is discussed in Section 3.4.1.2.4.11 LOW-WATER CONSIDERATIONS Figure 2.4-7 shows the result of a statistical analysis of drought flow conditions at the USGS gauge station in Cedar Rapids. It is expected that over the long term, the once in 50 year, 7-day average flow at the site may drop to 220 cfs while the corresponding 2.4-6 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 single-day flow may fall to 200 cfs. The minimum daily average flow recorded at Cedar Rapids is 212 cfs.The rates of population and industrial growth in the Cedar River basin above the DAEC site are low, and the projection of these rates does not indicate a substantial increase in water demand within the next 50 years. Therefore, it is not considered to be possible that increased water demand in combination with the extremely conservative 1000-year minimum flow of 60 cfs would approach the minimum requirement of 13 cfs.There are no storage facilities of importance in the Cedar River basin above the DAEC site, and planning studies by state and Federal agencies do not indicate that such storage will be needed or constructed within the next 50 years. Therefore, it is not possible for extremely low flows to be caused by the operation of such installations.2015-005 The design of the DAEC Iowa Vanes, guidewall, Spur Dikes (Wing Dams) and intake structure ensures that during periods of low flow all available river flow is diverted to the intake structure and to the river water supply pumps. A minimum 6 ft 0 in.submergence is maintained to ensure that no cavitation occurs. A minimum submergence of 2 ft 7 in. is necessary to prevent cavitation of the river water supply pumps.2.4.12 DISPERSION, DILUTION, AND TRAVEL TIMES OF ACCIDENTAL RELEASES OF LIQUID EFFLUENTS IN SURFACE WATERS The Cedar Rapids municipal water supply system as of 1981 consists of 31 wells with an average depth of 65 ft. All wells have 30-in. casings and intake screens of 10 to 15 ft in length; they are located in the Cedar River Valley 50 to 300 ft from the riverbank.These wells have a total estimated capacity of 42 mgd and the present average daily usage is 22.6 mgd. The single maximum day withdrawal was over 33.8 mgd. Before distribution to the city water users, the water is softened by a soda-ash treatment called "excess lime softening." This is very effective in removing particulate matter from the water. The present treatment capacity of the treatment facility is 52 mgd.There is no correlation between Cedar River flow and emergency water withdrawal directly from the Cedar River by the municipal water system. The original low-lift pumping station is maintained intact, but would not be used unless there were a power failure or a breakage in mains coming from the pumping fields. If the water plant experienced a total loss of power, it would be able to withdraw only 5 mgd using two gasoline engines. If power was available and a well main was not available, it could withdraw directly from the low lift station. This water would also be softened before distribution. It is therefore an extremely remote possibility that any water used for drinking within the City of Cedar Rapids will come directly from the river. Cedar Rapids is the only major city using Cedar River water between the DAEC plant site and the Mississippi River. All other communities located on the river are less than 1000 population with one exception, which is less than 5000 population.2.4-7 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 In Section 10.2.1 of the Revised Environmental Report, an analysis was made of the worst inadvertent pumpage of radioactive water. This consisted of a 20 min discharge at a 50-gpm rate of radioactive water having a concentration of 3 x 10-3 Ci/cc to the river. The resultant dose was 0.068 man-rem exposure to people drinking water from the municipal water system in Cedar Rapids, if all of the Cedar Rapids supply had been taken directly from the river. As noted above, this is an extremely remote possibility.In Section 11.3.3 of the Revised Environmental Report, a dose resulting from a nonmechanistic failure of all liquid radwaste tanks within the radwaste building was calculated. The resultant calculated total fraction of maximum permissible concentration at the first municipal water intake was 0.04. Again, this radioactivity would not be taken into the Cedar Rapids water distribution system unless the river was being used as a direct source.Precise quantitative studies have not been conducted to determine travel times for various river flow conditions between the DAEC plant site and the Cedar Rapids water intake. However, it has been estimated that for a 1500 cfs river flow, a minimum of a 9-hr travel time could be expected. If a slug of liquid was injected into the river at the plant site and had traveled to the Cedar Rapids intake point, again at 1500 cfs flow, it is estimated that this slug would pass the intake in 3 hours.See Section 11.5.7 for a discussion of the environmental radioactivity monitoring program.2.4.13 GROUND WATER 2.4.13.1 Description and Onsite Use In the Cedar River basin of Iowa, ground water is obtained from two main sources:shallow wells in unconsolidated glacial and surficial deposits, and deep wells into any of three underlying bedrock aquifers. Wells in glacial deposits usually range between 70 and 200 ft deep depending on location. Wells in rock range between 300 and 1700 ft deep depending on location and on whether the upper, middle, or lower aquifer is tapped.

1. Jordan Aquifer The lower rock aquifer is estimated to lie within the depth range of 1000 to 1700 ft below ground at the plant site. This aquifer is composed of Ordovician and Cambrian rocks, which include St. Peter sandstone, Prairie du Chien dolomite and sandstone, Jordan sandstone, and St. Lawrence dolomite. The Jordan sandstone is the most prolific source of ground water.

Water is under high artesian pressure. Well production is about 10 gpm/ft of pumping drawdown. Many wells in this region produce in excess of 1000 gpm of good 2.4-8 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 quality water. There are no plans to develop the Jordan aquifer as a primary water supply for the plant since the Jordan aquifer is a sandstone aquifer which cannot tolerate excessive pumping; alternate wet and dry conditions would lead to ultimate crumbling and collapse.

2. Shallow Aquifers Many adequate supplies of good water are obtained from sand and gravel aquifers in the surficial deposits that overlie the bedrock. These are replenished by direct precipitation, periodic flooding, and, where adequate underground hydraulic connections with streambeds exist, by river recharge.

Borings indicate that two aquifers underlie most of the site area, an upper water table aquifer composed of fine to medium sand, and a lower artesian-type aquifer in weathered rock. The two aquifers are separated by 10 to 60 ft of relatively impervious clayey material. Boring logs and water-level measurements indicate that this clay aquiclude is probably continuous over most of the site area. This clay extends above and below river bottom elevation at most boring locations.Ground-water measurements indicate that flows in the upper aquifer are toward the river in a general southeasterly direction across the site. Pressure surface contours indicate that flows in the lower aquifer are also in this same general direction.Since the aquifer below the clay is under considerable pressure in the natural state, any ground-water transfer between the two aquifers would be from the lower into the upper aquifer. With the production wells operating, the lower aquifer pressure could be lower than the surface water table in the immediate vicinity of these wells. Under this circ*mstance, ground-water transfer could possibly be reversed over a long period of time.In support of the site Ground Water Protection Program, 6 pair of monitoring wells were installed at the site in 2006. The wells were drilled in pairs. A pair consisting of a shallow well drilled to the base of the upper alluvial aquifer and a deeper well drilled to the base of the clay aquiclude. Water table elevation data gathered from the shallow wells has indicated lateral movement of the shallow groundwater on site to be variable.Groundwater flow directions trended from southwesterly to southeasterly.2011-010 6 additional pairs of ground water monitoring wells were installed at the site in 2011 in support of the site Groundwater Protection Program. Of these 6 pairs of wells, 5 pairs were installed in close proximity to below-grade plant systems containing radioactive liquids. The 6th pair was installed approximately 600 feet south-east of the plant. These will complete an arc of monitoring wells located on the south side of the site.2.4-9 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2015-008 4 additional pairs of ground water monitoring wells were installed in 2015. One pair of monitoring wells was installed in the southwestern area of the site. Three pairs of monitoring wells, one pair in the southern, one pair in the eastern and one pair in the southeastern area of the site were also installed.2016-010 Six (6) additional ground water monitoring wells were installed inside the Protected Area in 2016. Four shallow monitoring wells are located in close proximity to the south wall of the Turbine Building; two others are located southeast of the Turbine Building. The purpose of these wells is to detect and assist in locating the source of any contamination in the alluvial ground water.Two (2) shallow ground water extraction wells were also installed in 2016. One well is located southwest of the Turbine Building adjacent to the Protected Area security fence, and the other well is south of the SOCA fence, in the path of normal groundwater flow southeast of the Turbine Building, for the purpose of extracting and treating any identified contaminated ground water.2015-008 Modeling indicated downward flow into the Limestone; therefore, a single deep 2016-010 monitoring well was also installed in 2015 into the Limestone formation to detect potential contamination in the Limestone Aquifer.Groundwater flow direction at the base of the clay rich till was also variable.Ground water flow directions trended from southeasterly to northeasterly. This variability in lateral flow direction has been attributed to the operation of the site production wells which are acting to lower the static water levels in both of the overlying aquifers. Although variability in lateral flow direction is indicated, the description in section 2.4.13.3 of a flow direction toward the river is accurate.Gradients causing flow are quite steep in both aquifers. Information collected on domestic wells within a 1-mile radius of the plant indicates that all domestic wells west and north of the plant are up the ground-water slope from the plant; that is, ground water flows past these wells toward the plant or along some other path directly toward the river.Domestic wells southwest and south of the plant are approximately 1 mile away and are not in the line of ground-water flow past the plant.Should the area be inundated by a Cedar River flood, infiltration would temporarily raise the general ground-water table. Some domestic wells south of the plant would be flooded. Those on higher ground would maintain their same relative positions on the general water table slope.In the Village of Palo, 2.5 miles south-southwest of the plant, the water table stands approximately 12 ft below average ground-surface elevation 745, or at elevation 733. Ground-water flow is in an easterly direction toward the river.2.4-10 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 A comprehensive subsurface exploration program was performed to establish the adequacy and quality of water available for plant use. Two production wells were drilled into the lower artesian aquifer in weathered rock, and a yield of 750 gpm for each well, pumping concurrently, was established. Test reports of water analysis indicated a good mineral quality.2.4.13.2 Sources There are no potable water supplies taken from the Cedar River surface water downstream of the DAEC. Irrigation uses are presented in Section 2.4.1. No permit is required nor is there any restriction on the withdrawal of water from the river for livestock watering, and no records are available.The primary user of water that could originate from the river is the City of Cedar Rapids. Some of the recharge for the city wells comes from the river at normal withdrawal, and under periods of no or low withdrawal no recharge comes from the river.In 1981, the average city water consumption was about 22.6 million gal per day (mgd) with a peak day consumption of approximately 33.8 million gal. It has been estimated that this will increase 2% to 5% per year. This system is expected to have an ultimate capacity of 42 mgd. Total storage capacity within the city system is approximately 16.3 million gal. All of the city water was supplied by wells located adjacent to the Cedar River. Because of this location, a large portion of the water withdrawn from these wells was recharged from the river. In addition, the city has an emergency standby system capable of withdrawing 24 mgd directly from the river.Within a 1.5-mile radius of the plant, there were 14 property owners having 1 or more wells. The use of these wells extended beyond potable supply to such items as swimming pools, livestock watering, and irrigation.Major industrial water use, within 50 miles downstream of the plant, is concentrated in the Cedar Rapids area. Primary uses of river water include condenser cooling and process water.Agricultural withdrawals are made at a few locations for irrigation purposes. In addition, limited recreational use is made of the river, particularly above the power plant dams in Cedar Rapids, and in the headwater area recreational lakes. The operation of the plant does not affect these activities.A map of surface water users is presented in Figure 2.4-8. The owner, depth of well, use rate, and type of use is presented in Table 2.4-2. The figure and table represent the situation at the time of the initial FSAR.In the Village of Palo, 2.5 miles southwest of the plant, there are about 140 homes with individual well points. These wells are 1-1/4 in. in diameter by 3 ft long and are driven to a depth of 18 ft. Static water level is about 12 ft below the surface. In addition 2.4-11 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 to residential well points, wells existed (at the time of the initial FSAR) at the school, church, two taverns, two groceries, a barber shop, a garage, the Legion Hall, and a feed store. There were also six fire plugs tied into two well points each. There was one 85-ft well belonging to Lyle Dodd.Assuming 3.5 persons per household, the average usage for each of these wells would be 175 gpd.Average water usage is based on the following:User Gallons per Day Human 50 Cow 35 Horse 12 Hog 3 Sheep 2 Each 100 chickens 3 Each 100 turkeys 5 Each 100 ducks 5 2.4-12 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.4.13.3 Accident Effects There are no wells that presently exist down gradient of the plant with respect to the upper aquifer. It is not expected that the gradient in the upper aquifer could change such that existing or future wells would be down gradient without a major geological change. Areas in the line of ground-water flow from areas of potential spills are all onsite property.2 Figure 2.4-9 was developed in 1968 to determine the potential for shallow wells3 in the vicinity of the site. Figure 2.4-10 indicates the location of observation wells in the site vicinity. The "S" wells are all shallow well points 10 to 20 ft deep tapping the upper aquifer. Table 2.4-3 gives these observations for a period of low-river stage, and a period of high-river stage. These observations confirm Figure 2.4-9. A generalized water table map of Linn County is given in Figure 2.4-11. Figure 2.4-11 further indicates the ground-water flow towards the river.Figure 2.4-12 is a generalized map of the piezometric surface of the Silurian-Devonian aquifer within Linn County. This lower aquifer also flows toward the rivers. The production wells tap this lower aquifer. Extensive pumping in the Cedar Rapids area has depressed the piezometric level about 105 ft in 70 years in the center of the area.A piezometric level map for the site area has not been developed. Information available from borings indicates that the flow in the lower aquifer is toward the river.Test results from production well tests indicate that the recharge comes from a northerly direction in the site vicinity. Observation wells into this aquifer are highly localized making it difficult to state the direction of flow other than toward the river. Any spill at the site would seep into the ground and into the upper aquifer. This worst-case spill is considered in Section 11.2.3.2.4.13.4 Monitoring or Safeguard Requirements Offsite wells west, southwest, south, and southeast of the site used for domestic water supplies at the time of the initial FSAR were sampled monthly and analyzed radiometrically in the same manner as surface waters. See Section 11.5.7. The identification of these wells was as follows:Bull residence, No. 57 West Frantz residence, No. 58 Southwest Frantz cottage, No. 59 Southeast Comp residence, No. 60 South See the Technical Specifications for the current monitoring program.2.4-13 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Section 11.2.3.5 presents an analysis of holdup in the ground-water system for a postulated release of radioactive liquids from the Nonseismic radwaste building. This analysis used a permeability of 10-2 cm/sec for the sand and clay soil mixture and an effective porosity of 15% on the basis of data obtained from well production studies done at the site.In the immediate vicinity of the site, land use is devoted strictly to farming, and no significant change in ground-water use is expected in the foreseeable future. This is substantiated by Table 2.1-2 which shows a 1980 population of 18 people within 1 mile of the plant versus a 2010 population estimate of 27 people shown on Figure 2.1-6.2.4.13.5 Design Bases for Subsurface Hydrostatic Loading See Section 2.5.4.10.2.4.14 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATION AND EMERGENCY OPERATION REQUIREMENTS The Technical Requirements Manual requires reactor shutdown if a flood on the Cedar River reaches the DAEC plant grade.2.4-14 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC-1 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.4

1. Graves, E. A. "Improved Method of Flood Routing," Journal of the Hydraulics Division, ASCE, 1967.

2. Water-Supply Bulletin, No. 10, Iowa Geological Survey.

3. Shallow Well Potential, 10,000 gpm, DAEC, near Palo, Iowa, Commonwealth Associates, Inc.

2.4-15 Revision 24 - 4/17

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-1 FLOOD FLOW-RETURN FREQUENCIES Return Period Peak Flow at Cedar Rapids Stage at Plant Site (years) (cfs) (ft ms1) 1 in 5 51,000 743.4 1 in 20 63,000 745.0 1 in 50 72,000 746.2 1 in 100 79,000 747.0 1 in 500 100,000 749.0 T2.4-1 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 1 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 1 Free Methodist Drilled 5-3/16 110 Devonian- 500 Church Silurian Formation 2 Clarence Drilled 120 Devonian- 200 Waterbury Silurian Formation 3 Ivan Oliphant Drilled 6 120 58 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 4 Jack Luke Drilled 6-1/4 112 54 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 5 Guy Cole Drilled 6 120 53 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 6 Merle Wilson Drilled 6 120 69 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 7 Stella Moore Drilled 6 105 60 Devonian- 300 Silurian Formation 8 Ralph Wildman Drilled 6-5/8 122 65 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 9 Ray Bowers Drilled 5-3/16 118 64 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 10 Meryl Bowers Drilled 5-3/16 104 16 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation T2.4-2 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 2 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 11 Jay Olinger Drilled 5-3/16 104 16 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 12 Lon Hagerman Drilled 5 108 31 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 13 Toddville School Drilled 200 Devonian- 850 Silurian Formation 14 Church of Christ Drilled 6-1/4 132 21 Devonian- 500 Silurian Formation 15 Pat Roob Drilled 6-1/4 140 38 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 16 Melvin McBurney Drilled 5 250 17 Russel McBurney Drilled 5 84 200 18 Don Harter Drilled 5 200 19 John Topinka Drilled 6 105 29 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 20 Alice Matheney Drilled 6-1/4 124 32 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 21 Bev Roman Drilled 5 165 110 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation T2.4-3 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 3 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 22 Lyle McBurney Drilled 6 110 110 Glacial 250 deposits immediately overlaying bedrock Lyle McBurney Drilled 7 330 124 Devonian- 500 Silurian Formation 22 Lyle McBurney Drilled 6 195 81 Devonian- 250 Silurian Formation 23 Dee Bowers Drilled 222 Devonian- 250 Silurian Formation 24 Richard Odin 25 Doug Milburn 26 Bob McCann 27 Carl Holsinger Drilled 6 150 49 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 28 Wensull Andrews Dug 18 Alluvial 200 sand 29 Virgil Newman Drilled 5 87 55 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 30 Ed Phillips Drilled 5-3/16 112 54 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation Note: No information available where name only appears T2.4-4 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 4 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 31 Hugo Chandler Drilled 5-3/16 108 50 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 32 Eddie Anderson Drilled 6-1/4 116 17 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 33 Bud Wilman Drilled 6-1/4 75 15 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 34 Bob Engle Drilled 6 210 82 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 35 Bud Wilman Drilled 6 225 85 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 36 Leander Hoff Drilled 6 250 88 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 37 Lowell Sissen Drilled 6 225 66 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 38 Ronald Lamp Drilled 6 180 34 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 39 Bill Hepker Drilled 6 190 135 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 40 Lyle Shakespear Drilled 5 150 150 Glacial 200 deposits immediately overlaying bedrock T2.4-5 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 5 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 41 Ed Cosgrove Drilled 5 130 108 Devonian 200 42 Charles Moore Drilled 6 180 180 Glacial 200 43 John Graves Drilled 6 180 180 Glacial 200 44 Tom Moore Drilled 5 160 200 45 Leo Ellis Drilled 3-3/16 110 94 Devonian 450 46 Bill Hanson Drilled 6-1/4 120 42 Devonian 450 47 Elsie Hepker Drilled 5-3/16 98 53 Devonian 450 48 Clarence Hepker Drilled 6-1/4 110 74 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 49 Ray Novy Drilled 6-1/4 92 67 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 50 Irene Morris Drilled 6 305 257 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 51 Clarence Morris Drilled 6 250 190 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 52 George Chrystle Drilled 6-1/4 178 89 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 53 Jim Washburn Drilled 6-1/4 168 66 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 54 Kiwanas Club Drilled 6 270 133 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation T2.4-6 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 6 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 55 Richard Schmadeke Drilled 5-3/16 158 158 Glacial 200 deposits immediatel yoverlaying bedrock 56 Clifton Mitchell Drilled 6 118 72 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 57 Eldee Bowers Drilled 6 123 105 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 58 Green Groves Drilled 6-1/4 100 28 Devonian- 200 Church Silurian Formation 59 Wallace Oliphant Drilled 6 150 26 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 60 Darress Oliphant Drilled 6-1/4 160 68 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 61 Don Booze Drilled 6-1/4 135 32 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 62 Bernita Coonrod Drilled 6-1/4 135 32 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 63 Tom McGenis Drilled 6 120 19 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 64 Harlan Bruce Drilled 6-1/4 167 22 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation T2.4-7 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 7 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 65 Richard Edaburn Drilled 6 210 72 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 66 Keith Dice Drilled 6 210 139 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 67` Charlie Rozek Drilled 6 155 112 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 68 Larry McBurney Drilled 6 165 113 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 69 Ernie Paul Drilled 6 100 100 Glacial 200 deposits immediatel yoverlaying bedrock 70 Melvine McBurney Drilled 5 84 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 71 Allen McBurney Drilled 6-1/4 110 34 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 72 Allen McBurney Drilled 6 150 30 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 73 Loland Cooper Drilled 6-1/4 135 15 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 74 Oliver Cox Drilled 5-3/16 97 30 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation T2.4-8 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 8 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 75 Bob Shireman Drilled 6 195 18 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 76 John Shumaker Drilled 6 165 25 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 77 Russel Sleck Drilled 6 210 40 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 78 Larry Conover Drilled 6 315 19 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 79 Burnell Hines Drilled 6 120 81 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 80 Bud Wilman Drilled 6 240 104 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 81 Junior Hanover Drilled 6-1/4 85 30 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 82 Jim Kirchner Drilled 6 330 98 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 83 Laverne Kuel Drilled 6 270 153 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 84 Henry Michels Drilled 6-1/4 137 56 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation T2.4-9 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 9 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 85 Allen McBurney Drilled 6-1/4 110 34 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 86 Leotia Chewning Drilled 50 87 Richard Powers Dug 18 Alluvial 100 sand 88 J.A. Moser Sand 18 point 89 Marion Schminke 90 Wilma Williams Drilled 6 100 Devonian- 1150 Silurian Formation 91 Jack Wilder Drilled 6 150 Devonian- 150 Silurian One Formation windmill for livestock 92 Laverne Fink Drilled 6 135 Devonian- 100 Silurian Formation 93 Henry Michaels 94 Roger Wiegel Drilled 6 105 Devonian- 250 Silurian Formation 95 Leroy Boots Drilled 96 K.F. Schrieber Drilled 97 Loren Rezabek Drilled 98 G.T. McCormick Drilled 6 2750 99 Curtis Schnell Drilled T2.4-10 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 10 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 100 Clifford Bowers Drilled 101 Gene Anderson Drilled 4-1/4 90 30 Devonian- 1775 Silurian Formation 102 Harold Lanning Drilled 5 90 Devonian- 150 Silurian Formation 103 Don Lanning Drilled 6 120 Devonian- 2850 Silurian Formation 104 Elsie Squiors Drilled 6 175 Devonian- 3075 Silurian Formation 105 Enoch Smith Drilled 6 286 Devonian- 50 Silurian Formation 106 Enoch Smith Drilled 186 Abandoned 107 G.E. Moser Drilled 108 Fay Wisehart Drilled 6 300 Glacial 250 deposits immediatel yoverlaying bedrock 109 Yarbourough Drilled 6 320 Glacial 180 deposits immediatel yoverlaying bedrock 110 Carol Hines Drilled 6 200 60 Devonian- 1750 Silurian Formation T2.4-11 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 11 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 111 Burnell Heinz Drilled 6 120 8 Devonian- 298 Silurian Formation 112 Jack Orman Drilled 4 60 30 Devonian- 410 Silurian Formation 113 Harold Drew Drilled 6 100 30 Devonian- 160 Silurian Formation 114 Frank Stallman Drilled 4 100 595 115 H.W. Lutz Drilled 5 130 80 Devonian- 100 Silurian Formation 116 Melvin Wage Drilled 4 120 Devonian- 1300 Silurian Formation 117 E.W. Carson Drilled 6 80 57 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 118 Firman Stallman 119 Fred Klindt Drilled 4 Devonian- 100 Silurian Formation 120 Karl Behrens 121 John Behrens 122 Jerry Dellrich Note: No information available where name only appears T2.4-12 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 12 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 123 Cletus Thomas Drilled 6 196 Devonian- 250 Silurian Formation 124 Elzy Morris Drilled 6 305 Glacial 50 deposits immediatel yoverlaying bedrock 125 Ronald Roberts 126 Bill Eike 127 Randall Eike 128 Myron Okken Drilled 6 760 129 Orville Wright Drilled 6 210 Devonian- 190 Silurian Formation 130 Conservation Commission 131 Ray Derby 132 G. Fifield Drilled 6 168 Devonian- 374 Silurian Formation 133 George Loher 400 134 Ray Fifield 135 Ed McBurney 136 Ken Griener 137 Quentin Collins 138 M. Gossman T2.4-13 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 13 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 139 George Williams 140 R. M. Ulrich Drilled 6 350 Devonian- 600 Silurian Formation 141 Richard Meeny 150 142 Windmill (abandoned) 143 Fred A. Morris 144 Henry Just 145 Lester Bonishek Drilled 5 160 Devonian- 2300 Silurian Formation 146 H.C. Culin 147 Martin Hanzlik 148 Knepper Sand Alluvial 400 point sand 149 Roy Miller 2 S.P. 500 150 Hughes Drilled 6 170 135 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 151 J. Wallander 152 G. Hazeltine Drilled 150 153 James Sauer Note: No information available where name only appears T2.4-14 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 14 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 154 Milfred Heck Drilled 5 196 Devonian- 250 Silurian Formation 155 Frank Votroubeck Sand 50 point 156 Lester Heck Sand 15 100 point 157 158 Coon Hunting Club 159 Roger Harty Drilled 125 160 Paul Burke 161 Earl Coleman 100 162 Don Hopkins 400 163 John Bowers Drilled 5 150 850 164 James R. Stolba 165 Bob Baker 166 Max Thompson 167 Lyle Shakespear Sand 25 125 point 168 Jess Shannon Drilled 185 350 169 Ollie Corum Drilled 175 50 Note: No information available where name only appears T2.4-15 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 15 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 170 Leona Rankin 6225 171 Charles Frantz Drilled 5 136 43 Devonian- in-active Silurian Formation Charles Frantz Drilled 5 128 36 Devonian- 300 Silurian Formation 172 Herbert Hall Drilled 173 G. Wayne Elliot Drilled 5-1/2 109 174 Joe Buhrman Drilled 6 120 12 Devonian- 250 Silurian Formation 175 W.R. Lagerquest Drilled 6 130 Devonian- 100 Silurian Formation 176 Mrs. Dewey 2 S.P. 35 Alluvial 1750 Robins sand 177 Cecil Railsbeck Drilled 4 100 Devonian- 2050 Silurian Formation 178 John Stram Drilled 6 200 190 Devonian- 2250 Silurian Formation 179 Rose Myers Drilled 4 110 45 2921 180 Sherman Hopker Drilled 6 65 Devonian- 100 Silurian Formation Note: No information available where name only appears T2.4-16 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 16 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 181 Leo Pickerell Drilled 6 216 200 Glacial 820 deposits immediatel yoverlaying bedrock 182 B. Harlan Moore 183 Don Pemrose Drilled 4 90 Devonian- 50 Silurian Formation 184 Boyd Frazier Drilled 6 180 150 Devonian- 1429 Silurian Formation 185 Tom Lewis 3 S.P. 18-25 Alluvial 4550 sand 186 Kenneth Lewis Sand 30-40 Alluvial 250 points sand 187 Kenneth Lewis Sand 30-40 Alluvial 250 points sand 188 Cora Stodola 3 S.P. 30-40 Alluvial 2900 sand 189 Ira Lewis Drilled 82 Devonian- 200 Silurian Formation 190 Carl Andrews Drilled 287 Glacial 2620 deposits immediatel yoverlaying bedrock Note: No information available where name only appears T2.4-17 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 17 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 191 Wm. Strave Drilled 3-3/4 100 Devonian- 1475 Silurian Formation 192 Melvin Young 193 Melvin Young 194 Melvin Young 195 Mrs. Dewey Drilled 6 267 Devonian- 450 Robins Silurian Formation 196 Melvin Young 197 Stan Zeiser 198 Gary Railsbeck Drilled 6 151 Devonian- 4725 Silurian Formation 199 R.C. Hepker Sand 49 Alluvial 100 point sand 200 John Comp Sand 20 Alluvial 200 point sand 201 John Comp 2 S.P. 20 Alluvial 510 sand 202 Laveren Langreth Sand 20 Alluvial 186 point sand 203 Gerald Ball 3 S.P. 20 Alluvial 7666 sand 204 Maurice VanNote Note: No information available where name only appears T2.4-18 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 18 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 205 Ted Coleman Sand 24 Alluvial 200 points sand 206 Moubry Sand 24 Alluvial 250 points sand 207 Charles Stodola Drilled 6 120 95 Devonian- 350 Silurian Formation 208 Orville Faust Drilled 5 110 57 Devonian- 350 Silurian Formation 209 Marvin Johnson Drilled 5 200 210 Jim Bemer Sand 18 Alluvial 250 point sand 211 H.L. Johnson Drilled 6 170 580 212 Robert Shattucks Drilled 120 150 213 Marie McCarcle Sand 25 Alluvial 200 point sand Marie McCarcle Sand 25 Alluvial 75 point sand 214 Dick Bull Drilled 115 Devonian- 1250 Silurian Formation T2.4-19 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 19 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 215 Alfred Frantz Sand 25 Alluvial 200 point sand Sand 18 Alluvial 700 point sand Sand 20 Alluvial point sand Sand 25 Alluvial point sand Sand 18 Alluvial 200 point sand 216 Rex Meyre Drilled 140 Devonian- 1050 Silurian Formation Sand 15-20 Alluvial 500 point sand 217 Jesse Lint Drilled 6 160 Devonian- 500 Silurian Formation 218 Harold Kephart Drilled 200 Devonian- 650 Silurian Formation 219 Cliff Mather Sand 20-30 Alluvial 550 point sand 220 Loyal Meltons Drilled 5 180 120 Devonian- 250 Silurian Formation Loyal Meltons Drilled 5 210 165 Devonian- 700 Silurian Formation T2.4-20 Revision 12 - 10/95

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-2 Sheet 20 of 20 SURFACE WATER USERS Total Total Diameter Depth Casing Chief Usage No. Owner Type (in.) (ft) (ft) Acquifer (gpd) 221 D.W. Bizek 222 Cliff Mather Drilled 165 Devonian- 600 Silurian Formation 223 Melvin Young Drilled 80 65 Devonian- 700 Silurian Formation 224 Wencil Rehders Drilled 80 65 Devonian- 650 Silurian Formation 225 DAEC Gravel 16 120 92 Glacial 750a Production well 1 packed deposit overlaying bedrock 226 DAEC Gravel 16 138 110 Glacial 750a Production well 2 packed deposit overlaying bedrock 227 DAEC Drilled 8 118 46 Devonian- 400a (onsite well) Silurian Formation Note: No information available where name only appears aGallons per minute T2.4-21 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC - 1 Table 2.4-3 GROUND-WATER LEVELS Date S-1 S-2 S-3 S-4 S-5 03/26/71 738.25 737.37 737.12 737.70 739.96 04/02/71 738.16 738.08 736.83 737.41 739.63 04/09/71 738.33 736.83 736.99 737.78 739.46 04/16/71 737.66 735.49 735.98 737.68 739.33 12/03/71 732.25 730.66 731.28 733.36 736.63 12/10/71 732.26 730.66 731.20 733.36 736.64 12/17/71 732.41 731.33 731.53 733.45 736.78 12/24/71 732.83 730.83 731.45 733.61 736.88 07/14/72 734.68 732.33 732.70 735.30 738.08 07/21/72 734.88 733.11 733.60 735.22 738.28 7/28/72 734.80 732.78 733.20 735.36 737.41 08/04/72 734.98 733.78 733.53 735.42 738.96 Date S-6 S-7 S-8 S-10 River 03/26/71 749.15 744.69 742.77 744.07 737.2 04/02/71 749.32 744.69 742.85 744.07 738.6 04/09/71 749.28 744.65 742.81 743.87 736.3 04/16/71 749.54 744.66 742.85 744.20 734.5 12/03/71 744.65 742.86 740.85 743.42 730.12 12/10/71 744.65 743.11 741.03 743.99 730.00 12/17/71 744.90 743.28 741.27 744.24 730.40 12/24/71 745.23 743.44 741.35 744.07 729.76 07/14/72 748.40 744.26 742.60 745.89 732.20 07/21/72 748.57 744.02 742.48 744.18 732.80 07/28/72 748.88 743.99 742.57 744.32 731.20 08/04/72 749.95 744.58 742.85 744.34 733.20 T2.4-22 Revision 12 - 10/95

N

 , I S.D4K.: ~ __ ..... f CEDAR \- ... "'\ RIVER '-,~,--- \ BASIN ") \ I ~_ /

NEB. ~ IOWA " ILL.1I !

 '.... - - ------ - - - ----', (~

I

 \, MO. r \

LOCATION MAP

 ~~- SHELL ROCK(l746SQ.MI~ .--"l~FINCHFORD (846 SQ.MJ.) . --.-r-JANESVILLE (1661 SQ. MI.)

OA-" .WATE R LO 0(5 146 SO. MI.)NEW HARTFORD --~....- -(347 SO.MI~HUDSON (303 SO.MI.) ---.,.......'------+--.t LEGEND A GAGING STATION

DRAINAGE DIVIDE DUANE ARNOLD SITE CEDAR RAPIDS (6510 SO.M!.)

 --- ---------'--.-----=----..,

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY 0 to 20

 ~ ~ I~

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT MIL£~Cedar River Basin Map Figure 2.4-1

8 7CEDAR RIVER 6 AT

 \ CEDAR RAPI DS 5 \

CI)L..U oo

 \,

o r\4 WI l:)a::

 \

~I U 3

 \ ~ \,

CI) o f'

 "~'"

2 I

 ~ ~ ~ ~~

0 o 10 20 30 PERCENT OF T IME 84;.!::0!..-.-.....;5~0~~6::!.0_~7...:::O:-....=..;:O~~ ""90_ _0_0 I _ _1 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER FLOW IS EQUALED OR EXCEEDED IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Flow Occurrence, Cedar River at Cedar Rapids Figure 2.4-2

30.0 20.0 II

 -EXTREME MAXIMUMS I

1 10.0 I I(/)l.L.. -- I 7.0 U I o I ,8 5.0 IW 4.0 I I I~ I--LONG TERM AVERAG~<{ 3.0 IU rJ) o 2.0 I w I I~ I<< I a:w I~ \.0~I i 0.7 I-----l--~I --- ---

 ----t---

t--EXTREME MINIMUMS Z~r-0.5 0.4 I0.3 II ii 0.2 JAN FEB MAR APR MA.Y JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT NOTE: Monthly Average Discharges, FLOW RECORDS Cedar River at Cedar Rapids AVAILABLE 1902 -1967 Figure 2.4-3

I '-~I " ,

 '~ \

L ~!.tl~:.___ _ -~ WIS.

 ) \ (

S.DAK.( \

 ....- - , I CEDAR '-_, -,~ ~ __ "'-_

RIVER

 \ BASIN "', ) "\t IOWA ~_ )I NEB. , , ( ILL. ~ ) I r---- - ----------~ I~ " - 'l MO. \ -----~ ~ l ~.

LOCATION MAP I

• PALISADES KEPLER

2. CEDAR RAf'lOS (I.E.L.BI? Co.>

3. CEDAR RApIDS (City of Cedar Rapldl)

4. WATERLOO (Riverfront Improvement Comm.)

5. WATERLOO (I.P.S.Co.)

6. CEDAR FALlS,( Municipal Utility)

7. WAV~RlY (City of.* Waverly)

8. NASHUA. (I.P.S. Co,) .'

9. CHARLES CITY (I.P.S:Co.)

 \0. MITCHELL . (County Conservation Boord)

II. GREENE (Butler City Conservation Board)I2.MARBLE ROCI<

13. MASON CITY <<nterstote Power Co.)

14. MASON CITY (Lehigh Portland Cement)

I~ MASON CITY (Amer. CrYllal Suoarl c .....

 -0 0 0 ::E:

t:- :t:-

 -I 0 ..... rrI 0

rrI r-C

 ~lTl rrI Z X n c-t- .....

JVl "

z

 -I rrI "'Tl C'Dc-t ..... >> .....::0

0 n~ r- n ::z

 <.C C'D<.C 0 C 0- r- r-Vl "'"'l PJO C'D "'"'l OJ 0 en .5 S 10 15 0 20 N

0 Vl

3 rrI ::I: rrI *

 -I -I :z MILES ~ < PJ -< rrI I C'D ~ ~ ::0 W

OJ

 "'"'l 0- >> en co r z -0 -<

0 C'D OJ OJ >> 0

< Vl 7'

 ..... C'D r- ::E: n -< /Tl rrI Vl Vl :z ~ Vl ::0 0 -I

~Vl n rrI 0 ::0 N ::0 3:rrI -0

 -0 >>

en 0 :z

0 -<

00 -I~

I-(f) 0<<lIJ 0 In

 <t In I'-

0 ci 00 0

 <t o

Q o'o o

 ~

lIO:0 z 0In mN I-(f) lIJ

 ~

5 0

0 0:0 ll.0 N l-lIJ lIJ ll.0 0In oo QDUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Cedar River Valley Cross Section at the DAEC-River-Mile Point 133.36 Figure 2.4-4 Revision 2 - 6/84

I I-en ~

.E 0

 -,0 <<w -en 18 1"0 <l: : er er:::> !~

W <.!) IL.. w* ~Z IL..<<W:I: ;00 enl-Z W :.EO Z zeno:I:er>- i

 <l: ;:(Werl-°O

i: I- > IL.. IL..:::>

12I{\J m-' I- I-o <l:oenen en

 >wz er en er-WZ ,ID <l: W <l: W <i 0 ~<ri>~~-' I 0 zer::::i <.!)a.. i oWWOZo 0 _wowwo I- z ::.: I r

U-WulL..° w<.!)erwO-'en z w :I:w~ en IL.. 18::.:z enlL.. Ua..>- (\J<C

co: oerl- m I- ~zoz I-enen<l:u:::> en era..<.!) 0 w

 ~g~enwu ' ~ ~

UzO:I:

 <c I-I-Z 0 I- w ZO <c:I:<l::I:>--

Z I r~0 0 Ol-::Ea..m-'OI-I 0 .. ~w co, w

 ,... W l-IL..

0 I

 ~~ -' z W

I 0 00 0 0 0

 ..JI IL..

ILl

 ..J m <l: 0 m V 0 0 a:: 0 a.: 0 0 It)

E

Er x 0

 <l: 0 I- ::E en 0 ILl ~

0 IX) ,...0 0co It)

 ~

(\J

 .1.33.:1 NI NOI.1.VA313 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Cedar River Valley Cross Section at Valley Constriction Upstream of DAEC-Mile Point 135.13 Figure 2.4-5 Revision 2 - 6/84

o o o ie I{)f'.N f'.I III II

 \ I . I I

I (1:: Z-V '91~)NOIJ.:>3S ssoi:i:> * * --I I{)

 !:2 I

I I

 . I I

3N Il AJ./;l3dO/;ld I I I N/;l3HJ./;l~-.!O/;lddV1

• I I

 -- r--- - - - -------1 I !

I I

 . I I

• Cl 0

Cl g I 0 Cl 0 0 U.

 , I '" -l 0 -l

u. I << >

IlJ

 -l U. Z I r-- o lD -l I- 0 I Cl <<

IlJ CD UCl

 <.!l IlJ I CD (f)

CD I '"IlJ 0: :;E ...J 0 0:I << i 0:a.. a.. 1lJ*IlJ <t Cl ~Cl 0 I cr !:2

E 0 I-0: Cl (/)

J << IlJ

 -l

u. I

E

 - Cl Z

E 0

(0 I X

 \J ~ ~\J I-IlJ l- ~ I

E (/)

Z :I: I II << II I

• I II I I (Z Z-V

 . '91~)

NOIJ.:>3S - SSQ/;l:>

 . ., I I .

I I I I II( 3Nll AJ./;l3dO/;ld ,I N/;l3HJ.nOS 'XO/;lddV)

 - I I -- .~

0 0 6 0 0 0 I{) N f'. f'.DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Cedar River Water Profile at DAEC Site Figure 2.4-6

 \ ,\, I o

Lll

 \ , \ ,..,

o en ~ ,

 \ o C\J o

w-a.o

 \ Q (j <{

a::

 \

I w a:: I

 ~

a:: \ 8 Cf)~~ ~\I

 ~' ~

cf)'ex: ~ o rWeD I uO) -Ii' wI~ ..... 0' (j

~~ ~~ c~\ )- ~ ~

j

 ~ ~ ,..,. o co o

a:

 ~, I~ ';'.. N ;n o -..... ~\ ~ z-....

0:0 z

 ,q\

wO) ';0\ ,...o I

>\.J ..... , 1- U I

a:: I~I \ ~c::t , \ a::w ow I. o 6 1\ I' Li)

 ~

Cf)U

 \ ~

I

 \ \ ,..,o \ \ 1\ o \ \

l\.I

 \ \ \\ ,, , I o \ \ ~ \ ~ o o N o S..:! :J 001- MOl..:! .lH~nO'da DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Drought Flow Cedar River at Cedar Rapids Figure 2.4-7

29 26 11.11

 .~

IOJ I 12.19 N

 / I .r32 / I I J ! * /,S ".7 78

• liB 36 I

31 II~ 17 IOc ii' 184*"183 181 1'18Z

 -f-18! ~ I ;l r ~~/(I '-"L 100 7: ~9 1.98 ~5 ..

II:II:199. 1 97 o Ie LE SCALE

 '*96 6 lI4..:J3 1%' Ii 72 '65 19-(*

_ _+1- --- \ "180 81 J 1 I 66 92 6768 69 7I 24 1--+179 zs I~f,a I 19~83.

l 213 16 17 15 14 13 1-15*

I

 '200 '144 IM.:J-U 133 "5 'ITT l'f~

Ij.J 137'

 . _\L-, ~ :J.,...e I ,.., J ~\ in/. In ,15 I-{I 1.19 I - - ._- 140 138 /10 160/';' 161 163-;:.- 16Z 0 171 152. 3? {51 I4f GJ 20 22 I

23 155 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER 1\ --LI "1'1 Y' "<<I" ./IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT I29 27 26 Location of Wells within 3 Miles of DAEC Site Figure 2.4-8, Sheet 1

Security Related Information Figure Withheld Under 10 CFR 2.390 NOTE:5-"*.5'8NO POINT 2'7 '-Y? 't4veR<"IGE OEPTH DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Location of Wells within 3 Miles of DAEC Site Figure 2.4-8 t Sheet 2

 /'/, (y.1""'~ t

(, ..('~ ;" ~' .'. -

 ,.,.~

ti-.. "

 .. "~&, -.......IY ,"

~.

J

 .+ ':. ,.\ ., ",,'C? ...--, ,tto.. * ~ -i :v.*' ~': f:. ~ -, y

{ -;.~ ~0

 -"..... d <. ., " ,~ * ) 1/> " . ,i .,'.

r' l{

 .' I i?

o> ,< *

 ~ .! -A "':~

t

 ~ ~

(I{

 . ,,~ .. ~ ,.' ~ ."- .\ * ;i. 'l'\.,r .

o ",

 /./.

_.~\

 /\ ~".; , J ' t

'--L-<;' . _.~-!~'" t' <?:~ ,,r-* ~ -=:__ .: _. ~~4-"~' '*~I~;~~.!-l~)'~::.~;~,/i~~c -:;._~1-' --!; /'"."'.j ."

 '\-_':ri'-' (.'.'. I

..-' I 11..-, ' :! l

~/ *~t, ~'-1 '.' I'

 --', -- . ,-'. I A ;:, "':~" '~~'-,J'-'" -.,' ...... ~ / .~ ....., 1" + 6~ .* \-.p.,. +~c ./~

f/-' i ,l' .If''il~'<'vi' ~).- /~ i l ,..~it ",."

 -1'\,,,+ \~::, . *_1, ~ ...

i

 " \.., .

r-/'l-~ I.:, ~ "1\' -.

 "J' '" " ' .

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER l-~~-'

 ., .. ,~ ..,_ .... , ".-. .... -+- .......... *i! . - '~ "'-~

IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY

-+ _.z-"- ",' ':

I ! . ~.l .. " .t L ,'\_. ~ . *i _.,.

 ~ 'j'r. l -

'~~' /

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

 " t* ... J4 ) EXPLANATION I F~:o-r-

'. . / .~

r .'

• STAFF GAGE ~ PERMANI[NT

 ! 6. REFE.RU.aGE. POI .... T , i. L~ ~: )

I I ':J 1*~ .,...j - /'o BORI .... G ~ 06~E.RVATIOW WEI..L(PLA!.T1G "IPI. IN"TAL.L..O)BOAIW G ..... OL-it' Af!lANDo .... 5.0 (NO PLA.~TI C PIPl)PAL.O

 .l:-l;

j - - ,

 .+ ..*: +

Water Table Map

 ~."';" ~' ,1,,/1 ~. " ~._

L Ill, D~TA. POIWT

 '&7f _./ +1 ~= ,:" . " .*"J' j]',,;1,I 0

I -- _ '. .

 ! .. / ,:,..0) ..... ,.J.: '1' "'.......... .* .... "F' "; J ,: ~-_. .... '\ ' ....... Figure 2.4-9 \

( ...., -,j(;R \ . * ........... .1<1. ~ 1

 ~ .C.... L __ 0" "1[."'. I 0&0'.

Security Related Information Figure Withheld Under 10 CFR 2.390 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Location of DAEC Observation Wells Figure 2.4-10

oI I 2 3 miles EX PLANATION I I I Scale 767

 * - - - - 800----

Well Water level contour. Shawl Number i. water altitude of waler Jevell in 1959.level in feel above Contour inter'lal 100 feet.meon sea level.DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY"ANALYSIS REPORT Water Table Map - Linn County Figure 2.4-11

T.'42"15'- 86 r---+--+-~+-l--l--;""":::;N*T.'82 N.*t-Tl--I--,f-=EXPLANATION_ _-800- __ ..

• 671 Piezometric contour well, number IS* altitude shows altitude of piezometric of piezometric surface surface. in feet.

Dashed where approximately 0 0000000 located. Ground waler divide Contour interval 50 feet.Datum is mean sea level. 6, II 2, 3miles IScale DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Piezometric Surface Silurian-Devonian Aquifer-1959 Figure 2.4-12

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.5 GEOLOGY, SEISMOLOGY, AND GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING 2.5.1 BASIC GEOLOGIC AND SEISMIC INFORMATION This section presents a summary of the geologic conditions at the site and in the region surrounding the plant. The plant is located near the town of Palo in Linn County, Iowa. The site is located adjacent to and west of the Cedar River, approximately 8 miles northwest of Cedar Rapids, Iowa.The site lies within the Central Stable Region of North America, an area in which the geologic structure is relatively simple. The region is characterized by a system of broad, circular to oblong erosional uplifts and sedimentary basins that include the Wisconsin and Ozark Domes and the Forest City, Michigan, and Illinois Basins. Minor structures, consisting primarily of northwest-southeast trending synclines and anticlines of low relief, are superimposed on these broader features in the region. Precambrian crystalline basem*nt rocks lie some 2600 ft below the ground surface in the vicinity of the site. The crystalline basem*nt complex is mantled by sedimentary rocks of Paleozoic age. The bedrock surface at the site ranges in depth from approximately 25 ft to more than 100 ft and is, in turn, overlain by glacial till and surficial deposits of clayey silt, sand, and gravel.Faults have not been identified within the basem*nt rocks or overlying sedimentary strata in the vicinity of the site. The closest known faults are located approximately 17 miles southeast of the site and 10 miles north of the site. The vertical displacement of these faults is estimated to be about 20 ft. Other known faults are located at significantly greater distances from the site. Faults in the region are believed to have been dormant since late Paleozoic time, at least 200 million years ago. The Paleozoic strata and overlying consolidated sediments within about 100 miles of the site are essentially undeformed.The field investigation performed for the geologic study (Section 2.5.4.3) revealed varying degrees of solution activity in the Devonian limestones and dolomites underlying the site. The solution activity ranged from the formation of very small vugs in the Spring Grove Member of the Wapsipinicon Formation, to a cavity about 12 ft deep within the Spring Grove, above its contact with the Kenwood Member.There are no geologic features at the site or in the surrounding area that preclude the use of the site for a nuclear facility. The bedrock in the construction area is competent and will provide adequate foundation support for all major structures.Remedial measures have been taken to ensure satisfactory performance of the bedrock in cavity areas. Suitable rock exploration and treatment procedures are presented in conjunction with foundation design and construction data in Section 2.5.4.2.5-1 Revision 14 - 11/98

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The site geologic program included the following:

1. A thorough review of pertinent geologic literature (published and unpublished) and interviews with university, state, and Federal geologists.

2. A geologic reconnaissance of the site and surrounding area and an interpretation of maps and aerial photographs.

3. An investigation of subsurface soil, rock, and ground-water conditions by means of a test boring program, geophysical refraction surveys, and other related field studies.

The results of the geologic investigation are presented in the following sections.Detailed descriptions and results of the field explorations and laboratory tests are presented in Section 2.5.4.3. A list of publications reviewed and the organizations interviewed to obtain the information presented in this portion of the FSAR is presented at the end of this section.A separate foundation investigation was conducted prior to construction of the low-level radwaste processing and storage facility. This investigation is discussed in Section 2.5.7.2.5.1.1 Regional Geology 2.5.1.1.1 General The site lies in the northern portion of the interior Lowland Physiographic Province, within the Central Stable Region of North America, south of the Canadian Shield. The region is characterized by a basem*nt complex of Precambrian crystalline rocks overlain by a varying thickness of Paleozoic sedimentary strata. The sedimentary rocks are of Pennsylvanian age or older. During the Mesozoic and Cenozoic Eras, this region generally was above sea level and subject to erosion rather than deposition, which accounts for the absence of younger formations. Minor accumulations of Cretaceous sediments exist in western Iowa and have been reported in portions of western Illinois.These deposits have not been identified in eastern Iowa. During the Pleistocene Epoch, the stable interior of the continent was covered by continental glaciers. These glaciers scoured the bedrock surface and subsequently covered much of the region with glacial drift.Postglacial erosion and deposition of alluvial and windblown deposits altered the landscape to its present form. Topography in the region is characterized by smoothly contoured land forms of low to moderate relief. Steep slopes are usually found only in areas where a river or stream has cut into the loess-covered hills.2.5-2 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.5.1.1.2 Stratigraphy The distribution of the major geologic units in the region is shown in Figure 2.5-

1. The bedrock consists of unmetamorphosed sedimentary rocks that range in age from Cambrian to Pennsylvanian. In the vicinity of the site, the bedrock consists of the Gower Formation of Silurian age and the Wapsipinicon Formation of Devonian age. A detailed description of the bedrock stratigraphy in the vicinity of the site is shown in Figure 2.5-2.

The geologic column reveals the following depositional sequence:

1. Coarse sandstones of Upper Cambrian age.

2. Alternating sandstones, limestones, and shales of Cambrian to Middle Ordovician age.

3. Alternating shales, limestones, and dolomites of Upper Ordovician to Middle Devonian age.

In general, the strata are thinner in the upper portions of the column; this condition is typical of sedimentation processes in the continental interior. Several outcrops of sedimentary rock were examined in the region. The closest outcrops inspected are about 3 miles southwest of the site.Pleistocene glaciation, which occurred several hundred million years after deposition of the uppermost bedrock strata, mantled the entire region with unconsolidated sediments of variable thickness and composition. The distribution of surficial unconsolidated materials in the region is shown in Figure 2.5-3.2.5.1.1.3 Tectonics and Structural Pattern Conclusions Since Precambrian time, the stable interior platform of the United States has developed into a system of broad, circular to oblong erosional uplifts and sedimentary basins. The most prominent uplifts in the vicinity of the site are the Wisconsin Dome, Sioux Uplift (Trans-Continental Arch), and the Ozark Dome, to the northeast, northwest and south, respectively. Prominent basins in the region include the Salina and Forest City Basins, the Michigan Basin, and the Illinois Basin. Stable regions, those that have experienced relatively minor vertical movements, separate the deeper regional basins and generally connect the broad domes. These areas, within the region, include the Mississippi River Arch, the Kankakee Arch, and the Trans-Continental Arch. The locations of the various significant structures in the region surrounding the site are shown in Figure 2.5-4. The site is located on a stable shelf area between the Mississippi River Arch and the Forest City Basin, within an area that has experienced relatively minor vertical movements.In marked contrast to the broad, relatively simple, regional geologic structures described above are the complex gravity and magnetic fields observed in surveys of the continental interior. A Bouguer gravity map of the region is included as Figure 2.5-5.2.5-3 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 It has been pointed out by many authors that the high-gradient anomalies associated with the gravity and magnetic fields are due almost solely to density and magnetic contrasts in the Precambrian crystalline basem*nt rocks. It has been further suggested that the distribution of mass anomalies provides the basic mechanism for the subsequent development of basins and uplifts. Regions of high density have subsided and formed basins, whereas low-density regions have formed uplifts. The interconnecting arches (stable areas) have intermediate densities.Although the significant structural features in the region have been identified and located, innumerable minor structures have been superimposed on these broader features.These minor structures, in the vicinity of the site, generally consist of a series of northwest-to-southeast trending synclines and anticlines having general relief of less than 150 ft.Most of the faults in the region formed during the development of the uplift-basin-arch configuration of the Central Stable Region. It is believed that these faults are essentially vertical and developed along crustal heterogenetics as a result of imposed stresses of Paleozoic age. Early geologic studies have ascribed tectonics in the continental interior to lateral compressive stresses during the Appalachian and Ouachita orogenies. Subsequently, later work has indicated that most of the tectonics were the result of Paleozoic isostatic movements. Therefore, most of the observed faulting would have been caused by tensional stresses. In general, faults developed along the flanks of stable arches adjacent to a basin or dome.Faults within the region that appear to have formed in Paleozoic times include the Sandwich Fault, associated with the La Salle Anticlinal Belt along the southwest flank of the Kankakee Arch, and the La Platte and Humboldt Faults, associated with the Nemaha Uplift separating the Forest City and Salina Basins. These faults are approximately 120 miles east and southwest of the site, respectively. The Thurman-Redfield Structural Zone is a minor feature that extends northeasterly from the Nemaha Uplift. Minor faulting of about 30 ft is known to exist on the Missouri River associated with this structural zone.This structural zone is apparently developed along the southeastern edge of the Mid-Continent Anomaly and is presently known to extend from the Kansas-Iowa border northeastward to just north of Des Moines, Iowa. It is not presently known whether this zone continues further north along the Mid-Continent Anomaly to connect with the small faulting near Hastings, Minnesota.The only significant example of faulting that did not occur during the development of the uplift-basin-arch configuration of the Central Stable Region is the Ste. Genevieve-Cottage Grove-Shawneetown-Rough Creek fault complex that extends from central Missouri, easterly, through southern Illinois and into Kentucky. This system of faults lies some 300 miles southeast of the site. These fault zones intersect major structures including the Ozark Dome and the Illinois Basin. Since the faults are imposed on the regional structure, they must postdate the development of the Paleozoic uplift-basin-arch 2.5-4 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 system. It has been suggested that this fault system is a hinge line separating the stable continental interior to the north from the subsiding Mississippi Embayment. There is no geologic evidence to relate this fault system with any structure or faulting within the continental interior.No known faults exist within the basem*nt rock or overlying sedimentary strata in the vicinity of the site. The closest known faults are located approximately 10 miles north of the site, and about 17 miles southeast of the site. These faults have only minor vertical displacements.A few other faults are known in Iowa. These are located near the cities of Washington, Ottumwa, Decorah, and Fort Dodge. The maximum displacement associated with these faults is at Washington where at least 200 ft of displacement is evident.Vertical crustal movements in the stable interior occurred during the ice loading and rebounded with glacial retreat. Since the site area has undergone multiple Pleistocene glaciation, it may be inferred that this region has been subjected to repeated slight bending in the last few hundred thousand years. Present-day adjustment in the site area is nonexistent, as far as is known. However, slight movements, indicated by earthquakes along dormant Paleozoic fault zones, could represent a deep crustal readjustment to glacial advance and retreat.Based on the geologic research and interpretation of data outlined above, it was concluded that there was no structural feature in the region to preclude the use of the site for a nuclear power plant.2.5.1.2 Site Geology 2.5.1.2.1 Bedrock The bedrock strata immediately underlying the site are the Wapsipinicon and Gower Formations, of Middle Devonian and Upper Silurian age, respectively.The Gower Formation is a grayish-brown, finely crystalline to aphanitic limestone with occasional vugs. A second facies in the Gower consists of a massive, light gray, highly porous, vuggy, and fossiliferous limestone that is a biohermal (reef) type deposit. The vugs have formed as a result of the solution of organic shells during dolomitization. The top of the Gower is an erosional surface on which the Wapsipinicon was deposited. Sinks that developed on this erosional surface were subsequently filled with Wapsipinicon sediments. It is estimated that the Gower Formation is approximately 60 to 100 ft thick at the site.Although the Wapsipinicon Formation, regionally, contains six members, only three were identified at the site during the boring program. The three lower members of the Wapsipinicon Formation, the Otis, the Coggon, and the Bertram, are not present.2.5-5 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The lowest member present at the site, the Kenwood, is a gray, crystalline, dolomitic limestone that grades to argillaceous limestone and is interbedded with bluish-green calcareous shales. Locally this member is known as a "garbage" zone because of its varying composition. The lower beds of the Kenwood are composed of greenish shales that mark the contact between rocks of Devonian and Silurian age. The Kenwood ranges up to approximately 30 ft in thickness at the site.The Spring Grove Member lies above the Kenwood and is a light grayish-brown, finely crystalline to aphanitic dolomitic limestone. It is highly vulgar in places and is generally very massive. The member contains no identifiable fossils. This member ranges up to 27 ft thick at the site.The upper member of the Wapsipinicon, which forms the bedrock surface in the plant area, has been identified as the Davenport. It is a light grayish-brown, aphanitic limestone that includes several solution-breccia zones and a 0.5-ft thick bed of dolomitic limestone. It is thinly bedded and is usually argillaceous. This member is about 10 ft thick in the central portion of the site, but has been eroded and is absent in the bedrock valleys.The bedrock surface was encountered at depths ranging from approximately 25 ft to more than 100 ft below the existing ground surface. The configuration of the bedrock surface is shown in Figure 2.5-6. A bedrock high is centered directly beneath the plant.This bedrock high is probably a result of preglacial erosion modified by interglacial erosion. Weathered bedrock, found in the valleys, and hard unweathered rock, encountered on the highs, is attributed to differential glacial sour. In general, the rock encountered at the site is relatively fresh and hard.Two zones of cavity development were observed in the Wapsipinicon Formation during this investigation. One is within the Davenport limestone, usually just above the Spring Grove-Davenport contact. The second is in the Spring Grove, just above its contact with the underlying Kenwood. Other relatively minor solution activity was observed in some enlarged joints of the Kenwood and in enlarged vugs of the Spring Grove. No cavities were encountered in the Gower Formation during this investigation.The major cavity observed in the Spring Grove Member is in the vicinity of Boring 21. Nine probe holes were drilled around Boring 21, and five of these penetrated the cavity. On the basis of these explorations, it is estimated that this cavity is approximately 12 ft deep at the maximum. The top of the cavity ranges from about 12 to 20 ft below the rock surface. The trend of this cavity is generally northeast to southwest.The cavity was more than half-filled with Pleistocene soils consisting of clay and silt with some organic debris.A second area of solution activity was encountered in the lower part of the Davenport Member, in the northern portion of the site near Borings 18, 25, 26, and 32.These cavities were small, usually less than 2 ft in size.2.5-6 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Cavity development may be accounted for by the fact that the site is located on a bedrock high that was formerly subjected to the action of downward percolating preglacial waters. The bedrock high beneath the site probably was exposed before till cover, and the cavities apparently developed before glaciation. The subsurface water in the bedrock is presently artesian, probably precluding present-day solution activity.2.5.1.2.2 Soil Conditions A clay till containing some sand and gravel interspersed in the clay matrix directly overlies the bedrock surface. The till has, at various times, been described as both Kansan and Iowan, the latter being early Wisconsinan in age. The till thickness varies from 12 to 80 ft in the site area. The till thickness averages 20 ft in the plant area.Flood plain deposits averaging about 20 ft in thickness and consisting of fine to coarse sand, with some silt and gravel, form the surficial material at the site. Hills adjacent to the site are composed of till mantled with loesses of Wisconsinan age.A general description of the soils and rocks encountered at the site is shown in Figure 2.5-7. Logs of the geologic and foundation borings are included in Section 2.5.4.3. Logs of the borings made for the low-level radwaste processing and storage facility are provided in Section 2.5.7.2.5.2 VIBRATORY GROUND MOTION This section presents a summary of the seismologic studies performed at the site and in the region surrounding the plant. The plant is near the town of Palo, in Linn County, Iowa.Detailed descriptions and the results of the field explorations and laboratory tests performed in connection with the seismologic studies are presented in Section 2.5.4.3.This site is located in one of the most seismically stable regions in the United States.There has been no earthquake epicenter reported closer than about 75 miles and only 15 earthquakes were reported within about 200 miles of the site since the beginning of the nineteenth century. The intensities of these earthquakes were not greater than Intensity VII. (All intensity values in this section refer to the Modified Mercalli Scale revised in 1956. The intensity scale, which is described in Table 2.5-1, is a means of indicating the relative size of an earthquake in terms of its perceptible effect). The closest reported earthquake was a 1934 Intensity VI shock near Rock Island, Illinois. This earthquake caused some slight damage near its epicenter, but was not felt in the vicinity of the site.One or both of two 1909 Intensity VII shocks in northern and central Illinois may have been felt in the vicinity of the site. However, the effects of these shocks, in Iowa, were not great and no damage resulted.2.5-7 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Most of the few reported earthquakes in the region are associated with well-defined geologic structural zones. To the east of the site, earthquakes are related to faulting in southern Wisconsin and northern and central Illinois. To the west of the site, earthquake activity is related to uplifted areas in eastern South Dakota, eastern Nebraska, and northeastern Kansas. None of these structural zones associated with earthquake activity extends into Iowa. There are no known faults within 10 miles of the site.Significant earthquake ground motion is not expected at the site during the life of the plant. However, Seismic Category I structures are conservatively designed to respond elastically, with no loss of function (operating basis), to horizontal foundation level accelerations of

1. Six percent of gravity, if supported on rock or on about 10 ft of compacted fill and/or natural glacial soils, soil cement fill, or lean concrete fill.

2. Nine percent of gravity, if supported on about 30 to 50 ft of compacted fill and/or natural glacial soils.

Foundation level response spectra (horizontal) for the operating and design-basis earthquakes are presented in Figure 2.5-8. For structures on rock or about 10ft of soil, the vertical design accelerations shall be 80% of the appropriate horizontal foundation level accelerations. For structures on about 30 to 50 ft of soil, the vertical design accelerations shall be two-thirds of the appropriate horizontal foundation level accelerations.The purposes of this study were as follows:

1. Evaluate the seismicity of the area.

2. Evaluate the effect of earthquake motion on the foundation materials at the site.

3. Develop seismic design parameters.

The seismic program included the following:

1. Literature research to compile a record of the seismicity of the area.

2. A comprehensive geologic study to evaluate the geologic structure and tectonic history of the region.

3. Field explorations to measure in-situ dynamic properties.

4. A program of dynamic laboratory testing and analyses to evaluate the response of the foundation materials to earthquake-type loading.

Detailed description and results of the field explorations and laboratory tests, which provide background information, are presented in Section 2.5.4.3.2.5-8 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Geophysical studies were performed at the site to aid in evaluating the dynamic properties of the natural subsurface materials. The dynamic soil properties were used in evaluating the response of these materials to earthquake loading. The results of the field geophysical studies are presented in Section 2.5.4.3.A seismic refraction survey and an uphole velocity survey were performed to measure the velocity of compressional wave propagation at the site. Micromotions were measured to indicate the pattern of vibration at the site on the basis of ambient background vibration analyses. These measurements are of assistance in estimating any predominant natural period of vibration at the site. Poisson's ratios for the various materials in the stratigraphic section at the site were estimated from empirical data for similar materials. An attempt was also made to develop shear wave velocity from the field measurements of surface waves; however, this was not successful.Shear wave velocities for the shallower materials at the site were computed using the measured compressional wave velocities and estimated Poisson's ratios.Compressional wave velocities for the deeper rock strata were not measured. Therefore, estimates were made of both the compressional wave velocity and Poisson's ratio (based on measurements in similar material), and the corresponding shear wave velocities were then computed. Geophysical data for the entire stratigraphic section are presented in Figure 2.5-9.2.5.2.1 Seismicity The site is situated in an area that has experienced very little earthquake activity.No earthquake epicenter has been reported closer than about 75 miles to the site. Since the region has had a permanent population for over 100 years, it is probable that all earthquakes of about Intensity V or greater would have been reported during this period.Any major earthquake (Intensity IX or greater) that occurred during the time the region has been sparsely populated (300 or so years) probably would have been reported in the local newspapers or in private journals or diaries. The absence of such documentation is indicative of the absence of significant earthquake activity in the region during this period.The zone of major earthquake activity closest to the site is in the vicinity of New Madrid, Missouri, approximately 400 miles to the southeast. Earthquakes near New Madrid in 1811 and 1812 are considered among the largest ever to have occurred in the United States. Intensities in the region of the site were probably on the order of I to III.It is reported that these shocks were felt in an area of 2 million mi2 and changed the surficial topography in an area of about 30,000 to 50,000 mi2. The structural damage resulting from these earthquakes was small because of the lack of construction and habitation in the region. However, it is undeniable that these were major earthquakes.These earthquakes are probably related to the extensively faulted Ste. Genevieve-Cottage Grove-Shawneetown-Rough Creek fault complex which extends from eastern Missouri to western Kentucky.2.5-9 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The geologic structure in eastern Missouri, southern Illinois, and western Kentucky is not related to the geologic structure in the vicinity of the site. The Ste.Genevieve fault complex crosses major regional structures and probably forms a hinge line separating the stable continental interior to the north from the subsiding Mississippi Embayment. There is no geologic evidence to relate this fault system with structure or faulting within the continental interior. Thus, the seismically active region at the hinge line and to the south should be considered dissimilar and distinct from the seismically quiet region to the north.Most of the earthquakes reported in the region are associated with zones of well-documented structure. To the east of the site, earthquakes are related to faulting in southern Wisconsin and northern and central Illinois. To the west of the site, earthquake activity is related to uplifted areas in eastern South Dakota, eastern Nebraska, and northeastern Kansas. None of the structural zones associated with earthquake activity extends into Iowa.Several earthquakes, which are probably related to faulting associated with the Abilene Arch and Nemaha Uplift, have occurred in northeastern Kansas. The largest of these was an 1867 Intensity VII shock with its epicenter near the towns of Manhattan and Lawrence, Kansas, about 300 miles from the site. This shock was felt in an area of about 300,000 mi2 in the states of Illinois, Indiana, Missouri, Nebraska, Arkansas, Kentucky, and possibly Ohio. The shock also was probably felt in Iowa, but there are no reports of this. The maximum damage near the epicenter of this shock was minor, consisting primarily of cracked plaster and walls.Only four earthquakes have been reported within 100 miles of the site and only 15 earthquakes reported within about 200 miles of the site since the beginning of the nineteenth century. None of these shocks was greater than Intensity VII. Few were of high enough intensity to cause structural damage, and only two of these shocks can be considered more than minor disturbances. These were two 1909 Intensity VII earthquakes in northern and central Illinois. The epicenter of each shock was about 150 miles from the site. The closest reported earthquake to the site was a 1934 Intensity VI shock near Rock Island, Illinois. Although one or more of these shocks may have been felt in the locality of the site, no damaging effects were experienced (intensities were on the order of III or less).A list of earthquakes with epicenters located within a distance of about 200 miles from the site is presented in Table 2.5-1a. These epicenters as well as the epicenters of more distant regional earthquakes are shown in Figure 2.5-10.For purposes of this investigation, it is considered that the most significant earthquakes in the region are the 1934 Intensity VI earthquake near Rock Island, Illinois, and the 1909 Intensity VII earthquakes in northern and central Illinois.2.5-10 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 This evaluation has been made considering such factors as epicentral intensity (with regard to both damage to structures and perceptible area of effect), distance from the site, and geologic structure (with regard to possible relationship of geologic structure near the earthquake epicenter to structure near the site).The earthquake of November 12, 1934, occurred at approximately 8:45 a.m. near the town of Rock Island, Illinois. The duration of the shock was very short with the major ground motion consisting of a single strong jar. Damage near the epicenter was minor. The only damage of consequence was a dislodged stucco cornice that fell from a school in Rock Island. There were also reports of loose plaster shaken from a few buildings at Augustana College in Rock Island. On the basis of damage reports, the epicentral intensity of this earthquake was probably a low VI. The earthquake was felt in a northeast-southwest trending elliptical area about 100 miles long and 65 miles wide.The shock was not felt in the vicinity of the site. A magnificent feature of this shock was a very loud explosive sound accompanying the ground motion. This shock has not been related to a known major tectonic feature.The earthquake of May 26, 1909, occurred at about 8:38 a.m. It was felt in a relatively large and irregular area extending from the Wisconsin-Illinois border as far south as Bloomington, Illinois. The total perceptible area of this shock was on the order of 500,000 mi2. The duration of shaking of this earthquake was probably about 15 to 30 sec. The maximum damage from this earthquake consisted of many fallen chimneys in the Aurora, Illinois, area where the earthquake was reported to be "just under the point of damage to buildings." In Chicago, buildings swayed; the effect being most noticeable in the upper stories. There was no structural damage, although there was fear that walls would collapse. The maximum intensity of this shock was VII. The shock was felt in the vicinity of the site and was reported in Cedar Rapids newspapers (about Intensity III).The effect in Iowa was not great and no damage resulted. It is probable that this earthquake was related to the Sandwich Fault in northern Illinois. This fault is limited and does not project west into Iowa. Possible future earthquakes associated with the Sandwich Fault would occur no closer than 125 miles to the site, the westerly limit of the fault.The earthquake of July 18, 1909, occurred at about 10:34 p.m. in the vicinity of Havana and Petersburg, Illinois, north of Springfield. The shock was felt in an area of about 40,000 mi2. The maximum damage from this earthquake consisted of fallen chimneys at Petersburg, Illinois; Hannibal, Missouri; and Davenport, Iowa. Near Petersburg, more than 20 windows were broken, brick was pushed out over doors, and plaster was cracked. On the basis of damage reports and perceptible area, the epicentral intensity was probably a low VII. The epicenter of this shock is on the edge of the Illinois Basin. The shock cannot be related to any specific fault or fault system.2.5-11 Revision 14 - 11/98

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.5.2.2 Geologic Structures and Tectonic Activity The site is located in the Central Stable Region of North America, between the Wisconsin Dome and the Forest City Basin. On the basis of the available geophysical data, this area is a single crustal block. Precambrian crystalline rocks form the basem*nt complex. These rocks rise to the bedrock surface in an area to the north defined as the Canadian Shield and extend to depths of nearly 14,000 ft in the sedimentary basins of the continental interior. In the immediate vicinity of the site, approximately 2600 ft of Paleozoic sedimentary rocks overlie the Precambrian crystalline basem*nt complex.Since Precambrian time, the stable interior platform of the United States has developed into a system of broad, circular to oblong erosional uplifts and sedimentary basins. Stable arches (platforms), which have experienced relatively minor vertical movements, separate the deeper regional basins and connect the broad domes. Most of the faults in the region were formed during the development of the basin-dome-arch configuration of the Central Stable Region during Paleozoic time. A significant exception is the Ste. Genevieve-Cottage Grove-Shawneetown-Rough Creek fault complex that extends from central Missouri to western Kentucky. Since these faults are imposed on the regional structure, they must postdate the development of the Paleozoic basin-dome-arch structure in the region. Subsequently, crustal movements in the region occurred during Pleistocene time. Since the area has undergone multiple Pleistocene glaciation, it may be inferred that this region has been subjected to repeated slight bending in the last few hundred thousand years. Faults have not been identified in the immediate vicinity of the site. The closest known faults are located approximately 10 miles north of the site and about 17 miles southeast of the site. Other faults or structural zones in the region that may influence the seismicity of the site are discussed in the geology section and are shown in Figure 2.5-10. The most significant geologic structures are described below:

1. The Sandwich Fault, trends northwesterly in north-central Illinois, approximately 130 miles east of the site. Maximum displacement along the fault is about 600 ft.

The Savannah-Sabula Anticline, probably an unfaulted extension of the Sandwich Fault, extends westward from the western extremity of the Sandwich Fault.Gravity anomalies indicate that the crustal block along which the fault and anticline formed cannot be extended into the site area. The La Salle Anticlinal Belt forms the southerly extension of the Savannah Anticline-Sandwich Fault structural zone and is seismically inactive.2.5-12 Revision 14 - 11/98

UFSAR/DAEC-1

2. The Nemaha Ridge, with the associated Abilene Arch and La Platte and Humboldt Faults, forms a structural zone some 200 miles west of the site. This structural zone parallels a segment of the Mid-Continent gravity high, which can be traced from Oklahoma northward to the western tip of Lake Superior. The location of the gravity high and its apparent relationship to this structural zone indicate that the Nemaha Ridge is separate from and unrelated to the tectonics of the site area.

3. The Thurman-Redfield Structural Zone extends northeasterly from the Nemaha Ridge approximately 100 miles and has a maximum throw of about 30 ft. Based on the available data, the structure may terminate about 100 miles west of the site, coinciding with the southeast bounds of the Mid-Continent gravity high in southeast Iowa. There is no geologic or geophysical evidence to indicate that this structural zone extends further east than Des Moines, Iowa; however, even if it did extend into Minnesota the conclusions drawn in this section would not be changed. The zone may be the result of shear that occurred during the development of the Nemaha Ridge.

4. The Cap au Gres Fault, about 200 miles south of the site, trends west and northwest. Small, northwest trending folds south and east of the site indicate that this structure cannot be extended into the region of gentle folds and slight crustal tilt of the site area.

5. The Ste. Genevieve-Cottage Grove-Shawneetown-Rough Creek fault complex in eastern Missouri, southern Illinois, and western Kentucky approaches to within about 300 miles south of the site. This structural belt, which is seismically active, separates the stable Continental Platform, on which the site is located, from the gradually subsiding Mississippi Embayment to the south. This post-Paleozoic structural belt is unrelated to the Paleozoic tectonic features of the site area.

2.5.2.3 Correlation of Earthquake Activity with Geologic Structures or Tectonic Provinces Refer to Section 2.5.2.2.2.5.2.4 Maximum Earthquake Potential See Section 2.5.2.6.2.5-13 Revision 14 - 11/98

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.5.2.5 Seismic Wave Transmission Characteristics of the Site Deformation moduli and damping characteristics of the foundation materials at the site are presented here. These moduli and damping factors were used for the design of the major structures to resist earthquake loading.Since soil is not a truly elastic medium, the commonly accepted terminology of modulus of elasticity and modulus of rigidity are not completely applicable. However, for ease of subsequent discussion, these terms will be used to describe soil properties that follow the general definitions used for elastic media. Although soils are not a fully elastic medium, the assumption of stress-strain linearity can usually be made for a particular stress level range. Thus, the assumption of elasticity theory is fairly suitable for use in measuring moduli of elasticity and rigidity. For competent rock, the assumption of a linear stress-strain relationship is generally quite good.The moduli and damping values selected for the foundation materials at the site are presented in Table 2.5-2 and are applicable in the range of loading that might be experienced by the foundation materials during earthquake loading. The moduli of elasticity and rigidity and the damping values presented in Table 2.5-2 were evaluated from various dynamic tests.2.5.2.6 Design-Basis Earthquake Seismic Category I structures at the power plant have been designed so that they can be safely shut down in the event ground accelerations at the site exceed those established for the OBE. Consequently, an evaluation has been made of the degree of ground motion which is remotely possible, considering both seismic history and geologic structure. The critical structures are designed for safe shutdown due to the appropriate ground accelerations at foundation level, presented in Table 2.5-3. In developing the DBE factors, it has been considered that there is a history of minor to moderate earthquake activity in the region, which has not been related to known tectonic features.The 1934 Intensity VI Rock Island shock and the 1909 Intensity VII central Illinois shock are the largest earthquakes in the region which cannot be related to specific tectonic features. However, it is believed that these shocks (and several smaller recorded shocks) may be related to minor faults formed during development of the Paleozoic uplift-basin-arch regional configuration. Although these fault zones are believed to have been dormant since Paleozoic time, earthquake activity in the area may represent deep crustal readjustment to Pleistocene glacial advance and retreat. Glacial rebound at the site area is nonexistent as far as it is known. However, since the tectonics of the entire region are essentially similar, minor earthquakes, similar to the 1909 (July) and 1934 shocks, could occur in the vicinity of the site. On the basis of this very conservative hypothesis, the effect of a shock similar to the July 1909 central Illinois earthquake with its epicenter near the site has been considered. It is estimated that the maximum horizontal ground acceleration at the rock surface due to such a shock would be about twelve percent of gravity.2.5-14 Revision 14 - 11/98

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The effect at the site of a possible future earthquake similar to a large historical shock has also been investigated. The results of this study are presented below:

1. The May 26, 1909, Intensity VII northern Illinois earthquake. Should a shock similar to this earthquake occur, even the closest approach to the site of the Sandwich fault (about 125 miles), the effect at the site would be barely perceptible.

2. The 1867 Intensity VII northeastern Kansas earthquake. This shock was probably related to the Nemaha Uplift-Abilene Arch structural system. Making the conservative assumption that a similar shock could occur as close to the site as the closest approach of the Thurman-Redfield Structural Zone (about 100 miles), the attenuated ground acceleration at the site would be less than 5% of gravity.

3. The 1811-1812 New Madrid earthquakes. Should a shock as large as one of these earthquakes occur as close to the site as the closest approach of the Ste.

Genevieve-Cottage Grove-Shawneetown-Rough Creek fault complex (about 300 miles), the attenuated ground acceleration at the site probably would be less than 5% of gravity.It is concluded that these occurrences would result in ground motion at the site significantly less than that selected for the DBE.Foundation level response spectra (horizontal) are presented in Figure 2.5-8 for the operating-basis and design-basis earthquakes. The response spectrum for the operating-basis earthquake (OBE) is equal to one-half of the corresponding DBE.For structures supported on bedrock or on lean concrete, Housners average response spectra, normalized to 6% and 12% of gravity (with appropriate damping), were used as the criteria response spectra. For structures supported on about 10 ft of compacted fill and/or natural glacial soils or soil cement fill overlying bedrock, the smoothed response spectra for the 1952 Taft, California, earthquake, normalized to 6%and 12% of gravity (with appropriate damping), were used as the criteria response spectra. For structures supported on 30 to 50 ft of overburden soils and/or compacted fill soils, the smoothed response spectra for the 1952 Taft, California, earthquake, normalized to 9% and 18% of gravity (with appropriate damping), were used as the criteria response spectra.The response spectra for structures supported on soil were selected because it is believed that the subsurface conditions at the site are comparable to those at the strong-motion recording stations for the 1952 Taft, California, earthquake. In addition, the epicentral distance of the shock and the expected maximum ground accelerations are near to those recorded at Taft.The response spectra indicate the estimated responses of a structure subjected to earthquake ground motion. The spectra are presented over a range of frequencies corresponding to the natural frequencies of the various structural elements. The spectra 2.5-15 Revision 14 - 11/98

UFSAR/DAEC-1 represent the maximum amplitude of motion in the various elements of the structure for typical degrees of damping.Time-history analyses were performed for the seismically analyzed structures.One earthquake time history was developed for use as the input motion in performing the seismic analysis of structures as discussed in Section 3.7.1.2. Modal response spectrum analyses were not performed because the time history produced spectra that were conservative relative to the criteria response spectra.On the basis of the seismic history of the area, it does not appear likely that the site will be subjected to significant earthquake ground motion during the life of the plant.However, Seismic Category I structures are conservatively designed to respond elastically, at foundation level, with no loss of function, to the appropriate foundation level accelerations presented in Table 2.5-3. See Table 2.5-4 for design information on these structures.2.5.2.7 Operating-Basis Earthquake The operating-basis earthquake is discussed in Section 2.5.2.6.2.5.3 SURFACE FAULTING Surface faulting is discussed within the context of Section 2.5.2.2.5.4 GEOLOGIC FEATURES 2.5-16 Revision 14 - 11/98

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.5.4.1 Geologic Features The site is located on the western flood plain of the Cedar River approximately 2.5 miles northeast of Palo, Iowa. The ground surface at the site slopes gently downward from northwest to southeast. The ground surface within the plant area is relatively level with elevations ranging from approximately 746 to 750 ft.The average depth of frost penetration in the vicinity of the site is about 3.5 ft.The principal soil and rock strata at the site are shown in Table 2.5-5. To assist in visualizing the subsurface conditions at the site, three subsurface sections are presented in Figures 2.5-11, 2.5-12, and 2.5-13.The principal soil and rock strata in the immediate plant area are as follows.The upper topsoil generally consists of loose silt and fine sand with a variable clay content.The alluvial deposits consist of loose to medium dense predominantly granular soils that range in gradation from silty and clayey fine sand to coarse sand with some gravel and occasional cobbles and boulders. The silt and clay content of this stratum generally decreases with depth. A medium stiff alluvial deposit of cohesive soils containing organic material and fragments of decayed wood is present in certain borings.This layer of cohesive soils, consisting of clayey silts and silty clays with a variable sand content, ranges in thickness from 4 to 9 ft and was encountered at approximately elevation 722 to 737 ft and extended to approximately elevation 717 to 732 ft.The glacial till soils are predominantly stiff to very stiff silty clay with some sand and gravel and occasional boulders.The Wapsipinicon Formation at the site contains three members. The upper member is the Davenport, which consists of light grayish-brown aphanitic limestone, which includes several breccia zones and a 6-in.-thick layer of dolomitic limestone. The Davenport Member is thinly bedded and is usually argillaceous.The middle member is the Spring Grove, which consists of light grayish-brown, finely crystalline to aphanitic dolomitic limestone. Numerous zones of solution-enlarged vugs up to 6 in. in diameter were encountered in this zone. A trace of grayish-brown residual clay was detected in some of the vugs.The Kenwood is the third member of the Wapsipinicon Formation. The Kenwood consists of gray crystalline dolomitic limestone, which grades to argillaceous limestone and is interbedded with calcareous shales. The Wapsipinicon Formation is underlain by the Gower Formation, which extends to the depth penetrated by the borings. The Gower Formation is composed of gray aphanitic dolomite. Occasional highly argillaceous, vugged, and fossiliferous zones were encountered within the formation.2.5-17 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 A cavity was encountered in Boring 21 that extended from approximately elevation 676 to 684 ft. The cavity, which is partially soil filled, is located in the Spring Grove Member at the interface between the Spring Grove and Kenwood Members of the Wapsipinicon Formation. The soils encountered in the cavity consisted of clayey silts and silty clays containing occasional pockets of sand and gravel and occasional seams of black decayed organic materials.Additional borings revealed that the cavity may be a channel or a series of interconnected cavities. The vertical dimension of the cavities encountered ranged from approximately 12 to 3.5 ft.No other major cavities were encountered in the 65 borings drilled in the plant area. Numerous additional open and soil filled cavities, up to a few inches in thickness, and small solution-enlarged vugs and joints were encountered in many of the test borings.Although only one major cavity was encountered in the test-drilling program, geologic studies and the interpretation of test-boring results indicated that other such cavities could be present in the immediate plant area. A rock inspection and exploration-probing program, cavity stability analyses, and a rock-grouting program were performed to provide assurance that the rock would provide suitable foundation support. These programs are discussed in Section 2.5.4.3.2.5.4.2 Properties of Subsurface Materials The properties of subsurface materials are discussed within the context of Section 2.5.4.3. Section 2.5.7 provides additional information for the area in the vicinity of the low-level radwaste processing and storage facility.2.5.4.3 Explorations The original exploration program is discussed below. Explorations made for the low-level radwaste processing and storage facility are discussed in Section 2.5.7.2.5.4.3.1 General Field explorations and laboratory tests were performed to evaluate the geologic, seismologic, and foundation characteristics of the site. The field exploration program consisted of the following:

1. A geologic reconnaissance of the region and site.

2. A test-boring program.

3. Geophysical explorations that included geophysical refraction surveys, an uphole velocity survey, and micromotion measurements.

2.5-18 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The field exploration program was conducted under the technical direction and supervision of Dames & Moore geologists, engineering seismologists, geophysicists, and soils engineers. All surveying necessary to determine the locations and surface elevations related to the field explorations was provided by Soil Testing Services of Iowa, Inc.2.5.4.3.2 Geologic Reconnaissance A geologic reconnaissance of the general area surrounding the site was performed to examine surface features to aid in the evaluation of the geologic characteristics of the area. The site was inspected with respect to topography, river features, surface soils, drainage, and other related surface features.Geologic literature and aerial photographs of the site area were studied.Representatives of local, state, and Federal agencies; private organizations and universities were interviewed to obtain all available geologic data.2.5.4.3.3 Test-Boring Program The subsurface conditions at the site were investigated by drilling 15 test borings for the geologic study, 57 test borings for the foundation investigation in the plant area, and 9 test borings to define the lateral extent and shape of a solution cavity encountered in Boring 21. In addition, nine auger holes were augered to define the bedrock surface.The borings were drilled to depths ranging from 44 to 198.5 ft below the existing ground surface. The locations of the field explorations are shown in Figures 2.5-6, 2.5-14, 2.5-15, and 2.5-16.Borings Pl through P10 (P8 omitted) were drilled at the site by Soil Testing Services of Iowa, and the results were provided to Dames & Moore for review and use during the geologic studies. The logs of these borings are presented in Figures 2.5-17 through 2.5-20. In addition, Borings Al through A9 were augered by Soil Testing Services of Iowa. The results of the auger borings are presented in Table 2.5-6.The drilling operations for Borings Pll through P13, 1 through 54, and 21A through 21I were supervised by Dames & Moore engineers and geologists, who maintained a log of the borings, obtained relatively undisturbed samples of the soil using a Dames & Moore soil sampler and shelby tubes, performed standard penetration tests, and supervised the diamond core drilling operations performed to extract cores of the underlying rock. Soil samples were not obtained from Borings 21A through 21I.Graphical representations of the soils and rock encountered in these borings are shown in Figures 2.5-21 through 2.5-82. The method used in classifying the soils encountered in the borings is defined in Figure 2.5-83.Relatively undisturbed samples of the soils penetrated were obtained in a Dames& Moore soil sampler as illustrated in Figure 2.5-84 and 2-in. shelby tubes. Standard penetration tests were also performed in the test borings. The method of obtaining 2.5-19 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 samples and the sample type is explained in the log of borings. Rock cores were obtained from the borings by using BX- and NX-size coring equipment.Perforated pipe was installed in several borings at the completion of the drilling operations. The casing prevented the walls of the boring from caving and allowed periodic ground-water-level measurements to be taken. The results of the ground-water observations are recorded in the log of borings.The ground-surface elevation is shown above the log of each boring and refers to U.S. Geological Survey datum.2.5.4.3.4 Geophysical Explorations The following geophysical explorations were conducted at the site:

1. Seismic refraction lines to define the bedrock topography.

2. A seismic refraction line for the determination of dynamic soil and rock properties.

3. An uphole velocity survey to provide additional dynamic and rock properties.

4. Micromotion observations to determine predominant periods of ground motion at the site.

The locations of the above explorations are shown in Figure 2.5-6. A description of each phase of the geophysical explorations is provided in the following sections.2.5.4.3.4.1 Seismic Refraction Surveys Five seismic refraction lines were run to define the bedrock topography at the site.The north-south and east-west seismic lines were performed by Soil Testing Services of Iowa. Seismic lines X-X, Y-Y, and Z-Z were also performed by Soil Testing Services of Iowa under the direct technical supervision of a Dames & Moore geophysicist. These seismic lines were used in conjunction with the geologic and foundation test borings to arrive at the bedrock contours presented in Figure 2.5-6.In addition, a short seismic refraction line was run by a Dames & Moore geophysicist to determine dynamic properties for the soil and rock. Six groups of geophones, spaced at 100-ft intervals, were used to detect the various seismic waves generated by small explosive charges. Each geophone group consisted of two geophones, oriented vertically and horizontally in a radial direction. The charges were generally buried at least 3 ft below the ground surface and were placed at distances of 20, 400, and 800 ft from both ends of the seismic line. Permanent records of the seismic waves generated were obtained by using an Electro-Technical Labs M-4-E amplifier and a SDW-100 oscillograph.2.5-20 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The apparent compressional velocities measured during these studies are presented in Figure 2.5-85. Because of the relatively large number and the thinness of soil and rock layers at the site, measurements could not be obtained of either the shear wave velocity or a surface wave velocity as is generated by Raleigh waves.2.5.4.3.4.2 Seismic Measurements and Resistivity Survey Additional geophysical surveys were made by Western Geophysical Engineers, Inc., at foundation level under the reactor building to further evaluate foundation conditions.These geophysical studies, which consisted of seismic measurements and resistivity surveys, were to serve as an aid in outlining solution cavities filled with detrital glacial till and clay in the bedrock limestone underlying the reactor building. The field measurements were made during the period of March 14 through March 18, 1970.Data were recorded on six seismic lines in the reactor area, presented in Figure 2.5-86. Three of these lines had a common point at borehole B-288 on the southern side of the excavation. The three remaining lines had a common point at B-237 in the southwestern corner of the excavation site. The three lines from B-288 were laid toward B-67, B-55A, and B-101, with the four boreholes being used as shot points off the ends of the seismic lines. Similarly, the three lines shot from B-237 extended to shot points in B-101, B-67, and B-248.The line between B-288 and B-67 was also occupied by eight short, overlapping refraction lines. Energy for running these lines was obtained by either hammer blows from the ends of the lines or light explosive charges in B-67.The seismic geophone locations are shown in Figure 2.5-86, except for the short refraction lines with detector spacing of 3 and 6 ft between B-288 and B-67.Once the velocity of the sound rock was established from the recorded data, the arrival times at the individual geophones were interpretable in terms of whether the seismic energy arrived at this velocity or at a slower velocity. A slower velocity indicated that a portion of the travel path was through clay zones between the shot point and the detector.All of the long seismic lines recorded compressional (P) wave velocities of 15,000 fps, indicating in general that sound rock extended throughout the reactor area.The short surface refraction lines with penetration limited to the top few feet of rock had P-wave velocities between 9000 and 10,000 fps, and the transverse (S) wave velocities between 3300 and 3700 fps.Individual detector positions having clay zone indications are shown in Figure 2.5-86, qualified, as shown in the legend, on whether based on one-way or two-way arrival data.2.5-21 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 A Wenner electrode configuration with 10-ft electrode spacing was used to obtain resistivity data from the north-south pattern of lines labeled A through M in Figure 2.5-86.Lines B to F were run on March 15; lines G, H, K, and M on March 16; and lines K and M were repeated on March 17, in addition to new lines A, J, and L. The level of surface water and the dryness of the surface rocks and muds changed markedly from day to day. The high water level on the 16th influenced the resistivity results on the eastern half of the excavated area and reduced the depth penetration seriously. The affected lines were rerun successfully the following day after additional pumping had lowered the water level.The contoured resistivity values are shown in Figures 2.5-87 and 2.5-88. These resistivity values are plotted in ohm-feet. Units of ohm-feet were used for convenience, but may be converted to ohm-centimeters by multiplying by 30.5. In general, lower resistivity values correlate with known clay-filled solution cavities. However, the low resistivity values on the outer north-south lines (A and M) are a result, in part, to the lateral influence of the glacial till slopes to the side and above the rock floor of the excavation. The surface drainage pattern running north-south through the center of the excavation area appeared to be responsible for the broad area of lower resistivity values outlined essentially by the 2000 ohm-ft contour in this part of the excavation.A resistivity high was located at B-234 (not shown) north of the line joining B-238 and B-248, and in line between B-288 and B-67. The sharp saddle in this type of feature illustrated the case of a sharply defined low-resistivity section in a high-resistivity area.The resistivity results confirmed the evaluation of the seismic data that the overall rock quality is good with sharply localized zones of solution cavities. Combined seismic and resistivity data indicated areas of possible cavity zones. These were further investigated with drill holes.2.5.4.3.4.3 Uphole Velocity Survey An uphole velocity survey was performing in Boring 12 to provide a check on the compressional wave velocities measured during the seismic refraction surveys. The boring was cased to the rock surface, 47 ft below the ground surface, with steel casing.Small explosive charges were buried at a depth of approximately 3 ft and at a radial distance of 15 ft from the boring. The seismic response to the explosive charges was detected in the boring with a 12-trace geophone cable and was recorded with an Electro-Technical Labs M-4-E amplifier and a SDW-100 oscillograph.The results of the uphole velocity survey are presented in Figure 2.5-89. It should be noted that the compressional velocity of the bedrock measured from this survey is less than the corresponding compressional velocity measured by seismic refraction. Since the seismic refraction surveys record the average dynamic properties of the bedrock over a distance and the uphole velocity survey provides dynamic properties at an isolated point, 2.5-22 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 the compressional velocities measured during the seismic refraction survey are more representative of the actual dynamic properties of the bedrock.2.5.4.3.4.4 Micromotion Observations Micromotion observations were made at four locations using the Dames & Moore micromotion equipment (Kosaka recording system). This equipment measures ground displacement and is capable of magnifying ground motions up to 150,000 times. The equipment is capable of recording ground displacements ranging in frequency from 1 to 300 Hz. The micromotion records indicate predominant periods of ground motion at the site.Micromotion observation 1 was obtained on a rock outcrop near a quarry on the west section line of Section 18, Township 84 north, Range 8 west, approximately 3 miles southwest of the site. The intensity of ground motion was very low with no predominant period, which is indicative of hard rock. Observations were also made at three locations shown in Figure 2.5-6. The depth to bedrock at each location and the predominant ground periods observed are indicated in Table 2.5-7.2.5.4.3.5 Laboratory Tests Samples extracted from the test borings were subjected to a laboratory testing program to evaluate the physical properties of the soils encountered at the site. The laboratory test program included the following tests:

1. Static tests

a. Direct shear.

b. Unconfined compression.

c. Triaxial compression.

d. Consolidation.

e. Rock compression.

2. Dynamic tests

a. Triaxial compression.

b. Shockscope.

c. Resonant column.

3. Other physical tests

a. Moisture and density tests.

b. Particle-size analyses.

c. Atterberg limits.

2.5-23 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 2.5.4.3.5.1 Static Tests Strength Tests Selected representative soil samples recovered from the borings were tested to evaluate their strength characteristics. These tests were performed to evaluate the bearing capacity of the soils underlying the site. The direct shear tests were performed in the manner described in Figure 2.5-90. Unconfined compression and triaxial compression tests were performed in the manner described in Figure 2.5-91. A load-deflection curve was plotted for each strength test, and the strength of the soil was determined from this curve. For the direct shear tests, the shearing strength is a yield strength, and for the unconfined compression tests, the shearing strength is either the peak strength or the strength at an axial deflection of one-tenth of the sample height, whichever occurs first. Determinations of the field moisture content and dry density of the soils were made in conjunction with each strength test. The results of the strength tests and the corresponding moisture content and dry density determinations for Borings 1 through 36 are presented in the log of borings. The method of presenting the test data is described by the key to test data shown in Figure 2.5-83. The results of strength tests and the corresponding moisture content and dry density determinations for Borings Pll through P13 are presented in Table 2.5-8.Consolidation tests Representative samples of the soils that were obtained from the borings were subjected to consolidation tests. These tests were performed to evaluate the compressibility characteristics of the soils. The method of performing consolidation tests is described in Figure 2.5-92. The results of these tests and the associated moisture content and dry density determinations are presented in Figures 2.5-93 through 2.5-95.Rock Compression Tests Rock compression tests were performed on selected samples of the bedrock that underlie the site of the proposed plant. The rock compression tests were performed to evaluate the strength and elasticity characteristics of the bedrock. The tests on the rock cores were performed by the Robert W. Hunt Company and Soil Testing Services of Iowa. The results of the rock compression tests are presented in Table 2.5-9.2.5.4.3.5.2 Dynamic Tests Triaxial Compression Tests To evaluate the effect of vibratory motion on the strength of the in-situ soils and to determine the dynamic properties of those soils, selected samples were subjected to dynamic triaxial compression tests. The test procedure used is similar to that for static triaxial compression tests as defined in Figure 2.5-91. Each sample was subjected to a predetermined chamber pressure. The soil sample was then subjected to a series of 2.5-24 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 oscillating loads applied axially to the sample at a specified deviator stress. The additional deformation or strain of the soil sample under each oscillating load was recorded. The results of the dynamic triaxial tests are presented in Section 2.5.2.5.Shockscope Tests Several samples of the soil and rock underlying the site were tested in the shockscope. The shockscope is an instrument developed by Dames & Moore to measure the velocity of propagation of compressional waves in the material tested. The velocity of compressional wave propagation observed in the laboratory is used for correlation purposes with the field velocity measurements obtained in the geophysical refraction surveys.In the shockscope tests performed, samples were subjected to a physical shock under a range of confining pressures, and the time necessary for the shock wave to travel the length of the sample was measured using an oscilloscope. The velocity of compressional wave propagation was then computed. Since this velocity is proportional to the dynamic modulus of elasticity of the sample, the data are also used in evaluating the dynamic elastic properties. The results of the tests are presented in Table 2.5-10.Resonant Column Tests Resonant column tests were performed on samples of soil and rock to determine the modulus of rigidity of the materials. The samples are set up in an apparatus that is similar to a triaxial compression cell. The sample is then subjected to steady-state, sinusoidal, torsional forces applied to the top of the sample. The frequency of the force application is varied until the resonant frequency is attained, that is, the frequency associated with the maximum steady-state amplitude. The modulus of rigidity can be computed from the resonant frequency since it is primarily a function of the stiffness (modulus of rigidity) of the samples.The results of the resonant column tests are presented in Table 2.5-11.2.5.4.3.5.3 Other Physical Tests Moisture-Density Determinations In addition to the moisture content and dry density determinations made in conjunction with the strength and consolidation tests, independent moisture and density tests were performed on other undisturbed soil samples for correlation purposes. The results of all moisture and density determinations are presented in the log of borings.2.5-25 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Particle-Size Analyses A number of selected soil samples were analyzed to determine their grain-size distribution. The results of the analyses were used principally for classification purposes and to provide information for dewatering purposes. Grain-size curves illustrating the results of the particle-size analyses are presented in Figures 2.5-96 through 2.5-100.Atterberg Limits Representative samples were tested to evaluate the plasticity characteristics. The results of these tests were used primarily for classification purposes. The Atterberg limit determinations are presented in Table 2.5-12.2.5.4.3.5.4 Sandfill Laboratory tests were performed on a representative sample of sandfill to evaluate the dynamic soil properties of the sandfill that was placed for support of certain structures. The laboratory tests consisted of a sieve analysis, compaction test, maximum and minimum densities, and resonant column tests. The results of these tests are presented in Table 2.5-13.2.5.4.4 Geophysical Surveys Geophysical surveys have been discussed in the context of Section 2.5.4.3.Additional information for conditions in the vicinity of the low-level radwaste processing and storage facility is discussed in Section 2.5.7.2.5.4.5 Excavations and Backfill The information below is not inclusive of the low-level radwaste processing and storage facility, which is discussed in Section 2.5.7.2.5.4.5.1 General This section presents general criteria that were followed during excavating, dewatering, and filling. The methods of foundation support for the various structures are discussed and foundation design criteria are provided in Section 2.5.4.11.2.5.4.5.2 Dewatering Excavations for the turbine building and pump house extended below the ground-water level in the upper alluvial deposits. The excavation for the reactor building and intake structure extended to the rock surface, thus removing the impermeable cap existing over the artesian bedrock aquifer. Dewatering operations were therefore required in connection with all subsurface construction below approximately elevation 736 ft. The elevation of the ground water varied during the construction period, in 2.5-26 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 response to rain-fall, snow melt, and surface runoff conditions. Dewatering at the site was conducted by a qualified dewatering contractor in the following manner:

1. A well-point system was installed to lower the water table within the upper alluvial deposits. No dewatering of the lower glacial till soils was necessary because of the impermeable nature of these materials. However, minor water seepage through the glacial till was collected and pumped from the excavation.

2. The rock dewatering installation consisted of well points and deep wells into the rock and a system of sumps in the rock in which water was collected and pumped from the excavation.

The dewatering system maintained the water level in the upper soils and bedrock below all excavations or fill surfaces. Piezometers were installed to ensure that the water level in the over-burden soils and the artesian head in the bedrock were continuously maintained at a satisfactory level.2.5.4.5.3 Excavation This section presents the excavating operations that were required to attain planned grades and to prepare soils for the support of foundations or fill materials. The treatment of rock required for the support of foundations is discussed in Section 2.5.4.12.The maximum depth of excavation was about 40 to 45 ft in the vicinity of the reactor building and intake structure. A portion of the soils excavated were granular materials that provided an excellent source of fill materials. These soils were stockpiled during excavation and used later as select fill and backfill material under foundations, floor slabs, and adjacent substructure walls.In connection with attaining the required foundation levels, for all structures other than those supported on rock, all natural granular soils were either excavated from below foundation level in Seismic Category I building areas, or the granular soils were investigated to verify that liquefaction will not occur during the postulated DBE.All loose granular soils and soft cohesive and organic soils were excavated in the turbine building area. The excavation of these soils and subsequent backfilling with controlled compacted fill where required was necessary to provide uniform support and to minimize differential settlement of the turbine building foundation. All loose or soft material and water were removed from the bottom of the excavations and the exposed soils were thoroughly proof rolled to detect any localized zones of soft or loose soils and to compact the soils disturbed by construction operations. Zones of soft or loose soils that could not be compacted were removed and replaced with controlled compacted fill.2.5-27 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The glacial till soils are susceptible to a loss of strength resulting from frost action, disturbance, and/or the presence of water. Insulating materials were installed in foundation excavations left open during the winter to prevent the softening and disturbance of the upgrade soils because of frost action.On the attainment of final foundation grade in each area, a working mat of lean concrete was poured to prevent the loss of strength in the subgrade soils from water seepage and disturbance by construction operations.Banks of the excavations were constructed on stable slopes that underwent only minor localized sloughing. Where localized sloughing occurred, the disturbed materials were removed before placing any backfill.2.5.4.5.4 Sources of Fill Materials Available sources of fill materials were essentially the following:

1. Materials removed from the plant excavations. These materials consisted of the following:

a. Alluvial deposits (predominantly granular soils underlying the topsoil). Some of these granular soils were used in controlled compacted fill for the support of foundations and floor slabs and as back-fill adjacent to substructure walls.

The silty soils encountered in the upper portion of this stratum were not used for structural backfill.

b. Alluvial deposits (predominantly clayey silts and silty clays with some sand and some organic material). These soils were not considered suitable for use in controlled compacted fills for the support of structural loads but were used for site grading for construction activity.

c. Glacial till soils. These soils would be difficult to place and compact in a controlled compacted fill because of their sensitivity to moisture. These materials were, therefore, not considered desirable fill material for the support of foundations, floor slabs or adjacent to substructure walls, and consequently, they were not used for these purposes. They were used for general site grading in the construction area.

2. Materials obtained from other onsite sources. Two potential sources of fill were investigated: (a) a borrow area in the river flood plain at the site outside the immediate plant area, and (b) a borrow area in the offshore islands of the Cedar River adjacent to the site. Both of these areas yielded acceptable granular materials that were satisfactory for use in the construction of fills for the support of foundations and floor slabs and as backfill adjacent to substructure walls. Item b, a borrow area in the offshore islands of the Cedar River adjacent to the site, was used to obtain the granular material for fill at the site.

2.5-28 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1

3. Materials imported from offsite sources. Several possible offsite sources in the Cedar Rapids area were investigated. Available materials include clean granular materials such as processed sand and crushed limestone. Such materials were considered suitable for use in the construction of controlled compacted fills for the support of foundations and floor slabs and as backfill adjacent to substructure walls. Granular material from offsite sources was tested before placement to establish compaction criteria.

2.5.4.5.5 Filling and Backfilling Fills up to approximately 7 to 13 ft in thickness were required in the attainment of the proposed final grade of elevation 757 ft. In addition, fills and backfills were required below and adjacent to structures.All areas that are to receive structural loading, in which the final grade was raised by the placement of fill, were stripped of all topsoil and thoroughly proof rolled. The proof-rolling operations were required to detect any localized zones of soft or loose soils and to compact the exposed soils. Zones of soft or loose soils that could not be compacted were removed and replaced with controlled compacted fill.All fill and backfill materials were placed at or near the optimum moisture content in lifts not exceeding 8 to 10 in. in loose thickness. Each lift was compacted in accordance with the criteria of Table 2.5-14.It was considered that granular fills, for the support of Seismic Category I structures, placed in accordance with the above criteria, would have a significant margin of safety against possible liquefaction under the postulated design-basis earthquake.Following the selection of a source or sources of granular fill materials, laboratory tests were performed on representative compacted samples to verify that the margin of safety against liquefaction was satisfactory.Filling operations were performed under the continuous technical supervision of a qualified soils engineer who performed in-place density tests in the compacted fill to verify that all materials were placed and compacted in accordance with the recommended criteria.2.5.4.6 Ground-Water Conditions During the original exploration at DAEC, ground water was encountered in the alluvial deposits overlying the glacial till at approximately elevation 738 to 742 ft. The ground-water level will vary during the year in response to rainfall and snow melt and will generally slope toward the Cedar River. The glacial till deposits are practically 2.5-29 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 impermeable but may contain trapped water in pockets of granular soils. Most of the borings that penetrated the bedrock surface demonstrated a sustained artesian head up to 4 ft above the ground surface, approximately to elevation 749 to 751 ft. Many of the original borings displayed artesian heads of up to 14 ft above grade when the bedrock was initially penetrated. The glacial till probably forms a complete cap over the artesian aquifer in the bedrock.The level of the Cedar River at the site varied between elevation 732 to 734 ft during the time of the field investigation, June and July 1968. The maximum flood of record occurred in March 1961 when the Cedar River reached elevation 746.5 ft at the site. The Cedar River reached a peak stage of 751 ft with an approximate discharge flow of 110,000 cfs on June 13, 2008 at the Duane Arnold Energy Center.2.5.4.7 Response of Soil and Rock to Dynamic Loading See Sections 3.7.2.4, 2.5.4.3, and 2.5.7.2.5.4.8 Liquefaction Potential No problem of liquefaction or partial loss of soil strength under seismic loading is expected for any of the major structures discussed in this report. All loose granular soils extending below foundation level of Seismic Category I structures were investigated to verify their stability under seismic loading. If an insufficient margin of safety existed, these soils were removed and replaced by compacted fill that was sufficiently dense to provide a significant margin of safety against a loss of strength or liquefaction during the postulated design-basis earthquake.2.5.4.9 Earthquake Design Basis The seismic design basis is discussed in Chapter 3.2.5.4.10 Static Stability The walls of the power plant structures that are constructed below grade are subjected to horizontal components of adjacent foundation loads, plus lateral pressures due to backfill soils and water. In the design of these relatively rigid walls to resist backfill and water pressures only, the compacted granular fill material above the water table was assumed to act as an equivalent fluid having a unit weight of 50 lb/ft3. Below the water table, the compacted fill and the water are assumed to act as an equivalent fluid having a unit weight of 90 lb/ft3. These values are based on the original DAEC soil boring report. All Seismic Category I structures were designed for hydrostatic and uplift pressures from the probable maximum flood, elevation 767.0 feet msl.Substructure walls that are established below adjacent foundations are designed to resist certain horizontal components of foundation loads imposed by the adjacent foundations. Uplift loads are resisted by the deadweight of the structure and the frictional 2.5-30 Revision 21 - 5/11

UFSAR/DAEC-1 resistance between the foundation walls and the granular backfill material. The frictional resistance was computed by assuming the granular soils have a unit weight of 120 lb/ft3 above the assumed ground-water level, and 60 lb/ft3 below the assumed ground-water level, an angle of internal friction of 35 degrees, a coefficient of lateral earth pressure equal to 0.3, and a coefficient of friction between soil and concrete equal to 0.4. A minimum factor of safety against uplift on the order of 1.2 was maintained.Floor slabs established below the design floor level were designed for full hydrostatic pressure and were provided with adequate drainage facilities.All backfill adjacent to walls is composed of clean granular materials.All earth-supported floor slabs are underlain by a lean concrete mud mat or by a layer of thoroughly compacted clean granular fill at least 6 in. in compacted thickness.2.5.4.11 Design Criteria The reactor building is supported on a mat foundation established on rock, The program of rock inspection, exploration, and grouting for the reactor foundation is discussed in Section 2.5.4.12.The intake structure was founded at the same level as the reactor building. It is supported similarly and required rock exploration.Exploratory drillings to detect cavities were also conducted for the stack, radwaste building, pump house, and turbine building as discussed in Section 2.5.4.12, although a wider spacing of exploration probings was used.The low-level radwaste processing and storage facility, a non-seismic structure, is separated into processing and storage portions. The processing section has a reinforced concrete footing foundation supported on piles, while the storage section has a mat foundation also supported on piles.Mat foundations for the radwaste building and control building were founded at higher elevations. These structures were founded predominantly on compacted granular materials placed as backfill adjacent to the reactor and turbine building substructures.Little or no natural granular materials remain in place under the foundations of Seismic Category I structures. Any such materials that remained in place were evaluated to verify stability under seismic loading or were removed and replaced with compacted fill soils.The stack is supported on a mat foundation established at elevation 745 ft.Natural granular materials below the stack foundation were evaluated to verify stability under seismic loading.2.5-31 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The turbine building, a Nonseismic structure, is supported on a mat foundation The turbine mat foundation was established entirely on stiff cohesive glacial till soils or on suitably controlled compacted fill materials overlying the till.2.5.4.12 Techniques to Improve Subsurface Conditions 2.5.4.12.1 Rock Exploration The reactor building and intake structure are supported directly on rock or on a lean concrete fill overlying the rock surface. Since solution cavities were encountered in the bedrock beneath the plant during the initial site explorations, a program for rock inspection was conducted under the supervision of experienced engineering geologists.The rock inspection was as follows:

1. The exposed bedrock was carefully inspected to detect surface joint patterns, fracturing, weathering, and cavities. All unsuitable rock or foreign materials were removed and replaced with lean concrete fill.

2. Exploration probe holes in the area under the reactor building and control building were drilled on a grid pattern 14 ft on centers in each direction. One probing in the reactor area was drilled to a depth of 175 ft. All other probe holes extended a minimum of 40 ft below the rock surface below foundation and grade, and probe into bedrock. In areas of heavy foundation loading below the reactor drywell and reactor peripheral foundations, a supplementary grid pattern of probings was intermeshed with the probes at 14-ft centers. These supplementary probes consisted of another grid pattern 14 ft on centers in each direction extending 40 ft into bedrock. Thus, for heavily loaded areas, the resulting overall drilling grid was 10 ft on centers. Additional probe holes were drilled if required to further define height and lateral extent of cavities of significant size that were detected by the initial drilling pattern.

The turbine building was founded at elevation 729 ft, and an exploration probe hole grid on 40-ft centers extending 40 ft into the rock surface was established.The radwaste building and stack are founded at elevations 745 to 750 ft. For these structures, exploration probe holes for cavity detection were spaced at approximately 28-ft centers and 40-ft centers, respectively, and extended a minimum of 40 ft below the rock surface.The pump house is founded at elevation 723 ft, and an exploration probe hole grid of approximately 16-ft centers extending 20 ft into the rock surface was established.The intake structure is founded at elevation 706 ft, and an exploration probe hole grid of 15-ft centers both 20 and 40 ft into the rock was established.2.5-32 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The low-level radwaste processing and storage facility is founded at elevation 752 to 756 feet. Four exploratory borings were established to a depth of five feet into the rock.Figures 2.5-6, 2.5-14, 2.5-15, and 2.5-16 show the location, spacing, and depth of exploratory probe holes under all Seismic Category I structures or Nonseismic structures housing Seismic Category I equipment. Figure 2.5-101 depicts a typical probing log.2.5.4.12.2 Remedial Treatment of Rock All exploration probe holes were pressure grouted. Before grouting the probe holes, each probe hole was cleaned with rotary wash drilling equipment to remove any debris that had fallen in the hole subsequent to drilling and to ensure that grout would penetrate to the full depth of the probe hole.The rock-grouting program consisted of pressure grouting probe holes with a water-cement mix having a 1:1 ratio or a water-cement-sand mix having a ratio ranging from 1:1:1/2 to 1:1:2. In most of the probe holes, a packer was set at a depth of approximately 5 ft below the top of the rock, and the probe hole below the packer was then pressure grouted by using, a pressure of 5 psi. In some probe holes, a packer was set lower than 5 ft and correspondingly higher grouting pressures were used. Above a depth of 5 ft, the probe holes were filled by simple backfilling procedures. In probe holes where an adequate seal of the packer could not be obtained, the hole was filled by backfilling, and a new probe hole was drilled and pressure grouted to provide assurance that grout had filled all significant voids in the bedrock.Detailed daily records were kept of the probe holes grouted, the depth grouted, the grout mix used, the grouting pressure used, and the sacks of cement and sand placed in each hole.Rock surface treatment consisted of cleaning and filling with concrete all cavities and solution channels encountered at the bedrock surface. Surface fissures were generally filled with a stiff clay, and this clay was removed to a depth of at least twice the width of the fissure.Several fissures or clay-filled openings increased in size with depth below the rock surface, and these areas were inspected by removing essentially all the clay fillings.At some locations, this required removing rock cover from over an opening in order to gain access for cleaning, inspecting, and filling.The largest soil-filled cavity encountered was in the vicinity of probe holes 224 and 225. From a depth of 4 to 8 ft below the rock surface, this cavity was approximately 20 ft long and 12 ft wide. From a depth of 8 to 12 ft below the rock surface, the cavity was approximately 8 ft long and 6 ft wide. The cavity did not extend beyond a depth of approximately 12 ft below the rock surface.2.5-33 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 The rock at the site is considered suitable for structural support on the following bases:

1. All cavities and solution channels encountered at the bedrock surface were cleaned to a depth at least twice the lateral extent of the fissure and filled with concrete.

2. No large cavities that could detrimentally affect structural performance were encountered by the probing program.

3. Pressure grouting of all probe holes was performed, thus minimizing the effects of minor cavities and vugs not otherwise treated.

4. Hypothetical cavities that might not have been detected by the exploration-probing program can be spanned by the structures and will not adversely affect foundation performance.

2.5.4.12.3 Mat Foundations The ultimate bearing capacities of materials supporting mat foundations of the major units of the proposed construction have been evaluated on a conservative basis.The ultimate bearing capacities presented in Table 2.5-15 can be developed for mat foundations established at the appropriate tabulated elevations.The ultimate bearing pressure values in Table 2.5-15 are gross values and consider ground water and finished plant grade to be at elevation 757 ft.The ultimate bearing capacities of mat foundations established near the upper surface of the cohesive glacial soils were computed by using Skempton's1 method. The ultimate bearing capacities of mat or spread foundations established in natural or compacted granular soils were computed by using Terzaghi's2 method and were modified to prevent overstressing of the underlying glacial till soils. The significant parameters in both of these methods are the strength characteristics of the supporting soils, the width of the foundation, and the depth to foundation grade.The bearing capacities shown in Table 2.5-15 are ultimate values, and suitable factors of safety have been applied. It is considered that a minimum factor of safety of 3 is appropriate for dead loads and frequently applied live loads. It is considered that a minimum factor of safety of 2 is satisfactory for dead, live, and seismic loads (design-basis earthquake). Table 2.5-16 presents a summary of the factors of safety for the various units that will be supported on mat foundations.The results of settlement analyses for mat foundations imposing the bearing pressures given in Table 2.5-16 are presented in Table 2.5-17.2.5.4.12.4 Spread Foundations 2.5-34 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Conventional spread foundations are used for the support of the administration building and other appurtenant structures. These foundations are established in controlled compacted granular fill that has been placed to attain finished grade. The spread foundations are established at 3.5 ft below the lowest adjacent grade, and all controlled compacted fill was placed and compacted in accordance with the previously indicated criteria. The spread foundations were designed using the bearing pressures presented in Table 2.5-18. A higher bearing value may be used for foundations having an embedment larger than 3.5 ft. The bearing pressures were computed on the assumptions that the water table level is at elevation 757 ft and that foundations are at a relatively shallow depth. These bearing pressures refer to the total of all dead and live loads and are net values. Since these are net pressures, the weight of the backfill over the foundations and the weight of the concrete in the foundations was ignored in proportioning the foundations. The bearing pressures contain a factor of safety on the order of 3 and pertain to all design loads, excluding seismic loads. For seismic loads, the net bearing pressures have been increased by one-half.2.5.4.12.5 Settlement Settlement analyses were performed from results of consolidation tests that indicate that the glacial soils at the site have been preconsolidated under overburden and glacial pressures on the order of 10,000 lb/ft2. The results of the consolidation tests are presented in Section 2.5.4.3. The settlement analysis has been based on previously stated assumptions regarding foundation elevations and foundation loading conditions. The results of the analysis will therefore be reviewed when structural loads and foundation elevations are finalized.The results of the settlement analyses for mat foundations are presented in Table 2.5-17.It is estimated that shallow spread foundations supporting a total design load of up to 30,000 lb and proportioned using the bearing pressures presented in the previous section will undergo settlement on the order of 0.5 in. or less.Differential settlements between adjacent structures may be estimated by computing the differences between the settlements given in Table 2.5-17.Earthquake loading of short duration should not cause additional settlement of appreciable magnitude. The effects of earthquakes were evaluated by dynamic laboratory tests. Using an appropriate dynamic modulus of elasticity of 1,000,000 lb/ft2 for soil, it is estimated that additional settlements of earth-supported mat foundations under earthquake loading will be less than 1/8 in.The time rate of settlement for earth-supported mat foundations underlain by natural glacial till soils has been estimated from results of engineering analyses of the consolidation test data. The approximate portion of the total settlement of a mat foundation that will have occurred at various times after the full bearing pressure has 2.5-35 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 been applied to the supporting soils has been estimated and is summarized in Table 2.5-19.The settlement of conventional spread foundation, established on an appreciable thickness of controlled compacted granular fill or within the natural granular soils overlying the glacial till, will occur essentially as the load is applied to the foundation.2.5.4.13 Subsurface Instrumentation See the response to Safety Guide 12 in Section 1.8.12.2.5.5 STABILITY OF SLOPES This section presents a summary of foundation design criteria prepared on the basis of a comprehensive foundation investigation performed at the site. The plant is located near the Village of Palo in Linn County, Iowa. The site is located adjacent to and west of the Cedar River, approximately 8 miles northwest of Cedar Rapids, Iowa.The subsurface conditions at the site consist of an upper stratum of loose to medium dense granular soils underlain by stiff glacial till soils. The glacial till is underlain by limestone bedrock of the Wapsipinicon formation. The bedrock, which is at a depth of 40 to 50 ft in the immediate plant area, contains some solution cavities that are discussed in detail in Sections 2.5.4.1 and 2.5.4.8. The solutioning process apparently developed before glaciation and is considered inactive at this time.Competent foundation support has been ensured by a program of explorations to detect major cavities that may underlie foundations by a comprehensive rock-grouting program and by a reactor mat foundation designed to span any undetected cavities. The exploration and rock-grouting programs were conducted as outlined in Section 2.5.4.12 under the supervision of experienced engineering geologists.The reactor building foundation, including the high-pressure coolant injection appendage, is supported directly on the limestone bedrock. Other Seismic Category I structures are founded as follows.The intake structure is supported on bedrock at approximately the same level as and in a manner similar to the reactor building. The offgas stack and pump house are supported primarily on compacted granular backfill materials placed in contact with the natural glacial till soils.The turbine building is supported on a prepared subgrade of natural glacial till and controlled compacted fill soils. The low-level radwaste processing and storage facility is supported on piles and the radwaste building is supported on compacted granular fill over glacial till material. Other Nonseismic structures such as the office building and cooling tower are supported as required.2.5-36 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Criteria pertaining to foundation design and installation are presented in subsequent paragraphs.The following comprehensive foundation evaluation program was completed:

1. Drilling of test borings in the immediate plant area.

2. Performance of laboratory tests required to evaluate the pertinent physical properties of the soil and rock underlying the site.

3. Evaluation of the types of foundations that will be suitable for the support of various plant structures.

4. Formulation of foundation to design data including the following:

a. Allowable foundation-bearing capacities.

b. Magnitude and time rates of settlement of foundations subjected to static and dynamic loading, including the consideration of differential settlement between various buildings.

c. Recommended hydrostatic uplift pressures and lateral soil and water pressures.

5. Formulation of recommended criteria for site preparation and earthwork including the following:

a. Excavating, dewatering, and bracing and sloping excavations.

b. Explorations for the detection of cavities, evaluation of cavity stability, and remedial measures for the correction of cavities.

c. Selection, placement, and compaction of fill materials for the support of foundations.

6. Discussion of foundation design and installation considerations associated with the possible future construction of Unit 2.

The DAEC consists of one unit. Its location was chosen considering the possibility of a future second unit. The locations and arrangements of the major structures are shown in Figure 2.5-14. The final plant grade has been established at approximately elevation 757 ft, which is about 7 to 13 ft above the existing grade. The foundation elevations and foundation loading conditions that have been used in developing the conclusions of this report are given in Table 2.5-4.2.5.6 EMBANKMENTS AND DAMS 2.5-37 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 See Section 9.2.2.2.5.7 LLRPSF Foundation Investigation A foundation investigation was performed in the vicinity of the LLRPSF to investigate subsurface conditions at the proposed site by exploratory borings and to evaluate the engineering properties of the subsurface materials with appropriate field and laboratory tests.Four exploratory borings were drilled using 3/4 inch I.D. hollow-stem augers and rotary wash down equipment. The four-borings extended to auger refusal and were then cored for 5 feet into the underlying rock. During drilling, samples of the subsurface soils were obtained using a split-spoon sampler and shelby tubes. Unconfined compressive strength tests were performed on the cohesive and semi-cohesive soil samples. These borings were supplemented by four additional test holes. The locations of the field explorations are shown in Figure 2.5-6. Boring Logs are provided as Figures 2.5-106 through 2.5-109.Samples obtained from the borings were classified in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification Systems. Laboratory testing on representative samples from the borings included natural moisture contents, unit densities and unconfined compressive strengths. The results of the testing are shown in Figures 2.5-102 through 2.5-105.Groundwater levels are indicated on the boring logs (Figures 2.5-106 through 2.5-109).Borings RW-3 and RW-4 in the storage portion of the building encountered groundwater at depths of 12 to 13 feet below the ground surface. This indicates that the groundwater table is at elevation 739 to 744. For borings B-1 and B-2, the water table elevation ranged from approximately 742.7 to 743.7. Borings RW-1 and RW-2 in the processing portion of the building encountered groundwater about 13.5 feet below the ground surface for an elevation of approximately 741.7 to 742.7. Borings B-3 and B-4 indicated groundwater levels at an approximate elevation of 743.3.2.5-38 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2.5

1. A. W. Skempton, The Bearing Capacity of Clays, Building Research Congress, Division I, Part III, p. 180, 1951.

2. K. Terzaghi, and R. B. Peck, Soil Mechanics in Engineering Practice, John A. Wiley

 & Sons, 1960.

3. Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation, Calculation 402-C-14, dated November 12, 1984.

4. Bechtel Associates Professional Corporation, Calculation 402-C-8, dated November 6, 1984.

2.5-39 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 BIBLIOGRAPHY FOR SECTION 2.5 Alford, J. L., G. W. Housner, and R. R. Martel, Spectrum Analyses of Strong Motion Earthquakes, California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, California, 1951 American Association of Petroleum Geologists and U.S. Geological Survey, Tectonic Map of the United States, 1962.American Association of Petroleum Geologists and U.S. Geological Survey, Basem*nt Map of North American, 1967.Beck, M. E., Jr., Aeromagnetic Map of Northeastern Illinois and Its Geologic Interpretation, U.S. Geological Survey, Geophysical Investigations, Map GP523, 1966.Bell, A. H., E. Atherton, T. C. Buschbach, and D. H. Swann, Deep Oil Possibilities of the Illinois Basin, Illinois State Geological Survey, Circular 368, 1964.Bradbury, J. C., Crevic Lead-Zinc Deposits of Northwestern Illinois, Illinois State Geological Survey, Report of Investigation 210, 1959.Campbell, R. B., Stratigraphic Column for Iowa, Cambrian-Mississippian, Iowa Geological Survey, Field Trip.Cedar Rapids Gazette, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, issues of May 27, 1909; November 12, 1934; and January 2, 1912.Craddock, C., E. C. Thiel, and B. Gross, "A Gravity Investigation of the Pre-Cambrian of Southeastern Minnesota and Western Wisconsin," Journal Geophysical Research, Vol.68, No. 21, 1963.Duke, C. M., and D. J. Leeds, Site Characteristics of Southern California Strong-Motion Earthquake Stations, University of California, Report 62-55, Los Angeles, 1962.Eardley, A. J., Structural Geology of North America, 2nd Edition, Harper & Row, New York, 1962.Fryxell, F. M., "The Earthquake of 1934 and 1935 in Northwestern Illinois and Adjacent Parts of Iowa," B.S.S.A., Vol. 30, No. 3, 1940.Gutenberg, B., and C. F. Richter, Seismicity of the Earth and Associated Phenomena, Princeton University Press, Princeton, N.J., 1954.Harris, S. E., Jr. and M. C. Parker, Stratigraphy of the Osage Series in Southeastern Iowa, Iowa Geological Survey, Report of Investigation 1, 1964.2.5-40 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Henderson, J. R., I. Ziets, and W. S. White, Open File Report, Preliminary Interpretation of an Aeromagnetic Survey in Central and Southwestern Iowa, U.S. Geological Survey.Hershey, H. G., C. N. Brown, 0. Van Bok, and R. C. Northup, Highway Construction Materials from the Consolidated Rocks of Southwestern Iowa, Iowa Highway Research Board, Bulletin No. 14, 1960.Heyl, A. V., Jr., A. F. Agnew, E. J. Lyons, and C. G. Behre, Jr., Geology of the Upper Mississippi Valley Lead-Zinc District, U.S. Geological Survey, Professional Paper 309, 1959.Hinze, W. J., Regional Gravity and Magnetic Anomaly Maps of the Southern Peninsula of Michigan, Michigan Department of Conservation, Michigan Geological Survey, Report 1, 1963.Housner, G. W., "Response of Structures to Earthquake Ground Motion," Nuclear Reactors and Earthquakes, TID-7024, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Division of Technical Information, 1963.Iowa Geological Survey, Skvor-Hartl Area, Southeast Linn County, Iowa, Field Trip, 1962.Iowa Geological Survey, Preliminary Geologic Map of Iowa, 1962.Iowa Geological Survey, Preliminary Interpretation Report, Airborne Magnetometer Survey of Northwestern Iowa, 1965.Iowa Geological Survey, Preliminary Interpretation Report, Airborne Magnetometer Survey of Northeastern Iowa, 1968.Keyes, C., Controlling Fault Systems in Iowa, Academy of Science, 1916.Lyons, P. L., The Greenleaf Anomaly, a Significant Gravity Feature, Kansas Geological Survey, Bulletin 137, pp. 105-120, 1959.McCracken, E., and M. H. McCracken, Subsurface Maps of the Lower Ordovician (Canadian Series) of Missouri, State of Missouri, Division of Geology and Water Resources, 1965.McGinnis, L. D., Crustal Tectonics and Pre-Cambrian Basem*nt in Northeastern Illinois, Illinois State Geological Survey, Report of Investigation 219, 1966.McGinnis, L. D., "Glacial Crustal Bending," Geological Society of America Bulletin, Vol. 79, No. 6, 1968.2.5-41 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Newmark, N. M., "Design Criteria for Nuclear Reactors Subjected to Earthquake Hazards," Earthquake Reactor Conference of the International Atomic Energy Commission, Tokyo, 1967.Petersen, W. J., "Earthquakes in Iowa," The Palimpsest, Vol. XIV, State Historical Society of Iowa, Iowa City, 1933.Philbin, P. W., and F. P. Gilbert, Aeromagnetic Map of Southeastern Minnesota, U.S.Geological Survey, Geophysical Investigation, Map GP-559, 1966.Philbin, P. W., and F. P. Gilbert, Aeromagnetic Map of Southwestern Minnesota, U.S.Geological Survey, Geophysical Investigation, Map GP-560, 1966.Richter, C. F., Elementary Seismology, W. H. Freeman and Company, San Francisco, California, 1958.Sims, P. K., and I. Zietz, Aeromagnetic and Inferred Pre-Cambrian Paleogeologic Map of East-Central Minnesota and Part of Wisconsin, U.S. Geological Survey, Geophysical Investigation, Map GP-563, 1967.Thiel, E. C., "Correlation of Gravity Anomalies with the Keweenan Geology of Wisconsin and Minnesota," Geological Society of America Bulletin, Vol. 67, pp. 1079-1100, 1956.Twenter, F. F., and R. W. Coble, The Water Story in Central Iowa, Iowa Geological Survey, Water Atlas 1, 1965.Udden, J. A., "Observations on the Earthquake of May 26, 1909," The Popular Science Monthly, 1910.U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Earthquake History of the United States, Part I, 1965.U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, United States Earthquakes, Serial Publications, 1928 through 1965.U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey, Preliminary Determination of Epicenters, Card Series 1966 to date.Woolard, G. P., The Determination of Gravity from Elevation and Geologic Data, University of Wisconsin Geophysical and Polar Research Center, Research Report Series 62-9, 1962.Woolard, G. P., and H. R. Joesting, Bouguer Gravity Anomaly Map of the United States, American Geophysical Union and U.S. Geological Survey, 1964.2.5-42 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Wright, H. E., Jr., and R. V. Ruhe, "Glaciation of Minnesota and Iowa in the Quaternary of the United States," H. E. Wright and D. G. Frey (editors) VII Congress of the International Association for Quaternary Research, 1965.Yoho, W. H., Preliminary Report on Basem*nt Complex Rocks of Iowa, Iowa Geological Survey, Report of Investigation 3, 1967.Zietz, I., E. R. King, W. Geddes, and E. G. Lidiak, "Crustal Study of a Continental Strip from the Atlantic Ocean to the Rocky Mountains," Geological Society of America Bulletin, Vol. 77, No. 12, 1966.2.5-43 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 AGENCIES INTERVIEWED FOR SECTION 2.5 Iowa Geological Survey, Iowa City, Iowa Northern Illinois University St. Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri U.S. Geological Survey, Iowa City, Iowa U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C.2.5-44 Revision 13 - 5/97

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-1 Sheet 1 of 2 MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY (DAMAGE) SCALE OF 1931 (Abridged)(The intensity scale is a means of indicating the relative size of an earthquake in terms of its perceptible effect. The intensities indicated in this report are maximum intensities and indicate the damage caused by an earthquake at its epicenter.)I. Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circ*mstances. (I Rossi-Forel Scale)II. Felt only by a few persons at rest, especially on upper floors of buildings.Delicately suspended objects may swing. (I to II Rossi-Forel Scale)III. Felt quite noticeably indoors, especially on upper floors of buildings, but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake. Standing motor cars may rock slightly. Vibration like passing of truck. Duration estimated.(III Rossi-Forel Scale)IV. During the day felt indoors by many; outdoors by few. At night some awakened. Dishes, windows, doors disturbed; walls make creaking sound.Sensation like heavy truck striking building. Standing motor cars rocked noticeably. (IV to V Rossi-Forel Scale)V. Felt by nearly everyone; many awakened. Some dishes, windows, etc.,broken; a few instances of cracked plaster; unstable objects overturned.Disturbances of trees, poles, and other tall objects sometimes noticed.Pendulum clocks may stop. (V to VI Rossi-Forel Scale)VI. Felt by all; many frightened and run outdoors. Some heavy furniture moved; a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys. Damage slight. (VI to VII Rossi-Forel Scale)VII. Everybody runs outdoors. Damage negligible in buildings of gooddesign and construction; slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures; considerable in poorly built or badly designed structures; some chimneys broken. Noticed by persons driving motor cars. (VII Rossi-Forel Scale)T2.5-1 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-1 Sheet 2 of 2 MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY (DAMAGE) SCALE OF 1931 (Abridged)VIII. Damage slight in specially designed structures; considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse; great in poorly built structures.Panel walls thrown out of frame structures. Fall of chimneys, factory stacks, columns, monuments, walls. Heavy furniture overturned. Sand and mud ejected in small amounts. Changes in well water. Persons driving motor cars disturbed. (VIII + to IX Rossi-Forel Scale)IX. Damage considerable in specially designed structures; well-designed frame structures thrown out of plumb; great in substantial buildings, with partial collapse. Buildings shifted off foundations. Ground cracked conspicuously. Underground pipes broke. (IX + Rossi-Forel Scale)X. Some well built wooden structures destroyed; most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations; ground badly cracked. Rails bent.Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes. Shifted sand and mud. Water splashed (slopped) over banks. (X Rossi-Forel Scale)XI. Few, if any, (masonry) structures remain standing. Bridges destroyed.Broad fissures in ground. Underground pipelines completely out of service. Earth slumps and land slips in soft ground. Rails bent greatly.XII. Damage total. Waves seen on ground surface. Lines of sight and level distorted. Objects thrown upward into the air.T2.5-2 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-la EARTHQUAKE EPICENTERS WITHIN 200 MILES OF THE SITE Approximate Approximate Perceptible Distance Area from Site Year Date Time Intensity Location N. W. mi2 (miles)Lat. Long 1804 Aug. 24 14:10 VI Fort

Dearborn 42 88 30,

000 200 Chicago, Illinois 1905 Apr. 13 10:30 V Keokuk, Iowa 40.4 91.4 5,000 120 1909 May 26 08:42 VII Northern Illinois 42 89 500,000 145 1909 July 18 22:34 VII Central Illinois 40.2 90.0 40,000 160 1912 Jan. 2 10:21 VI Northern Illinois 41.5 88.5 40,000 170 1928 Jan. 23 03:19 III-IV Mt. Carroll, Illinois 42.0 90.0 400 90 1930 May 28 11:31 I-III Hannibal, Missouri 39.7 91.3 Local 175 1933 Dec. 6 23:55 III-IV Stoughton, Wisconsin 42.9 89.2 -- 145 1934 Nov. 12 08:45 VI Rock Island, Illinois 41.5 90.5 5,000 75 1935 Jan. 5 00:40 I-III Davenport, Iowa 41.5 90.5 Local 75 1935 Feb. 26 08:15 I-III Burlington, Iowa 40.8 91.1 Local 95 1939 Nov. 24 13:45 I-III Davenport, Iowa 41.5 90.5 Local 75 1942 Mar. 1 09:43 IV Kewanee, Illinois 41.2 89.7 -- 120 1947 May 6 15:25 V Milwaukee, Wisconsin 42-3/4 88 3,000 205 1956 Mar. 13 09:05 IV Fulton Co., Illinois 40-1/2 90-1/4 -- 130 T2.5-3 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-2 MODULI AND DAMPING VALUES Damping Factora Modulus of Modulus of Operating Design Elasticity Rigidity Basis Basis Material (lb/ft2x 106) (lb/ft2 x 106) (%) (%)Alluvial sand 1.5 0.5 5-10 10-20 Glacial till 2 0.7 5-10 10-20 Wapsipinicon 500 200 1 1 Formation (limestone/dolomite) a Expressed as a percentage of critical damping.T2.5-4 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-3 FOUNDATION LEVEL ACCELERATIONS (ZPA) for the design of Seismic Category I Structures OPERATING-BASIS EARTHQUAKE (OBE)Percentage of Gravity Horizontal Vertical Supporting Material (Acceleration) (Acceleration)Rock, or about 10 ft of 6 4.8 compacted fill and/or natural glacial soils, soil cement fill or lean concrete fill About 30 to 50 ft of 9 6 compacted fill and/or natural glacial soils DESIGN-BASIS EARTHQUAKE (DBE)Percentage of Gravity Supporting Material Horizontal Vertical (Acceleration) (Acceleration)Rock, or about 10 ft of 12 9.6 compacted fill and/or natural glacial soils, soil cement fill or lean concrete fill About 30 to 50 ft of 18 12 compacted fill and/or natural glacial soils T2.5-5 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-4

SUMMARY

OF DESIGN DATA Approximate Bottom Actual Foundation Load (psf)Plan Foundation Dead and live Dead, Live and Dimensions Foundation Elevation Loads Seismic (DBE)Structures (ft) Type (ft) Loads Seismic Category I Reactor building 143 x 146 Mat on bedrock Dry well 86 diam. 12,200 23,000 Peripheral 16 width 8,600 35,000 walls Remainder 1,400 3,400 of mat Control building 70 x 84 Mat on fill 4,500 7,000 Pump house 84 x 56 Mat on fill 2,200 4,000 Intake structure 40 x 75 Mat 2,600 5,400 Stack 60 diam. Mat on fill Later Later Nonseismic Turbine building 142 x 262 Mat on fill 3,100 5,400 Administration 103 x 95 Spread footing on fill 4,500 5,200 (UBC) building Radwaste 69 x 98 Mat on fill 3,300 4,100 (UBC) building Low-level Radwaste Processing and Storage Facility Storage Portion 155 x 66 Mat on piles Reference 3 72 x 28 Processing 161 x 146 Footing on piles Reference 4 Portion 46 x 74 Floor Elev.T2.5-6 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-5 PRINCIPAL SOIL AND ROCK STRATA Top Bottom Thickness (ft)Stratum Elevation Elevation Minimum Maximum Topsoil 746 to 750 744 to 747 0.8 2.5 Alluvial deposits 744 to 747 717 to 736 8 30 Glacial till 717 to 736 705 to 707 12 33 Wapsipinicon Formation Davenport Member 705 to 707 701 to 692 8 15 Spring Grove 692 to 696 671 to 678 15 21 Kenwood Member 672 to 680 645 to 653 25 40 Gower Formation 640 to 645 T2.5-7 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-6

SUMMARY

OF AUGER BORINGS Ground-Surface Boring Number Elevation (ft) Depth to Rocka (ft)A1 49 A2 52 A3 57 A4 52.5 A5 44 A6 68 A7 (b)A8 44 A9 44 T2.5-8 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-7 MICROMOTION OBSERVATIONS Micromotion Observation Predominant Period of Number Depth to Bedrock (ft) Ground Motion (sec) 2 45 0.13 to 0.14 3 100 0.35 4 25 Quiet, no signal T2.5-9 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-8 STATIC STRENGTH TESTS FOR BORINGS P11, P12, AND P13 Moisture Shearing Boring Depth Content Dry Density Strength Number (ft) (%) (lb/ft3) (lb/ft2)P11 12 15.7 117 3200 14 12.6 123 1900 18 18.8 108 28 13.8 120 46 16.8 116 56 16.5 114 61 17.3 122 66 19.6 111 2200 71 12.4 123 P12a 14 15.3 114 2300 19 15.5 117 3000 24 15.0 112 1850 29 15.8 113 1250 31 15.5 112 2200 34 17.3 114 1400 38 15.1 115 1700 44 18.3 112 1500 49 18.0 109 1500 54 32.4 97 1700 P13 18 17.3 115 28 14.4 120 2600 33 15.7 118 2100 39 19.2 112 44 16.1 115 aAll samples from Boring 12 were tested by Soil Testing Services of Iowa, Inc.T2.5-10 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-9 Sheet 1 of 2 ROCK COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS Ultimate Compressive Modulus of Boring Depth Density Strength Elasticity Number (ft) (1b/ft3) (1b/ft2) (1b/ft2) 3 64 -- 3,190 --4 47 465 10,890 --6 62 154 1,920 --8 57 -- 5,730 --11 46 -- 16,820 --17 52 -- 16,050 --18 68 154 4,330 --20 43 170 16,880 --20 45 -- 9,680 10.5 x 106 21 46 -- 17,580 --21 65 -- 2,360 4.5 x 106 21A 47 -- 7,120 --21B 60 -- 4,410 --21C 66 -- 3,110 --21D 54.5 -- 8,470 --21F 49 -- 10,430 --21G 58 -- 7,060 --21H 45 -- 9,600 --21H 57 -- 9,450 12.7 x 106 21I 55.5 -- 8,850 8.3 x 106 22 58 -- 7,260 --24 64 -- 3,190 --27 54 -- 8,600 --28 71 -- 11,150 --30 56 158 10,510 --30 60 -- 12,230 --40 56 157 7,420 1.3 x 106 40 64 142 2,850 0.7 x 106 40 65 130 3,600 0.8 x 106 40 68.5 130 2,800 0.6 x 106 41 46 162 10,810 0.9 x 106 41 67 127 2,800 0.5 x 106 41 85.5 170 11,850 1.7 x 106 42 58 146 2,080 0.3 x 106 42 71 153 3,500 0.4 x 106 43 65 120 500 0.2 x 106 43 70 144 4,150 0.5 x 106 43 79 171 9,900 1.1 x 106 44 66 129 1,760 0.5 x 106 45 59 158 6,910 0.9 x 106 45 68 159 11,840 0.9 x 106 46 64 141 3,320 0.5 x 106 T2.5-11 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-9 Sheet 2 of 2 ROCK COMPRESSION TEST RESULTS Ultimate Compressive Modulus of Boring Depth Density Strength Elasticity Number (ft) (lb/ft3) (1b/ft2) (1b/ft2) 48 46 164 9,350 1.3 x 106 48 62 146 1,860 0.2 x 106 51 105.5 144 3,630 0.3 x 106 41 94 155 1,580 0.04 x 106 51 100 130 18,400 1.0 x 106 51 100 137 15,400 2.5 x 106 T2.5-12 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-10 SHOCKSCOPE TEST RESULTS Confining Velocity of Compressional Wave Boring Depth Soil Pressure Propagation Number Type Type (lb/ft2) (ft/sec) 7 23 CL 0, 2,000 5,500 4,000, 6,000 5,500 7 38 CL 0, 2,000 5,900 4,000, 6,000 5,900 9 5 SP 0 1,000 2,000 1,200 4,000 1,400 6,000 2,100 10 43 CL 0, 2,000 5,900 4,000 6,000 5,900 17 48 Rock 0, 6,000 14,000 17 66 Rock 0, 6,000 15,000 17 70 Rock 0, 6,000 16,000 17 91 Rock 0, 6,000 11,000 17 133 Rock 0, 6,000 16,000 20 35 CL 0, 2,000 5,200 4,000 5,200 6,000 5,900 23 5 SP 0 1,400 2,000 1,700 4,000 2,100 6,000 2,800 23 40 CL 0, 2,000 4,600 4,000 6,000 5,200 28 5 SP 0 700 2,000 800 4,000 1,000 6,000 1,400 30 35 CL 0, 2,000 5,500 4,000 6,000 5,500 T2.5-13 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-11 RESONANT COLUMN TEST RESULTS Boring Depth Soil Modulus of Rigidity Number (ft) Type (lb/ft2) 7 33.5 CL 0.983 x 106 12 63 Rock 143 x 106 17 49 Rock 181 x 106 17 85 Rock 171 x 106 17 103 Rock 170 x 106 20 40.5 CL 0.762 x 106 23 25.5 CL 0.823 x 106 30 30.5 CL 0.851 x 106 T2.5-14 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-12 ATTERBERG LIMIT DETERMINATIONS Boring Depth Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Number (ft) (%) (%) Index 12 41.5 26 16 10 25 35.5 26 15 11 28 10.5 33 15 18 33 18.5 29 26 3 T2.5-15 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-13 SANDFILL LABORATORY TESTS Sieve Analysis U.S. Standard Sieve Number Percent Passing 10 94.5 20 80.0 40 40.7 60 15.1 100 4.4 200 0.9 Compaction Test, ASTM-1557 Maximum dry density 114 lb/ft3 Optimum moisture content 12.0%Minimum and Maximum Densities, ASTM-D2049 Minimum dry density 101.9 lb/ft3 Maximum dry density (dry method) 120.3 lb/ft3 Maximum dry density (wet method) 124.2 lb/ft3 Resonant Column Test Results Sample dry density 107.8 lb/ft3 Sample moisture content 3.4%Confining Pressure Modulus of Rigidity (lb/ft2) (lb/ft2) Shear Strain 993.6 1.303 x 106 0.143 x 10-3 1497.6 1.707 x 106 0.123 x 10-3 2995.2 2.640 x 106 0.082 x 10-3 5011.2 3.379 x 106 0.067 x 10-3 T2.5-16 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-14 SOIL COMPACTION REQUIREMENTS Recommended Minimum Compaction Criteria (Percentage of Maximum Density) a Purpose of Fill Cohesive Soil Granular Soils Support of Seismic 95 100 Category I structures Support of Nonseismic 90 95 structures Adjacent to structures 90 95 Areal Fill (not supporting or 85 90 adjacent to structures) 2013-004 a Maximum density and optimum moisture content were determined by the American Association of State Highway Officials Test Designation: T180-57.T2.5-17 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-15 ULTIMATE BEARING CAPACITIES FOR SEISMIC CATEGORY I AND NONSEISMIC STRUCTURES Ultimate Foundation Bearing Supporting Elevation Capacity Structures Materials (ft) (1b/ft2)Seismic Category I Reactor building Limestone rock or lean 100,000 concrete immediately overlying rock Pump house Stiff to very stiff natural glacial 13,500 till soilsa Intake structure Limestone rock or lean 100,000 concrete immediately overlying rock Stack Controlled compacted granular 15,000 fill overlying natural glacial till soils Control building Controlled compacted granular 15,000 fill overlying bedrock Turbine building Stiff to very stiff natural glacial 13,500 till soils a Radwaste building Controlled compacted granular 15,000 fill overlying natural glacial till soils Administration building Controlled compacted granular 15,000 fill overlying very stiff natural glacial till Low-level Radwaste Steel 12 x 74 H-piles driven to 190,000 Processing & Storage Facility limestone rock lb/pile 2013-004 a Some over-excavation and backfilling with controlled compacted fill was necessary in certain areas to ensure that all unsuitable soils were removed.T2.5-18 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-16 BEARING PRESSURE VERSUS FACTORS OF SAFETY Dead, Live, and Dead and Live Loads Seismic (DBE) Loads Bearing Bearing Pressure Factor of Pressure Factor of Structures (lb/ft2) Safety (lb/ft2) Safety Seismic Category I Reactor building Dry well 12,200 8.2 23,000 4.3 Peripheral walls 8,600 11.6 35,000 2.9 Remainder of mat 1,400 71.0 3,400 29.0 Control building 4,500 3.3 7,000 2.2 Intake structure 2,600 38.0 5,400 19.0 Stack Later Later Later Later Pump house 2,200 6.1 4,000 3.4 Nonseismic Turbine building 3,100 4.3 5,400 2.5 Radwaste building 3,300 4.5 4,100 3.7 (UBC)Administration building 4,500 3.3 5,200 2.9 (UBC)Low-Level Radwaste Processing and Storage Facility Storage Portion 163,800 lbs/pile 1.16 179,300 1.06 (UBC) lb/pile Processing 157,700 lbs/pile 1.24 153,700 1.24 (UBC)Portion lb/pile 2013-004 Based on maximum pile loadings T2.5-19 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-17 ESTIMATED SETTLEMENT Structure Estimated Settlement (in.)Reactor building and intake structure 0 to 1/4 Radwaste building 1/2 to 1 Control building 1/2 to 1 Stack 1/2 to 3/4 Turbine building 1/2 to 1 Low-level Radwaste Processing and Storage 0 to 1/8 Facility T2.5-20 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-18 ALLOWABLE NET BEARING PRESSURES FOR SPREAD FOUNDATIONS Allowable Net Bearing Pressure Supporting Soils (lb/ft2)Controlled compacted granular fill Foundation width = 2 ft 3000 Foundation width = 4 ft 3500 Foundation width = 8 ft 4500 Foundation width = 12 ft 5000 T2.5-21 Revision 22 - 5/13

UFSAR/DAEC-1 Table 2.5-19 TIME-SETTLEMENT RELATIONSHIP Total Settlement Time(%) (Months) 20 1 50 7 90 30 T2.5-22 Revision 22 - 5/13

JACKSON CLINTON SCOTT ILLINIOS MILES LEG END:10 5 o 10 20

 .1 COLOR PERIOD 'SERIES COLOR PERIOD SERIES tro=&~w! nwii§jeiia ~ENNSYLVANIAN,DES MOINES ;'::- ,,'" DEVONIAN MIDDLE \\\\ HISSISSIPPW MERAMAC SILURIAN UNDIFFERENTIATED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER~~ ~ ~ISS ISS IFP IAN OSAGE ~ , ,,. .",C/' < MAQUOKETA, GALENA, ,ORDOVICIAN DECORAH, PLATTEVILLE IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POl~ER 80MPANY II... .. - UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT MISS ISS IPPW KINDERHOOK "i ,'\ (0,- O=;~~N UNDIFFERENTIATE.D.

DEVONIAN UPPER

REFERENCE:

THIS MAF WAS PREPARED FROIl A PORTION OF USGS Regional Geologic Map BASE MAP OF THE STATE OF UNA, 1950.THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FROM AN ENLARGED PORTION OF liTHE PRELIMINARY GEOLOGIC MAP 11 Figure 2.5-1 OF lCAJA BY IGlA GEOLCClCAL SURVEY, 1962.

PERIOD FORMATION MEMBER LOG .THICKNESS 100' Dl\Y!!'fPORt lO'-15' sPoIII: COOll! In' 'O'~20'====InD' 70' on' 7n' lln'

 ...QUOUV.

_IelAN PKOSSER 185 1 DICO. .H ION CPIATmllLU SP!CHTS F!.ARY lO' ll'_IlC C!lICOO ST. PITtO PECATOHICA 310' CUHIIOOO

 \

PlAIR-I! DU CHIEN 170' ONF.OU ll'=MADISON 120'

 . ---.In ' - .-----'- ~O' 'PI.ANCONtA 160' 130' GAUSVILLZ CAMlUAN ---..c..-':-==

tAU CIAI" NT.sDlON

 ..=.=-~ -='. ~:: - " ))0' r-- ...~ .- .:..:.. .. -=.;- ....--nr:-CAMU--lA-N--+-------.L.---------i~'~~f~'~~~t:~::J.*;':~:;.:;: ....nIOXDlATt lllIcut:Ss IN pron OP ROCk UNITS TIN:;..;,;lll.:I~S:.:U::IS:.:U:.:"'*,;.;AC::E;..... ..,.

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Generalized Stratigraphic Column MOT E:of Eastern Iowa IlSID OM ... COL_ BY I. I. CAIlI'IEU O"WN BY J. N. ROs!.Figure 2.5-2

JACKSOf'{POWESHIEK ILLINIOS STATUTE MILES LEG END:COLOR OESCRll'TION COLOR DESCRIPTION 10

 ~ ~

9 10 20

 " " / " " '. .. . ~HSCONSIN DRIFTS- PRE-WISCONSIN DEPOSITS-1,'/'0', "IOOAN-LOESS-MANTLED .. KANSAN DRIFT c* '" -~ , PRE-WISCONSIN DEP.9.SlTS-ILLINOIAN DRIFT DRIFTLESS ARE,. DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER II/I PRE-WISCONSIN DEPOSITS-GlACIAL UKE CALVIN (ILLINOIAN) BEDS I r-..\\\ ALLUVIUM IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY --+-- *WISCONSIN LOESS THICKNESS IN FEET @ RADIOCARBON SITES UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT EFERENCE:

T HIS HAP WAS PREPARED FROM A PORTION OF USCS SASE !lAP OP THE STATE OF lEIlIA, 1950.THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FROM AN ENLARGED p*rn ON OF A Pleistocene Deposits in Eastern Iowa FIGUR& ENTITLED "PLEISTOCENE DEPOSITS IN IOWA" J GLACIATION OF MINNESOTA AND IOWA BY H. E. WRIGHT JR.Figure 2.5-3 R. V. RUHE, 1965.

45*! "'"

 ,/i 42* . ..,to. t. ANTICLINE S~~~~::::~:.!-,. ...--."'- ~ * -', '" ~. .

SITE

 ~,' --.,.. "'~/. /' ~ '.'"

co

 ff/

Gll£S

 / .... ~~ . ~ ' ..

OZARK " - .... ', DOME LEG I::: :"01 D: STATUTE MILES 50 o 50 100 U

 , , , til, 1 ---;.-, AXnCLl~AL AXIS ---t- SYXCLlXAL AXIS DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY ¥kj~~mzJl UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT It. I::; FER E ~ C E:

THIS HAP WAS PREPARED FROH ." PORTIO;.; OF THE FOLLOWt::q; eSGS "IFR WALL PU~X[:XC ettAKT F..\ST .J.XD I/EST; .... ')5... TECtO~lC F&\7l~RES L\)(£X FROt! A PORrUl;.; Of THE "TEcroXIC HAP OF TIlE L'XITED ST.J.TES" flY eSGS A:'\D ..' A PC.

 ~ ':(*2. Ft"$Ef'IEXT fEA!L'IU:S nKEX FR~I "BASEl-lEX! HAP or XORTH AMERICA" ~)Yl':iGS. l~lll;.

Regional Tectonic Map Figure 2.5-4

MtLES 50 0 50 100

 =:::0-.4--" .~-':':o:J =q DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Regional Bouguer Gravity Map I:. r ~: FEN r. F.:

Figure 2.5-5 Fo TMts HAP VAS rREPAJtm FROM

• J!'ORTlGrl "F ""nur.lJ"R r.i':A\'I'N ANl">>1A.t\' MAP or 1'111 UNlntl ~TATP.S" ay A. C. U. AND G. S. 1964.

 \) -~- ~

I 4 p-s z

 \ ~ ~ ~~

IC\

 ~ \ " ~

10 s 18

 !C) 2 10 ~ ~

A-6, -- , , 11.-12 C)

 ~

NOTE:ELEVATIONS REFER TO U.S.G.S. DATUM. IC\r" e "\( , \ , \ \,Q)LEGEND: 2 10 10 J I! II I i I I I I ~11 \ \ \ \\ \\

 " I 'X ~ -$ BORINGS DRILLED BY SOIL TESTING SERVICES OF IOWA, INC. ~ 10 z 10 BOR INGS AUGERED TO DEFINE BEDROCK SURFACE BY SO IL TESTING SERV ICES OF IOWA, INC.

BOR INGS DR ILLED BY DAM',S &. MOORE (HOT ALL OM[S " K)()R[ lOR IHGS IN PLAttT AREA DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER ARE SHOWN

• SEE. FIGURE 2.6-11)

IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY MICROMOTION OBSERVAT ION t-----l SEISMIC LINE 1-----1 GEDLOG IC PROF ILE UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 1-695 -i CONTOURS OF BEDROCK SURFACE DRAWING

REFERENCE:

Site Plan Showing Bedrock Topography SITE PLAN BECHTEL JOB NO. 7884 FEET DRAWING C*IOl, REV. 7 100 0 100 200 DATED 6-29-71 ~~~_-.l I J Figure 2.5-6

B-21 B-17 730 III III 710

 ~'=: ~~: ~

110

 ! SPRING GROVE 0 .~ ~~~ =

III 870 oJ III KENWOOD

 .~ ~1 8SO 630' - J-.l--- ... GOWER FORMATION (SIL.URIAN)

TO Pot>:v. S47' ~610

 '~

SECTION A-A 770 B-33 8-12 AL.L.UVIUi.!-- :....-:-:-:~... .,..,..

 "'~' .. ' - -==- ..... ..:-_;-:-=_---=-;=.:;~= ==-: ..,.:.'~~ -=-,....L_~~

710 ::. ~ ---------:=--=---III III - --_:-_~---- - - -- =- .;.. - - - -- --- ... -'

 '"'---- DAVENPO~

SPRING GROIfE WEATHERE~KENWOOD 8&0 GOWER FORMATION (SIL.URIANI ~U=r" 110 SECTION B-B g,r:=DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 1l0RIZONTAL SCALE IN _EET Geologic Profiles 100 0 100 200 3n~ . 00 500 liiii'iii d ! ! Figure 2.5-7

Q __ ~'" .. III

- 000 0 0 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IES UTILITIES, INC.

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Foundation Level Response Spectra Structures Supported on Rock or Lean Concrete Fill Operating Basis Earthquake Figure 2.5-8, Sheet 1 ReV1s10n 14 - 11/9?

 ~ . ~"t ~;t-: t- ~

OIl

z ...:[

 .L.C:%:

N ~Q ex: I.L.Z o 0 0 U :I:~ ~Z W .*! I.)Q ex: .... I ....o ~Q..

 -'- .~

i r

 .. ~

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IES UTILITIES, INC.UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Foundation Level Response Spectra Structures Supported on Rock or Lean Concrete Fill Design Basis Earthquake Figure 2.5-8, Sheet 2 Revision 14 - 11/98

 *~_- ': J ....~-"--=--.*.,..- ---_-_-_-_" ..., _ - -__.:-.-:..L..~-;--::.r,....--:"-_-;-_

1

 .. = .

O§.*Q-/.a!2 II:Q, OMO:liSlSlN:lHI HI DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER I rES UTILITIES, INC.UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Foundation Level Response Spectra Structures Supported on About 10 ft. of Soil Over Bedrock Operating Basis Earthquake Figure 2.5-8, Sheet 3 Revision 14 - 11/98

 ~"""""""'--:,-~-:.........:-r:~~~~~'1"......L.-.,::E-=-.;:.;.....,.'... .,__::~..-r~~~;:~~~~~~-'-:~:":"'ET:~1~~

..--,-:: "'~ ~~-:-..1-;-.:.:~~::~~~-;;;:

 ,r/~ .. 'j,.l J}.', "," \.

a z0 4It U aIII z II>0

 ...u U 4It III III 4It q ~

~ , ' . .......:- U a ....;~ ~0 §l ii: --. ~III Cl.

 '.3. u Z

III

J

 > 0 Ie III a:

a::II.IGl.I.I

 /

1ft o get ..... 'It ., ..,., N ~ ~~ ""':: ~ ltl N N -0000 0 ci OHO:J3S/s:JH:JHI HI U.I:JO':lIA DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IES UTILITIES, INC.UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Foundation Level Response Spectra Structures Supported on About 10 ft. of Soil Over Bedrock Design Basis Earthquake Figure 2.5-8, Sheet 4 Revision 14 - 11/98

2 o o N

QCJ'4D . . . . . ., ... "" N g~~d ~ ~ ..o ....o No OHO;)3S/S3H;)HI HI ... .&.1;)0'3 ...DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER ]IES UTILITIES, INC.UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Foundation Level Response Spectra Structures Supported on About 30 to 50 ft. of Soil Over Bedrock Operating Basis Earthquake Figure 2.5-8, Sheet 5 Revision 14 1l/9P

Cl Zo uW lit "lWit

 ..J U )-

U

 ~ )-

U ZW

 ~

W II:o N

 . N QHO:liS/SJH:lHI HI .Ul:lO'lA o~~.., -000 0 '" ~

 ~

o Nc:i DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER I rES UTILITIES, INC.UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Foundation Level Response Spectra Structures Supported on About 30 to 50 ft. of Soil Over Bedrock Design Basis Earthquake Figure 2.5-8, Sheet 6 Revision 14 - 11/98

I COIlPUiSS 10lW. POISSON'S SHEAR IIAVE TaUL SYKIlOL I DESCRIPTIOII I IIAVE VEIDeITY RATIO VEIDeITY UNIT Wt:lCHT (US/CU. PT.)(PT/SEC) (ESTlI1ATED) (n/SEC)(COMPUTED)

 .~-~--.-

Al.ttNlAL 1140

 - ------1 0.37 I 500 I 120 SAHD s~tJOO CUCIAL TILL 6100!JOO I 0.4S I 1800 I US ~.4W[*Zl;G '--

100 _'JI~'ir~1! IIAPSIPIIIICOII FORKATIOH (LIMESTOME I +14,OOO-SOO I 0.20 I 8600 I 160 AHD DOLOllITE)SlLUIllAM 160 (LlISTOHE 14,OOO!SOO 0.20 860C (EST1I4ATED)AND DOLOMITE)JOO

 ~ 400 ~

i'OO,

 .~~+ 4='

I~~_~ORDOV IC lAM AND CAKIlRlAII 16000!1000 ISS (ESTIMATED) .20 9800 (ESIlMATED)SEDIMENTS (PREOOPIINATELY DOLOMITE)K:;;,,'1 I I 2600ii~tM1;'~~~;B

 ~;~~'::J~I~"~~:;":, ~~I~:~;s.:"I'..:~~Z\~~~,_ . .~~;~'~~~,;~~/~~'.:!.~:I:\~ \ ~

I

 -j _

I

 .... I f..----- ~\~~:::.:;~J:15~~~;.y~';I\~{;:~:- !,!~"i'!,-..":',',' I~':"-',' ,:,,\,~ "~'\I ..."!~ ~.....,~ -;\-.:'I\~)l""'" .;! *~~~~~~~~0J,g?~r PRECAMllRlAII 2700: -t!~=/~:~7?~.~~~~~~~~£,~~ IASEJ<<lft' 18.000t ZOOO .U 11500 17S ..~=:'~- -, '~/~'..:"'~ ...' .. "~ ..,,'.. '1,," 'I,~_,~ \,_, "='_', (ICllEOUS AMD (ESTIMATED) (ESTIMATED) ;:;:~~.~;-.. " ~<.!.?~_~J" HETAIClRPHIC ROCKS)

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Stratigraphic Section Showing Geophysical Data" 0 T E:PIlTS1CAL ntOPERnES ARE HEA<URED VALUES UIlLIiSS lIor~D OTIIElIIIl:SE.Figure 2.5-9

97" 46" ******--. *l~;..; ';. ~;--~I'"44 0

 /~! ~:

c:r;

 -::2 -.: iii ;-; ,ct lD Z

ct

I:

U 241"

 .. ~~_.~~- . /~" (,)-

I)OZARK SEE NOTE 50 100 NORMAL FAULT

 -+-

IN1'I::NS lTY 1V ANTlCLINAL AXIS 0 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER

 -+-

• OR LESS SYNCLINAL AXIS INTENSITY V IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY

 --fl--

0 rr-.::TENS ITY VI INTE~S ITY VII UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT REF ERE X C E:THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FRCH A PORTIOK OF THE FOLLOWn'G USGS "IFR WAU PL\~:n~G CHART EAST A:'\"D IlESt \968". TECTONIC FEATURES IAKEX FROM.. A PORtIO:': OF THE "rEcronc HAP OF THE liXlTED STATES" BY I.:SGS A~"D AA}l:C.1":;62.BY l!SC:S, 1967.B.o\SD-lE~T FEATURF.S TAKE:\' FROM "BASEMEXT HAP OF ~ORTH AMERICA" Epicenter Map NOT E:THE AREA BOUNDED BY THE DASHED LINE HAS A HIGHER DEGREE OF SEISMICITY THAN THE SITE AREA, ONLY EARTHQUA1.ES WITH F:P!CENTRAL INTENstnEs OF v AND GREATER ARE INDICATED.Figure 2.5.,.10

WATER LEVEL

 ;;,:i~*.*~mit!;'~:':".~:-:*::::*i:l-----NO ':*:-:}:*:':::~*':*:*:*::::*i:"*:*:*:'*.::::::':*'::::*

• • l;:::~;~-:-':i:!:;:.'*::::*;:~:::.:'::::,":*'::*:~:"""":::;:::::!:;':;";-:';,::I 7SO I 720 1-----7/0 I 690

 ._-68{)

1:1 l(

 ~ ," 1I_~n: ~

C) i:::

 ~ ~ ~ ~ -----650 -_..- - c o Ets" '--620 ~~====-610 ,**t'-~~~:S~6~7;J~~~~~~

600 7'l-r*?~~_' ~~-_,;l~~~,. --t:.~;;-~

 ~ ----------------600 690 690 ...;-:-£:..

ELEVATIONS REFER TO U.S.C.S. DATUfII.DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY GROUND SURFACE [lEVATIONS AU CCM'AECl ONLY AT TEST lOA'N' lOCATIONS.THE DEPTH AND THI(KHESS OF THE SOIL STAATA AND THE DEPTH OF THE ROCK STRATA INDICATED Ofj THE SUBSURFACE SECTION WERE OBTAINEO BY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT INTERPOLATING eETWEE-N TEST BORINGS. IHfOR#1,ATIDN ON ACTUAL sell AND ROCK CONDITIONS [XISTS ONLY Al lH( nSf 80RING LOCATIONS AND IT IS pc.ssleu THAI THE SOil AND ROCK CONDITIONS l(rwUN THE FEET TEST BORINGS ""v VARY FROH THOSE INDICA *r,. 50 o 50 100 Generalized Subsurface Section A-A

 !!!i Figure 2.5-12 Revision 5 - 6/87

 "X/STING G/l)(JNO SURFACE 25 ! 16 1 760 ---740 A.':;~lS,J~E~$,cr:='~:~~~--"i7'~'I::::*i';;;****'111111Illii;;;I:111 ~~ ---7SO 111111: I :1 ..... ~ ~ 720---- " I I 1]1111! 11,_1-.,'7////. --,,--720 ~

l(l(

 ~ ~ ~ 7/()- '---7/0 :t:

i:: ~

 ~ ~ ..... ",,",WI I ' = ----}OO lc.r .... 700 lc.r ~

69t:r--- --~690

 ~~t----__680 670 ------ ~===c.----670 NOTES, ELEVATIONS REFER TO U.S.C.S. DAn...

GROUND SUR-fAt( £LlVATIONS ARE CORRECT ONLY AT TEST BORING LOCATIONS.THE DEPTH AND THICKNESS Of 1HE SOIL STAATA AND THE DEPTH OF THE ROCK STRATA INDICATED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY ON THE SUBSfJRFACE SECT I ON WERE 08TA I NED BY tNTERPOLATING BETW((H TEST BORINes. tNrO~T10H ON ACTUAL SOIL AND ROCK CONDITIONS EXISTS ONLY AT THE TEST BORING LOCATIONS AND IT IS POSSIBle 1AAT THE sal L AND ROCK COHO 11 IONS BETWEEN THE TEST BORINGS J'\AY VARY FROP1 THOSE INDICATED.UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT FEU lOll 0 102030 40 1I0

 "--------..I.. ,,_.. a .I. -------""-

Generalized Subsurface Section B-B Figure 2.5-13 Revision 5' - 6/87

EX/STING GROUND SURFACE 7$0 BORING 29 21 I 12 3 7$0 740 f:t.fmij~f,ri.i{~~f!f;B~iI1t!;~~~f~NJ~{~~{!~W~::~~h2~~~:'::~~~~1~~¥8!!!!!!)@kf{i(~f0i%r&jJ~0%};tt!!;tl;~f~filiI!~

'.. ":':.': .: :***:*>SOILS GRADING WITH DEPTH FROM SILTY FINE SAND AND CLAVEy:.:!}****:****:**************,**,******'u** . 740 FINE SAND TO FINE TO COARSE SAND WITH SOME GRAVEL \;',:

AND OCCASIQtAL COBBLES AND BOULDERS) )5jf 7~ -----_})))Jjft~g:rCWtH{-~Wf1WWfii¥~~~W<&dZ22~~f------ 7~720 *720 7/1 70 700 700

 ,~

690 690 ....

 ~ ~

680 680 ~

 ~ ~ .~...

I..;; 670 670 ....

 ...~ ......., ~ ~ 660 660 ...

6$0 640 640 co 6~0 620------------------ 620 NallS:UEVATlOIlS ~(n~ TO U.S.C.S. DAT....6/0 ...!"'"!:~*- - - - - - - -T:qtr~k£~*~~,rxFi~&!?:~~

 '~UHD S~FAC( ELEVATlOIIS ARE C~~ECT ONLT AT TEST I~IN' LOCATI!l"S.

TNE DEPTH AND THICIUlESS OF THE SOIL STAATA AND THE DEPTH OF TH( lOCK STAATA INDICATED 011 THE SUIS~FACE SECT I011 WEIE alTA INED BY INTERPOLATIN' I(TWUN TEST lORIN'S. INFOIIMT'1llI 011 ACTUAL SOIL AND ~OCK (_'TIONS £lISTS ONLY AT THE TEST 10~IN' LOCATIONS AND IT IS POSSIIU IlIAT THE SOIL AND ~DCK CONDITIONS IETWUN Tl\(DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER TEST IOIIN'S MAT 'A~' FIlOH THOSE INDICAllD.IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY

 ~SO ~

FIll

 ~ ~ ~ ~

UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Generalized Subsurface Section C-C Figure 2.5-14 Revision 5 - 6/87

 / LCGOJII ~ NO... *!

L.OCI C. ~ NO. ..trw. rUCtI.( lICMT .. PaW'" ~. . . I'ca.c:;;;-::.AHS

 ....",". I.- I~O-=ll.. Cf_"""'. rae.un Ii ~ ; t I .; ; f I Ii J I ~ ~i~ J j~s~

I I I* S""'M. _._** 1_ 1'.0' J ;- ....1

 *!*!;11 f ; " 13 '

• i
• s't! I -, .,. - ... f! ff i 1!!E1..1W.

I

 .. ...:1>0,. n.i')~' r'-+*_*~+-+-~~-+"'H '!I! TO rIP"" UF* . .: ... stl II,,"".. ,-",-11"~'~*::i*ii~;:r.iiii:iiU!;s:--1 r;- ~ ..~.,. '700

• u*

 * ~ ....'+'s~'"".:+.. .:+-'-'+--+-. -I--.!: ~ 17,.......",.""' *. __.__ -. -'---'------1 "I , ...: ~I-*-*h~-_I__+__if-H .:

flM

 ....., aM "'M'. ~.lAeM f!!r '9 Mil . . . , ,I ** I .. ,0...: f-! ~;.:::...-":.!+-.!.. -I--I-+-+~ ,0...: ,,... "....

I ** '" ,. \1.1'* .1 II ~

 ** ~P:I:::""::~-+--+--+---f""l,s-I-! ¥ 's- ... n- D peg' ye. ~

i- f+/--I..-.+1-..+--+-+-~I .. -l U .1 7 1ft

 * " \ 1 1I.s~.=..,.,.,."... -I 1m.' .... I ..

1"- "".. ... ......, 1'.71,,,.,. ~~51 '!s, I * " ....

 '7- a. I-i-l!-+L. .J4---I---+-I-...+:Ill.s- * ** ,. I.... we! I"D gey .. TWI HI ... I,ll.*' , I" I I..... ~ ., . . . . _ _ _. J t-:'-¥-':,.'FI'4:li""!-:.'.-j:':!."""'!!!l_+.-1I-lI_IoI-.,...17IJ. .. * .- ~. I".. .~""'I .... 1,- . ~.I- 1*- '11: ..,

D SIM$I IMXQ,LJ nw____.L_ aw.I-+-~,-+-+--+---,f-+-+ - ,. IT! [u.x _ IMee . " " , n 7 " *. !." ._ I 0 7 IS , .. I' la "1" ,,1_I-'-!M~=+-"'--+=:=+-+--+~ IS-: """.1111' v,

 's-: ..

I

 "'.ll 1'1 1S1_ It - ' :1' ...".=;"To"....--_. -

r ,_~ .

 * ~~,~~,~,t,,~~,*~.~;..~1*;,,;..~~:~~:jWi~~f'A -' """.2p(<::JI::;**:.*.:,)

1....2 ......1'.1.0*. .....*.,. III If

 .. i I 1-+"'-+'-+i-+--+--+-~-+ ...;'- lIIILJ!!!l. ~ .... *.1.. .. I II ".,.. I t - . ~I~I., ,,1- IMp! , " " PM .. tw(

to! oa

 ....y. "ry ' ......

il ** 1

 ,. I ,. ,.1..... ... . '0: ssl.. I. I~

IfIO- 1sa-

 !1 '

v. i I c, II ,.. I,. .. I..... Cl.

 " I I I IS-15S-I '0.: I . J-~.-+-+--+-+--I-+-1 -

II IS II a.

 " .,1- . ..: ~ 1" ..*** ",,"1 s.-Uy." .*' _ ..... ... I , IS '1' ,I' .. I...... I ... I:W! IIlD BIt .. JME( I!J-~ ,,1 a.

OS...: .IW1l,. OS

 "..,.. , .........., '....... ...1 IS II IS 1- Cl.

In

 .. 1Je- .,I I I""':

tWJ:"LU ":'" '9 H

 ',N, ......, . 71'" .. n.,* .. , ....,..1. . . . . . . .".1....,. ~+I_"'_. --:i"""'~-4._-I--+_-I---I ...: 'S s, a. ~t .. ,.I,*** 1- C\

7S"':I' ,I' . <-

 .. ! ! I 1 .. ;1 ..I..... In . .. a. ,-- I....

j16'.I (I'SI A

 ~

(M.ri 11

 ~ ~ L!.' -. "I,. ,. .. 1-... QAID JUT Si¥J VlT!! !~

9(jii It- ~p '. "~ un ""9 Slbu CLey.A!ID..1ll!.

 .. .... i lIS-::

1: * ¥eryl'"

 ..r**::=- i**** ..:i if u. ! .. &r.,.. 1..,.. ** ....., '......

III"'tl,"'~lc

 ~:I - C\

_I; ~ II lC ... L... '".1')

~

h:

-~1

1 ;1 Iid =a h* ;z II.:;z 11 A.mL1IIJ.

 " " . ' ....... tIMy ' .....

IU..'., ....... c

 ~,

" i- i~ j; ~

 . * '. - 1,....*\

II "I ; ult,.* ,I' '11 ~ ~:7 ..

 'I l- "I " ~

B. I I SllTl qe, - IS!! . . .

 "I I d .~ ~i ...:.. ~ . -~ :,! -~

i! :5 J "I ,.1" ,. ... ,.11_1..- ,.,. .....

 ;: ~: .....' . . . Li '_) !: * *' . . . . . LlJIU*

i:I,M

 'i i 1 e:

i*I I I let- I

 " 0 ..., . . .nAIn! ".!!fog

• Ii *1 ., . 1."'1' " - !!Oll! UNUIlft[

 '-' " \ ...... ", ....

,. ..... ....1hh. Cleo, .

I ". Llt'l. Cr.,. - * ..-I.. ~!.* "i"l,. -.etIe"'" t,.. 107.1' , . I* .i* 11 " ,.. C ,og.o*)

 -1Ul1l! WATIOQ . . II!OOEUHbJ Wl'ATM[l£P" 11&

l!p!uLlnuTolll. ,0...:11I1_, ""'--t . , e-I,,_ epan L! MSTO!!(. 'jr. " . . . . , *** A.Dunt .r "'11

 ! "-' C_hi ...... w.' v.",

LI,.' ........... .: ..illt.,. MM,",. (....i.,l, CI.., ..... ) * !U.O* I .

 *" HJ.~* aMI "6.0' ** 117.S*. ""': 'S--: Utt'c &.or," 1..- *, " 117.") " ...:Iw* 1-1'" _u_ --',. .,X wynn gAX.

n14 1,-.: ..,.,1..p,."nI I I*. III PD.' KM!!('g *

 "O'rfl lIMn " " . ............ ., c..,I.

a.-

 ....u ..........

II c:: .....

 -0 0 .~ ** aos -

r 0 :e::0 :P :P ,*... )-

 <..Cl ~. ! -l 0 i IT1 IT1 c:: ,....-

0 Cl r- >>

 --Il ........ ..... , i ' - i f IT1 :z ILllfTU IIA1!PQ ...

n IT1 "OOIL! I!D!I! lIsnw. ",-,.

• _n.* ......

t:tl __,... '......i.'0 -l ~ .. e-III...IloS- L.,," ..., .. - . -

 ~ :z;:0 >> ,.1..;- ...... >> .....;:0 . tIwy ......., ---_....

l r- ."".1. CI., a-,) _

 <..Cl n :z r 14IZ." ,. I.J.S*. I"." te Vl 0 I I 1~.1

• 150.1' .. lSI." _

.,...... 1-

<..Cl VI r r- I 1".1' .. IfIit."c I :P ..... 0

 ~ ., en I i --l- -

ro :z IT1 :I: IT1 Lao. II....*'C N 3 -l -l :z -_ .. -.

. 0" -< IT1 ...:

U1 ro 120 ;:0 I ~ I

P en

..... Vl :z -0 -0 :P 0 ...:

r :e:: n I

 .....I -< m IT1 ..;

VI ;:0 :z I]OJ - ., ,

 ..... -l IIll *1

l * ~. my. IO'IIW -

VI . ..0-n m -....,.. .: ...0 ;:0 .,

 ;:0 ~p.1;.' .... t -0 3: -

I IT1 -0 N -0 :P 0 :z

 ;:0 -< -l

 ._. __._ 1'_.: ._._ .=-:-'rn:IC .......... -... 1'~~I.1I ......... ,.. I:=;'~.. - . n** .-I, ,- ,-.- .......-

J.J..i.IuS: II. - - - . . . - . . .I lila. 2,'" """-.~1-'4!':!.'~*t:*L!'*~:!.'''_1--+4.!!!j ..a U I' " ,I II

• 11,.....",1-+--1--+--+-=1,0..

m: "."

 ".p.,

J IS 'I .1 II n I' i' J7 ..... ",I-"+"f'o"":, 't'-'-F=r-+-+" ...

 ** j ~'

I

 ,,,x II,n MY .. !'WI II ~'I.II'" - a. aw,. , 1Ny* .,.... . . IM;p "'-P *. * - """D9.-'"

I, IS' II II ~

 '14

• 1.!.,+u!!.J!.*~*f.!l'4-+-+-1-IIoi1,",311.s, _ _ ...... _ .....

 ]II * ~I "I e-t - - - a.M ~ -.-- J II...... n I....

IWT"'DNT-pe

• U I . '. . . . -

J.!.'.j!1!!..l'.!....j!I!..~.!!....~. ....Z~-+-1'-!a.~...I. n * ,.1. "- a. t IS 'I **r-'

 'I' ,n , i.- ,_ . .u up,". "'9

' .. II

 .. - . . , . If "'Illg._

jl"'::***:*i:*l::-*~'~::-I,rrl""SI!~""~"i"ip~-i~j

 ..I . . . ~.--- . . . .a .** ,.. I :

' o. OJ

 ~ ! 'eame ' N t! *. I . . , . 1I1D 1M! .. JMA IJ IS JMW,.

I...

 . * . .. .... " **I . * *~.i' h, u i.-

I .. * , .

 . p It I....

IWJ 'un AM W1I wmw,'.I ** I~ ---I-n s*l l

 *

• PDt . . . . .

t-way "IC:IT!I!C, LGeCP . . . . M:)..~O I'" " L1 ...'...., .. ~I'_~,,-~,-_"ft

 'IlL I 4 I J

' ,.,. t!* fI 1ill !~I! I -

I __ n--_-,. -

 "I. "'Dn__.

I. ,M

• I.'"

I'*1 .... . II

 ,. n.D_,,_wq M .-- 'IS.

I J .... I. ,II

 + '1J.. ~'!!*!o***l:**L- --1 M ... I'"'

oo It

• 1:1 'I m!"u .... wq 1-M 1.1 .. loa I.. I ..

I. *1.... 'ft *. **wrnwmng_

 ~K.!TIg '-'--- , I . . . . I'P'UW _ _ ..

N'W!lr w.gme.

 ..... !I.n.

11I_.....-.. .. e-t,'. :' "" "

 - .............. w-L. . . . . . . . . . . . . . -_. I- ,,~

t.I'

 ..I. 1-- *'MDy . . . . .

• W5lI' 'IIJIW eM

 *.... =-gnJ'9.

L~"""*",,ix,iI

 ,-- I c: ....... * ,.j" .... ""0 0 I --

r c ~0 )::0 )::0 - ,....., I Q'fi't;;;::......

 '"" MICH wfDIID

• LA. . . . . . . . .

 <.0 -l C ~"'.U *.

fTl fTl c: I U _ "-"-t ..0 c r )::0 . i.

 -t) ,,'

fTl Z

 -_..... 1-- ,

n fTl OJ ,... """I-;;;;:;;;;:;;;-~ .. ..... ". - .. . . . . -.,rt. .0 "....... -l u ... _

 ~ :z ;0 )::0 -I. ~ )::0 .......;:0 <.0 r n :z ,... II".*-I. 0 d."

<.0 V!Vl r r It' -.:;: ' .alDmlsmso .l:: I )::0 ....... C

~ G')

CD :z lTl ::I: fTl Nl::3

 -l -l :z ~'E::' ......~

fTl U1 0-CD RO ;:0 u... _*I ~ )::0 G')

...... V! Z ""0 CO ""0 )::0 0 I r ~ n w -< fTl fTl Vl ;:0 :z l:lJ ...... -l ~

Vl n fTl 0- ;:0 0 UIlr. . . . 1*' ...........

 ;:0 ""0 I lTl 3: ""0 ~ ""0 )::0 CD 0 :z ;:0 -l

 .r::-.:t'1I' IDI"I _. ~ T--- -~a:::--:, ...n I ~..

i t I . ~i' =-.';_.- 'I I

 ~J l* IJ i J 1 Hi~t!:. r,! I~ d 1 -

IILD "!lIe.h"" , . . . . L - . A6lI.UlJ,I.f-o.* ln. ,,' f ..., I~' I I:: "',..".IUT! fill 'MR. " ,.-.t-:'¥":.t:=':+:'~f-='-+_+--+-+'-=! .. .. 1..-. "--. ...: ~..*tIll<>:.!,5:.1.*'

 .-.... --l '0 11 'I !I

• fln u . '. . . .

 ...,; ....y. L - . ~4-"+...l.-+-+--I-4--4~

• JI"'~!'~'J-' ~

 ) IS It I * ** I~ I a ~+'~"+,'",+,-,,-, -f'1o=-:r---+-R"' IS ,"'"

• TM" WT *

 'f- * . . -. . . .1_ . . . . ....:.¥"4!!,.:..;'

I c!,J+1"lL.f-~-!l!--+-+-l .... I-*=+''-F*+":+:~F-='I--+-+="'~ ..

 ..I "'j ~,+'~'-t-!."-r":+:"!-F-='I--4-+="'~:tS I

1-l.'+-'~'cLl:!I~'I4-!"~i=-:!!--+-~ '1-H-+-+-+--+--+-+-+-1 H--+-+-+--+--+-+-+-+-1-!'-+1!"~IICI!"!.J.'J!!,-+I_~~-4-J.l'41...., ~I~<1"!4!.1-\!'!!'~'~1o-~!!!-....f_+I.~ .. ... "".. !l~i-iL-.a;';.&....--------i

 !WI IUT! "M - JUce . MAyO PCW'5l!N eoys,em, &ny. ' ....... 1hIry ' .....

I. .. ,_1-411.f't-l1f.l:4-4-+---J. n.

 .. _""." .",.' 1U.L~' ,0 J-I+I~L.LL+-&4--+--+--+-I... 1-"4'U'.j:*'J.I+!!..4-"*!....F-=~-+-+-~...

I . .:

 .. I 1 ,

aruID'f wmna . . Il'!.*+: ~::.!I--J.!!'"4-.!:"~':!!"'"~--1--4-1 I .Ie"" ,.,.nO!! ",cuu In._.*,

• I so. "*flLll:.* ~n~.~l'i:i!Q~,~",L ..iiii:.;:JiJwWi!r1 erp<<t Of ",'!I'" ....

I~ , II .... In"" ~~~:a~'_

 ........w.;L.-:=;:..;:=::..::=---i ~-+--+-+--+--+--+-+-I'JL* .,.. lsLz*J ------- -f¥TD'" W!T!tPO!!I n.D.'. . . .

UI)l(Ul ,,,,,no. !!XlIUU

 '1I IMrn 'lI EM' 'lNG* .. 120)'

M..Uptl....v . u . . ,_ye.1Io.J t ** ,,,

 ~I_I IU. _ _ . .,_ '5. It' pal! ,.. 'lAYMf1tP "'" ,... --.. 'J.*'

II

 .w:mu. " 51" ~I. . . . . CO lilf'!tl_ ~ emu n. D EMNI 10 --... .. _.

twX IUD Be * !WI JIWj,.1-tea 1a w l IIID AfT

• PH' JI6lll,.

my ** " , W!!WUI-WlW! b1D1URII..11& -

 '- 10' r..,. "...., ,.., -rMJD'lIAT!INI-IN!!L' L1suO![. '-1 ~,..,.-.~ ~. (117.5')

I . II U,u e-, -.,..

 *"t-t-t--+-+-+-H .......... m .** ......

I,,, ..

 ... ....., .... "-.117." .. 1" **' "- _~- 1I.~."'J11"'_.""'*,'-- -i I ~J, ,--+I-+-+_+-+-+-l~""

M'WIl' 'UDPD *

 * ,"usu_,

1- 1I .. " .....,c:: 1-1

 -0 0 r c:::

0 >> >> '....(,Q -l C IT1 IT1 c:: 11011111 0 C r >>

 ....... IT1 :z to ." n IT1 0 1-1 -l ""') :z;;0 >>

5

 >> 1-1;;0." (,Q r n :z.... Vl 0

(,Q Vl r r I 1-1 l::

"'i ." m C

(1) :z IT1 :t: IT1 l::N 3 -l -l :z

. 0- -< IT1 U1 (1) ~ ;;0 I ""') >> m...... :z <;~ -0 0 I >>

r 0'\ ::: n

 -< IT1 IT1 QI Vl ;;0 :z

5 1-1 -l 0.. Vl n IT1 0 ;;0

 -0 I ;;0 :3: ....... ITi -0 III nSlllC SlIIlCU _ -0 >> ... ~ ..... -=- 1_

0 :z

 ;;0 -< '" -l

LOG Of" ~INQ NO, '.10 LOG Of" ~ NO. '.11I

 .* 1111. D.,lo.lr-. ,.. T....oll. 'II~. o-rlo."'-

WI1!....1W.1-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+mI. ..: 11s.lfll"D'-'-'--'-'-"_" -I I 1551'olu' " .~1--'-'1-'1<<i1j!J-'-4-..L.i~To<<i!!O!J~+--+.!!l! .-'SILT* XMH £Lay. C.!.

 ~ ....,p""'.* - - - - - - - - i fI'O" ~

no. (.S)I 14l'4'J+ !. '--l--I--+-+UI ,e>-I-!-~~',!..~.*:.t---'-.P'''''I---i~A *...,

 ,,,: i I

55,f 18 III I' ,.II!H-+++-+-+-+-+---j-

 ~'+,''L-'W,,!.'!-I!.!.'+-I-+-+-"l' ,0- 1-'-F-t",;,'I".,+-,',;,'I"-=t-+-+., '0-:

1-1-+-+-+---+--+-+-+-i-' H-+++-+-+-+-+ I-'-I-":>"f!'-,+,'.L'+--1~+--+-9,....= oIil'~*~":.L--------1 1-'--1"-'+,'.;.'-1"",+-".;.'F"'f---1I---P-i ':I I ' ,... SOU-lM,,"",

 , ...: Cr*.,.I..-.....U~--..

1-+-1-1--1--+-1-+-+-; -' '~~'~~~~~~;;;;;==::1 1-1-+-+-+---+--+-+-+-1--:J-!.'!J'1l4-!'!.'/-!L1--+-l-+-I)0-= 1""~'_' . - .... "-1-'T ' f*'-t--l.f-=t-+-f,.,,,H+-H-f-+-+-H-'I-!-'I"'!.!.'f~:~1 f'-'" :.t--1-+-+9,,-, I "

 " jl SILT ~ TI,IL:[ (LAT. .l.-I-+-+++~ -' r-f'-i-:-' - Ir_. ""'til").

SOO 8 ~~ 'lo;'a T+~f-+-i-H z, ....1

 'r., ..... ~.I-'.,,'I-"':......:'!... ~":.t--1-+-+9 .. $ILUrl![M. 'r--....... 1. . . . . .

l -....i'..

 ..JII--;~_+--+---iI--H - ~~1 110 1000 1-',+,'",'1""+"-1-,-,+--11--+--+-,...

H-+-;-+-+--+--+--+-;-'lObs lS'J 152500 "l 50-= 7Z8.oI":f"'L,;,.!:..L -I P,"'T'+-'-'-f=f-+-f"'i ~ ".",..,""""--- -(1-1-+++----1--+--+-+--1-= I--i~H'I -I-+-f--+---i-H -'11155 II II IS.zSOO

 .,1 1---+--';"'+..1-+-+-+-+-1-' H~-++--j-+-++-l - "',,"'.." ',.""'--------:-\ . '" I-"!.!.'!!.U~',!.'F":.t-~'!.<'P':::"""'I--l-f''1 ..3*7.a S'.i*) Sn: IIJTl ,t e~",~,~~~I-=:::t:::j~~60-= 1'.\11!"~">:***l- -1 . SA." $ILn CLAY - TMU H+-:-I-jf-+-HH -' ~~;;",_.(lIDlll").

lJ55 IIS',I" )1.,500 hry TOV9f\j..!J.-!-U+J.E'!J""'.!--"- '0I-+--1f-+"'I,,-, ,... ~.7t"'O*H-+-'-l!--I-+-+-H -' .. SS I:) o:i ... soo a. WlIOV ilL" hAY - 1'MCI J-!.!

 ..~,+".LiI+...J>. "+--+-I--+I~ "'0-' ~.

f111E 19 ' W I ( !W!). I"" 10'.,. "...,T....lOr.,.,,",.. Iw I J

 ~H--'--+----if-+--+--+...,- ~'Ll.+'~'.1:'!..'......I-I4--I-+-+~" 1"'-1"'-'+,fl-j--:!F.... =t-+-+"-{tL 1S-: 71.j'~'!a'.o.!**CJ"1 ' - '-1 ~ ...... ~ 0.-1111", _ _

• 7I.S*

 ! ~

H-+++-+-+-+-+-1_

 ~'!!.:'*U* .j!'.L+-,+..ll.. .o+-+_I--.p>l.... .: ", WATHe-U UIl MOIWI LIen.

I'" -'-'OYI (I.y ' - - * *,r_10--\, 1--+-"-I--I---+--l--I-H ....: 12 2'

 ~'eL+-',!jI; ...-1"....+-.>'+-+-+-+""'1,,-' ! '. I 'i'~:~~Y "1_ 116.0' ...111II _ _ .0 c. * . S 1-1-1-1-1-+_1-+-+-1 ...: 6'-1. fA!ID" SilTy SlAY.

57,7 '.0' 1!."!..j.l'o!.'f"!..¥'L'f-!!"'-!--f-+-+'1tL!O-= ",. ICAcl.S') IOn, * *err 1ou,h wu,TtI(lU . . _caE_ LtflUT

 .. I,. ....f'_c: * ..,w-.* ~

H-4--'-+---+--+--+-+r.J'" _au ,._ x' ........ ~. ~-I!.I!.,J.1'!.!.*f'*~..**;..::";!.."~..4--f-+-+~'"'5"= IOr.y I_Dot.... *

 "'.7 '7.0')

1--1-+-+-+---+--+--+-+.-.1-=

 !-"'-f.u.jILl-'-!--L4--I-+-+.!i<J" 100..: ,,,,~I"!!!...l.'l:.l' ' - ---1 1-1"-'-'--1----+-+--+--1---1....:

Il':!'"J.!''''''-'-':..!..'I-.l."~'l!"~!!!}--+.. _j.-S! los..:

 ~I i SM!! SlID gay * !WE ~,

c:,..,.......,. .......1"-,-'-1"!.!.'I"",-+,'.~",,)2'-F"=""I-_+-+-'-'lU "I -'

 ~'::"I-"~'F"!..*I!.'!..**~"'-!--I-+-+~"..

Sill TESTlISm'ICES

 '---+-+--4--1--+--1-=

25 $! ~ II ., $I' i2S-:c.-............-.'"..0.,

 "KIp .11" 1M Ir..,. "-ry ....

I!"!...¥':>,'~"~"'-f'-"''-!--I-+-+1.' ,,..::H+-H-f-t-I-H-'

 ~ W*;,:;- -1 I!"~'('~'*+"+:"+:::j~t+~l~~JI.SJ.!I.!'!..

f.="+ '"',.c '*fC-1'F~--'-1'f-':"'+-+-H -= W'!!! PMu t:aAyn.

 ,,..!= ....TO,.,hll1*

I

 " y'llx r'9 "lAm" -

IIle-n "nlS10!1.

 ""j ",,~5.U~ .:* * ";9"~- -I c ss-' ""C a ! a'gn'U!!U:TK[ll:[tl NIIO MO!lI....'nx ...ou! Ll!l'U'O![.

r 0c

t::o

E:

t::o

 -I ' ,!"~"

Minor ~U li"'t ~r..,of

 '-i~i_

c.o ~ c .ITl ITl C 0 C r- ):- 61S.41!I!l'~. W"'-_~ ---1

 -tl ITl :z ,~

OJ ("') ITl 0 ~ ....: IlIMP !lA!!!Up lllpX_

 -s :z ;:0 ):- ..... > ::0 :' .J. ".

3 r- ("') :z c.o

..... Ul a U;..:I-+--+-+-I-H loos,sI1!'ll"'W*'L:;"L,.~ ...-_-.~_=. ,.------l c.o (/) r- r s:: I :J:o 0 "'-s m CD :z ITl ::I: ITl s:: " -

N 3 ~ -I :z

. 0- -< ITl<J1 CD 120 ;:0 I -s :J:o m N Ul Z ""C a -< ""C :J:o a r- :E: ("')

I

 ~ -< ITl ITl

(/) ::0 :z ..... __..-Q.I :1,\' III USTi. m'l5Es

 -I

3 (/) ("') ITl "IOU. "'. . . 0.. eel . .... _

0- c.-....- . ,-'

0

 ""C ;:0 a

3:I ITl ""C

 ...... ""C ):-

a a :z

 ;:0 -< -I

UtO., . . . . IIG .*u

 . . . f1,ftfttt ..... - .... .....,. I' ~-:-;*."'n . _ IllTftK , .... _ ...... - . .

1_--

• r-=.-=-.. nnn uno -_- . I-=.-=-. r-. . ('P

 - . I :.. " *t I J! if 1 - ~ I 1 . ~ i I!:~' 1 I CI.'" lWU!!L-- , D ... * ~.-.'-

I a. , £!:... ~. !W1 ,ill I * *,I .. 'IS! I P9' "". - 1M" I!!!II!!II.. *. - . . - _..

 , . I.....*

I OJ

 . a.,. * . * ~'L'!,!""'; Ell J In .I.J "" Cl * ... ... , Ul'tl'..!"!.; I!:l " 's-n ... 11.'IIJ1 lO ,,1;-- .... ...e " -

• n .... II.' II .. I..... ~ II ., I)'

 . =t't:.!'f........ ..I;';" ... f,o * ,. .~ II I , nbo S~ s.s IIIIQ: 1.- .u I-I ... I- I1.JII' ..

I-

 .... ... , . ., Q. :rm!'L".!'bWS

• I~ '..

u .....I-I .. , .... ".JIII co.

 .. ,I.:..- ~ Is .. I ... II *

• r....

 .. rr .. I_.~

I . . '" .... I!,'\!l!'..;.ra..... we . . *..I I... I~** ~ MP! til n 9*1 ...,.

 ...... , .. uge -J'MI .. .. .IT" I!!!!II... ................... * --

a" a . . . . - elf L'--' ......... 'I.I....~ " ..

 .. a " 1_ ** "'C!I!U -:~U. a. Illn cu.,.,::;r,U!! uo:* * ~'r.,.

I,... _'Mnlt Ur.¥.:'!1 ___

 ~ II .. II ..-....... ..., " ,._ ...... lm"3 .lIm -:1 ..

• 1Jt" m.'~

 . ~ . -IMJ,,'-_'WIH a~ 1GB gam ...., ~.'-'

L.,......... 10-

 .... I* I-

• I"

 ..... ~ - E::!'~~!.'i!&::p i ' I!jI ,u _.

L ....

 "..: 8""-'" ar.r _m""f*-*-_

I I ~ -..-.

 ,_ .......~.4.!!"!f - '" ~ . _mmlsmas.._oc.

_*000 c ... ~ ~_ II

 '_ILleNll: ~.""'MO. -I t' ~teC ..ns I--

I .; ~I I1* I'"

• liB i ui IJ!~lf 1 I

 ... ~ ,- ..: F l . " _wqIST I ...

I.I....1-

 ~--,"'I_ . ~1-l4-+~~+-+-+~.. . , .. * . . . . . *_0 al' * ..

• 1!!!!Il..'...,....-. ...

II...*I II II

• 10- .. 1!mt\P II *

 , . ,..,.......'--¥!" ., ~ II I ..: **- ~-j.;Co ,. ... .." - I- !!!t!'.::" Ie . -*

I- ...... IllD CU" - tMCI

 . .ft ......~. . . . . . _ ~ '.1- . , ,~

I;.;,. '-I" I-

 ..I - ....

• I-III. '

1- 1_..*c ......r '"'0 0 -0 0 :E:

 ~ \0 ~ lO@~n: ~ ~ ......

 -I 0 -/N ,." ,." c -t, 0 r- ~ ... ..... ,

OJ ,." :z 0 n ,." ...

 -s ...... -I

I

z::0 ~ 100 !!!Z'.! J!!!'! l!el!'"

 \0 ~ ......::0 ~

Vl r n :z . II

..... 0

\0 s::

• t/)

 ~

r r

 ...... 0-S :z Ci")

CD s:: ,." "" ~ .......

I: ITI N

3 0"

 -I -I :z

. CD -<U1 -S 120 ::0 NI Vl

 ~ Ci") '"'0 :z '"'0 -< ~ 0

• r :E: n t/) ::0 :z AI

-- ...... -I

I _. _ _ oc.

t/) n ,."a- ., . _ns,.sunw -0 ::0 _000

 '"'0 ::0 3: -

I ,." '"'0

 '"'0 N

 ~

z

 ;:c -< - -I

BORING I SUlfFAC£ £L£ ...rlOit 747.0 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LS$./SQ.n:700 6l. 100 4000 ~ JOO 2~ roo It. '00 0 150 DESCIf'IIrlO1IIS_ mOE SAHOY SILT - TOPSOIL 7 II !IROWN 'INE SANtI WITH A TWACE 0' SILT

 ......,- DII SP 19.""'-I~_ II II ........- - - i !ROWN 'INE TO IIIEDIUIII SAND SP GRAY SILT'!' CLAY WITH SOlliE SAND AND GRAVEL T~

13.9'llo-'22

---- 15.2%-120 15.O'r-120 TIC WAPSIPINICON 'ORIIIATION DAVENPORT MEMBER TC- LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY BEOOED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS 0' DAIIll GRAY DOLOMITIC' LIMESTONE

 'i~,+TION ENLAROED JOINTS ~

• TO 5D. S 4 INCH CAVITY AT CONTACT 690 SPIIING GROVE MEIII8ER LIGHT GRAYISH-!ROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSIVE HIOHLY YUOOED ZONE 'ROIII 15 TO" 'EET

--, - IIORINO COMPLETED AT 79.0' ON 7/5111 CASINO USED TO A DEPTH at' '1.0' WATER LEVEL NOT RECORDED IJt!JO DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 1 Figure 2.5-22

t! BORING 2 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LSS./SQ.n: !e.t SURFACE ELE ...TION 747.1 a~6()()() !JOOO 4000 ~ 2000 1000 o **r:1U ~ ~ SYM'OLS DESCRIPTIONS 7 * ~::C::l~~;;;;:~-'::OW=OW=':::""":'~':'::::~~-::==D:'::Y-':~~L-:::"'~-::TT::::O==~IL-Of'-SI-LT---500-1"4.104_10

• IIAOWN FINE 11) alAllSE SAND 15.5'l'.-106 7"'~ WATER L£VEL ON 713/68 7$0 14.0"4-121 GRAY SILTY CLAY WI'nt SOME SAND AND GRAVEL

.- I 14.7"4-121 7~_

14.8"4-116 15t4'l'.-IIll 7/0 WAPSIPINICON ftlllMATION OAVENPORT MEMBER 100 LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF CAlli< GRAY DOLOMITIC -LIMESTONE SPRING GlIOVE MEMIER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC,~ DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE. MASSIVE

 ~

HIGHLY VUGGED FROM IZ TO 70 FEET OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GIIAYISH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS 680 610 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 2 Figure 2.5-23

BORING 3 SlIIfFACE ELE..TION 747.1 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LSS./SQ.n:tsOOO 6000 4000 $()()() 1000 1000 r:K) 5 YIIIIIOL 5 DESC",PTIONS WN IL Y I IL IllIOWN SILTY SANO IIROirN FINE 10 foIElllUM SAND WATER LEVEL ON 6/24/68 7';:;

 .... -.... ~N FINE 10 CXlARS£ SAND WITH GRAVEL 7,-- GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOME GRAVEL OCCASIONAL CCllIlLES

~14.ll'll.-1I3 BOULDER 1S8'lIo-114 710 WAPSIPINICON FORMATION DAVENPORT MEMBER 700 LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY BEOOEo. SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF CARIC GRAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH- BROWN VUGGEo. APHANITIC.690 DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE. MASSiVE SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS UP TO 2 INCHES AT $7.$ FEET OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAYISH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS HIGHLY VUOOEo F~M 64.0 FET 10 68. $ FEET SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS UP 10 2 INCHES KENWOOD MEMIIER GRAY FINE DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE WITH SOME 6~ THIN SHALE SUMS IIDRINO CXlMPLETEo AT n$ FEET ON 6/2$/M CASING USf:0 11) A DEPTH OF 16.$ FEET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 3 Figure 2.5-24

BORING 4 SHEARIN6 STlfEN6TH IN L6S./S(J.FT.6000 $()()() 4000 ~ 1000 1000 0'JV l/E$C"'"ION$DAIlK _ N SILTY 'IN( SANIl WITH E CLA - L IROWN SILTY SAND WITH SCIIIE CLAY IROWN file: 'Ill alARSE SAND WITH SOME GRAVEL,~GRAY SILTY CLAY WITtl SAND AND SOME GRAvEL no'2" 14.1 ill.-1I4 16.0'llr-11O TI.,WAPSIPINICON I'ORMAT10N DAVENPOflT IIEIIIER 700 LIGHT GRAY'SH -IROWN APHANITIC LIIIESTONE.THINLY IEDDED, SOME IttECCIA lONES AND SEAMS 0' DARIl GRAY OOLDIIITIC - LIIIESTONE

 ~~rI8YJI:UmL.f,t"JT\lmD c!'JlltN-P CLAY SPRINIO GROVE IIEIlIlER GO LIGHT GRAYISH-IROWN VUGGEO, APHANITIC, ~g:LV\:U';l:l~T~~M~~S~IV~

4 IIlCH SOI.UTIOII ENLARGED VUG III 'EET OCCASIONAL TRACE O. GRAYISH - GREEN RESIOUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS 660 HIGHLY VUGeED 'ROM IS TO 70 .EET SOliE SOLUT lOll EIILAllGED VUGS K£~G"IPP~R'1,nH TO COARSE DOLOIIITIC,"4.- k1tcYJiafE!IT"i.lMlAl,RTIALLY

 ~OE1'llHA.fL.,\~llltfV CAVITY OR SHALE TNCE 0' CHERT AT 71 'EET g~tgl:I',~~J~~~~~A~Dt:.::~mCiEDDED B~IIJy=m THI II SHALE SEAIIS AND TRACE IIOIlING COMPLETED AT. 90. I F'EET 011 6/211'"

CASING USED 'Ill A .D£PTH Of ".OREl' WATER LEVEL NOT RECOllDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 4 Fiqure 2.5-25

BORING 5

 $HEARINB STlfENBTH IN LS$./SQ.n: SIJIIFACE ELEIMrlOll 747. I 6DDO 6000 4000 ~ 2000 1000 TOlfJ DESC/flPTIO/IIS "'OWN SILTY SAIClWITH IOIoIE CLAY -1OPSOtL 9.1"-106 lllOWN "NE 10IIIEDIUIII SAND ,,-:- me 10 C1DAIIIlt: SAND WITH !DillE GRAYEL ..............;;...;...-4 lllOWN WATEII LEYIEL ON 7/25/.

7.2"*1I~

 ,,, ......,,. IDULDVl 14.51'EET 10 16.0 FEET ,- II11AY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND IOIIIE 1I11Avt:L 14.""-117 .

7:_ 13.5'lI.-122 17.7'lI.-U2 17.S.... U6 7/.Is.cl-U7

 .-- WAPSIPINICON FOIIMATION DAYENPOIIT MEMIEII LIGHT GRAYISH' BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY BEDDED. SOME "'ECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF oARl< GRAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER

 -.. LIGHT GRAYISH-BIIOWN YUGGEo, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSiVE HIGHLY YUGGED FROM 14.0 FEET TO 71.0 FEET SOLUTION ENLAIlGED YUGS OCCASIONAL TRACE OF II11AYISH- GREEN IIESloUAL CLAY IN THE YUGS GRADING WITH "EDOING PLANE JOINTS APPIlQACHING ENIl OF SPRING GIIOYE

_INIl CXlIIPl.£Tt:D AT M.5 FEET s--: ON 1/lIIg CASlIllI USED 10 A DEPTH 0' 44.5 FEET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 5 Figure 2.5-26

BORING 6

 .£AIIINS STII£NSTH IN LII&./SQ.n:

MXJ() 6Of)() 4000 MXXJ 1000 1000';w OIW< _DE$CIt/~TION$SLTV SAND WITH SOME CLAY - TOPSOIL.IIIOWN SIL.TV lAND_ FINI 10 CDAllIE lAND WITH SDME CJlAVf:L.,.~.,-.- "+---1 GIlAY S1L.TY Cl.AY WITH SAND ANO SOME GRAVEL.

'-- 13....... 11' I~","II~

11.2'lI.-l'1 "0

 ......... . - -... WAPSIPtN1CON RUU_AlION DAVENPORT MEMIER- LIGHT GRAYISH *I!IAOWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

TH'NL.Y IEDOEO, SOMf BRECCIA ZONES ANO SEAMS OF DARK GRAY DOL.OMITIC - L.IMESTONE TRACE OF CHEIIT AT 415 FEET SPRING GROVE MEMII£II L.IGHT GRAYISH-III1OWN VUGGEO. APHANITIC.DOL.OMITIC - L.IMUTONE

• MASSIVE GO 100'l'.

 ~ SOL.UTlON ENL.ARGED VUGS AT 51,0 FEET AND AT ".0 FEET OCCASIONAL. TRACE OF GIIAYISH - GREEN RESIDUAL. CL.AY IN THE VUGS HIlIHL.Y VUGGED I'IlOM 10.5 F'EET 10 67.0 FEET

~SOL.UTION ENL.AIIGED VUGS GRADING AII£NAClOUI NEAR CONTACT KENWOOD MEM8I11 L.IGHT YEL.L.OWISH -(JIIAY APHAN ITIC. DOL.OMIT'C-L.IMESTONE GIIADING IL.UISH-GIIAY AT 72.0 FEET 670 SOME Vf:1IY THIN SHAL.E SEAMS AT 71_0 FEET MODERATEL.Y IEDDm AT 71.5FEET lOlliNG OOMPL.ET£D AT 76.0 F'EET ON II 261611 CASING USED 10 A DEPTH OF 11.0 FEET WATl:1I L.EVEL. NOT RECOIlOED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 6 Figure 2.5-27

BORING 1 SHEARING ST1IEN.TH IN LIIS./SQ.n: SlJIfI'M:E ELI""DIt 746. 3

 <<J()()!/(J(J() 4000 ~ ~OOO 1000 SYIIIM)LS DE$Clf/~'101tS K IL. I H L.U IlDOTS - TOPSOIL.

r -yw IIllOWlil SlL.TV SAND_ I I FIIIE SAND M.5~*'1 ~~t-lw...-l CllIAY :::~E:.li~YEL. 7/1111 OCCASIONAL. L.AYEIlS OF FINE 10 OOUISE SAND 22.""__r_GltAY SlL.TY CL.AY .,TIt SAND AND 90lIlE GRAYEL.14.""-121 20eXl-I'.1'llo-1I1 nO' WAPSIPINICON I'OIIMATION OAYENPOIIT MEMIEII L.IGHT GIIAYISH-IIIOWN APHANITIC L.IMUTONE.THINL.Y IEDDED. SOME IMCCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF CAIIK GIlAY DOL.OMITIC - L.IMESTONE SPIIING _ MEMIEII L.IGHT GIIAYISH-IIIOWN YUGGED. APHANITIC.OOL.OMITlC - L.IMESTONE

• MASS lYE 6=" SOL.UTlOIl EIlL.AIIGED YUGS UP TO Z INCHES IlJ"

 ~.onn 6~

SOL.UTIOIl EIlL.AIIGED YUGS UP TO S INCHES GIIADIIlG AIIEIlACEOUS KEIlWOOD IIIEIllIEII

 .L.UISH -GltAY APHAIlITIC. DOL.OIIIITlC-L.IIIIES1ONE.

_IIATEU IEDDED 6Tl _'110 COIIIPL.ETED AT 15. S fEET OIl 7/1/. .CASING USED TO A DEPTlt or 41.0 FEET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 7 Figure 2.5-28

SORINe 8

 $HEA",N6 ST"EN6TH IN LUo/SQFT.

,- 6Of)() 6()(J() 4000 ~ 6000 1000 11IO'" SillY SAND WITH SOME CLAY Y- L 8110WN ',NE TO CDAMI[ SAND WITH SOliE GIlAVEL,~.7.-' GIlAY SILTY CLM WITH SAND AND SOlIE GRAVEL 16.n.-1II 16.11%-111

 ... 17D'llo-I WAPSIP',NICON I'llRMATION DAVENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY BEOOED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES ANO SEAMS OF OARK GRAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMIlER LIGHT GRAYISH- BROWN VUGGEO, APHANIT'C, Ii- DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSiVE SOLUTION ENURGE 0 VUGS UP TO Z INCHES OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAY,SH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY 'N THE VUGS HIIHLY VUIGED 'ROII U TO . . FEET Ii.,., 83 SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS UP TO Z INCHES KENWOOD IIEIIBER LIGHT GRAY IIOTTLED WITH BU/ISH-GRAY FINE s- ~o'f::"'K~Cif~t:DII~I~~L~=~NS~~:.s0 ' SHALE lIZ INCH SHALE SEAII AT 7S FEET GRAD I NG liAS S IVE AT 18.0 FEET

 ....106 COIIPLETED AT 12.0 FEET ON 11271511 CASING USED 10 A DEPTH OF 1*.0 FEET WATER LEVEL NOT RECORDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 8 Figure 2.5-29

BORING 9 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LIIS./Sen: SII/IFACE £L£IMTIDN 746.6 (j()(J() $()()() 4000 ~ 1000 1000 7iIfJ DE$Clf/~TIONS B_N SILTY SAND-TOI'SOIL- 30 INCHES BIIOWN FINE Ttl COMSE SAND 74...GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SANO ANO SOlIE GIIAYEL n., 14.8'Y.-125.... 16.4"--117 16.4".-1I!l 7/_WA"S'NICON ""RMATION OAVENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY BEDDED, SOME BIlECC'A ZONES AND SEAMS OF DARK GIIAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE S INCH CAVITY AT 49.0 FEET, OPEN SPRING GROVE MEMIER LIGHT GRAYISH-BROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, 6:- DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSiVE OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAYISH-GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS 6:-SOLUTION ENLARGED YUGS UP TO 2 INQ£S S-..KENWOOD MEMBER BLUISH -GRAY A"HANITIC. DOLOMITIC-LIMESTtlNE OCCASIONAL. VERY THIN SHALE SEAMS ON 7/1'._,1Cl GOMPLETED AT TT S FEET CASlIII USED Ttl A DE~ ~ 42.0 FEET WATER LEVEL NOT RECOIIDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 9 Figure 2.5-30

BORING 10 SNEAltlNG ST"ENGTH IN LBS./SQ.n:6000 !IOOO 4000 ~ 2000 1000,.,., SY1II60LS DESCIf'I*TIONS 12A....1D5 lWIll IllOWN SILTY SAND WITH SOIIIIE CLAY - TOI'SOIL_ N SILTY SAND 1OA'Io-lO!I T4... 1'.9"'-99

 .........-:::-=--i GRAY FINE TO CllAIlSE SAND GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOliE GRAVEL T~" I&.Z "'"III

,-- I!U....1I9 14.9'10-111 15.0'11o-119 T/~WA~SI~INICON I'OIIIIATION Tr- DAVENPORT MEMIIEII LIGHT GRAYISH -IIROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY IIEOOED. SOME IIll[CCIA ZONES AND 5[AIISOF DAIIIl GRAY DOLDIIITIC - LItIIESTONE SPIlING GROVE MEMI[II~ LIOHT OllAYISH-IlROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLC'MITIC - LIIIESTOIoE

• IIASSIVE HIOHLY YUGOm FIIDII sa TO S1 FUT HIOHLY VUGIlED FIIOII 10.5 TO 17. S FE[1

...- I INCH AIIENAct:DUS SEAII SDLU TlON ENLAIIOED VUOS U~ TO 2 INCHES IlENWOOD MEIIIIEII IILUISH -OIlAY APHANITIC. DOLOIIITIC-LIMESTONE IIASSIVE _INO COMPLETED AT 15.0 FEET 6_ ON 111111" CASINO USED TO A DEPTH OF _0 FEET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 10 Figure 2.5-31

BORING II SIJIfFACE ELE..TIOit 747, I

 $HEARING STRENGTH IN LIIS,/SQ.n:

6IXJ() 6f)()() 4000 ~ 1000 1000 T!J() l)ESCIIIPTIONS H L Y- IL IRlWN IIU'r SAND WITH iIllIIE CLAY c_T'-_ N!'INt: 10 alMS! SAND WITH iIllIIE GltAVEL WA1I:R LEVt:L ON 1/20111 r,-- GIIAY SILTY Cl.AY WITH SAND AND SOlIE GRAII£L 1~-1I4 T20 19.1'll.-1II TlO WUTHEIlt:D LIMt:S'lONt: IIllULDER IIt:DIliSH IIlIIOWN CLAY WITH SDlIt: LIIoI£S'lONt: fll_HIS

~' ....... ---h..A'SI',NICON!'ORMATION DAVENPORT MEMIIER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY IIEOOED, SOME IIRECCIA ZONES ANO SEAMS OF DARI< GIIAY DOLO.UTlC - LIMESTONE... SPRING GRO\It: MEMKR LIGHT GRAYISH-IlROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE. MASSIVE SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS AT !I5.0 FEET HIGHLY vuoom FROM 11.0 FEET "to 611.0 FEET 6IJO V£IlY THIN SHALt: SEAM AT CONTACT KENWOOD Mt:MIIER IILUISH _ FIN£ "to MmlUM DOLOMITlC-

 ~1:~S~':i.EM;::::E WITH OCCASIONAL VERY 610 _,NG COMPLETED AT 77.0 FEET ON 1/211_

CASING USl!D 1'0 A DEPTH OIF 210 FEET 66f)DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 11 Figure 2.5-32

BORING 12 SURFACE El.EIilATfCII 746.9 DESCRIPTIONS

 ~

SP

 ~ '~-4~-~ .. LIIHT BROWN ".10 COAItSf; SAND WITH SOME OIlAVEL

13. SP OIlAY SILTY Q.AY WITH SAJIIl AND SOlIE GIIAVEL 14.*~-I2II:===~==:t LAYERS OF "'NE 10 COARSE SAND WITH GIlAVEL GRAY"..E SANll'I' SiLT 7/1a---t-----.,f-----+---+---I-----I 0It1tf SILTY Q.AY WITH SAND AND SOME GRAVEL SlOO-I7.9"llr-III _

19,"- -110

 !!f----iWAP5IPINICON FOftMATlON DAVENPORT MEMBER liGHT GRAYISH - 8ROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS Of' DAR" GRAY OOLOMITlC* LIMESTONE SPRING GROvE MEMBER LIGHT GAAYISH~ BROWN VUGGEO, APHANITIC.DOLOMITIC - L,MESTONE , MASSIVE HIGHLY vUGGED f _ 640 f(£T TO 70.0 f(£T OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GItAYISH - GREEN RES10UP.L CLAY 'N THE VUGS ARGILLACEOUS ZCI'IE FRQlII 70.0 ~ 10 72.0 FUT SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS UP TO 2 INO<ES "E"WOOD MEMBEIt LIGHT GRAY TO WHITE DOLOMJnC - LIMES10NE WITH 6rot---t---+---+---+-----4---I IOAIn' I'IlRTIALLY REa:IIIENTBl FRACTURES, SOtoIE SHOW SOLUTION ACTlVITY. MOOERATELY BEDDED, GRADING BLUtSH* GIIAY AT 79.0 F££T HIGHU' ENLARGED VERTICAL JDI"T flU-EO W'TH '12 INCH OF GItAY CLAY lIZ 81.0 nET GRADING IIIASSlvE ANO UHFIIACTURED AT ....0 ~GRADING ARGILLACf:OUS llWlSH - GIlIEEN CALCAREOUS SHALE IHT'ERIIltlOED WITH THIN SEAMS OF ARGILLACEOUS 1I IIIESTONE SOlliE PYItITE AT 91.5 FlEET GRAY AItGILlLAC£OUS LIMESTONE S;S'JII~-_+--_+--_+_--+---~-~ llWlSH - GREEN CALCAREOUS SHALE GRADING W,TH SOME LIMESTONE OOWEIt P'DRIIIATION LIGHT GRAY FINE TO AI'tlANtnC oot.DM~, THINLY BEDDED WITH THIN SUMS Of SHALE AND OCCASIONAL WH~ CHERT NODULES HIGHLY ARGILLACEOUS FROIII 106 ~ TO 109 Fn:T SHALE S[AlltS GRADING OUT AND GRADING IilOOERATELY BEDom GItADING TO A ILUtSH -GRAY VUGGED DOLOMITE.FOSSllIFlEROOS MO MASSIVE Of BIOHERN ORIGIN 6/1a----11----+---+---+---+-----I ON "14/.

 .-:llUHG COMP\.£TED AT 147.0 fEET CASING USED 10 A Dt:PTHOf 47.0 fEET WATER LEVEL NOT RECORDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 12 Figure 2.5-33

BORING 13 SHEARING ST"EN.TH IN La/SQ.n: Sl/ftFACE £L£WATION 746.8 6000 6()()() 4000 ~ 6000 1000,~

 ~~ SYII.OLS DESCIfIPTIONS WN FINE SANDY SIL WITH ~ CL..Y -~IL 14 III . - N SlLTY_

74_ 22 III 16 III _ FItl[ 'Ill CO..IIS[ SAND WITH SOME OR"VEL 13 III 7~,- ORAY SILTY CUY WITH SAIel "NO SDMl GR..VEL 22 III 21 III 7=14!No-1I pI pC 7/., pC pC 14 III W.. PSIPINICDN I'OR....TION D..VENPORT MEMIER~C... 7ll'IIo LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY IlDOED, SOME BRECCI" ZONES AND SEAMS OF DARIl GIIAY DOLOMITIC' LIMESTONE SPRING _ MEMIER 6,-'"88%LIGHT GR"YISH *IROWN VUGGEO, APHANITIC.DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, M"SSIVE SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS UP 10 3 INCHES "T 53.5 I'eT OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAY,SH - GREEN

 . RESIOU"L CLAY IN THE VUGS HIGHLY VUGGO I'RlM CI.OF£ET TO 57.0 FEET S"'" .1OO'lf.

SOUITION ElIUIIGEO VUGS GIIAOINQ ARENACEOUS IOO"lI KENWOOD ME..IER 1ITi'" ILUISH -CIII"Y "PH.. NITIC. OOLO..,TIC-LI"lS'IllNE_ _ COIIPL£TED ..T ".0 I't:ET tA,,_1118'"011 W"~R WID 'Ill .. DEPTH OF IC.D f'EET LEVEL NOT RECORDED 6"'-DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 13 Figure 2.5-34

BORING 14 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LS5./SQ.n: SU"FACE ELEIAATION 746.4 6000 !JOOO 4000 ~ 2000 1000,~ill ~ SYItIIIOLS DESCRIPTIONS pawll ""E SAIIDY SILT - TO ~LI..

 ,ROOII SILTY "liE SAIlO 16 II I_II FIIIE ,., COUSE SAND WITH TRACE OF SILT 1911 ~..:..;jl----l lAOWN FINE SAIID WITH OOCK[l'S DE "ED IU" TO COARSE 13 II SAIID- 140 17 II ~~f----4 18 II GRAY SILTY CUlY WITH SOME SANO AIID GRAVEL 138 !C.-liS pi 15.rr.-1I2 PI 24 II TI~

29 II i 100'J'.91'l1 WAPSIPINICON DAVENPORT FORMATION "EMlER L.IGHT GRAVISH - BROWN APtlANITIC THINLY IEDDED, SOME III£CCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF DARK GRAY DOLO"'TIC - UMESTONE liMESTONE4 SPRING GROvE ME"IER L.IGHT GRAYISH- BROWN VUGGEO I APHANITIC I 6;.. 1OO'lI DOLO"'T'C

• LIMESTOt<< ... ASSIVE SOl.UTION ENL ARGED VUGS AT 55.0 FEET HIGHLY V..... ED FIlO" 61. S F£ET TO 66.0 FrrT 6:.. 96'lI SOME SOLUTION ENLARGED TUGS ICENWOOO ME..SEll LIGHT YELLOWISH - GRAY APHANITtC. DOLOMITIC
• i UMESTONE.

Ii ... GRADG TO tuJISH-GRAY AT 72.5 F£ET MASSIVE WITH OCCASIONAL VERY THIN AND IRREGULAR SHALE SEA" AT 14.0 F£ET

 !lORING COMPLETED AT 15.0 F£ET 010 115/68 CASING USED TO A DEPTH OF IS.OFEET WATER lEVEL NOT RECORDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 14 Figure 2.5-35

BORING I~SHEARING STRENGTH IN LSS./SQ.FT. S/JRFACE ELEWArlON 746.3 6000 ~ 4000 ~O 2000 1000 rOlU 117.4~d SYIJIIIOLS DESCIIIPTIONS r~~ \1m ';!rtk ~D WITH SOME CLAY - TOP!OIL 70,_ 1m.,,,24.6%-96 P ....- - -! BIIOWN SILTY FINE SAND WITH SOME CLAY

 .- 15.5"... 119 ~"""'I----f GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SJME GRAVEL -,-- 15.8".-118 I

4000-16 t:l~-1I7 6OOO-17.7~-I15 7/_17.1~-1I

 ~---lWAPSIPINICON FORMATION QAvENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES ANO SEAMS OF DARK GRA'f DOLOMITIC -LIMESTONE SOLUTION ENLARGED BEDDING PLANE JOINT AT 46.5 FUT SPR 100 GROVE MEMBER 8 LIGHT GRAYI$H-I!IROWN VUGGEO I APHANITIC I DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSiVE HIGHLY VUGGED F!lOM 5S.0 FE£T 10 59.0 FEET HIGHLY VUGGED FflOM 62.0FEET TO 67.0 ~6~ 91

 .ENWOOD MEMBER BLUISH -GRAY APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC-LIM[SlONE 1 !lORING COMPLETED AT 75.0 FEET S- ON 6"1/61 CASING USED TO A DEPTH OF 43.5 FEET WATER LEVEL NOT RECORDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY A~ALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 15 . Fi gure 2.5-36

BORING 16 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LBS./SQ.FT. SURFACE ELE'tAATION 746.6 6000 $000 4000 ~000 2000 1000 7:N SYMBOLS DeSCRIPTIONS N IL I SM ~WN SILTY FINE SAIID t!'!"~-=':;;""-i GRAY SILTY SAIID 74.., SM SP 5W 73., .........----1 GRAY S~~~~AY WITH SAIID AND SDWf: GRAVEL 72", CL 148"'.-1I~la~%-II 7/....16.1%-113

 ~~---i WAPSIPINICON FORMATION DAVENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES ANO SEAMS OF DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE SPRING GRovE MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH- BROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - L'MESTONE , MASSiVE 6::" TRACE OF GREENISH-GRAY CL"Y FlLL IN VERTICAL

 ..(lINT AND ADJACENT VUGS AT 54.0 FEET ,~

OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAYISH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS HIGHLY VUGGED FROM 65.0 FEET TO 69.0 FEET vUGS ENLARGED BY SOLUTION, UP 10 2-1/2 INCHES KENWOOD MEMBER 6 __ BLUISH' GRAY APHANITIC. OOLOMITIC-LIMESTONE BORING COMPLETED AT 76.0 FEET ON 1/27111I CASING USED 10 A DEPTH OF 16.0 FEET WA TUI LEVEL NOT RECORDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER *COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFET~ ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 16 Figure 2.5-37

 ~ BORING 17 1It SHEARING STRENGTH IN LS$./San: ~~ SURFACE ELE.".r,OW 7468 7'lII6000p....;.",..;$()()();"";;...;;....;.,,,....;.4~OO..;;.,;;,O--.;~;.;.:;.;;O;.....;2::.;.OO=-O~..:.".;;O.:;.OO=--=.O~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ SYi/BOLS DESC"'PTfONS -......,~~~=~:::-:=~~~=-:~

16.7'Y.-t08 6 . ",_ . "*I---u-'C""L--< ~~N~:;;'., F~~~y SANOY SILT WITH SOME CUIf*1Ol'!Ila.IO.~*II! 13. - .- IlIlOWN FINE TO loIEDIUM SllI<D 7'::- ~ -~Sp_ WATER L.EVEL ON 6,"'68

 ~-29.!S.....-* ..... 6 . . . .- . . - . -....... GRAY FINE SAND 18.8"1'.-101I 3 II SP TRACE OF CLAY IlOULOER , _ 20.0' TO 21. 0' 29 I GRAOING WITH LAYERS OF CLAY 7:... 7 0 ~0-1----~ GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOfolE GRAVEL 23 I ~

17."".-114 12.

 ~ CL 71:-

1!SI5"O

 - WAP!IPINICON ro""ATION 70-/. QAvENPORT MEMBER ~ - LIGHT GRAYISH* 8ROWPII APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY 8EOOEO, SOME 8RECCIA ZONES ANO 82"1.

... v_

SEAMS OF DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC* LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER

 -- 8~. LIGHT GRAYI$H- BROWN VUGGEO. o1 P HANITIC.

DOLOMITIC* LIMESTONE. MASSIVE

 ~ - SOWTlON ENLARGED vUGS UP TO Z INCHES~

OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAYISH - GREEN 96'1'. RESIDUAL CLAy IN THE VUGS AT 5TD ~[T

~ ...- 98%

SOLUTION ENLAROED was AT 595 FEET HIGHLY VUGGEO FROM 61.0 FEET 10 69.5 FEET HIGNLY SOLUTION ED VUGS, ENLARGED 10 3 INCHES! ~ XENWOOO MEMBER BLUISH -GItAY F'INE TO MEDIUM OOl..OMITIC- lIMES'TON(i:: OCCASIONAL VERY THIN SEAMS ~ SHALE 6-;' 98'>'.!ii1 -_.SHALE SEAMS GRADING OUT IOO"Y.

 -- ~

72'lI GRAOING ARGILLACEOUS 8LUISH-GREEN CALCARt:OUS SHALE INTER8EDDEO WITH THIN SEAMS OF ARGILLACEOUS LIMESTONE GRAY ARGILLACEOUS ~IMESTONE 8LUISH - GREEN CALCAREOUS SHALE 6~ 3O'lI SOME PYRITE GOWER FORMATION LIGHT GRAYISH-BROWN APHANITIC DOLOMITE MODERA TELY 8EOOED 7ll'lI SOME THIN SHALE SEAMS AND WHITE CHERT 6--

 ~

NODULES VERY ARGI~LACEDUS FROM 120.0 F'EET TO 121.0 ~ET 6:_

 '21..----1-----+---..+----1-----1---- 99'Y. .~

SOME SOLUTION EN~AIlGED BEDDING PLANE JOINTS 6': 'D1I----~---+_---+_---+_---+---_l 9!S%TlIACE OF 'OSSILS BORING COMPLET£O AT 142.0 FEET ON 6114".CASING USED 10 A llEI'Tl1 OF 42.0FRT

 ~

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 17 Figure 2.5-38

BORING 18 SHEARING STRENaTH IN L65./SQ.FT. SU"FAC£ £L£W1lTION 746.9 6000 <<JOO 4000 ~ 2000 1000 7:1fJ SYIIIIIOLS D£SC",PT,ONS DARK BRO_ SIl.TY FI NE SAND WITH SOllIE Q.AY (llJP!IDIL Ii' I JIoIol".........I!!.k~ LIGHT II"OWN FINE 10 IIIEDIUlil SAND WITH SOllIE GltAVEL wlITE" LEVEL ON 71 251M 7~ LAYEItS OF F'NE TO COA"SE SAND t--4--~ G"AY FINE SAND W'TH !DillE G"AVEL t--f--~ BROWN FINE 10 0DAII!l! SAND

 "'-.04f---i GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOllIE <RAVEL 7:..

7/...

 ~~--I WAPSIPINICON FO"MATION DAVENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAVISH ~ eROW~ APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY BEDOED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF DARK GRAV DOLOMITIC* L.IMESTONE 4 INCH SOLUTION CAVITY AT CONTACT SPRING GROVE ..EMBER LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN VUGGEO, APHANITIC.S;... DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE. MASSIVE HIGHLY VUGGED FROM eo.S FEET 10 67.5 FEET KENWOOD MEMBE" BLUISH* GRAY APHANITIC. DOLOMITIC-LIMES1ONE BOfl'HG CDIIIPLETED IJ 72.5 FEET ON .117/.S- CAS'HIl USED 10 A DEPTH OF 42.0 FEET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 18 Figure 2.5-39

BORING 19 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LSs./San: SI/RFACE ELE ....TION 746.4 6000 !JOOO 4000 ~O 2000 1000AJ DESCRIPTIONS 12 IS 7'::- 13 IS SP 16 II ....-1~--1 BROWN FINE 10 MEDIUM SAND_. SP 9 II 11'1'-._- 2' II Jil! 'I

 ; 1 f . I ML Ii ct 1!l.9 rx.-1I7 p

• P. II

 \

PO 1'.,.,..117 7/...25 IS IWAPSIPINICON FORMATION OAvENPORT M£M8EA

 ~IGHT GRATISH - BROWN APHANITIC ~IMESTONE.

THIN~Y 8EOOEO. SOME BRECCIA ZONES ANO SEAMS OF OARK GRAY DO~OMITIC - ~IMESTONE SPRING GROvE MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - 1!!I1110WN VUGGEO. APtotANITIC I OO~OMITIC - LIMESTONE. MASSIVE 6;'" 9J~UTlON EN~ARGED VUGS UP TO 2 INCHES AT n.OFEET OCCASIONA~ TRACE OF GRAYISH - OREEN RESIDUA~ C~AY IN THE VUGS-- HIGH~Y KENWOOD VUGGED FROM 63.0 FEET TO 6S.0 FEET SOME SOLUTION MEMBER EN~ARG[D VUGS B~UI5H -GRAY APHANITIC. DO~MITIC'~IMESTONE BORING COMPUTED AT 73.0 FEET ON 11/22/M S- CAS'" USI:D 10 A DfJ'TH OF 21.0 FEET WATER L£VE~ NOT RECOROED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 19 Figure 2.5-40

BORING 20 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LB$./SQ.n: SU"FACE ELEIMTION 746.1 6000 ~ 4000 ~ 2000 1000 7~ SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS 15

• 1IoIO.........,;Jl.IIL~:"~::::;~Y~'N:~~~o;A:O;~~~ SOMl! GRAVEL 17.ll'll.-101 1OO-1'.......1I2 111111111111111 18
• GIIAolNG TO FINE SAND T<~

S.f WATER LEVEL ON 1/27III

 ~~--~ GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOME GRAVEL 7~ 11.,)""-

15.5"--118 CL 7/....4000-16.7"--115 WAPSIPINICON I'OIIMATION DAVENPORT MEMBER

' ........ LIGHT GRAYISH -IIROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF CAlli< GRAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC,-.. DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSIVE OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GIIAYISH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS SOME SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS AT !III.S FEET 10_ HIGHLY VUGGEQ FROM 6t.oFEET TO 65.0 FEE7 SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS UP TO t. 5 INCHES GRADING SLIGHTLY ARENACEOUS KENWOOD MEMIIER IBLUISH - GRAY APHANITIC. DOLOMITlC-L1MESlONE BORING COMPLETED AT 73.0 FEET ON 6/27/611

6. CASING USED TO A DEPTH OF 2O.01'EET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 20 Figure 2.5-41

BORING 21 SHEARING STRENGTH IN L.S./SQ.FT. SU"~AC£ £L£ ..TION 146.1.- 6000 !JOOO 4000 3000 ~()()() 1000 SYIIIIOLS oDESCRIPTIONS H ~AY - ltlPS)IL 10 l! *~:. 5 W IIlIOWN FINE ltl COMI[ SAND WITH SOlIE G'lAVEL 13 l! ~..o.t-"---i LIGHT IAClOfN FIN[ SAND WITH SlIIlE SILT 1'~ SP 12 l!SP

 -.. ~..-i---l G_ SILTY CLAY W,TH SMO AND SOME GRAVEL ".1"...111 .....-1 1'1., !!f-----l WAPSIPINICON FORMATION DAVENPORT MEMIER LIGHT GRAYISH

• BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE
• THIIlLY IIEOO£O, SOME IIRECC'A ZONES AND SEAMS OF CARl< GRAY OOLOM'T'C' ,-'MESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMllf:R LIGHT GRAYISH -BROWN VUGGEO, AFtHANITIC I 6_ OO,-OMITlC - LIMESTONE, MASSIVE HIGHLY VUQG(() F1IOM 62.01'&:T ltl 65.5 I'EET CAVITY FROM 65.5 FEET ltl 11.2 FEET

..- MOTTLEO BIlOWN AND GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SOliIE SANO ANO GRAVEL OENWOOO MEMIIER UGHT GRAY TO CREAM COLOR[O APHAIl'T1C, OOLOM'TIC - UMESTONE 6:-:' MAllY PARTIALLY REHEALEO FRACTURES TRAl% OF FOSSI'-S GRADING ro a.uISH-GI!<<1 FIN[ ltl APHAIlIT1C OOUlMITIC - LIMESTONE MOOElUlTU.Y IEOOm

 'TRACE f7 ~~~O=PLC~fo i9':n FEET ON 6/20/6.

CASING USED TO A DEPTH OF 15.5 FEET WATER LEVEL NOT RECOROEO DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & P0l4ER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 21 Figure 2.5-42

BORING 21 A nDl..-_-'StJllFACE ELEIMTION 746.1

 ~ ,..S_I':,'II.,;;.",;;.O;.LS;..,~~~~~DE~S;.C~R ..1P~TIO~N~'S~~ _

DltILLED THROUGH OYER BURDEN SOILS.NO SAMPLING ATTEMPTED.7"IO----~7-~ 7/~WA~:~~~'I.'&l'TN ...'F:rtFi'ON~ LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND~ -SEAMS OF DAR. GRAY DOLOMITIC -LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER....~LIGHT GRAY'SH - BROWN YUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSIYE HIGHLY YUGGED FROM !l9.0FEET "TO 62.5 FEET~ 12 OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAYISH- GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE YUGS CAVITY FJIIDM 62.5 FEET 1U 74.0FEET 0I"fN "TOlI4.0FEET (lAAY CLAyEY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL SEAMS OF 680 IIUC. DECAYED ORGANIC MATERIAL MOTTLED BROWN AND GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SOME SAND, GRAYEL AND OCCASIONAL SEAMS OF DECAYED ORGANIC MATERIAL MAY CLAYEY SILT ICENWCXlD MEM BEA 6 L'G~-r:-:.;.'t::,-,.'t~"E'1:'EHA~'l!J'~~~~E~'C -LIMESltIlE YERTICAL JOINT SHOWING MUCH SOLUTION ENLAIlODIENT 4 INCH DECOMPOSED SHALE SEAM AT 78.6 FEET

 ~B~1t::::T GRADING "TO BUJlSH- GRllI" DENSE FINE "TO CXlAIISE fJUGEIeCT ON ./50/.B CASING USED 1U A DEPTH OF 4S.0 FEET WATE" LEYEL NOT "ECORDED 6!JO'-----

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 21A Figure 2.5-43

BORING 21 B SURFACE ELEW4TtON 746 . I D£SCRIPrIONS DRILLED THROUGH O.... ERBURDEN SOilS, NO SAMPLING ATTEMPTED.7.~-----I~ 7.i!U------f~7/0------4~~....~ 1lrzJ-----+--£i WAPSIPINICON FORMATION DAvENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.~ THI"LY BEooEO. SOME BRECCIA ZO"ES A"O SEAMS OF DARt( GRAY OOLOM'TIC* LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN VUGG£O I APHANITIC I DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE. MASSIvE SOLUTIO" E"LARGEO VUGS UP TO 4 iNOOES HIGHLY YUGGEO FROM 58.5 FITT TO 68.0 FEET OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAYISH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE vUGS 680----+--1=:: SOLUTION ENLARGm VUGS UP TO 2 CH(S "IllIN SHALE SEAM AT CONTACT KENWooO MEMBER IIl.UISH-GIlAY FlNE 10 APHANITIC lXlLO/lllTIC LIMESTONE 670----==-"'_ _...J MASSIIIE WITH OCCASIONAL \/EIIY THIN At<<J IRREGULAR SHAU: SEAM BORING COMPLETED AT 75.0 FEET ON 6/30/68 CASING USEO TO A DEPTH OF .5.0FEET WATER LEVEL NOT RECOROED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 21B Figure 2.5-44

BORING 21 C DRILLED THROUGH OVERBURDEN SOILS.NO SAMPLING ATTEMPTED.7-

~

14:

~

710

~~

!~ 700 WAPSIPINICON FORMATION DAVENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH* BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY BEDDEO, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF OAR. GRAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER 690 LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSIVE SOLUTION ElIILARGED JOINT AT 51.0 FEET 80".SOME SOLUTION ElIILARGED VUGS FROM 57.5 FEET 10 59.5 FEET HIGHLY VUGGED FR* 6Z.SFEET 10 &5.5 FEET SOLUTIOlII ENLARGED VUGS AT &7.0 FEET 680 KEN\IOOD MEMBER LIGHT YELLOWISH - GRAT APHANITIC DOLOMITIC LI MESTONE MODERATELY BEDDED SOME FIlIlTIALLY _ALEC JOINTS SIOI¥ING SOLUTION ElIILARGEMENT 670 BORING COMPLETED AT 74.5 FEET ON 7'"&8 CASING USED 10 A DEPTH OF 45.0 FEET WATER LEVEL NOT RECORDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 21C Figure 2.5-45

BORING 210 7!JO---'

 ~ $UllFACE ELE. .TION 746.1 ~ $"1II60LS DESCR,,.rIONS 7.~

l(7.~TI~i:::~ i'r:t)o-----=t=:.I§§§t-i WA~SI~INI CON ,gItMATlON 141 OAVENPOllT MEM8ER LIGHT GItAYISH - 8ROWN APHAIlITIC LIMESTONE *~ .THIIlLY IEOO[O, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AIIO s~~~SJ6..,~A':."EMG~A.;r DOLOMITIC - LIMESTOllE

6. LIG"T GRAYISH - 8ROWIl VUGGEO, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSIVE SCM SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS AT 57.0 raT 33 *HIGHLY VUGGED FIlOM 61.0F£h TO SI.O I'[£T OCCASIONAL TRACE O~ GItAYIS" - GRI![11 RESIOUAL CLAY III THE VUOS 2 INCH OItOP AT CONTACT PllOU8LY OUE TO

_ DECOMPOSED

 . . . . .It SHALE SUM LIGHT GItAY A~A"T1C IlOl.CIIIITIC LIMESTONE 670'----- OCCASIONAL 112 INCH 'lUGS AND SOM[ ~ARTIALLY ItENEALED ~RACTUItES MOOERATUY 8EDDED SLIGHLY ARENACEOUS AT 13.0 raT

_'NO COMPLETED AT 14.5 F!ET 011 112'"CASING USED TO A DE~ O~ 4$.0 F!ET WATEIt lZVEL Nl1I' ItECOIlOE1l DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COHPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 210 Figure 2.5-46

BORING 21 E SUIfFACE ELEWATION 746.1 SYIIIIIOLS DESCRIPTIONS O"ILLED THAQu()H OVERBURDEN SOILS.NO SAMPLING ATTEMPTED_74'~----I 7.30------1 n,,~----I 7"'0-----1 WAPSIPINICON FOItMATION DAVENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND

 -SEAMS OF DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE SPIIING GROVE MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH -IIROWN VUGGEO, APHANITIC, 6.:.90--- DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSIVE SOME SOLUTION ENLARGEMENT OF OONTACT SOWTION ENLARGED VUGS FROM 55.0 FEET 10 S7.0 FEET SOLUTION CAVITY FIIOM 62.0FEET 10 71.0FEET VOID FROM 62.0 FEET TO 64 S FEET IlROWNISH GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SOME FINE TO MEDIUM SAND AND SOME GRAVEL GltAY CLAYEY SILT WITH OCCASIONAL PIECES OF DECAYED WOOD AND PTItITE ICEN\MXlD MEMIIEIt LIGHT YELLOWISH-GRAY APHANITIC DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE M~:N PA;-'~L~/:~~~~L~rtHCJ~It~~6~~w~

SOLUTIONING GRADING WITH STREAKS OF BUUISH - GRAY LIMES10IC

 !lOItING COMPLETED AT 71.0 FEET ON 7/2/61 CASING uSED 10 A DEPTH OF 45.0 FEET 66f)L----- WATE!' LEVEL IIOT RECORDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED F~NAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 21E Figure 2.5-47

no

 ~

BORING 21 F SlIIIFACE ELEWAriOit 746.1 Sylt.OLS DEsc"/~rIONS DIIILLt:D TH"DUOH DVEIIIIUIIDEN SOILS.NO SAMPLINO ATttMPTED.74O 73~14::~7t~i:::~.... WAPSIPINICON ",,"MATIDN DAVENPOIlT IlIEIlIIIEII ii1 M'll.LIOHT GIIAYISH -1I11O"'N APHANITIC LIMESTONE.

 -THINLY BEDDED, SDM[ IIIl£CCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF llA"" GIIAY DOLOMITIC' LIMESTONE SPIlING GIlOII! MEMKII LIGHT OIlAYISH* llIO"'N VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC* LIMESTOME

• MASSIVE SCUlTIDN DlLAIlOm VUGS AT S3.0 FEET

 !llLUTIlN ENLAIlOED VUGS AT 57.0 I'EET HIGHLY \/UOGED FIlOM '1.0 FEET TO ".0 flEET SCUlTlON ENLAIlGED VUGS ICENWDOD MEMIEIl LU'SH-GIIAY APHANITIC DOUlMITIC LIMES1llNE OCCASIONAL VEIlY THIN AND IIlIlEGUL.... SHALt: SEAMS SLIGHT SOLUTION ENLAIlOE.NT OF A VEIlTICAL JOINT FIlOM 70.0 FEET TO 72.0 FEET lOllING Q)MPL£TED AT 74.0 FEET ON 713/61 CASING USED TO A DEPTH OF 45.0 FEET "'Attll LEVEL NOT IlECOllDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 21F Figure 2.5-48

BORING 21 G t: SUlPIfICE nE...TIOII 746. I

~'----~Scot $'I'II~L$ -~~~~~~~~~~--

D£SC"/~TIO/IIS OlIILLIO THItOUGH OVlltlUItDEN SOILS.IlO UMPLINCI AT~MPTEO.7.'RJ----~? / o - - - -....1I':1W'-- -=F'a=r-1WAPSIPINICON I'OItMATION OAVINPOItT M[MI[1t LIGHT GItATISH -IlIOWN APHANITIC LIMESTON[.THINLT IEoorO. SOME IIIt[CCIA ZOMS ANO KAMS OF 010"" GlIAT DOLOMITIC - LIMESTON[SPItiNG GIIOV[ M[MII[It 6.!IO--.---+- LI6HT GRATISH-IItDWN VUGG[O. APHANITIC.DOLOMITIC - LIMESTOHI

• MASSIV[

SOLUTION INLAIlG[I) WGS UP 1'0 21NCHD AT !M.OI'[IT SDUITION EllLAItGIO VUllS UP 1'0 Z INCHIS AT 9.0 I'!ET HIGHLT WGGIO . . - 11.0 mT 10 **.0mT SOLUTION ENLAIIGEO IlmlllNG JOINTS FItOM S7.01'1!!T TO **. 5 FaT

 ~[NWODIl MOIlElt LI6HT GRAT APHANI TIC DOLOMITIC LIIlll[SltM. OCCASlOllAL VUGS GIlf2"1li11~~M~YI~w~mT THIN ON 7131 . .

CASING USED 1'0 A Dt:PTH OF 45.0 RET WATEIt LEVEL IlOT ItECOltOIO DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 21G Figure 2.5-49

BORING 21 H

SIJIIFAC£ ELE..T,Ofi 746.1 750~---'~ S'I'II.0LS DESCIf'I'TION$

DIIILLED THROUGH OVERIURDEN SOILS.NO UMPLING ATTEMPTED.7.'JD-----I WA::~:~~'J.9f ,,~a"TION LIGHT GRAYISH -IIROWN APHANITIC LI"ESTONE.THINLY IIEDOED, SOME IlltECCIA ZONES AND SEA"S OF DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC' LIMESTONE

 ...-. _,YE SJIIHT stl.UTlOI!.~ CONTjlC1' ~&rir ocaaw~~1Il'dlfN _ANITIC.IlCI.DII'TIC-UIID1'ONE....

YUOS UP 10 S INCHES . . - 52.0 FUT 10 510 rUT ENLMllIf:D . . S)Wl'1DN OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GIIAY,SH - GREEN RESIDUAL. CLAY IN THE VUG!SOLUTION EI&AllG[D S INCH VUG AT ~.6 FUT YOID 1'1I010 11.0 FEET 10 ....0 I"((T SOLUTION CAV'TY FROM 61.0 ,~ 10 ".! FEET GMY CLAY£Y SILT WITH SOIIl! I'IM[ UNO ANO SOME GRAVEL GIlADINO LESS CLAY kENWOOO "EM BEll LIGHT YELLOWISH - _ A_TIC, llOlDIllTIC - LIiDlOME MANY IIt!IlEALED I'1IACT\JlIU CEMENTED WITH CALCITE

,.rJ-----4-~!2I

_INO COMPL[T!D AT 71.0 I"((T ON 7/4/ . .CASINO USED 10 A DEPTH 01' 44.0 I"EET WATER LEVEL NOT IIf:COIlDED Stl()1--._--DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 21H Figure 2.5-50

BORING 21 I

SUlWACE EU..TION 746.1

 '--__rII

,,$)-

 ~ SY".OL$ D£$CIf/~T1ONS DIlILLED THROUGH OvERBURDEN SOILS.

NO UM~LING ATTEM~T[D.,,"o-----f WA~S1~INICON I'OIlMATION DAVEN~OIlT MOOIER LIGHT GIlAYISH -IIIIOWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY IEOO[D, S01lllf: IlIIfCCIA ZONES AND SEAMS O~ 0A1tlt GIlAY OOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE 2 INCH YOlO AT 441.2 Ft£T SOLUTION ENl.AIlOED 1I[l)0lNG PLANE JOINT AT ".5 ~SUGHT SOLUTION EM..AIIGEMEHT AuDNG ODNTACT SPRING 011O\I[ MEM.1l LIGHT CIIIAYISH -BROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC.OOI.OMITIC - LIMESTONE, MAS5'VE SOWTlON ENLAIlQ[O \lUGS AT 53.5 ~ET VOID ~ sa.O ~EET TO 60.0 ~T HIGHLY 'IIJIlll[D AT 60.5 F£[T 5 10 4 INCH VUGS ENLAIlGEO IT SOUJTlON AT 63.0 F£[T MOTTLED BROWN AND GIlAY SILT WITH lOME CLAY AND SOME "HI: llANO KENWOOO MEMII[ll m~---=-- .LIG~~~~'1a.;~E"t~~~~~~sJi.~ESTONE SlOW lloIlOEIlAlI: IOLUTlONING OCCASIONAL ARGILJ.ACEOUS ZONE

 -.NG COMPL£T[ll AT 75.0 F£[T 011 7/$16.

ealiNG USED 10 A 01:"" 0/1 45.0 ~E[T WATEIl u:vn NOT Ilt:COIlOED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 211 Figure 2.5-51

BORING 22 SHEARINS STRENSTH IN LBS./SQ.FT. SUllFACE EL£...TIOf/I 746.3 tiODtJ 6ODO 4000 ~ 1000 /000,.- DESC"'PTIONS IIlIOWN slLn llAlCl- TO~SOIL_ N SILIY ~Nt: SAND_ ~INE TO COAItK _ WITH SOlliE SILT.".~IOULO[II G!lAY SILTY CLAY WlTM _ Me SOllIE CIIIAVEL

12.9'11.-122 71_ 1T.4"llt-1I2

,- W....SI .. ,NICON I'OIIIII..TION DAVENPOIIT MEMIlER LIGHT GRAYISH -IlROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY IlEODED, SOME IlR!i:CCIA ZONES AND SEAMS O~ CARlI GIlAY DOLOIIIITIC - LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMIlER 6:- LIGHT GRAYISH-IlROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSIVE HIGHLY VUlGED FROM 6O.0FEET TO 69.0 FEET..- SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS KENWODO ME MilER GlIAY FINE TO MEDIUM DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE.OCCAS IONAL VERY THIN AND IRREGULAR SHALE SEAMS BOIliNG COM"LETED AT n.s FEET ON 6/2216.CASING USED TO A DEPTH CF 15.5 FEET WA TER LEVEL NOT IIECOIIDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 22 Figure 2.5-52

BORING 23 SHEARING ST"ENGTH IN LSS,/SQ.n: SlJIIFIICE ELE..Tfott 746.2 6000 6000 4000 ~ ZOOO 1000

iAJ ~ D£$Clff~TfONS I _ N 11L.:n FINIE lAND WITH A TllAC[ C1F a.AY- TO~

11.6'110"09 III IIIIOWN IILTY lAND WITH 1010[ CLAY WATUl L[VIEL DN 1121,n 1'~' 231 IIIIOWN " . . TO IO[DIUII SAND OCCAlIDllAL LAYIEIIS C1F FIN[ TO cnAllSIE lAND 17.2'110-110 24 I 1':;' 16.5'110-111 15 I _v IILTY CLAV WITH lAND AND 10M[ ORAVIEL 221 1':;., 24 I II I 15.0'llo-1I9 211 1'1."I 1t.5'llo-11O 20.91 WA~II~INICO" DAVIEN~DIlT

 ~RIIATIOII IIIElIlIlER LIOHT GRAYIIH-.-N A~HANITIC LlllIESTONIE.

THINLY IIIEDOf:D, 10M[ PlECCIA ZONIES AND li6"llo S1EAMS ~ DAM< OllAY DOLOIlITIC -LIIiESTONIE 1",1" _ 1l1E1I. . .6:::- LIGHT OllAVIIH-IIIOWN VUGGIED, APHANITIC, DOLOIlITIC - LIIiEITOIlt: , IIASSIVIE 31'110 fiIIAolI~~~ IllLUTIDIl ALONG VERTICAL JOIIlTl~100'll0 101I1 IOLUTION Dl.AllGfD WGS AT 17.0 ~UT HI... LV V"'IIED F1lOII41.S FEET "II 41.0 I'[£T SOlIE Sl1.UTlON IENLAROUl VUOI KIENWOOD IlIEMIER 1100'IIo ILUISH -IIIIAV ~HA"lTIC, DOLDIlITIC-LIIiDTONE_IVE IORIIO alWLETIII AT 74.01'1EET ON 4,U, . .CAl. . UIfD TO A DE"" C1F 15.01'1EET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 23 Figure 2.5-53

BORING 24 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LSS./SQ.FT. SUlfFACE ELE\IfITION 746. 7 6000 $000 4000 ~ 2000 1000 rOl(J .....a'll:SYMBOLS DESCRIPrlONS

 .Pl Ii ML ItAOwN FINE TO MEDIUM SANOY SIL! . T~:PSt)ll. -:'>0 t l' i....o- - -

I~ MOWN FINE SANO T~~ 19 l! ~- ~SP- .A1'£A L£Y£L ON &/24/58 GAAY FN: SAHO 2~ 1lI SP.- ii;[', ' . ML QltAY ~AY[Y .. ,,!, WITH LAY£R~ I"~ r:'INE SANO AND I.5 ~ SOM[ OIIG.... ,~ MATTIEA GAAY SILTY CLAY WITH SA.., AND sour: ('1AAF.l It ..:~/

 'l'() ~<' ,,:.-

p * /".'

 /

15.5'lI.-1I2 PI

//

CL

 @~; ./ .

TN"' ... 16.7"Xo-11I pi V'(

 ~ ..//.

27 It

 ~ f-.-

WAPSIPlllllCON I'CUUUTION-.. r\r

 - OAVENrOln ME,.flIf.A G"aYISH- ,."0.... APHflfr\lI'TI(; l,,.[ST,,"[. ~IGHT 75"fo ~ THINLY "F QOf:O , SuM[ BRECCIA ,vN~~ A'IO B

S[ ANS OF OAA'~ GRAY OOlOMtftl.* L1.. eSTONE 3 INCH SCl..UTICW CAvITY AT 49";"EET SPRING GAOVF. "EM REA-: 86"Xo LIGHT GA.~ISII- RIIOWN YUGGEO. APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC

• U"E~TONr:
• MI\~5IVr Sl*E 9CUIl'1ON ENLAIIGfil VUGS AT 511.0 F((T

 -C;::-. ~~.~ .... OCCA!iIO,..AL TRACE 0" G"AYIS~ . GREEN IItS'OUAL <:;.hY IN T"E VUGS IIOO"t. .,:.....!. HIGHLY VUGGlEO FROM 6O.0F((T 10 6& ~ F[IET ~. SOME SOLUTION ENLAAG(("I Vlr..S AT 61'0 F'EET "0 'i.~ AII[N4lICEOUS 5E.M FROM FEET TO * . S FaT KENWOM MEMBEA I~ \",,~ BLUISH

• GRAY APHANITIC. DOI.OMITIC-LlMESlONE' 6,-... ~j~j SOM[ VERY THlt, -~. (ftRrGlJLAR SHAlL SEAMS

 .. S'.~ GR2~f':; C'iflJrr-~AC~OUS BOAING OMPLE~O AT 79.0 F[IET ON 6/2.".

CASING USED TO A OFM'tt n. I~. ~ F'[£ T DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 24 Figure 2.5-54

BORING 25

 $H£AIfINB STIf£NBTH IN La/SAn: SlIIfF/ICE ELE ...TIOIiI 747.0 tItJtJt) 6f)()() 4(J()() ~ I()()() /()()()

r.IU D£SCIf/~TIONS,.~30.1'110-_zo.7'IIo-_14.SP,-- ::ggg-II.S'lIo-III ...... 40 .....-4-s-p~ UlIIl1' . -75 *

 ~INE 10 COAME 1:**- .'~".~-s-w~ UGMT .110'" ~INE TO SAND AND OIIAVEL alARSE SAND WIT>4 SDMt: GIUIIt:L DAIlK CIIIAT SANDT SIll' WITH SlIoIE a....., ORGANIC 14ClC>-52.I'IIo-_ _ MATTER AND PIECES O~ DECAYED WOOD 17.

ML OIIADtNG WITH LATERS rYF SILTT a.AT 21.S'lIo-IO!l IZ.GIIAT SlLTT a.AT WITH SAND AND _ E ClIIAvEL Z00CH5.0'lf0-1I' II.I CL II.Z50CHU....114 21.71~141.1**_E

~ ... W~~~~~':cli~NM~"nTION LIGHT GRAT'SH' 8110WN APHANITIC LIMESTONE

• THINLT 8EDOED. SOME BllECCIA ZONES AND SPIIING _ MEMKR

 .S" HAMS OF 0A1lK GIlAT DOLOMITIC' LIMESTONE

• INCH SOWTION CAVITT AT FEET LIGHT CIIIAT'SH-8I1OWN VUGGEO, APHANITIC,

--, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE. MASSIVE SOWT1OIl ENt._ VUGS I(f" 57.0 FEET HIGHLT W _ P1IllM ".0 FEET 10 * .0 FEET

~

KENWOOD MEM.ER

 .LUISH -CIIIAT APHANITIC. OOLOMITIC'LI"!S1ONE OCCASIONAL VERT THIN SHALE SEAM

_INO CQlPLETED AT 72.5 FEET ON ."8'"CA_G UR:D 1lI A Dt:1'TH OF ~.O FEET WATER LEVEL AT *. 3 I'EET ON .'25'**DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 25 Figure 2.5-55

BORING 26 SlIIfFIfCE ELEWITIOIII 747.4 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LS£/$(J.n:6(J()() !SOOO 4000 ~ 2000 1000 r:1CJ DESCRIPTIONS DA'tlS.H.a!'N SILTY FINE SAN> WITH SOME CLAY II l! 1I..oM.~.tTY FINE SAND 9 l! GRADING LESS SILT 7<-::'LIGHT II_N ,.,N£ TO COARSE SAND ""'TH 18 l! OIlAV£L 7~

8 II 0 allAY FIN£ SAND DAS:cmb ~~gYF~t1M1~+'s SAND AND 81!

allAY 51 LTY "NE SAND WtTH SOIoIE GRAVEL AND LAYEIIS OF CLAY 38 I!

~

allAY SILTY O-AY WITH SAND" AND SOME 18 13 GIIAV£L 75f3"[!7/:WAPSIPINICON ~'UIATION

 '7 II DAVENPORT MEMIIU ~% LIGHT GRAYISH -IIROWN APHANtTIC LIMESTONE.

THINLY II£DOED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES ANO 179"lIo 1~:t'J>> c~lf~~T ~~y~ ~~ *~::=o ..

 . S.... ,NG GIIQV[ 00£1011[11 LIGHT GRAYISH-IlIlOWN 'lUGGED, APHANITic.

93% DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE, MASSIVE

 §~~~,~'~~e.=~GJ~j.N~,.5 FEET OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GIIAY'SH - GIIEEN IllESlDUAL CLAY IN THE 'lUGS .% HIClllLY VUGGm _ 10.0 FEET TO &5.0 FEET .~

MENWOOD MEMIIEII 78% IILUISH -GIIAY APHANtTIC. DOLOMITIC-L,ME:S'lONE

 .L. OC:CASlONAL~~TH&M:t~ ~A'1..0 FEET ON 6".'"

CASING USED '10 A DUnl OF 2O.5F((T WA1EII LEVEL NOT IllECOllOED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 26 Fi gure 2.5-.56

BORING 27 SIJIfFACE ELE..rlON 747.6 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LSS./SQ.n:8000 $()()() 4000 ~ 1000 1000 FOIfJ DE$c"/~rION$2 I! ML 1110.11 ~IIIE UIID

,.~. * *EII LEVEL 011 11Z11A I II SP 23 III .....---IIIIIO.N CLAYEY SILT WITH LAYEIIS O~ FIIIE SAND AIID DIIGANIC IIIATTEII 7::' 17 III ML 1911 GIIAY SAIID SP ~IIIE GIIAY SILTY CLAY .ITH SAND AND SOlliE GIIAVEL I~IO 16.5""'-112 7/_

W&~SI~INICON ""lItMATION OAVEN"OIIT MEMIIEII LIGHT GIIAYISH -III1OWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY IIEDDED, SOME BIIECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS O~ DAttIl GIIAY DOLOIIIITIC* LIMESTONE S.... ,NG GIIOYE MEMIlEII LIGHT GIIAYISH-III1O.N VUGGED, APHANITIC.DOLOIIIITIC - LIIIIESTONE , MASSIVE 6;;' !DME SlLUTION DLAIIGED VUGS AT S3.0 l'IiET IOIIE !DLUTION _GED VUGS AT S1.0 ~EET HIGHlJ' VUClGED _ -a.S ~EET 10 &7.0~ET OCCASIONAL TIIACE O~ GIIAYISH - GIlEEN IIEIIDUAL CLAY IN THE VUGI SOWTION ENl.MGED VUGS UI' TO 2 INCHES IIEN.OOD IIIEIIII£II ILUIIH' GIIAY A"HANITIC. DOLOMITIC* LIMES'lONf:_ , . COWLETED' AT n.S~ET 011 "2&1'1 CAIING U!t:D TO A D1EPTll M I!l.S"E£T DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 27 Figure 2.5-57

BORING 28 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LS$./SQ.FT. SllltFACE ELE..TIO#t 7'16.0 6()()(J $000 4000 ~ 2000 1000 T:KJ DESCRIPTIONS

g SYII'OLS

 .,...q...lll-'4 llIOWII :,~~Y WITH SOME CLAY-TO~SOIL &.Z"Io-M 7~' - I 2lXlO-11.8'llo-1l!_ Oll((IIISH-OIIAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND I

SOMI OIlAVEL OCCASIONAL LAYERS OF SILTV SAND T:;' 111.'-111 IIIIOWN SILTY CLAY WITH SAIID AND SOME GIIAVEL OllAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOlIE GRAVEL 14.1...-122

-,-- 1:l.~ZI BOULDER FROM 2.I.S TO 29. S FEET 1'.3~1I5 7/.... 18.0'11.-111 I .....-112 WAPSIPINICON FQIltMATION DAVENPORT MEMBElI L.IGHT GRAllSH a 8ROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE:.

THINLY BEOOEO, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF CAlli< GIIAY DOLOMITIC* LIMESTONE

 ~--+ S~ING GROVE M~MIlf:R LIGHT GIlAYISH - BIIOWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC* LIMESTONE, MASSIVE SLIGHTLY ARENACEOUS IN UPPER 3 FEET HIGHLY VUGllEIl F _ QO F£ET 'Ill 17.0 FEET 29

~DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 28 Figure 2.5-58

BORING 29 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LBS./So.n: SURFACE ELEIMTIOIt 746.6 6000 6000 4000 ~ 2000 1000 r.xJ SYIJI/IOLS DESCRIPTIONS DARk 8AO.H !ILTY SAND WITH ACXJ'TS - TOPSOIL DARK GRAY AND BROWN CLAYEY SAND 'W\TH l.AYERS OF SANOY SILT 70-,.. GIIIAY FlN[ SAOlD wlTK SOM[ SILT I-~'-!!!.!--l GRAY FINE TO MEDIUM SAND WITK LAYERS OF SILT AND CLAY BROWN SILTY CLAY WITK SANO AND IOIIE GRAVEL lo4---l GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND ANO SOlIE GIIIAV£L 14.7'1'. 18 14.0'l'.-1I9 LAYER OF SILTY 'AND WITH GRAVEL 71_

 !!!I---lWAPSIPINICON FORMATION-. DAvENPQAT MEMBER LIGHT GRAVISH* BROWN APHA~ITtC LlMESTO .. £.

TKINLY BEDDED, SOME BIlECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC -LIMESTON(SPRING GROVE MEMBER S-LIGHT GAAYISH-BROWN VUGGED, AfliHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE. MASSivE SOLUTiON ENLAIIIG(O VUGS AT !l5.0 Far HIGHLY VOOGED FIlOIIl 59.0 fUT m &2.0 F[(T OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAYISH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS HIGHLY VU(;G(D F _ 64.0FaT TO 67.0FEET SQI,l[ 9OLUTlON [NLARGfD VUGS UP TO 5 INCHES-- - I KENWOOD MEMSER LIGHT GRAY APHANITIC. DOLOMITIC -LIMESTONE IIANY REHEALED FRACTURES

 ° GRADING TO 8LUISK GRAY AT 60. F££T BOIIIING COMPLETED AT B2.0 I'!ET ON 6/19/68 CASING USED TO A DEPT11 OF .5.0I'EET WATER LEVEL AT 5.2 FEET ON 6128168 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 29 Figure 2.5-59

BORING '30 SlI"FACE ELEMITION 747.6 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LBS,/SQ.FT.6000 $0()() 4000 ~OOO 2000 1000 TON SYIIIBOLS DESCRIPTIONS 116.7"lIoo l02 1000-20.2"11.-106 _70-;" _TER L£V£~ ON 7/2!l/68

 --.I 2~*22.3"11.-104 "'M---l GRAY CUY£Y SILT WITH ~AYERS OF FINE SAND

--- 11.6'1\,-111 16.7'lI.-1I5 l,loiOioOl.iI---l GRAY SI~ TY C~AY Willt SAND AND SOME GRAVE~14'()'lIo-121 T::'6000-15.3%-119 TIC

-,- 11.6'1\,-109 WAPSIPINICON FORMATION DAVENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN APHANITIC L.IMESTONE.

THIN~Y BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES ANa SEAMS OF ')ARK GRAY DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER 6_ LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN VUGGEO, APHANITIC.DOLOMITIC a LIMESTONE. MASSIVE

 ~ SOUlTION E~AIlOED VUGS UP10 2 'NCHE" AT!>4 FEET 5OI.UTlON EN~ARGED VIJGS .... 10 S'NCHES AT 57 "EEl OCCASIONAL. TRACE OF GRAYISH - GRf.EN 6;;" RESIQUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS AT 600 FEET HIGH~Y vUGGED FROM 61.0 FEET 10 670 FEET GRADING Sl.lGHTLY AIlEIlM:EOUS KENWOOD MEMBER 8LUISH - GRAY AfttiANITIC I OC1QMITlC -LIM£SlON£ ClCC"SIONA~ VERY THIN I>K) lRREGU~AR SHA~E SEAM IN THE UPPER 40 FEET 6~... MASSiVE AT 75.0 FEET ARGIu.ACEOUSB~lIl~Ri-rWl.TTO,r.8D,f.VtT ON 6/26/68 CASING USED TO A DEPllt OF 15.0P'IET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 30 Figure 2.5-60

! BORING 31

 ~ SIIRFACE ELEIMTION 748.5 ~:::

SHEARING STRENGTH IN LS5./SQ.n: ...6000 $000 4000 ~ 2000 1000 o ~,

,~

iif ~ SyltlBOLS DESCRIPTIONS 9 II _1mIr'"":::''''III'IIIr'Il'I'PnIIIIl'"l'=~:I=W1m:H-:S~O:::II~E-:C~L-:~Y~---21 I!SP 7~A 1611 3611 GII"D'NG FINE TO CO.. llSE SOliE GII .. VEL S"ND WJTH GII ..Y FINE SAND 34 I! SP t - - + - - - i Gil"" SILTY F'NE S"ND W,TH L"YERS OF CL ..Y 7~ 911

 !SI!

D.. IIK GII ..y CL ..YEY SILT WITH DEC"YED WOOD 7= FR.. GIIEIl1S OllAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOME OIlAVEL 7/.,.-_- ..........- - - i W.. PSIPINICON FORM ..TION OAVENPORT MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH' 8P'.. *". ...... l-iAHITIC LIMESTONE.ThiNLY EDOEr ;',M! jR[CC1A ZONES AND SEAMS OF OAAK ':;;... 1 DOLOMITIC* LIMESTONE SPRING GROVE MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH - BROWN VUGGEO. APHANITIC, 6~ DOLOMITIC - L'MESTONE

• MASSIVE H!GNU VUGGED FIlOM 54.0 FEET TO 55.0 FEn OCCASIONAL TRACE OF G,.AVISH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY ;N THE vUGS AT 584 FmT HIGHLl' WGGED FROM 59.0 FEET TO 63.0 FEET 6:- HIGHLY VUGGED FllOM 65.0 FEET TO 67.0 FEET KENWOOD MEIIBER BUlISH -GRAY FINELY CRl'STALUNE DOLOM'TIC LIMESTONE MODERATELY BEDDED W,TH SOliE OF TWE BEDDING

 ~ JOINTS SHOWING SLIGHT SDLUTCW ENLAIlGONT OCCASIONAL vERY THIN SHALE SEAMS BORING CDIIPLETED AT 77.0 FEET ON 6115/68 CASING USED TO A DEPTH OF 2O.0FEET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 31 Figure 2.5-61

BORING 32 SURFACE ELE'rIArlQN 749_4 8HEARINfJ STRENfJTH IN LBS./So..n:6()()() 6000 4000 ~ 2000 1000 SYIIIIIOLS DESCRIPTIONS II.

~

I DA'l-~It8,tll S'LTY FINE SAND .,TH SOliE CLAY 8 * .RoWII SILTY FIII[ SAND CIlIAolIIG FIIIE TO IIEolUII SAlIo SM

~. -- ... - .... . .-- 17

• LIGHT IRoWII FINE TO liED lUll SAND WITH SOliE GRAVEL

63. SP

 ! L--'---l GRAY FIII[ SAND

'- 41. SP

 ' - . . . I - - - l IRoWN CLAYEY SILT WITH SOliE DECAYED WOOD ML 16 II FRAGIIUTS 4!l.2%--!58 GRAY FINE SoUIDY SILT WITH SOliE CLAY ML GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOliE Nl.2%--1I GRAVEL

?Iv '........11' WAP"PINICoN I'ORIIATloN DAVENPORT MEMIER LIGHT GRAYISH -IROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY IEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAIIS OF CARIe GRAY DOLoIIITlC* LIMESTONE SOLUTION CAVI TV fROII 48.S FEET 10 !lO.o FEET

 !lOLUTKlN CAIlTV FROM !D.S FEET 10 S2.0 FEET SPRING GROVE M[IIKR LIGHT GRAYISH -IROWN VUGGED, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE. IIASSIVE S~ ARGILLAaDUS FIIOII ~.O FEET 10 56.0 FEET HIGHI)' VUGGEO FRlM 63.0 FEET TO 68.0 FEET OCCASIONAL TRACE OF GRAYISH - GREEN RESIDUAL CLAY IN THE VUGS KENWIXlO IIEIlIER BLUISH-GRAY FINE 10 IIEDIUM CllYSTALL.INE ~W~,~~W:'h::r~~ThL~::"~D IlDIIING COMPLETED AT 1'!l.Q FEET ON 8/18'88 caSING USED 10 A DEPTH 01' Zl.oFEET WATEII LEV£l. NOT REalIIllED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER CO~1PANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 32 Figure 2.5-62

BORING 33 SURFACE ELEIlATION 749.7 SHEARING STRENGTH IN LSs./San:6000 $0()() 4000 ~O 2000 1000 DESCRIPTIONS

,;;IfJ I

7'00-4.5%-100_61"'.-108 7<~SP 43 *

 ....-J--=-::,.....-l GRAT FI P<E SAND 7::" :oorr>-34.4"l1-11r7 _ SP OAR. GRAY CLAYEY SILT WITH SOME ORGANIC MATTUl ML

_. ~~I--~sw BROWN FINE 10 COARSE SAND AND GRAVEL BOULDEJIS

 '-- IS.Z.,.. .I"" .........I--~ GRAY ~,~~~R CO:AyB~,~:;;'~ SSA':D AND GRAVEL 187%-115 CL 7/~ 15.7"'.-119 ""'~I--~ ,*APD~':~~~~~~:;>E~~~ION 59%

LIGHT GRA'l'ISi'i* BROWN APHANITIC LIMESTONE.THINLY BEDDED, SOME BRECCIA ZONES AND SEAMS OF DARK GRAY DOLOMITIC* LIMESTONE CONTACT ENLARGED BY :5iEll!TION. 4 INCH -..<)10 SPRING GROVE MEMBER LIGHT GRAYISH-BROWN VUGGEO, APHANITIC, DOLOMITIC - LIMESTONE I MASSIVE 6~ SOME SOWTION ENLARGED VUGS AT 55,0 FEET UP m 4 INCHES HIGHLY VLGGEO FROM 61.0 FEET TO 70.0 FEET-- 98"l1 SOME MINOR SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS AT 69.0Fl£1' KENWOOD M[NBER BLUISH - GRAY APHANITIC. OOLOMITlC-LIMDlONE' 3/4 INCH GRAY SHALE SEAM AT 1~.OFEET(;,';"' MASSIVE GRADING SLlGHn.y ARGILLACEOUS MANY REHEALED FRACTURES CEMENTED WITH ARGILLACEOUS LIMESTONE FROM 15.0 FEET TO B9.0 FEET 67"l1 GRADING HIGHLY ARGILLACEOUS BLUISH - GREEN CALCAREOUS SHALE INTERBEDDED WITH THIN SEAMS OF LIMESTONE GRAY ARGILLACEOUS LIMESTONE 6..1' BLUISH-GREEN CALCAREOUS SHALE WITH OCCASICIIIAl.46.,.. THIN L1MES1ONE SEAM l!!lii!!!il--~ GCMER FQRMATION LIGHT BROWN APHANITlC DOLOMI~OCCASIONAL WHITE O1ERT FRAGMENT BORING COMPLETED AT 105.0 ~EET ON 715 I f;8-~ CASING USED 10 A DEPTH C1F 4Z.DF'!ET WATER LEVEL NOT RECORDED DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 33 Figure 2.5-63

BORING 34 SHEARINt1 STRENt1TH IN LIIS./SQ.n:SUIfFJlCE EUIMr,Ott 7 ~ 3 . 3 tJO()() 6000 4000 ~ 2000 1000 rou It_.- 11.~"IIo-9lI

 ~

8 I 13 I DESC",PTIONS IlIlOWN FE SA"DY SLT W BIlOWN FlIIE SILTY SAND INlOJl:TFrLc-¥lb6* &/22_SOlo ~- SOl\..

-23.2'lr105 - 17

• SP 7~'

18 20 o.- 13.3"110-107 21 I SP 31 I GIlAY FINE SAND 17..-110 SP

 =-11.0'11.-113 48 I lJIIADINll F'~ '10 M£l)IUM SAND I .........I---~ GllAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOME GRAVEL 23.4"-101 14 71..

9 I SEAMS OF F'NE SAND.- 22 20

 ........1----1 GIlEENISH GRAY SILTY CLAY 19.!'lfo-1 16 I GIlAY FINE TO COAIlSE SAND WITH GRAVEL I!IO'3"O IlOULDER FIlOM &11." TO &7."

BOULDER FROM lIlI." ,TO 71."10_..- 19.2....112 . III ""~I----l GIlAY SILTY CUY WITI< SOME SAND AND SlIoIE GIlAVEL 27 I S- -

 ~I GIl.., FI ..E SANOY SILT WITI< SOlI[ CLAY 1061 OIIADG WITI< IftATH£RED LIMESTONE AND

......... DOLOMITE BOULDER ""OM 114.5' TO M.O' ML 511 97 *~

-~

W3*1 40")\IO~.~4~"Jl "I-......... ZI'lI

 'lbll~~ ~t¥TIONEO VEi'T1CAL JOINT AT 121I.0 PUT 5ClJJTlOII CAvrn , , _ 121.0 FEET TO 129.0 I'EET OI'EN Ci'llllN COULD BE HIGHLY ENLARGED VERTICAL JOINT ISO'll; 10_

3&...23% _Mll TO BROWNISH-GRAY BORING COMPLETED AT 141.0 FUT ON B/22/M CAS 1M .usm TO A DE,,", OF 110.0 I'&T DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 34 Figure 2.5-64

 - .. -_.*_.*.*** t!

I

 ~.,., ~..,.r I.

BORING 3!5 6()()() !JOOO 4000 ~ 1000 1000 0 SUIIFACE £L£..rfOf/l 750.4 DESCllf,.rfON$DARa IlIIOWN SILTY UNO .,TH SOME CU\Y - TOPSOIL IllIO.N SILTY SAND 11I'IO.10 flNf: SAND 170 SP

 .llOO-.6.9'lC,-tlO. ._ _ 14 GRADING TO flNt: TO COARS[ SAND .6 * "'-I~-~ GIIAY fiNE SAND T.;JOI---+---+---+--+----I~-~50.

27

• SP 3OOCl-17.7%-1I0 18.

 .....-I--~ GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AHD SOlIE GRAVEL 7t'Gt---+---+--+----I~-___+_-__1 GRADING SOME BOULDERS

,~ 6-SPRING GftOVE MEM8R LIGHT GRAYISH*8AOWH VUGGEO, APHA~I'f1C.DOLOMITIC* LIMESTONE. MASSivE HIGHLY VUGGED fROM ROCK SURfACE TO 67.Df!ET SOLUTION ENLARGED VUGS UP 10 3INCt£S AT

~ ~2.S fEET SOME SOLUTION ENLARGED vUGS AT 69.0 f [ [ f~ S ARENACEOUS fROM 70.0 ft:ET TO 70. S ft:ET KENWOOD ME"IIER~ IILUISH - GIIAY APHANITIC. DOLO",TIC-LIMESTDNE I-.:: MODERATELT 8£COED WITH OCCASIONAL VERT~

THIN AND IRREGULAR SHALL SEAMS'u 670 !lOME Of REHEA LEO fRACTURED LIMESTONE flIOM 79.0 fEET TO 1 .. 0 FEET~ GRADING ARGILL A CEO.JS BLUISH - GREEN CALCAREOUS SHALE INTERIIEIlIlEI)WITH SOME THIN SEAMS Of LIME STONE GRATISH* BROWN ARGILLACEOUS LIMESTONE IlLUISH - GRaN CALCAREOUS SHALE ClOW£R fORMATION LIGHT BLUISH - GRAT APHANITIC DOLOMITE. HIGHLT VUGGED AND fOSSILlft:ROUS. BIOHERN ORIGIN MASSIVE HIGH ANGLE SOLUTION ENLARGED JOINT WITH 1/4 INCH CLAy fiLL AT 101.0 fEET QIlADINO DARKER SLIGHTLY EN LAROE!) VERTICAL JOINT WITH TRACE Of CLAY fILL AT 124.0 fEET SLIGHLY ENLAltGED VERTICAL JOlNT WITH TRACE Of' CLAT fiLL f _ 134.S faT TO 138.0 fEET 61'(;II---+----+---+---I---+-~_'NO OOII~ETED AT 14**0 n n ON ./2S/.1 CASING USED 10 A OEJ'TM Of'IO.onn WATER LEVEL NOT RBlllItOf:D DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 35 Figure 2.5-65

BORING 36 SHEARINS STRENGTH IN LBS./SQ.n: SURFACE EL£..TIOIII 145.4 600() !1000 4000 $000 2000 /000

'"IU SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS ~.

_ Il;U.I 2'- foI-~I-'--t IIRO"" "NE TO OOARSE SAND WITH SOW[ GRAVEL WATEll LEVEL ON ./I1I/S8 t-~I-'--t GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND AND SOME GRAVEL 14.*~ZO 7/..

-,- p4.1'llo-121 69..

1U'll.-I12

 ...........f--"'"i GRAY "NE TO OOARS[ SANO WITH GRAve.

BOULDER 'ROM .S.O* TO ST.S' COI8lZS 6':"'::: KENWOOD MEMBER LIGHT GRAY - BROWN mLY CRYSTALLINE DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE GRAOING TO BLUISH' GRAY GRE[NISH -GRAY CALCAREOUS SHALE WITH OCCASIONAL THIN S[AMS 0' ARGILLACEOUS LIM!STONt: CONTAINING SOM[ PYRITE M'NERALLIZATlON GRAY ARGILLACEOUS LIMESTONE WITH OCCASIONAl.SEAMS Of' GREENISH* GRAY SHALE GRAYISH -GIl[EN SHALE TR ~ Of' PYRITE GOWER 'ORMATION LIGHT GR" APHANITIC TO ',NELY CRYSTALLINE ORGANIC DOLOMITE HIGHLY VUGGEO ANO 'OSSlLLlFEROUS.6~ BIOHERM ORIGIN MASSIVE 6:.. BORING COMPLETEO AT 12*.0 I'!!T ON S/20/U CASlNIiI USED TO A O!PTH C7 7~01'!!T 6/DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 36 Figure 2.5-66

 "'ACTI/IIE ~

BORING 37 760 _--,r-..D..E*N..S..'T_Y~_..:V..:U~'q:.:S~ItQ;;.:.:D;;..,'t-_ _D£SCII'~TIONS 750 DlIIL~O THAO.JGH OVERBUIIOEN SOILS NO SAIIPLING ATTEIIPTEO 740 730~720~~ 7/0~

 ..,..tI!!!lI!!!t---! WAPSIPINICON FOIlllAnON

~ Do\VENPORT IIEIlBER~ CLOSE, CAU:ITE ~IGHT ClIlAY ANO 1II0WN IIANIlEO ~INE -OllAINEO~ 700 ~I~~EO '10'" ~IIIESTONE. IIASSIVE. "'0 OPEN I'lIACTUIlE SETS' ONE RANIXlII ORIENTATION, OTHEII HOIlIZONTAL Ttl

 ~A~WA~PSIVo"~i,;JLLEO. ONE 'NCH WIOE C~OS£D 10...

690 OCWIR."&l. SPIlING GIIOVE IIEMIER LIGHT 1Il0WN FINE - GRAINEO 10 APHANITIC YEII'I CLDSI! TO ~.CLDIf:. ONII Jj....i tf:. OOLOMITIC LIII£S1ONE. IIASSIVE. OP£N FIlACTUIlES.IIO~IZONTAL WITH A I'EW AT III omllEE Oil! VUGS dl'£N 680 -~----+----l KENWOOO IIEIIIEII LIOHTG~AY FINE - CIIlAINEO 10 AI'tlAllIT'C _ITlC

 ~~&,~Nllllr~l+,(&.CbenOJWTUIIES, WITH 670 ---.. ..... .....1-..._

lOlliNG COMPLETEO Ilf 14.0 FEET ON 10'4'"DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 37 Figure 2.5-67

760.F"AcrllllE DENSlry .'"VIIGS "flD BORING 38 SU/IFACE ELE.",rlOW 749.9 SY".OLS DESC",PrlOfliS 750 CIRILLED TMA(JJGH OVER8URDEN SOILS HO SAMPLING ATTEMPTED 740..... 730~l(~ 720~(:\~~ 7/0~~ WAPSIPINICON FORMATION DAVENPORT WOOIlER eLDIE, CALCITt LIQHT GIlAY AND MOWN IIANlED FINE - GIt.&INED 700 FILLED '10'" " ~~E~~~~~~~~~hrJ'NO.~~~R~~~~~[5ttJ 60 DEGREE DIP VUGS FILLED.WEATHEREO 44-'F[ET TO 45.5 FEET.1 10'" SPRING GROVE ..E"BER 690 VfJItV ClDS£ TO OC~"Al. LIGHT 1Ill0WN FINE - GRAINED 10 APHANITIC

 ~~?~~~lLL1:,~~""l"'t:~~S~~Egm~ ~"i~N CUlSE,OI't:Il ...~ 211 680 KENWOOD MEMBER V£IlY 12 LIGHTGRAY FINE -GRAINED 10 APHANITIC DOLOllITIC ClDS£,CUYAIllI 10'10- 20... ~'r:~"'ll'b~,~~Ut':~ilCb~IOo~~TURU, WITH SILT FILL£ll BORING COllPLETED AT 74-'~T 670 Ofrrt 10/41'9 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 38 Figure 2.5-68

BORING 39 S""F/ICE ELEl#IrlON 74'l.S 750 F/tAcru/tE DENSlry -"VUGS /tOO DESCRIPTIONS D'ULL.£D THAOJGH OVERBURDEN SOILS NO SAMPl.ING ATTEllPTED 740 730 720~l.( 7/0~..... WAPSIJ'INICON FQAMATION DAVENPORT llEllBER LIGHT GIlAY AND BROWN B&NlED FINE -GRAINED~~ a.DSE. CAL.CrT£ t,:.':;Em:'J.. ~~~~~hi~~. ~~~R"':.~T,tcMi~i:: 700

 ~tO'"

Sr.:.'tL~1I 60 DEGREE DIP VUGS FILLED 5O"E FRACTuRES QPEN TO 1'I INCH

~~ SPRING GROVE "EMBER~ 690 10'"

42 LIGHT "OWN FINE* GAAINEC 10 .IoPH"NI TIC

 ~g~?~~~~C':,\~~Nh:~S~iE2m~~~~N OC~SIIAL '1msE~~ 82 21)"'-10'"

IllT10III 680 KENWOOD "EllBER LIGHT GRAY FINE' GRAINED "Ill APHANITIC DOLOMITIC CLOS£~~&lID 101l0- 20,.,0 ~~~rsNJAI~~~lf,~"Cbea~DO~~~CTURES. WITH SILT ',LL£D 670 BORING COllPLETED AT 1IIOF££T ON 10/4/69 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 39 Figure 2.5-69

 'IIACTUIIE % tiURING 40 DEN$ITY VU6S IIQD 760 SlIIt'ACE ELEIMTION 750.0 SY"'.OLS DESCRIPTIONS 750 D11ILLED THAOUGH OVERBURDEN SOILS.

NO SAMPLING ATTEMPTED 740 730~ 720 l&:~~ 7/0~~ WAPSIPfNICON F~"ATION DAVENPORT MEMBER~ CLOR, CALCITE .(10 .. LIGHT GIIAY AND 1lI0WN BANlED FINE - GRAINED FILLED SOllIE CLAY~ 5l.~E~J.w~~~l,'.~~TiJ:,O, ~~~II~'7ra~~~700 , .. CUlY FILUD FILLED~ 60 DEGREE DIP vUGS FILLED HIGHLY WEATHEREr ~OM 43.S FEET TO 44.5 FEE T ONE Z INCH OPEN VUG AT4II.S FEET 3lI 10..SPIIING GROVE MEMBER 690 ~~ OC~AL 51 LIGHT 1IIl0WN FINE - GIIAI~D Ji APHANITIC Jl....w&. DOLOMITIC LIMESTONE. M "V. OPEN I'1IACTUAE~HORIZONTAL WITH A FEW AT .:l DEGIIEE DI~ \lUGS N KENWOOD MEMBER 680 15 LIGHT GRAY FINE - GIIAINED TO APHANITIC DOLOMITIC VEIIY ~~,f&,~NJlilr~Ut":~NCbea'D~TUIIES. WITH Q.OSE, curt AIlIl 10-.- 20 ..SILT FILLED BORING COMPLETED llI'7!.5I'E[T ON 10/4/69 670 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER CO~1PANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 40 Figure 2.5-70

 'IIACTUIIE. ~

BORING 41 DEII$/T'f' VIJ6S IIQD 760 SURFACE ELEWATION 7

50.2 DESCRIPTION

S 750 DRILLED THRaJGH OVERBURDEN SOILS NO SAMPLING ATTEhiPTEO 740 -730 720 710

..... ..-I----!*WAPSIPINICON FOR..ATlON~~ 700 QDII, CALCrn:

[If,VENPORT "E"BER LIGHT GRAY ANO BROWN BAHDED FINE -GRAINED

f

 ~ILL!D CIO ..

5:.~Em.~~~~~~~Ml"NO. g~~U~~W~~fi~~ 60 DEGREE DIP VUGS FILLED. ONE 2 INCH OPEN VUG AT !l4 0 FEET~ 10.. SPRING GROVE "E"BER~ 690- ClC~AL LIGHT BROWN FINE - GRAINED 10 APHANITIC i::: VIIIY' CLOa, ~g~?rti~~~LLI:,~~""iNIE:~~S~~Em~~'It~"i~N

 .~

~0"111 rlJa"iJR.l4I~ 680 1-.!.1.:.7!I-I!!!!I--'" KENWOOD "E.. BER VIIIY CLOSllO LIGHT GRAY FINE - GRAINED 10 APHANITIC COLOWITIC 10'- 20.. ~~lI.f&>"llNJRI~~~1j.'(~"Cb8a~DO~~~TURES. WITH

 ~~r;fct~AICl LI8~Iy G&l,;~ t~~ttl"~T1Jp'll'M,T8~lb~'rWoS~~JiE SETS, ~~~,~59.~~LWITH RANDOW ORIENTATION. OTHER OPEN AND 670 ONE 2 :NCH WIDE CLAY LAyER AT 71.5 FEET VUGS OPEN TO I," INOl II VIIIY CLOII, 660 CALCITE',LLID cIO" AIID 01'111 3 INCH GREEN CLAY LAYER AT 92.0 FEET WHITE APHANITIC LI .. ESlONE. CLAY INTERLAYEIIS. UP TO 1/4 INCH THICK.

58 CLOSED FRACTURES, RANCO" ORIENTATiON 650 GREEN CLAY LAYER D&RK GIIAY SHALE. THINLY BECOED WITH UPlO 10.. SCATTERED VIIIY CLOSE, FINE SAND SOlIE FRACTURING SHOWING SLICKENSIDU GIIADING TO VERY LIGHT GRAY 0'11I 640 GOWIII FOR"ATlON LIGHT GRAY ARGILLACEOUS COLO"'!~ THINLY 9EDDED WITH

~~TJ,~urott~U!fI!fAde~fs~oII1fC~M'!M it~'tcr.r~Nffip 5

630 BORING CO"PLETED AT 1200 FUT ON 10/4/69 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 41 Figure 2.5-71

BORING 42

 'IIAC'UIII 'l6 DI"."., VtJ6S HD I 760 SUllFACE ELEIMTION 750.1 $.,1I.0LS DESCRIPTIONS 750 DRILLED THRO.JGH OVERBuRDEN SOILS.

NO SAMPLING ATTEMPTED 740 730 kJ

~ 720~

~ 7/0 i::::~ WAPSIPINICON FORMATION~ _ENPCRT MEMIlER lj 700 CUlM, CAl.Cln FILLID <10" II LIGHT GRAY AND BROWN IWIlED FINE-GRAINED 5:.Mn~Nt&~~~~~hTJ'NO.g;~~R~~~~~~fiZST6

 &0 DEGREE DIP VUGS FILLED SPRING GROVE MEMSER 690 10..

IS LIGHT BROWN FINE - GRAINED Ji APHANITIC DOLOMITIC LIIlESlllNE. IlASSIV . OPEN FRACTUREfj OC~AL HORIZONTAL WITH A FEW AT 8:l DEGREE DIP VUGS PEN

 ~l~

J!ia"itTfI. 51 680 QDlE, curt_liLT FILLED 10-.-10"

 ~

KENWOOD MEMIlER L1GHTGRAY FINE -GRAINED III APHANITIC DOLOMITIC

 ~~J60"llNcflil~~:f':~NCb~DO~TURES. WITH BORING COMPLETED "'7401'UT 670 ON 10/4/69 DUANE .ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 42 Figure 2.5-72

BORING 43 SlI/IFlIC£ ELEIMTION 748.4

 "'ACTUIIE %

DENSITY VI/OS IItlD 750 SYIII.OLS OCSCIIIPTIONS ORILL£D THAQ.oGH OVERBuRDEN SOILS.NO SAMPLING ATTEWPTED 740 730 720

 -1 ~ ~ \lI&PSIPlNICON F~IoI&TION ~ IlIIfENPORT "EIUlER LIGHT C1AAY AND 1It0WN Il&HDEO ~INE' GII&IIIEO LIMESTONE ...ASSIVE. TWO OPEN I'lUCTUIlE S[TS' ~ 700 CLDI[, CALCITE ",10" 21 ONE AANlXlIoI ORIENTATION, OTHER HORIZONTAL:m 0 ~ILUD 10 DEGREE DIP VUGS FILLED ONE 3 INCH VUG i.l 49.S fEET I:::

• HIGHLY WEATHERED FRO" UI FEET TO 42.0 FEET.

 ~

ll.I 690 39

 ~ 10..

OC~SNAL ClDK.O~N 20"-:10"_-ar'lOlil 35 680 VUlYCLDU TO Cl.OS[. CUlY &lID ~-ZO" 4.SILT ~ILLm 670 LIGHT GRAY lANDED APHANITIC LIME STONE. MasSiVE WITH ZONES r:JF PARTING. TWO FRACTURE SETS,ONE CLOSED AND HORIZONTAL OTHER OPEN AND HORIZONTAL T060 DEGREE DIP. VUGS OPEN TO III INCH.

 ~ <10 ..

SlI 660 OP N ONE 21NCH GREE N CLAY LAYER AT 10.0 FEET.LIGHTGRAY BANDED APHANITIC LIMESTONE.CLOSED FRACTURES UP TO la'll. OF SAMPLE CLOU.CLDKD 41 650 GRAY AND GREEN SHALE. THINLY BEDDED WITH PARTING ALONG BEDDING SHOWING SLICKENSIDES.VUlYa..otI: BORING COMPLETED lIl'102.5 FEET O~N ON ICl!~"~ _

64()

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 43 Figure 2.5-73

BORING 44 SUllFACE ELE. .TIOIiI 748.5

 'IIACTUII£ ."

750 __ r_D_£_N_$_'_T_YT__V_lI<_'6_STII_t1_D__r __~S:YII.;":O:L~S~~~~~~DE:;S;C;";~T;'IO;'N$~~ _DRILLED THROJGH OvERBURDEN SOLS.Ne SAIIPLING ATTEIIPTED 740 730 CLDa:, CALCrn:

 ~ILLfD 10'" ZI 9t SPIIING GROVE IIEIIBER 116 690 LIGHT BROWN FINE - GRAINED 10 APHANITIC DOLOIlITIC LIIIU1ONE. IIASSIVED*.2~N FRADIPecr~SSoN HORIZONTaL WITH A FEW AT III ~RI:E ~ OPE 72 680 670 ---1. .... _ IIOR1NG COIlPLETED ON 10/3/51 jI!'73.S FEET DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 44 Figure 2.5-74

BORING 45 SURFACE ELEIllATION 747.9 750 FRACTUIIC DeNSITY -"VUGS ROD SYMBOLS DESCRIPTIONS DRILL£D THROJGH OvERBURDEN SOILS.NO SAMPLING ATTEMPTED 740 730 720

~

I( 7/0....~ WAPSIPINICON FORMATION DAVENPORT "E"IlER~ cLoSE, CALCrn LIGHT GRAY AND 1III0WN IIAIClED ~INE - GRAINED~ 700 ~ILL[D 10 .. 30 5:.~El.~Jj.~~~b\~hT~ g;~~R~~W~Mf~i::: J~G:H P~';:{'18So:!PrthH'8arY,1'i~~N WG AT4~~F£ET§ li.I SPRING GROVE "EMBER~ 690 LIGHT BROWN FINE* GRAINED 10 APHANITIC ag~9r6~~~LLI:I~~~'1E:~lSJJtEg:i.~ ~~'f~H OCWU/Al. "10..ClJlIS[, O~N

 .&..~

680 KENWOOD "EMBER LIGHTGRA,l' FINE - GRAINED 10 APHANITIC DOLOMITIC 670 k~"~&"llN!Rlr~lf':~NCbea~Do~~~cmES, WITH CI..OSE, CLAY AND 61 SILT ~ILL[I) 10-.- 20..660 ONSt~,~~~p~Altf~,~L~~..l:A~M.l.Tc~~ ~mRLAY[A'.CloOSE, CLOIEO 0 CLOSEO FRACTuR ES UP TO 110 INCH WIOE.BLUISH- GREEN CALCAREOUS SHALE 650 ao~ !tr'IATION

 ~ H~ tlfi'Ht1H8'AhDvllIes~lJtN~f/n:m\t,1ifN BORING COMPL£TEO I.f 1023 FEET ON Kl/31/69 640 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 45 Figure 2.5-75

BORING 46 SUff'1ICE ElE"T'OIt 746B DESCIf'PT/ONS llIIlLUD THAC1JGH OVERBuRDEN :lOLl.ItO SAWPLING ATTEMPTED 7'40 730~ 720~~ 710 i:::~ l!Ioo!ll!tI---i\IIAPSIPINICON FaI ....TION DAVENPORT WEWIl[R~ LIGHT GIIAY AND MOWN 1IANl[l) FINE-GIlAINED~ 700 I' 5:.'?1tA~J..~~~~~hk,v;.o.g;~R~W6~::~eo DEGREE DIP vlJQS FILLED HIGHLY WEATHERED FROM 41.0F((T TO 41.S FEET.SPIIING GROVE W[l'BER LIGHT BIlOWN FINE* GRAINED 10 APHANITIC DOLOWITIC LIWES'IONE. WASSIVE. OP£N ~CTUI'I£S.HORIZONTaL WITH A FEW AT III DEGREE DI~ was ClP£N gnil!!il~--i KENWOOD WEWIl[R UGHTGRAY FINE - GlIAl NED 10 APHANITIC OQLOWIT1C

 ~~.f~~Noil,r~Ut';~ .. Cb8MD~TUMS.WITH IIORlHG COMPLETED .rr7l.S I'UT OOIQI1/.

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 46 Figure 2.5-76

BORING 47

 ~M:I ELI..TfON 747.0 'ffACTUffE 'l' DENSfTY VIJ6S ItQD 750 SYfIIMJLS D£$Clff~TfONS DIlIu..t:D THIIl1JClH OVERBUIlDEN lOLl, NO SAM~INCI ATTEMPTED, 740 730 720

.... 7/0~Ii: ~IPtNICDN f'OIlMATlON lIIIIt:NPORT MEMIER~ LIGHT CIIlAY AND IIlOWN _ED ~INE* GRAINED 700 Q.D~ CALCITE

 ~ILLED clO .. ~"U':J..~t.~~tTTo~

ao g;~:Il~~frrS:~tb~ DEGREE DIP YllOS FILLED<:)i::~ SPRING GROVE MEM'ElI'-' 690 biGHT IIIOWN FI~~ GIlAI~D ~ APHANillc l:8~OMITIC LIM~ NT! M SlY. 0:iN CTIJIlE1ft N IZONlIlL WI HAW AT III Dmll E DIP \lUllS~10..CUlK,OPEN ~Al.JA"iIf.&,680 AIlTElIAN WATER AT IS FUT. UP Ttl III GPM WITH I lIZ FOO'!' HEAD KENWOOD MEMBER LIGHTGIIAY ~INE' GRAINED Ttl AP'HANITIC DClI..OMITlC

 ~m"S"o\I~:t":&..~8ftDmTUIlEl, WITH 670 CLOIE, curt _

liLT I'ILLID ~-IO" IS 660 10 ONE 2 'NCH GIlaN CLAY LAYEIl

 ~~~ UMEITONE, CLOSED I'RACTUIlEl ~ILLED WITH _EN 650 31 CLi~~U'ID lOlliNG COMPLETED oIl'loo.o'l'E!T 0II11~'

640 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 47 Figure 2.5-77

BORING 48

 $IJIfIW2 ILI..,.IOII llCll "'At:r"'"

VIR8"".750 -_":~~~_":'=:"=~r---$YIIMJL$DIlIU..111 T H _ O\I[III1/IID[1I 1llLS.110 IAIIIlUM "TT["~TUI.7~0 690 **680 670 - ....... ""-_....._ ...J - - -DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 48 Figure 2.5-78

BORING 49 SIJII'M:E El.E..TIOIt 746.8

 'II,.CruilE %

DENSIry VlIGS IH1D 750 SYII'OLS D£SCII"rlOll/S DIULUll THIUlGH OVERBURDEII SOLS.110 SAMPLIIIG ATTEM~n:D 740 730 720.... 7/0~l4: Wt'S1"'",CO" RJllIIlAlIOII DlWtNr?:JT"6~~:ND.OWI! ~IIIE-GIlAIIIEIl~ _Ell lil.-rb~J..~~m.~M)~~ ~~,,~~trr'I~

It 700-QDI[. <:ALeIT'[

 ~ILU:D <Ill"* 17 10 DEGII£E DI~ VUOS ~ILLED.OIIE tillCH DIAIIETER a VUG AT 45.UEET I::

~ sPlitillG GROvE IIEIIIE"~ 690 10..II biGHT l:81l01l1 lrIl IC LIII~S *f8:n Wll ~IIIfc GIlAI\tD ~ A~HAIIITIC "It ij IZOlllaL WI HAWII 0( SlY eo " ~CTIJIlI:~DIP! \lUllS VEJl"tQDl[ TO ClDIf.OPII ~""

 ..&..~ Te 680 II KEIIWOOD IIEIlIE" LIGHT G"AY ~IIlE - GRAIIIED TO AI'MAliITIC DOU:lIImC 1l~"&"S"O\lrc.:.p:&.CWftDJr.fbV.?I, UHrvuG 670 AT 7D~'EET CUlSE, curt AND SILT ~ILLEIl 10'1o-20" .1 660 ONE Z '"CH GR"" CLAY LAYER AT tl.5 ~EET LIGHT GRAY ~IIIE-GRAINED LIMESTONE. ~. II CLOSED ~RACTURES aWISH - GREEN CALCAREOUS IHAU.

650

 .oRlIICI COII~U:TED 1IT1ll1l.S FEET ON 10/""

640 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 49 Figure 2.5-79

BORINe 50 IlIII'IIt:E EU. .TIOII 746.8 750

 'ACTU,

DI1IIIry .'"VlJtJS IItID S".OLS DI$C"/~TIOM$DlIIUID TIlll()JQ1l O\I[II..,IIOfll .elL'.110 ....."-1110 ATT[IIPT[lI.740 7JO 720~Ii:710~~_ _U""ICO" I'OIIIIATlOII_III'011T 11[11.11 LIIMT ....T AIlD IIlOWlI _ED ".'11WllII) i:: 700~

 ~CAU:IT[ 10 .. lil."~~~~M:~~II~~,"S:~ ~o2~~'VtffitlmtW- 'ILLID D 4!.O,m' TO 4" 'UT

""~0"[

• IIICN OIAII[T[1I VUI AT 44.' 'UT 690 """Nt IltOVIlltlllUII

 ~IlT 11IO'" '~fo -:~ tUm"~

MO~?~~tl:.~t A"Ii. A Jrl II DIll _ _680 ~:;o ~AL 10..

 ""'iR.. .el_ COMP\.ET[O Ilr 71., '(('1' ON 10/1/11 670 660--

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 50 Figure 2.5-80

BORING 51

 ,.ltACrUltE %

r_".,..__V_IJ(;;,;;,;:S;,-:IttI;.:.:D;",.,,~_ _750 _-,r-;;,D;;,E/II;,;,;;,$;,;I

 $""'MJL$

DllILLED T H _ OYE~IU"DEII lOLl.110 'QPLIIIG IoTTEIiPTED.740 730 720 710 QDM,eALCIT'[

 ~ILI.!O Ill" 670 CLOIE, CLAY AIIll SILT ~ILLI!D IO'I.-ZD" 660 DIIELIOH 0 OllEEII~LIoY Z IM:H LIo~LIIiEITONI loY "111

• O~IoIl loT liD ~ CLOSED 650 QDM, CLOIED ~AIoC £S. PA UCINO IoTEA loT SO !lD_

OAEEN SHALE. THINU' IlEDOED IIC!lIIA ~OA II10T IDN

 ~~SO:C~ D?f~:,I;r,,\~~~D C~D 640 - ..... ...._ _......_£-_-L.IiiiiIiiilo_...I lORING COMPLETED lIT 101.0 ~

D11ID/I/**DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 51 Figure 2.5-81

E BORING 52 t'

 ~:::

750-iil ~ M$C"/~rlOM$

~

I.;:7- 811 12 II

~

GRAY SilTY CLAY WITH SOME SAND AND GRAVEL

~ 730~

20 II

~ 19 II~ 720~

22 II 9CfIING COMPLETED AT 31.8 FEET ON 10/6/69 710 CASING USED TO A DEPTH OF 14.5 FEET BORING 53 SlI/IF/ICE £l,I..rlO/ll 746.5 M$c"/~rlOM$L BLACK SANDY CLAY - TOPSOil BROWN MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND

.... 1111~ 740'---4 l( SP 13 II SOME COB8lES~ GRAY SilTY CLAY WITH !IlME SAND AND GRAVEL 720-.............

BORING COMPLETED AT 31.8 FEET ON 10/6/61 710"---- CASING USED TO A DEPTH OfF 15.5 FEET BORING 54 SlI/IF/ICE ELE..rlO/ll 746.7.... M$Clf/~rlOM$~l(BlA CK BROWN SANDY CLAY - TOPSOil MEDIUM TO COARSE SAND

~ 740-....:..:!...iL.I>

GUY SilTY CLAY WITH SOME SAND AICl GRAVEL DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 52 Figure 2.5-82

DIRECT SHEAR AND FRICTION TESTS m/f{fIll ~r,ISTUIf£rrsr NORMAL "fICSSr.HtC lit ~s "It S~£ 'ooT_rtf'.Js/ff ~=::JlEII COlT f"CLD 1I0f$T1I/I£ Cr1't!tCSSCD AS A ~IIC£IIITAG£ OF rN£ /I1W ..",. ( I .IGt~r - - - o lt , DeNSITy Cr~"csS£O flit ~O,,"OS ~C" ",.,e 'DOT --.,I ~£" e{NT II(}fSTlMl WHeN TeSTCD _ I

 ".\j"-..".

I I (r"'l£SSCD AS " "CIICC/fTAg ' " THE 11m' ",,.,, " "_--, r

 ~

t f~--Ei~'O~'.~!~"'~

 @?@

l!iiiii!ti"iilililiiiillillli-ll1D

 § SH£A/ItIItG srllCKTH Ilf ~CUtDS ~EII F1hCT701t(7St1tQllt~_~"C1ISCIUMI!'1fK1T ,,,,cnow 0' 501£ ow cOtf/llCllCrr_"'DUIlDS IiOUMItI '0tJT nhCTION ' " SOIL ON STEEL JtIt ~ 110I ....... " , .

lIDI ...... fIIIlJtIr

 " kid mUM UMWNOW_.

Ii! W QIi up biii ill h

• m.

UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TESTS I r-r--=.arll CDtT TJ:;LIJ 1I0lSTcI1IE (X""ESSEO AS A ~1IC£IfTA(;C 0" THE lJtIW * .,T til' .JDIl DIIY DeIfSIT,. Exnl{SSEiJ IN ~O(/NOS ~{" CV.'C 'DOT TYPICAL DESCRIPTIONS I 10." f 1?f I SNEAItI/rG STIIENGTH IN M./""'5 ~CII SOUA!IC nxJT MAJOR DIVISIONS GRAY(L

 .\ND CLEAN GRAYELS GW WELL.-GR .... O(D GkAVLS, SAND:.4lxtURtS, NO fiNES GHAVeL.-

LITTLE OR I TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION CONF/N/NII PIfE$$URE /NPOUIiD$ PER SI/UAIIE FOOT "Ell C£ltT ~/£f.O 1II01STUIC OIJt1l£SSLO G - - - o l l r "ENSITr Fxn/iSSlo

 .u A lit ~~IfT~ 0' ~OV"OS ~lll TESTS rw IJII1'r " T ,,-MJIt, C""C 'DOT GRAYELLY (LITTLE OR NO SOILS rlNES) PQORL Y-GRADED GRAVELS. GRAVEL* 'M'-'Q"'-m * ~ DEVIATOR .rltE** /N ~DUND8 PEN .QUAII' '(JOT COARSE GP SANU MIXTURES, L1TTl.. E OR NO fiNES GRAINED SOILS ROCK COMPRESSION TESTS SILTY GRAVELS, GRA ..... EL-SAND L_ - ---.~]------ COMPReSSIvE ~OUNO. ~EII WORC THAN sot GM SILT WIXTURE:S sr"£N';T"" IN $QuAH INCIt or co.... rRAc_jGRAYELS WITH FI~(3 T ION!I!..!.!..!llP (APPREC I ABLE ~"'Ol.i,*.

ON No.4 SIEVE Of FINES)GC CLAVE:Y CLAY GRA ..... E:LS.MIXTuR(~GRAVE:L-SAM)KEY TO TEIT DATA

• lNOICArES DEPTH OF U~OlSTtJ".EO ,JA""LE

 .... E:LL-GRADE:D SAP<lDS. :iRAVE:LLY ~ IIIIOICArES DEPTH OF DISTU".EO 5~ItIPL£ SW i I I :J SANDS, LITTL( OR NO FI~[S INOICATES SAND DEPT,., OF SAMPLING ATTEMPT WITH "0 IIECOveltr AND CLEAN SAND (LITTL' ti:;j:**:- 1!I INDICATES DEPTH OF SPLIT-SPOON SAMPLE SANDY S01LS OR NO fiNES):::::::::::: I INDICATES DEPTH AND LEN.TH 0' CDIIIN6 /tUN POORL.Y-GRAD[:'!)AN.J~, "RAVEL. ... '"

WORE THAN 50% SP SANDS, LITTL( 0;" ~c f1N[5 Of MATERIAL IS~E~~A~I~~'KEY TO IAMPLEI SM SIL.TY SANDS. SAND-SILT 1IIIXTUR[S WORE TH" 50% ISANDS WITH FI~t:S Or COARSE rRAC- (.~ppR(CIAaL( Al.l.OU~~TION ~ Or fiNES)No.4 SI(V( LlOUID L.,T SC CLAYEY SANDS, SAND-CLAY MIXTuAE:5 I I_ 0-D 10 <<J JD ~ 10 .0 ~ <<J H 100 VINORGANIC SIL.TS AND V[RY FII1(SANDS, ROCK FLOUR. S I L TY 010.ML CL .... Y[Y F IIIlE SA~DS OR CLAY('(SIL.TS WITH SL.I.j,HT PLASTICITY 6D V

 ~

INORGANiC CLAYS OF LOW TO WUIIUlirIl 0 FINE SIL TS L I QUID GRAI NQ AND L.INI T PLASTICITY. GRAVELLY CLAYS. z

 ~ THAN 50 CL 0 ....~

SOILS :LAYS S .... NDY CLAYS. SIL.TY CL .... YS. L.EAN

11< CH -il I

CLAYS

 ~~ - !I! .0 Y /

ORGANIC SILTS AN:) ORGAI'oIC ~OL SILTY CL.AYS or L.Ott PLASTICITY ~~

 <'0 j ~:: ~O MH I P<lOR C,AN Ie ~IATOMAC(CvS SilTY SOIi..S S I L. T S. "I C A.C tOUS OR tiNE: SA~D t..; ~: il ?-: ~~, ~ ~ t:L ~

V t V WORt THAN SOX or MATE:RIAL. IS SILTS ANJ L.IQU I D L. I ~ I T INORGANIC CLAYS OF HIGH ~-GREATER 5C CH

 , MH a. OH ./

~_THAN NO. THA.N PLASTICITY, fAT C... A.Y~CLAYS ~200 SIEVE: SIZE:ID I "/'/// "OH ORGAfIIlC CL .... YS PLASTICITY.OF J,.l[DIUM TO HIGH OR"A:'I.IC SILTS 0-

 ~CL -MU' ~;

ML i OL PEAT. HUMUS. SWAMP SOILS HIGrlLY ORG~IC SOILS PT WITH HIGH ORGANIC CO~T(I'oTS PLASTICITY CHART NOTE:: DUAL SY"'BOLS ARE: USED TO Il'tuICAT( BORD(RLIN( SOIL CLASSIfiCATIONS.DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER lOlL CLASSIFICATION CHART IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Unified Soil Classification System Figure 2.5-83

(.. DIIIVING Oil I'U~l MECHANISM r

 /

COUPLING

 .ATEIl OUTLfTS ALTERNATE ATTACHMENTS NOTCHES fOil ENGAGING I'ISHING TOOL NEO""ENE GASKET CH!CK VAlLvn HE SPLIT BARRE VAlLVE CAG!

SPACE TO RECEIVE DISTURBED SOIL LOCKING CORE.RETAINING RING DEVICE NOT!. SPLIT

 -HeAD eXTeNSION- CAN fERRULE IE ,.. TIIOOUCEO BETWEEN -HI!AO* .\NO *S"LIT ...... EL*

CORE.RETAINER IlINGS(,.1/2- 0.0. IY .- LONG) THIN.WALLED SAMPLING TUBE SPLIT BARREL (INTERCH.... GE ... LE (TO 'Aell.lrATE .EMOVAL l.ENGTIlSI Of CORE I ......UI BIT COR E.R ET AINING

 ~---"E~A~~~ie,.ING .nAlNU PLATEI (I .. TE.04 ....GE...U WITH OTHER TYPES)

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Soil Sampler Type U Figure 2.5-84

NORTH DISTANCE IN FEET SOUTH 1#00 4#$0; $#00 $1'20 i I I

i

 - I i I' ' I i I 1 1/11 I I :

i:_

 -- I!

I I I 70

 ~---t -f 11 6$ ~---+---I---r+---4--tl ~"" - --'--l---i,.* 1---\--- T-- +--1----

60 0 e - - r --- 0 t-------i--+--+-----"o,........ ~--- --1---1-.--t---+-----t--_+_~X --tI---- ! I !

 -l------t-~--1 --7-"----- ----1 1 $0 /'

j t I I

 --i- -+--- I .---J . I c--,-

4$ c 1-------. - - - - -40 I --- + +I I

 ~-u--

I IHI' l\\--I I; (I)~ I

 .---t-f\- ~-t--}\I---tl

() I * *~ ~$...:::!~~

 ~O \\ II --~!--1!;;

L~

 'I APPARENT COMPRESSIONAL VELOCITY If\r.:

I I~ '--4----'-IN FEET PER SECOND:....-;....--+--'i:: 2$ - _I I I

• i I \ I.

20 II II 1$0 0 b0 I S 0 10 - - ----i

 $ 1--- -- ------+- I I I 0 L_ I I ,-

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Seismic Refraction Line Figure 2.5-85

ABC 0 EF G H J I( L M 1rI f I

 .....---.J-.-+..--+-+---f I I I I I I r!

I I I 1 I 0 f r I 1 r

1. II I 1 1

I 11 -j c: ......

 -0 a VI o ~ 1 C1) ):a ):a VI --i 0 ITI ITI c:

3

 ..... t:l r ):0

(") ITI :z

 "'T1 n ITI r ..... ...... --i

z ;::0 ):a

s ):a ......;::0 C1)

"'T1 VI r n :z..... a A 8 CD E F & H J K L M lCl OJ VI r r C :::s ):a ...... 0~ c..

C1) "'T1 m

 ;::0 ITI :J: ITI N C1) --i --i :z

• VI -< ITI c..n ..... l2<' ;::0 I VI ):0 m ex:> M-

z -0 -<

 < ):0 a LEGEND: ..... r :E: n -< ITI ITI Hor. Seale

• 1-. 20'

 ~ VI ;::0 :z ...... --i Resistivlt, Line VI - Seismic Line C VI n ITI ~ a ;::0 e Borehole Used for Seismic Measurements < ;::0 3: o Seismic Detector Locotion ITI -0 ~ -0 ):a @ Late Arrival'One Way Control a :z o Late Arrival*Two Way Control ;::0 -< --i

o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o , o o

 \

o~

 ~'f\ *e ~.2 e_ %~ .G E~ .0 ~;

i3

 $ (

2 Z""SiW £ -I

 -I E en s:

o ~_

 ~1 E .. ._u I&J o -g o ~:2 gO:'! ,:,N~~ ~ G. ~- 0 0 . . . . ,1;. .5.!!J~ .. 0 ..

lu e o.. !~

Ii~.o "z (J~C'

 .J DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT I Resistivity Survey Figure 2.5-87

I o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o oo \ 0 o

 \

o

 .~

It) n "0c-eo E~eo is

 ~=

2 zcaw$< { -I!!t

 . . .!!!u I

E E::ee ..(1)-IA.I 0I:oo ~- 4

 .. g o 'V~ ~

gb:.~ oS "N~l a ii.. - (,,)E'- -1

 ..""~ --J'"

_"I:.0 .!8 - t.

9 oZ

 .. 2~ &~.o S~

(,,)2: ~

 ~ &&I DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Resistivity Survey Figure 2.5-88

TIME IN MILL/SECONDS o 10 I~ 20 :JO 40 o10 20 40

 , STEEL CASING TO TOP OF ROCK AT 47' - II ~,

I I70 60

 , ("l 0 ~ ~ \\ ~ '0

("l 100

 \~ ;;.

0 I I110 11

 -4 i

/lD

 'r~ ~ I \

I:JD 1lifD . _ -j

 ~

I~D iDUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Uphole Velocity Survey Boring 12 I Figure 2.5-89

DIRECT SHEAR TESTS ARE PERFORMED TO DETERMINE THE SHEARING STRENGTHS OF SOILS. FRICTION TESTS.. ARE PERFORMED TO DETERMINE THE FRICTIONAL RE-SISTANCES BETWEEN SOILS AND VARIOUS OTHER MATE RIALS SUCH AS WOOD, STEEL, OR CONCRETE. THE TESTS ARE PERFORMED IN THE LABORATORY TO SIMULATE ANTIOPATED FIELD CONDITIONS.EACH SAMPLE IS TESTED WITHIN THREE BRASS RINGS, DIRECT SHEAR TESTING

 *TWO AND ONE-HALF INCHES IN DIAMETER AND ONE INCH & RECORDING APPARATUS IN LENGTH. UNDISTURBED SAMPLES OF IN-PLACE SOILS ARE TESTED IN RINGS TAKEN FROM THE SAMPLING DEVICE IN WHICH THE SAMPLES WERE OBTAINED. LOOSE SAMPLES OF SOILS TO BE USED IN CON-STRUCTING EARTH FILLS ARE COMPACTED IN RINGS TO PREDETERMINED CONDITIONS AND TESTED.

DIRECT SHEAR TESTS A THREE-INCH LENGTII OF TIlE SAMPLE IS TESTED IN DIRECT DOUBLE SHEAR. A CONSTANT PRES SURE, APPROPRIATE TO THE CONDITIONS OF THE PROBLEM FOR WHICH THE TEST IS BEING PER FORMED, IS APPLIED NORMAL TO THE ENDS OF THE SAMPLE THROUGH POROUS STONES. A SHEARING FAILURE OF THE SAMPLE IS CAUSED BY MOVING THE CENTER RING IN A DIRECTION PERPENDICULAR TO THE AXIS OF THE SAMPLE. TRANSVERSE MOVEMENT OF THE OUTER RINGS IS PREVENTED.THE SHEARING FAILURE MAY BE ACC;:OMPLISHED BY APPLYING TO THE CENTER RING EITHER A CONSTANT RATE OF LOAD, A CONSTANT RATE OF DEFLECTION, OR INCREMENTS OF LOAD OR DE FLECTION. IN EACH CASE, THE SHEARING LOAD AND THE DEFLECTIONS IN BOTH THE AXIAL AND TRANSVERSE DIRECTIONS ARE RECORDED AND PLOTTED. THE SHEARING STRENGTH OF THE SOIL IS DETERMINED FROM THE RESULTING LOAD-DEFLE.CTION CURVES.FRICTION TESTS IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE FRICTIONAL RESISTANCE BETWEEN SOIL AND THE SURF ACES OF VARIOUS MATERIALS, THE CENTER RING OF SOIL IN THE DIRECT SHEAR TEST IS REPLACED BY A DISK OF THE MATERIAL TO BE TESTED. THE TEST IS THEN PERFORMED IN THE SAME MANNER AS THE DIRECT SHEAR TEST BY FORCING THE DISK OF MATERIAL FROM THE SOIL SURFACES.DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Method of Performing Direct Shear and Friction Tests Figure 2.5-90

THE SHEARING STRENGTHS OF SOILS ARE DETERMINED FROM THE RESULTS OF UNCONFINED COMPRESSION AND TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TESTS. IN TRIAXIAL COMPRES-SION TESTS THE TEST METHOD AND THE MAGNITUDE OF THE CONFINING PRESSURE ARE CHOSEN TO SIMULATE ANTICIPATED FIELD CONDITIONS.UNCONFINED COMPRESSION AND TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TESTS ARE PERFORMED ON UNDISTURBED OR REMOLDED SAMPLES OF SOIL APPROXIMATELY SIX INCHES IN LENGTH AND TWO AND ONE-HALF INCHES IN DIAMETER. THE TESTS ARE RUN EITHER STR:\I~-CONTR(lLLED OR STRESS-CONTROLLED. IN A S"i RAIN-CO!'<TROLLED TEST THE SAMPLE IS SUBJECTED TO A CONSTANT RATE OF DEFLEC-TION AND THE RESULTING STRESSES ARE RECORDED. IN A STRESS-CONTROLLED TEST THE SAMPLE IS SUBJ ECTED TO EQUAL INCREMENTS OF LOAD WITH EACH INCREMENT BEING MAINTAINED UNTIL AN EQUILIBRIUM CONDITION WITH RESPECT TO STRAIN IS ACHIEVED.YIELD, PEAK, OR ULTIMATE STRESSES ARE DETERMINED TR lAX IAL COMPRESS ION TEST UN IT FROM THE STRESS-STRAIN PLOT FOR EACH SAMPLE AND THE PRINCIPAL STRESSES ARE EVALUATED. THE PRINCIPAL STRESSES ARE PLOTTED 0:-';" WHiR'S CIRCLE DIAGRAM TO DETERMINE THE SHEARING STRENGTH OF THE SOIL TYPE REI:'-:G TFSTEll.UNCONFINED COMPRESSION TESTS CAN BE PERFORMED ONLY ON SAMPLES InTH <:;( Ff*iClF'T c.elllr.SION SO THAT THE SOIL ~'ILL STAND AS AN UNSUPPORTED CYLINDER. THESE TESTS \IA Y BE RUN ,n NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT OR ON ARTIFICIALLY SATURATED SOILS.IN A TRIAXIAL COMPRESSION TEST THE SAMPLE IS ENCASED IN A RUBBER ME\IBRA:-.;r, PU.CFD l~ ....TEST CHAMBER, AND SUBJECTED TO A CONFINING PRESSURE THROUGHOUT THE DljRATICJN OF THE TEST. NORMALLY. THIS CONFINING PRESSURE IS MAINTAINED AT A CONSTANT LEVEL, ALTHOUGH FOR SPECIAL TESTS IT MAY BE VARIED IN RELATION TO THE MEASURED STRESSES. TRI.HI.... L r.O\lPRES-SION TESTS MAY BE RUN ON SOILS AT FIELD MOISTURE CONTENT OR ON ARTIFICIALLY S.... TURATED SAMPLES. THE TESTS ARE PERFORMED IN ONE OF THE FOLLO\t'ING \t'AYS:UNCONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED: THE CONFINING PRESSURE IS IMPOSED O~ THE SA\lPLE AT THE START OF THE TEST. NO DRAINAGE IS PERMITTED AND THE STRESSES 1X1lICH ARE MEASURED REPRESENT THE SUM OF THE INTERGRA~UL."'R ST1\F.';:;I':<;!\:"m PORE WATER PRESSURES.CONSOLIDATED-UNDRAINED: THE SAMPLE IS ALLOIX'ED TO CONSOUD ..\ TF FIT!.Y l::-';DER THE APPLIED CONFINING PRESSURE PRIOR TO THE START or THE TE'T. THE \'01.1"\11'.CHANGE IS DETER\lINED BY MEASURING THE \t'ATER AKD OR AIR EXPEI.Lf"D Dl:Rl:-';(,CONSOLIDATION. NO DRAINAGE IS PERMITTED DURING THE TEST ".\Ii [I,IF. ~TRE~<;ES WHICH ARE MEASURED ARE THE SAME AS FOR THE UNCONSOLmATE[,-I;\;nRAl~:rDn:~T.DRAINED: THE INTERGRANULAR STRESSES IN A SAMPLE MAY BE \IEASl:RED BY PER-FORMING A DRAINED, OR SLOW, TEST. IN THIS TEST THE SAMPLE [<., IT!.!.Y SAnm,HED AND CONSOLIDATED PRIOR TO THE START OF THE TEST. DURINC, THI- TI-:<:T. £"11\ .... I"."GF IS PERMITTED AND THE TEST IS PERFORMED AT A SLO\t* ENOUGH H ."1':: TO PRF \TNT THE BUILDUP OF PORE WATER PRESSURES. THE RESULTING STRF;;:.sE~ IX Hie II ."RE ~tFAS URED REPRESENT ONLY THE INTERGRANULAR STRESSES. THESE :rF:,,"r~ ARf- 1'~l:'\I.l.Y PERFORMED ON SAMPLES OF GENERALLY NON-COHESIVE SOILS, .'\I.TIIOll,11 TilE H.<;T PROCEDURE IS APPLICABLE TO COHESIVE SOILS IF A SUFFICIENTLY "I Ill! nST R.'\TF IS USED.AN ALTERNATE MEANS OF OBTAINING THE DATA RESULTING FROM THE DRAI~E[) TE""1' I . TO PER-FORM AN UNDRAINED TEST IN WHICH SPECIAL EQUIPMENT IS USED TO MEASURE THE POR E IX' ATE R PRESSURES. THE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE TOTAL STRESSES AND THE PORE \t'ATER PRESSl:RES MEASURED ARE THE INTERGRANULAR STRESSES.DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Method of Performing Unconfined Compression and Triaxial Compression Tests Figure 2.5-91

CONSOLIDATION TESTS ARE PERFORMED TO EVALUATE THE VOLUME CHANGES OF SOILS SUBJECTED TO INCREASED LOADS. TIME-CONSOLIDATION AND PRESSURE-CONSOLIDATION CURVES MAY BE PLOT*TED FROM THE DATA OBTAINED IN THE TESTS. ENGINEERING ANALYSES BASED ON THESE CURVES PERMIT ESTIMATES TO BE MADE OF THE PROBABLE MAGNITUDE AND RATE OF SETTLEMENT OF THE TESTED SOILS UNDER APPLIED LOADS.EACH SAMPLE IS TESTED WITHIN BRASS RINGS TWO AND ONE*HALF INCHES IN DIAMETER AND ONE INCH IN LENGTH. UNDIS-TURBED SAMPLES OF IN-PLACE SOILS ARE TESTED IN RINGS II TAKEN FROM THE SAMPUNG DEVICE IN WHICH THE SAMPLES WERE OBTAINED. LOOSE SAMPLES OF SOILS TO BE USED IN CONSTRUCTING EARTH FILLS ARE COMPACTED IN RINGS TO PREDETERMINED CONDITIONS AND TESTED.IN TESTING, THE SAMPLE IS RIGIDLY CONFINED LATERALLY DEAD LOAD-PNEUMATIC BY THE BRASS RING. AXIAL LOADS ARE TRANSMITTED TO THE CONSOLI DOMETER ENDS OF THE SAMPLE BY POROUS DISKS. THE DISKS ALLOW DRAINAGE OF THE LOADED SAMPLE. THE AXIAL COMPRESSION OR EXPANSION OF THE SAMPLE IS MEASURED BY A MICROMETER DIAL INDICATOR AT APPROPRIATE TIME INTERVALS AFTER EACH LOAD INCREMENT IS APPUED. EACH LOAD IS ORDINARILY TWICE THE PRECEDING LOAD. THE IN-CREMENTS ARE SELECTED TO OBTAIN CONSOLIDATION DATA REPRESENTING THE FIELD LOADING CONDITIONS FOR WHICH THE TEST IS BEING PERFORMED. EACH LOAD INCREMENT IS ALLOWED TO ACT OVER AN INTERVAL OF TIME DEPENDENT ON THE TYPE AND EXTENT OF THE SOIL IN THE FIELD.DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Method of Performing Consolidation Tests Figure 2.5-92

PRESSURE IN LBS. / SQ. FT..~8- 8- ~ ~ ~ ~ §- N . -

 ~

02

 ~ ~

r-...

 ~~

04 __- - -0-011 "-

 "~ ~ r-....

BOklNG P*II SAMPLE DE PTH

• 5 I' NOISTUkE CONTENT' 17.2\

DkY DENSITY' II] PCF II

 '" '\

1\1\.1

 \ "" ~ \

r----...12 r-o-. f- ...

 \ .- _.. '- ~---+--- ~. \

.I~*-*- ------ --- ~i -"" - -~joo:

 ---~--I"~~l 1-- .._-----

18'---- -- 1 -----. ___ '-- ._,--,-_ ..L ---I II DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Consolidation Test Data Figure 2.5-93

PRESSURE IN LIlS. / SQ. FT.o o

 §- ~ ~ ~ ~

8- 8-

 ~ r---; ~ ~ ~. ~, .02 ~ ~ -. '- -. '1-. ............... K ..... ...., ~ -~ .. . .......... ~ '- . ' ....1"-. r\ '- - - I':~ r-::=-, ...

I.- BORING 25 S ELEVATION 711.5 FEET ...

 ~.

GRAY SILTY CLAY WITll SAND A/lD SOMli:

 ... V GRAVEL FIELD MOISTURE CONTENT 16.4 'f, ". -.t. .... FIELD DRY DENSITY 114 LBS ./cu . FT , .10 1" * .... I \ \ \ ..... I \ ............J f'... r--.. .... 1\ \ \ .12 r""-- I'- .!"' .... ..... ~ ....... ... \ .I l.->t '~ '\ -- -.

1/ ~f'.. r" j~f\

 .1 \ I " ""k~ \

1'.1'- DORING 28 rs ELEVATION 735.5 FEET

.18 GREENISH-GRAY SILTY CLAY WITH SAND I"... \

AND SOME GRAVEL

 . FIELD MOISTURE CONTENT 17.8 'f, .......... ~

FIELD DRY DENSITY 113 LBS .Icu. FT. r--... I'- ~

 ~ ~

.2.22.2.26.2.30 DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER CO~1PANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Consolidation Test Data Figure 2.5-94

IN LIIiS. / SQ. rr.

 ~ ~ ~

• I

 .... "... .... ... "\\ ~ '. .11et---+-+-t--+4.J:-j+lf---+--I-+-+-+-J-I-W-------l-I~ "'-+.....l'>o-I--I---l-U.u ~~~ ~

r-. .... ~ ~ 1\ \J~----r-i-++-H+I+--+~-='"~""i-.....-+/-::-t+++_ _--+--I-I\.~--+\~~~--I-I

 ~ .... '~'" ..... ----r---f--~ .. \ ~ .11'":'--+-+-t--t--++-l--Hf----+--I-+-+-+-J-I-W--*--'--~.-~.od---l--l-+--+-<~~ -. ~ .I1er----t--t-+-t-lH-+++---t---+-H-++-j-+l---!--+---+-i--t-++-H i .I1......--+-+-t--+-++-lf--Hf---+--I-+-+-+~-I-++----1---+-I-l--.j-+.-i-l--1 .zzt---+----t-+++-f-+++----l---+-.j-.*Hf-+-+-+-+-------+----I---+-+--+-~f...W *24I r---+-+----+-+++-+++---I----l--I---I--H+lI+----+--+---l---l--+-I-.J-+-.,

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Consolidation Test Data Figure 2.5-95

 *0 t-t--ttf.ttiH-+-+-tt++t-H-+-+--+HH*H-+--I---f+f.H+1-+--+--H++-II+-H I::

t-t--t-ttl+t--t-t-t--l++tH-t---I--II---+f++M-::1-+ -t--r--+Hrt+++-+-t---H++-t-f.-+-f---+--l++-++II\'I ~H-

~ .0 t-+--+HH+H+--t---tl++-H-+---'I-+--H+I-HI-l-+:~~~G F~: ~~~~~ mO ,i'\'

IS 60 t-t--ttft+i++-+-tt+t+f:++-+--+H#H,-+,!-+---1I+fH++++-+--t++-I+l+-l. . 40 t-+--tHH+H+-t---tl++-Hl-oHl-+--H+I-HHI-+-+--+l-lH-I-hH-l--4+H-H-+-I§ 60 t-i--tttt+++-+-+--+H++-lH-+-~-+++H+-il---Hr-+-~~+++-1---+H++++-I~ 10 t--1:----+tiH-H-+--1f----t-;++-H-*;+.--1-+--+l+H-+++H,--Itf.t-+t-1~-f---i++t-1+t1 10 t-+--+Hot+++-+---f--+f++H+-l-+--.j.H.H-I-'l-4-\4-------*-- ~r~tttt-~'=--=.t-='-='~~~++-+ Ct>>IILES; fJlrAV£L ! . SAND SIL r 0" CLAY

 ; COA"S£ FINE ;COARSE; MEDIUM 1 FINE 1iO.100 .0 1-+--**t-HH-+-+-tt++t-H+-+-.......... ~+H++-+-+-+--H*I+l++-+--tt++t-t-+-I 1'0 t'-t--'---ttttt+-H-f--++++++.+-+--+--++\l-H++-+--+HH-t+-t-+-+--ttttt++-t

• 70 t-t--+f-f.+1+-!-+--+---l+HI-+-I!+-I---~_++++Jj.+4...J--l--J.J..J;.l..J..-l-...L-l----'-_++H+++--I

~ '0 t--r--+Hrt+++-+--t---H++-+-++-f---+--l++-H\I-it:~~~~GFiN~ ~~~~~~ ~~~O---1+f-H-+-f--j I 60 t-+-+tt.t++++-+---tl+++++-+--f---H+++~~-It#t-I++I+-l-t---++tl+t-H.. 40 t--r---ttI:++H-t---t---H++-t-f.-+-I--+--l++-++I-*,H- " ,-t---++*hf-t-H-I---H+I-H-t--i~ 60 1-+--;#++t-+-+,""",",,"'-'-+++++++-++--I++++1++-+--;ffi+t--H-+--+++++++-I~ 10 t-I----ttIH-Hl-t-t---If-----t+++Hf+--l--f---+H-I-t+*-f\--+,-ttf.f-+++-+-+-tt+++t-H 10 t--t--+HH++-t-+--t--+H+H+-+-+--+H-+t-H+-\'-.:----tl-f:t-t+t-f--t--tttt+H--I

 ~~O~--IO~O......................,..-IO~.....oi!-Io....~--/,j,j.OI.U..I..I..:...........- (1,1,j/;;.:.::. .............I.....-~O.~O~/.......O~.~OM lAIN sUE ", Mlur- rEltS Ct>>IILES!-_~(J.;.;.."A:..;,V.:...::'£.:..='L_ _ -+.___._-~s.;;.;~,;.:ND=...y.-----< SILr 0" CLAY COA"S£ i FINE fa,..Rsi MEDIUM i FlN£ DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Particle Size Analyses Figure 2.5-96

II. S. SrANDJIItD SIEVE SIZE

 .3 IN. .3/4. IN. NO. 4 NO. 10 NO. 40 NO. """0 100 .....,...-"'m~T""".....;~.;;.;;...,,~~i-~~-"""'m~*~-~....;.;;;;"O;~;;.;,v.,...,...,..-'TI"I..,.,..,....., .0 : f- ....... ;' t-+:-- t1iH::++-H-+-+---ttI++H--I t-t----tf-f.tt++-+--+---1ttt-t-1i-!--+-+-++Pl..++-j~t i - -+-'""'4-t-t--lf-t---++++++-+-t I... 80 ~ 70 t-+---.,.-+ti!ttt-+--....-f-~++-H;-+-f-+--l++-~I-*-+--l---H-i+H+-I-+-I--++++++-t-i BORING' 12 ELEVATION 743 LIGHT BROWN PINE TO MEDIUM SAND .0 \: .L. ., ~ t-+---ttI'+4-+-t=~=~:::::::::~~t~;t:~:::::::::::::~t~8~'i--+--l- '---I-..l.['I;I~!~~~:::~~:::~:::::::::~:::::-:::

i l i i I~ "'0 t-t--H+.I+++-l-t--++++-+++-1---jf--+lI++-f-+-i,'.\-,--!----!---+J. 1

 *1:1-H-+-+-+----jIttt+++-1 lo: +-+-+-+--+t-t++-1H--+--+--+t-H-t+-;,H,+--t---t-'-,,!++-H-_+_-+--+ttH+H... 40 t-+---+ti:++t-+-+-f-~++-+-++-f-+--l++-~H:if-~,-l---H-*4+H---I--++++++-t-i

§ ",0 1-+----ttl!t++-+-+~-_++H+++_+_+-+++1f+++~l--+4H-I+_f_t-+--__t+1++t_H

~

lr ZO I-+---+ffit+-t-+-i--H-H+-i+--+--+--+mf++++-ll\r-t---+t!<H-+-IH-+--I---1+ttt+-+-t

 ~-l--++++++-*--+\~-H-l;++t-+-+---f---

10 t-+--ttf.f-I-If-!-+-+--+++-H-H-+-+--+H++H-+~,:---++f:H+1-+-t--tftrrt-H

I --

 ~O~O~-":"'O~O~:!"-i-""'''''-:",O~'~ ...........+--I.l.I.O.....I..I..o~il-l-.....-a.~,~::::.:c:lIoI. ..............-O~.O~/~""""'!O~.OO.3 ~AIN sizE IN WLtr--rE"S . G..AV"-' .......

COIJIILES;;...---'-'--!-:.::' ......:....--+.--.....--.....:..,..'-:...,------:

.;, S/Lr 0" CLA.,.

 ; COA"SE FINE ~S!j MEDIUM ~ FINE .3 IN. NO.eoO .0 I-t--fttl+++-f-t--++++-++.'i+-i---jf--+I++f-l-iH-+--tf*H-I-t-t--ttttt+t-t t-+---+ti!tt+-+-+-f-~++-+-I+-~+--H+H-Hl-_+_-+--+t#+-H_H-t_---1Itti+t_t_l *"1 170 ~:::~:::::::::~~~tt~:::t:::~:::::::::~~tt~t:::~~~~\.:::~H~+~~+-~I-~GI-BiI-~~-1WNC-t1l-~+-~-A~-6H-ON*coj--IH~I-E+-S-tA-ND- _~It H~-tl--+-~ ... 80 1-1-_-_- ++-1 \. WIT!! SO..ME GRAVEL i~ ",0 t~ .0 t-+---+ti:t++-+-+---t---+l*+-++-f-+-~H+H-Hl-_+_-+-_t+#+-H_H-t_-IItti+t_t_l t---t--t+r.-t++-+ -+-~------

t--I--++t.H++-+-+--+++++++-+-f---+fIt++++-+-+------iH-f:t-t+t-+--+--+trtH-+i... 40 t-+---+ti:+++-+-+-f-~++-+-r.-+-f-+--H+N-I-+-t--+-_t+_f.+_H_H-t_-IItti+t_+_t§ "'0 t--I--+l-ft++t-+--+---+++H-H-+-f---++f+f-\+-+-+------irtr.+-t+t-+-+--+trtH-+i~~ ZO 1-+---1-Hi-H4-!---J--+-+4-I-H+-I-~-H+++-Hl,I\+_+_-~_++_H__t-_+ttt+++_I 10 1-4--+4;.1-l-+-J.-4----+---+l*+-r..+-l-+--H+H-Hl-,-l1~"+--I#*I_++_+--++++-t+H I r--

 ~D~O....lo--IO~O!ol;~.l..l..........i--IO~.......l!-"o.....~--/.....O~I.I-il.: .........-~a.~/"!i:::*. ..I.oIoo.........-O~.~O/~--O~.O~(U ~AIN sizE IN M'LrTEWS G"AflEL SANO COIJIILES~;..:---=-:..;;..;:;,;;;-.---+i--....,.---=-.....:...,....-------1 SILT Oil CLA.,.

COA"SE FME ;a:wrS!j MEDIUM FINE DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Particle Size Analyses Figure 2.5-97

U. s. SrANDARO SIEII'E SIZE

 -+-- f-Lf'.;1:...... - i~:; ~ N. ~/*. IN. 1/0,. NO. 10 1/0,. 40 NO. 100 i1; f- ~,- - f*,.i':!+-H1H-+--+--+':'t'+-t-t---t---t -+: 1 - ' 1+

100 f--+--- L I_j !

 .0 II' I ' ........ '1' ; I: I;ill

""0 1 - - - - rl~ - t_t_-. - ;T 1-11 --r-;-';,++-+-f--f---++++-++H I -------~+~l'*-t 70 _.-.1.~ 110' iii , - I j:: , i

 ~ -1_-,-_- * ,-t-I LL n;;O~ING 4 i 1,115.. _Ei.E"ATION n -- - I; iff H;4!"-+++-+-+--H++++-----t-i LI~I' !lR(;Ii~ PINE TO MEDIUM SAND ~

736

 ......,..----r--r---+H++-t-t----t i

J--+---It-ft-t*H-+-- .(--~~-t~'__I____~+_--t-t-th\l-ii.*__ J __ . ~lli-H--HI-t---f+H+++-t I~i 10:

 ,f0 1--1---- . --l-~-f'--4J.u..~l___+-l~_+fJ+WH--I"---J.+-4+-l-t----jftH+t+--l I ~_, -+I ' II +----+I,l-ki ++-+--+----1I--+++++t---t-t .:>t-,

.. :00 L.i +1_ ~ -- Lit... * +--+---TH+++-~.;' I\- 'I' - j: -" ~~ -+++-I-j-~+++++-+----t§ .,1--1----- .

 -, ~ ': \ , I:

1 t_ -- *

• t*~-t------ H - --~' }~ i Hi ~ -l-f--' I ~

~:~ i H i l\

60 dt --- 1---- f'~lit-+-+-+-t---f- 11 10 o 1-- j----Ir.+~'t,tl r-t-t- Ii!* --. -.. 1+ ~ i -i'-t+ --f-+---+--+-f-f-:HI,+t---t SOO 100 : .~ 10*

 !.' AIM itrE 1.0 IN .LI~rE"S ~ Q.I .i::. 0.01 o.oo~

t1IIAII'EL SA/IID COMILES;..:.:--.:::::::;.=.=---i!'--....,.---=:=-,- --i "IL I" Oil CLAY

 ; COAlrSE i 'litE ;CnflrSlj MEDIUM: "ItE U,S. SrANDARO SIEII'£ SIZE 100 _ _-.,.~;,...IN,;.'. .......;;.;~I'-~i-.IN._*...,. I/O,~.;..-NO..;;;.".;.IO.;...,.....,.....;.I/O,,;;;.;,..;;;.O;...._ _NO .......20;..;...;,O ~'!""I""r__ ..

lJ +,---~ .L U -t- .Jt~ ~ ' -L'i~~!W-+- f---

 .0 1--+--++f.++H-+--+-*,-++.j;.'+'-';-~-ll'i-'I++~;---+-'--L.'--+'.1;-";.~.+I'-+-+--tift-l--t+-t-t -- -- :~ I +__'-c-I~. i N - t Ht+ H*-+----If-t!+tt++-t ct>>IILES ~_--=:GII.:::":;II:.=.~::.'L_ _.....i'-_....,.--..:s.='A/IID=-.~---_i ",Lr Oil CLAY COAIISE 1 'IIIE jaWrslj MEDIUII ~ "itE DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Particle Size Analyses Figure 2.5-98

 /I. S. SrANOARD SIEVE SIZE 100 . -_ _~~~IN_.~_,,_/'f+-'N._,~_Na-r!"_'f _NO._..*'O=-~_N_a';..'f_O N(]_, 2O~0 "",,_"'!"'I"~ "0 ---lifo,I,lil"r'-','--

II ~III'

 -.t', - lW~,i~-;-!-:-:-~.

• r;x,L, ji,:,.:.'i'*'-t'f-+----H-I-

 " '.1 Ii L...L ... 60 f - --- lli: ~ i-I I; ,~ ',i .:. .....: fH,:I:,~_ +- -- ~LLi ,I I'~i ! iii \ - H; ,1 ( __L. 11 j.. ~-

I '::', I I iiii i i170 t'

 . ,; I .; f ;1.~~;.~~-L - t': 1. -~'I" --

I,:i'.t

 ~\ n", ,',-, . ':\H,,,-'." .;',,;', - '~iLVATION '1"3 ,SAND wITH SOME CLAY

• I'jjl;r:+-~--- II~ 1++,( h\i i'H -~"---- t,L" --

 .'I:~,- ....;.'-!=i---++++-1-1:;..J....+-+-_~,"....'+'1-" ~-l_-+,-<': .... I 1-+-1-+-+_-++:-+++-+-+-1 1 1 - 60 .;......;. t-.,....' -- - ,:,;, :! L __ '+~ijiLI;'.*,*~,\i, I:.,',:,:" -\--1, it Jl:; so f-~_~~---1E!--tl'*!tl-f.-~ +-+-++'+++ ;.-' '+-i'_--\-'-__ +~-H~-+--+--_-+,-+i '~!+-t--H i;:- 'f0 1 - " - _ +~.

k,: I ~

 ~

pu iI I: I

 ~L .'- Ull. ~;- \'

II1I :1

'::, t:,' ! j' f:j

~!oj -'0

[ - .-- II~I: i , I I!! ~-~.- -III, ' 1 iI' , , I 1111'

 ~ j

\

\

': h,,1-i-i+,--+-

ii:

 ----- ill_ - .-~ 1#1' -;-~ Ii -j ~-I- -t IT l "ktt"--l Hi 11; '"~ 20_~_ ~+':;I" ,~.

_-_Liiu; i! II i:I j'TI:' IiI 10 I iI I

 ~o~o-----...-'--_~;...~:..i ,.j""j,,"';'!_'"~~_-_---...r....il!.I.-+!o..l,-....;--I......_.l.l.i.i1'..1.~~....~-O._ ......I f...!......I_t...-...I-...-_-....'~:jI,HI--~-+..+~

1 l

 .. 100; 10 MAIN SFE 10:

iN MIL~rERS 0.1;i 0.01 0.00:1 COBBLES;:,:---_ _G.:..:.R.:..:.~,;..:V~:..:L:....__ _i_-___:---=SA=N.='D~----......; slLr OR CLAY COARSE FINE icoARSi; MEDIUM! FINE

 /I, S. SrANOARD SIEVE SIZE " IN, 3/'f IN. NO. 'f NO. 10 Na 'f0 NO. 200 100 ....- __~~--.,;-"""'T~~- __;_;..~------~ ....--~-.,...~.,......, -- i~:; ,.1i:IKj---'-- iii; j-f-t-rHH -+ I i++'++-+-I* :00 if:', 1-:, ~",' ; l Ii ~ iL"~ ...... - ,JI Li it "'" .1 n ,I jJ~.I.+_

,:1 I

 ----- ~

I:i' i " I Ii I,;, -_ .. r; .!ilU -- ------:~i; \" .i' L __ . I j I L:.1 1 --' - -- ill+- HORINI) ,.~ I~ ELEVimoN 733 E I ~: . :!'\i ' ~.I0HT RROWN FTNE TO COARSE SAND rr II -

 - - - _. -t,;---

Ii 70 I E Ull' , , 1 .ITH 3<lME GRAVEL -+++;-I-.........--t~60- .---- H~'I t i E--'lli+~'j It ~'~'-I to. ;mi-t*!--+----

 -_- ..1::, L E III 'I' Il! .l\i j f'-- ,.1:!

so 1 ,I' E l i l"i

ii' I ~:. ' "I iO: !~Ii ~: ---fHt ~ f-----W,inV* ~-- Ht+-++-+--f---

§:: I ~! iJJ i Ii-H I ~ it t ~ 1\ I -- - ~ I i ei ---+~tt+--;-**:: ~+--20 I---+---I~++--"--f---+++

 .. ~+l t."~-\. --Hit.' . - -- - . -H IIH! --1-+' ~ ,~++~__I~-+W+l._f_'!i__'___\'-_tl*f+_!_+_+--++H+t-t i:'1 1 t--~---H'7i:! E I: , +1 i! ' I' lit;!

I i1 ti\--- 1m - --I -

i '

 ,I:

j': ,m

 ,i~H ~--+- ~H i j ~ - ~~O~-I-=Ol:"q....:.': ........---~-t~o,j"j"j,~"'"-I..o-+- ...... ,.O~ ........

rH:.) ~;-!-'-..l:ll!l ++----- ~ 1--

 , ............~I1~/..:i::IW.I.ooo............""""':a:":!.a~1 .......~0~.01>>*

MAIN SIzE IN IIIL~rERS etmBL£S ~ __ GRAVEL SAND SILr OR CLAY i COARSE: FINE icoARsi; /IIEDIUM 1 FINE DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDAT~D FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Particle Size Analyses Figure 2.5-99

II. S. SrANDIIRD SIEVE SIZE

 ~ IN. ~/". IN. 1tO." NO. .10 NO.. "0 NO. 100

H lOOr-~-~~~..;.;...;p.;;~~~~~~~~~~;';"--';';';~~~....,.-~m"T""'"

 ~=t==j:!~i.:;.f.-J,t+H--+:_'-j-'=t=~.r:I+1 +-+.1 -+--+'--_":'-+J;I.jl'-1-t-I!-+-i~j-~.J,; _'+..1---,.-.1+:1;-¥.1Ill'H:-t:Hi-t-it- 1---11...:iH-i+1-1 1 .0 J-'

i t +'+-~---\+++-I-f.--I--+-+---tt-J-N--+~~.l.to_III:!1 I I I I 1.I-L-U.-1--l-.i r--f----- ; i I BORING 30 r~ Ei.i::VATION 742 110

 !IU_i +-

t-BROWN FINE TO MEDIUM SAND wITH SOME SILT I 70 f-+-- r' +. Iii~ 60- _.! ;t;t I; ; \ - - it~!t I-f-- .~:t** t- ,-' !~+-+-+- --!.f0 "0

 --f----~; i ~ j~. I -J--t++'+~ +-+--tr--.-+l-t+t-+;r;.. \ '---- H~~'Ht1-+-1I---+'-+'-*H+++-If-+-*-t t -L,F,---

I I I II~ r--f--; I J \~ ~O ;j I~ ~H j. ~-+\-.- J1 11 I'20 t .-:- .- "" ' '"N-Lt1r.i;'-+-+---+-i

 +. . , Ii; I i

10 1--f--*++-If-I--+-+-+4++H+-+--+Hf++H--+--+--++:r:'-i-H~-+--tl+t-t-t-H IT' I ~ '~--++++++r+-+-- il-++-+-+--t+-IH--t-+ d

 ~oLo...J._,-0~0';;';W~.J-"""'-,0..LlJ.u.J!.J....l..4-..l/.~ou.l.J..!Li .........L.-~o.U.,~.:~::u..J......l-.....--:O~.O~I.u..I.D~.~OO*~

MAIN SizE IN IIILIfMErEIIS COBBLES ~ (J,~'It..:.;."'.;..V~=.:'L=--_-+i_ _..,.._ _=.:SA..;;.N.;.:.'D..,- ---;SILr Oil CLAY i COARSE i FINE ;COARSC; MEDIIIII i FINE

 ~ IN.

GRAVEL SAND COBIILES ';...::.---..,....:c=-----.,i!--....,.--...:..-~,-- __- _! SILr Oil CLAY COARSE FINE 1cOA"'sC; MEDIIIII i FINE DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Particle Size Analyses Figure 2.5-100

BORING 232 RATE OF PENETRATION SECONDS PER FOOT o 20 40 60 80 100

 ~

I

• 6'VOIo

 ~ 4' VOID 10 -I~- - - - 3' VOID I

20 ~

 ~ ~- ~'-='-- ~--

3 hj 30 ~L&J IL L....Z

 .~

c 40 120

~Q.W Q

• r 50 -i,20 50 r-I~5 t--: 0 I

60 ---- - - ~12) r----t 60

 'IO ~I ........

100

 -165 70 120 ~

80 ~ :DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Typical Probing Log Figure 2.5-101

lo_ ~ ..cu*1c ..J.p,

• Po_~/~

 '"tMf. Caclu Rallicia. Iowa hfe ....... 9/:6/84 " . ........ 184JlZ-O S""l- .L ..1=

SW- l

 * - I j .II 1 ]1~ ij * .- ~ ~ !i

11) jUn ..

h )1

 ':1 1- *>> jJ ii Jj J"'"'\.

S.I_ Elevation a 756.2:H U

 !.o~s~e_ _ _ _ _ _ - /

Gray to Brown !1ediUll Sand **Lee 4.3 ~p Trace Clay, Trace Gravel s- Fine from 10.5 to 13.0 SP Reddish from 13.0 to 17.0*

 .;I-55 4o 2.7 - '3-s5 11 l.OO 8.2 SP 10-14*55 lZ - 13.0~ SP Very Oense to loose. looser With Oellth 1:

WD

 ~-55 a - SP 15- ~ ~ .~---

Brown Sand~ Silty Cla~Trace r.ravel liJ-S5 t:2 - - 32.1 - CL 20*Stiff

 ""~

Gray ~edium Sand. Fine Below *

 ~-S5 10 - - - - SP 25- 27.0. ~edium Dense

- ""..I-iS ~j - - - - SP ~o*

 ~ ~ i-_ ""'-55 ~ l.24 0.i5 40 1 - Ml*CL 35- ** Gray Clayey Silt. With Fine Sand Below 37.0, Firm to Stiff With Sand SellllS * ~u-S'" - - 0.50 25.3

• Ml-CL" .... Wntlnued ,J";:) Ieee
• at _

 '-D.

_ .1M _ _. _ [ITI ___1 _

• _ _ In'. _ , , , _ I. tI.. la_.,...,.

SHIVE -HATTERY ENGINEERS Record of Subsurface Exploration DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring RW-l Fiqure 2.5-102 (Sheet 1)Revision 5 - 6/87

 ......... lova ~sccr1c Liane , Povar/a.£C Csdar ReDid.. tova .......... ltW-! Dol.......... 9C6/84 ",.... It-. 184m-r, o Coa:1nuad FroID Sheec! of ~ *.~--------- ** Gray ~fity Clay Trace ~ine Sand.

I_~~ n III 10 I" ~n '1; Q _ CL

~~....II....1f.11-'l:L..f~llf-'~fo=--+-='-¥o+'1 Fi", to Stiff

• Wi tJl Sand SealllS

 ,DIT Bocca. ~t 30rtnl! j9.;'

Borial 3&ckftll.d 9/;G/84 65.70*75._ A. ,...._ _ (ITI _....._ *_ _ 1 ,. I " 1._.....,.SHIVE -HATTERY ENGINEERS Record of Subsurface Exploration DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring RW-l Fiqure 2.5- 102 (Sheet 2)Revis10n 5 - 6/87

 ......... [ _ UeccI:1c Ulllt 4 P_r/DAiC

(...... R~~I .. - 1_-lUi-l 91:5/84 ".... Me. 14431::-0 S.... ..L ~

 .I 1~i..!; .- - .- lJ__ ...... -...** t. d I-i lsI

• In

 .f J jjJ l,. jJ Ie 11 1.J h,,-;*

a~ r1 Elevation

• 7SS.Z!

 ~ L--AowtoMS--- - -- - -~-

U l-I-h-.s Cl.Brown Sandy Silty Clay Trace Gravel, Hal"d H- .4.50 7.5 - 5~ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _._

 ~-5S Jj - - S.O - SW Brown Sand With Gravel. Dense iJ-ss III - - 8.0 - SP 100-Brown Fine Sand. Reddish With Clay Fro. 10.5 to 13.0, Hedl~ Dense to -- ~_":C J _ - lIu. SP Loose lIDo! '5-S5 "- - - - SP t- - IS-cr.-.s - -

10 - - SP 20-I-

~ -------------- -- '"7-ss SP 2S* . Gray Madi u. Sand. \Otth Gravel Seaas Fine Be!ow Z7.0', Medi~ Dense ",,-55 til - - - - SP 30' l-I- ------------ * . - 'u 25.6 _ Gray Clayey Silt, With Fine Sand r<J_cc II 141 In 3S- Below 31.0', Fi,. to Stiff .--. c_,_

j.!1l-.1 - ML/CL 40-I- - Con c1nued lln .sheec ~ 0) t ~

 ...... ,. $lief'" _ [STI _ _, _ ~ I. ,... 'a_.ewy.

SHIVE-HATTERY ENGINEERS Record of Subsurface Exploration DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring RW-2 Fiqure 2.5-103 (Sheet 1)Revision 5 - 6/87

1.0"'. w..c~nc u.an~ ;, Pover/llAI::C Cedar Rapids. t _lert...... !l'J-2 .,... ....... 9/25/84 "..... !843t2-'l S"'fL-"~i ii .J -;-1=... .-; -- J* 1

 ~ ~ ......... .I]

i-

 ~

ll)

 **:1 lnh 1} II I.. i H l>> U a.-; i~ i-. .. .,II ~. ~

I-

 ~ 40 l-oon:1nued FrOll Sh** t 1 of ~

i-Gray Sandy Silty Clay, '/ery Stiff 11-:;5 10 - 1.30 18.S - CI 5-

 ~

12-55 21 - I rl SO-

 ~

• l-n

 - ~--------- -

• i- Moderately ~eathered Limestone

 ~ 55 i-i-

60

 =.

• I Bo~~o.

Boring of Sorillg! 59.Sac~fill.d 9/~3ia4 I-

 ~ 65.

i-i-i-70*

** 75.

a-a._ A" _... ,_ lnl ._'1_ ......... ,_ -'_ '" ,... I._~.SHIVE -HATTERY ENGINEERS Record of Subsurface Exploration DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring RW-2 Fiqure 2.5- 103 (Sheet 2)Revision 5 - 6/87

 ,....... Iowa l::lcc!:rk u.p!: " Paver eo......,/1lA£C Cadar !taD tds Tov.

su.' hte ........ Q,,§/84 ............ 18431"4 S.... ~ .. ~j

 -i1 .-. -.I; Ii--*

u I -~ ......... .11 t-III 1Ub e- ~i~ d

 *>> U a* "'I !l I" I s-t_ ~! ~, ~ ~ ~ ~ Co~tiDued from Sheet 1 of 2 I- ~ -f-------- - - -

• Gray Sandy Silty Clay, 1-11-51 - 1.09 1.25 19.7 111.8 CL 45'
• Very Stiff Stiff to

 ~ ~

hZ-55 13 1.:'5 1.31> 20.9 - CL SO.

• • • "1--------- -_.

 ~derately weathered Limestone

~~ 55.

 ~ ~ottoa at Sortng! 36.0' ~

• Soring Sac:killled 9/:7/84

 ~ ~ 60.

~,

• 65' *

 ~. " !-- 70'

~.

• 75.

 ..... A. ___ IITI _1___ 1_ ~ ,. I'" ,_*....,.

SHIVE-HATTERY ENGINEERS Record of Subsurface Exploration DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring RW-3 Fiqure 2.5- 104 (Sheet 2)Revision 5 - 6/87

 ......... lava Eleccr1c: LJ.lI/lc C"da .. ~"fti~. 1~Wll .so Povu/OAEC ...... Me. RW-3 De.......... 9/27/84 "..... Me. 184312-0 S..... 2.-.. 2 i -.I: .- .--*.* I ...........

• Jl h11 U h
• i 1 .. -*

1-2

 ~ .Ii ~

n h*111 j )Il

 **i . i.. lJ- . 'II ~ ij **

j~ I_ Elevation

• 752.0! II U

Sand With and Clay B~o.n G~avel

 ~" ~

b.-55 12 0.::19 ... 30 22. - CL 5 Da~k G~ay Silty Clay, Stiff f-;l-5T - 1.58 1.2 33. 88.1 CL 1"3-55 3 1.lb O.7S 22. - CL 10- Light G~ay Sandy Silty Clay

 ..-55 i - 0.2;; ". - CL Fi to Stiff 1"1I ---------_.- ~I: "'5-55 12 - SC 's- Medi.

Light G~ay Silty Clayey Med1~ Sand.Dense"

 ~-----

oD-S5 J4;. - . - SP 20*8~o.n MediWi S.nd T~ace r.~avel. Dense

~~ ~----------~

• 7-55 39 - SW Light G~ay Sand T~ace G~avel. Clnse 25-

 - - -Clayey - -Silty - -Fine-Sand.---

Da~k C~ay

 !I-55 :'i .. SH 30*

Dense

• Sand With Silt. HediUll Dense G~ay 9-55 2b - - SW 35-

~~~

 -' . ,l ". 11 311 24.9 _ .., leI

• G~ay Clayey Silt. Finn to Stiff

~

 ~nclClu.d ~n She.t ~ ~t 1 .

a-a*

 . . . lUI - . . . , _ ISTI _ 1 _ c_ _ 1_ ,.._ _ 'll ,... I.........".

SHIVE-HATTERY ENGINEERS Record of Subsurface Exploration DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring RW-3 Fiqure 2.5-104 (Sheet 1)ReV1Sl0n 5 - 6/87

 .......... Lowa Uecu':ic l.1l1iu: " P_~/DA£C C..da~ Rall:ida, Iowa 1lW-4 DeN ........ 9/28/84 ............. 1S4J12-o U ... ~ ~ -.1=

i

• J

 * !lIb 1 .......... ..J ~

Ji h,,-;* 1]" i*il)

 **:i j)h =1 1-; jJ -

lor is.- EleYat10n

• 752.S:

H U

• u .~

Dark Gray Silty Clayey Sand Trace Gravel l- I** Medf.. Dense r'i.ss IJ - 2.30 t2.2 - SW

 "%-ST - 0.87 1.00 30.6 91.0 CL Gray Silty Clay, With Fine Sand OHr! ,.l-ST - 1.48 0.50 30.3 95.1 CL 10-Below 11.0, Finn to Stiff ':'-S5 10 0.70 0.25 29.6 - CL. wI: ;I-S5 14 - 15.2 - CL I- ~

IS.

 -~---- - --------

I-Brown to Gray, Medium to Fine Sand

 'i.-S5 - 16.3 - SP 20- ~lth Silt, Mediwa Oense to ~ense ]3 -

i-55 21 - - 20.3 - SM 25-I-

~

Lo-5S 1-.

 :; 22 1- SP 30* ,

oi/-ST - - .- - - - 35- Gray Sandy Silty Clay, 1ery Stiff ---

'0-S1 - 2.00 .75 18.0 13.9 CL .A.

~ Concinu~ on Sheec ~ ~f 2 -

 '-De lief. All - - . . _ (ITI .... f1_ ._...... ,.... __ I* *Ile ,...........

SHIVE -HATTERY ENGINEERS Record of Subsurface Exploration DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring RW-4 FiQure 2.5-105 (Sheet 1)Revision 5 - 6/87

 ,....... l _ Ueceric ~C " rovu/DAIC Cedar RaDids. towa Dele ....... ""S/84 "..... ... '3 431 "-0 SIIMf~"~

S!lri 111 iIlh if -Ijy ..I ia-1i .-

• ij- J j II I- ji 1...- Ii i- **

i-i-

• CoDciaued Fro. Sheec I ~t ~

~ 'A~~l-SS :. 1z.70 4.;)0 20.0 Cl.

5' *-i- -*i-i-i-

 ~.

Mader.cel, We.Chered Ll..stane~I-~ -55 3occo. of ~orin;: 3~.j'~Sorine ~.ckiil~.d ~j~S/S.~~~~. 60' i-~~.~I-I-

65. -

I-~ **!- 70* . --i-i- -l-I-~~7S-_ ** _ _ _ (STI - ' _ c_.____ I..... ,_ _ _*SHIVE -HATTERY ENGINEERS Record of Subsurface Exploration DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Bori-ngs - Bori ng RW-4 Fiqure 2.5*105 (Sheet 2)Revision 5 - 6/87

 =,. :=17"..::... ...--.-.... ---1-'--"1*--- _. 1------- ---:.-,;- r;-1~1"""

1-........-

 ~:-;:- .......-----. -r......... ...-- , - u .*onu.'

U

 -~

TH.' ".s'ntI'.J_00 UI 1.'11 La. _ 3 *** CI_

 ~

I

 -I 1*

II --- --tl.~.~..~~~~~t~~~ '".J 1.0

• 2'0 .0 ** **

I .. ,. ** ** I **

 ,, 0 I

I'_n

1... n.o*

n..a.:t.

 *.., ;l!Z. a ..& * . - .

i._ te

 ~CI.l -...a. IILMcur&cy*

11 11 III ., I.

l. / 0. ,.. - 2** ' cat

 '21.' J1 11.0-".5' JUly

• pl'-Cleuy. Q~.a&c

 ...., elav * .... ....,....'" lcatf ..... r;; =-er lQ,,) cp. no-* 1.5 -:st j l **** _ l a y e C ~ tU- 2.0 oat II * * * : 0. U~ 2.5 CIt , ... J II* - . ---. ....- T-DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGKT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring B-1 fiqure 2.5-106 Revision 5 - 6/87

 / -s.' .....& t__ .----

1.....,..

 - ........... -._...- 1"'-1--'-- .....-- . . . ., ........ ItdltU" ......,., S' SouU . f 'nlnl "un,l -------- 1--'.....'....

3 * ...::::..I u I

 ---1-."'.J. 1 - - -

I_ " ]"u.s'noJ.'I Sl.S I SI.s'nN.'Sl.S' rIfq~Iii!

 ,i::'.. Ii; l' I: I' .

I : - --- --

 ** ' : r , . *. J

• 2- .... weI I.,... AtIIlIeI' wi.U1 n .. to coane ,....ly

 ..Utll' .- . . . .1' to ** t. to .... ....... SAlMI. I t , . . te ...., u.s'. M" ...... tiiie , ...u..o>rill " 11 lor aut_ (SI')

J.,"U.S* u.,t .....U ' _ .U,&.WitJI J- u ..

 ,. I>&t_

I **

• vo.,. _a _ of .way

 ]' .Ut . .uat.t.r t.S* ~_cl-. . !lie &C

'lU'" ** ,. 1 OJ ] 11 u.s ft.u.,.,..**01.,.1__ tnFia-.0' U4Ilt 011&1' _ "'Ui u _1'.5-14.0' S - . , .....a* .-..

 ~:i~7;:i:l:r.~;~~_::~.

21 :;,1.;.. ! ~~ 0,.... 1." ... -=~MJ.c 0tI!N' 31 ~;;-:~i:~.:li:" to~~~!':=1&y* * * * & (e:t.J s 11

 * ,. II U .. .J "

4' .""'0_._I..t..

 ~:-~;:: ~~.:!t;~~*

p.1MciUtT.(~I u." 1f"."J.

• OS! n" Z.I ** f II 11 1 IS l' U Z'
• IU- 1.15 **

I.II 11

• II II 11 1M.' 51

 . . . . . . . . 51.5* -.lo ........

Sl.S' ta . . . '/llnl *

 .--..---- -..~ . "Z DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring B-2 FiQure 2.5-107 Revision 5 - 6/87

80RIH' LOG_ .*r orr elM h U " , 4" _ .r ..4 ("4 1. 12'- . . . . ., *

 ..... orr _I I" II' I*. ,...,..,

r:.III dl;!II iI t*I: .::

 'Ii iii Ii I ... . II / -- ,z*** G:l. . . .

7n.7 I.7'S.~

• II 14 U 7n.7 I 'J au 12 n 13

,,,,,1 ..l u to ., n 17 n .,1&11 U II LI 24 12 nS.7 J'.O-*41.J" SU,ty SoUCI. 1I'a". -.u...

 ~" _je** tl'.ci""iJ...,. t1ae to .-J.. . 'RaJ.aed ¥ita 4'

tl'.c. ~111II'U . . ,.

• 711.~

71S.7_ . ~

 .~ - I-J DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring B-3 Fiqure 2.5-108 Revision 5 - 6/87

 - /-I-m * ., OIf _ a.u_

r_I ~** cu- f ,.orf -

 '--1-1-U.S',,,,, ..." . . . . '--;: ' - , 1 --

I u.s' ,o.s* ,n.o*

 ...-...... ---1---'....--,_.. ,-- -

1"

 '/l,ne 1121/71 I J. _ _ CMi 71 I~" --

I 11 I I ISl.. * ** *nu..J * ** 1 1 _1.1 ~11 I,..JlllllClWAI' _so 11 It 21 II 21

• nl.'

_ne_;.-=_I..o-n .*'

':us::

 ** J-IS ** '

7.o-U.O'

 /'oed¥ , . _

lIP' e-ee.

 ~- !~_

tD

 ~& . . . .

D2Ulu.. w,,,,

 . . . .,h ...

J. a_cew.1.

• 1t, I..... lllal*

t't.vita C* * .,...._~l.U.o-lS." ,...

 . . -. ..u.... .. ~.I. pay "1' 11<

811 IS SO 20 n 27 02_1&11 14 U 2. U ." H.o-n." SU"l1y _IUt ~ cUi", _ eNne ....

 .... ql'. . .l, ~. . . .

8 II U 22 U U ~".I' ........2'7.G-)l.O' ":ray wtu ..... tit ca ..... 11.11,...... c.l.a, 121**

 "11 u 2' 12 12

• Ill**

II II 11 U m:!I l l**In**III.' to so til: I b

 ....... .. .. -...~

DUANE ARNOLD ENERGY CENTER IOWA ELECTRIC LIGHT & POWER COMPANY UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT Log of Borings - Boring 8-4 Fiqure 2.5-109

 ~evision 5 - 6/87}}