FINAL

Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Round 9 - Dam Assessment Report

Clinch River Power Plant Ash Pond Management Units Appalachian Power d/b/a American Electric Power Carbo, VA

Prepared for:

United States Environmental Protection Agency Office of Resource Conservation and Recovery

Prepared by:

Dewberry & Davis, LLC Fairfax, Virginia

Under Contract Number: EP-09W001727 December 2011

FINAL INTRODUCTION, SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The release of over five million cubic yards of coal combustion residue from the Tennessee Valley Authority’s Kingston, Tennessee facility in December 2008, which flooded more than 300 acres of land and damaged homes and property, is a wake-up call for diligence on coal combustion residue disposal units. A first step toward this goal is to assess the stability and functionality of the ash impoundments and other units, then quickly take any needed corrective measures.

This assessment of the stability and functionality of the Clinch River Power Station Ash Pond Management Units (Bottom Ash Pond 1A/1B and Bottom Ash Pond 2) is based on a review of available documents and a site assessment conducted by Dewberry personnel on February 17, 2011. In general, we found the supporting technical documentation provided to be adequate for preparation of this report (Section 1.1.3). For the purpose of this report, Bottom Ash Pond 1A/1B is defined as Ash Pond 1 and Bottom Ash Pond 2 is defined as Ash Pond 2. In summary, Ash Pond 1 is rated FAIR and Ash Pond 2 is rated POOR for continued safe and reliable operation.

An engineer from the Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Dam Safety and Floodplain Management (DCR DSFM) has indicated that the Commonwealth of Virginia plans to take action in 2012 to investigate potential hydrologic and structural stability issues with both Ash Ponds 1 and 2.

PURPOSE AND SCOPE

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is investigating the potential for catastrophic failure of Coal Combustion Surface Impoundments (i.e., management unit) from occurring at electric utilities in an effort to protect lives and property from the consequences of a dam failure or the improper release of impounded slurry. The EPA initiative is intended to identify conditions that may adversely affect the structural stability and functionality of a management unit and its appurtenant structures (if present); to note the extent of deterioration (if present), status of maintenance and/or a need for immediate repair; to evaluate conformity with current design and construction practices; and to determine the hazard potential classification for units not currently classified by the management unit owner or by a state or federal agency. The initiative will address management units that are classified as having a Less-than-Low, Low, Significant, or High Hazard Potential ranking (for Classification, see pp. 3-8 of the 2004 Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety).

In early 2009, the EPA sent letters to coal-fired electric utilities seeking information on the safety of surface impoundments and similar facilities that receive liquid-borne material that store or Clinch River Power Plant ii American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL dispose of coal combustion residue. This letter was issued under the authority of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) Section 104(e), to assist the Agency in assessing the structural stability and functionality of such management units, including which facilities should be visited to perform a safety assessment of the berms, dikes, and dams used in the construction of these impoundments.

EPA requested that utility companies identify all management units including surface impoundments or similar diked or bermed management units or management units designated as landfills that receive liquid-borne material used for the storage or disposal of residuals or by- products from the combustion of coal, including, but not limited to, fly ash, bottom ash, boiler slag, or flue gas emission control residuals. Utility companies provided information on the size, design, age and the amount of material placed in the units (See Appendix C).

The purpose of this report is to evaluate the condition and potential of residue release from management units for hazard potential classification. This evaluation included a site visit. Prior to conducting the site visit, a two-person team reviewed the information submitted to EPA, reviewed any relevant publicly available information from state or federal agencies regarding the unit hazard potential classification (if any) and accepted information provided via telephone communication with the management unit Owner (Appalachian Power d/b/a American Electric Power). Also, after the field visit, additional information was received by Dewberry & Davis LLC from the Owner about the Clinch River Ash Pond Management Units. The additional information was reviewed and also used in preparation of this report.

This report presents the opinion of the assessment team as to the potential of catastrophic failure and reports on the condition of the management unit(s).

Note: The terms “embankment”, “berm”, “dike” and “dam” are used interchangeably within this report, as are the terms “pond”, “basin”, and “impoundment”.

LIMITATIONS The assessment of dam safety reported herein is based on field observations and review of readily available information provided by the owner/operator of the subject coal combustion residue management unit(s). Qualified Dewberry engineering personnel performed the field observations and review and made the assessment in conformance with the required scope of work and in accordance with reasonable and acceptable engineering practices. No other warranty, either written or implied, is made with regard to our assessment of dam safety.

Clinch River Power Plant iii American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Table of Contents Page

INTRODUCTION, SUMMARY CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... II PURPOSE AND SCOPE ...... II 1.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 1‐1

1.1 CONCLUSIONS ...... 1‐1 1.1.1 Conclusions Regarding the Structural Soundness of the Management Unit(s) ...... 1‐1 1.1.2 Conclusions Regarding the Hydrologic/Hydraulic Safety of the Management Unit(s) ...... 1‐1 1.1.3 Conclusions Regarding the Adequacy of Supporting Technical Documentation ...... 1‐2 1.1.4 Conclusions Regarding the Description of the Management Unit(s) ...... 1‐2 1.1.5 Conclusions Regarding the Field Observations ...... 1‐2 1.1.6 Conclusions Regarding the Adequacy of Maintenance and Methods of Operation ...... 1‐3 1.1.7 Conclusions Regarding the Adequacy of the Surveillance and Monitoring Program ...... 1‐3 1.1.8 Classification Regarding Suitability for Continued Safe and Reliable Operation ...... 1‐3 1.2 RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 1‐4 1.2.1 Recommendations Regarding the Structural Stability ...... 1‐4 1.2.2 Recommendations Regarding the Hydrologic/Hydraulic Safety ...... 1‐4 1.2.3 Recommendations Regarding the Maintenance and Methods of Operation ...... 1‐4 1.2.4 Recommendations Regarding Continued Safe and Reliable Operation ...... 1‐5 1.3 PARTICIPANTS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...... 1‐5 1.3.1 List of Participants: ...... 1‐5 1.3.2 Acknowledgement and Signature ...... 1‐5 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE COAL COMBUSTION RESIDUE MANAGEMENT UNIT(S) ...... 2‐1

2.1 LOCATION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION ...... 2‐1 2.1.1 Fly Ash ...... 2‐2 2.1.2 Bottom Ash ...... 2‐3 2.2 SIZE AND HAZARD CLASSIFICATION ...... 2‐3 2.3 AMOUNT AND TYPE OF RESIDUALS CURRENTLY CONTAINED IN THE UNIT(S) AND MAXIMUM CAPACITY ...... 2‐4 2.4 PRINCIPAL PROJECT STRUCTURES ...... 2‐5 2.4.1 Earth Embankment ...... 2‐5 2.4.2 Outlet Structures ...... 2‐6 2.5 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN FIVE MILES DOWN GRADIENT ...... 2‐6 3.0 SUMMARY OF RELEVANT REPORTS, PERMITS, AND INCIDENTS ...... 3‐1

3.1 SUMMARY OF LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS ...... 3‐1 3.2 SUMMARY OF SPILL/RELEASE INCIDENTS ...... 3‐1

Clinch River Power Plant iv American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

4.0 SUMMARY OF HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION ...... 4‐1

4.1 SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION HISTORY ...... 4‐1 4.1.1 Original Construction ...... 4‐1 4.1.2 Significant Changes/Modifications in Design since Original Construction...... 4‐1 4.1.3 Significant Repairs/Rehabilitation since Original Construction ...... 4‐2 4.2 SUMMARY OF OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES ...... 4‐2 4.2.1 Original Operational Procedures ...... 4‐2 4.2.2 Significant Changes in Operational Procedures and Original Startup ...... 4‐3 4.2.3 Current Operational Procedures ...... 4‐3 4.2.4 Other Notable Events since Original Startup ...... 4‐3 5.0 FIELD OBSERVATIONS ...... 5‐1

5.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS ...... 5‐1 5.2 ASH POND 1 ...... 5‐1 5.2.1 Crest ...... 5‐1 5.2.2 Upstream/Inside Slope ...... 5‐2 5.2.3 Downstream/Outside Slope and Toe ...... 5‐3 5.2.4 Abutments and Groin Areas ...... 5‐5 5.3 ASH POND 2 ...... 5‐7 5.3.1 Crest ...... 5‐7 5.3.2 Upstream/Inside Slope ...... 5‐9 5.3.3 Downstream/Outside Slope and Toe ...... 5‐9 5.3.4 Abutments and Groin Areas ...... 5‐11 5.4 OUTLET STRUCTURES ...... 5‐11 5.4.1 Overflow Structure ...... 5‐11 5.4.2 Outlet Conduit ...... 5‐13 6.0 HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC SAFETY...... 6‐1

6.1 SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION ...... 6‐1 6.1.1 Flood of Record ...... 6‐1 6.1.2 Inflow Design Flood ...... 6‐1 6.1.3 Spillway Rating ...... 6‐2 6.1.4 Downstream Flood Analysis ...... 6‐2 6.2 ADEQUACY OF SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION ...... 6‐3 6.3 ASSESSMENT OF HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC SAFETY ...... 6‐3

Clinch River Power Plant v American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

7.0 STRUCTURAL STABILITY ...... 7‐1

7.1 SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION ...... 7‐1 7.1.1 Stability Analyses and Load Cases Analyzed ...... 7‐1 7.1.2 Design Parameters and Dam Materials ...... 7‐1 7.1.3 Uplift and/or Phreatic Surface Assumptions ...... 7‐2 7.1.4 Factors of Safety and Base Stresses ...... 7‐2 7.1.5 Liquefaction Potential ...... 7‐3 7.1.6 Critical Geological Conditions ...... 7‐3 7.2 ADEQUACY OF SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION ...... 7‐4 7.3 ASSESSMENT OF STRUCTURAL STABILITY ...... 7‐4 8.0 ADEQUACY OF MAINTENANCE AND METHODS OF OPERATION ...... 8‐1

8.1 OPERATING PROCEDURES ...... 8‐1 8.2 MAINTENANCE OF THE DAM AND PROJECT FACILITIES ...... 8‐1 8.3 ASSESSMENT OF MAINTENANCE AND METHODS OF OPERATIONS ...... 8‐1 8.3.1 Adequacy of Operating Procedures ...... 8‐1 8.3.2 Adequacy of Maintenance ...... 8‐1 9.0 ADEQUACY OF SURVEILLANCE AND MONITORING PROGRAM ...... 9‐1

9.1 SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURES ...... 9‐1 9.2 INSTRUMENTATION MONITORING ...... 9‐1 9.3 ASSESSMENT OF SURVEILLANCE AND MONITORING PROGRAM ...... 9‐1 9.3.1 Adequacy of Inspection Program ...... 9‐1 9.3.2 Adequacy of Instrumentation Monitoring Program ...... 9‐1

Clinch River Power Plant vi American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL APPENDIX A

Document 1: Exhibits 1 - 5 Document 2A: Virginia DCR Inventory Number 16703 Certificate, Inventory Report and Operation & Maintenance Program Document 2B: Virginia DCR Inventory Number 16702 Certificate, Inventory Report and Operation & Maintenance Program Document 3: DCR Inspection Email to AEP, 2008 Document 4: Dam Safety Inspection Report, by Woodward-Clyde Consultants Document 5: Ash Pond 1 Stability Analysis, By AEP Document 6: Ash Pond 2 Design Summary for Final Closure, by BBC&M Engineering Document 7: Ash Pond 1 Construction of Cutoff Wall, by AEP Document 8: Clinch River Plant, Dike Inspection Checklist 2008 Document 9: Clinch River Plant, Dike Inspection Checklist 2009 Document 10: Clinch River Plant Ash Pond 1, Annual Dam & Dike Inspection Report, by AEP 2009 Document 11: AEP Dam and Dike Inspection and Maintenance Program Summary Document 12: EPA Impoundment Inventory, in Response to February 2009 Letter Document 13: AEP’s Annual Inspection Form & Report to VA DCR Document 14: Clinch River Plant Aerial Survey, Ash Pond 1 Document 15: Clinch River Plant Aerial Survey, Ash Pond 2 Document 16: Draft Letter, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Dam Safety Region 4, dated December 29, 2011, #16703 (Flyash Dam No. 1) Document 17: Draft Letter, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Dam Safety Region 4, dated December 29, 2011, #16702 (Flyash Dam No. 2)

APPENDIX B

Document 18: Ash Pond 1, Dam Inspection Check List Form Document 19: Ash Pond 2, Dam Inspection Check List Form

Clinch River Power Plant vii American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 1.0 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

1.1 CONCLUSIONS

Conclusions are based on visual observations from a one-day site visit, February 17, 2011, and review of technical documentation provided by the Owner, which is provided in Appendix A.

1.1.1 Conclusions Regarding the Structural Soundness of the Management Unit(s)

Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 did not show any areas of significant structural concern during the one-day site visit. The stability analysis report for Ash Pond 1 was prepared, signed and sealed by the Owner’s engineers and indicates that the main perimeter dike for Ash Pond 1 is structurally sound. The stability analysis report for Ash Pond 2 was prepared, signed and sealed by BBC&M engineers and indicates that the main perimeter dike for Ash Pond 2 is structurally sound. However the stability analysis report for Ash Pond 2 assumed that only the ash in contact with the existing water table was saturated and not saturated to the top of the ash in the impoundment. This was assumed because at the time the Owner was considering a closure permit for Ash Pond 2 and that it would be capped and would function as a landfill. The Owner submitted the closure plan for Ash Pond 2 for regulatory approval in 2009 but has since retracted the plan.

We note that the Virginia DCR DSFM has not accepted the structural analysis. The reasons for not accepting the analysis include: the analysis was not sealed by a Virginia PE; the analysis does not address large quantities of shale that the State has indicated were illegally dumped on the North end of Pond #2; and the analysis misrepresents saturation conditions because there are no spillways from the ponds. (See Appendix A – Docs 16 and 17)

1.1.2 Conclusions Regarding the Hydrologic/Hydraulic Safety of the Management Unit(s)

Hydrologic/Hydraulic calculations were not provided for Ash Pond 1 or Ash Pond 2 so conclusions regarding hydrologic/hydraulic safety cannot be made at this time.

Clinch River Plant 1-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL The Virginia DCR DSFM believes that the utility has misrepresented the drainage areas for the ponds and plans to request additional hydrologic analyses in 2012.

1.1.3 Conclusions Regarding the Adequacy of Supporting Technical Documentation

The supporting technical documentation provided is adequate for preparation of this report. Data reviewed by Dewberry did not contain hydrologic/hydraulic calculations. Technical documentation reviewed in preparation of this report is provided in Appendix A.

1.1.4 Conclusions Regarding the Description of the Management Unit(s)

The description of Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 provided by the Owner was an accurate representation of what Dewberry observed in the field. We note that Virginia DCR DSFM does not believe that accurate information concerning drainage conditions at the site has been provided by the Owner. (See Appendix A – Docs 16 and 17)

1.1.5 Conclusions Regarding the Field Observations

Dewberry staff was provided adequate access to Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 to complete the field assessment. The visual assessment of the perimeter dikes for both ponds showed no significant signs of erosion, settlement or instability. Seepage was observed along the down slope of Ash Pond 1 but was well controlled with monitoring weirs. No seepage was observed at Ash Pond 2. The spillway for Ash Pond 1 appeared to be functioning properly. The spillway for Ash Pond 2 is currently not active.

During the field assessment it was noted that a large boulder had dislodged from the adjacent hillside and impacted one of the slurry pipes that conveys bottom ash to Ash Pond 1. This pipe showed no visible signs of leakage. Dewberry understands that the boulder would be removed and the pipe repaired as appropriate. No other indications of unsafe conditions or conditions needing immediate remedial action were noted during the one-day site visit.

However, subsequent to the site visit the Regional Engineer, DCR DSFM, who participated in the site visit, indicated considerable concern about the safety of both ash ponds. Based upon observations made during the site

Clinch River Plant 1-2 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL visit the Virginia DCR DSFM plans to take action in 2012 that could require AEP to analyze and, if necessary, remediate both ash ponds.

1.1.6 Conclusions Regarding the Adequacy of Maintenance and Methods of Operation

Current operation and maintenance procedures appear adequate for Ash Pond 1. Operation and maintenance procedures were discontinued at Ash Pond 2 when it became inactive in 1998.

Virginia DSC DSFM has indicated that woody vegetation control on both dams does not comply with state regulations. (Appendix A – Docs 16 and 17)

1.1.7 Conclusions Regarding the Adequacy of the Surveillance and Monitoring Program

Current surveillance and monitoring program procedures appear adequate for Ash Pond 1. Although Ash Pond 2 became inactive in 1998, surveillance and monitoring procedures for the pond are still in effect. Ash Pond 2 is monitored at the same time monitoring procedures for Ash Pond 1 are conducted. However, a written record of monitoring results for Ash Pond 2 is not kept.

1.1.8 Classification Regarding Suitability for Continued Safe and Reliable Operation

Clinch River Ash Pond 1 is rated FAIR with acceptable performance expected under static and seismic loading conditions in accordance with applicable safety regulatory criteria. Ash Pond 2 is rated POOR due to use of potentially non-representative assumptions in the structural stability analysis and the lack of hydrologic data addressing drainage to the pond. A hydrologic and hydraulic analysis is required for both units to demonstrate adequate hydrologic loading conditions. The classifications are based on the one-day visual assessment performed by Dewberry and supporting technical documentation provided in Appendix A of this report.

Clinch River Plant 1-3 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL We note that the Regional Engineer, Virginia DSC DSFM, has indicated that in 2012 the State will require additional hydrology-related action be taken by the utility for Ash Ponds 1 and 2, and that additional structural analyses will be required for Ash Pond 2. (see Appendix A – Docs 16 and 17)

1.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

1.2.1 Recommendations Regarding the Structural Stability

Perform a structural stability analysis of Ash Pond 2 that is representative of ash saturation conditions in the pond.

1.2.2 Recommendations Regarding the Hydrologic/Hydraulic Safety

A hydrologic and hydraulic analysis should be performed to evaluate the hydrologic/hydraulic safety of Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2. The analysis should consider off-site drainage to Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 and should be in accordance with all requirements for such analyses as required by Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation (VA DCR), Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management, including spillway capacity.

This recommendation is consistent with our understanding of the State’s planned actions in 2012.

1.2.3 Recommendations Regarding the Maintenance and Methods of Operation

It is recommended that the facility maintain frequent inspections of Ash Pond 1 and resume recording monitoring results for inspections of Ash Pond 2 in accordance with Owner’s current inspection program until such time that the facility is formally closed and the closure is approved by the state.

It is recommended that all underbrush and trees be removed from the Ash Pond 2 perimeter dike in accordance with VA DCR DSFM requirements.

It is recommended that all animal burrows located along the perimeter dike of Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 be backfilled in accordance with standard geotechnical engineering practices for dams, and monitored for future reoccurrence.

Clinch River Plant 1-4 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL It is recommended that the Owner perform an interior inspection of all outfall pipes from the Ash Pond 1 & 2 outlet structures to the reclaim pond as well as an interior inspection of the pipe systems that bypass off-site drainage through Ash Pond 1. Interior inspections should focus on the structural integrity of the pipes as well as seepage paths into and out of the pipes. The inspection report should summarize findings and remedial action required, if any.

1.2.4 Recommendations Regarding Continued Safe and Reliable Operation

No recommendations, other than the above studies and maintenance activities, appear warranted at this time.

1.3 PARTICIPANTS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

1.3.1 List of Participants:

 Gary Zych, American Electric Power, Senior Engineer, Civil Engineering  Behrad Zand, American Electric Power, Engineer II, Geotechnical Engineering  Jim Saunders, American Electric Power, Glen Lynn Plant Director  Richard Chatin, American Electric Power  Edwin Shelton, American Electric Power  Thomas I. Roberts, PE, CFM, VA Dept. of Conservation & Recreation, Dam Safety Regional Engineer  Jim Kohler, United States Environmental Protection Agency, LCDR, Public Health Services  Patrick Kelly, United States Environmental Protection Agency  Scott Clarke, P.E., Dewberry, Associate, Water Resources  Lorainne Ramos Nieves, P.E., CFM, Dewberry, Engineer III, Water Resources

1.3.2 Acknowledgement and Signature

We acknowledge that the management units referenced herein was assessed on February 17, 2011.

Clinch River Plant 1-5 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 2.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE COAL COMBUSTION RESIDUE MANAGEMENT UNIT(S)

2.1 LOCATION AND GENERAL DESCRIPTION

The Clinch River Power Plant, ow ned and operated by Appalachian P ower d/b/a American Electric Power, is located on the Clinch River in Russell County, Virginia off Route 665 near the town of Carbo, see Figure 2.1-1, Location Map and Figure 2.1-2, Aerial Photograph. The Plant functions as a coal-fired electric power station, operating since 1958, and consists of three 235 megawatt generator units.

The Plant contains two m anagement units for storing CC R: Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2. Ash Pond 1 is a m ulti-cell pond composed of Pond 1A and Pond 1B. Ash Pond 2 is a single-cell pond th at is currently inactive and does not receive CCR. Table 2.1 provides some general dimensions of both Ash Ponds.

New River

Clinch River Plant

Figure 2.1-1: Location Map

Clinch River Plant 2-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

ASH POND 1

ASH POND 2

Figure 2.1-2: Aerial Photograph

Table 2.1: Summary of Approximate Dimensions and Size of Ash Ponds 1 & 2 Ash Pond 1 Ash Pond 2 (Pond 1A/Pond 1B) Dam Height (ft) 651 562 Crest Width (ft) 35 20 Length (ft) 3150 1650 Side Slopes (upstream) H:V 1.75:1 3:1 Side Slopes (downstream) H:V 2:1 3:1 1Per Owner, however Appendix A, Document 2A: VA DCR, Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management inventory reports indicates a dam height of 55 ft.

2 Per Owner, however Appendix A, Document 2A: VA DCR, Division of Dam Safety & Floodplain Management inventory report indicates a dam height of 65 ft.

2.2 COAL COMBUSTION RESIDUE HANDLING

2.2.1 Fly Ash

Fly ash generated inside boilers at this facility is collected by electrostatic precipitators (ESPs) and moved by forced draft air fans through ducts and into hoppers. Any fly ash remaining on the ESP charged plates is removed through applied vibrations and knocking of the plates. Vacuum

Clinch River Plant 2-2 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL lines then carry dry ash collected inside hoppers to a concrete fly ash silo. The concrete silos at the plant are approximately 100 ft tall and 30 ft in diameter; each rests on a concrete pad. No secondary containment exists for either the hopper or concrete silos. Once in the silos, fly ash is conditioned with water to prevent dust emissions as well as to facilitate in transportation. Wet fly ash residuals are either sold for beneficial use or hauled in trucks for disposal at an approved offsite landfill.

2.2.2 Bottom Ash

Bottom ash and clinkers from boiler tubes are collected inside hoppers below the boilers. Once residuals reach the hopper, they are watered down and ground into slurry that falls into a sump. From this sump it is pumped to a tank. This tank is used to help equalize and control the solid content of the slurry. Slurry is pumped periodically through basalt-lined iron pipes to Ash Pond 1, a distance of about 1500 ft. Slurry pipes are primarily located above ground and have no secondary containment.

2.3 SIZE AND HAZARD CLASSIFICATION

According to the VA DCR DSFM, inventory reports (Appendix A, Document 2A) Ash Pond 1 has a maximum capacity of 1,240 acre-feet with a maximum design height for storage of 55 feet. Ash Pond 2 has a maximum capacity of approximately 126 acre-feet with a maximum design height of 56 feet (Appendix A, Document 2B). (As noted in Table 2.1, the Owner indicated dam heights of 65 feet and 56 feet, respectively) Based on Table 2.2a, Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 are classified as intermediate size impoundments since dam height is the controlling factor for both Ash Ponds.

Table 2.2a: USACE ER 1110-2-106 Size Classification Impoundment Category Storage (Ac-ft) Height (ft) Small 50 and < 1,000 25 and < 40 Intermediate 1,000 and < 50,000 40 and < 100 Large > 50,000 > 100

Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 are classified as Significant Hazard facilities, see Table 2.2b. If Ash Pond 1 and/or Ash Pond 2 were to fail, it is anticipated that there would be significant environmental losses along Clinch River and Dumps Creek. In addition, it is suspected that there would be damage to State Route 616, State Route

Clinch River Plant 2-3 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 665 and potentially the Norfolk & Western railway. While loss of human life would not be expected, economic losses would be expected.

We note that State records currently indicate the ponds are listed as Low Hazard dams, but that the State is re-considering the classification (to Significant). (See Appendix A – Docs 16 and 17)

Table 2.2b: FEMA Federal Guidelines for Dam Safety Hazard Classification Loss of Human Life Economic, Environmental, Lifeline Losses Low None Expected Low and generally limited to owner Significant None Expected Yes High Probable. One or more Yes (but not necessary for expected classification)

2.4 AMOUNT AND TYPE OF RESIDUALS CURRENTLY CONTAINED IN THE UNIT(S) AND MAXIMUM CAPACITY

The volume of CCRs stored in Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 at the time of the one- day field assessment was not available by the Owner. Table 2.3 summarizes the storage capacity for Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2.

Table 2.3: Approximate Maximum Capacity of Ash Ponds 1 & 2 Ash Pond 1 Ash Pond 2 (Pond 1A/Pond 1B) Maximum Pool 1 Surface Area (acre) 21.0 12.5 Maximum Capacity (cubic yards) 2,000,534 203,280 Maximum Capacity (acre-feet) 1240 126 EL Top Dam, min (ft) 1570 1565 Normal Pool (ft) 1568/1556 15571 1Ash Pond 2 is currently inactive and there is no free-standing water. Value corresponds to when the pond was active.

Clinch River Plant 2-4 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 2.5 PRINCIPAL PROJECT STRUCTURES

2.5.1 Earth Embankment

Ash Pond 1

According to the Dam Safety Inspection Report dated July 18, 1978 (Appendix A, Document 4), Ash Pond 1 was originally built as one large pond; a side hill dike creating an embankment that runs parallel to both Route 616 and Route 665. Subsequently, a splitter dike was constructed that divided the pond into Pond 1A and Pond 1B. The earthen embankment, built in 1955, was originally constructed of silty clay soil with a mixture of shale and sandstone fragments to an elevation of approximately 1540 feet. The original dike has been raised several times since, using the upstream method, to reach its current crest elevation of 1570 feet. The first raise of the dike was composed of fly ash and bottom ash material. All subsequent lifts to the dike have used shale rock (Appendix A, Document 5).

Ash Pond 2

The design summary for the proposed final closure of Ash Pond 2, by BBC&M Engineering, indicates the original pond embankment was constructed in 1954 (Appendix A, Document 6). The embankment has since become a three-tiered dike system consisting of a lower, middle and upper dike. According to soil borings completed in 2006 and 2008, the dikes consist of shale fragments, silty clays, clayey silt and sand. The top of the upper dike has a crest elevation of 1565, although a portion of the dike was removed in 1998 to eliminate the potential of ponding water. The middle and lower dikes remain; each is filled with compacted ash to crest elevations of 1570 and 1559, respectively (per Owner).

Clinch River Plant 2-5 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 2.5.2 Outlet Structures

Ash Pond 1

The outlet structure for Ash Pond 1 is located in the north corner of cell Pond 1B. The outlet structure consists of an overflow drainage shaft and a 36-inch reinforced concrete pipe that directs water to a catch basin at the toe of the perimeter dike where it then flows through a 30-inch reinforced concrete pipe to an existing reclaim pond adjacent to Clinch River. The outlet structure serves as the principal and emergency spillway for Ash Pond 1.

Virginia DCR DSFM believes this outlet structure is inadequate to handle drainage to the pond (see Appendix A – Doc 16).

Ash Pond 2

The outlet structure for Ash Pond 2 is located at the northeast side of the facility and is currently inactive. The outlet structure consists of an overflow drainage shaft and a 30-inch reinforced concrete pipe. The pipe previously conveyed flow over Dumps Creek via a pipe bridge and below State Route 616 and an existing railroad before combining with outflow from Ash Pond 1 in the existing reclaim pond adjacent to Clinch River. When it was active the outlet structure served as the principal and emergency spillway for Ash Pond 2.

2.6 CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN FIVE MILES DOWN GRADIENT

Immediately downstream of Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 is the Clinch River Power Plant on the opposite side of Clinch River as well as State Routes 616 and 665 and Norfolk & Western railway. The nearest downstream town is approximately 6 miles away at St. Paul, Virginia.

Clinch River Plant 2-6 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 3.0 SUMMARY OF RELEVANT REPORTS, PERMITS, AND INCIDENTS

3.1 SUMMARY OF LOCAL, STATE, AND FEDERAL ENVIRONMENTAL PERMITS

Virginia DCR – Dam Safety Program

VA DCR has a dam safety program under which Ash Pond 1(Inventory Number 16703) and Ash Pond 2 (Inventory Number 16702) are state-regulated. Each pond was issued a six-year Regular Class III Operation and Maintenance Certificate on March 20, 2008 (Appendix A, Document 2A and Document 2B). Under the dam safety program, AEP is required to submit annual inspection reports to DCR as well as an engineer’s inventory report and a renewal certification application at the conclusion of each six year term. Permitting is administered by DCR, dependent on information provided by AEP regarding basic inventory of each pond, an emergency action plan and an operation and maintenance review.

Virginia DEQ – NPDES Permits

Seepage and discharges generated from Ash Pond 1 outfall into a reclaim pond which circulates to a treatment facility that recycles the water for use on site. As there is no direct pond discharge to a neighboring body of water, an NPDES Permit from Virginia Department of Environmental Quality (VA DEQ) is not required for Ash Pond 1. Ash Pond 2, however, is permitted by VA DEQ. The seepage collected at the toe of perimeter dike is discharged directly into Dumps Creek. Seepage discharge is currently listed as Outfall 015 under the NPDES Permit No. VA0001015, issued September 15, 2009. Under this NPDES Permit, AEP is required to submit monthly Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR) to VA DEQ for this permitted outfall.

3.2 SUMMARY OF SPILL/RELEASE INCIDENTS

Ash Pond 1

No documented spill/release incidents to the best of Dewberry’s knowledge.

Ash Pond 2

In 1967, a failure of the lower dike of Ash Pond 2 occurred. SourceWatch documented that approximately 130 million gallons of coal ash slurry spilled into Dumps Creek; however, this figure could not be confirmed by the Owner.

Clinch River Plant 3-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL It is alleged that the spill affected fish and benthic fauna on Dumps Creek and Clinch River as well as aquatic insects, snails and mussel populations. Dewberry requested information from the Owner regarding the failure but after further research by the Owner, no additional documentation was found regarding the incident.

The cause of the failure or the extent of damages to the Plant, roads and railroad has not been documented to the best of Dewberry’s knowledge. At the time of failure, the middle and upper dikes had not yet been built. Damage to the lower dike was repaired and Ash Pond 2 was put back in service.

Clinch River Plant 3-2 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 4.0 SUMMARY OF HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION

4.1 SUMMARY OF CONSTRUCTION HISTORY

4.1.1 Original Construction

Ash Pond 1

Ash Pond 1 was built in 1955 as one facility consisting of one continuous side-hill dike.

Ash Pond 2

Ash Pond 2 was built in 1954 as one facility consisting of one continuous side-hill dike located in the old river valley of Dumps Creek, which required re-routing the creek to its current alignment (Appendix A, Document 6). The portion of the dike adjacent to Dumps Creek was armored with rip-rap along the toe of slope.

4.1.2 Significant Changes/Modifications in Design since Original Construction

Ash Pond 1

A splitter dike was constructed in Ash Pond 1, dividing the pond into cells identified by the Owner as Pond 1A and Pond 1B. The original perimeter dike has been raised several times by placement of material directly over the crest of the dike. Toe drains (10-inch perforated pipes encased in gravel backfill) have been installed along the toe of the embankment to control seepage. Seepage discharge collects in a sump pump and in v- notched weirs at the toe of the embankment. All seepage flow is conveyed to the outfall pipe and into the reclaim pond adjacent to Clinch River.

During the period of November through December 1990 a cement- bentonite-fly ash (CBFA) cutoff wall was constructed within the perimeter dike of Ash Pond 1. The cutoff wall served to block potential seepage paths in the dike to improve downstream stability. The cutoff is approximately 2.5 ft wide, 2,150 ft long and reaches a depth of approximately 65 ft. It was installed along the entire length of the perimeter dike and keyed into both abutments as well as the original dike material. Construction of the cutoff wall crossing the existing 68-ft deep, 36-inch diameter outfall pipe was limited to 60 ft deep and 10 ft on both sides of the estimated outfall pipe centerline (Appendix A, Document 7).

Clinch River Plant 4-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Ash Pond 2

The original Ash Pond 2 dike has been raised several times since it was first constructed in 1954. Since then the original dike has become a three- tiered system, consisting of a lower, middle and upper dike. The original dike was raised by constructing new dikes upslope of subsequently lower dikes and on top of existing fly ash fill. A 12-inch toe drain system encased in gravel was installed along the toe of the middle dike (Appendix A, Document 4). Seepage discharges via one outfall from the toe of the lower dike into Dumps Creek in accordance with an NPDES General Permit.

4.1.3 Significant Repairs/Rehabilitation since Original Construction

Ash Pond 1

There are seepage concerns from the dikes surrounding Ponds 1A and 1B (see more detailed discussion in Section 7.3). In 2006, the Owner commenced with a seepage control project that consisted of placing inverted filters with rip-rap cover along most of the downstream face of the perimeter dike of Ash Pond 1. This project was completed in 2009; however, the Owner has indicated that there are plans to extend the limits of the project to provide near-complete coverage to the downstream face.

Ash Pond 2

No significant repairs/rehabilitation since original construction except for repairs of the dike when it failed in 1967. No additional information was found regarding the repairs that resulted from this event. Section 3.2 elaborates further on the 1967 failure.

4.2 SUMMARY OF OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES

4.2.1 Original Operational Procedures

Data reviewed by Dewberry did not contain the original operational procedures for Ash Pond 1 or Ash Pond 2.

Clinch River Plant 4-2 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 4.2.2 Significant Changes in Operational Procedures and Original Startup

Significant changes in operation procedures and original startup cannot be confirmed based on the data reviewed by Dewberry.

4.2.3 Current Operational Procedures

Ash Pond 1 is the only active management unit at the Clinch River Power Plant. Ash Pond 2 is currently inactive and has been inactive since 1998. Ash Pond 1 is primarily used for handling all bottom ash residuals generated by plant operations. Fly ash residuals may also be sluiced to Ash Pond 1, though AEP has stated that this is on rare occasions, since nearly 100% of fly ash residuals are hauled off-site to an approved landfill or sold for other beneficial use. Ash Pond 1 is periodically dredged, residuals allowed to dry, and the CCR is trucked off-site to an approved landfill or for other beneficial use.

4.2.4 Other Notable Events since Original Startup

No additional information was provided to Dewberry concerning other notable events, except the 1967 failure of Ash Pond 2, that have impacted the operation of either ash pond.

Clinch River Plant 4-3 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 5.0 FIELD OBSERVATIONS

5.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND SIGNIFICANT FINDINGS

Dewberry personnel, Scott Clarke, P.E. and Lorainne Ramos Nieves, P.E., CFM, performed a site visit on February 17, 2011 in company with the participants listed under Section 1.3.1.

The site visit began at 8:30 AM. The weather was clear and sunny. Photographs were taken of conditions observed and selected photographs are included in this report for visual reference. All pictures were taken by Dewberry personnel during the site visit. Appendix B includes two Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Forms, one for Ash Pond 1 and one for Ash Pond 2. These checklists provide a good summary and inventory of the items assessed during the site visit.

5.2 ASH POND 1

5.2.1 Crest

The crest of the perimeter dike had no significant signs of depressions, tension cracks or other indications of settlement or shear failure. Figure 5.2.1-1 and Figure 5.2.1-2 shows the typical crest conditions along the perimeter dike.

Figure 5.2.1-1: Crest, West. Clinch River Power Plant to left not seen in this figure.

Clinch River Plant 5-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.2.1-2: Crest, Northeast. Route 616 and railroad to right. 5.2.2 Upstream/Inside Slope

The visible upstream slope of the perimeter dike, including all groins, had adequate and well maintained cover of grasses/weeds. The upstream slope below the permanent pool was not observed. There were no obvious signs of scarps, bulging cracks, depressions or other indications of slope instability. Rip-rap armoring was observed at operating pool elevations to mitigate wave erosion. Figure 5.2.2 shows a representative upstream slope section of the perimeter dike looking south.

Clinch River Plant 5-2 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.2.2: Upstream slope, South. Plant shown in background. 5.2.3 Downstream/Outside Slope and Toe

The visible downstream slope of the perimeter dike had adequate and well maintained cover of grasses/weeds as well as rip-rap armoring and inverted filter. A paved access road from Route 665 runs up the downstream slope of the perimeter dike to its crest. An animal burrow was observed along the downstream slope of the perimeter dike. The burrow hole was small in size and near the crest. No scarps, sloughs, bulging, cracks, depressions or other indications of slope instability were observed along the downstream slope. Figures 5.2.3-1 thru 5.2.3-3 show representative downstream slope sections of the perimeter dike.

Clinch River Plant 5-3 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.2.3-1: Downstream slope near access road entrance off Route 665. Note animal burrow near the crest.

Figure 5.2.3-2: Downstream slope along paved access road, Southwest. Note reclaim beyond the toe of the perimeter dike.

Clinch River Plant 5-4 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.2.3-3: Downstream slope, Southwest. The embankment runs parallel to Route 616. Note transit pipes along edge of riprap. Transit pipes carry offsite runoff through the pond’s splitter dike and out to Dumps Creek. 5.2.4 Abutments and Groin Areas

The perimeter dike has two abutments; the south and north abutments. Both abutment contacts consist of a drainage ditch. The south ditch shows some signs of erosion due to wet weather flow runoff from the adjacent hillside. The north ditch appeared in better condition with some stone and a v-notch weir that is used to monitor seepage, which was present on the day of the assessment. Apart from some minor erosion along the south abutment ditch, both abutments were well maintained. There were no observed scarps, sloughs, bulging, cracks, depressions or other indications of slope instability. Figures 5.2.4-1 and 5.2.4-2 show south and north abutment contacts.

Clinch River Plant 5-5 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.2.4-1: North abutment ditch. Note upstream riprap and v-notch weir used to monitor seepage.

Clinch River Plant 5-6 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.2.4-2: South abutment ditch. Note downstream slope rip-rap used for seepage control and abutment ditch used to convey hillside drainage.

5.3 ASH POND 2

5.3.1 Crest

Portions of the upper dike have been removed and some re-grading has been completed near the crest of the middle dike. A small sized animal burrow was observed along the crest of the middle dike. No depressions, tension cracks or other indications of settlement or shear failure were observed on the crest of the middle or lower dike. Figure 5.3.1-1 and Figure 5.3.1-2 show typical crest conditions along the dike.

Clinch River Plant 5-7 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.3.1-1: Lower dike crest, South.

Figure 5.3.1-2: Middle dike crest, South. Note removed portions of upper dike and re- grading near crest of the middle dike.

Clinch River Plant 5-8 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 5.3.2 Upstream/Inside Slope

Upstream slopes for the middle and lower dikes of the embankment are not visible due to placement of fill material. The upstream slopes of the upper dike were visible. No slope maintenance appears to be in place (pond is currently inactive). Slopes are covered with sparse grass/weeds.

5.3.3 Downstream/Outside Slope and Toe

The downstream slopes of the dikes are covered in high grass/weeds. The upper dike had some areas of tree growth. Significant tree growth between the toe of the lower dike and Dumps Creek made visual observations difficult. Based on what could be observed there were no scarps, sloughs, bulging, cracks, depressions or other indications of slope instability along any portion of the dikes. Figures 5.3.3-1 thru 5.3.3-3 show representative sections of the downstream slopes and toe.

Figure 5.3.3-1: Remaining portion of upper dike, Southeast. Note tree growth on downstream slope.

Clinch River Plant 5-9 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.3.3-2: Downstream slope of lower dike, Southeast. Note significant tree growth along Dumps Creeks.

Figure 5.3.3-3: Downstream toe of lower dike. Note significant tree growth and rip-rap adjacent to Dumps Creek.

Clinch River Plant 5-10 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 5.3.4 Abutments and Groin Areas

There were no observed scarps, sloughs, bulging, cracks, depressions or other indications of slope instability at dike abutments and groin areas of upper dike. Significant tree growth was observed along south abutment as shown in Figure 5.3.4.

Figure 5.3.4: South abutment. Note tree growth to the right along hillside; Ash Pond 2 is to the left. 5.4 OUTLET STRUCTURES

5.4.1 Overflow Structure

Ash Pond 1

The overflow spillway structure for Ash Pond 1 is located in the north corner of the facility (Figure 5.4.1-1). The structure appeared to be in satisfactory condition and operating as designed. There were no obvious signs of trash and/or debris around the intake. Water was observed entering the spillway but could not be seen exiting the spillway as the outfall pipe consists of a long storm sewer that outfalls into the existing reclaim pond below its permanent pool.

Clinch River Plant 5-11 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.4.1-1: Overflow spillway structure Ash Pond 2

The overflow spillway structure for Ash Pond 2 is located at the eastern midpoint of the facility (Figure 5.4.1-2). The structure appeared to be in poor condition with obvious signs of corrosion and encroaching vegetation. The spillway is currently inactive. Fissures/cracks were observed immediately west of the spillway where it appeared runoff had been migrating into existing ash residuals. The overflow spillway structure is located at an elevation significantly higher than the current finished grade around it. Discharge through the structure and outfall pipes is not possible at this time.

The Virginia DCR representative who participated in the onsite visit indicated particular concern that, as noted above, runoff is migrating into the ash residuals and there is no corresponding outlet for accumulating water.

Clinch River Plant 5-12 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.4.1-2: Ash Pond 2 overflow structure.

5.4.2 Outlet Conduit

Ash Pond 1

The spillway outlet conduit for Ash Pond 1 consists of a 36-inch reinforced concrete pipe leading to a catch basin that subsequently outfalls to a 30-inch reinforced concrete pipe that drains to the existing reclaim pond. The 30-inch outfall was not visible as it is completely submerged below the permanent pool of the reclaim pond (Figure 5.4.2-1).

Clinch River Plant 5-13 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Figure 5.4.2-1: Outlet conduit outfall, reclaim pond at intersection of Route 616 and 665.

Ash Pond 2

The spillway outlet conduit for Ash Pond 2 consists of a 30-inch reinforced concrete pipe. The conduit connects to the same 30-inch reinforced concrete pipe as Ash Pond 1 prior to reaching the reclaim pond. The outlet conduit was not visible at the time of the site assessment.

Clinch River Plant 5-14 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 6.0 HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC SAFETY

6.1 SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION

6.1.1 Flood of Record

No documentation was provided to Dewberry regarding local flood records. USGS river gage (USGS 03524000) for the Clinch River, located approximately 4 miles upstream of the plant, shows the largest peak flows occurred during 1957 and 1977. These peak flows are comparable to the Clinch River 1% annual chance (100-year) flood discharges found in the Russell County FIS Study. Therefore, the flood of record is comparable to the base flood elevation. The Russell County FEMA FIRM dated September 29, 2010, Map Number 51167C0215C and the FIRM dated September 29, 2010, Map Number 51167C0205C are provided for reference (See Appendix A, Document 1, Exhibits 1 - 4).

6.1.2 Inflow Design Flood

Data reviewed by Dewberry did not contain Inflow Design Flood information. It should be noted that Ash Pond 1 has the potential of receiving run-off from three areas west of the pond, see Figure 6.1.2-1. Run-off is controlled from entering the pond in Areas 1 & 2 through the use of run-off diversion dams with open headwall culverts that channel flow to an outlet at the eastern edge of the pond. During the site visit these culverts appeared to be joined by a series of manhole structures prior to crossing through the Ash Pond 1 internal dike and outfalling. It was unclear how offsite run-off was controlled from Area 3. Additionally, no controls were observed for offsite run-off draining to Ash Pond 2.

Virginia DCR DSFM plans in 2012 to direct the Owner to further investigate runoff control to and from these ash ponds (see Appendix A – Docs 16 and 17).

Clinch River Plant 6-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Area 1

Area 2

Area 3 Ash Pond 1

Figure 6.1.2-1: Offsite run-off draining to Ash Pond 1. 6.1.3 Spillway Rating

Data reviewed by Dewberry did not contain Spillway Rating information.

6.1.4 Downstream Flood Analysis

Data reviewed by Dewberry did not contain a detailed technical downstream flood analysis; however, according to the owner, the Emergency Action Plan for the facility contains copies of flood inundation maps and a dam break analysis summary.

Clinch River Plant 6-2 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 6.2 ADEQUACY OF SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION

Data reviewed by Dewberry did not contain the necessary documentation to make a proper determination on adequacy of hydrologic and hydraulic safety factors. There is also no information on whether hydrologic safety factors were considered in the design of Ash Pond 1 or Ash Pond 2.

6.3 ASSESSMENT OF HYDROLOGIC/HYDRAULIC SAFETY

An assessment of Hydrologic/Hydraulic Safety cannot be made at this time.

Clinch River Plant 6-3 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 7.0 STRUCTURAL STABILITY

7.1 SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION

7.1.1 Stability Analyses and Load Cases Analyzed

Ash Pond 1

A stability analysis report was provided for Ash Pond 1 (Appendix A, Document 5). The stability analysis is based on geotechnical investigations completed by MACTEC in 2009 as well as various instrumentation reading summaries acquired from plant records. The slope stability analysis of the perimeter dike considered static and seismic conditions under steady-state seepage.

Ash Pond 2

A design summary was provided for final closure of Ash Pond 2 (Appendix A, Document 6). With this summary a stability analysis was included. However, this analysis was completed assuming the ash was saturated up to existing groundwater levels and not to the top of the existing ash.

7.1.2 Design Parameters and Dam Materials

Ash Pond 1

A total of 12 boring logs were completed in 2009 by MACTEC. It was determined that the dike material for Ash Pond 1 was primarily composed of shale rock, with the exception of fly ash and bottom ash material that was found in a lower portion of the dike at a depth coincidental to the first raised section of the dike. Refer to Appendix A, Document 5 for more detail regarding design parameters considered in the slope stability analysis.

Ash Pond 2

A total of 8 boring logs were completed in 2008 by BBC&M Engineering and the Owner. It was determined that the dike material consisted of shale fragments, silty clays, clayey silt and sand.

Clinch River Plant 7-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 7.1.3 Uplift and/or Phreatic Surface Assumptions

Ash Pond 1

As part of the 2009 geotechnical investigation, eight new piezometers were installed to complement twelve existing piezometers along the perimeter dike. Piezometers were used to determine phreatic surface elevations at the crest and toe for use in the slope stability analysis.

Ash Pond 2

Groundwater observations were made at the beginning and completion of the eight borings drilled in 2008. Groundwater elevations were noted to generally decrease at borings located closer to Dumps Creek.

7.1.4 Factors of Safety and Base Stresses

Ash Pond 1

Three critical sections were used in the slope stability analysis completed for Ash Pond 1. Seepage conditions at the pond were considered in determining phreatic water surfaces and hydraulic gradients along each section. Each section was analyzed considering steady state seepage using effective shear strength parameters.

Different failure modes were considered for each section under static loading. Analysis of slope stability under seismic conditions considered both drained and undrained shear strength for each section. A summary of the calculated safety factors is included in Table 7.1.4.

Table 7.1.4: Factors of Safety for Clinch River Plant, Ash Pond 1

Static Loading Safety Required Seismic Loading Required Factor per Safety Safety Factor per Safety Failure Mode Factor Analysis Type Factor Section Outer (US Army Drained Undrained (US Army Deep Block Shell Corp of Shear Shear Corp of Failure Failure Failure Engineers) Strength Strength Engineers) A 1.8 1.5 1.9 1.5 1.3 1.3 1.2 B 1.7 1.7 2.0 1.5 1.3 1.4 1.2 C 1.6 1.8 1.5 1.3 1.2 1.2

Clinch River Plant 7-2 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Ash Pond 2

As discussed in Section 7.1.1, safety factors from the slope stability analysis completed by BBC&M Engineering cannot be used for the purpose of this report based on design parameters used and assumptions concerning saturated ash levels. Specifically, the BBC&M study fails to analyze margins of safety under total saturation of the ash pond materials.

7.1.5 Liquefaction Potential

Ash Pond 1

Appendix A, Document 5 states that a liquefaction potential analysis was not performed for Ash Pond 1 but that based on other studies performed for similar facilities, including Ash Pond 2, that Ash Pond 1 is believed to have no potential for liquefaction under probable earthquakes that may occur in the region because the magnitude associated with them are not strong enough to impose cyclic stress ratios high enough to cause liquefaction.

Ash Pond 2

Appendix A, Document 6 states that a liquefaction potential analysis was performed for Ash Pond 2 assuming saturated fly ash conditions under long term conditions after closure of the facility. Under these conditions, the analysis concluded that liquefaction would not occur during the applied earthquake load, which was based on a synthetic seismograph record for the location of Ash Pond 2.

7.1.6 Critical Geological Conditions

Clinch River Power Plant is located on Lower Paleozoic sedimentary rock and near the vicinity of a thrust fault.

The Owner’s stability analysis referenced a seismic force of 0.16 g at the Clinch River Power Plant, which matches well with the 2008 USGS Seismic-Hazard Maps for Central/Eastern United States, considering peak ground acceleration with a 2-percent probability of exceedance in 50-years (See Appendix A, Document 1, Exhibit 5).

Clinch River Plant 7-3 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Bedrock was encountered during bore drilling at Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2. Based on descriptions obtained from the samples, bedrock was classified as very-soft to soft gray shale and hard gray limestone, exhibiting massive bedding with many diagonal fractures. The top of rock was determined to be relatively flat.

7.2 ADEQUACY OF SUPPORTING TECHNICAL DOCUMENTATION

The supporting technical documentation submitted to support the structural stability of Ash Pond 1 appears to be adequate.

The supporting technical documentation submitted to support the structural stability of Ash Pond 2 is not adequate. A structural stability loading that assumes full saturation of all ash in Ash Pond 2 should be evaluated in addition to the condition that was analyzed (i.e., assumed saturation of the ash up to the existing groundwater table).

7.3 ASSESSMENT OF STRUCTURAL STABILITY

Ash Pond 1

The overall structural stability of the perimeter dike for Ash Pond 1 appears to be FAIR, based on a visual site assessment and review of documentation provided. The fair rating reflects continuing concerns of seepage from the pond dikes.

Signs of significant seepage have been recorded as far back as 1975. In 1980, seepage and a wet area were observed along a 150 ft stretch of the perimeter dike adjacent to the cell, Pond 1B, about 22 ft from the toe of the dike (Appendix A, Document 5). Conditions in this location did not notably change after the construction of the cutoff wall along the embankment in 1990. A boil at the toe of the perimeter dike adjacent to the cell, Pond 1A, just above the reclaim pond was also noted to remain after construction of the cutoff wall. Recent inspections in 2008 and 2009 indicate continual wet spots and seeps at different locations along the perimeter dike adjacent to the cell, Pond 1A (Appendix A, Documents 8-10). Based on the one-day site assessment it was evident that seepage is heavily monitored and controlled by the Owner. Close monitoring of seepage at this facility is strongly encouraged as it is necessary in identifying any drastic change in seepage patterns that could potentially affect the structural stability of the perimeter dike.

Clinch River Plant 7-4 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Ash Pond 2

Based on a visual site assessment and review of documentation provided, the overall structural stability of the perimeter dikes for Ash Pond 2 appears to be POOR. The rating reflects the inappropriate assumptions regarding groundwater elevations in the slope stability analysis and the previous dike failure. It is noted that there was no standing water in this inactive pond. No documented signs of significant erosion damage, cracks, sloughs or releases of materials could be found. The facility was retired in 1998; however, it is encouraged that more frequent inspections and maintenance of the facility continue in accordance VA DCR, Division of Dam Safety regulations and requirements.

The Appendix A - Document 17 draft letter from Virginia DCR reflects the same concerns about the inadequacy of the structural stability analysis of Ash Pond 2.

Clinch River Plant 7-5 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 8.0 ADEQUACY OF MAINTENANCE AND METHODS OF OPERATION

8.1 OPERATING PROCEDURES

Operating procedures are described in Section 4.2.3.

8.2 MAINTENANCE OF THE DAM AND PROJECT FACILITIES

In 1983, the Owner adopted a Dam and Dike Inspection and Maintenance Program (DIMP), where all earthen dams and dikes used for ash storage or disposal, waste water ponds, and large cooling water storage facilities under the Owner’s management are routinely inspected, documented, and monitored. Under this program, there are four separate levels of inspection. First is to routinely make inspections by plant personnel to monitor visible changes; second is to make formal ‘checklist type’ inspections completed by plant personnel on a quarterly basis; third is to routinely schedule engineering inspections supervised by a professional engineer according to the risk classification of the dam; and, fourth are non routine inspections completed after heavy rains, seismic activity or other major events. The inspection and maintenance program continues today for Ash Pond 1. Although Ash Pond 2 became inactive in 1998, inspection and maintenance program for the pond are still in effect, however, a written record of procedures for Ash Pond 2 is not kept.

8.3 ASSESSMENT OF MAINTENANCE AND METHODS OF OPERATIONS

8.3.1 Adequacy of Operating Procedures

Operating procedures reviewed appear adequate for Ash Pond 1. This is also true for Ash Pond 2 before it became inactive in 1998.

8.3.2 Adequacy of Maintenance

Maintenance procedures reviewed appear adequate for Ash Pond 1. Though currently inactive, further consideration to maintaining vegetation and tree growth on Ash Pond 2’s upstream and downstream slopes should be addressed until the facility is formally closed through VA DCR, Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management, and VA DEQ.

Clinch River Plant 8-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL 9.0 ADEQUACY OF SURVEILLANCE AND MONITORING PROGRAM

9.1 SURVEILLANCE PROCEDURES

Appendix A, Documents 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 13 show sample inspections reports and summaries submitted by the Owner in accordance with their adopted Dam and Dike Inspection and Maintenance Program as described under Section 8.2.

9.2 INSTRUMENTATION MONITORING

Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 are both instrumented. Ash Pond 1 has twenty working piezometers and staff gage present in each cell (Pond 1A and Pond 1B). Ash Pond 2 has approximately fourteen piezometers; however, a continuous record of readings has not been kept at Ash Pond 2 since it became inactive in 1998. Documentation provided by the Owner included reading summaries for Ash Pond 1 piezometers. Data collected from Ash Pond 1 and Ash Pond 2 piezometers was used to monitor phreatic surfaces and prepare stability analysis reports.

9.3 ASSESSMENT OF SURVEILLANCE AND MONITORING PROGRAM

9.3.1 Adequacy of Inspection Program

Based on the data reviewed by Dewberry, including the observations during the site visit, the inspection program appears to be adequate, though inspections should resume for Pond 2 until the facility is formally closed through VA DCR, Division of Dam Safety and VA DEQ.

9.3.2 Adequacy of Instrumentation Monitoring Program

Based on the data reviewed by Dewberry, including the observations during the site visit, the monitoring program appears to be adequate.

Clinch River Plant 9-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report

APPENDIX A

Document 1

Exhibits 1 - 5

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Exhibit 1: USGS Peak Streamflow, USGS 03524000 Clinch River at Cleveland, VA

Clinch River Plant E-1 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL

Clinch River Plant E-2 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Exhibit 2: FEMA Russell County FIS Study, Table 2-Summary of Discharges.

Clinch River Plant E-3 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Exhibit 3: FEMA Russell County FIRM, Map Number 51167C0215C

Clinch River Plant E-4 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Exhibit 4: FEMA Russell County FIRM, Map Number 51167C0205C

Clinch River Plant E-5 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report FINAL Exhibit 5: USGS Seismic-Hazard Map for Central/Eastern US, 2%/50Years, 2008

Clinch River Plant E-6 American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report

APPENDIX A

Document 2A

Virginia DCR Inventory Number 16703 Certificate, Inventory Report and Operation & Maintenance Program

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 1: VIRGINIA DCR INVENTORY NUMBER 16703 CERTIFICATE, INVENTORY REPORT AND OPERATION & MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

Preston Jr Bryant Joseph Maroon

Secretary of Natural Resources Director

COMMONWEALTH of VIRQINIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION

203 Governor Street Suite 206

Richmond Virginia 232 804 3716095 Fax 804 3712630

April 2008

Appalachian Power Company Ann William Smith

Post Office Box 2021 Roanoke VA 24022

RE Clinch River Fly Ash Dam Inventory Number 16703

Dear Mr Smith

The Operation and Maintenance Certificate Application for Clinch River Fly Ash Dam

Inventory Number 16703 and the required supporting documents have been reviewed for compliance

with the provisions of the Code of Virginia Dam Safety Act Section 101604 et seq and the

regulations promulgated by the Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board Board Based on this information on March 20 2008 the Board issued sixyear 03202008 33 120 14 Regular Class

III Operation and Maintenance Certificate Certificate The Certificate and other pertinent data are enclosed

The Dam Safety Act requires dam owners to maintain their dam in condition to prevent

unreasonable threats to life and property of others The classification of your dam and the Certificate issued were based on the current known downstream hazard potential from upstream characteristics

reinspection report operation and maintenance application and an emergency action plan The actions contained in the documents accompanying your Certificate Application must be adhered to for the duration of the terms contained in the Certificate To assist you in adhering to the terms of the

Certificate the following table provides schedule of dates to submit required documents

State Parks Soil and Water Conservation Natural Heritage Outdoor Recreation Planning

Chesapeake Bay LocalAssistance Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Land Conservation William Smith

April 2008

Page

Annual Owners Inspection Owners Engineer Renewal Certification Six Year Owner and Owners Report Inventory Report Application by Engineer

03312009

03312010

03312011

03312012

03312013 12312013 12312013

Should you have questions please direct them to Thomas Roberts PE Dam Safety Regional Engineer Department of Conservation and Recreation Dam Safety and Floodplain

Management Division Radford Street Suite 203 Christiansburg VA 24073 telephone 540394 2550 or via email at ThomasRoberts

Director Dam Safety Management Division

Enclosures as stated

James Robinson PE Dam Safety Program Manager Thomas Roberts PE Dam Safety Regional Engineer MAINTENANCE Department of Conservation Recreation

Division of Dam Safety Floodplain Management 203 Governor Street Suite 206 Richmond VA 232 192094

Name of Dam Clinch River Fly Ash Dam No Inventoiy Number 16703

Location Offstream Dam Near New River CityCounty Russell

Owner Appalachian Power Company Designed by Casa Graude Consultants Attn William Smith Constructed by Unknown Address 40 Franklin Road PO Box 2021 Year Constructed 1964 lZipQh Roanoke VA 240222121

Type of Dam Rockfill Purpose SedimentFly Ash

Drainage Area Sq 003 Type of Watershed NA

Total Height Ft 55 Elevation 1570

Normal Pool Height Ft 53 Elevation 1568

Maximum Capacity Acre Ft 1240 Maximum Area Acres 21

Normal Capacity Acre Ft 1200 Normal Area Acres 20

Size Classification Medium Hazard Classification III

Required Spillway Design Flood 22 PMF Available Spiliway Design Flood Impounds PMF

Type of Spillway NA Note ifSection 130

Operation and Maintenance Plans Schedule by AEPPedro Jose TrujiVA PE 036174 Reinspection or Inventory Report by AEPPedro Jose AmayaTrujillo VA PE 036174

Emergency Action Plan filed with

Virginia Dept of Emergency Management

Local Coordinator of Emergency Services CityCounty Russell County

Application Reviewed and Recommended for SixYear Regular Certificate 32020083312014

By Thomas Roberts PE 19966 Date March 17 2008

Concunence with the Recommendation

By William Browning Dire Date lar 19 2008 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA

DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION DWISION OF DAM SAFETY VIRGINIA SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION BOARD

DAM SAFETY CERTIFICATE REGULAR

CLASS III OPERATION MAINTENANCE CERTIFICATE NUMBER 16703

Appalachian Power Company owner of Clinch River Fly As Dam in

Russell County is entitled to operate and maintain this dam pursuant to the

provisions of the Dam Safety Act Section 101604 et seq Code of Virginia

and Regulations promulgated thereunder

This certificate is for term of six years It becomes effective March 20

2008 and expires March 31 2014 In accordance with 4VAC5O20100F of

the Regulations the owner shall apply for new certificate 90 days prior to its

expiration fltl

EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN FOR CLASS CLASS AND CLASS ifi STRUC IS

Soil and Reference Impounding Structure Regulations OOh et seq Virginia Water Conservation Board

Name of Impounding Structure River Fly Ash Dike No

Inventory Number

Other Name ifany Area

Hazard Potential Classification from Table iQni Dam ltRegulations

Class Class II Class ifi Underline One

Name of Owner Power

Address Franklin Road P0 Box 2021 Roanoke VA

Telephone 800 9564237 lQl

NameofDam Operator Power Company Clinch River

Address P0 Box 370 Cleveland VA 24225

Telephone QQ276 1540 Residential

NameofAlternateOperator are at the plant 24 hours per

Telephone Residential

Name of Rainfall or Staff Gage Observer for Dam

Address Clinch Plant address as above

Telephone

Name of Alternate Observer

Telephone

DCR 199103 1201 24Hour Dispatch Center Nearest DamPoliceFireSheriffs

Departments County Sheriffs

Address VA

Telephone 889 8033 Residential

Naomi Honaker Name of CityCounty Emergency Management Coordinators

Address 656 Clydesway Drive

PO Box 997

Lebanon VA 24266

Telephone 276 889 8247 Residential

the Name address and telephone number of all occupied dwellings that would be affected in

event of dam failure andor inundation mapping of affected areas

Name Address Telephone Number

occupied dwellings would be effected in the event of dam

DCR 199103 1201 Name address and telephone numbers of owners of all commercial or recreational

establishments that would be affected in the event of dam failure andor an inundation mapping

of affected areas

Name Address Telephone Number

Failure would effect only Virginia of Highways See Item

and 10 Name address and telephone number of owners of property land unoccupied buildings

that would be affected in the event of dam failure andor an inundation mapping of the

affected area

Name Address Telephone Number

See Attachment as 15

DCR 199103 1201 11 ifthere are public roads downstream from the impounding structure identifij by highway

number and distance below dam

Route Route Route Miles Route Miles

Provide name of resident engineer VA Dept of Transportation or CityCounty engineer

Mike Branham

Address Department of Highways Lebanon VA

Telephone 27 889 Re 27

NOTE Items 12 and 13 should be provided from the Operation and Maintenance Application

Definitions

flood watch or heavy continuous rain or excessive flow of water from ice or snow melt

flood warning or emergency iQ activated or dam overtoppingbreach may be possible

Emergency spiilway activated dam overtopping or imminent failure is probable

12 Amount of illh that will initiate

Stage II Condition Attachment per hrs

Attachment per 12 hrs

Attachment per 24 hrs

Stage ifi Condition Attachment per hrs

Attachment per 12 hrs

Attachemnt per 24 hrs

Andor the amount of flow in the emergency spillway that will initiate

Stage Condition depth of flow

Stage ifi Condition depth of flow

Total depth of emergency iQavailable before crest of darn is overtopped feet

of observations rainfallstaff 13 Frequency by gage observer during

Stage Condition Stage

Stage ifi recommend continuous Please jh access route and means of travel during flood conditions

DCR 199103 1201 until elevation starts to Note It is recommended that the Observer remain on post pool

recede

14 Surveillance and Notification

The dam owneroperator tbr noti1 local

site government of any problem or potential problem at the dam

The darn owneroperator dam surveillance under

Stage conditions ie when flood watch is issued

The darn owneroperator the 24hour dispatch center

and the local Emergency Services Coordinator when Stage II

conditions are met in order to alert them to review actions that may be

required for the safety and protection of people and property

The dam owneroperator the 24hour dispatch center and the

local Emergency Services Coordinator to initiate warning of residents when

Stage ifi conditions or imminent dam failure are probable

The owneroperator BE for operating such devices as

low outlets such to the darn to thnction spillway gates and level as cause effectively

Attach narrative if required

24hour center should Standard Procedures to dispatch prepare Operating sh

implement dam overtoppingfailure evacuation plans

15 Evacuation Procedures 24hour Note The dam owneroperator should ihthe CityCounty Dispatch Center as

required in paragraph 14d above Phone should be listed in

Note Once the local government has been notified of any problem at dam site it should take

appropriate protective measures in accordance with the local Ernergency Operations Plan and

accompanying Emergency Action Plan and Standing Operations Procedures Other local

government actions might include

lQlthe individuals who are directly downstmam and in immediate danger

list of the names addresses and telephone numbers of these individuals should

be listed in

Monitoring the situation and iltime permits review of evacuation plans

Begin Alert Notification and Warning

Immediately evacuating the inundation areas if conditions warrant

Expanding Direction and Control as well as beginning Emergency Public

Information and operating shelters

Provide Situation Reports to the State Emergency Operations Center

8046742400 or 8004688892

199103 1201 Once the local government has been notified of condition requiring evacuation the

dam and local government are mutually responsible for effecting evacuation

Thedamowneroperatorwill the Russell County 24hour Dispatch

Center Telephone 276 889 8033 and the Emergency Management

Telephone 276 8898247 home276 8894508 or cell 276 9717147

Local government will the situation begin alert

and warnings evacutate the inundation areas if conditions

warrant Expand directions and control as well as beginning Emergency

Information Provide situation reports to the State

Operations Center 804 6742400 OR 800 4688892

Individuals who are directly downstream and in immediate danger include NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE

See Attachment

Methods for notification and warning to evacuate include Check appropriate methods

Telephone

Policefiresheriff radio dispatch vehicles with loudspeakers bullhorns etc

Personal runners for doortodoor alerting

Radiotelevision broadcasts for area involved

DCR 199103 1201 16 Certification of Coordination between OwnerOperator and Local Government

Certification by OwnerOperator

of this have been coordinated with certify that procedures for implementation plan

and the local Emergency Management Coordinator

Also that copy of this Form has been filed with the State Department of Emergency Management

that the information contained herein that this plan shall be adhered to during the life of the project and is current of my knowledge anes Signat of OwnerOperator

This dayof 20

Printed Name

Certification by Local Government

certify that procedures for the warning and evacuation of

CityCounty residents as required in the event of actual or impending failure of the

River Fly Ash Dike No name of dam have been coordinated with the dam owneroperator

Signature of CityCounty Official

This

Printed Name

Position

Please fill out and mail to

Virginia Department of Emergency Management Dept of Conservation and Recreation

Emergency Services Division of Dam Safety

10501 Trade Ct 203 Governor Street

Richmond Virginia 232363713 Richmond Virginia 232192094

DCR 199103 1201 EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN WORKDATA SHEET

Name of Impounding Structure River Fly Aeh Dike No

Inventory OtherNameifany Storage area

Total Height feet Measured vertically from top of structure to

streambed at downstream toe

Total Impoundment Capacity at top of structure feet

Size Classification Circle one Large Medium

Hazard Classification Circle one Class Class II

lway Design Circle one PMF 100YR YR

Downstream Inundation Area determined by Mark one

Judgement

Empirical Fonnulas Type used

Computer Programs Type used

Critical Conditions used for structure failure Mark one

Failure due to overtopping using

PMIF

PMIF

100YR

Other

Failure not due to flooding

Describe inetability or failure due to piping or

DCR 199103 1201 Clinch River Flyash Dike No Inventory Number 16703

Attachment

No

The ash ponds do not receive large quantities of stormwater runoff therefore storm event

would not result in an overtopping Water falling directly on the pond will not generate

flows which will overtop the structures unless the discharge and emergency overflow

systems are not operating simultaneously

No

City of St Paul Water Plant Earl Carter Box 66 Office 276 7629683

St Paul Virginia 24283 Home 276 7627161

St Paul Police Department Office 276 7625022

16531 Russell Street

St Paul Virginia 24283

Wise County PSA Waterworks Roy Markham Carfax Plant Office 276 7620159 Rt Box 7368 Home 276 3595880

Coeburn Virginia 24230

Virginia Department of Environmental Quality Michael Overstreet Box 976 Office 276 6764800

Abingdon Virginia 24210

Southeast Railroad Contractors Inc James Aldridge 1235 Ohio Avenue Office 540 3871620

Salem Virginia 24153

If unable to contact Wise County PSA Waterworks please contact the Wise County Sheriffs Department at 276 3283566

Emergency Action Plan FL

INVENTORY REPORT FOR CLASS ifi AND CLASS STRUCTURES

Soil and Water Conservation Reference Impounding Structure Regulations 4VAC5O20OO et seq Virginia Board

Project Information

Name of Impounding Structure River Fly Ash Dike No

Name Inventory Number if any

Name of Reservoir River Plant nottom Ponds lA

Purpose of Reservoir of Bottom

Location of Impounding Structure

CityCounty Magisterial District

Located adjacent to Highway No 665

Name of River or Stream eenot impound but is near Clinch

W82 Latitude 55 Longitude

Ownership

Owners Name Power

MailingAddress Franklin Road PO Box

240222121 9Eh Roanoke VA

Owners Engineer

Electric Power Service Engineering FirmEngineer

Professional Engineer Virginia Number Jose Amaya lo

Mailing Address Riverside Plaza Columbus OH

Telephone OR 614

DCR 104 Impounding Structure Data All elevations NGVD unless noted

Type of Material concrete masonry

Other

Top of Dam Elev if known

Downstream Toe Lowest if known

Height of Dam 55 Feet

Crest Length Exclusive of Spillway Feet

Crest Width 35 Feet

Upstream Slope

Downstream Slope

Reservoir Data sQ Configuration

Maximum Capacity Acrefeet

Maximum Pool 1568 Elev if known

Maximum Pool Surface Area

Normal Capacity

Normal Pool 1568 in 1556 if known

Normal Pool Surface Area

Freeboard Normal Pool to Top 3ft in 14

Freeboard Normal Pool to Emergency

Spillway Data

Low Level Drain

Principal Spillway iabl 180 cfs

Emergency Spillway

Low Level Drain None Elev if known

Principal Spillway le if known

Emergency Spillway if known

DCR 199104 1201 of Briefly describe the low level drain and principal spiliway to include dimensions materials

construction trash guards location in reservoir and through dam and orientation of intake and

discharge to dam if looking downstream is no low level drain because

would become clogged with bottom ash or would discharge bottom ash

spillway is variable elevation side hill structurs with remote control

valve

Describe the emergency spillway to include dimensions whether the lway is an earth

channel or other construction spillway surface protection and orientation to dam if looking

downstream This is an upground reservoir which is filled by

Watershed Data Class ifi only 22 acres including pond surface

Drainage Area Sq Miles

Type and Extent of Watershed Development

Time of Concentration Method

Spillway Design Flood used mark appropriate box

PMF source

12 PMF source

100 Year source

50 Year source

XOther source Applicable upgroimd

Design inflow hydrograph Volume feet

Peak inflow

Rainfall duration of design inflow hydrograph hours

of flood Freeboard during passage lway design

Impounding Structure History

Date construction completed modified

Design by

Built by

1991041201 1982 1984 2005 and 2007 Inspection dates annuallyfrom

AEP and Inspections by Consultants Geosytec

Description of repairs drain rebuilt in 1988 Drainage blanket

on ds Slurry cutoff in 1990 North end of drain rebuilt in 1991 Drainage blanket to cover most sections of the slope started Has the impounding structure ever been overtopped Yes No in 2005

10 Impounding Structure Assessment

Provide brief descriptions for each item

Condition of the impounding structure Good

Condition of the reservoir Good

Condition of the upstream area Good

iv Condition of the downstream area Good

Provide narrative in the describing any recent changes impounding structure reservoir

upstream area and downstream area placement of drainage blanket

slope until the low third is entirely covered

Recommendations for remedial measures routine brush cutting and piezometer readings fill gullies and rodent burrows if yE maintain proper operation of seepage control

DCR 199 104 01 11 Provide sketch of the impounding structure

See Attached Sketch

CERTIFICATION BY OWNERS ENGINEER Class ifi only

in this has been examined hereby certify that the information provided Inventory Report by me

to be true and correct in my professional judgment

Signed

Profes onal Engineer

Virginia Number

This

CERTIFICATION BY OWNER Class IV only

hereby certify that the information provided in this Inventory Report is true and correct

Signed

Owner

This day of

Please fill out and mail to

Department of Coaservation and Recreation Division of Dam Safety 203 Governor Street

Richmond Virginia 232192094

199104 1201 REVISION

FEBRUARY 1996 NOTCH WHIR NORTH

100 200 300

SCALE FEET

TEQ PJEZOMEmR RUNOFF DIVERSION DAM

PUMPS

ASH POND

VNOTCH WHIR

NATURAL WHIR HIGHER GROUND

VNOTCH WEIR

PLANT

PLANT ASH AREA INSPECTION LOCATION PLAN OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE APPLICATION CLASS AM ifi STRUCTURES

Reference Impounding Structures Regulations 4VAC 00h et seq Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board

Name of Impounding Structure River Fly Ash Dike No

Ash Area lA Inventory Number Other Name if Storage

la Potential Classification from Table Impounding Structure Regulations

Circle One Class Class II

Name of Owner Appalachian Power Conpany

Address Franklin Road PO Box 1l VA

Telephone Business Residential

Operating Plan and Schedule Provide narrative for each item

Operation of control gates and lways Attachment

Operation of Reservoir Drain not to exceed foot drawdown per day on embankment dams

See Attachment

Maintenance Plan and Schedule

Provide narrative for each item Embankment Dams embankment

principal spiliway Attachment

emergency spillway See Attachment

low level outlet See Attachment

reservoir area See Attachment

downstream channel See Attachment

other See Attachment

Concrete dams including masonry and others upstream face

DCR 199 1201 downstream face NA

crest NA

galleries NA

tunnels etc NA

abutments

lways NA

gates and outlets NA

other NA

Inspection schedule aft ach schedule and checklist

operator inspection daily weekly etc Weekly No Checklist

maintenance inspection monthly quarterly semiannual annual Qunrterly Checklist Attached

technical safety reinspection by professional engineer required for certification update Class dams

every two years Class II dams every three years All dams inspected after overtopping Inspected annually by piofessional engineer and submitted to the state

Emergency Action Plan Schedule

Provide the information that initiates the Emergency Action Plan rainfallamounts andor is an upground reservoir with little or no drainage beyond its own perimeter spdlway flows inflow is controlled by pumping of ashwater slurry EAP be triggered by enbanknent instability or failure due to piping or erosion frequency of observation

For newly constructed impounding structure provide certification from Professional Engineer who has the inspected impounding structure during consiruction that to the best of the engineers judgment knowledge and the belief impounding structure and all appurtenances have been constructed in conformance with the plans specifications and drawings submitted to the Department of Conservation and Recitation

Not Applicable

199099 120 OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE PERMIT APPLICATION

OPERATION ANI iNT SCHEDULES CERTIFICATION BY OWNER

will be adhered to hereby certii that the operation and maintenance plans and schedules provided herewith during therefrom in order to the life of the project except in cases of unanticipated emergency requiring departure mitigate will be hazards to life and property at which time my engineer and the Department of Conservation and Recreation notified

Signed

This day of kx 20 Ct

CERTIFICATE BY OWNERS ENGINEER

hereby certi that the information provided in this form has been examined by me and found in my professional judgment to be appropriate to operation and maintenance considerations for this dam

Signed VirginiaNumber

Professi al Engineer

This dayof

Remarks npqronnd reservoir has been operated successfully for many years for the

purpose of sedimentation of bottom We intend to continue our program of careful

with frequent periodic inspections and we will continue to perform remedial

and maintenance as required by conditions

Please fill out and mail this form to Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Dam Safety 203 Governor Street

Richmond Virginia 232192094

DCR 199099 1201 Clinch River Fly Ash Dike No Inventory Number 16703

Attachment

4a Operation of control gates and lways The discharge structure for this pond consists of variable elevation vertical drainage shaft connected to 36inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe The overflow elevation of the lway may be changed by inserting or removing steel plates Flow is controlled by pneumatic piston activated slide gate which responds to water level sensors at the

recirculation pond Freeboard is sufficient to store the Probable Maximum Flood

4b Operation of Reservoir Drain There is no reservoir drain of this facility because such drain would either become clogged with bottom ash or

would discharge it from the pond The pond can be drained by

pumping if desired

Sa Embankment The upstream and downstream slopes are visually inspected by plant personnel several times each week Items

checked for include signs of instability seepage rodent burrows erosion features and vegetative cover Grass brush and tree

cutting is done as needed Rodent burrows and erosion gullies are filled in when they are found

Principal lway The principal lway forthis upground reservoir consists of variable elevation sidehill overflow

structure connected to 30inch diameter discharge pipe It is

inspected visually by plant personnel several times each week and would be repaired promptly by plant personnel or contract

forces if necessary

Emergency lway Not applicable see 4a above

Low Level Outlet Not Applicable

Reservoir Area Since this is an upground reservoir the reservoir

area is checked when the upstream slopes are inspected

Downstream Channel The ponds 36inch diameter discharge pipe terminates at concrete sump box where the discharge waters are collected and pumped to recirculation pond

Other No comment

Operation and Maintenance Application Page of Revision 52093

RIVER DIKE INSPECTION

Date of Inspection

Inspected by

Weather

Temperature

Rainfall During Past Days

Reservoir elevations at time of inspection

Pond

Pond 13

Pond

CONDITION AT PONDS lA

Please refer to the Ash Area Dike Inspection Location Plan which is found on Page Place number and descriptive sketch on the location plan at each problem area Place the same numbers next to the appropriate descriptions

Cracks

Bulges

Sliding

Erosion

Soft Soil Page of Revision 52093

Leaking Pipe

SeepageWetness

Vegetative Cover

Trees on Slope

Hillside Runoff Drain

Hillside Runoff Drain

Rodent Burrows

Other Please Specify

READINGS AT PONDS

PIEZ ELEV TOP DEPTH TO WATER WATER OF Uh FROM TOP OF Al 67 A2R 15695

A3 15350 AS 15722

A6 15713

A7R 15720

31 15712

15711

B3R 15709 B4R 15711 BSR 16714

36 16718

Pl 15299 Page of Revision 52093

15206

15199

24 15186

1512

15170

15232

15212

Please determine the flow rate in gallons per minute for each of the Vnotch weirs This can be done by measuring the head of water above the apex of the Vnotch to the nearest 14 inch and comparing it to the chart below

HEADU FLOW RATE GPM HEAD FLOW RATE GPM WEIR WEIR INCHES 900 WEIR WEIR 075 37 72 14 14 45 89 12 14 12 53 108 34 19 34 65 125 12 26 76 145 14 17 34 14 88 168 12 24 46 12 100 19 34 30 59 34 114 216

Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute

COLLECTION

Please determine the flow rate in gallons per minute of the two branches of the French drain at the foot diameter seepage collection sump This can be done by measuring how much the water Page of Revision 52093

level rises while recording the time during period when both pumps are off Flow rate is given by the following formula

FLOW RATE

in which rise of water level in feet during the unpumped time interval in seconds

FLOW RATE GALLONS PER DT

STRUCTURE AT POND

Please note the conditions with regard to the following

Condition of concrete

Are stoplogs available

Obstructions

Foreign object in pond

Pedestrian access OK

Erosion Problems

Other Please specify

AT PONDS

Is seepage repair area OK

What is condition of French drain Is white precipitate building up impeding drainage

What is the overall condition of the discharge structure from Pond lA to Pond lB Page of Revision 52093

Are seepage sump pumps

Is entrance to 24 seepage overflow pipe clear of obstructions

lB NOTES AND COMMENTS INCLUDING JOB ORDERS WRITTEN AND REPAIRSMAINTENANCE SINCE LAST

CONDITION AT POND

Please refer to the Ash Area Dike Inspection Location Plan which is found on Page Place number and descriptive sketch on the location plan at each problem area Place the same numbers next to the appropriate descriptions below

Cracks

Bulges

Sliding

Erosion

Soft Soil

Leaking Pipe

SeepageWetness Page of Revision 52093

Vegetative Cover

Trees on Slope

Rodent Burrows

Other Please Specify

READINGS AT POND DEPTH TO PIEZ ELEV TOP WATER FROM WATER OF Uh TOP OF Uh COMMENTS Pl 15570

P2 15558

15567

P4 15574

Ps 15577

P6 15574 P7

Ps 15574

P9 15582

Ul 15600

U2 15611

U3 15600

16600

L5 16320

L6 15320 L7 53 LS 16347 Page of Revision 52093

PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE BETWEEN LOWER LEVEL AND MIDDLE LEVEL DIKES WORKING PROPERLY AND IN GOOD

12 STRUCTURE AT POND

Please note the conditions with regard to the following

Condition of concrete

Gatesvalves operational

Obstructions

Is access clear

Erosion problems

Other Please specify

13 NOTES AND COMMENTS INCLUDING JOB ORDERS WRITTEN AND REMEDIAL WORK DONE SINCE LAST FAOE OF REVISION FEBRUARY 1996

NOTCH WHIR NORTH

300 190 290

SCALE FEET

DENOTES PIEZOMETER

RUNOFF DIVERSION DAM

RUNOFF DIVERSION DAM

PIT PUMPS

NOTCH WHIR

ASH POND VNOTCH WHIR

NATURAL HIGHER GROUND

PLANT

INCth Hh DIKE CQPLAN PAGE OF

Revised 42998

DENOTES 4ETER

300

SCALE FEE

Inactive

ASH

OVERFLOW STRUCTDRE

Upper Dike Removed 1998

aASLN

JQi PT iQ fl TN

APPENDIX A

Document 2B

Virginia DCR Inventory Number 16702 Certificate, Inventory Report and Operation & Maintenance Program

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 2: VIRGINIA DCR INVENTORY NUMBER 16702 CERTIFICATE, INVENTORY REPORT AND OPERATION & MAINTENANCE PROGRAM

Preston Jr Bryant Joseph Maroon

Secretary of Natural Resources Director

COMMONWEALTH of DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION AND RECREATION

203 Governor Street Suite 206

Richmond Virginia 232192010

804371 6095 Fax8043712630

April 2008

Appalachian Power Company Attn William Smith

Post Office Box 2021 Roanoke VA 24022

RE Clinch River Fly Ash Dam Inventory Number 16702

Dear Mr Smith

The Operation and Maintenance Certificate Application for Clinch River Fly Ash Dam

Inventory Number 16702 and the required supporting documents have been reviewed for compliance

with the provisions of the Code of Virginia Dam Safety Act Section 101604 et seq and the

regulations promulgated by the Virginia Soil and Water Conseniation Board Board Based on this information on March 20 2008 the Board issued sixyear 03202008 3312014 Regular Class

Operation and Maintenance Certificate Certificate The Certificate and other pertinent data are enclosed

The Dam Safety Act requires dam owners to maintain their dam in condition to prevent

unreasonable threats to life and property of others The classification of your dam and the Certificate issued were based on the current known downstream hazard potential from upstream characteristics

reinspection report operation and maintenance application and an emergency action plan The actions contained in the documents accompanying your Certificate Application must be adhered to for

the duration of the terms contained in the Certificate To assist you in adhering to the terms of the

Certificate the following table provides schedule of dates to submit required documents

State Parks Soil and Water Conservation Natural Heritage Outdoor Recreation Planning

Chesapeake Bay LocalAssistance Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Land Conservation William Smith

April

Page

Annual Owners Inspection Owners Engineer Renewal Certification Six Year Owner and Owners Report Inventory Report Application by Engineer

03312009

03312010

03312011

033 120 12

03312013 12312013 12312013

Should you have questions please direct them to Thomas Roberts Dam Safety

Regional Engineer Department of Conservation and Recreation Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Division Radford Street Suite 203 Christiansburg VA 24073 telephone 394 2550 or via email at ThomasRoberts

Sincerel

William Browning

Director Dam Safety Floodplain Management Division

Enclosures as stated

James Robinson Dam Safety Program Manager

Thomas Roberts PE Dam Safety Regional Engineer MAINTENANCE Depaitnient of Consei ion Recreation

Division of Dam Safet Floodplain Management

203 Governor Street Suite 206 Richmond VA 232192094

Name ofDam Clinch Rivei Fly Ash Darn No iub 16702

Location Offstream Dam Neat New River City County Russell

Owner Appalachian Power Company Designed by Casa ancle Consultants Attn William Smith Consti ucted by Unknown Address 40 Franklin Road PO Box 2021 Yeai Constructed 1964 lZiph Roanoke VA 240222121

Type of Dam Rockfill Puipose SedimentFly Ash

Drainage Area Sq 002 Type of Wateished NA

Total Height Ft 65 Eleation 1560

Normal Pool Height 62 Elevation 1557

Maximum Capacity Acre 157 Maximum Aiea Acres

Normal Capacity Acre Ft 82 Nonnal Aiea Acies 10

Size Classification Medium Hazaid Classification III

Required Spillway Design Flood 28 PMF Available llwa Design Flood Impounds PMF

of Section Type lway NA Note if 130

and Maintenance Plans Schedule Jose VA PE 0361 74 Operation by iQoh yaT Reinspection or Invcntoiy Repot by AEPPedi Jose Tih ujillo VA FE 0361 74

Emergency Action Plan filed with

Virginia Dept of Emergency Management Local Coordinator of Emergency Services CityCounty Russell County

Application Reviewed and Recommended for SixYear Regular Certificate 32020083312014

By Thomas Roberts PE 19966 Date March 18 2008

Concurrence with the Recommendation

By William Browni Date March 19 2008 COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA

DEPARTMENT OF iONhAND RECREATION DIVISION OF DAM SAFETY VIRGINIA SOIL AND WATER CONSERVATION BOARD

DAM SAFETY CERTIFICATE REGULAR

CLASS III OPERATION MAINTENANCE CERTIFICATE NUMBER 16702

Appalachian Power Company owner of Clinch River Fly Ash Dam in

Russell County is entitled to operate and maintain this dam pursuant to the

provisions of the Dam Safety Act Section 101604 et seq Code of Virginia

and Regulations promulgated thereunder

This certificate is for term of six years It becomes effective March 20

2008 and expires March 31 2014 In accordance with 4VAC5O20100F of

the Regulations the owner shall apply for new certificate 90 days prior to its

expiration 4tDCR

EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN FOR CLASS CLASS AM CLASS ifi NG STRUCTURES

Soil and Water Reference Impounding Structure Regulations 0OOh et seq Virginia Conservation Board

Name of Impounding Structure il Fly Ash Dike No

InventoryNumber

Other Name if any free

Hazard Potential Classification hem Table Virginia Dam Safety Regulations

Class Class Class ifi Underline One

Name of Owner Power

Address 40 Road P0 Box 2021 Roanoke VA 24022

Telephone soo 9564237

Name of Dam Operator Power Company Clinch River

Address Box 370 Cleveland VA

Telephone Bu 276 EJU

Name lter Operator are at the plant 24 hours per Telephone El

Name of Rainfall or Staff Gage Observer for Dam

Address co Clinch River Plant address as above

Telephone

Name Observer

Telephone

199103 24Hour Dispatch Center Nearest DamPoliceF riffs

Departments County Sheriffs

Address Lebanon VA 24266

lep Uh 889 8033

Name of CityCounty Emergency Management Coordinators

Address 656 Clydesway Drive Suite

Box 997

Lebanon VA 24266

lep 889 275 873

Name address and tekphone number of all occupied dwellings that would be affected in the

event of dam failure andor inundation mapping of affected areas

Name Address Telephone Number occupied dwellings would be effected in the event of dam

199103 1201 of all commercial recreational Name address and telephone numbers of owners or

establishments that would be affected in the event of dam failure andox an inundation mapping

of affected re

Name Address Telephone Number

Failure would effect only Viiqinia Department of See Item

Name address and telephone number of owners of property land and unoccupied buildings

that would be affected in the event of dam failure andor an inundation mapping th

affected area

Name Address Telephone Number

See Attachment Same as

199103 1201 11 there are public toads downstream from the impounding structure identify by highway

number and distance below dam QIh QIh Route Miles Route Miles

Provide name of resident engineer VA Dept of or CityCounty engineer

Mike Branham

Address Vrqinia Department of Lebanon VA 24255

Telephone BusinessL2 7j 3131

NOTE Items 12 and 13 should be provided from the Operation and Maintenance Application

Definitions

Stage Condition flood watch or heavy continuous rain or excessive flow of water from ice or

snow melt

flood warning or emergency spifiway activated or dam overtoppingbreath may be possible

Emergency spifiway dam overtopping or xQtIhilure is probable

12 Amountofrainthllthatwiil initiate

Stage II Condition Sec hrs

inches per 12 his

Attachment per 24 his

Stage ifi Condition per his

Attachment per 12 his

Attachamnt per 24 is

Andor the amount of flow in the emergency lway that will initiate

Stage II Condition depth of flow Stage ifi Condition depth of flow

Total of depth emergency spifiway available before crest of dam is overtopped

eet

of observations 13 Frequency by gage observer during

Stage Condition Stage

Stage ifi recommend continuous

Please identify access route and means of travel during flood conditions

199103 1201 until elevation starts to Note It is recommended that the Observer remain on post pooi

recede

14 Surveillance and Notification

The dam owneroperator for notifying local

at the clam site government of any problem or potential problem

The darn owneropeiatoi lATE dam surveillance under

Stage conditions when flood watch is issued

The dam owneroperator the 24horn dispatch center

and the local Emergency Services Coordinator when Stage

conditions are met in order to alert them to review actions tnat may be and required for the safety and protection of people properly

The dam owneroperator the 24hour dispatch center and the

local Emergency Services Coordinator to initiate warning of residents when

Stage ifi conditions or imminent dam failure are probable

The owneroperator BE for operating such devices as

such the dam to function spiliway gates and low level outlets as to cause effectively

Attach narrative if required

24horn center should Standard Procedures to dispatch prepare Operating sh implement dam thlQlureh evacuation plans

Evacuation Procedures

Note The dam should the 24hour as opera notify CityCounty Dispatch Center

required in paragraph 14d above Phone should be listed in

Note Once the local government has been notified of any emh at dam site it should talce

appropriate protective measures in accordance with the local Emergency Operations Plan and

accompanying Emergency Action Plan and Standing Operations Procedures Other local

government actions might include

Notify the individuals who are directly downstream and in immediate danger

list ofthe names addresses and telephone numbers of these individuals should

be listed in

Monitoring the situation and if time permits review of evacuation plans

Begin Alert Notification and Warning

Immediately evacuating the inundation areas if conditions warrant

Expanding Direction and Control as well as beginning Emergency Public

Information and operating shelters

Provide Situation Reports to the State Emergency Operations Center

8046742400 or 8004688892

DCR 199103 1201 Once the local government has been notified of condition requiting evacuation the dam iatorh and local government are mutually responsible for ling

evacuation

the County 24hour Dispatch

Center Telephone 5l 3893033 and the Emergency Managument

lelephorie 2768999247 or cell276 9717147

Local government wifi the situation alert notification

and warnings evacutate the inundation areas if

and directions and control as les

Provide situation reports to the State Emergency

Operations Centen 804 6742400 OR 800 468 89

Individuals who are directly downstream and in immediate danger include NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE

See Attachment

Methods for notification and warning to evacuate include

Check appropriate methods

Telephone

Qiadiohdispatch vehicles with loudspeakers

bullhorns etc

Personal runners for doortodoor alerting

Radiotelevision broadcasts for area involved

199103 1201 16 Certification of Coordination between OwnerOperator and Local Government

Certification by OwnerOperator

of this have been coordinated with certify that procedures for implementation plan

and the local Emergency Management Coordinator

State of Also that copy of this Form has been ified with the Depariment Emergency Management

and that the information contained herein that this plan shall be adhered to during the life of the project is current to my knowledge iQiE of OwnerOperator

This day of 20

Printed Name

Certification by Local Government

certify that procedures for the warning and evacuation of

CityCounty residents as required in the event of actual or impending failure of the

River F4y Ash Dike No name of dam have been Inated with the dam owneroperator

Siof CityCounty Official

This day of

Printed Name

Position

Please fill out and mail to

Virginia Department of rgen Management Dept of Conservation and Recreation

Emergency Services Division of Dam Safety

10501 Trade Ct 203 Governor Street

Richmond iah 232363713 Richmond Virginia 232192094

199103 1201 EMERGENCY ACTION PLAN WORKDATA UE

Name of Impounding Structure Rivex Ply Ash

iyh rNarn any area inactive

Total Height feet vertically lam top of structure to

streambed at downstream toe

Total Impoundment Capacity at top of stiuctur cfeet

Size Classification Circle one ig Medium

idh Classification Circle one Class Class II

Spillway Design Circle one PMIE 100YR YR

Downstream Inundation Area determined by Mark one

Judgement

used Empirical Formulas Type

Computer Programs Type used

Critical Conditions used for structure failure Mark one

Failure due to overtopping using IF

PMIE YR

Other

Failure not due to flooding

Describe instability or failure due to piping or

199103 1201 Clinch River Flyash Dike No Inventory Number 16702

Attachment

No

The ash ponds do not ieceive large quantifies of stormwatei runoff therefbre storm event

would not result in an overtopping Water falling directly on the pond will not generate

flows which wilt overtop the iesh unless the discharge and emergency overflow

systems are not operating simultaneously The facility has been inactive since November 1995 The upper Dike wad removed in 1998 with permission fiom the Department of

Conservation Recreation Darn Safety

City of St Paul Water Plant Earl Carter PO Box 66 Office 276 7629683 St Paul Virginia 24283 Home 276 7627161

St Paul Police Department Office 276 7625022 16531 Russell Street

St Paul Virginia 24283

Wise County PSA Waterworks Roy Markham Carfax Plant Office 276 7620159 Rt Box 7368 1lorne 276 3595880 run Virginia 24230

ihin Department of Enviromnental Quality Michael Oveistrcet Box 976 Office 276 6764800

Abingdon Virginia 24210

Southeast Railroad Contractors tames ridg 1235 Ohio Avenue Office 540 3871620

Salem Virginia 24153

If unable to contact Wise County PSA please contact the Wise County Sheriffs Department at 276 3283566

Emergency Action Plan dT OPERATION AND NFAPPLICATION CLASS AND IM1 STRUCTURES

4VAC Soil and Water Conservation Board lQImpounding Structures Regulations 00h et seq Virginia

Name of Impounding Structure River Fly Ash Dike No

Number ih Name if any Potential lafiom Table Impounding Structure Regulations

Circle One Class Class

Nameof Owner yl

Address 40 Road Box 2021 Ruanoke VA

Telephone Business S9f Residential

iati Plan and Schedule Piovide narrative for each item

Attachment Operation of control gates and fQl

Operation of Reservoir Drum not to exceed foot drawdown per day on embankment dams

See

Maintenance Plan and Schedule

Ptovide narrative for each item mnenthDarns embankment Attachment

principal spillway Attachment

emergency spillway Attachment

low level outlet See Attachment

reservoir area See Attachment

downstream channel Attachment

other Attachment

Concrete dams including masonry and others upstream face

099 1201 downstream NA

crest NA

rQIes NA

tunnels etc NA

abutments NA

lQi

gates and outlets NA

other

Inspection schedule attach schedule and checklist

operator inspection daily weeldy etc Weakly No Checklist

maintenance inspection monthly quarterly semiannual annual Quarterly Checklist Attached

technical safbty reinspection by professional engineer required certification update Class dams dams every two years Class every three years All dams inspected after overtopping Inspected annually by professional engineer and submitted to the state

Emergency Action Plan Schedule

Provide the that initiates the Emergency Action Plan rainfall amounts andor is an pro reservoir with little or no nqQe area beyond its own perimeter lway flows fl is controlled by pumping of ashwater slurry EAP be triggered by embankment instability or failure due to piping or erosion fiequency of observation

rh newly constructed impounding provide certification flora Professional Engineer has tbe structure the inspected impounding during iruct that to best ofthe engineers judgment knowledge and the belief impounding reh and all appurtenances have been constructed in conformance with the plans arid specifications drawings submitted to the Department of Conservation and Recreation

199099 1201 OPERATION AND AJPERMIT APPLICATION IONh AND MAINTENANCE SCHEDULES ER BY OWNER

Thereby certify that the operation and maintenance plans and schedules provided herewith will be adhered to dining thercflorn in order the life of the project except in cases of unanticipated emeigency requiring departure to mitigate be hazards to life and property at which time my engineer and the Department of ivatio and Recreation will

notified

Signed

hi dayof

ICATEh BY OWNERS ENGINEER

that in this form has been examined and fotmd in hereby certify the information provided byrne my professional be late to and considerations for this dam judgment to ih operation int

Signed VirginiaNumber Profe aaltQQkEngineer Remains upground reservoir has been operated successfully many years for the

purpose of sedimentation bottom ash We intend to continue our program of careful

operation with freotent periodic inspections arid we will continue to perform remedial reapirs end maintainence as refield conditions This facility has been since

aQs ih anti this to Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Dam Safety 203 Governor Street ic 2094

DCR 199099 1201 Clinch iv Fly Ash Dike No ntor Number 16702

Attachment

4a Operation of control gates and spifiways Clinch River Plant bat used

Pond No in November 1995 the discharge for this pond consists of variaMe sidehiU drainage shaft connected to inch diameter reinforced concrete pipe The EQl elevation of the spiflway may be changed by inseftng or removing steel plates Flow is controlled by

pneumatic piston activated Side gate which responds to water level sensors at the lationh pond Freeboard is sufficient to store the Probable imum Flood

4b Operation of Reservoir Drain There is no rQvn drain of this facility because such drain would either become clogged with bottom ash or

Would discharge it from the pond

Embankment the upstream and downstream slopes are lQiy inspected by plant personnel checked for include signs of

invisibility seepage rodent burrows emsion features and vegetative cover brush and tree cuffing is done as needed Rodent burrows

and erosion gullies are filled in when they are filled in when they are found

Principal liwa The principal iQ for this upground reservoir consists of variable elevation id overflow structure connected to in diameter discharge pipe

Emergency iQ Not Applicable See 4a above

Low Level Outlet Not Applicable

Reservoir Area Since this is an upground reservoir the reservoir area is checked when the upstream dopes are inspected

Downstream Channel The ponds 30inch diameter discharge pipe terminates at concrete sump box where the discharge waters are directed to latQion pond

Other No Comment

Since the pond has not operated since 1995 thorough inspection would be necessary before the pond is returned to service

Operation and Maintenance Application Page of Revision 52093

RIVER DIKE INSPECTION FOP

Date of Inspection

Inspected by

Weather

Temperatur

Rainfall During Past Days

Reservoir elevations at time of inspection

Pond

Pond 13

Pond

CONDITION AT PONDS

Please refer to the Ash Aea Dike Inspection Location Plan which is found on Page Place number and descriptive sketch on the location plan at each problem area Place the same numbers next to the appropriate descriptions below

DESCRIPTION

Cracks

Bulges

Sliding

Erosion

Soft Soil Page of Revision 52093

Leaking Pipe

SeepageWetness

Vegetative Cover

Trees on Slope

Hillside Runoff Drain

Hillside Runoff Drain

Rodent Burrows

Other Please Specify

OMETERS READINGS AT PONDS

PIEZ TOP DEPTH TO WATER WATER NO Uh FROM TOP OF Uh 16710

A3 15350

15722

A6 15713 57 Bi 2h Eh 9h 13711

SR 15714

BS 15718

15299 Page of Revision 52093

1520

1519

15186

1512

15170

VNOTCH fQ

Please determine the flow rate in gallons per minute for eaoh of the Vnotoh This oan be done by measuring the head of water above the apex of the Vnotch to the nearest 14 inch and oomparing it to the chart

HEAD FLOW RATE GPM HEAD FLOW RATE GPN INCHES 900 WEIR 22 INCHES 22 075 37 114 314 45 89 112 14 12 53 108 34 34 65 225 12 26 76 145 14 17 34 14 88 168 12 24 46 12 100 19 34 30 59 34 114 216

Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotoh Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch rh gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute

COLLECTION

Please determine the flow rate in gallons per minute of the two branches of the French drain at the foot diameter seepage collection This can be done by measuring how much the water Page of Revision 52093

level rises while recording the time during period when both pumps are off Flow rate is given by the following formula

FLOW RATE

in which rise of water level in feet during the unpumped time interval in seconds

FLOW RATE GALLONS PER HflTtJTE

STRUCTURE AT POND

Please note the conditions with regard to the following

Condition of concrete

Are stoplogs available

Obstructions

Foreign object in pond

Pedestrian access

Erosion Problems

Other Please specify

AT PONDS lA

Is seepage repair area 1C

What is condition of French drain Is white precipitate building up imoeding drainage

What is the overall condition of the discharge structure from to Pond IB Page of Revision 52093

Are seepage sump pumps OK

Is entrance to 24 seepage overflow pipe clear of obstructions

lA lB NOTES AND COMMENTS 0Lt JOB ORDERS WRITTEN AND REPAIRSMAINTENANCE SINCE LAST

CONDITION AT POND

Please refer to the Ash Area Dike Inspection Location Plan which is found on Page Place number and descriptive sketch on the location plan at each problem Place the same numbers next to the appropriate descriptions below

LOCATION BERS

Cracks

Bulges

Sliding

Erosion

Soft Soil

Leaking Pipe

SeepageWetness Page of Revision 52093

DESCRIPTION QI

Vegetative Cover

Trees on Slope

Rodent Burrows

Other Please Specify

READINGS AT POND AR DEPTH TO PIEZ ELEV TOP WATER FROM WATER OF Uh TOP OF Uh IQQIQ 15570 8h 15567 P4 4h Sh

15574

15574 2h Ui 15600 U2 11 U3 15600

U4 15600 L5 0h L6 0h 15353

15347 Page of Revision 52093

PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE BETWEEN LOWER LEVEL AND MIDDLE LEVEL DIKES WORKING PROPERLY AND IN GOOD

12 STRUCTURE POND

Please note the conditions with tegard to the following

Condition of oonorete

Gatesvalves operational

Obstructions

Is access olear

Erosion problems

Other Please speoify

ANDC INCLUDING JOB ORDERS WRITTEN AND REMEDIAL WORK DONE SINCE LAST EVAGE OF FEBRUARY 1996 IR NORTH

130 203

SCALE FEET

DENOTES ER RUNOFF DIVERSION DAM

RUNOFF DIVERSION DAM

PUMPS

VNOTCH WHIR

ASH POND VNOTCH WHIR

IONATURALQID

VNOT OH

PLANT

PLANT ASH AREA LQCATION PAGE OF

iQl4299

PIEZDFIEIER

300 300

SCALE

Inact ye

SQ AREA OR

Upper DHce Removed 1998

pU

GLANCE RIVERPLANT AREA IJNl anrqdci

TORYh FOR CLASS AM CLASS WO SIRUCTURES

et Soil id Water Conservation Reference Impounding hu Regulations 0QOQh seq Virginia Board

Project Infbrmation

Name of Impounding Structure River Ash Dike No

inventory Number Other Name if any

Name of Reservoir River Plant Bottom Ponds

of Bottom Purpose of Reservoir

Location of Impounding Structure

CityCounty Magisterial District

Located ream of Highway No

Name of River or Stream not but is near Dumps tributary of the Clinch River Latitude 0E Longitude

Ownership

Owners Name Power

en Road Box Te Roanckn VA

shEngineer

Engineering Engi Electric Power Service Professional Engineer Virginia beQ Jose aTQ lQi Riverside Plaza Columbus

Telephone OR 6141

DCR 199104 1201 Impounding Structure Data All elevations NGVD unless noted

Type of Material earth concrete masonry

Other

lop of Dam if icnown

Downstream Toe Lowest 1e if known

Height of Dam Feet

Crest Length Exclusive of Spillway

Crest Width

Upstream Slope

Downstream Slope Facility consists of dikes impoundments as terraces This facility has been inactive since 1995 Downstream toe elevation given foi lowest point of lowest dike See Diagram

Reservoir Data

Maximum Capacity re

Maximum Pool 1563 Elev if known

Maximum Pool Surface Area 125 Acres

Normal Capacity ro

Normal Pool if known

Normal Pool Surface Area Acres

Freeboard Normal Pool to lop

Freeboard Normal Pool to Ernest gency NA Feet

Spillway Data Cap

Low Level Drain

Wait Principal lway lU 200 cfs

Emergency liwa

Low Level Drain Mone if known

Principal Spifiway 1557 Eiev if known

Emergency llwa None P1ev if in

199104 1201 drain and to materials of tQa describe the bw principal spillway lude dimensions

construction trash guards location in reservoir and through darn and orientation of intake and

discharge to dam if looking downstream no low level drain because uld with bottom ash or would pQgQu bottom

is variable elevation hill with control

Describe the emergency spillway to include dimcnsioas whether the spiliway is an earth

channel or other construction spiliway surface protection and orientation to dam if looking

downstream is sri pr reservoir which is

Watershed Data Class ifi only 13 acres including pond

Drainage Area Sq Miles

Type and Extent of Watershed Development

Time of Concentration Method

Spillway Design nsed mark appropriate box Ih source

PIvif source

100 Year source

50 Year source

xOther source Applicable tmdl

Design inflow hydrograph Volume bowh

iE duration of design inflow rogr

Freeboard during passage of spillway design flood

impounding Structure History

Date construction completed modified 1970

Design by Date

Builtby

104 1201 dates 1980 1982 annually from 200

consultants Inspections by

Descrption of rsh dike in repairs

placement of additional filler mate and ri rap at ds Since then routine maintenance based on recommendations from annual inspections Has the impounding structure ever been overtopped Yes No

10 Impounding Structure Assessment

Provide brief descriptions for each item

Condition of the impounding structure Good

Condition of the irh Good

Condition of the ih earn area Good

Condition of the downstream ra Good

Provide narrative describing any recent changes in the impounding structure ir

upstream area and downstream area the upper was removed in order

to reclaim the bottom ash for sales Permission was received from Duncan

agor the Division of Dam prior to beg

Recommendations for remedial measurer routine brush cutting and

readings fill lli and rodent burrows they

mnintian pcrper operation of seep

DCR 199104 120 11 Piovide sketch of the impounding structure

See Attac Sketch

IONh BY QtSS ENGINEER lQ only

and hereby iQy that the information provided in this Inventoiy Report has been examined by me

to be true and correct in my professional judgment

Si Engineerf

rg Number

of

IONh BY OWNER Class ly

hereby certify that the information provided in this inventory Report is true and correct

This day of

Please fill arid mail to iQtQi of aQ and are Division of Darn SaMy 203 Govnaor Street Richmond ir232192094

DCR 104 1201 Revised

DENOTES

03 200

SORLE

kEN

RFLO OIQL

Upper Dike Removed

SQ

RIVER PLANT ASH AREA DIKE INSPECTION LOCATION

APPENDIX A

Document 3

DCR Inspection Email to AEP, 2008

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 3: DCR INSPECTION EMAIL TO AEP, 2008

Thomas Roberts To aepQco Thomas dcrh virgini cc leraep corn Thomas Roberts Thomas virginiah 20 0537

Subject 16702 Clinch River Ffyash Dam 16703 Clinch River

Flyash Dam

History This message has been forwarded

Mr Smith

Visited the AEP site in Carbo yestet day with Rex Peppler and Monty Guy couple of quick observations

It does not look like the data provided on the Inventory Report was up to date on the

Clinch River Flyash Dam for volume of normal pool and maximum pool for normal

surface area etc Looks like the numbers provided are 15 years or more out of date

When convenient please revise the numbers ie normal pool acre feet and send me

corrected copy for the file

It appears that there is no dam here at all made for the impounding of water just plateau

with few berms here and there By the vegetation it appears that there is not even

ponding during heavy rainfall events As as could tell this area has not been used

for many years You might consider having your engineer review this to determine if you

have the volume needed at least 15 acre feet for dams over high to justif keeping

this as regulated dam lf you determine that it is no long of size to be regulated

please forward letter from your Proffessional Engineer indicating the reasons and we

will close out this dam as regulated dam

If is still dam and is still continue to be regulated all brush on the dams and within

25 of the dams must be removed and maintained This dam does not appear to be

hazard class other than Class Ill

The same information needs to be updated on the Inventory Report for Dam

Dam looks like it has been devided with permanent dike road through the former

dam volume The the dike road is at the same elevation as the top of the dam

Effectively the area to the South West of the dike road has separate volume flom the

area to the North East With some measurements think it is possible for your engineer

to show that neither of these volumes exceed 15 acre feet of water ash to be removed

If Dam does turn out to still be tegulatable then you will need to have your engineer

review the hazard class with respect to the roadway just below the dam Essentially if

the dam did fall would it wash over the toad If so it is likely that this is Class

hazard dam rather than class

lfDam does turn out to still be latab then all trees and brush within of the dam embankment toe top ete must be removed Mr Peppler indicated that he would

be taking care of removing the trees

Ihere is no rush on the above items but they should be addressed in the next months left both of these dams on the list for Regular Certificates

Please call me if you have questions or comments

Tom Roberts

Thomas Roberts PE Regional Engineer Dam Safety

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation

Dam Safety and Floodplain Management

Radford Street Suite 201

Christiansburg Virginia 24073 3341 Phone 540 394 2550

APPENDIX A

Document 4

Dam Safety Inspection Report, by Woodward- Clyde Consultants

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 4: DAM SAFETY INSPECTION REPORT, BY WOODWARD-CLYDE CONSULTANTS

DAM SAFETY INSPECTION POND 1 AND POND 2 1978

APPENDIX A

Document 5

Ash Pond 1 Stability Analysis, By AEP

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report

DOCUMENT 5: ASH POND 1 STABILITY ANALYSIS, BY AEP

CLINCH RIVER POWER ANT

BOTTOM ASH DISPOSAL FACILITY

Pond I

Stability Analysis

December 2010

lEIA ELECTRIC POWER

American Electric Power Service Corporate

1 Riverside Plaza

Columbus Ohio 43215 STABILITY ASSESSMENT REPORT

BOTTOM ASH POND

CLINCH RIVER POWER STATION CARBOY VA

PREPARED BY Date

13eh4d Za d Engineer

REVIEWED BY Date

Pedro J imaya PE

APPROVED BY Date

Gary F ZychE<

Section Manager Geotechnical Engineering

QAQC DOCUMENT NOR GERS10023

2

FEDROJOSE ANYA r UJJI

0

PROFESSIdNAL ENGINEER

SEAL SIGNATURE TABLE OF CONTENT

Stability Assessment Report i

1 Summary 1 2 Introduction 2

3 Previous Study and Subsurface Conditions 3

4 Identification of Soil Layers and Material Properties 5

5 Seepage Analysis 12

6 Stability Analysis 21 7 Warning and Critical Piezometric Levels 23

8 Liquefaction Potential 24 9 Conclusions 25

10 References 26

Appendix 1 Facility Layout Drawings

Appendix 2 Geoteclmical Data Report

Appendix 3 Piezometer Data

Appendix 4 Seepage and Stability Model Inputs

Appendix 5 Stability Analysis Results

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1 Idealized dike section A of Pond IA

Figure 2 Idealized dike section B of Pond IB

Figure 3 Idealized dike section C of Pond IB

Figure 4 Computed total head distribution in Section A before construction of

the cutoff wall

Figure 5 Historical piezometer records near Section A together with readings

from newly installed piezometers P0908S P0908D and P0909

Figure 6 Computed total head distribution in Section A after construction of the

cutoff wall

Figure 7 Computed hydraulic gradients for Section A after construction of the

cutoff wall a at retention pond and b at the embankment toe

III Figure 8 Computed total head distribution in Section B before installation of the

cutoff wall

Figure 9 Historical piezometer records near Section B along with the readings

from newly installed piezometers P0904 and P0905

Figure 10 Computed total head distribution in Section B after installation of the

cutoff wall

Figure 11 Computed hydraulic gradients at the toe of Section B at after

installation of the cutoff wall

Figure 12 Computed total head distribution in Section C before installation of

the cutoff wall

Figure 13 computed total head distribution in Section C after installation of the

cutoff wall

Figure 14 Piezometer water levels near Section C

Figure 15 Computed hydraulic gradients at the toe of Section C at after

installation of the cutoff wall

LIST OFT ABLES

Table 1 Material parameters for Section A

Table 2 Material parameters for Section B

Table 3 Material parameters for Section C

factors Table 4 Steadystate condition slope stability safety

Table 5 Seismic condition slope stability safety factors

iv American Electric Power

Riverside Plaza AMERICAN 1 Columbus OH 432152373 ELECTRIC AEPcom POWER

1 SUMMARY

Pond 1 An assessment of the stability of the main dams that form the bottom ash disposal areas at the Clinch River Power Station in this In 2009 a is presented report geotechnical

conditions investigations was conducted by MACTEC in behalf of AEP to investigate subsurface of the dike and its foundation This study included drilling of 12 borings to identify soil strata perform standard proctor test and extrude split spoon and Shelby tube samples for laboratory testing The laboratory testing program included eight 3point triaxial compression consolidated undrained four 2point triaxial compression twelve hydraulic conductivity three consolidation twenty gradation twenty Atterburg limits and 25 moisture content tests

Three idealized sections were developed for the numerical analysis to represent the existing condition of the main dike that forms the IA and lB ponds Seepage through each dike section was analyzed to numerically determine phreatic water surfaces and the maximum hydraulic gradients across each section Hydraulic properties of the material were evaluated through field

recovered from several explorations and laboratory testing of undisturbed samples boreholes as well as back analyses of the recorded water levels in the piezometer that exists around the facility Stability analyses were performed for downstream slopes of each section under static and earthquake quasistatic conditions with steadystate seepage The subsurface earthen zones of each dike construction were determined based on available design drawings and subsurface investigations Material properties used in the stability analyses were selected based on the findings of geotechnical investigations Nvalue and index properties as well as laboratory

found be under static conditions testing The calculated factors of safety were to 15 or higher and 12 or higher under seismic conditions The calculated hydraulic gradients at the toe of the three sections determined to be within As the believed to were acceptable range such facility is be in safe and stable condition

HIInternaiCLINCH RIVER PLANTIStability Pond ICRstabilityFinaldoc Page 1 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

2 INTRODUCTION

The Clinch River Plant located in Russell off of 664 and the town is county Virginia Route near

of Carbo The plant has three units with the total generation capacity of 705 MW Units 1 and 2

started operation in 1958 and unit three in 1961

The ash disposal facilities at the plans consist of a bottom ash pond and a fly ash landfill

Bottom ash material in the three units of the sluiced into the bottom ash produced plant is pond

near and to the East of the While most of the ash the

facility plant fly produced by plant is

in the some ash sluiced into the bottom ash The placed dry landfill occasionally fly is pond pond facilities at the Clinch River plant constructed between 1955 and 1956 consist of two

separate ponds named Pond 1 and Pond 2 Pond 2 was dewatered in 1998 and has been out of

service since thus has not been included in this Ash IA and lB located then it study ponds are

at the intersection of Dump Creek and the Clinch River They are separated by a splitter dike as

shown in the facility layout plan Appendix 1 The main dike that forms ponds I A and 1 B has been raised several between and The current crest elevation main dike

times 1955 1971 of the is

approximately 1570 ft

The original 1955 dike was made of relatively impervious silty clay soil with a mixture of shale

and elevation 1540 ash and ash sandstone fragments to a crest of ft A mixture of fly bottom material was used in the first raising to a crest elevation of 1550 ft Shale rock fill was used in

subsequence raisings to the current crest elevation 1570 The second and third dikes first and

second raises were constructed above and behind the original dike following the upstream

construction method The last raising was constructed on the downstream side of the previous

dike raisings with a downstream slope graded to 2 horizontal to 1 vertical In a letter from

Casagrande Consultants on July 14 1973 the ash mixture used for the first raising and the shale

fill used for the of the dikes to the elevation of 1560 were evaluated to have a low raising up ft

while the shale fill elevation 1560 was estimated to have a permeability beyond ft relatively high permeability

The levels at Pond IA and Pond 113 are 1565 and 1558 The ash operating pool ft ft respectively

mixture sluiced into Pond IA and overflow water flows from Pond IA to Pond is currently being

HJntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond 11CRstabilityFinaldoc Page 2 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

113 decant and 30 in diameter The overflow from Pond 1B through a structure a spillway pipe is

36 in from which flows directed to a catch basin at the toe of the dike through a spillway pipe it

Pond 1A used to sluice and excavate the ash at the by gravity to a Reclaim Pond is produced plant while Pond 1B primarily functions as a clear water pond Both the ponds are dredged on a

basis and the excavated ash hauled to a landfill near the regular is plant

Ponds 1A and 1B had a history of seepage and boils at the toe area and on the downstream face since before 1978 To control these seeps a toe drain consisting of 10 in diameter perforated

in installed the toe in the In the late 80s pipe buried a gravel blanket was along 1980s a new

150 the downstream face of seepage and saturated area was reported along a ft long region on

22 above the

Pond IB at elevation of 1533 ft A approximate ft about toe stability study

for the main performed in 1990 1 by AEP geotechnical engineering revealed low safety factors dike recommended that cutoff wall be installed at the crest and be extended to 116 It was a

soil As in 1991 65 bentonite cutoff wall was installed the foundation such a ft deep slurry

into the abutments The cutoff wall was extended into the along the crest of the dike and 2 original 1955 dike that possesses a low permeability In 2009 an inverted filter with a riprap revetment was placed on the lower half of the downstream slope to control seepage and provide protection against piping

3 PREVIOUS STUDY AND SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

AEP Geotechnical Engineering conducted a stability analysis in 1990 before the construction of

2 This the cutoff wall to study the condition of the slopes of Pond 1 and Pond 1 study included drilling of 7 exploratory borings on the main dike some of which were continued into the bedrock to explore the conditions of the foundation soil Shelby tube samples were obtained from the soil layers and direct shear tests as well as triaxial compression tests were conducted to evaluate shear strength of the material Phreatic water surface was estimated based on the available data from the piezometers and the observed seepage on the downstream slope at

factors elevation of 1533 ft A set of stability analyses were performed to calculate safety

of and against slope instability for the dikes and minimum factors of safety 117 116 were calculated at the time for Pond IA and Pond IB respectively

HIlntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond ICRstabilityFinaldoc Page 3 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation Clinch River Stability assessment Power Station 1262010

The 1990 report recommended that a cutoff wall be installed along the crest of Pond IA and

Pond lB to lower the water levels and the of the dikes was

phreatic improve stability It

predicted that a cutoff wall would increase the safety factors to at least 145 by dissipating the

phreatic level A cementbentonitefly ash cutoff wall 65 feet deep was installed throughout

the crest in the winter of 1991 Readings from the piezometer A7R located on the downstream

of the wall Appendix 2 indicate that the maximum recorded water level dropped by about 8ft

after the installation of the while wall the water levels recorded at piezometer A6 located on the upstream side of the wall increased by about 10 feet These readings confirm that the cutoff wall has been performing as intended to decrease the phreatic level on the downstream side of the wall Nonetheless subsequent site inspections revealed that the seepage has been steady at the elevation of 1533 the ft on downstream slope of Pond 1B Furthermore water level in piezometer A7 has consistently been recorded at about elevation of 1533 the same level at

ft which observed on the of Pond 1B seepage is slope

The detailed construction report of the cutoff wall by WoodwardClyde Consultant 2 states that on the basis of visual inspection seepage quantities decreased after the wall was placed

One boil area at the downstream toe near the reclaim pond was reported to be continued after the construction This area was covered with a riprap over fabric blanket to minimize piping

and to have potential it appears remained stable since then

In 2009 a geotechnical investigation was conducted by MACTEC In this study 12 borings were drilled on the crest and toe area of the dike at three sections to explore subsurface conditions and extrude and tube for location split spoon Shelby samples laboratory testing A boring plan is provided in the Geotechnical Data Report Appendix 2 Eight new piezometers namely P0901SP0901D P0902 P0904 P0906 P09085 P0908D and P0909 were installed in the boreholes to complement the exiting piezometers The new piezometers were installed in the crest and the toe area of the dikes to monitor water levels in the embankment the foundation

and the bedrock Details of the subsurface and soil investigation laboratory testing program are included in Appendix 2

H1IntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond 11CRstabilityFinaldoc Page 4 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 12162010

4 IDENTIFICATION OF SOIL LAYERS AND MATERIAL PROPERTIES

Locations of the three sections selected for this study are presented in Appendix 1 The geometry

in The earthen of each section was based on the 2006 Photography Map presented Appendix 1 zones of the dike at the selected section were based on AEPs drawing 131058531074 and the

2009 boring logs Appendix 2 Figures 1 through 3 present the idealized section developed for the seepage and stability analyses Shear strength parameters friction angle and cohesion and hydraulic conductivity for each zone were primarily determined through field and laboratory

match the testing Appendix 2 Hydraulic conductivities of the material were adjusted to calculated phreatic levels with the measured piezometric levels before and after the installation of the slurry wall Review of historical piezometric data Appendix 3 shows that the water levels in the piezometers generally exhibit minor fluctuations that are the result of changes in the pool level seasonal variations in the ground water regime and measurement errors Hydraulic conductivities were backcalculated by conservatively using the maximum recorded water levels in each piezometer Tables I through 3 present material properties for the three sections respectively

HIntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond IICRstabilityFinaldoc Page 5 of 26 Figure

Stability

1 American

151

145 146 147 148 149 150 152 155 156 157 159 154 158 153

HllnternalCLINCH 5 4 3 2 1

Electric

last

Idealized

Clay Silty Silty

RIVER

assessment

1 Clayey

50 50

power

with

dike

Sand Sand

raising

Compacted

Silty

Clinch

with

Ash

Gravel

Service

PLANTStability

section Gravel River

I second

100 100

fist

A Shale

Pond

with

of

original

Power

raising

raising

Sand

Corporation

dike

Pond I

153 150 Fragments

Station

IA

1CRstabilityFinaldoc

200

200

9 8 7 6

10 i

Mix

250 250

Silty

Sandy

Sandy Clayey

Sluiced

silt Sand

Silt

Fly

Lean

Distance 1

Ash

300 300

Clay

foundation

foundation foundation

Bottom I original

350 350

Ash

dike

14 13 12

11

400 400

Bed

Lean

Cutoff

Rock clay

foundation

Wall Weathered

450 450

with

Shale

sand

1

500 500

550

Page

12612010

145 146 149 151 154 158 148 150 147

155 152 166 6 153 157 CC

of

26 Figure

Stability

2 American

151

161

149 150 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 143 144 146 148 159 160

147 0 145 1 0 6 5 4 3 2 1

IIInternalCLINCH

Silty Electric

Clay

Clayey Clayey

Sluiced

Idealized

RIVER assessment

with

sand

silty

silty Compacted

ash

power

50 50

dike

ash gravel

sand sand

Clinch

with and

Service

PLANTSlability section River B

gravel

100 100 gravel

Pond

of

Power with

Corporation

rock

Pond

Station

150

150

1B

fragment

11CRstabilityFinaldoc

200

200

1 1 7

12 10 9 8

250

250

Silty

Lean Rock

Sandy Sandy

clay sand

Weathered clay lean

fragment

Distance clay

shale

300 300

350 350

400 400

14 13

450

450

Cutoff

Bedrock

wall

500 500

Page 7 1262010

550

550

of

151 153 154 156 157 158 159 160 161

143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 152 155

26 Figure

Stability

3 5 4 3 2 1 American

HIntemaIICLINCH

Silty

Clay

Electric

Clayey Clayey

with

Idealized

sand

RIVER

assessment

50 1 •0

silty Compacted silty

power

dike

PLAN

ash

gravel

sand sand

Clinch

I TStabi

with and

Service ity

section L River C 100 100

Pond

gravel gravel

of

Power

with

Corporation

Pond L

450 150

rock

Station

113

ICRstabilityPinaldoc

L fragment

200 200

L

250

250 9 8 7 6

10

silty

Silty

Clayey

Sluiced

L clay

300 300

sand

Weathered ash

sand

shale

L

350 350

L

400 400

12 11

L

450 450

= Cutoff

Bedrock

wall

11 L 1

500 500

1216120

Page 0 8

of

550 550

145 1413 154 153 151 752 149 148 147

26 158 159 156 457 155

150 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

C Saturation Ysat 0 c C Soil Type Location pcf deg psf psi psf k fthr

Clayey

silty sand Outer shell 136 36 0 36 0 005 1 and gravel

wl shale

fragment Second 2 Silty sand 136 31 1006 36 0 50E4 raising

Compacted First 100 30 0 30 0 0069 3 raising ash

Clay w 134 12 1810 25 700 35E6 4 Original dike gravel

Clayey Fill at toe 135 29 580 34 0 007 5 silty sand

w gravel

Sluiced 97 22 0 22 0 0069 6 Impoundment ash

Sandy lean 32 850 35E6 7 Original Dike 140 21 1270 clay Foundation 98 20 400 39 0 158E5 8 Clayey silt

Foundation 915 15 1800 31 700 58E3 9 Silty sand

Foundation 100 20 400 28 0 213E5 10 Sandy silt

Lean clay Foundation 88 18 200 30 0 346E6 11 w sand Weathered Foundation 140 35 1000 35 1000 21E5 12 shale Bedrock NA NA NA NA NA IE4 13 Bedrock

Middle of Cutoff 150 NA 1200 NA NA 6E4 14 crest into wall original dike

Table 1 Material parameters for Section A

HIlnternalCLINCH RIVER PLANTIStability Pond 11CRstabilityFinaldoc Page 9 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

C Saturation ysat 0 0 C Soil Type Location pet deg psf psf psf k fthr

Clayey

silty sand

I and gravel Outer shell 136 36 0 36 0 005 w shale

fragment Second 2 Silty sand 136 31 1006 36 0 5E4 raising

3 First 100 30 0 30 0 008 slmpacted raising

Clay w 4 Original dike 134 12 1810 25 700 35E6 gravel

Clayey

5 silty sand Fill at toe 135 29 580 34 0 50E5

w grave Sluiced 6 Impoundment 97 22 0 22 0 0069 ash

Outer shell at Rock 7 elevation 136 35 0 35 0 0 8 fragments 1533

ft

Sandy lean 8 Original Dike 140 21 1270 32 850 12E5 clay

9 Sandy clay Foundation 98 20 400 35 400 20E6

10 Silty sand Foundation 90 28 0 28 0 508E3

Weathered 11 Foundation 140 35 1000 35 1000 2 1E5 shale

12 Lean clay Foundation 92 12 1800 25 0 472E4

13 Bedrock Bedrock NA NA NA NA NA 10E4

Middle of Cutoff 14 crest into 150 NA 1200 NA NA 60E4 wall original dike

Table 2 Material parameters for Section B

HaIntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond ICRstabilityFinaldoc Page 10 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1 21612 0 1 0

Ysat C 0 C Saturation Soil Type Location pcf deg psf psf psf k fthr

Clayey

silty sand 136 0 0 1 and gravel Outer shell 36 36 005 w shale

fragment Second 2 Silty sand 136 31 1006 36 0 50E4 raising

Compacted 3 First raising 100 30 0 30 0 008 ash

Clay W 4 Original dike 134 12 1810 25 700 35E6 gravel

Clayey

5 silty sand Fill at toe 135 29 580 34 0 50E5

wl gravel iced 6 Impoundment 97 22 0 22 0 0069 Slu

Clayey 7 Foundation 97 22 900 36 100 608E6 sand

8 Silty sand Foundation 90 6 400 18 400 50E3

9 Silty ay Foundation 110 22 900 36 100 326E6 Weathered 10 Foundation 140 35 1000 35 1000 21E5 shale

11 Bedrock Bedrock NA NA NA NA NA 10E4

Middle of Cutoff 12 crest into 150 NA 1200 NA NA 00006 wall original dike

Table 3 Material parameters for Section C

HllnternalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond 1CRstabifityPinaldoc Page 11 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1 21612 0 1 0

5 SEEPAGE ANALYSIS

Several seepage analyses were performed Using GeoStudio SeepW program to study the

seepage behavior of the dikes and obtain the hydraulic gradient and pore pressure distributions

across each dike sections All the analyses were performed under twodimensional transient

conditions to establish the phreatic water surface and velocity field The model inputs for a

transient analysis include volumetric moisture content versus soil suction and hydraulic

conductivity versus soil suction curves SeepW has several builtin functions to estimate such

functions based on soil type or grain size distribution saturated hydraulic conductivity and

saturated volumetric moisture content soil porosity For more detail on the inbuilt functions

and the estimation methods consult the users manual of SeepW 3 The hydraulic conductivity

of the cutoff wall was determined in laboratory as indicated in the WoodwardClyde report

levels used in the taken to be 1565 and 1558 for Pond IA Operational pool analyses were ft ft

and Pond I B respectively

Each in analysis was performed two stages In stage one the pool levels were raised from the

the in bottom of each pond to the operational pool levels without cutoff wall and stage 2 the

cutoff wall was activated by changing the material type of the elements that defined the wall

Figure 4 presents the computed total head distribution across Section A together with the seepage

flow rates per unit length of the dike before the installation of the cutoff wall The predicted phreatic surface can be seen to be in a reasonable agreement with the historical records of piezometer A2 and A3 To achieve such agreement the hydraulic conductivity of the outer

shell was adjusted to 005 fthr Depicted in Figure 5 are plots of historical readings of all the piezometers that are at or near Section A including the piezometers installed in 2009 More

information on the locations and screening depths of the piezometers has been included

3 The model at the toe that confirmed of and Appendix predicts seepage is by history seepage boils at this area of the dike In general the model predictions are in reasonable agreement with the field observations and piezometric readings indicating that the values of hydraulic

conductivities and the boundary conditions used in the analysis were well selected

HIlntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStabflity Pond 11CRstabilityFinaldoc Page 12 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1 21612 0 1 0

Figure 4 Computed total head distribution in Section A before construction of the cutoff wall

the second of the after the cutoff wall Figure 6 shows similar results for stage analysis was activated can be seen that the surface in reasonable with the

It computed phreatic is agreement recorded piezometric water levels in piezometers P09085 P0908D and A2R Figure 7 shows the predicted hydraulic gradients xygradient at the toe and the retention pond The maximum

the surface about 03 that within the for this predicted gradient on ground is is acceptable range type of structure The analysis showed that installation of the cutoff wall can lower the phreatic water levels and significantly decrease seepage flow rates through the embankment These outcomes were expected and are consistent with field observations and monitoring data The seepage analysis did not conclude any adverse condition that could be considered as a potential

the toe of the hazard to the safety and stability of the structure The seepage areas that exist on structure are thereby believed to be through penneable layers of the foundation soil a normal phenomenon that occurs in majority of earthen structures and does not pose a threat on the

has be that this not substitute for the stability It to emphasized analysis is a regular inspections and that the on basis The and monitoring program is performed by plant quarterly inspection monitoring program has to be continued and any unusual condition should be immediately reported to AEP Geotechnical Engineering

HUntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTIStability Pond ICRstabilityFinal doe Page 13 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

•A2R A3 B2R P2R P7 P8 • P09085 P0908D +P0909

1570

1550

° 1530

m

4 1510

1490O n

1470

0910184 0212790 0811595 0204101 072806 01118112

Data

Figure 5 Historical piezometer records near Section A together with readings from newly installed piezometers P09085 P0908D and P0909

Figure 6 Computed total head distribution in Section A after construction of the cutoff wall

11llnternalCLINCI1 RIVER PLANTStability Pond 11CRstabilityFinaldoc Page 14 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation 1262010 Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station

i

a b

for Section after construction of the cutoff wall at Figure 7 Computed hydraulic gradients A a

retention pond and b at the embankment toe

the of the dike that Section the at elevation For portion is represented by B reported seepage

1533 continued after construction of the cutoff wall the observed

ft even Furthermore

about piezometric level on the downstream side of the wall from piezometer A7R has been at

the same elevation 1533 ft since the construction of the wall Water elevations in the

elevation 1542 and 1546 and P0904 have been at ft piezometer B4R approximately ft

respectively These observations suggest that a relatively permeable horizontal layer exists at

about elevation 1533 which acts as a conduit to transfer water to the slope face Such a

ft

structure could have been formed by segregation of fine and coarse portions of the shale rockfill

a low within the outer shell during placement A high permeable layer over permeable layer is

8 shows the incorporated into the analytical model of Section B as depicted in Figure 2 Figure

computed total head distribution across the crosssection of the dike along with the seepage flow

rates per unit length of the dike A saturated hydraulic conductivity of 005 fthr was used for the

outer shell at this section The computed water levels for piezometers A6 and A7R are in

agreement with the recorded water levels that are marked on this figure and also presented in

Figure 9 The readings from the piezometers varied with the pool level however the maximum

levels to the were water Figure 9 most likely corresponding maximum experienced pool level

used to backcalculate the hydraulic conductivity The computed levels are within few feet of

field observations

HlntcmalCLINCH RIVER PLANTIStabiiity Pond ICRstabilityFinaldoc Page 15 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1 21612 0 1 0

Figure 8 Computed total head distribution in Section B before installation of the cutoff wall

0 A6 a A7 R B5 R PSR P09G4 POS0E

1570

Crest upstream of cutoff va

1550

• A cD n c

w _ 144N0•4 4N ° • o fOL 1530 r p • m

re

f f 1510

m • A

1490

1470

0901194 0212250 221410 I 07206 0V1at12

Data

Figure 9 Historical piezometer records near Section B along with the readings from newly installed piezometers P0904 and P0905

HIntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond 11CRstabilityPinaldoc Page 16 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

Figure 10 illustrates computed total head distribution across the section after construction of the cutoff wall The model 5 raise in the levels on the side of predicted a ft piezometric upstream the wall and a 5 on the downstream with the from

ft drop side presenting consistency readings

level in with piezometers A6 and A7R Furthermore the computed phreatic water is agreement the readings from piezometers P0906 P5 and P0904 Piezometer B5R located in the crest of

since 1992 Pond 113 between Section B and Section C have a water level of about 1537 ft

that within the levels the downstream side of the cutoff wall Figure 9 is predicted on

Figure 10 Computed total head distribution in Section B after installation of the cutoff wall

Figure 11 Computed hydraulic gradients at the toe of Section B at after installation of the cutoffwall

HlInternalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond iCRstabilityFinaldoe Page 17 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1 216120 1 0

Figure 11 presents predicted hydraulic gradients at the toe of the section after construction of the

cutoff wall The maximum at the surface less than 01 computed hydraulic gradient ground is under the existing condition an acceptable hydraulic gradient for this type of structure Thus no

for failure due to internal erosion believed to exits The toe drain and inverted potential piping is

filter on the slope face was constructed to prevent future increases in the hydraulic gradients

raise in the levels at the toe area an indication of Any unexplained piezometric is pore pressure built Such condition can occur the toe drain inverted filter becomes and up if or clogged it can be corrected by replacing the drain and filter layers

A thin layer of ash on the slope of the original dike was not included in the seepage model for

Section C as analysis of Section A and B suggested a hydraulic conductivity of 005 ftday for the outer shell that close to that of the ash 12 shows is very compacted layer 008 fthr Figure the computed total head distribution across Section C before the construction of the cutoff wall

All the existing piezometers near this section were installed after the construction of the cutoff wall thus no piezometric data are available to confirm the predicted phreatic surface A hydraulic conductivity of 005 fthr backcalculated from analysis of Sections A and B was used for this section The analysis predicts some seepage at the toe of the embankment before the construction of the cutoff wall in agreement with the field observations made before 1991

Figure 13 shows similar results for Section C after the construction of the cutoff wall The predicted phreatic water levels are in agreement with the data from piezometers P0901 and

Water level in Piezometer B6 has not been shown on this because the P0902figure screening of this unknown 14 of recorded water depth piezometer is Figure presents plots piezometric levels for B6 P09015 P0901D and P0902 Figure 15 presents predicted hydraulic gradients at the toe of the section after construction of the cutoff wall The maximum predicted gradient at the surface about No for failure due to internal

is 02 erosion

ground potential piping is believed to exits

HInternalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond lCRstabilityFinaldoc Page 18 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Minch River Power Station 12161210

4 •

I

MIX

$

fix

Figure 12 Computed total head distribution in Section C before installation of the cutoff wall

•Figuretotal distribution in Section after installation the 13 computed lead of cutoff wall

m

I°Tnte a1CLTNCII RIVER PLANTTStability Pond PERstabilityr inaldoc Page 1 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

B6 P09015 P0901D A P0902

Figure 14 Piezometer water levels near Section C

Max xygradient = 0202

Figure 15 Computed hydraulic gradients at the toe of Section C at after installation of the cutoffwall

HIntemalCLIIVCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond 11CRstabilityFinaldoc Page 20 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1 21612 0 1 0

6 STABILITY ANALYSIS

The current stability analyses were performed using the GeoSlope software developed by GeoSlopeInternational This program can utilize various limit equilibrium solution methods to factors In these methods the failure divided compute safety against slope instability wedge is up into several slices and each slice assumed to be under limit condition In order to

is equilibrium

utilize make the whole assembly of slices a statistically determined structure different theories a different simplifying assumption to estimate the induced forces on the sides of each slice In this study the limit equilibrium theory of MorgensternPrice was used that can satisfy the equilibrium equations of both forces and moments

The facility has been in its current operational condition for several years Therefore the analyses

the for condition effective for static stability of slopes were perfonmed steady state seepage using shear strength parameters Pore water pressure distributions calculated in the seepage analyses were imported into the model and used to calculate effective stresses along the failure surface

In all the stability analyses the minimum depth for the failure surface was set to be 10 ft Any failure surface less than 10 feet considered to be a surface that can be

deep is sloughing prevented by the existing riprap revetment or be easily repaired The inverted filter system was

the lower not directly built into the model instead a vertical surcharge load was applied to portion of the downstream slope to simulate its effect Safety factors were calculated for the downstream slope of each section A uniaxial compressive strength of 1200 lbft2 was used for the cutoff wall Upstream slopes of the sections are not susceptible to sliding because both the ponds are filled with sluiced ash all the way up to the maximum normal operating elevations

Ash excavation in Pond lB with not to excavate the operation is performed care as areas near

dikes a berm maintained the of the dikes perimeter Thus is always by upstream slope

Three different failure modes were considered for each section under static loading A deep

failure starting at the crest and penetrating into the foundation soil a shallow failure surface that enters and exits on the downstream face and a block failure through the ash layer on the slope of the original dike Sections A and B only A summary of the computed safety factors for the three sections in Table 4 determined that for Section the critical failure is presented It was A mode was failure of the outer shell with a factor of safety of 15 For Section B and Section C

HIIntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTIStability Pond 11CRstabilitylrinaldoc Page 21 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

the critical mode was determined to be deep failure with computed safety factors of 17 and 16 respectively Block failure mode was not considered for Section C because the geometry of the embankment and the material shear strengths are similar to those of Section B Thus the factor of associated with block failure mode to be the that of Section that safety is expected same as B

All the calculated factor of safeties than is 20 are equal or higher the minimum acceptable factor of of 15 under condition The that show safety 4 steadystate seepage graphical outputs the critical failure surface for each analysis are included in Appendix 5

Failure Mode Section

Deep Failure Outer Shell Failure Block Failure A 18 15 19

B 17 17 20

C 16 18

Note for each failure mode a systematic search was performed to find the critical

failure surface and the associated factor of safety

Table 4 Steadystate condition slope stability safety factors

Stability analyses under seismic loadings were performed following the pseudostatic method In this method the effect of the simulated a lateral acceleration to design earthquake is by imposing the failure wedge USGS seismic hazard maps published in 2008 5 for this geographic region recommends the peak acceleration a of 016g corresponding to 2pecent probability of exceedacne in 50 years There are different methods to determine a design lateral acceleration

for the of Newmark block coefficient a slope stability analysis 6 Application sliding

has shown that earth dams with factor than 10 analysis a safety greater using a > 05amax are not expected to experience any large deformation during an earthquake 6 Furthermore the

1970 version of the Army Corps of Engineers Manual for the Engineering and design Stability

= of earthen and rock fill dams 7 recommended a 01g for this geographical region

Therefore the current was based on a lateral of This value analyses acceleration a 01g is

= higher than 05amax 008g calculated following Newmaks method Stability of the sections

HllntemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond 11CRstabilityFinaldoc Page 22 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

1 21612 0 1 0 Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station

was assessed using drained and consolidated undrained shear strength parameters Table 5

with drained and presents a summary of the stability analysis results for seismic condition undrained shear strengths

Analysis Type Section Drained shear Undrained shear

strength strength A 13 13

B 13 14

C 13 12

Table 5 Seismic condition slope stability safety factors

7 WARNING AND CRITICAL PIEZOMETRIC LEVELS

of the cutoff The stability and safety of this facility highly depends on the proper performance

drain in in the within the wall and the toe maintaining pore water pressures embankment design

in range If the pore pressure begin to buildup in the embankment for example due to a crack

of the the cutoff wall the stability of the dike will need to be reviewed The main purpose

to detect in the so quarterly monitoring program is any unexplained change groundwater regime

levels and flow that any malfunctioning of the system can be corrected The piezometric seepage

that action will be taken rates are reviewed by Geoteclmical Engineering to assure appropriate if

behavior recorded any unexplained is

the three critical In this section warning and critical piezometric levels have been established for

sections studied The warning and critical levels were determined by raising the phreatic surface

the factor level defined in each stability model and calculating corresponding safety Warning is

of the dike section to values less as a water level sufficiently high that can lower safety factor

than 15 The factors for Section thus modest increase in the safety A is already 15 any

piezometric levels near this section above their maximum historical levels will raise a warning

HIInternalCLINCH RIVER PLANTIStability Pond ICRstabilityFinaldoe Page 23 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1 21612 0 1 0

note levels for Sections B and C were determined to be 7 increase from the Warning ft

maximum historical water levels in the crest or toe piezometers If water level in a number of

the become to conduct piezometers triggers warning level it may necessary a new seepage and

stability assessment for dike sections near those piezometers to attain a more specific assessment

of the condition

critical water level water level reduce factors below 12 for A is a sufficiently high to safety any

portion of the dike Such condition indicates that failure of the dike may be imminent and

therefore the Geotechnical Engineering Section has to assess the condition immediately The

increase in the piezometric levels should be measured with reference to the historical maximum

water level of a Critical level for Section determined to be 7 increase in piezometer A was a ft a piezometric level beyond its historical maximum level The critical levels for Section B were

determined to be 12 increase in level for located the ft water a piezometer on crest downstream

of the cutoff or 10 increase in water level for a located at the toe The wall ft piezometer

critical levels for Section C were calculated to be 28 increase in water levels on the crest

ft

of the cutoff or 9 increase in water levels at the toe of downstream wall ft Graphical outputs the stability analyses of this section are presented in Appendix 5

Besides improper functioning of the cutoff wall and toe drain system other factor can influence piezometric levels including heavy precipitation changes in the ground water regime human

error and malfunctioning of a piezometer Simultaneous increase of water levels in multiple

that continues or for a of time an indication of a piezometers persists period is usually problem

that needs to be monitored and assessed If a or critical condition

closely immediately warning is

detected by plant personnel Geotechnical Engineering Section shall be informed immediately

and and monitoring of the piezometers flow rate measurements shall be continued daily until

instructed otherwise by Geotechnial Engineering

8 LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL

No liquefaction potential assessment has been performed for Pond 1 However based on other

studies performed on similar facilities 8 and 9 and a site specific liquefaction study performed

for Pond 2 at Clinch River this believed to have for 10 Plant facility is no potential liquefaction

HantemalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond IICRstabilityFinaldoc Page 24 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation Station Stability assessment Clinch River Power 12612010

under the probable earthquakes that may affect this region because the magnitude of the expected

not to stress ratios to earthquake is sufficiently strong impose cyclic high enough produce

liquefaction

9 CONCLUSIONS

of In this study a series of seepage and stability analyses were performed to assess the condition the main dike that forms the bottom ash pond 1 at the Clinch River Plant The subsurface

based the stratigraphy and material parameters were selected on data from the 2009 and 1990

from archives The subsurface investigations as well as available design documents AEPs

hydraulic conductivity of the outer shell of the dike sections was calculated based on actual static

water levels observed in the piezometers

for Pond 1A and two for Pond 1B was Three idealized dike section were developed one It

horizontal exists in the downstream shell of the Pond concluded that a relatively permeable layer

113 dike in the area modeled in Section B This horizontal layer most likely formed as a result of

direct toward segregation of fine and coarse materials during construction can water the slope

face and cause the observed seepage on the face of the dike at elevation 1533 ft Calculated

showed that the cutoff wall phreatic surface from the seepage analyses for all the three section

the installed in 1991 has been effective in reducing static water levels and water pressures near

downstream slopes

found to be The Steadystate factors of safety calculated for the dike sections were 15 or higher

found to be Under calculated factors of safety under seismic condition were 12 or higher

seismic loadings the literature recommends a minimum factor of safety of 10 when a coefficient

of lateral acceleration of = used In this a coefficient of lateral a 05amax is 6 study

thus the calculated factor of of 12 The acceleration of 062aax was used safety is acceptable

computed hydraulic gradients near the ground surface were found to be less than 05 for all the

three sections In conclusion based on the outcomes of the seepage and stability analyses

believed to be performed slope failures piping or liquefaction at this facility is unlikely

H1lntemalCLINCI RIVER PLANTIStabiity Pond IICRstabilityFinaldoc Page 25 of 26 American Electric power Service Corporation

Stability assessment Clinch River Power Station 1262010

10 REFERENCES

1 Clinch River Plant Stability analysis of ash pond dikes American Electric Power Service

Corporation 1990

2 Summary Report Construction of cutoff wall Ash pond 1A and IB dikes Clinch River Plant Woodward Clyde Consultant December 1991

3 Geo Studio 2007 Help Seep W 2007

4 US Army Corps of Engineers Engineering and Design Slope Stability EM111021902October 2003

5 USGS Documentation for the 2008 update of the united states national seismic hazard maps Open file report 20081128

6 Kramer S L Geotechnical earthquake engineering Prentice Hall 1996

of and of earth and rockfill 7 US Army Corps Engineers Engineering Design Stability dams EM111021902 1970

81 Zand B Tu W Amaya PJ Wolfe WE and Butalia T S An experimental

investigation on liquefaction potential and postliquefaction shear strength of impounded

fly ash Fuel Vol 88 No 7 July 2009

9 Gandhi S R and Dey A K Liquefaction analysis of pond ash Proceedings of the 15th international conference on solid waste technology management Philadelphia PA Dec 1215 1999

10 Clinch River Pond 2 Closure Appalachian Power Company Clinch River Plant Final

closure subsurface investigations and design calculations January 2009

HIInternalCLINCH RIVER PLANTStability Pond ICRstabilityFinaldoc Page 26 of 26 APPENDIX 1

FACILITY LAYOUT DRAWINGS

APPENDIX 2

GEOTECHNICAL DATA REPORT GEOTECHNICAL DATA REPORT

AEP CLINCH RIVER DIKE DRILLING CARBO VIRGINIA

Prepared For

AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER

Columbus Ohio

Prepared By

MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC

Abingdon Virginia

MACTEC Project 3050090131

January 26 2010

7MACTEC OMACTEC

engineering and constructing a better tomorrow

January 26 2010

Mr Gary F Zych

American Electric Power

I Riverside Plaza

Columbus Ohio 43215

Phone 6147162917

Subject Geotechnical Data Report

A71P Clinch River Dike Drilling

Carbo Virginia

MACTEC Project4 3050090131

Dear Mr Zych

and to submit our results for soil MACTEC Engineering Consulting Inc MACTEC is pleased

at the AEP Clinch River site and rock sampling piezometer installation and laboratory testing in

Carbo Va Our services as authorized by Mr Timothy A Randolph of AEP were provided in dated 2009 general accordance with our proposal number PROP09ABTN030 July 30

the and This report reviews the project information provided to us discusses site subsurface The contain the Field conditions encountered and presents our laboratory results Appendices Test and Piezometer Construction and the Exploratory Procedures a Key Sheet Boring Logs Logs

Laboratory Test Procedures and Test Results

services and look forward to MACTEC appreciates this opportunity to provide our to you we

consultant this Please contact us have serving as your geotechnical throughout project if you For Otoev6 questions regarding the information presented Br With permission

Sincerely MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC

Ryan D Rasnake PE Brian D Owens PE

Engineering Services Manager Principal Engineer Office Manager

RDRIBDOmss

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc

1070 W Main Street Suite 5 Abingdon VA 24210 Phone 2766760426 Fax 2766760761 wwwmacteccom AEP Dike Drilling Cllnck River Site Janztaty 26 2010

JL4CTEC Project 3050090131

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

LIST OF TABLES LIST OF FIGURESiv 10 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES 6

20 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION SUMMARY 30 LABORATORYvSOIL TESTING SUMMARY 7 40 PIEZOMETER INSTALLATION SUMMARY 910

TABLES

FIGURES

APPENDIX A FIELD EXPLORATORY PROCEDURES

APPENDIX B KEY TO SYMBOLS AND DESCRIPTIONSTEST BORING RECORDS

APPENDIX C PIEZOMETER INSTALLATION LOGS

APPENDIX D LABORATORY SOIL TEST RESULTS

iii 2010 AEPDike Drilling Clinch River Site Janttary26

AMCTEC Project 3050090131

LIST OF TABLES

Table

1 Table 21 Test Boring Summary

2 Table 31 Summary of Laboratory Testing Program

3 Table 41 Piezometer Installation Summary

iv 4EP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 26 2010 AL4CTECProject 3050090131

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure

1 Figure 1 Site Location Map

2 Figure 2 Boring Location Plan

v AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site Janua y 26 2010

MACTEC Project 3050090131

10 INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

This report presents the findings of our subsurface exploration and laboratory testing recently performed for the existing Ash Dike at the American Electric Power AEP Clinch River Plant in Carbo Virginia

We were selected by Mr Timothy A Randolph on behalf of American Electric Power AEP to perform a subsurface exploration at the existing Ash Dike at the AEP Clinch River Plant

The objectives of our subsurface exploration was to gather information including field test data and

test the site and subsurface conditions that could be used AEP their of laboratory data about by in analysis the existing Ash Dike at the Clinch River Plant An assessment of site environmental conditions or an

assessment for the presence or absence of pollutants in the soil bedrock surface water or ground water

site this of the was beyond the proposed objectives of our exploration Therefore any statements in report or attachments regarding color odor or unusual items or conditions are for information purposes only

6 AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 26 2010

MACTEC Project 3050090131

20 SUBSURFACE EXPLORATION SUMMARY

Subsurface conditions were explored with twelve widely spaced test borings drilled at predetermined locations at the site accordance with the The in general procedures presented in Appendix A boring locations and depths were determined according to information provided by Mr Gary Zych of AEP Our

actual field geotechnical engineer established the boring locations in the by taping distances and estimating angles relative to onsite landmarks Therefore the boring locations shown on the Boring

Location Plan Figure 2 should be considered approximate

Subsurface conditions encountered at the boring locations are shown on the Test Boring Records in

Appendix B These Test Boring Records represent our interpretation of the subsurface conditions based on the field logs and visual examination of the field samples by one of our engineers The lines

the Records the designating the interfaces between various strata on Test Boring represent approximate interface locations

The refusal materials in eight of the borings were explored using NQ rock coring procedures The

Recovery Ratio and Rock Quality Designation RQD of the recovered rock core samples were estimated

in Ratio defined the ratio the laboratory during visual classification The Recovery is as percentage

drilled defined between the length of core recovered and the length of core on a given core run RQD is

as the percentage ratio between the sum of lengths of moderately hard or better core recovered that are at

least 4 inches in length to the length of core drilled on a given core run Recovery Ratios and RQD values

0 are shown on the Test Boring Records in Appendix B The recovery ratios ranged from to 98 percent

and the RQD values ranged from 0 to 92 percent

A summary of the total depth depth of fillash soils depth of residualalluvial soils and depth to bedrock

encountered the shown below in Table 21 in borings is

7 AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 26 2010

MACTEC Project 3050090131

Table 21

Test Boring Summary

Top of Depth Depth Elevation Total Thickness of Boring Date Ground of Fill to Top of Top of Depth Residual Alluvial Number Completed Elev Soils of Rock Rock feet Soils feet feet feet feet feet

B0901 922009 156966 839 700 80 788 149086 B0902 9142009 151481 290 76 164 240 149081 B0903 8312009 15600 801 708 43 751 148490 B0904 9162009 156914 888 750 38 788 149034 B0905 9142009 156914 300 300 NE NE NE B0905A 9222009 156914 800 800 NE NE NE

B0906 932009 151815 350 214 65 300 148815 B0907 9152009 15670 855 700 105 805 148650 B0908 9112009 156763 895 715 129 846 148303 B0908A 982009 156763 218 218 NE NE NE

509088 982009 156763 195 195 NE NE NE

B0909 9112009 151935 388 205 133 338 158555

Note Depths are in feet below ground surface

Locations and elevations for borings 35 5A Prepared by RDR on 121109 7 8A and 8B were estimated based on Checked by BDO on 121109 borings 0904 and 0908

NE Not Encountered

8 AEPDike Drilling Cinch RiverSite Jajnrary262010

IMCTEC Project 3050090131

30 LABORATORY TESTING SUNS ARY

Samples obtained during drilling were transported back to the MACTEC Abingdon VA laboratory for

testing Laboratory testing was performed on soil samples selected by AEP The laboratory testing

consisted of natural moisture index with program tests plasticity tests gradation tests hydrometers permeability tests consolidation tests triaxial compression tests and dry density tests The results of the

are in D and summarized Table 31 below laboratory testing presented Appendix in

Table 31 Summary of Laboratory Testing Program

No Test Results Test Type Test Tests Standard Type Value Range Units

Moisture Content ASTM D 2216 25 115319

Atterberg Limits Liquid Limit ASTM D 4318 12 310460

Plastic Limit ASTM D 4318 12 200260

Plastic Index ASTM D 4318 12 70210

Gradation Analysis See Appendix ASTM D 422 1 I wPI drometer C

Permeability of Soils ASTM D 5084 3 cms

11008 2589y

Consolidation Tests ASTM D 2435 3 008019 C

ASTM D 2435 3 01

Cr

ASTM D 2435 3 179525 Pksf 000085 Triaxial Compression Tests ASTM D 4767 5 Cksf

ASTM D 4767 5 1770 3650 Ddeg

Dry Density of Fly Ash ASTM D 7263 2 5977 6902 pef

Prepared By RDR 121112009 Checked By BDO 12112009

9 AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 26 2010

A 4CTEC Project 3050090131

40 PIIEZOMETER INSTALLATION SUMMARY

Eight groundwater piezometers were installed under the supervision of a MACTEC professional during

2009 at the AEP Clinch River Site Piezometers installed after the September in Carbo Virginia were completion of drilling activities All piezometers were constructed using a sand pack consisting of DSl

GP2 sand extending approximately one foot below the screened interval and approximately two feet

above the screened interval ENVIROPLUG medium bentonite pellet seals were placed approximately

of bedrock with two feet above the sand pack and below the surface Annual space was grouted Volclay grant to ground surface for each well In borings containing two piezometers an ENVIROPLUG medium

five feet two feet above the lower to bentonite pellet seal of approximately was placed screen

of the well and approximately one foot of the bottom of the upper screen A summary installation screen

in Table 1 Piezometer installation are included length is presented logs in Appendix C

Table 41 PILE ZOMETER Installation Summary

Elevation Elevation of Bottom Elevation Total Top of of 24HR Boring Date of of Top of Depth Screen Bottom Groundwater Number Installed Screen Screen feet feet of Screen Level feet feet feet feet B0901 922009 665 70 660 156266 150366 154766

B0901 922009 789 735 784 149616 149126 154766 B0902 9142009 220 70 220 150781 149281 150951

B0904 91162009 778 60 778 156314 149134 156114

B0906 932009 290 60 290 151215 148915 150685 B0908 9112009 670 70 670 156063 150063 151823

B0908 9112009 834 760 834 149163 148423 151823

B0909 9112009 320 70 320 151235 148735 149175

Note feet RDR on 121009

Depths in Prepared by below ground surface Checked by BDO on 121109

each Well extended Lockable steel well casing protective caps were installed at location caps were

3 foot above surface and set concrete cement One bollard was set approximately ground in protective

approximately 3 foot from each well in general accordance with ASTM D5787

10 AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 26 2010

MACTEC Project 3050090131

FIGURES FlLE P200930520131ccad0131Fg 1site location plondxg DRAWN BYDAZE RDR12510 CHECKED BYDATE EDO12510 APPROVED BYDATE BAD12510

NOTE DeLorme Topo USA 70 DRAWING NOT TO SCALE

SITE LOCATION AEP Dike MACTEC Drilling PLAN Carbo VA MACFEC Engineering and Consulting no 1070 West Main Street Suite 5 PROJECT NO Abingdon Virginia 24210 3050090131 FIGURE 1 MLE P200930500131acad0131 fig 2 boring location plandwg DRAWN BYBATE RDR12510 CHECKED BYOATH 50012510 APPROVED 5YDATE BD012510

r

`•

1 T y r i YI1 1

I1 I r

$ S

r t l r kr J lj 1 1 r a i3 At ti F

5CF

r = 34 1 7Jlle Y3L7 x r ryas

xu B09fl13

50905 B = 19 F D 0904 771 E

I t r 57 1•i • x Law1 3 645t 3ii54 3di

090 yam B0908A I

NOTE Drawing provided by others DRAWING NOT TO SCALE

f MACTE C BORING LOCATION AEP Dike Drilling PLAN Carbo VA MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc 1070 West Main Street Suite 5 PROJECT NO Abingdon Virginia 24210 3050090131 FIGURE 2 AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site Janurry 26 2010

AMCTEC Project 3050090131

APPENDIX A

FIELD EXPLORATORY PROCEDURES AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 26 2010

MACTEC Project 3050090131

FIELD EXPLORATORY PROCEDURES

Soil Test Boring

All and were conducted accordance with ASTM D 1586 boring sampling operations in general

advanced continuous steel The borings were by mechanically turning hollowstein auger flights

into the ground At regular intervals soil samples were obtained with a standard 225inch ID

2inch OD splittube sampler The sampler was first seated 6 inches to penetrate any loose

cuttings and then driven an additional foot with blows of a 140pound hammer falling 30 inches

The number of hammer blows required to drive the sampler the final foot of penetration was

test recorded and is designated the standard penetration SPT resistance Proper evaluation of

the penetration resistance provides an index to the soils strength density and ability to support

foundations

of the soil obtained from the sealed Representative portions samples splittube sampler were in

glass jars and transported to our laboratory where they were examined by our engineer to verify

the drillers field classifications Test Boring Records are attached graphically showing the soil

descriptions and penetration resistances

Undisturbed Sampling

For quantitative testing relatively undisturbed samples are obtained by pushing sections of thinwalled

steel into soil at the or brass tubing Shelby tube the desired sampling levels This procedure is

described ASTM D 1587 Each tube removed from the by Specification is carefully ground sealed

and transported to the laboratory for specialized testing Locations and depths of undisturbed samples

are shown on the Test Boring Records

Rock Coring

Prior to set the hole drilled the overburden soils if to the

coring casing is in through necessary keep

bole fiom caving Refusal materials are then cored according to ASTM D 2113 using a

bit fastened to the end of doubletube barrel This device rotated at diamondstuddeda hollow core is high

speeds and the cuttings are brought to the surface by circulating water Core samples of the material

penetrated are protected and retained in the swivelmounted inner tube Upon completion of each core

AT 2010 AEA Dike Drilling Clinch River Site Jarusary 26

AMCTEC Project 3050090131

are barrel to the the is the run the core is brought surface core recovery measured samples removed

boxes for and

and the core in

is placed transportation storage

to where the refusal material and the The core samples are returned the laboratory is identified percent

rock detennined a soils or The core recovery and quality designation are by engineer geologist

the ratio of the obtained to the drilled expressed as a percent core recovery is sample length depth

The rock obtained the of core recovered percent quality designation RQD is by summing up length

including only the pieces of core that are 4 inches or longer and divided by the total length drilled

related to the soundness and of the refusal material The percent core recovery and RQD are continuity

and the bit size used are shown on the Test Refusal material descriptions recoveries Boring

Records

in The NQ and NX sizes designate bits that obtain rock cores 178 and 218 inches diameter

respectively

Water Level Measurements

noted the Test Water level readings and caved depths are measured in completed borings as on Boring

location of the ambient Records These water level readings indicate the approximate groundwater

the caved indicate table at the time of our field investigation In some instances depths may possibly

groundwater activity

level the Test Records determined field crews as the The time of boring water reported on Boring is by

obtained one drilling tools are advanced Additional water table readings are generally approximately

after The time used to stabilization of the day the borings are completed lag is permit groundwater

The are taken a table that has been disrupted by the drilling operations readings by dropping weighted

level surface line down the boring or using an electrical probe to detect the water AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 26 2010

AIL1CTECProject 3050090131

APPENDIX B

IIY TO SYMBOLS AND DESCRIPTIONS

TEST BORING RECORDS Soft

Stiff Hard

ry

Soft Stiff

Firm

Hard

Hours

hours

Very Very Ve

with Soils

Consistency

24

24

CLAY

after after AND G

Residual

Sampler Meter

Resistance

SILT

Level

Table 50 E

Cuttings

Blows

Sample

Recovery 58

02 34 915

of 1630

3150

Over

Auger Bulk Crandall Pressure No Water Caved

Piedmont

Na

n Q 1 Penetration

Cone

SYMBOLS

Consistency

Density

Dense

drilling 5

Firm

and Dense

Loose

Test

Dynamic

of MALT

VerLoose Very

TO

of

Relative

GRAVEL DESCRIPTIONS

Density

attune Sample j

Penetration

50

Table

SAND KEY

Correlation

Core

Blows

510

of 04

1130 3150

Over

Standard Rock Dilatometer Packer Water

Undisturbed

No

No

or

low

with

clays

lean

of

flour

combinations

little

and

Boulders

fat

sand

sands by

mixtures

12

rock silts

clay plasticity

silts

clays clays

soils

sand

diatomaceous

silt sands high

or Memorandum

silty to

NAMES mixtures

sands silty

grave

sand clayey elastic

gravelly plasticity

medium Cobbles

or

mixtures or

organic sand

gravel clay fine

or ts

fines fines 3

clays to il

gravelly

designated

soils high s

no no organic

silt medium

very sands c

tow

gravel of i

micaceous

Technical are

or gravels or sands highly

sand of

sandy

gravel of silty

TYPICAL and and

gravels fine sands

sand Co

fines or

silts clays organ little little 4

lays other

silts clays

silts

clays Army

gravels no sands 31

graded graded ty groups clayey i c

graded gravels graded sands plasticity or i and e

of sandy

GRAVEL n

files le

ast US

two l Fi

Silty Clayey mixtures Well no litt Silty Clayey Inorganic silty inorganic gravelly clays Organic inorganic fine Organic Peat slight p

Well mixtures Poorly mixtures Poorly plasticity Inorganic

of

SIZE

No4

oarse

SP SC PT

GP GC SM CL OL CH OH

GM SW ML MH GW C

Engineers

SIEVE 1 a °

No10

of

GROUP

L um

SYMBOLS fl di

XX

NO

characteristics e M

Corps

SAND

fines fines

50

fines

fines

No40

WITH

symbols

STANDARD

no

no FINES 50

of of

or or than

1960 ne

possessing System

FINES

SANDS

CLEAN CLEAN than Fi

US

group

GRAVELS GRAVELS Appreciable Appreciable

CLAYS CLAYS

WITH amount amount

SANDS

Little Little Soils

of

April

LESS

SOILS

No200

of is of is GREATER

AND AND

limit

than

size

50 50 Classification a Sieve limit 4 Revised

SILTS SILTS

fraction R fraction DIVISIONS s

than than Size Soil

Liquid

4 No

SANDS

ORGANIC

CLAY

1953

Liquid

GRAVELS

the

SMALLER

coarse No coarse

More LARGE More

OR

Unified

MAJOR

of of

CLASSIFICATIONS

March

No

HIGHLY

SILT

than The 1 is

size

50 50

than

sievesize

Vol

than titan

sieve

FINE

SOILS SOILS

materialis material

200

COARSE

GRAINED GRAINED

200

SMALLER

More LARGER More No BOUNDARY Reference 3357 SAMPLES PL G6 N> LL SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E L E L N COUNT AND REMARKS T G E D FINES V Y F E SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P SPT bpf N ti SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D ft E T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1569 6 Red with Silt and Rock FILL Hard to Brown CLAY CL 51226 Fragments Moist SS1 N = 38

UD1 REC=20 Stiff to Very Stiff Brown Silty SAND SM with Sand and Rock Fragments Moist 56 46 SS2 1196 5 N = 15

UD2 RECI1

SS3 1377 = 14 5596 N 10 UD3 REC=12

SS4 7108 N =18

5546 LTDRE4 C81 15

5S5 756 N= 11

LTD5 IBC1 A

5496 20 SS6 345

C1D6 REC=11

5446 SS7 745 25 N=9

UD7 REC=20

SS8 677 N 14 5396 3 0 UD8 REC=13

SS9 456 SPOIL Finn to Loose Dark Brownish Gray Silty SAND N=11 SM with Coal Fragments Moist

5346 UUD9 REC=22 35

FILL Very Stiffto Hard Brown to Gray Silty CLAY SS10 215 Wet Moist = CIK with Rock Fragments Coal and Sand to N 6 UD10 REC17

5296 40

SS11 889 N = 17

UD REO=20

II

5246 SS12 7 45 Rock More Evident at 4451 450 NOTE Fragments to N=91 6

UD12 REC=16

5513 5612

c otir 1 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUiPIYEENT CML 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 IISA

I 3522496982 N O RT II N G BORING NO B0901 FASTING 10403787 283 PROJECT AEI Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION Virginia CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake eme Carbo DRILLED September 2 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 1 OF 2

THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE OMACTEC TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AM PLES PL NM LL D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L I l L NCOUNIT M E E I AND REMARKS G E T A FNES P D T E V Y SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P SPT H y c b bpf ft SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D ft E T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 519 6 TILL Very Stiffto Hard Brown to Gray Silty CLAY UD13 REC=07 CII with Rock Fragments Coal and Sand Wet to Moist

SS14 111111 N = 27

= 55 5146 UD14 REC 16 55

SS15 467 N=13

10 Gallons fo Water Put Hole at Below NOTE in 580 UD15 REC=05 Ground Surface to Clean Augers Because Steel Kept Getting 60 Stuck in Hole and Au gers wont Cut 5096 60

SS16 151112 N = 23 NOTE Tube Refusal at 09 UD16 REC=09

SS17 879 = 16 N 65 65 5046

UD17 REC=15

Stiff Reddish Brown Silty CLAY CH with Large Rock Moist SS18 747 Fragments = r N 11 70 4996 70 with Firm Light Gray to Brown Silty CLAY CH Sand Moist UDIS ILEC=20

SS19 345 Stiff Brown Sandy SILT ML with Clay Moist N=9

4946 UD19 REC= 19 75 with Rock Very Dense Gray Silty SAND SM Fragments Wet SS20 1115x04

Very Hard Gray Highly Weathered SHALE HWR Wet SS21 5016

NOTE M ater i a l Too Hard for a UD Tub e

A Ref usa la t 78 9 B el ow G round S ur fa c e BGS on uger 4896 SO 922009 Moderately Hard ray ose otnt pacing Moderately RC1 REC=7$ Weathered SHALE RQD=42

Coring Terminated at 839 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91212009 4146 85 Boring Terminated at 839 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9212009

4796 90

4746 95

deo Fr 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 1

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 3522486982 BORING NO B0901 EASTIN G 10403787283 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel r• LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake ••t• Carbo Virginia

DRILLED September 2 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 2 OF 2

THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAYBE GRADUAL S AMPLES PL 1 NM pro LL D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E E NCOUNT E I •0 REMARKS P AND E A FINES T T V E H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P ° p b i SPT bpf I i SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D ft E f1 T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 N 90 100 0 514 5 Crushed Stone SS1 434 ASH Very Stitt Grayish Brown Sandy SILT ML with N = 7 Coal and Rock Fragments Moist to Wet UD1 RFC=05

SS2 131410 N = 24

1 5 1 5098 UD2 REC=20

Finn Brownish Gray Sandy SILT ML with Coal and Rock Fragments W et SS3 333 N = 6 ALLUVIUM Finn Brownish Gray Sandy SILT ML Weathered Rock Trace of Wet with Highly Fragments Clay UD3 REC=22 5048 l0 10 Rock Very Soft Gray SILT ML with Sand and Small 000 Fragments Wet SS4 = Last Blow Drove an Extra D5 Soft N 0 NOTE Spoon Spoon in Material

with Very Soft Dark Brown to Black Sandy SILT ML UD4 REC=17 Wet Organics 15 h is 499 8 Materials Augers Water Introduced to Get Tools NOTE In 013 Back in Augers Use Piston Sampler SS5 Water N = 4 Firm Light Gray Silty CLAY CH with Brown and Root and Mica Moist to Staining Throughout Fragments 5 REC°0 7 Wet

Very Soft Brown to Gray Silty CLAY CII with Water Stainin and Or anics Wet x20 g g 4945 SS6 000 20 N=0 UD6 REC=16 Finn Gray Silty SAND ML Wet Very Hard Gray Highly Weathered SHALL IIWR Moist SS7 1122503

Soft Gray Moderately Close Joint Spacing Moderately 25 Weathered SHALL 0 to 30 Degree JointInclination 4898

RCI REC=86 RQD=26

Auger Refusal at 240 Below Ground Surface BGS on 30 91412009 4848 Coring Terminated at 290 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9142009 Boring Terminated at 290 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91412009

4798 35

4748 40

4698 45

drAq

0 1

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 3522383518 BORING NO B0902 EASTIN G 10403 874406 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel r•• LOCATION CIECIGED BY Ryan Rasnake •+•R Carbo Virginia

DRILLED September 14 2009 PROJECT NO 305 0090131 PAGE 1 OF 1 THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AM PLES P L LL SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E E L NCOUNT AND PFNLARKS G E I T D FINES V SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N C P SPT bP 1 SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW E D ft T 560 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 60 7 0 8 0 9 0 10 0 FILL Stiff Grayish to Reddish Brown SILT ML with

i Rock Fragments Moist to Wet SS1 71110 lp N=21

UD1 REC=10 Soft Brown SILT ML with Rock Fragments Wet

555 0 SS 2 4 2 1 N=3

UD2 REC=l0 Very Stiff Brown SILT ML with Rock Fragments Wet

5S 3 SILT Wet 119 ASH Soft Dark Gray to White Sandy M L N=10 550 0 5 10 1JD3 REC=17

SS4 311 N=2

1545 00UD 4 REC=1 3 15

SS5 011

NOTE No RecoveryBegan Using Piston Sampler UD5 No Recovery

540 0 20 Finn to Soft Dark Gray Sandy SILT ML Wet SS6 01i N=2

UD6 REC=20

535 0 SS 7 N1 1 1 N = 2 UD725REC=20

Very Loose Gray Silty SAND SM Wet SS8 00I = 53 00 N 1 30 NOTE White Streaks at 284 to 286 UD8 REC20

Firm Gray to Light Gray Sandy SILT ML Wet

SS9 1 N=5 NOTE 326 to 329 Contains Stiff Sandier Material 5250 UD9 REC=20 35

SS10 232 4 0 5 Loose Light Gray Silty SAND SM Wet UDIO REC20

5200 40

SS11 241 Rock = Soft to Finn Light to Gray Sandy SILT ML with N 5 Fragments Wet UD11 REC=15

5150 SS12 03 0 45 N = 3

UD12 REC=20

Very Soft Light Gray SILT ML with Rock Fragments SSl3 000 Trace of Sand Wet L Ginn 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 SO 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 352221929 BORING NO B0903 EASTBNG 1040329395 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake iE Carbo Virginia

DRILLED August 31 2009

PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 1 OF 2

THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER

IMACT IC INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL SA1•IPLES PL NM LL D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E °i° E E L COUNT AND REMARKS T P G E D A FINES Y T E V E H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P w SPT bpi ft SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D ft T E r 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 SO 90 100 50 510 SAND with Rock Loose Light Gray Silly SM UD13 REC=L6 Fragments Trace of Clay Wet

with Rock Stiff Dark to Light Gray Sandy SILT ML Wet Fragments SS14 333 N=6 UD4 REC=15 1 55 5050 55

SS15 0010 N =10

UD15 REC=18

60 5000 60 Very Soft Light Dark Gray Clayey SILT with

to NISI Rock Fragments Sand and Organics Wet SS16 060 N=0 UD16 REC=12

Loose Brownish Gray Clayey SAND SC with Silt and Rock Fragments Wet 65 4950 SS17 014 65 N=5 Firm Gray Clayey SILT with Rock Fragments and MB UD17 RFC=17 Sand Wet to Moist

SS18 003

1 70 4900 N=3 7 0 Loose Gray Silty SAND SM with Rock Fragments and UD1 S REC=08 Clay Wet RESIDUAL Hard Gray Sandy SILT ML wtih Rock Fragments Moist SS19 51013 N = 23 Very Bard Sandy CLAY CL with Rock Fragments SS20 5015 Moist 4850 5

NOTE Spoon Sample Taken Because Rig Lifting Off Ground On AugersMaterials Too Hard to Push Tube

Moderately Hard ray ose oint pacing i o erate y RC I REC=98° Weathered SHALE RQD=30

450 0 80 Auger Refusal at 751 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9112009 Rock Coring Terminated at 801 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91112009 Boring Terminated a 501 Below Ground Surface GIGS on 91112009

4750 85

90 4700 90

k 95 4650 95

100 ncn n 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 352221929 BORING NO B0903 EASTING 1040329298 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel Drilling LOCATION Carbo CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake nR Virginia DRILLED August 31 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 2 OF

2J THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF S CONDITIONS THE E LOC LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONSS ATATOTHERER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER ARE •IMACTEC INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA APPROXIMATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AMPLES NM D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E LL NCOUNT P E REMARKS E L P AND T E V E H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P e SPT bpf N 72 SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D ft E ft T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 569 1 0 TOPSOIL 551 510$ FILL Very Stiff to Hard Reddish Brown to Brown Silty N 18 CLAY CL with Sand Mica and Weathered Shale Fragments Moist 552 7911 N = 20

5641 SS3 91619 5 N =35

SS4 91213 N=25

LIDI REC=14

10 10 Tan to CLAY with Weathered Stiff Brown Silly CL 155914SS5 I1497 Shale Mo ist N = 56 Soft Gray Clayey SILT MI1 with Highly Weathered Shale Fragments Moist UD2 REC=20

FILL Very Stiff Reddish Brown Clayey SILT ML with 5541 556 61112 15 15 Weathered Rock Fragments and Mica Moist N=23

UD3 REC=15

20 5491 SS7 5912 20 with = 21 Very Stiff Grayish Brown Silty CLAY CL UD4 N Weathered Shale Frawwnents Moist REC00

IF o SS2 g 91715 ASH Firm Grayish Brown Silty SAND SM with Coal B = 32 and Rock Fragments Moist N SS9 533 FILL Soft Brown Silty CLAY CL with Shale = Fragments Moist 6 1544 c NOTE UD 4 had No 14N Recovery LID5 REC=20 ASH Loose to Very Loose Grayish Brown Silty SAND SM with Coal and Rock Fragments Moist to Wet 5510 311

NOTE Wet from 283 and Below N 2 LID6 No Recovery • Very Stiff Gray Fine SandyY ML with fine Coal 5391 30 Fragments Wet SS11 1195 FILL Very Stiff to Stiff Brown to Gray Silty CLAY CL = N 17 with Weathered Rock Fragments Wet to Moist R UD7 REC=19

5341 SS12 356 35 = N 11 UD8 REC=11

NOTE SS Used Because of Difficult Angering

SS13 546 q =

10 l• 5241 N 40 SS14 61010 Very Stiff Brown to Gray Throughout Clayey SILT ML = with Weathered Shale Fragments and Organics Moist N 20

5515 6814 Material Encountered StiffUsed SS to Get NOTi Very Nt 22 Recovery REC=I2 152414UD9 45

Very Stiff Reddish Brown to Brown Throughout Silty 9313 CLAY CL with Highly Weathered Shale Frag rents and SS16 = 22 Organics Moist to Wet N

UD10 REC=22

ata i 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 3522130379 BORING NO B0904 EASTING 10403332818 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake Carbo Virginia

DRILLED September 16 2009 ZPTHIS PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 1 OF 2 RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION Or CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION SUBSURFACE 0 LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER rMACTEC INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE 4 TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAYBE GRADUAL

I SAMPLES P NM •i i SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E 0ia E L NCOUNT I AND REMARKS E T A FINES G D E V Y SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N N P SPT bpf SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D ft E • T 70 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1 5 19 Stiff Reddish Brown to Brown Silty 1410 Very Throughout SS17 6610 CLAY CL with Highly Weathered Shale Fragments and IN = 16 Moist to Wet C=13

SS18 4913 5 55 N=22 UD12 REC=09

5S19 368

NOTE UD 13 had No RecoveryTube was Bent During N =14 Pushing 5091 UD13 No Recovery 60

Ilard Brown Silty CLAY CL with Highly Weathered Shale Fragments Moist SS 20 54916 =65 Stiff Brown CLAY Willi to Very Stiff to Gray Silty CL SS21 246 Highly Weathered Shale Fragments and Organics Wet N = 10 5041 UD14 REC=07 65

SS22 12710 N = 17

Stiff Tan Clayey SILT ML with Weathered Rock Fragments and Organics Wet SS23 366 Gv 12 Stiff Grayish Brown CLAY CL with Silt and Mica Moist 4991 70 UD 15 REC=23 Stiff Brown Clayey SILT ML with Weathered Rock Fragments Moist

Stiff Brown Silty CLAY With Weathered Rock CL SS24 458 Fragments Moist N = 13

4941 LID 16 REC=22 75 ALLUVIAL Very Loose Gray Coarse SAND SM with Wet Silt L SS25 000 I IN = 0 Very Hard Dark Gray Highly Weathered SHALE HWR SS26 245012

N O TE SS U se d B ecause Roug h M ater i a l inH o l e Bottom No RLCUVERY rote Data rom an 4891 8o

this l t h e Material Not Recovere d i s Sh a l i th Jo int in Ho e e w Inclinations Between 75 and 95 Degrees from Horizontal RC1 REC=0° RQDO

Soft Dark Gray Moderately Close Jointing Moderately

d J in t I nc n ati of75 to 90 De W ea th ere SHALE o li on grees 4841 8 5

RC2 REC=62 RQD=0

Auger Refusal at 788 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9172009 4791 9 0 Coring Terminated at 888 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9172009

Begin Coring at 788 Below Ground Surface BGS con 911712009

Boring Terminated at 8B8 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9172009 474 95

Lot 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD CQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 3522 130379 BORING NO B0904 FASTING 10403332813 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel Rasnake LOCATION Virginia CHECKED BY Ryan RPR Carbo DRILLED September 16 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 2 OF 2 THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER 1MACTEC INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL D L E S AMPLES PL NM LL SOIL CLASSIFICATION o E E L NCOUNT ern I AND REMARKS T P 0 E D A FINES V T E E H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P f SPT bpi SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D II L 0 T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 5 69 1 ASH Firm Brown Sandy SILT ML with Rock SS1 466 Fra m uents and Organics Moist = Ve Brown Sill with Rock Fra ments N 12 ry Stiff y CLAY CL g Moist SS2 1115 Stiff Yellowish Brown Sandy SILT with ML N = 25 12VerySandsone Fragments Moist Y i h B 5 S t iff to ard e s Cl SILT 5 54 1 SS 3 9 16 14 Very Il ll ow rown ayey ML = with Sand Rock Fragments and Organics Moist N 30

SS4 131721 N=38 NOTE Blow Counts Too High for 150 Sampes Switlrced SS5 132318 from 725 SSA to 325 ESA at 90 N =41 i 10 559 1 5 10 SS6 898 N =17

UD1 1tEC=17

NOTE UD2 Only Pushed to 175 Due to Stiff Material 15 155 410SS7 4I 5 0 15 N = 15

UD2 EEC=t4

NOTE UD3 Only Pushed 19 Due to Stiff Material

SS8 91313

20 5491 N76 2 0 UD3 REC=17

SS9 173221 N = 53 NOTE No 1JA Because Too Hard at 240 to 260

5 44 1 SS 10 9 13 22 2 N = 35 Very Hard Yellowish Brown Clayey SILT ML with Rock and Coal Fragments Moist SS11 252823 = NOTE No UD Because Too Hard at 280 to 300 N 51 NOTE SS12 had No RecoveryOnly Gray Powder SS12 10155025

NOTE SPT Refusal on Lnneslone Fragments at 300 30 Surface Difficult Encountered 5391 30 Below Ground BGS Drilling SS135 50115 0 at 295 r 1 jzcund Auger a usa at a ow ur ace on 91512009

Boring Terminated at 300 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91 5120 0 9

5341 35

5291 40

45

` 50 1524105101 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 550X Truck Rig

METHOD 225 SSA 00 to 60 325 HSA 60to 300 NORTIZING 3522130379 BORING NO B0905 BASTING 10403332818 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Nick Smith LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake Carbo Virginia

DRILLED September 14 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE IOF1 THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT TEE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE OMACTEC TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AM PLES P L NM LL D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E C E L NCOUN AND REMARKS I 4 D A FIN ES E V T SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N E P SPT bp f SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW E D 11 T 20 4 7 l O 3 0 0 5 0 6 0 0 8 0 9 0 0

10

569 1 Auger Probed to 300 Below Ground Surface BOS No SCompleted

564 1 S

I 10 559 1 1 0

554 1

15

544 1 2 0

544 1 5

5391 30 ASH Very Stiff Yellowish to Reddish Brown Clayey SSI 678 SILT MH with Rock Fragments and Organics Moist N=15 NOTE Only Rushed 80 Don to Very Stiff Material UD1 REC=06 Very Hard to llard Yellowish Brown to Brown Clayey SS2 162034 SILT ML with Rock Fragments Moist N =54 534 1 35

Onl Rushed 4 V NOTE y 5 D uet o ery H ard M a ter ia l UD2 REC=04 Hard Yellowish Brown Shale and Sandstone Fragments Moist SS3 183423 N=57

52 9 1 40 Difficult NOTE Augering Encountered from 360 to 440 Below Ground Surface BGS 554 211716 N = 33 Very Stiff to Hard Brown to Tan Clayey SILT ML with Rack Fragments and Coal Moist SS5 281810 N = 28 NOTE Difficult Drilling with Augers Becoming Light 524 1 SS 311536 1 45 N=28

557 101725 = Dense Dark Gray Silty SAND SM with Coal Fragments N 42

UD3 REC=11

5D 41a 1 Moist0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME SSOX Truck Rig

METHOD 225 SSA 00 to 80 32511 HSA 60 to 800 NORTHING 3 52213 0379 BORING NO B0905A FASTING 10403332818 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike LOGGED BY Nick Smith Drilling CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake LOCATION Carbo Virginia

DRILLED September 22 2009

PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 1 OF 2 THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE •MACTEC TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAYBE GRADUAL S AMPLES P L NM LL D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E era E E L NCOUNT I AND REMARKS T P C E D A FIN ES T E V Y E H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P SPT bp t SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW 1 ft D f T N 1 0 2 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 70 8 0 9 0 10 0 50 519 Finn Dark Gray Silly SAND SM Wet SS8 366

N`I = I NOTE Too Wet and Loose No Recovery fD 4 REC=01 NOTE Ash Heaving lnto Augers when Center Bit SS9 4 10 Removed N = 1 Ver Loose Dark Gra Silt SAND Wet 55 y y y SM 514 I SS 535I0 55 NOTE Started Center Bit Before Rods Flushing Pulling N = 8 Because of Heaving Did not try UD Because Too Loose Wet and No Piston Sampler SS11 6108 = I8 Very Stiff to Hard Yellowish Red to Tan Silty CLAY N CH with Shale Fragments Coal and Organics Moist UD5 REC=09

60 509 1 60 SS12 61012 N = 22

UD6 REC=15

65 504 1 SS 13 6 9 13 6 N 22

UD7 REC=09

SS14 8710 N = 17 70 499 1 5 07 UD8 REC=115

SS15 141823 N=41 NOTE Pushed 12 Due to Hard Material 75 494I UD 9 RE C=1 I 7 5

SS16 151410 N = 24

NOTE SPT Sample Taken Due to Difficult Augering SS17 61315 Boring Terminated at 789 Below Ground Surface BGS on CN 78 80 912 20900 14891080

85 484 1 85

90 479 1 3 9

95 47 4 1 0 95

100 nen t 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 550X Truck Rig

METHOD 225 SSA 00 to 80 325 HSA 60 to 800 NORTHING 3522130379 BORING NO B0905A E A STIN G 10403 33 2818 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Nick Smith LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake e Carbo Vbinia

DRILLED September 22 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 2OF2

THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFERINTERFACESBEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE 4rMACTEC TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AMPLES nL Nlvl LL D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E pro

E E I NCOUNT AND REMARKS I1 P G E T A FINES E V Y T E H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P = SPT bpQ ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW E ft SYMBOLS AND D 0 T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 5 18 1 FILL Crushed Stone from Road

SS 1 8 19 5 SAND with Rock Firm Grayish Brown Silty SM = 24 and Coal Moist Fragments UD 1 REC04 Reddish to Yellowish with N CLAY FILLStiff Brown Silty CH 767 SS2 Rock and Coal Frag vents Moist N = 13

1 5 5131 UD2 REC=15 a

NOTE Because of the Difficulty of Augering Elected to Use SS Sample SS3

Soft Brown Silty CLAY CH Moist to Wet SS4 532 ° 10 5481 N 5

10

UD 3 REC=2 0 ASH Finn Gray Sandy SILT ML with Rock and Coal Fragments Wet SS5 12106 NOTE No Recovery N= 16

` F 15 5031 UD4 REC=20 15 Soft Gray Sandy SILT ML with Rock Fragments Wet I SS6 N1101

UD5 REC=20

20 4951 2 0 with Rock Wet Stiff Gray Sandy SILT ML Fragments SS7 036 1`1= 9 RESIDUAL Stiff Gray to Brown Silty CLAY CL with Moist Sand UD6 REC20

Soft Brown Silty SAND SM with Clay Moisi 4931 SS3 022 25 N=4 Very Dense Brown Silty SAND with Clay Moist SM UD7 REC=15

SS9 155016

Very Hard Gray Highly Weathered SHALE HWR Moist SS10 30 4881 30 6 Moderately Hard Gray Moderately Close to Close Jointing to Weathered SIIALE Slight Moderately w RC REC=60 RQD=0°n

z 35 35 14831591312009Auger Refusal at 300 Below Ground Surface BGS on _it Coring Terminated at 350 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9142009

Terminated at 350 Below Ground Surface R Boring BGS on in 9142009 w a 40 4781 4 0 u Z a U G w C 45 14731545 a 0 m u a 0 50 dAe 5 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 50 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CMC 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 352203 8937 BORING NO B0906 EASTLNG 10403414543 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake IRVie Carbo Virginia DRILLED September 3 2009

PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 1 OF I

THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE OMACTEC BEWEEN TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AMPLES PL LL SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E ° E L NCOUNT M AND 75 I O E D T A FINES °o E V Y SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION Of N N P SPT bpl SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW F D B T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 667 0 ASH Stiff Dark Grayy Sandy SILT ML Moist 117 SS1 244 N = 8 Stiff to Finn Grayish Brown Sandy SILT ML with Coal and Rock Moist Fragments UD1 REC=L 0

66 2 0 55 2 3 4 2 5 Soft to Very Soft Grayish Brown Sandy SILT ML with = 6 Coal and Rock Fraavents Moist N UD2 REC=20

SS3 221

6570 •3 10 NOTE UD3=0 6f Sample Lost from Tube on Exit UD3 REC=20

SS4

6520 15 UD4 REC=20

Hard Gray Fine Sandy SILT ML with Coal Fragments Wet SS5 51027 = 1`I 37 UD 5 Very Stiff to Stiff Gray SILT ML with Fine Sand Wet REC02 SS6 114812 6474 10 NOTE Layering Apparent at 191 Below Ground Surface N= 60 BGS to 195 Below Ground Surface BOS Q UD6 REC2 0

SS7 1 2122 with Coal and Rock Stiff Gray Silty SAND SM 1 14 Fragments Wet 642A L TD7 REC= 20 25 Water Introduced to Hole to Allow Tools to Run Sack

in Augers Very Stiff Brownish Chay to Gray Throughout Sandy SILT 553 111810 with Rock and Coal Wet = ML Fragments N 28

UDS REC=20

6370 30 Stiff Gray Sandy SILT with Black Streaking ML 277 Throughout Wet SS9 N=14 UD9 REC=10

Firm Brownish Gray Silty SAND SM with Coal Fragments Wet SS 01 11 4 = 12 C l F N St if G ray S andy SILT ML w i t h Fi ne oa ragme n 632 0 35 Wet 8ts 5511 956 Brownish SAND with Coal Firm Gray Silty SNM N = 14 Fragments Wet UD10 RFC 05 Stiff Gray Sandy SILT NIL with Coal Fragments Wet SS 1 17112 4 Finn Brownish Silty SAND with Coal Gray SM = 35 Fragments Wet 6370 4 NOTE Material Too Dense for ID Tube SS13 712 4 SILT with Coal Very Stiff Cray Sandy ML Fragments N = 19 Wet SS14 51615 Finn Brownish Gray Silty SAND SM with Coal and = Rock Fragments Wet N 31 NOTE Material Too Dense for UD Tube SS15 24 5 6220 N=9 45

UD11 REC=17

Brownish SAND with Coal Very Loose Gray Silty SM SS16 620 and Rock Fragments Wet N=2

F1rn 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CMG 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 352156116 BORING NO B0907 EASTNG 1040257931 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION Virginia CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake ••• Carbo DRILLED September 15 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 1 OF 2

THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE 0MAClEG INTERFACES BEWEEN TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AMPLES PL NM ° LL D SOL CLASSIFICATION L E o e o L NCOUNT E AND REMARKS E P G E D T _ FINES T E V Y H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P SPT bpt N SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW E R D ft T 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 50 1617 2 = Soft Dark Gray Sandy SILT ML with Clay Fragments 0010 Wet

Firm Brownish Gray Silty SAND Sill with Coal and SS17 887 Rack Fragments Wet 15

UD 13 REC=2 0 Stiff Gray Sandy SILT ML with Fine Coal Fragments 55 Wet 6 12 0 55

Loose Brownish Gray Silty SAND SM Coarse with SS18 314 Coal and Rock Fragments Wet N = 5 Stiff Brownish Gray Sandy SILT ML Coarse with Coal UD14 REC=10 and Rock Fragments Wet

Soft to SILT with Coal to Very Soft Gray Brown MR 160700SS190 01 60 r 60 Fragments Organics and Sand Wet N =1

IJD15 REC=l9

SS20 000 4 1 N = 0 I 65 6024 65 UD16 REC=20

SS21 000 4 1 N=0

70 5970 UDl7 REC =1 6 70 ALLUVIUM Very Soft Grayish Brown Clayey SILT uIII with Rock Fragments and Sand Wet

Brownish with Fine Very Soft Gray Silty CLAY CH SS22 000 1 1 Sand and Mica = aF Wet N 0

UDI8 REC=13

75

11 Very Soft Brownish Tan to Gray Sandy CLAY CL with SS23 000 59200Siltand Mica Moist N = 0

UD19 REC=18

5870 SS24 000 1 0 80 NOTE SS25 h ad No Recovery SS 20 0 Hard Gray Moderately Close Joint Spacing Slightly 0I Weathered SHALE

RCI 82 INCLUSIONS Joints at 95 and 82 9 to REC=96°° High Angle RQD=92 830 Below Ground Surface BGS

5$30 87

Refusal Below Ground Surface Auger at 805 BGS on 911512009

Coring Terminated at 855 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9116P009

Boring Terminated at 855 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9162009 5770 90

157200 95

fl 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 352156116 BORING NO B0907 EASTIN G 1040257931 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake jPx Carbo Virginia DRILLED September 15 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 2 OF 2 THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES 13FWEEN STRATA ARE •MACTEC APPROXNATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E S AMPLES PL NM °i LL •i NCOINT 0 e E AND REMARKS E L P G E D T A FINES T V H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N N P SPT bpf ft SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D E B C T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 567 6 TOPSOIL SS1 597 ASH Stiff Brownish Gray Sandy SILT ML with Coal = 16 Clay and Rock Fragments Moist N UD1 REC=20

5 5 62 6 55 2 233 5 N = 6 UD 2 RE C=20 FILL Stiff Gray Clayey SILT MH with Sand and Coal Fragments Moist

Very Stiff to Hard Brown to Gray Silty CLAY CL with SS3 191512 and Limestone Sand Rock Fragments Moist to Wet = 27 10 557 6 N 10 r SS4 659 14 UD3 No Recovery RECO I SS5 12115 N = 16

I 15 552 6 SS 6 15 23 18 N=41 SS71591112 •• N°23 No Recovery RECO1 558 203020 = 50 20 547 63 N 0 0 I° NOTE Wet at 198 to 200 Below Ground Surface BGS on9102009 SS9 111312 N=25

SS10 151414 = Hard Gray Sandy SILT ML with Coal Fragments and N 23 Clay Moist to Wet 15426= SS11 2347 506

SS12 405013 SS13 506 SS14 506 UD5 REC=01 SS15 4040225 = 537 6 N 62 30 Very Stiff to Hard Gray Sandy SILT ML with Coarse Sand Wet SS16 679 N 16 LTD6 REC04 SS17 9917 N = 26

532 6 35 SS18 91011 = Water Introduced Hole Used Aid N 21 NOTE to to Auger Drilling SS19 91315 N = 28

7 RFC2 D Stiff to Very Stiff Grayish Brown Silty CLAY CL with 507 40 Shale Rock Fragments Moist SS20 346 N= 10

UD8 REC=20

5 00 45 5521 6611 Nf7

SS22 51011 N=21 UD9 REC=10 rt•c 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Trick Rig METHOD 325 BSA NORTI1INO 3521467007 BORING NO B0908 FASTING 10402599492 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake Carbo Virginia DRILLED September 11 2009

PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE I OF 2 THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE IMACTEC BEWEEN TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AM PLES PL NM SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E o E L NCOUNT AND REMARKS G E T A EWES E V fj Y E SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P o a SPT bpf SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D fl T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 517 6 Finn Yellowish Brown Silty SAND ML with Clay and SS23 71012 Shale Fragments Moist N = 22 Yellowish Brown Silty CLAY CL with Weathered Rock UD10 REC10 Fragments Moist Brown Very Stiff to Hard Grayish to OrangeBrown Silty SS24 4712 Weathered Shale and = CLAY CL with Highly Fragments N 19 Org anics Moist 5126 55 SS25 468 N = 14 UDI1 REC=14

SS26 5711 N= 18 5076 60 UD12 REC=11

SS27 7810 N= 18

UD13 REC=20

5026 65 SS28 477 N =14 UD14 REC=l6

SS29 71214 4976 70 N = 26

SS30 51513 RESIDUAL Very Stiff Dark Gray to Brown Clayey SILT N 73 ML Trace of Fine Sand Moist Used to Due to Material NOTE Split Spoon Sample in SS31 446 Bottom of Hole N1O 4926 75 UD15 REC=20

Stiff Dark Gray Sandy SILT ML Moist to Wet SS32 347 N=11

UD16 REC=23 4876 80

Finn Dark Gray Silty SAND SM with Shale Fragments Wet SS33 5119 N = 20 Very Dense Wllitis8 Gray Coarse to Fine Grained Silty SS34 1511506 SAND SM with Rock Fragments Wet SS35 501 Coring Terminated at 844 Below Ground Surface BGS on 148 63 85 91102000

Moderately Hard Light Gray to Gray Moderately Close Joint S p acin g M o d eratel y Weathered SHALE R RECS ° QD=53

R f l 84 6 B l G d S f A uger e usa at e ow roun ur ace BGS ou 4776 90 91I012009 Below Ground Surface Coring Terminated at 895 BGS on 9102009

Baring Terminated at 895 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9102009

3 4726 95

dF7 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 1ISA NORTI1ING 3521467007 BORING NO B0908 FASTING 10402599492 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake R LOCATION Carbo Virginia DRILLED September 11 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 2 OF 2

THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER •IMACTEC INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL S AMPLES PL NM LL D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E NCOUNT E AND REMARKS E L P D _ FOVLS T V Y P = H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N N i SPT bptl ft SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D ft E T 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 5 676 a TOPSOIL SS1 31414 FILL Very Stiff to Stiff Reddish Brown to Gray Clayey = 28 SAND SC with Sand Rock Coal and Organics Moist N UD1 REC=20

562 6 SS 2 1213 13 N = 26

LID2 REC=20

SS3 675 N=13 10 557 6 5 10 r UD 3 REC°2 0 ASH Soft Gray Sandy SILT AIL with Coal and Rock Fragments Moist 1 554 312 N = 3 F UD4 REC=15 15 552 6 15 r 1 1 1 FILL Very Stiff Yellowish Brown Silty CLAY CH with Rock Frarnents Moist SS5 468 N 14 Finn Stiff with Large Rack to Brown Silty CLAY CH Fragments Moist SS6 345 = NOTE SS Sample Taken Due to Hard Material UD5 IN 9 I 20 Encountered at 17 5 547 6 REC=O S 20 NOTE Augers Kicked Off In Hole at 175 Below Ground SS7 586 932009 Due Rock Surface BGS on to N = 14 Refusal Below Ground Surface Auger at 218 BGS on 98009

Will Offset 160 North ofOriginal Location Toward B0907

Boring Term inate dat 21 5 Be l ow G round S urface BGS on 542 6 25 91812009

1753760 30

532 6 35

527 6 4 0

522 6 45

<17 F 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 3321467007 BORING NO B0908A EASTING 10402599492 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION Virginia CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake EVA Carbo DRILLED September S 2009

PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 1 OF I THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE aMACTEC TRANSITIONS BET WREN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL SAMPLES D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E PL NM E E L NCOUNT AND REMARKS T G E A FINES o E V Y T E H SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF N P SPT bpf BELOW E SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED D ft T 4 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 1567

60D Auger Probe to 195 Below Ground Surface BGS on 1 91812009

5626 5

AU1 5576 1 0

5526 15

A R f l 19 5 B l G d S f 20 uger e usa at e ow roun ur ace BGS on 5476 2 0 983009

Boring Terminated at 195 Below Ground Surface BGS on 982009

25 5425 21

I 30 30 15376035 M 35 5326

1

40 40 1527604 45 5226 5

C

50 cis 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling SOIL TEST BORING RECORD EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 EISA NORTHING 3521467007 BORING NO B0908B L A STING 10402599492 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasrake Carbo Virginia DRILLED September 8 2009

PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE I OF

1J THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER INTERFACES STRATA ARE APPROXIMATE •MACTEC BEWEEN TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL SAMPLES P o D SOIL CLASSIFICATION L E LLCP E F L NCOU•r AND REMARKS I P G E D T A FINES a Y T F V E P SEE KEY SHEET FOR EXPLANATION OF to SPT H N N 0 bpf SYMBOLS AND ABBREVIATIONS USED BELOW D E ft B T 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 0 519 Grayish Silty SAND with Coal 3510 ASH Finn Brown SM and Rock Fragments Moist SS1 477 N = 14 UD1 REC=15

Hard to Very Stiff Gray Sandy SILT ML with Small Coal Fragments Wet 101616 F 5 Si4 3SS2 N=372 5

SS3 7159 N = 24 FILL Very Stiff Brown Silty CLAY CH with Weathered Rock Moist Fragments UD2 RECD 0 NOTE Material Too Hard For UD Tube

i 10 S ot Sill y CLAY CII with Rock Frag ments Wet to 50 93 10 Moist SS4 132 N=5 UD3 REC20

SS5 222 11 15 504 3 N = 4 15

UD4 REC=20

Moist Stiff Gray to Brown Silty CLAY CH SS6 224 N=6 49935 D c REC2 O ALLUVIUM Stiff Dark Gray Clayey SILT MIT Trace of Sand Moist NOTE Streaks ofBlack Throughout SS7 N8235

IUD6 REC=20 4943 25

Very Soft Dark Gray to Brown Sandy SILT ML with SS8 000 Clay Wet N = 0

UD 7 REC=2 0 Very Loose Dary Gray Silty SAND with to Brown SM Streaks of Dark Red to Brown Clay Throughout and Rock 4893 3 0 Wet Fragments SS9 NI201 UDS REC20

55 10 375011 Very Hard Yellowish Brown Highly Weathered SHALE V R with Silt Moist 484 3 35 Rock Coring Begins at 338 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9112009 RC9 REC=70 Soft Dark Gray to Brown Close Joint Spacing Highly RQD=16 Weathered SHALE W et

Ground Surface Auger Refusal at 338 Below BGS on 911 12009 4793 40 Coring Terminated at 338 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9112009 Boring Terminated at 388 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911 V2009

4743 45

Sao z 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

DRILLER TriState Drilling EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig METHOD 325 HSA NORTHING 3521314623 BORING NO B0909 EA STIN G 10402604531 PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel •p LOCATION CHECKED BY Ryan Rasnake cDR Carbo Virginia DRILLED September 11 2009 PROJECT NO 3050090131 PAGE 1 OF I THIS RECORD IS A REASONABLE INTERPRETATION OF SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT THE EXPLORATION LOCATION SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND AT OTHER TIMES MAY DIFFER APPROXIMATE •IMACTEC INTERFACES BEWEEN STRATA ARE TRANSITIONS BETWEEN STRATA MAY BE GRADUAL AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 2b 2010

AMIA CTEC Project 3050090131

APPENDIX C

PIEZOMETER INSTALLATION LOGS BORING NO B0901 SHEET 1 OF 2

MACTEC and Engineering Consulting Inc PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Carbo Virginia PROJECT NO 3050090131 •Tt LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel CHECKED ARyan Rasnake

WELL ELEVATION DEPTH water DESCRIPTION Love CONSTRUCTION FEET jr DETAIL bgs FILL Hard Red to Brown CLAY CL with Silt and Rock Fragments Moist

Bentonite T 5

Stiff to Very Stiff Brown Silty SAND SM with Sand and Rock Fragments 156500

Mo i st

156000

155500 155 0

i•z 155000 20

154500 25

154000 Sand5 665

SPOIL Firm to Loose Dark Brownish

Gray Silty SAND with Coal SM 153500 30Fragments Moist

FILL Very Stiff to Hard Brown to Gray CLAY with Rock Silty CH Fragments and Sand Wet to Moist 153000 3540 Coal

152500 45 NOTE Rack Fragments More Evident at 445 to 450

152000

DRILLING CONTRACTOR TriState Drilling Northing 3522486982

Easting 10403787283 DRILLING METHOD 3255 HSA

DRILLING EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig

DATE DRILLED 922009 BORING NO B0901 SHEET 2 OF 2

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Carbo Virginia

PROJECT NO

3050090131wKLOGGEDBY Jon McDaniel CHECKED BRyan Rasnake

WELL DEPTH watr DESCRIPTION Lev CONSTRUCTION s

FEET Cl DETAIL bgs

FILL Very Stiff to Hard Brown to Gray

Silty CLAY CH With Rock Fragments Coaland Sand Wet to Moist 151500 55

NOTE 10 Gallons fo Water Put in Hole 580 Below Ground Surface Clean to 151000 60Augers Because Steel Kept Getting Stuck Hole and Augers wont Cut

in

Refusal 09 atNOTE Tube at 150500

Reddish CLAY Stiff Brown Silty CH with Rock Moist Large Fragments Bentonite 665715 150000 70 65to CLAY Firm Light Gray Brown Silty with Sand Moist

Stiff Brown Sandy SILT ML with Clay Moist 149500 75 Sand 715 789 Very Dense Gray Silty SAND SM CHwith Rock Fragments Wet

Very Hard Gray Highly Weathered SHALE H1NR Wet 149000 NOTE M a t er i al T oo H ard f or a LID 80Tube Bentonlte 789 839 Auger Refusal at 789 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91212009 era e y ar ray use oin Spacing Moderately Weathered SHALE

Coring Terminated at 839 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91212009 Boring Terminated at 839 Below Ground SurfaceoBGS on 91212009 BORING NO B0902 SHEET 1 OF I

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Carbo Virginia

PROJECT NO 3050090131

OLOGGEDBY Jon McDaniel CHECKED BRyan Rasnake

WELL ELEVATION water DEPTH DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCTION Level FEET FEET to DETAIL bgs

Crushed Stone

ASH Very Stiff Grayish Brown Sandy SILT with Coal and Rock ML Bentonite C 5 Fragments Moist to Wet 1 151000

Firm Brownish Gray Sandy SILT ML with Coal and Rock Fragments Wet

ALLUVIUM Firm Brownish Gray Sandy SILT ML with Highly 150500 Weathered Rock Fragments Trace of Clay Wet Very Soft Gray SILT ML with Sand and Small Rock Fragments Wet NOTE Last Spoon Blow Drove Spoon Sand 5 24 an Extra 05 Soft Material 150000

in

10151

Very Soft Dark Brown to Black Sandy SILT ML With Organics Wet Materials NOTE In Augers Water

Introduced to Tools Get Back in Augers Use Piston Sampler 149500 Firm Light Gray Silty CLAY CH with Brown Water Staining Throughout and Root Fragments and Mica Moist to Wet

Very Soft Brown to Gray Silty CLAY CH with Water Staining and Organics Wet

Firm Gray Silty SAND ML Wet Bantonlte 24 29 Very Hard Gray Highly Weathered SHALE HWR Moist

Soft Gray Moderately Close Joint Spacing Moderately Weathered SHALE 0 to 30 Degree Joint Inclination Auger Refusal at 240 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911412009

20a Coring Terminated at 290 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911412009 Boring Terminated at 290 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911 412 009

zz

DRILLING CONTRACTOR TriState Drilling Northing 3522383518 Fasting 10403874406 DRILLING METHOD 325 HSA

DRILLING EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig

DATE DRILLED 911 412 00 9 BORING NO B0904 SHEET 1 OF 2

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Carbo Virginia NO 3050090131 PROJECT 92 LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel CHECKED BRyan Rasnake

WELL ELEVATION water DEPTH DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCTION Leve• FEET FEET DETAIL bgs TOPSOIL

FILL Very Stiff to Hard Reddish Brown Bentonlte to with 0 4 Brown Silty CLAY CL Sand Mica and Weathered Shale Fragments Moist 156500 5

156000 10 Stiff Tan to Brown Silty CLAY CL Weathered Shale Moist Gray Clayey SILT MH with withWeathered Shale Fragments SoftHighly155500 15 FILL Very Stiff Reddish Brown Clayey Moistwith Weathered Rock ML Fragments and Mica Moist 0 SILT 155000 2a

Very Stiff Grayish Brown Silty CLAY with Weathered Shale Fragments Moist

ASH Firm Grayish Brown Silty SAND 154500 SM with Coal and Rock Fragments 25 Moist

FILL CLAY with CLSoft Brown Silty CL Fragments Moist ShaleUD 4 had No Recovery Loose to Very Loose Grayish 154000 SAND with Coal and 30BrownNOTESilty SM Fragments Moist to Wet NOTEASHWet from 283 and Below RockVery Stiff Gray Fine Sandy SILT ML with Fine Coal Fragments Wet 153500 Very Stiff to Stiff Brown to Gray 35 Silty CLAY CL with Weathered Rock FragmentsFILLWet to Moist

NOTE SS Used Because Difficult of 153000 Augeri ng 40

Very Stiff Brown to Gray Throughout Sand 4 788 SILT ML with Weathered ClayeyShale Fragments and Organics Moist NOTE Material Encountered Very 152500 StiffUsed 5S to Get Recovery 45

Very Stiff Reddish Brown to Brown

Silty CLAY CL with ThroughoutWeathered Shale and Highly Fragments Moist to Wet Organics 52000

DRILLING CONTRACTOR TriState Drilling Northing 3522130379

Easting 10403332818 DRILLING METHOD 325 HSA

DRILLING EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig

DATE DRILLED 911 612 0 09 BORING NO B0904 SHEET 2 OF 2 and MACTEC Engineering Consulting inc PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Carbo Virginia

PROJECT NO 30550090131

LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel CHECKED BRyan Rasnake

WELL water ¢ DEPTH DESCRIPTION CONSTRUCTION Level r FEET to DETAIL bgs

Very Stiff Reddish Brown to Brown CLAY with ThroughoutSilty CL Highly Weathered Shale Fragments and OrganicsMoist to Wet 151500 55

151000 NOTE UD 13 had No RecoveryTube 60 was Bent During Pushing with Brown Silty CLAY CL HardHighly Weathered Shale Fragments Stiff to Stiff Brown to MoistVery Gray Silty 150500 65 CLAY CL with Highly Weathered Shale Fragments and Organics Wet

0 Stiff Tan Clayey SILT ML with L

IL Weathered Rock Fragments and 1500 00 Organics Wet 70 Stiff Grayish Brown CLAY CL with Silt

d Mi ca M o i s t

Stiff Brown Clayey SILT ML with Weathered Rock Fragments Moist 149500 Brown Silty CLAY CL with 75 Weathered Rock Fragments Moist StiffCoarse anVery Loose Gray ALLUVIALwith Slit Wet SM

Hard Dark Gray Highly Weathered SAND 149000 HWR VeryNOTE SS Used Because Rough Material Hole Bottom 80SHALEin a a rom MW0914 and SPT26 this the

in Hole Material Not Recovered with is Shale Bentonite 788 888 1485 00 Joint Inclinations Betweenrom75 and 95 85 D from H ori zon t a l

S o D k GMray od erat e l y Cl ose egreesft Jointing Moderately Weathered SHALE

Joint inclination of 75 90

to Degrees

Refusal at 788 Below Ground Surface BGS on 9172009 arTerminated at 888 Below Ground AugerCoring Surface BGS on 91720C9 Begin Coring at 788 Below Ground Surface BGS von 9172009 Boring Terminated at 888 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911712009 BORING NO B0906 SHEET 1 OF 1

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Carbo Virginia

PROJECT NO 3050090131

VIZLOGGEDBY Jon McDaniel CHECKED Rasnake BRyan

1 4c WELL ELEVATION DEPTH Water DESCRIPTION ce Y CONSTRUCTION FEET

e1 FEET U DETAIL bgs FELL Crushed Stone from Road

FILL Firm Grayish Brown Silty SAND with Rock and Coal Fragments SM Bentenlte 05 151500

Stiff Reddish to Yellowish Brown Silty MoistCLAY with Rock and Coal CH Fra gments Moist

NOTE Because of the Difficulty of Elected to Use SS Sample 151000 AugeringMoist to Brown Silty CLAY CH Wet 10 Soft ASH Firm Gray Sandy SILT ML w Rock and Coal Fra ments Wet 150500 NOTE N o Recovery

15 ithSILT with Soft Gray Sandy ML Rock 5F ts W e t ragmenSand 5 30 150000

20 Stiff Gray Sandy SILT gwith Rock ML FragmentsWet RESIDUAL Stiff Gray to Brown Silty CL with Sand Moist 149500

Soft Brown Silty SAND SM with 75 CLAYMoist Clay

Very Dense Brown Silty SAND SM with Clay Moist 1490 00

Very Hard Gray Highly Weathered SHALE HWR Moist Hard Gray Moderately

CloseModeratelyto Close Slight to Jointing Moderately Weathered SHALE Bentonite 30 35 148500

35 300 30Auger Refusal at Below Ground Surface BGS on 91312009 Coring Terminated at 350 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91412009 Boring Terminated at 350 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91412009

III

DRILLING CONTRACTOR TriState Drilling Northing 352203a937 Easting 70403414543 DRILLING METHOD 325 HSA

DRILLING EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig

DATE DRILLED 9312009 BORING NO B0908 SHEET 1 OF 2

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Carbo Virginia

PROJECT NO 3050090131

LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel CHECKED BRyan Rasnake

WELL ELEVATION DEPTH water DESCRIPTION Level CONSTRUCTION FEET FEET Cl DETAIL bgs TOPSOIL

ASH Stiff Brownish Gray Sandy SILT with Coal Clay and Rock ML Bentenlte 0 51 156500 Fragments Moist

FILL Stiff Gray Clayey SILT MH with 156000 Sand and Coal Fragments Moist

Very Stiff to Hard Brown to Gray Silty CL with Sand Rock and 10CLAYLimestone Fragments Moist to Wet No Recovery 1555 00

15

155001

No Recovery

NOTE Wet 198 to 200 Below

at Ground Surface BGS on 91102009

1545 00

Hard Gray Sandy SILT ML with Coal and Moist Wet 2025FragmentsC€ay to 154000

30 Very Stiff to Hard Gray Sandy SILT with Coarse Sand Wet 153500

35

MLNOTE Water Introduced to Hole Used Sand 69 to Aid 5 Auger Drilling 153000

Stiff to Stiff Brown 40GrayishVery Silty CLAY CL with Shale Rock Fragments Moist152500 45152000 1

TriState DRILLINGCONTRACTOR Drilling Northing 3521467007 Fasting 10402599492 DRILLING METHOD 325 HSA

DRILLING EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig

DATE DRILLED 9112009 BORING NO B0908 SHEET 2 OF 2

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Carbo Virginia

PROJECT NO 3050090131

LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel CHECKED BRyan Rasnake

< WELL DEPTH water DESCRIPTION Level CONSTRUCTION

FEET Cf DETAIL bgs

Firm Yellowish Brown Silty SAND with Clay and Shale Fragments Moist 151500 CLAY with YellowishBrown Silty CL Weathered Rock Fragments Moist 55Very Stiff to Hard Grayish Brown to MLOrangeBrown Silty CLAY CL with Weathered Shale Fragments and OrganicsHighlyMoist r151000 60150500 65150000

70

sent on e 74

lt 69 RESIDUAL Very Stiff Dark Gray to 149500 Clayey SILT ML Trace of Fine Sand Moist

BrownNOTE Used to Split Spoon Sample

to Material Bottom of

in Hole

Stiff Dark Gray Sandy SILT ML Moist 1490 00 Dueto Wet Sand 74 844 7580 Firm Dark Gray Silty SAND SM with Wet Fragments 148500 ShaleVery Dense Whitish Gray Coarse to Grained Silty SAND SM with 85 Rock Fragments Wet FineCoring Terminated at 844 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911012009 Bentonlte 844 895 148000 ModeratelyHard Light Gray to Gray Moderately Close Joint Spacing ModeratelyWeathered SHALE Auger Refusal at 846 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911012009 Coring Terminated at 895 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911 012 0 0 9 Boring Terminated at 895 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911 0120 09 BORING NO B0909 SHEET 1 OF I Inc MACTEC Engineering and Consulting PROJECT AEP Clinch River Dike Drilling

LOCATION Garba Virginia

PROJECT NO 3050090131

LOGGED BY Jon McDaniel CHECKED BRyan Rasnake

WELL ¢ ELEVATION DEPTH water DESCRIPTION Level CONSTRUCTION FEET DETAIL bgs

ASH Firm Grayish Brown Silty SAND with Coal and Rock Fragments

Bentonite 0 5

MoistHard to SILT Very Stiff Gray Sandy 1515 00 with Small Coal Wet g SMML Fragments

FILL Very Stiff Brown Silty CLAY with Weathered Rock Fragments 151000 10NOTE Material Too Hard For EJD Tube MoistCLAY with Rock Soft Silty CH CHFragmentsWet to Moist 150500 15

O Stiff Gray to Brown Silty CLAY CH N Moist Sand 5 338 150000 20

ALLUVIUM Stiff Dark Gray Clayey SILT Trace Moist MH of Sand NOTE Streaks of Black Throughout

149500

25Very Soft Dark Gray to Brown Sandy = SILT ML with Clay Wet

Very Loose Dary Gray to Brown Silty 1490 00 30SAND SM with Streaks of Dark Red to Brown Clay Throughout and Rock FragmentsWet

Hard Yellowish Brown Highly 1485 00 Weathered SHALE HWR with Silt VeryMoist Bentonite 338 388 Coring Begins at 338 Below Surface BGS on 911112009

S f D k G B Cl J i t RockGroundo t ar ray to rown ose o n Spacing Highly Weathered SHALE Wet

35Refusal at 338 Below Ground Auger Surface BGS on 91112009 Coring Terminated at 388 Below Ground Surface BGS on 911112009 Boring Terminated at 388 Below Ground Surface BGS on 91112009

DRILLING CONTRACTOR TriState Drilling Northing 3521314623

Easting 10402604531 DRILLING METHOD 325 HSA

DRILLING EQUIPMENT CME 75 Truck Rig

z I2nno rATC flDII I MM ami AEA Dike Drilling Clinch River Site Jamraty 26 2010 M4CTECProject 3050090131

APPENDIX D

LABORATORY SOIL TEST RESULTS AEP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site Janua y 26 2010 RA4CTECProject 3050090131

LABORATORY TEST PROCEDURES

Soil Classification

Soil classifications provide a general guide to the engineering properties of various soil types and enable the

engineer to apply past experience to current situations Samples obtained during drilling operations are examined in our laboratory and visually classified by an engineer The soils are classified according to consistency based on number of blows from standard penetration tests color and texture These classification descriptions are included on our Test Boring Records

The classification discussed above A detailed soil classification two system is primarily qualitative requires laboratory tests grain size tests and plasticity tests Using these test results the soil can be classified according to the AASHTO or Unified Classification Systems ASTM D2487 Each of these classification

systems and the inplace physical soil properties provide an index for estimating the soils behavior The soil classification and determined this physical properties are presented in report

Moisture Content

The moisture in of soil the as of the weight of the content a given mass is ratio expressed a percentage

to the of the solid This test conducted accordance with ASTM D 2216 water weight particles was in

Grain Size Distribution

Grain Size Tests to aid the soil classification and the size distribution are performed in determining grain

The soil samples are prepared for testing according to ASTM D 421 dry preparation or ASTM D 2217 wet

the size distribution of soils than number 200 sieve preparation If only grain coarser a 0074mm opening

the size distribution determined the number 200 sieve after is desired grain is by washing sample over a and

the standard set of nested sieves the size distribution of the soils drying passing samples through a If grain finer than the number 200 sieve also the size distribution of the soils coarser than the number

is desired grain

10 sieve determined the a set of nested sieves Materials the number 10 is by passing sample through passing sieve are with a and and the size distribution calculated dispersed dispersing agent suspended in water grain ASP Dike Drilling Clinch River Site January 262010 MACTECProject 3050090131

rate the tests with ASTM D from the measured settlement of particles These are conducted in accordance

422

Atterberg Limits

the characteristics of the Portions of the samples are taken for Atterberg limits testing to determine plasticity

the of moisture which the soil deforms as a plastic soil The plasticity index PI is range content over

limit and the limit The limit the moisture bracketed the plastic liquid is

is material It by liquid LL PL

at which the soil becomes wet to flow as a viscous fluid The plastic limit the content sufficiently heavy is

moisture content at which the soil sufficiently plastic to be rolled into tiny threads The

lowest is manually

limit and limit are determined accordance with ASTM D4318 liquid plastic in

Consolidation Tests

Onedimensional consolidation tests are conducted to determine the compression characteristics of soils

the of under applied vertical stresses Test results may provide information including magnitude settlement

the timerate effects and the past stress history of the soil

Tests are conducted accordance with ASTM D 2435 A soil 25 inches in diameter and in general sample

the soil 10 inch thick fitted into a stainless steel with stones above and below The sample

is ring porous

then in device and to a series of vertical stresses under conditions is placed a loading subjected increasing

of no lateral strain Timedeformation readings are recorded for each applied stress and the resultant

strain ratio calculated or void is

of the The Typically test results include a plot of void ratio or percent strain versus the log applied stress

index the coefficient of consolidation the virgin compression index Ce the rebound or swelling C Cv

obtained constrained modulus M=lm and the preconsolidation stress P are all important parameters

from this test

Triaxial Shear Tests

Triaxial shear tests are used to measure the stressstrain characteristics and strength of soils under various

conditions the field Tests be semidrained or to simulate loading expected in may undrained fullydrained

field Triaxial tests are with ASTM D 4767 behavior shear performed in accordance 2010 AEP Dike Drilling Clinch a River Site Januwy 26

MACTEC Project 3050090131

conducted either undisturbed Triaxial shear tests are on relatively samples or on remoldedcompacted

14 and 60 inches and minimum specimens of soil Diameters of specimens range between a lengthdiameter ratio 2 Either stresscontrolled straincontrolled tests are Loads measured of is standard or performed are using proving rings or electronic load cells deformations are monitored using electronic LVDTs or dial

and water measured with transducers are indicators pore pressure is Nonnally samples saturated

and sheared to failure under extension also consolidated compression loading although loading is possible

Various consolidation conditions may be implemented in the triaxial apparatus Stress and deformation occur in under triaxial conditions The three of triaxial tests three dimensions most common types compression in routine use include

CU = isotropicallyconsolidated undrained ie CIU

CD = isotropicallyconsolidated drained ie CID

UU = unconsolidatedundrained shear tests

results tests are of stressstrain and stress to failure The of the presented in terms curves paths Alternatively

the be MohrCoulomb circles at failure Shortterm undrained be strength may represented by strengths may

The drained represented total stress parameters 0 and C or by undrained shear strengths Su longterm

by

strengths condition of zero excess pore pressure response are described the effective stress parameters 4

by

and C 21 Total Effective c 042 039

59 177 I 032

1 Y 14 • h €

I I

I r r f

h r

I I t

I

07 I • I I

E I

11

I I

I

I

0 I I € I 71 q 0 07 14 21 28 35 42

Total Normal Stress ksf

Effective Normal Stress ksf

Sample No 1 2 3

Water Content 721 457 721 503 591 525 I Dry Density pof Saturation 925 769 990

25Void Ratio 16913 12903 15787 Diameter in 283 274 283

I I Height in 556 559 532

Water Content 758 552 684

5 Dry Density pcf 512 616 545 N a3 Saturation 1000 1000 1000

Void Ratio 16450 11978 14850

I I I 3 Diameter in 281 170 279 i Height in 553 552 525 2 EE Strain rate inmin 001 001 001 05 I Back Pressure psi 6000 6000 6000

Celi Pressure psi 6500 7000 7500

Fail Stress ksf 116 118 148 10 20 30 40 Total Pore Pr ksf 916 1005 1038

Axial Strain Ult Stress ksf 109

Total Pore Pr ksf 962

rr Failure ksf 136 120 189 Type of Test 6 Failure ksf 020 003 042 CU with Pore Pressures Sample Type UD Client Americana Electric Power

Description Gray Sandy SILT

Project Dike Drilling

Source of B0902 Specific Gravity= 2170 Sample Depth 130150

Remarks Percent passing no 200 sieve pills 1 3 Sample Number UD 4

867 pill 2 591 Date Proj No 305009013102 Sampled 91409

Note I 3 were loaded pills stage TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST REPORT

MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC JAX FL 125 125 2

LI I

0 0 0 10 20 0 10 20

125 125 4

10 10 7r

75 75 4

25

0 0 0 10 20 0 10 20

12 Peak Streng Total Effective

a= 0 42 ks 9 0 38 k s f

a= 58 169 deg

5dg tan a= 0x0 030 08

Y V 1 1

04

V 0 0 4 6 8 10 12

p ksf

Stress Paths Total Effective

Client American Electric Power

Project Dike Drilling Source of Sample B0902 Depth 130150 Sample Number UD 4 JAX FL Project No 3050090131 02 MACTEC En g ineerin g and Consultin g Inc

Tested By FB Total Effective

C ksf 71 181 i 070 de 124 253

I Tan 022 047 r

I I

I I I

I I I

•• I I

E I

I I I

y 1

I I T7l= I

Total Normal Stress ksf

Effective Normal Stress Ref

Water Content 119 66 145

Dry Density pcf 1235 1310 1202

Saturation 867 614 961 Void Ratio 03729 02938 04103 Diameter in 283 285 284 Height in 561 557 561

Water Content 122 100 112

Dry Density pcf 1272 1332 1273

Saturation 1000 1000 1000

Void Ratio 03320 02723 03314

Diameter in 280 283 279 Height in 555 554 551

Strain rate inmin 001 001 001

Back Pressure psI 5000 5000 5000

Cell Pressure psi 7000 6000 9000

Fail Stress Ref 84 53 76

Total Pore Pr ksf 76 66 93

Ult Stress ksf

Total Pore Pr ksf

U Failure ksf 108 73 113 Type of Test 63 Failure ksf 24 20 37 CU with Pore Pressures

Client American Electric Power Sample Type

Description Brown sandy lean clay with gravel

Project Dike Drilling

LL 42 PL= 22 PI= 20 Source of B0904 324344 Specific Gravity= 2715 Sample Depth

contain rock Remarks All pills were found to Sample Number UD7

than 12 diameter fragments larger ProNo3050095131O2 Date Sampled 91609 TRIAXIAL SHEARTEST REPORT MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC

Tested By FB 411x1v

•l 125 125

10 10

75 m 75 N

5 0 5

25

0 0 0 10 20

Peak Strength

Total Effective

a= 202 ksf 055 ksf 256 a 125 deg deg tan a= 022 046 r

rte

J J r

P ksf

Stress Paths Total Effective

ClientAmerican Electric Power Project Dike Drilling UD7 Source of Sample B0904 Depth 320340 Sample Number 305009013102 Project fry © 2 1r 1 Total Effective C ksf 127 085

de 325 I Tan 39 064

2101

6

I I I

3 I 1

I I i fiI I

444+ 0 I I 98 0 3 6 12 15

Total Normal Stress ksf

Effective Normal Stress ksf

15 1 2 3

Water Content 168 154 161

125 Dry Density pcf 1225 1198 1225

Saturation 1000 969 1000

Void Ratio 04911 04388 04604

in 282 285 283 10 Diameter Height in 556 559 564

Water Content 158 132 142

75 Dry Density pcf 1249 1263 1270

Saturation 1000 1010 1000

Void Ratio 04622 03647 04080 280 280 280 5 Diameter in Height in 553 549 557

Strain rate inlmin 001 001 001

25 Back Pressure psi 5000 5000 5000

Cell Pressure psi 6000 9000 7000

Fall ksf 54 102 31 0 Stress 10 15 0 Total Pore Pr ksf 78 99 99

Axial Strain Ult Stress ksf

Total Pore Pr ksf

Failure ksf 62 133 33

a1 Type of Test 08 31 01 a Failure ksf CU with Pore Pressures

Cllent American Electric Power Sample Type

Description Graybrown sandy lean clay

Project Dike Drilling

LL= 35 PL= 22 Pl= 13 Source of Sample B0904 Depth 4781500 Specific Gravity= 2926

Remarks All pills were found to contain rock Sample Number UD10

than 12 diameter fragments larger Proj No 305003011102 Date Sampled TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST REPORT

MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC 15 15 1 I

12 12

0 0 0 10 20 0 10 20

15 15 3

12 12

C a 3

0 0 10 20 0 10 20

Peak Strength

Total Effective

a= 025 ksf 072 ksf J a= 239 deg 282 deg

tan a= 044 054 6 r

• r J JJ

3

I I 0 2 4 6 10 12

p ksf

Stress Paths Total Effective

ClientAmerican Electric Power l Project Dike Drilling Q Source of Sample B0904 Depth 478500 Sample Number UD10 J 11A

Jax FL liliAC a En and Project No 305009013102 EC ineering Consulting V Total Effective

G ksf 106 0 de 311 365

Tan 060 074

E E

i • I

I 1

i I •7 I

4 j I

1 •

i I

V

Vi

I

4

I I

l 16 20 24 0 4 a 12

Total Normal Stress ksf

Effective Normal Stress ksf

I I 2 3 Sample No 1

159 109 115 I I I I Water Content k•••T 1 I 1 1 J 1193 1202 Dry Density pct 1142 777 a Saturation 16 909 715

Void Ratio 04719 04098 03983 288 287 Diameter in 287 558 Height in 566 558 110 Water Content 167 135 1232 1298 Dry Density pof 1159 0 1000 1000 1000 Saturation ¶h Void Ratio 04502 03646 02955

Diameter in 286 285 179 2 552 544 Height in 563 9 Strain rate inlmin 001 001 001 5000 5000 5000 Back Pressure psi

1 I 111iII14Ii 6000 7000 9000 Ill Cell Pressure psi Fail Stress ksf 76 89 163 i 68 77 5 10 15 20 Total Pore Pr kef 58

Ulf Stress ksf Axial Strain Total Pore Pr ksf

a k sf 10 4 12 3 21 6 F il ure

ul Type of Test 28 33 53 U Failure ksf CU with Pore Pressures Client American Electric Power Sample Type UD

Description Brown clayey sand with gavel Project Dike Drilling

LL= 35 PL= 24 Pl= 11 Source of Sample B0905 Depth 120140 Specific Gravity= 2693

Remarks Pill A from B0905 UD3 Sample Number UD1

is sampled Date Na 305609013102 Sampled 200220 Proj TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST REPORT MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC

Tested By FB i 14

U 20 20

16 16

12

T ti

0 0 10 20 10 20

20 20

16 16

12

8

M 4

0 0 10 20 0°l 10 20la 0

12 Peak Strength

Total Effective

a= 091 ksf 050 ksf

a= 273 deg 328 deg r r tan a= 052 064 8

0 r r r r

+ n r as 0 3

p ksf

Stress Paths Total Effective

Client American Electric Power

Project Dike Duelling Number UD1 Source of Sample B0905 Depth 120140 Sample lax FL MACT EC Engineering and Consulting Inc Project No 305009013102

Tested By fB k•+ 4

f 13 Total Effective 012

056 069 1 1

i 1

I I 6

I V T

3

l I

1 I i J billeL T 4H 0 0 3 6 8 12 15 18

Total Normal Stress ksf

Effective Normal Stress ksf

15 Sample No 1 2 3

Water Content 173 173 173 1184 125 Dry Density pcf 1133 1154 S Saturation 943 999 1000

Void Ratio 04999 04717 04895

in 290 291 287 10 Diameter Height ln 554 503 495

Water Content 167 153 148 1243 75 Dry Density pof 1167 1200 N Saturation 1000 1000 1000

Void Ratio 04555 04160 04189 282 5 Diameter in 287 288 Height in 549 496 487

Strain rate inmin 001 001 001

25 Back Pressure psi 5000 5000 5000

Cell Pressure psi 6000 7000 9000

Fail Stress ksf 39 89 121 0 0 10 20 30 40 Total Pore Pr ksf 73 69 85

Ult ksf Axial Strain Stress Total Pore Pr ksf

5 2 12 1 16 6 a Failure kst Type of Test a3 Failure ksf 13 32 45 CU with Pore Pressures

Client American Electric Power Sample Type UD

with Description Clayey silty gravel sand

Project Dike Drilling

LL= 35 PL= 25 P1= 10 Source of Sample 50909 Depth 1151135 Specific Gravity= 2721 Remarks Sample Number UD3 Date P rot N o 3050 5013102 Sampled TRIAXIAL SHEAR TEST REPORT MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC

s1rIJ• Tested By FB s L 15 15

12 12

m 9 o

Q• 6 6 v o oso Iz > e ro o 3 3

0 0 0 10 20 0 10 20

15

12

9

0 0 10 20

9 Peak Strength

I Total E fective

a= 051 ksf 010 ksf

a= 259 deg 295 deg

tan cc 048 057 6

3

0 3 6

P ksf

Stress Paths Total Effective

Client American Electric Power

Project Dike Drilling Number UD3 Source of Sample B0909 Depth 115135 Sample lax FL MAC EC Engineering and Consulting inc Project Mo 305009013 102

19 S Tested By FB c•j`lF

1 MACTEC BNGIl ER3NG AND CONSULTING INC • •EC 22010 Commerce Drive Abi d on Virg i ni a 2427 1 276 6760426

Dike Project Name AEP Drilling

Project Number 3050090131

Report Date 11109109

Washed Particle SizeGradation Test Report ASTM D422

Sample Number T3D6 Location B0901

Percent Finer than No from washing

VL Retained Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Sieve Size Each Sieve Passing Passing wl Wash 200

1 in 2647 2647 939 962

314 in 3686 1039 915 947

318 in 11788 8102 730 831

4 21255 9467 513 694

4 10 29673 8418 320 573

20 35525 5852 185 489

4 40 38702 3177 112 444

60 1707 73 419

rt 40409

n 1 00 41748 1339 43 400

200 43317 1569 07 377

PAN 43605 28E

WtofSoilg 69572

Particle Size Analysis

US Standard Sieve Sizes

3 314 No 4 No40 No 203

100

20090

80

70

60

50

+ I I •

Ing

10000 1000 0100 0010 O001 0000 Grain Size mm

Per£bnuez1 f• Checked iti B O5D1 Sieve Jv • F •• q By 77 Cg y •f UD6 MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC 22010 Commerce Drive

1 ACTEC VA 24211 Abingdon

Sieve Analysis Test Report

HydrometerSieve ASTM D422

Project Name AEP Dike Drilling

Project Number 3050090131

Report Date 111912009 Sample Number B0901 UD6

Sieve and Hydrometer

Curnulative Wt Retained

WL Retained Each Sieve Cumulative

Particle Size Units g 9 Passing 250 mm 2647 265 962 190 mm 3686 104 947 95 mm 11788 810 831

48 mm 21255 947 694 20 mm 29673 842 573 850 um 35525c`r 565 489 425 Um 38702 318 444 250 um 171 419 150 um 134 400

75 urn = 57 377 49 um 321

35 Um 281 27 um 264

18 um 223

11 um 166 81 um 143 59 um 120 sa vm •1

13 um 17ia 63

Wt of Soil g 69572

Particle Size Analysis US Standard Sieve Sizes 3 34 No 4 No 40 MD 200

100

I VIII I 95 11

I 1111V 11 1H i so

I I 85

Bo gill

75

f is

MMII I

I• II 65

I I I 1 LI II •1i 1 1 l 60 I

55 €i

I 11 n 50

1 45 i I 40 r I I I

35 14

I I 3D I 25

20 h I 15 II

I I 1a 1 ` 1 I It I I

l

II

Grain Size mm

>eriormed Checked by 1tftog

30901 UD0 Hydrometer Distribution D Grain Size Rep rt

0 GO CC C E 9 C O OO 4

100 I I

i I 90

I 4 I I I

80 41

I

7D

I

60

f

50

I I I k I I

I I 40

E I I I 1 I I i

4 I 4 I I 2 I 1 3

1

4 4 • • 4 • • • • 1

X4

•• 2 f • I I I I I t

I I• I l t I i t I

1 • I 1 I I I I I I I E I

I I 1 1 I I I f

I n nt nl 0001 100 AI

GRAIN SIZE mm

Gravel Sand Finns

+3 Silt Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine 207 00 00 91 149 258 295

Test Results ASTM D 422 wlo hyd ASTM D 1140 Material Description

Pass Brown medium to fine clayey SAND Opening Percent Spec silty

Size Finer Percent X=Fall 38 1000 4 909 Limits ASTM B4318 PLAtterber PI 10 760 LL= 20 606 Classification 40 502 AASHTO USCS D 24117= SCSM M 145= 60 429 100 340 Coefficients 207 32989 08188 200 Dg0= 44809 085= D60= 01214 D56= 04197 1330= D15= 010= Cu= Cc=

Remarks

Moisture content 180

Date Received Date Tested 101609

Tested By PB Checked By Raa ` Title C l

no specification provided Date Source of Sample B0904 Depth 2501270 Sampled Sample Number UD5 Client American Electric Power ••U• I NGP MACTEC G Project Dike Drilling INC CONSULTING 305009013 tax FL AND I Project No 02

Checked By mg 13 O5

I Grain Size D stribut n Report

c •0el c c c = m • N ° ` M c• y ec

100 E E

I I I I I I t 90

7 I I

80 E

I I 1 I I I I I I

70

i 1 1

B0

I I I I I I 1 1

50

1 I E k I 1 I

E E E E 40

I

I i 30

I I

1 20 V l I f

3 1 l 10

I I I 1

L r I k 1 I I I hil 0 i nn V 1 0 1 001 0001

GRAIN SIZE mm

Gravel Sand Fines o

fo 3 Fine clay Coarse Fine Coarse I Medium 149 281 335 1 124 84

TEST RESULTS ASTM D 422 Material Description

Opening Percent Spec Pass Brown sandy lean clay with gravel

Size Finer Percent X=Fail 4 973 10 849 Atterberg Limits ASTM D 4318 20 749 PL= 22 LL= 42 Pi= 20 40 700 Classification 60 671 IJSCS 2487= CL AASHTO M 100 647 0 145 A7610 200 616 Coefficients 00548 601 mna D90= 28725 D85= 20118 D60= 00535 00391 mm 587 050= 00162 D30 00037 L 15= 00283 mm 553 010= cu= Cc= 00184 mm 511 Remarks 00109 mxn 455 Moisture Content 145 00080 mm 400 00058 mm 352 00027 mm 268 00013 mm 192 Date Received 101509 Date Tested 101509 Tested By FB Checked By

Title

no specification provided

Source of Sample B0904 Depth 320340 Date Sampled 91609 Sample Number UD7 ACTEC ENGINEERING Client American Electric Power Project Dike Drilling INC AND CONSULTING Project No 30500507310 lax FL

Checked By Pe t1309 Grain Size Distribution Report

o a a

t0 M sv r n • k 9k 3 3fi 100 4 i

I • I I LL 90

1 I

• • ao i

r1

k f J 70 L

i

1•1 Sc 3 E

4 II I

50 ~

I I

40

I

30 1

I V I I

I I 20

I f I I I I I I

I I I I 1 1 1 10 f i l l I 1

I I I I I 0 I

1 00 1 0 i 0 1 n n7 0 On1

GRAIN SIZE mm Gravel Sand Fines

14 16

Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 158 00 00 1 40 211 105 248 238

TEST RESULTS ASTM D 422 Material Description

Opening Percent Spec Pass Brown clayey fine sand with little fine gravel 12Size Finer Percent X=Fail 100039949 Atterberg Limits ASTM D 431$ 4 842 L= LL= P1= 10 802 20 666 Classification USCS ARS11TO 40 591 D 2487= SCSM IIII 446= 545 60 Coefficients 100 518 DSO 72367 D85= 51425 Dgp= 04707 200 486 1360= 01093 D30= 00085 D16= 00021 00576 mm 486 d10= Cty Cc= 00411 mm 473 Remarks 00294 mm 453 Moisture Content 00190 mm 413 115 00113 mm 354 FM197 00083 mm 295 00060 mm 256 Date Received 101509 Date Tested 101509 00027 mm 174 00014 mm 115 Tested By FB Checked By er FATitle•

no specification provided

Source of Sample 80904 Depth 3603801 Date Sampled Sample Numlber UD8 MACTEC ENGINEERING Client American Electric Power Project Dike Drilling AND CONSULTING NC I Project 305009013102 Jax i No FL

Checked By CDR I473e5 Grain Size Distribution Report

J= µ t7 aS

100

t I 9o • I

80

i

70

l

LLii 2 60

I I I I I I I

I

s

I I I I I I I I l

I 1 f 30

20

10 Tq 1 I 1 f I 0 I n i n ni 0001

GRAIN SIZE mm Sand c Fines 51 Gravel

Fine t Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium N 325 00 00 00 05 188 102 380

TEST RESULTS ASTi1 D 422 Material Description

Pass lean clay Opening Percent Spec Graybrown sandy

Size Finer Percent 4 1000 10 995 Atterberg Limits ASTIVI D 418 20 872 PL= 22 LL= 35 Pl= 13 40 807 Classification 60 767 USCS D 2487= CL AASHTO M 145= A68 100 738 200 705 Coefficients 00549 697 07030 00254 mm D90= 10210 Day= D60= 00393 mm 672 D50 = 00131 D30= 00043 1315= 00286 mm 622 ©I0= Cu= Cc= 00187 nun 547 Remarks 00112 mm 472 Moisture Content 168 00082 nun 396 00059 mm 348 00027 mm 227 00013 trim 153 Date Received 101509 Date Tested 101509

Tested By PB

Checked By X ni i 1R r1l

Title

r no specification provided

Source of Sample B0904 Depth 478500 Date Sampled Sample Number TID10 Power ENGINEERING Client American Electric MACTEC Project Dike Drilling INC AND CONSULTING Project No 305009073102 Jax FL

Checked By ZDR 13 p1 Grain Size Distribution Report

d = 0 OO c o v • q N

ea 100 w •

E

90 •

1 I I f I i I

80

I I I I I I I

70

Elf I I 1 k 1 1 I I € J

w 11 z so

I I f € I I I 1 1

•

1 I I I I I I I

I H H I I I 1

I I 1 I i I I I 1 1 I

4 30

E E E

t t 20

I E

I I

i 1 1 1 1

J 1 1 I i 1 • J I I I W 9 1

11

i nn i n 1 0 1 001 0001

GRAIN SIZE mm Sand Fines Gravel °4

94 +31 04 Coarse Fine coarse Medium Fine Silt 00 00 149 40 272 117 309

Test Results ASTM D 422 ASTIt1 D 9140 Material Description

with Opening Percent Spec Pass Brown clayey sand gravel

Size Finer Percent X=Fail

3 1000 2 1006 ASTM 4318 Atterbero Limits 13 15 1000 PL= 24 LL= 35 PI= 11 1000 112 1000 Classification 318 899 SC AASHTO 4 851 USCS D 2487= M 145= A61 10 911 Coefficients 20 633 07004 940 539 D90= 95420 D85= 46338 0160= 00276 00100 60 492 D550= 02762 D30= D45= 100 461 046 DIG= 00024 Cu= 29543 Cc= 200 422 00614 mm 396 Remarks 00446 mm 349 Moisture content 159 00320 mm 322 00209 mm 261 00123 mm 221 00091 mm 120 00064 mm 115 Date Received 101409 Date Tested 101809 00031 mm 110 Tested 00013 mm 84 By FFB e Checked By11

Title

no specification provided

or 09•S 120140 Date Source Saml3i •3 Depth Sampled Sample Number MACTEC ENGINEERING Client American Electric Power Project DikeDrilling AND CONSULTING INC Protect No 305009013102 Jax FL

Checked By Z lli3Cjg MACTEC ENGINEERING AND INC 4KI CONSULTING NMA •TEC 22010 Commerce Drive Abingdon Virginia 24211 276 6760426

Project Name AEP Dike Drilling

Project Number 3050090131

Report Date 110909

Washed Particle SizeGradation Test Report ASTM 1422

Sample Number UD3 Location B0905A

Percent Finer than No 200 from washing

Wt Retained Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Sieve Size Each Sieve Passing Passing wl Wash 200

1 in 000 000 1000 1000

314 in 000 000 1000 1000

318 in 3446 3446 961 966

4 12931 9485 855 872

410 37055 24124 583 633

1 20 54613 17558 386 459

4 40 66335 11725 254 343

F 60 73204 6966 177 275

4100 80538 7334 94 203

1200 98192 7654 08 127

PAN 88906 714

Wt of Snils 101013

Particle Size Analysis

US Standard Sieve Sizes

31 31411 No 4 No 40 No200

100

90

80

70

60

50

40 i r 4 i 1 1

N l 30

20 1

• I

10 1

I

I

0

10000 1000 0100 0010 0001 0000 Grain Size mm

PerfermedBy IVCff f ldc CneckedByF9IID• B0905A UD3 Sieve MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC 22010 Commerce Drive TMACTEC Abingdon VA 24211

Sieve Analysis Test Report

HydrometerlSieve ASTM D422

Project Name AEP Dike Drilling

Project Number 3050090131 Report Date 111912009 Sample Number B0905A LID3

Sieve and Hydrometer

Cumulative Retained

Retained Lach Sieve Cumulative

Wt 111L

Particle Size Units 9 g Passing 250 mm 000 00 1000

190 mm 000 00 100D 95 mm 3446 345 966 4B mm 12931 949 672 20 mm 37055 2412 633

850 urn 1755 459

425 um 11173 343

250 um 587 275 150 um +8053E 733 203

75 um 765 127

se urn 120

4B um 76

I 35 um ` I 57 38 22 4m I i i t 13 um 32

93 um •` At` 19 66 13 um ` i 32 um 1

um I 08

0614I Wt of Soil g 109013

`Particle Size Analysis US Standard Sieve Sizes 3 34 No 4 No 40 No 200

100

IIIIL 1 I 95 II

90 Il

I I I IIIwill 85

I 80 I I •I

I 75 70 65 so 55 50 45 40 35 30 III

25 1H 20 I l• 1 I I = 1s fiII l`I v II I I I IIII 1• 1 i 10 L 1I LILIIJiI7 r t I I •• 1111 11JI 1L 5 i 1 I IIII 0

10000 1000 0100 0001 0000

Grain Size mm

Derformed by lC j0010flI `cr Checked by

80908 UP13 Hydrometer Grahn Size Distribution Report

0 • v fD i7 N r + r m • 100 s I

i f 1 I • 00

l k I I 80 V

70

f I I

l I I I 11 I I

I I I 1 1 I I I V

I I

1 1 1 I 1 i l I

1

3 I 1 1 I 1

I I I I 2 V

• 1 WL

1 l I 1 i I I

I I I I I n l 0 01 0004 100 10

GRAIN SIZEmm Fines Gravel Sand 1

Fine Silt Clay Coarse Fine Coarse Medium 117 439 438 00 00 00 00 06

TEST RESULTS ASTM D 422 Material Descri Lion Pass and brown lean Opening Percent Spec Gray clay

Size Finer Percent X=Fain 4 1000 4318 10 1000 Atterberg Limits ASTMID 20 997 PL 25 LL= 46 P1= 21 40 994 Classification 60 977 USCS D 2487= CL AASHTO iVI 145= A7620 100 943 200 877 Coefficients 00572 00114 00519 mm 838 090= 00950 1J85= D60 00016 00377 Trop 797 D50= 00073 330= DIT= Cc= 00270 tom 772 D10= Cu= 682 00180 mm Remarks 00109 mm 590 Moisture Content 319 00080 mm 517 00058 mm 460 00027 mm 351 00013 278 nam Date Received 101509 Date Tested 101509

Tested ay FB Checked tti•TitleBy••ft

r n specification provided Date Source of Sample B0906 Depth 220240 Sampled Satmale Number UD6 Electric Power ENGINEERING Client American MACTEC Project Dike Drilling

INC Jax FL AND CONSULTING Praec No 05OA9 131 02

Checked By 9D 12 MACTEC ENG1NEERTTG AND CONSULTING INC jMACTEC 22010 Commerce Drive Abingdon Virginia 24211 276 6760426

Project Name AEP Dike Drilling

ProjeciNumb er 3030090131 110909 Report Date

Washed Particle SizeGradation Test Report ASTM 1422 B0908 Sample Number UD13 Location

Percent Finer than No 200 803 from washing

Wt Retained Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Sieve Size Each Sieve Passing a passing 9 w Wash200

I in 000 000 1000 1000

34 in 000 000 1000 1000

38 in 1317 1317 150 970

4 4 2666 1349 695 940

4 10 4464 1798 490 899

1 20 6072 1608 306 163

4 7245 1173 172 837 40 I

60 7874 629 101 823

1 100 8309 435 51 813

1200 9726 417 03 803

PAN 8754 028

of So A44 05 Wt il

Particle Size Analysis 314US Standard Sieve Sizes No 4 No40 No200

100

I I

90 y

11

so

t 70 y

7

60 i 1 t

50

•

1

40

7 9 1 4

11 30

t t t 20 E

I

I0

S I I

I

I4 0

10000

Grain Size mni

Performed JIJC 3 CheckedBy 2 f ff 0 7 09na UD1a Sieve By f fl MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC

22010 Commerce Drive VA 24211 J1MACTEC Abingdon

Sieve Analysis Test Report

HydrometerSieve ASTM D422

Project Name AEP Dike Drilling

Project Number 3050090131

Report Date 111912009 Sample Number 80908 UD13

Sieve and Hvdrometer

Curnulaiive WL Retained

Wt Retained Each Sieve Cumulative

Particle Size Units O g Passing

250 mm 000 00 1000 190 mm 000 D0 1000

95 mm 1317 132 970

48 mm 2666 135 940

20 mrr 4464 180 899

950 Um =6J72i 161 863

425 um 7245 117 537 7874 63 813 250 rm r 613 150 um 44

75 um 42 803

52 um 747

37 um 733 719 26 um ` 678 17 um I

10 um 609

75 um i 567

55 Um J 498 r 29 um°• 387 12 um 318 I

1Nt ofSoii g

Particle Size Analysis USStandard Sieve Sizes

314 No4 No 40 No 200

100

1 s I

II II l l 1 95 i1I I I I I I E I 90 II L I 85 li

so

75

I I 70

E i 65 l 60 I I I 55 50

s 45 40

i I 35 I SO

S• 25 111 20 B

II 15 I I

II 10 •rl 5

1itI 11I

10000 1000 0100 DA10 0001 0000

Grain Size rum

7erl5mied by AICH

Checked by Z

B0908 UDi3 Hydr neier Grain Size Distribution Report

C 0 G E d O a y 0 0 0 n c xk •D rl N r

i I I 100 i

1 I I I

9Q I

E qIf I I 80

k I I T1 I 70

I I I 1 I

Z 60

f I V I I f I l

I I I I

I I I I

I I I I I

f 30

1 k

l f I 20 E I I l I

• 1 1 1 I I 4 V I

I 1 1 1 1 I I I 1 II I n n m nnni

GRAIN SIZE mm Sand Fines

Gravel 00 Slit 3 Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine I Clay 299 217 00 00 00 00 12 472

TEST RESULTS ASTM D 422 Material Description CLAY with sand Opening Percent Spec Pass Gray brown lean

Size Finer Percent XFail 20 1000 40 988 Atterberg Units ASTM 0 4318 60 911 PL= LL= F1= 100 756 Glassifdcation 200 516 USCS 0 24B7= CL AASHTQ WI 145= 00573 mm 484 00413 mm 462 Coefficients 00304 411 01981 01002 mm 090= 02387 D05= DSO= 00021 00200 mm 355 050= 00679 030= 00115 D15= 00119 mm 305 010 Cu= Cc= 00087 mm 261 Remarks 00062 mm 234 Moisture Content 238 00029 mm 171 00013 mm 1218

Date Received 101509 Date Tested 101509

Tested By PB Checked By in Title

no specitiicationprovided Date Source of Sample B0908 Sampled Sample Number LTD16 American Electric Power ENGINEERING Client MACTEC Project Dike Drilling

INC Jax FL AND CONSULTING ut ftio 305004013102

Chocked By Zie 1309 Grain Size Distribution Report

C 0 0 C O

2 RY V fO l°1 LV r Cr1 100

50

I I V I

aD i

I I I I t I

70

I I 1 I I

60

1 I I I i

50

I I I V I I

40

f

IT 30

E V

I 3 20

k

9 • k I 10

i k I l i I k

1 1 1 t I 1 0

nn 1 0 1 D 1 001 0001

GRAIN SIZE mm

°4 Gravel Sand Fines +3 14 Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine silt Clay 00 00 313 128 137 87 214 121

TEST RESULTS ASTM D 422 Material Description

Opening Percent Spec Pass Brown clayey sand with gravel

Size Finer Percent X Fail 112 1000 318 850 Atterbero Limits ASTM D 4348 4 687 PL= 20 LL= 32 P1= 12 10 559 Classification 20 461 USCS SC AASHTO M 445= A260 40 422 B 2487= 60 403 Coefficients 100 381 D90= 105802 Dar= 95286 D68= 26520 200 335 00090 D50 12617 030= 00631 D15= 054 00632 mm 300 D10= 00028 ee= 95065 Cc= 00452 mm 285 Remarks 00332 mm 232 Moisture content 141 00216 mm 193 00126 mm 174 00091 mm 150 00065 mm 132 Date Received 101509 Date Test d 101509 00032 mm 104 Tested By 00013 mm 85 FS e

Checked By II

Title

no specification provided

Source of Sample B0908A Date Sampled i Sample Number UD2

Client American Electric Power

MACTEC ENG NEER a Project Dike Drilling AND CONSULT NC M Project No 305009013102 Jax FL

Checked By EDE I Grain Size Distribution Report

0 0 C r 4 v v C • • N q

100 I

I I I I I 1

s0 l

I I I I l I I I I

sa

k I 9 f

70

I k

6o

f k

I 50

I I I 1 €

40

I i I I I I I1 I f I I

I

II S I 30

I I I I I I 1 1 1 1 1

I I I I I 20

I I

I I I l i l I 10 I l

I I I Ell I n • n n nnn

GRAIN SIZE turn

Gravel Sand Fines

Coarse Fine Coarse Medium Fine Silt Clay 209 00 104 201 49 161 71 205

TEST RESULTS ASTM D 422 Material Description

with sand Opening Percent Spec` Pass Clayey silty gravel

Size Finer Percent K=Fail 1 1000 314 896 Atterberg Limits ASTM D 4S181181 PI= 10 112 807 PL= 25 ILL= 35 318 736 Classification 4 695 USCS 2487= GM AASHTO M 45= A41 10 646 D 20 550 Coefficients 40 485 156615 13088 Dg0= 193229 D85= ©g©= 00028 60 455 050 05131 D30= 00095 D5= 100 433 °10 00013 Cu= 102002 C= 005 200 414 Remarks 00479 nun 404 Moisture Content 173 00343 mzn 396 00253 mm 366 00163 mm 355 00100 mm 310 Date Received 102109 Rate Tested 102109 00076 mm 247 00055 nun 217 Tested Sy F13 00026 mm 144 Checked By 00013 =i 99 Title

no specification provided Date Source of Sample B0909 Depth 115135 Sampled Sample Number UD3 A TEC ENGINEERING Client ArnericanElecfricPower Project Dike Drilling

INC Jay FL AND CONSULTING Project No 305009013102 22010Commerce Drive Abingdon Va 24211 276 6760426 276 6760761

Moisture Content

Project Name Aep Dike Drilling Project Number 3050090131 Date 1192009

Boring B 0901 s1 B0905 8=0508 BD908 Sample UD 15 UDi UD 8 Up=13 UD 1S Depth

Tare + Wet 11135 23240 18920 27270 31570 22260

Tare + Dry 9670 18522 16305 23914 26145 17653 Water wlw 1465 4718 126 15 56 5425 46 07 Tare 813 797 820 844 838 838

Dry Soil wls 88 5T 1725 15485 23070 253 7 6816 Moisture 165 266 69 145 274

Boring Sample Depth Tare + Wet

Tare + Dry Water ww Tare

Dry Soil wls Mb isture

f BQCinf• I •

Sara Pier r

j Depth

Tare + Wet

Tare+ Dry water wlw Tare

Dry Soil wls Moisture

Boring < Sample Depth

Tare + Wet

Tare + Dry Water wfw Tare

Dry Soil wls Moisture

Checked Performed By IVC r f° 3 D 9 By •eDp Itq61 IVIACTEC

REPORT OF SOIL PERMEABILITY TESTING

Number 305009013102 Project AEP Dike Drilling Project

Date October 2009 Client AEP Completed 22

Sample Number B0904 UD5

Sample Information 6043 Dia in 400 Length in 284 Weight gr

Moisture Content 180 Dry Density pct 547 Wet Density pcf 646

Test Parameters Permeant Fluid Deaired water Test Method Used ASTM D5084 method A

Gradient 13 Maximum Hydraulic Gradient 29 Minimum Hydraulic

Consolidation Stress 5 Maximum Consolidation Stress psi 5 Minimum psi

Permeability Rate

5BE04 I

Permeability vs Time

61 E04 60E04 59E04 58E04 57E04 56E04 55E04 54E04 40 50 60 0 10 20 30 Time sec

Reviewed By

c fit Ld•6lt•

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting inc 3901 Carmichael Avenue

Jacksonville Florida •MACTEC

REPORT OF SOIL PERMEABILITY TESTING

Number 305009013102 Project AEP Dike Drilling Project

Client AEP Date Completed October 22 2009

Sample Number B0904 UD8

Sample information Dia in 284 Length in 386 Weight gr 8388

Content 116 1174 Wet Density pcf 11310 Moisture Dry Density pct

Test Parameters

Test Method Used ASTM D5084 method A Permeant Fluid Deaired water

83 Maximum Hydraulic Gradient 166 Minimum Hydraulic Gradient

Maximum Consolidation Stress psi 5 Minimum Consolidation Stress psi 5

Permeability Rate

29E08 1

Permeability vs Time

r 40E08 V 35E08 E 30E08 I 25E08 20E08

ix 15E08 a 10E08

501=09 o0 E+00

0 50000 100000 150000 200000 250000 300000 Time sec

MACT EC Engineering and Consulting Inc 3901 Carmichael Avenue

Jacksonville Florida 00h1ACTEG

REPORT OF SOIL PERMEABILITY TESTING

Number 305009013102 Project AEP Dike Drilling Project

Date Completed October 22 2009 Client AEP

Sample Number 50908 UD16

Sample Information 456 Weight gr 9391 Dia in 285 Length in

Content 238 Dry Density pct 995 Wet Density pct 1232 Moisture °o

Test Parameters metFod A Permeant Fluid Deaired water Test Method Used ASTM D5084

Minimum Gradient 09 Maximum Hydraulic Gradient 19 Hydraulic

Minimum Consolidation Stress psi 5 Maximum Consolidation Stress psi 5

Permeability Rate

I

Permeability vs Time

25E07

E 20E07 0 15E07

10E07

50E08

00E+00 250000 300000 0 50000 100000 150000 200000 Time sec

Reviewed By

Ran hwani

ti

MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc 3901 Carmichael Avenue

Jacksonville Florida AMACTEC

22010 Commerce Drive

Abingdon Virginia 24211

Telephone 2766760426 Facsimile 2766760764

Proj cot Name AEP Dike Drilling

Proj ect Number 3050090131 110909 Report Date

Soil Yellowish Brown SAND Description Silty SM 10YR 514

Atterberg Limits AASBTO T9000 2004

Three Points

Sample Number B0901 Depth 1t UD6 20 240

Blows Moisture

35 288

27 310

20 326

Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index

31 24 I 7 I

Performed by f flrfal Chocked by rPe IIfa9 jIMACTEC

22010 Commerce Drive

Abingdon Virginia 24211

Telephone 2766760426 Facsimile 2766760761

AEP Dike Project Name Drilling 3050090131 Project Number 110909 Report Date Soil DescriptionLight Olive Brown Clayey Sandy SILT ML 25y 53 T9000 Atterberg Limits AA•SHTO 2004 Three Points B0904 Sample Number Depth ft UD15 695 718

Blows Moisture

33 392

24 413

16 431

Plastic Limit lmdex Liquid Limit Plasticity 15 41 26 I I

i

Liquid Limit ASTM D 4318 Three Points

539 i inr + 5i45

100 Blows

FDIC Performed by AC 1111P617 Checked by LIQUID AND PLASTIC LIMITS TEST REPORT

60

D`aiiFSTd I•cS 1 1•` kk i1r+ Sz •aY ei •••9

50

y µy

40

20

10

0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 50 90 100 110

LIQUID LIMIT

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION LL I PL Pl <40 °u<200 USCS

Gray Clayey SAND 39 25 14 570 260 SC

Project No 305009013102 Client American Electric Power Remarks ® Moisture Content 152 Project Dike Drilling

® Source of Sample 30905 Depth 200220 Sample Number UD3

MACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC Jax FL

Tested By FB Checked By RCl•of1 MACTEC

22010 Commerce Drive

Abingdon Virginia 24211

Telephone 2766760426 Facsimile 2766760761

Project Name AEP Dike Drilling 3050090131 Project Number

Report Date 110909 Lean Soil Description Very Dark Grayish Brown CLAY with Sand CL I OYR 32

Atterberg Limits AASHTO T9000 2004

Tbxee Points B0908 Sample Number

Depth ft TiD8 425 445

Blows Moisture

35 333

24 353

15 374

Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index

12 35 23 l I I

Y Performed by f cf 171fap Checked by P It MACTEC

22010 Commerce Drive

Abingdon Virginia 24211 1

Telephone 2766760426 Facsimile 2766760761

AEP Dike Project Name Drilling 3050090131 Project Number

Report Date 110909

Soil Description Grayish Prown Lean CLAY with Sand CL 25Y 52

Atterberg Limits AASHTO T9000 2004

Three Points

SawplcNumber B0908 Depth ft UD13 630 650

Slows Moisture

35 342

19 375

13 396

Liquid Limit Plastic Limit Plasticity Index

016 24 12

Checked EDE Performed by 4e¢ y r1off by ff4J MACTEC

22010 Commerce Drive

Abingdon Virginia 24211

Telephone 2766760426 Facsimile 2766760761

AEP Dilce Project Name Drilling

Project Number 3050090131

Report Date 110909

Soil Description Dark Gray SILT with sand ML

25Y 411

Atterberg Limits AASHTO T9000 2004

Three Points

Sample Number B0908 809 Depth ft UD15 786

Blows Moisture

33 370

22 382

15 398

Plastic Limit Liquid Limit 12 38 I 26 I

Liquid LimitASTa1 D 4318

3543Inx + 49278

m a 0

36

35

1D Blows 100

Checked Z Performed by cbl 1111 0 by CONSOLI DATION TEST REPOR T

oo

12s

250

375

Ji

500

a7 e 625

750

675

i

1

20

i8

T 12 UN F

1

11

I l

i 4

h• 5 10 20 1 2 5 2

Applied Pressure ksf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO

Brown clay with gravel

Dens pcf Moisture Saturation Void Ratio Sp Overburden Dry Pc C LL pl c Gr Init Final knit Final init Final ksf ksf init Finn

2745 1174 115 a 150 689 1000 0459 0323 179 011

D2435 Swell Process Trimmed cylindrical cutting ring Press Preparation using Cr Method ksf Heave

Condition of Test Natural inundated at 005 ksf moisture B 001

ProjectNo 305009013102 Client American Electric Power Remarks

Project Dike Drilling Percent passing 200 sieve 5 11

Source B0904 Sample No UD8 ElevDepth 360380 Checked By CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT TitlD

ACTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC JaxFL

lL Da Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD8 EIevIDepth 360°380

00024 Load No 1

00020 Laad= 010 lcsf

= 000000 00016 DO

D50 = 000005 00012 D100 = 000010

g = nDnnn T50 419 min

00004 Cv T50

00000 007 ft2day

0000

ca = 0000 0000 0601 j J 0001 5 1 2 5 10 2 0 5 0 2 00 5 00 201 0

Elapsed Time min

0003 Load No= 2

0000 11N Load= 025 ksf llifl

l = 000010 0003 D0

= 000093 FH1I1 i •lllIN II IIHNILU I• D50 0006 = D100 000176 I1Y111 1•11• •L011• ffl•U• H 000E T50 003 rum

i 1•10012•I poi T50 P C© i i I III I IITJ 001 II 835 ft2day

I II

i

Ili WN 0016

I I f 4P 1 Ca = 0000 0021

III M111IN Milk 111111 1 0024

I I I I

1L1 III IIICI MW 0027 2 5 10 20 5D 200 500 2000 01 05 1 2 5 1

Elapsed Time min Jax FL MACThCEngineering and Consulting Inc Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD8 ElevDepth 360380

0034 Load No= 3

0037 Load= 050 Icsf

= 000220 0040 DC

D50 = 000378 0043 Hh •M• D100= 000536 NN I IN•l

lll• 0045 T50 = 002 min C C 0049 CV Q T50

OD52 in 1691 ft2day

0055

Ca = 0000 0058

0061

0064 200 500 2000 01 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 50 Elapsed Time min

00650 Load No= 4

H H • Y • 0D725 Load= 100 ksf

= 000560

00000 Dp

D50 = 000867 00875 D100= 001175

00056 T50 = 002 mm C7 C 01025 a CV T50 CIf

m 0110 n 1335 ft2day

0117

Ca = 0000 0125

• 1 4 J 1 V 1 11 M II H• 0132

t i 0140 1 0 20 50 2 00 50 D 20 00 01 05 1 2 5 1 25 Elapsed Time min Jax FL MAC T EC Engineering and Consulting Inc Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102

Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD8 ElevDepth 360380

4tD 0• 690 Load No= 5

01765 Load= 2001csf

= 001766 01840 D0

D50 = 001975 01915 D100= 002185

T50 = 007 min

Cv T50

02140 0 410 ft2day

02216

Ca = 0000 02290 i

02365

02440 20 50 200 500 2000 0 1 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 Elapsed Time min

020 Load No 6

l l I I I idll I u • a uJ iII 022 Load= 400 ksf

D0 = 002280 024 y D50 = 002881 II iii•J 026 DIM= 003481

1•111 028 IIiIII•Li T50 = 003 min

li•

030 Cv T50

032 a 775 ft2lday

034

Ca = 0001

038

040 5 10 20 50 200 500 2000 05 1 2 5 1 2 Elapsed Time min lax FL MAC T EC Engineering and Consult lrsg Inc M Reading vs Time

PI

Project No 305009013102

Project Dike Drilling

Source E0904 Sample No UD8 ElevIDepth 360380

t 41 03714 Load No= 7

037D9 Load= 200 ksf

= 003720 03704 D0

D50 003695 03699 0100 003670

= tz 03694 T50 014r in ZM e e 03689 C©9 T50

190 221da

D367

Ca = 0000 0367

H E • 2 D366

0366 n1 ro ns 2 5 1 2 S 10 20 50 2 00 600

Elapsed Time min

t 4t 03764 Load No= S

03739 Load= 100 ksf

= 003670 03714 D0

D50 = 003618 oaess = D 100 003566

0366 T50 = 008 min

0363 CvT50 M U

332 ft2lday

0358

I 0356 t

0353 U I I J H

HI I•

0351 4 3 t • n 911 0 2 00 500 20 00 V •1 V 3 Elapsed Time min Jax FL MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD9 ElevDepth 360380

4t0

to 03454 Load No= 9

03469 Load= 200 ksf

= 003540 03484 DO

= 003539 4 D50 03499 D100 = 003538 I HUI 1••11771

III T50 = 018 mug

i I I • I III•i Cv T50 d L 147 ft2day

4jj• 03652

Ca = 0000 03574

03589

03604 2 5 10 20 50 200 500 01 02 05 1 2 5 1 Elapsed Time min

0343 Load No= 10 I i 1 I 1 II • I •• II I• ill IJ 0348 Load= 400 ksf

= 003560 0353 D0

D50 = 003658 0358 D100= 003756

= T50 005 min

CV T50

555 ft2lday

0378

Ca = 0000 0383

0388

0393 10 20 50 200 500 a1 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 Elapsed Time min Jax FL MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD8 ElevDepth 3603$0

036 Load No= 11

038 Load= 800 ksf

H11 M I I

i IH•

Il• = 003780 T lfl 040 DO = 111 D60 004463 I

11

J HI III 042 dA 1•111 DI Op = 005145

044 T50 = 005 mini N ro 045 ctl Cv T50

I IIi

ITUO11 it

540 ft2lday

ON k • Q 1 M 05C IN

ca = 0001 052

054

I I I • I I • I • • 1•111 J

JI

I •• 058 so 200 5Q0 2000 01 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 Elapsed Time rain

t 4t 05 Load No= 12

05 31 Load= 1600 ksf

Dp = 005260 05 56

D50 = 006068

05 81 0100= 006877

06 T50 006 min

X31 C© T50

i56 393 ft2lday

0 381

•

I Ga=0001 0 Fos ffl

0 731

0 756 54 0 2000 ni ns t 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 5 0 2 0a

Elapsed Time min lax FL M CTEG Engineering and Consulting inc CO N SOLI DAT IO N TEST R EPOR T 5390

5265

514

6015

• I 4890

4765

4640

4515

4390

4265 i

4140 II

2

12

1

4

I I

•

fl 2 5 1 W 5 1 0 2C Applied Pressure ksf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO

Brown clay with gravel

Moisture Saturation Void Ratio Dry Dens pof I Sp Overburden O C c

LL PI Gr icsf Init Final init Finar Init Final Init Final Ics1

2686 1 I07 142 169 1000 10x0 0515 0427 196 008

D2435 Swell Press Heave Preparation Process Trimmed using cylindrical cutting ring Method Cr ksf

inundated at 005 ksf Condition of Test Natural moisture 5 001

Project No 305009013102 Client American Electric Power Remarks

Project Dike Drilling Percent passing 4200 sieve 755

Source B0904 Sample No UDII EleviDepth 520540 Checker X CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT Titled•liJf MACTEC ENGINEERING AND INC CONSULTING t• Jay FL CON SOLI DATI O N TEST REPOR T

I II ao

075

25

h CnrL saa

I I i i I

525

6D0

675

20

16

12

4

1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 Applied Pressure ksf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASHTO

Broom clay with gravel

Dens Moisture Saturation Void Ratio Sp Overburden Dry pcf pc LL P C c Gr Init Final ksf Init Final Init Final Init Final ksf

2696 1107 192 169 1000 1000 0515 0427 196 008

D2435 Swell Press Heve Preparation Process Trimmed using cylindrical cutting ring C r Method ksf

Condition of Test Natural inundated at 005 ksf moisture B 001

Project No 305009013102 Client American Electric Power Remarks

Project Dike Drilling Percent passing 4200 sieve 755

Source B0904 Sample No UD11 ElevlDepth 520540 Checked B • 1 CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT Title v •

ACTEG ENGINEERING AND Jwc FL IHal Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102

Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD11 ElevDepth 520540

0004

Load No= 1

0002 Load= 0101csf

= 0000 DO 000000

D50 = 000067 0002 D00= 000134

0004 = T50 1063 min

0005 CvT50

0008 003 ft2lday

003 0

= 0000 0092 Ca

0014

0016 2000 1 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 56 200 500 Elapsed Time min

0000 Load No= 2

I I • • I I Jil I

•11 0012 fJ11 II Load= 0251csf

= 000140 0010 D0

DOD = 000285 0020 D100 = 000430

0024 T50 = 417 min

0020 CV T50

0002 007 ft2day

0036

Ca = 0000 0040 •

f l q i

0044

t

i I J l I i i 0048 Jl II•I a 05 1 2 5 10 20 50 200 500 2000 Elapsed Time min Jax FL MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102

Project Dike Drilling

Source 30904 Sampie No UD11 ElevlDepth 520540

0035 Load No= 3

0038 Load= 050 ksf

000200 0041 Do=

D50 = 000388 0044 D100 = 000576

T50 = 002 tram

CvT50

1703 ft2day

0058

Ca = 0000 0059

TM 0052

Li I 0065 200 500 2000 01 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 50 105Elapsed Time min

0069 Load No= 4

0074 Load= 100 ksf

= 000680 Jays D0

= • •I •• • • • I I • 000900 I• D50

•1 11•111 W111 0084 d••l D100 = 001120

T50 = 113 ruin

0094 C©© T50

0099

c6 6 025 ft2day

0104

I I i • iPlli i•l•I IIJ•L T 0000

III II Ca 0109

I

0114

I

0119 2 5 10 20 50 200 500 2000 01 05 1 2 5 1 Elapsed Time min Jax FL ACTEC and Consulting Inc

i4 Engineering Dial Reading vs Tlme

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD11 ElevDepth 520540

01109

Load No= 5

01170 Load= 200 ksf

= 001070 01254 D0

D50= 001318 01329 I = D100 001565 WI J TFT i I MLLI T50 = 041 min

I d li f

11

•0 DV T50

m 01554 Q 068 ft2day III III •kk•sue

Illli• 01829

C00=0001 01704

•

I1 01779

MhU W I 01654 200 500 2000 1 2 50 l0 05 1 2 5 Ij 12 Elapsed Time min

015 Load No• 6

016 Load 400 ksf

DD W 001580 017

D50 = 001894

010 D100 ` 002249

010 T50 = 026 min

•

i i i hill i

ii• ii•

M1 i1 020 Cv T50

iiiii•

021 105 ft2lday •• •

tzWLl• iIP1 022

Ca = 0001 024023 11• I

MH IIT •I 025 200 500 2000 01 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 70 50 Elapsed Time min Jax FL Inc l ACTEC Engineering and Consulting Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD11 ElevDepth 520540

02454 Load No= 7 02439 F•• Load= 200 ksf

TIFI

lill• H•UI it I• = 02424 D9 002430

T • • D50 = 002375 X •I •• l 02409 002321 I r D100= i •

l• • • I

Il

r `1 •i T50 = 026 non

02379 H11H Cv T50 02364 HE 102 ft2day I TnTU I

02349 P11

02334

02319 LH41• • k H

11 02304 200 500 01 02 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 50 Elapsed Time min

0233

Load No= 8

0236 Load= 1001csf

= 002320 0234 DQ

DOj = 002266 0232 D100 002211 T50 487 min

DV T50

006 fs2lday

022

6 Q

I

022

022 r

I 021 ni n 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 50 200 5 00 20 00

Elapsed Time min Jax FL MACTEG Engineering and Consulting Inc Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Dritliag

Source B0904 Sample No UD11 ElevDepth 520540

02120 R No= 9 02135 Load= 200 ksf

= 002210 02150 D0

D50 = 002216 02155 0100= 002222

T50 = 071 mui ON 02195 N C© T50

02210 08 ft2day 44 1 1 1 Y 02225

C = 0000 02240

02255 I L 02270 01 02 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 50 200 500

Elapsed Time min

0215 Load No= 10 I l i • 0219 Load= 4001csf

I

I

ly = 002170 0223 D0

rr D50 = 002259 0227 D100 = 002348

0231 T50= 010m m

11 0235 CV T50

269 ft2day

0243

Ca = 0000 0247

0251 1 0255 0 05 1 2 5 10 20 50 200 500 Elapsed Time min Jax FL and NIACTEC EnginesBeing Consulting lrscLoad Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0904 Sample No UD11 ElevDepth 520540

02314 Load No= 11

02439 Load= 800 ksf

= 002390 02584 DD

D50 = 002819 02689 Dl = 003248

02814 T50 = 024 min

C 02939 Cv T50

03064 110 ft2lday E Rsr • I 03189

Ca = 0001 03314

03439 TTtilll

l IJIJ IdMlh i HHl1 W•CTH uo a1 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 50 200 500 2000 Elapsed Time min

030 Load No= 12

I • I • H•1• 11111V lhl•il •111 032 Load= 1600 ksf

= 003240 034 D0

D50 = 003766 036 0100 = 004292

T50 = 017 min

Cv T50

CJ 042 0 150 ft2day 044 ri Cu= OX01 046 •J

II

I i •

• •lJ 048

050 50 200 500 2000 01 05 1 2 6 1 2 5 10 20 Elapsed Time min Jax FL MACTEC Engineering and Consulting Inc CONSOLIDATION TEST REPORT 92

I •Hl i I I lily 89

iLII •JI`IJI I 86

83

80 0

77

O

74

HTl I i I • I•I I I I I I IIIIiIUII I•IIi•l 71 I1 II Hd H 11•IN III H 68 ILI

l l I 7 F•Tl ill illJTrff I l T`•il

11 II 65 llltlllllUlh•H111ilI 62

125 III iIlll lrlll lil iII li•I1I

• • 100I I > 75 U• • 5A

i i i I I l I I I I I i rKLLLL LiLI 25 411WH

00 2 10 20

Applied Pressure ksf

MATERIAL DESCRIPTION USCS AASIiTO

CL Cxxay and brown lean clay A7620

Dens Moisture saturation Void Ratio Sp Overburden Dry pcf PC G LL PI c Init Final nit Final ksf Gr ksf Init Final init Final 0886 0660 019 46 21 2778 920 1000 10001A 525

D2435 Swell Press Heave Preparation Process Trimmed using cylindrical euttingring Method Cr ksf a

Condition of Test Natural moisture inundated at 005 lcsf B 001

Client American Electric Power Remarks Project No 305009013102

Percent Passing 200 sieve 832 Protect DiiceDrilling

Source UD6 ElevIDepth 220240 B0906 Sample No J f Checked5y yv i F W T ON TEST REPORT Title 1 d CONSOLIDA t MAGTEC ENGINEERING AND CONSULTING INC lax FL Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0906 Sample No UD6 ElevDepth 220`240

0003 n m Load No= 1

0000 Load= 010 ksf

D = 0 00000 6003 O

D50 = 000093 0008 D100 = 000186

0009 T50 = 005 min

0012 CvT

0095 588 ft2ldr

0018

Ca = 0000 0021

f

m

I

0024

0027 0 5 0 2 00 50 0 20 00 01 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 1 0 2 Elapsed Time min

002 Load No= 2

I I I a0s Load= 025 ksf ®

I I = 000240 004 D0

D50 = 000592

005 D 100 = 000943

= T50 003 min

037 CV T50

a0a o Q 872 ft2lday

Oa9

Ca = 0001 010

012 5 10 20 50 200 500 2000 09 05 1 2 5 1 2 Elapsed Time min JaxFL NIACTEC Engineering and Consulting1 Inc Deli Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source 30906 Sample No UD6 ElevDepth 220240`

01204 Load No= 3

01279 Load= 0501csf

VIA

D0 = 001020 01354 = I I top D50 001357

Nl• 01420 D100= 001695

= T50 003 min

01579 I Cv T50 r+ I r•

01554 • •I 973 ft2lday

ff

i•

01729

Ca = 0001 01804

01879

LLM• I • 01954 2 5 10 20 50 200 500 2000 01 05 1 2 5 1 Elapsed Time min

019 I• Load No= 4

• •

020

41 ksf I Load= 100 r •

i• DQ = 001750 021 D50 = 002i68

022 = D100 002586

023 T50 = 005 min

024 Cv T50

025 568 ft2day

026

Ca= 0000 027

028

020 20 50 200 500 2000 0 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 Elapsed Time min Jax FL Inc I11iACTEC Engineering and Consulting Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0906 Sample No UD6 ElevDepth 220240

02764 Load No= 5

02880 Load= 200 iksf

I

I•I•

d••I = 002590 03014 Id D0

= D50 003093 03139 = 1l D100 003596

I I

IM 03264 • T50 = 006 min •11M q u

III 03359 • Cv T50

• I • I I

•• 03514 I 426 ft2lday 03639

Ca = 0001 03764

03889

T11 53 200 500 2000 04014 01 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 Elapsed Time min

034 Load No= 6

1

11 036 Load= 400 ksf ICI

111 = 003730 038 IN D0 •5 = 004284 D5p 040 D100= 004838

T50= 021 min

il•ill I I

J1•• 044 1T Cv T50

I I I I M • I I I 046 118 ft2day

III

048 •liiil Cc = 0001 050 FMWIi• W•I•III iUIIl11 H lliLL IiIiT 052

I LIJIJII• 1

S I1I

kt 200 500 2000

05401 05 1 2 I20 Eiapsed Time min Jax FL MACT EC Engineering and Consulting Inc Deal Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0906 Sample No UD6 ElevDepth 220240

05104

Load No= 7

05102 Load= 200 ksf

= 005100 05100 D0 = D50 005095 05098 D100 005090

= T50 10271 rain

C© T50

tu 05092 000 E ft 2lday ITTI T iimJ 05090

NIH ca = 0000 05088 MIN HIT 05086

I

05084 20 5o 200 500 01 02 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 Elapsed Time min

051 34 Load No= 8

051 49 Load 100ksf

D0 = 005090 051 34

D50 = 005066

051 19 D100 005041

051 04 T50 = 201 min

05 189 Cv T50

05 74 012 ft2day

05 759

05

I

I• I i I FMi 05

I • 1• 1 H FF i I U 05 014 00 D1 4 5 1 2 5 1 2 5 10 20 50 200 5 6D 20

Elapsed Time min Jax FL MACTEC Engineering and Consulting inc Dial Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Drilling

Source B0906 Sample No uD6 ElevDepth 220240

0486 Load No= 10

048 Load= 400 ks1

= 004970 0492 D0

D50 = 004996 0495 D100 = 005021

T50= 021 min

Cv T50

114 ft2day

0507

C• = 0000

0513

I W IIm M1

I I

Ml•l 0516 5 10 20 50 200 500 01 05 1 2 5 1 2 Elapsed Time min

050

i Load No= 11

l I II I f I I IIIT I •

d• 052 i Load= 800 ks£ = 005060 05 DO

• i • I D50 = 005795

II

II

D100 = 006530

= 056 T50 021 min C C 060

• C© T50

I I I fllfI IfiNfi IIPI Vlilll • I•

CVI 062

S2 a 113 ft2day ilL 064

L

Ili 0001 III cam= 005 P•K M I •

I• 055

I uJIJ Ii19

070 50 200 500 2000 01 05 1 2 5 1 2 5 lO 20 Elapsed Time min Jax FL MACTPC Engineering and Consulting Inc Dal Reading vs Time

Project No 305009013102 Project Dike Dri1Ting

Source B0906 Sample No TD6 ElevDepth 220240

663 Load No= 12

066 Load= 1600 ksf

L• 006750 069 Do=

= 007749 1111111 1 IN J 1111 11H 11I D50 072 D100 = 008747 112 1

d ••l 075 = 040 min 0 T50

• I I l h I K I 07$ •11R cu au CV T50

iI1 I FT Cu 081 055 ft2day

• d TM11 11 1•1 084

C = 0001 087 090 fio 2LL IiiliLL I • KI2 093 5 200 500 2000 61 05 1 2 5 1 2 10 20 50 Elapsed Time min

Jax FL MACTEC Engineering and Consulting 16G 22010 Commerce Drive Abingdon Va 24211 MACTEC 276 6760426 276 6760761

Density of Soil Specimens ASTM D 7263 Method B

Project Name AEP Dike Drilling

Project Number 3050090131

Boring Number B0903

Sample Number UD9

Depth 3436`

Moisture Content

Tare + Wet Soil 124147

Tare + Dry Soil 101653 Water 22494 Massg Tare 47747

Dry Soil 53906

Water Content 417282

Weight Volume Relations

Height 459201 461951 45760 45725 459 Average Height Measurementsin Inside Diameter 288601 28760 28795 28870

Average Diameter 28821

Tare +Sample 24085

Masslb Tare 07152 Sample 16932

Volume PCF 001731

Wet Density PCF 9782

Dry Density PCF 6902

Performed By CA f 94p Reviewed By P •Z 7 p7 22010 Commerce Drive Abingdon Va 24211 276 6760426 276 6760761

Density of Soil Specimens ASTM D 7263 Method B

AEP Dike Project Name Drilling 3050090131 Project Number

Boring Number B0907

Sample Number U D14

Depth 5759

Moisture Content

Tare + Wet Soil 93703

Tare + Dry Soil 64162 Water 29541 Massg Tare 1663

Dry Soil 47532

Water Content 621497

Weight Volume Relations 46880 Height 46385 47175 1 47510

Average Height 469875 Measurementsin Inside Diameter 28750 28770 28675 28790

Average Diameter 28745

Tare +Sample 24549

Mass lb Tare 07491

Sample 1707

Volume PCF 00176

Wet Density PCF 9692

Dry Density PCF 5977

Reviewed Z2 Performed By 2•d9rC By 1>E 2•Q r29 APPENDIX 3

PIEZOMETER DATA • f IVECHRSRAP

i r

ASH POND 1B a A7R a

t OVERFLOW STRUCTURE ti L d

r

VNOTCH WEIR 2

Jo

P7 AECLAM POND

PLANT 011812

B6

A

P0908D

R

042309

B5

P0908S

R

B4

0712806

P0901D

S R

P0901

B3

110103

R A

P8

B2 AA

020401

A

B1 P7

+

Date

051198

R Time

P6R A7

+

081595 A

P5R A6

A

A

aQ

P4R P0902

A5 1111892

+ A x A 4

P3R P0906

A3

022290

A

R A 6 a

P2R P0904

A2

e

4o

052987 A R AA

P0909

o1 P1

t +

090184

1510 1490 1470

1550 1530

1570 APPENDIX 4

SEEPAGE AND STABILITY MODEL INPUTS gravel

sand

with d

grave

f°IIft ftft

sure

Ash

fragment clayey silt

with

045

Dikeclay 045

shell

clays=y

AU

shale

aetr

Dikeday

Suter eySStl gravel Original recO Dnirr3actus

Tcn=clayey

shall Content Content

and

igiral

UOIacl3 Unsaturated tUsasra• Unsaurated

`nti

With

I =0 D Only Cary 0

Outer 0 1 Cavu

Water Water

sand09UD8a8UfI5

sand d

Function S Function 1 Function 1 Function i 1

rate

0Oh4 Ipr

ipsf

trtel Ash C

WC WC WC WC

silt

Saturated SC Saturated situ=aLed

Iota atrated

Dikeclay A KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KFunctionCoe• Vol KRatio KDirection KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio KDirection KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio KDirection

shellsilty

Model Hydraulic Model Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Hydraulic

ash

Section Materials

Oub2r Toeclayey original Compacted Fly Foundationsi€ty

Ltd

tioooI a

•

Intern

CEOSLOPE

•r°tl>cod s

linc 519912009 S

Anatysis

25

No

Copyright

Analynis°

Reviews

Lifer

of 711 Seepage 2 liniC1 Diract Dike C if

Iterations K K

allel

Plant of

version ad in Stepping

Table in Max

K1 20

h14 land No

Pa hi `or Method in

2007

fond

lien t4ccr Yes 0

Riven Time 250 psf L

ihjrr Flow Every

Analysis teet 01

lbs Number Change

Change

Svhrav bf Water 27721

Solver Seepage

PM Flours

Time

Air

Change

of Clinch

GeoStudlo Units

By PWP Runoff

A4gsz

U2010 Units of Steps

Units Generation

Steps Adaptive

Units Settings

Number Tanrient

Units 8yhrad

uing Units

Settings

C of

F54522

SV2010 Flux

Analysis Initial Maximum Rate Minimum Equation Duration Use SEPAV Include Maximum Potential

Tolerance Starting Save Apply Step

Edited Weight

A Name

information

Last generated Created Date File Directory LengthL ForcelF Pressurep Mass Unit Description Klnd Method Control Convergence Revision MassM

View Time Timet Settings Time

Section

SEEPW Retort He Project SEEPJLI

Analysis 041 It

year

it ft ft

per 1Ss15ft

Content

1503jt 1554511 1323Si

ftr

1303 C 1C`t 0 S 1531 1410 °

I 45

Face Only 3 F o

530 22 273 18 Water C

t Tables

3503 I tinsel head 1503 H

3slrie Conditions Fill =lon

Table Level 1 2 3

Pool

ater

true •nOl

Iotastud

Seepage

is iced

tot4 Head

KSat Volumetric MvCpKRatio KDirection negative Coordinate Coordinate

Coordinate 14Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate A Pool t

Water

Sections

Flux

Section Section Section

Model Review Function Coordinates Hydraulic

Type Type Type Max Coordinates Coordinates Coordinates Type

ai5`irg

Section Boundary

ContaI Initial Potential Zeros Fie Flux Flux Flux

clay

ility

can y

sa=id

cloy t3

perrrea ey

san

ftft

years

ftft ftli ela 4

ipvrer

C>srts Dike l°S i02 1

shell

At

clay

rirainai

Dikesandy

hr

PGaed

hr 0t

Content Content Content shell Content

y f`

lean

° snturaied

lJoe Silt09UD6

ftOr slit08UD16

Om 9 Iciy 8 Ony j ti only C

0igino C C Utter

Water Water Water

Water

Clay07UD18

Function 1 1 Function I si I

at°ro

rated 2ftl

Q••701 Ps 23 ysi Fs

shale 0 Clayey WC 3 C WC 0 Lean

Saw Sate Saturated Saorxtcrj

Satraft Saturated

Raising

KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio4 KDirection iliitesandy KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KSat Mv KRatio KDirection KSat Mv KRatio KDirection KFunction KRatio KDirection A Volumetric Volumetric Vol KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio KDirection

Rock Model Hydraulic

Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic

Section

Bed Original Foundationsandy Weathered Foundation

Second foundation gravel

rcticn

F with

4sh

fthr g Dineclay

036

ical

Pressure

Compacted Cri

33e

007

XConductvity

Method

50910Z7cC06

ftft 349932644005 34339431e006 339Fc 69492o3eCi6 43215314uUSj

014000277 681 53732444OG6 30281534006

349675314CVK 419461

0153951021 006£82257 3 3 0 r 0 r 43094434006 4 1 1

00068454191 6060515145 0012131327 000311827391 346963524CC61 0003652732 0067013444 0064776342 0027170679 J 3 3 336540384O09 327743504006 31290250e006 238940254000 251381444406 Function 3 Function

0268725053 PoreWater

17 psf

ftsr

02 r

100 302

vs

gravel

O0004856927

5110 3re003 53432

1169

55943

11 Estimation

1235379

329522 Content

Content

Content

Suction 0

091 274275

2C 8475°57

Function

with

€037926 039514260066360026 €1274275 Data 07

020691191006591383I 23357215 42613324 73175937 14384499 253665J91 08 53 16237767 545559131 1000 Sat D DC19324 6a233•J53155 2 011223379 20092381 1037925002 0551428 I 23357215 428131242 14384439 25365509 cfi329502 83585079 16237767 97£3574 345 1070

1000 K 00i

to Curvature

Water

35eO6

Water Water

Paint Metric

Fit

Properties Points Properties

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point29763514 Point Point Point Point Point Paint Point Point Point

KFunction Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

Xunducuvitj

Duty

Dikeclay

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Minimum Num Residual Curve Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data

Segment A Volume

Estimation Model KSaturation Data Estimation Function

Section

Original

sand

Function

dayey ft

ftJhr

shell

FrtrdlundXing

Pressure 7 Pressure

Outer

2340 r 7438536

XCartcivctivity 9703091 614901E94

Method XConductivity

it 4•749973I9 x033992692 ftft 006998775 0068995948 0

009924445 00495501411 0040352574 ft 1

011 01145347919 0D33268053 00279901551 001977119 0O 00015469029 O110021186539 000483041 0047355541

Function

PoreGVater PereWater

02454

tef 1488

133

$S

fthr

100 100

vs vs

2222783940t5

1332 15045 100 5P9113 0012 0069 531321

005

e514

Estimation

005 Content

nttion

sand Content

Suction 20901 0051525 Suction 0335is

Fti 20 Frsctirr

334 333 Data f0 Data 1001 iD01E319807 009133r62i0049982465 011222579 0379261022 r 23357215 42£13324 76475997 F1438449 200360435 48324302 54586£379 1637767 54555940 1000 001812607 0

003 1213276 1297 Sat 1100 K 00

Curvature Curvature

nclcnlivitq to Water to

005 20611

Water

PcurY Prtirt

Metric Metric

Fit Fit

clayey Properties Points

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

KFunction Ash

XCc XCcnrluctitity

15yea 03a

Coordinate Coordinate Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Minimum Num Residual Curve Segment Data Data Data Data A Points

shell

Model Coordinates Model Function KSaturation Data Estimation Function KSaturation Data

Functions

Section K

Outer Compacted clay

i9an

sand

+uicticn

lavev

ifthrl Dikerandy 5

6 shed 4

2 t1

FreJluncXing

e006

Pressure

93

Orignul Outer

t 049

3213008

Method HConductivity

499027pCu5 Y1ctCD7

ftYf 0220499926511 0013

270c39e0126

011172133011s

323554a4 fthr 02333362813 010349524444 00004031024 3ca53516e005 n

53i51G5iie007 34596i259e605 33664171e000 325359700011 30455374vGCS 1532317513003 12037SSteO07 tns 004043081478 15 177074413006

Function 0711249704303 110147311113 333174S947E3 0003317581137 5709353e035 °3A016771139

Function

26322113D0t PoreDater

3 000049423406

ps` 97 1

120 IF

73775113eC11F vs

767

permeability

9779 9302 700 72279

13918 rion

Estimation

3Se026

Content

Content Content

Suction

20 Fur

018329507 0794731 16237767 335938 143544 7976351+1 61584$21 263665092090373213006 1731 233572 4812 Sat Data

07925902349715112v066 6153923 1274275 549 10000 10000 001 0014329807000049997919 O0335w8113 00115541121 0112853• 020091331 037923302 €300951528 1274275 233522 47€33324 07807599r 00423139754 250665509 433293021 08951669 15237 29763514 14555943Gx355391312011 120

01 K lower

to Curvature

Water

Water 0015 Water

Pcirt

fatric

Conductiviy Fit

Properties Points silt Properties

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point KFunction h Point Point point

Cato

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hyd Maximum Minimum Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Hydraulic Num Residual Data Data Data Data A Volume

shell

Estimation Model Function KSaturation Data Estimation

Section

Outer

E=nctic7

Psnntkr

silt

fthr `Itjhr3

6 0113

rndlundH•ng F clayey

Frerivn•X013

Pre•are

Pressure

413006

activity 22 Toe 5 1119COOS

71 7813= 3 5

`t

Method XConductivity Method XCon

05 03

t`Let f

31995151c 34 34973

fthr 12 2039 O0191133 001009234131 0 o

errWater 0053E97402 0G6515 009130234 0041439111 0000131334704 001195fi909 001731417`1 9

00147337199 00275t9304 00123372411 Function

00544431£

3Cn97150t P PoreWatzr 7

psf psf 315

clay 6

100 fthr 100 6

vs vs

000043273

100 007 39£3130 721 59a3 100 3513 501

Estimation Estimation

35cX6 007

Content Content

lean

Content P11

Suction 5314211 Suction

20 Function 212 Function

Data Ct+s26f92 i`

Sat 00183233070003905755 0012255442100699907091 06951925 4231324 X71471199 26MZ1122 3329302 131546079 1$37707 29713514 51S1 Data

1402 00333 011233379 020691331 174275 234 1001 Sat 1000 001 10020091331 t1`42313324 K 1201 K 0111

Curvature

to to Curvature

Water Water

07 Water 35130011

Point rirt

Matric Matric

Fit Fit

Points Properties Points

KFunction Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

KFunction

XQnductivity

XConductivity

Data

sits Data

Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Minimum Num Residual Dikesandy

Minimum A Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Num Residual Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data

Model Function KSaturation Data Function

Estimation Model KSaturation Data

Section

Teeelycy Original fit`

Piesnre

Contentft•

functions 1unctio>•5

31 t

li1

16 7 Water

f7339

75 ftf

Sanpln tft S•rrE

39999595

351 Vol

PoreWater

26

7 94036Cil 0 033555587 035Sa4965

339994495` G4 03 0

0003 07

ryas 059567 024896473 titrd 4 039995861 ¶

D05t7947255 00335431 C=0 vs

022317553 03835577 346£1782 4311511 ChCI551013931 0aG423317t `0547716051

24

5 o537975114 s Sa4 yst

04

10 tit

1L0

00195 ii

Method Method

675978773

7215 100 0599P59951

Eit Silty

U Content Content Content passing passing

5594

Content

51S281039967261

Suction 78475597 t

012S 79922402

55 il040

2f ` Function 9S3293332 12

10passing 6opassing 16329302 10

Data 5 60 54 1i2112375 2 1002 1101 IC 111332340 1 33593133 33+ 297635 515F4521 1274271 45`555943 I123337 i

1il08853os73 f 10000 C0lCS913Fs1 =C13 E1co36tSxt 1u

001 121 trio

Water Water Water

at at at at

to

Wate Curvature

Estimation Estimation

Material Material

Point

Pala

Limit Limit

Fit

Properties Points

Point Point Properties

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point WC Ash Vn1 0ssi 0 WC

Data

Data Data Data Data Data Liquid Diameter Num Curve Liquid

Data Vol Sample Saturated Diameter Maximum Minimum Segment Mv Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Sample Saturated Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum A Data

Estimation Model Function

Porosity Data Estimation

Section

Compacted

Function

tft1

PrOssur

Content

adlundtarg

allr

98P r v

1641

ft

293agc•

ft`p Vol

Method i PoeWater

ft

I OZtiSSlSSSt 1 tr259 5 291111197 27400984

¶4 0299906 0239CSCiSS 025iIODO

0 •a

1hr vs 1 029490617 0299701567 02971 0166506524 1m

Functions

3 C2900954 13316

Functions i

psi

567`°

10C 1C0 13

Function 1525 1552 15655

15SI c5>72 1S6il9 1567

5f`d

Tme 9 Iti7

11 11011 ItO

025509095

`otai aion

Content

Estimation 116 21113324

i7 n275

Content on Sea Content

54 558183

year Point Suction C1 629

i8329507

20 C h sand btiit r

OO31$26512

Data G Data Sat SOLO L uCtJGi 3800 S256tr I132L 02 rC= 23iilS L t1 5 5°=1924 i143644911 `2976351 r•i+84321 26365509

ra

K Icaad Water

per to Curvature rne to Curvature Water Dutu r rLstcr T Content o

t50 M1r=

Fit Fit

Points Boundary ps

KFunction Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

Intel Vo

clayey

1129954596

Oft

Swine Data

Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Minimum Num Residual Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Segment Mvi Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data A Data Curve

shefl

Water

Level

Model Model Porosity Function Function

YIntercept Data Data

Section

Hydraulic Pool Otter

Vol f17jftl

Pressura

Content

functens ter z

69 71 23

Water

1341

99728 ftft

99959

123859

L9 Sarplz

°tjft

3259391 +creWu

32993155 €59=3721

03291995M9 09195999 032399589

26613327 207597 035

0 0 0005 210703

631599495j 1si2=997671

03199957

1077515530 4

1523473 03323915421 65912549 132318 vs 031986233 0321610491 03185506 029 32512542 0 73272037 0 0053439574 03 11

331956272 015907

032972973 030+34359 79

035955 03671139

jpsVol

02

clay 9

1001

Method

5902

1615 031999999 8571

Silt

1 Content passing passing Content

20137

Content 75

lean

Suction £

95528 832930=7

21 Sanction

35

10 60

6 Data 1

00835=8 273329307 19 07825997 111237767 i389359 7438499 29763514 61534821 177427= 12F£ 555i9 11288379 23357213 45329902 31 002069333631949997 l0 OC=385E6 013 073475977 16137767 95558133 1697920 x143544 x20763514 6353821 127427 263366509 354559948

10000 11

501

Water Water

at at

to Curvature

Water

attic

Estimation

Material Point

mS9F99

Limit

Fit

Properties Points

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Paint Point Point103300035291799

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Paint

WC Vul

63

Duty

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Liquid Diameter Diameter Minimum Num Dikesandy Data Data Data Data Data Data Data i2Maximum Me0Ps

Sample Saturated Segment Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data A Curve Data Data

Model Estimation Porosity Data Function

Section

Original

j

jfi

j•tf i rt

PrESGc Psrssure

Coat Cenet

1 functions 3 I 1 9

Water 5

So Water

`tjtt

4671

88

Sample

533

ftit 9 11531

PoreLlater Vci Vol

30999777411 3 PoreWater

iail99599i 032999999 0323995551

7 0311 0

000144 0123

0305599662 0321994514

31633£02

vs 0319 0257125323 vs 030990132 030963725 130839538

32 0319321 02031 01530753

23960 0 lv 11309i35>

lpsfi 77 fpf n

19C i0u

30351 015313731 Method Cant

gravel

300

0425969 100 0522959983

5319 Clay

Content Content passing passing Content

Ccntent

Fttiar

lactic S

3020 17513314

223

2 >c•otian 21

iic 2274275 42

Data 001 011385t100 0ii32°E=77 0734759370 1054 60 Data

f=D20G 631042313324033399954 037926 13237767 335641830309983226 6552928 234384139 39763514 6158`821 253E 54555948 °11113378 123357235

433293+2 0x54631361

20070

Water Water Water

at at

to Curvature to Curvature

Watercty f

Estimation

Material

1=6unction Pent

Mati Matrie

Fit Limit

Points o4Vater Points Fit

Properties

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

Vol

Vo€ Se

WC

alit 632953995

Dana Data

Dikectaywith

Curve Segment Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Sample Liquid Diameter Diameter Num Segment Saturated Data Data Data Num MaCPsf Saturated Maximum Minimum701 Curve Mv A Points

Function

Model Porosity Data Estimation Model Porosity Data Function

Section Originai

Toe£iayey •

T

AS

2C

125 e5756 F e

7016126 •

201<5 381c75 SIR 04994451 7292 12162051 30<78 526693t sl2CJ0

7375

1G

2O

7

75

F53 h i I i

S$

•2 > e

7 C3TA

•7

7 40

5257

1533 1703 1703

6`5b55 19679268 7

33

Boundary

4720 7475177973 ac

513777095 e` c=• 656600221543054 24 245E V ri

lieu

cx

itlead

ort

557

hydraulic

shale shale oha shale

Co toot Ca

lire

sod

and and ata t d

n Point

sanriu9

sand aC

ty r•

iy 11 1 c

End 2 LC 15 18 i9 s 3

Ash Ass SiiO Ak t y t Ett y

shili ec§ Shell shell5ity

Point

Il

•r

otis rsh ash

rif lrrifaLif titer 3zer i

F5 OntershtslFtitysad 22171 F Fey 5O4nOytCn UOSn3LC115 rc>urir Car Eompoced 4t T 7 fragaent fragment f fragment S 8 i`3 1 Start 4 C 7 3 15 8

13 111

1 1 1 1 x

3 i 7 7 10 121 1a 17 2n

larE 1 A e

IY rn I1S

• 2rs7

cint Ulan

RESkcn Re4311 4t7lnr • Lme I

22 2s 24 3i 1054•r75 Jn5 Lire Line Lirz Lire Lire 95430u92a n2 U

t int Lire

Section

Lin

€ E €

07

r7

75 ft r 25

151=7C 39 5

5LItJ 3 •

Area 35335 1

279125 2vE 211920=9 359273 195 105 211`525 3 3 1087

109

mm•

117161211

• • J 52726 •

Points G13 1 4r

rn 43

44 5

1 asI2oo

rsr

22 59 4 • 7

13 4c1424st 3843 9 1

lalnrsv2521232z 5

nis175

123 1h 73 26272 3945 4041 37454340 • GZCd•dla 46515249 `352 52 E € 7

functcns C

D8

cy

tLive gravel gEave

an

Sample tCOt It5Silla c

ay ay

C12

0021 0020 ult ilt t li

7219707524 0255194451 €c n n a J

c75tt clay =1

Material

01960497 Method Lse Lea A Ash psh

SirQ

9S

nsandy Clay r E1e

Content passing passing a

to

1 CK D2• 2 3423 Rai•intll

na

05 10 60 mnI

•J•iL

€2305721 Z4932 111403

ash na alt

22s1 gn22 Enai

Igln

Water

at at tln y

OF simpace

Estimation

ES FUso Fotaso U FI Flyah FIY Fl Ce£ad c•vnd

Material L Wa tuietar f Oro Or cCcrnpacted

Limit

Properties Points

Point Point Point WC 8 G

n n

af3

Data Data Data Val Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Num Sample Saturated E 1i A gas toil Sor6

igmn

Regios iiegcn tegECn i•eglnn =` •egipn Region Region KtTon ite•an 1 Peqon

Estimation I

Section

Re € f I

E • faev

of l z03 to

3a

3c

€ ``eF x k a x x

s r3i t

ei€ r r FiydraulluBoundary C c

Ze Ze Z 3n 7F•• j F 3 Zoro zero I

Yft S L 5 s 9 4 > 77 58 co E2 Fit 55 a4 • 34 25 67 65 63 34 9 79 74 I f f 14665

4 6 S 1 Xkf

53 53 33 61 7t• 65 62 94 G 20 19 77 3 55 64 66 37 57 of 74 116 77 0 € 1 l 153 € I C

0 4 7 07 p3 73 75 4a a1 a3 $5 37 84 SQ 100 7117 l 10 1 111 1

A n e e

re LI I

tcr Une bpi one Lire LI+ €e U• lane Lire Ul•• L L

€ L Poot

c € F77

Section

Points

S3

me

03 03 1

WzaciS Hied n x t

FuK 1

Conta zero Cartarf • • °

1 $e 2 2 3 4

3 b4 i

17 74 20 29 27 23 3r 22 11 23 35 1 42 43 4S 40 4 46 7 ilk 45 27 5 4p q7 € €

s 9 0 3 C 1 3 4 4

se i3 c5 29 50 31 54 39 33 3i 31

7 2 7F 4 31 42 44 S4 31 45 =i 53 49 64 F5 •H €

1 u 2 c Z 24 27 28 L 3 •° 34 35 • 4 5`1 5t 13 54 5a

40 41 4Z 45 49 52 59 51 54 6t 67 i9 A n n 3 r3i F r C na n•3 ne fin n n r r r

ne ne

ne Ine44

an n 3 1f1 r n• I I1 ine17 Line Una Hoe on Lino i1ne6 Line s t • •

Section rsc

S403F

= o

X75 c 5 5 5

3133 11

z13

1439 son 1343 1765

1530 1550 IS•t 1560 156 1555 15495 15• 34 157 1516= 152 AS 33t 14 1

a

i 14

3

75 5 38136 s

1 34

st 2

s3 2S

339 30 299 1 35C 525 135 2 255 i32

vF 367 oil 33 133 352 215 173 116 1 Ss

c 1 b i 5• r 2 $

M 5 6J 75

5 31 63 4 73

• 55 rtn3 I 75 A in o W jri

Dint F

2 000 04453 Pe1tt soi•3 3oir •ai• Paint73 Poi E n

gas

t i •rc•

Section

3 S

TT h 6 9

144 53°

141=1 14 54516423 1457 vsl 13 1132 1442 5 1491 149149672 M+6 BEE 3 1444 113773

jun 1104

5 5 G 5 o 4 c 2 1

21 3 p a

1535 y3i 769 M 3151

S 1 333 33 lo i D c

Lc 3i

1J 24 i5 28 54 t i ° wS •a9

fli nt

A iot

Ort eE

ova vo0201

•i3 Ytr Rcnt Pci•t pas Point

Section gravel

sand

avc with

g ft

It ft`ft`

sad

Ash

clayay

with

Dikeclay 04 745

sand

shell a

clayey

Ash

sitly

Dikeclay

Deter gravel

ToeelpyY4sl rigiral aacted

raisins Content Content

seturated iv

hr

°

t Uassturated Ueseturat Unsaturated

raising

with 7 u Or Art+y

i 0 P tt €i

Ostn Theelyxy Yigina€ First Compacted

Water

Water

e4

Function Function Function Function tro` 1 2

U yrt

third p G•70505

sundatitsn04UD15

Ash P

WC WC WC WC silt f rection

Settnra Ssturatstd Saturated 1stcrated

Sateated Saturated

Dikeclay

KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KFunction KRatio KDirection KFunction KRatioKDirection KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KSat My KRatio KDirection KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio KDi B Vol Vol Volumetric

shell

sand

Hydraulic Model Model Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Model

ash

clayey

Section Materials

Outer Tos Original Cenipacted Fly silty

Ltd

iii

Internlional

Pond

GECSLOPE

Rived

2003

5

001991

AnalyStS

25

Copyright No

Reviews

Linear

°==a±c of 111 i Direct Dike 1 00001

iterations pcf K K

ocrslen Nan of

and in Stepping

Tattle in Max

11

c 5O

Zancs Sc

Farm€e is Method

in hr

2007

and C

Darn Rver Yes

Time

psi I

251

Dieter

ibslhr

Flaw Ll CL Every

Analysis feet

Of lbs Number Change

i1 Change 9740u

n=utrao Water

Solver Seepage

P Iloses

Time

Air Change

Clinch

Echrad of

Ge5ludie Units

By PWP Runoff

BCgsc

U<2010 Units of Steps

Units Generation

Steps Adaptive

Units Settings Transient

Number

By Units

using Units

Settings D 2 of

1211201C

Flux Analysis SEiW

Use Initial Include Maximum Maximum Rate Minimum Equation Starting Duration Step Save IM Apply Potential

Tolerance

Edited Weight B Name

Information

Last Date Directory Lengthltl Timet Description Method File

generated Created Revision Time FcrceF Pressurep Mass Mass Unit View Kind Control Convergence Time Settings

Section SEEPW File Project

Report Analysis SEEP1W seam

7 R ft

ft ft

It ft

perineahility

16 L peryve 1301S 1SR1S

titSSt

Content

15101 5 153451 1

fthr k 11tH 0 lijeeritcrated T

Face

pernicability Lr

s 539 27 r=1 ii5 274 273

Layer

Water

ol0 Qi Tables

lore

tenet Function 1 1503 head

pc

wer

0000472 Conditions 1F

Flux Table Level 1 2

WC Pond

tree Or0

Sefurrted

Seepage Head in

Iotal Head Total

KSat Mv2 KRatio KDirection KDirection negative

Volumetric KFunction Vol KRatio Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate

Water

Pool

B ction

shellls

Water

Sections

Flux

St Section

Hydraulic Model Hydraulic

Type Review Type Function Type Type Max Coordinates Coordinates Coordinates

Section

Outer Boundary Potential Raising Cctiistant

Zero Initial Flux Flue Flux

l ity

day

lean

nand

ley

permeasi

Fifft

man

16340

titey

ft1t

lower

0 Dikesandy o41 02

hell

ed

fragmun

silt

clay

toe06U05

Pikesandy

rock Oigini Outer

Content Content Content shell

at

iragmcet

nal saturated y

lean fiiirr

c Unwtura °

fjhr •turated `

xr

0 uolp

0 i Only

Or 2 Outer t

Water Water Water

raising

fragment d

Function Function 1 1 i 1 Function 1

0001

isf

rated t ate

2e006 2SeDOS

0 i rs lpsf

rrratedo4y

shale

S WC WC 0 WC ruction

foundation Sr S4ta d Sate SStu Setrated

Second

Dikesandy

KSat Mv KRatio KDirection KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KFunction Vol KDirection KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio KDirection KSat Volumetric MV KRatio KDirection KFunction Vol KRatio KDl B Volumetric KRatio

shellrock

Rock thor clay

Model Model5uraret Hydraulic ModelSSrrated Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic

foundation03UD17 Model Model Model Hydraulic Model

Section

Fled Original roekfill

outer silty Function r

As==

thr

frdlun6K€ 100

Pressure 081

s0051

COmpactsd e

702

140782

3Conductivity 4995094e006

Method

OS000catL•

605 048 34985915=020 34973747n1006 4S95165e006

C 0583t158ail LO

09t34137 4595235e006

0073955929 34956Be006 G 34332148e005 3

33928565e005 fi 35337407o0965 d74Ss•s8 3 34345712e003151 30121393eL•t5i 22251837e096 55535024e065

D0$4 0979994 09870153337 00775145441 41515749 2n9€9377 811E6835e907 0083143053 3 0 0 8532733o005 00227425e006 32050099e006 Function a

000Dt302G4i PCreWate

pst

ft1St

2547515e0371 100 is

so

gravel 9M

1 18267413e007

100 3Se006

Estimation

168

74276 366509 586E15 Content

Content 585675

f35951 Suction

610 Fection 9435997

20

01 with

0206929I 453260020026472014

0 Data

€0061554821 €051235373 €037926932007909998 OE451328 112 23057715 428113324 70475997 14554495 28 685 1152377 29763514 54655943 1 Sat 001 0083790073 0033590163 0051554321 01126837 029693331 037926902 0695 1774275 233572 42803324 7 14334499 26365509 45329302 09 6362371167 29763514 1000 K 1001 0

to Curvature `v006 Water 3

Water

Point Matis

Fit

Properties Points

Point Point Point Paint Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

Point Point Point Point KFunction Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point5455548 Point

XCcndactivity

Oata

Data Data Data Dikeclay

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Minimum Num Residual Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data B Curve Data Data Data

Estimation Model Function KSaturation Data

Section

Original

sand

Faacte

layry

hr

fthr 3

sheii

FrsctlurrdXiag

Pressure

Pressure

u1 s2

Outer

XConductivity Method XConductivity

705 005 05 ftt 002

o OOS0 005 005 0 `

005 005 00i 0051 005000170 005 904311x79946 0050000243 9i75003fi9 OGS9996635 C05302494E

Function

PoreWatts

005 ForeWater

psf o psfj ft ft `

100 ftSr

200

vs

A907

0010177189

140 005 1170

4073

55942 Estimation

005

1518 2439 Content

sand Content

ntic

SuctrOn 6951928 Suction 8 8 F 73 Function

Data O06i5E4823 Data

001 011288370 020691381 037923902 0 23357215 023200324 784759DI 14334490 26356509 14329302 16237067 297x354 1003

00013329807 0033593153 1274275 S45 sat 1900 C01133 K €01 nt

to to

Curvature Water Curvature

C5 Water 038

Point kat=ic =r

Matric

Fit Fit 3 Clayey Properties Points

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point point Point Point Point Point85589670 Point Point Point Point KFunction Point Point

Xondsctivus Ash Conductivity

Data Data

Data Coordinate Coordinate Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data titData Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Minimum Num Residual Data Data

Segment B Curve Segment Points Volume Curve Points

shell

Section

Model Coordinates KSaturation Data Estimation Function KSaturation Data Model Function

Functions

Section K

Flux Outer Compacted rencian

it

fthr

frarme

FrditineXirs

iDkS GCS

Pressure

rock

005

XConductivity

1999954 Method

08 034 1213005 i2e003 1e005

01112004399

08 113 it

12e605 12v005 n 0tft 5

060025332 079252227 0300600351 079998220 0535684951 05171160°I5O O`C015S70178 12111019901CS 182629S9e005 1£O24103e0071 12eJt35j 12eDS 1199><41C0O5 12•97935e 1200752e7451 2673219€n0G6 1l100003e005 531se952e067

Function

030000065 PeroWater 12e 115 1104913550iC5

Psfi clay ti

100

G730ue002

fthr

vs 5 147402340007

60 12eOCS 837998443759

Estimation

03 Content

Content lean

SuLFior

20

Funttien

Data

00S35981S3 €00135S4821 0112383770 020691051 0379255=02 06951928 1274275 3357215 42513324 75475897 14334499 263Cdiot 43329+7 8353G67 35217767 29713135514 54555948 1000 Sat

101 4206913 0042313241 0053555679 N15328C7 037925902 073475597 16237757 13359F7fi 59519223 14384439 23763514 61534321 1274275 263136509 54555q48 1123 23357215 41329302 10000

1000 K 001

to Curvature

Water

12e215

Water

Point

Matric

Fit

Properties Points

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

KFunction

YCondactivity

Data

Data Data Data Data Data Data Dikesandy

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hydraulic Maximum Minimum Num Residual Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data B Hyd

Estimation

Model Function KSaturation Data

Section

Original

gravel

rictic u

with

Functirr

silt

e iftlhr ffhl

DikeClay

FredlundXing

FredlundXing

Prc5su rDOiii Pressure

Original

Toecayey

onductivity

DOB

ft=

hr XConductivity nDif Method Method 13 Xd

ftjft 5e005 5a

5eCOS 05

tiOC00=03eOOS

5e005 ft 0 V Sv 52005 n

SnOYJS S=~005 51005 50003019005 499999019 t 5eoc044vO0 459980193OSj <0992064v0051 5000183500001 441201132v005

Function Function

ft1hr

9oruWetcr StDOS AcreWater

psi r ipso

100 1011

vs IS

vs

20497071OC5

10011 3i24

`eDOS 100

Estimation 55546 Estimation

3a000

Content Seu+I5

1554821 Content

Content Content

Suction 11288319 =451423

Section

201

=unction 211 F•nrtion

01

Data

s 0 r Data

Sat 001 0015s29127 003059Y193 97381 237520902 1214 2A3521 4781 i3475997 1435549 2536o5OP t4729302 53556579 16207767 297133514 545 1620 Sat GDu$ 0035329307

1010 1020 001 K 2

K aOilS

to Curvature to Curvature

Water

sand Water

Water Water G3

=t

Matric Point f4tatif

Fit

Points Points Fit

Properties Properties

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

KFunction KFunction

XCcr•rticity

XConductiuiry

sitly Data Data

Volume Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Num Residual Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hydraulic Maximum Minimum Num Residual Data Data Minimum Data 12e009Hyd B Curve Segment Points

fragment

Function

Model Estimation KSaturation Data Estimation Model Function KSaturation Data

Section

Rock

Toeclyey n

seam

aie

re

Prss

permcbility

CCS Fradlunrtiny

ss0035 e005

2euUS1 1ow

EeCGa

ie005

314005 s5i3e05 e

e0771 ft

33401e

i Method PareWater

a9 49090272eOCS 9$42d025 It15

4 49559203100Sj 4946201e3051 0

1737677 < 313siltl` 16107 542111105sOi vs r

4SSOl115xGCS 45422012eCiCS d957S32 50223 2tt033R

Function 1hr 1 Functions Ha0 7 Functions °

902

100 100 19 a

Functicr 5 75ut825313e1051 1550 135111 1557 1553 1339 15~0

Time 2 3633224

1110 1011

S928 75 53514 55944

Estimation

tieDOS

75 Content vs ure Content

•2tS t 9 Content 1510

year Point

59

2C Ecairn

sand

15SenSl9 i5a2377117 i

Data

J C0615t4321 02123a37s 12nOE41E 111 C 12742 2357225 42421324 P54 ltO320499 IPR P1000 Sat 12 E=38C 57510 151320 18768 Data

2237 145 135100

1700 K Curva

per to nee to Curvature

Water Data Water

Water

t Content

ii3x2537 Form

I5G 3

Fit Fit

Points Boundary

Properties

point Point Point Point Point Point Paint Paint Point Point Point Pointe Pont Point Paint Point Point Point it Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

KFunction

tel 1 soul clayey

Date Sp•a

egmen

MinimumO Num

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hydraulic Hyd Residual Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Curve Segment Maximum Curve S B

shell

Water

Level

Estimation Model Function YIntercept Data Model Function

Section

Hydraulic Pool

Vol Outer

unctia weld

Funtti0n

clayey

Nhr tnJhr

Dikesanerciao

shall

edlundXin 4 Gi 211 2 F•edluis4Xirsg

Pressure Piessure rigra i 02 OC972 timer

520

3593424x1352

XConeucfnity

Method Method XConductivity

0005 ft

ft=

00305i 00002 00035

COOS 4

COC50001 E 0 v 0 5i 00005 CCDS 0 y

020075 0705 10025 0005 CLltM4S4995 000050 00005211241x46 CCOC49°£5525 t

Function 1 0 0OC0 Function

PareWater PoreWater

psi C

E r psfj

106

1007

vu 75

323 vs

permeability

OttOCtcOii77i°

03005 4>19 3075 10

SeGCS

5997

2883 26902

Estimation 560iS 37767 Estimation

12s00Yi Content ecticn 0

11 Content

Content

Content

2€12324

S 21691138 Srsun

20

Fuunction 10 inirtion

01 aivIty

2335721 d Data 203353153 ii 7r4 83 Data

Sat 002 10016320507 00615`111821 01 4 U•=5351 02742 ` <2115ESGt s53293t3 223761514 545`5543 10017

401 Sat S1015 001 €5021423307

st 312

1 €€swer K t K

to Curvature to Water e n Water ntuctVit Curvature utrc Water 20045 Water is 5e005

F Mutic i l Pont € o

Points Fit Fit

silt Points Properties Properties

Point Point point Paint

KFunction Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point P Point Point Point Point Point Point Point KFunction Point Point XConti a XCa

Data t a Data

Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Minimum Num Residual

Data Volume Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hyd Maximum Num Residual Curve Segment Points Data Data D Hydras Minimum B

shell

Estimation Model Function KSaturation Data Estimation Mode Function KSaturation

Data

Section

Outer Layer Pressure

Function

Content Funaiian

Site

Sn

5i later

344

ftt

ftft

gain

f 95555

Itaro

59

ttsftx

urnWater Vol 4>

it52 59`7

51973334

0459973841 459337334 97354

03502725 ti4 0 c

004 0412

CA 045097334

399354

1240752356 032079005 0955332025 35iC3S03722 9025143562 vs 045597387 515931 7

0445433529

04599354

Psi 2 397354

14

100 3324 8i7

Method

020114637 016917344 Method

gravel

04

Sit 5015

Content passing passing Content Uay

355567° Content

y543

584V21 0ontent p G 1938

Suc6c

20S51335

Functin 33 53291322

12 10479

10 X31 with

60 Data

1433449 2976S5 61 174275013705704 26305•0 54555945 126937 3463253 €>tt00 707 i3 C37923902341997364 076475907 166337757 139539133 14364459 20763644 19153323 2320509 111288373 2s57215 4

10300 003 018329 139 127421 523 j1020x

Water Water

at at Water

to Curvature

Water

Estimation Estimation

Material Material

tulatric

Omit

Fit ipn

Properties Points

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Properties u Point Point Point Points Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Paint Point Point

WC Vol WC

04593

Dkooaay

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Saturated Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Sample Num Curve Mv Data Data B Segment Saturated Vol Sample Saturated

Estimation

Model Function Porosity Data Estimation

Section

Original

std t

t

Pasure

Function C=ent 7 7 Size 6

Water 121 Water

7147

ttift

52555

+Srair

00125145

ftlft Vol

Vol 40052556

PoreWater

030703121 1330601771 D 930303121 G3 0 0 060053

=0033121 C003 07

040012513 030003121 030073121 030603121 00152

73004321 5f

130003121 03053 030003121 030003121 0300032 t293223 0277 vs 040052556 415255 0 023764077

4 010

090003121 030003121 i 8 Clay Psf 7

70 51 140

F9 02004689 Method 7

5387

030003121 50 042032555

Silty

Content Content passing passing Content

275 17

885E76576 nt

341321

539612

Suction 16329507 37926902 4

theen 3792E902 3593233

636559

20 Function

is 35

t0205134 111237167 336951 112313 10 60 03423133 4451923

fi Data 002569351

001 00428113324 033475937 39523 043549B 9763514 612 2 23357219 49325332 10301 001 l0063536675040052555 018329307 0734

10000

0011

Water

Water Water

at at

to Curvature

ins t4=ter

Estimation

Material

Mat `

13930

Limit

Fit

Properties Points

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Paint Point Paint Point Point Point Point Point Paint Paint Point

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

Ash o

WC a

031046558 30912

Data

Mvl Saturated Paints Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Num Mv Data Data Data Data Data 3 Vol Sample Saturated Curve Segment Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data

Porosity

Data Estimation Model Function Porosity Data

Section

Compacted fIft

Prestte

Coten Content

functsun

715 7 i

124 rie

1ti3ter 51543 i Water st3a6

90602

363361

rtjtt`

Sarr

30153 41555336

Vol V21

Pretuater e9•n• Rs273a2 41

341 G458899971 itAO9P994 it495 031581536 05 C 0 O45 03909539 1i =57818 y 031913336 051 019923361

3330

Oa059 01>833799` tr0 00333122231 0017542b3 0023391 125 02133$61 03138353 `ffi33F 004107053 it

sagSj

24 0°77502 03153136

12054114480 psi 3 lpsf 3

5 s clay

10

13 0075 Method 12

or 514

247 S021i2100232

Gra 2 011

Content passing passing ContentC

28

action Cotet

lean

3612 7=75

3 Succ 11132152

Suction 379261 63774 211 5795502 5237

22 3

s 976

f1 10 60 Data 30

4121 tU1S328=7 1 073473101 1 33595183 ri530921 25763550 545559413 111583t1 2335721 4332 ID iG251132 O 70=75597 i7 33553153 1453

2=220531381 0124 1Ct35i58657S 613159X3 itOOtt0 17c5d 5102055101 x08353537 6951

ub

7145 Pitt

Water Water

at at

`v to Curvature

Estimation

Material

i2975351° Scint

Matic 21stric

Limit Fit

5001 Properties Points

Point Pont Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Pont Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

vol

WC

tL 032215137

Iota

Dikesandy B Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Sample Saturated Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Num Curve Segment Mv0ps Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data

Porosity Data

Estimation Porosity Data Model Function

Section

Original

cn

Pressure Pressure

Ftimie

Content

Size

Water

t5it

53707

rei<1ater

757285

ftft 33 `t€t=

Vol

P PocViater

32953707 0 032957071 03=953707 C 00010 0it25 7077 it tt0013 15 o

332363707 `21 032

uus vs 032270525 1222`1353

032951707 132953727 432953707 03295707 413235x7557

0323537W 3253707 032553127

WO City `

915

1012 33 120

42196553461 MethodOrain

SO 100

0393 SiSq

passing passing Content Content 4 passing passing Content

Cot Cunient

Suction r1 17926307 3593

89556879

4r 70 Trrtian =33495 Psrction

10 `74475517 35 10

60 CCr Data is329537 2 60 Data

iii 0 2 l1 291E3514 61524877 505555250329537707 12233379 43321302

12090 u2C59i33ii032953707 C002Sis20 t1W237767 ti3 6051925 1274275 2213€iCStr 2335721502 x10

001 091

Water Water Water

at at at at

to Curvature to Curvature

Wtrr

Estimation

Material

Ooint =c=a

Mytric Wes psi

Limit Fit Limit Fit

Points Si Points i

Properties

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

nt

Vo is

WC Vni 0

Silt ata 93324

Daa

Data Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Num aay Segment Mv Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Saturated Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum0Hia Minimumi0t Num Segment Mv B Curve Sample Curve Saturated

fragrri

dst Function Porosity Function

Model Data Model Estimation

Section

rock

T0t f 1 7

zt 3

4R E ft i 3E t CC95

75 f

74

a3 p275 f s5 K 2 35 63

Area

17 3E75 23 40220321 C7 77

X33 03 4 E5Rr 91 2

7a

51

s5

i3

3359 1 3 8

3Z

42 Points fi c

S2 15 7 4 •14is 4961 • • C

33 4€r •f SS J a 25 3 33S S 11i2S 7 6 I 536 6 S 7 1 ts e26222 as a 55 5•5

35 22825 45 7 5r

$ 2153sC+3 L

33047 1

51 > 4c o 1 3 1e 2 32 •7 5••535552 V0s•6< 3 5n cS

•c • r a Boundary

•r

4 r• EI a

53

it

av 1e5 ine 1 4 a7r gra 6 gravel 3• soissic rur rrsin raising r n IHydraulic 2 h n t

ear th s I Ctras S

rasing L IaJng Cry alzm r

Point yy3t7 L i Sat

iRy n I •r h ri s•ncr cl Material ch R

an A third shale A1 c s11 9n Asir Ash ici• End

nel silt a o •I

1a

••

passing t s ted ccx L•I•c i31ic Ii1 3Sfkiy

ke

rtJ I y

Lr1j

31 a a sh•iithird sheii ar G I r r 20 1tS J1°y oactecl iac i•E41 pl

oa Point

60 r a er g Is Y 1500 D1 e

•nli • `gin

ty3 a van t 1y at 1 4 0s±S ti Coy 0 t••r 1131 Co Ci

Tae Cur3actcd sly cEa C 2 3 E E 6l7 e Start Points 3 S 0 6 7 4 1 2 4 R i7 11 14 a5 17 72 i3 74 26 3 32

z1 t n o G 2

Diameter Maximum Minimum Num

i3 on oor s•

so

si • e12

ye qu4 Po

B yi•r f

e3011 ci egon

••or

e • R= €s K to €2 Lgl03 4`20 e K0 S ietIon Pe=Gr Kr 2e •y•a PFbJ Rztgcn 3 s

Section

Regions

ift``ft

rsors

Prentim

Fncsun Courant

5 fue

Sae

497

o53 93

Water 84 14S

itat 9 2416

TO

s 737281

Grain t`ft Sample

3 9h6t+75

i98333a CGViati Vol

3 4q

034°5S

5532 0 0 031493951

1383336 2756455 035

3 Gut 57125 3 3 0

034219W 031959912

03 131954338 03199833331 13155848 1022543 va 034955055 03 0314 033539557 03555954 027403505 0 n 0 0

03 034920197

psfl

Ciay

22

rat

331

E=5

0199113277 Method 1 21794043 Method 75 6

cn

1C 0495999

Clay Silty

Content passing passing Content `75 Content passing

6E519 8s2980I 3595154 34499 =5945

02 r 3 5S6673

184621

rg 51268373 a 2 5557

Suc 02 C

6237767 Fundon 0

31 10 10 scorn

w5948 60 t Data c 10 0061584521 i7 42513324 23357225 48323302 5 4 0 02Cr5i C ra•f59J7 20528502 23763514

lei 27=2 2943751 i0 25751 1514517238021139537 14 43329 `34S 1100

r rer

Water Water Water

at at at

to Curvature

Vi

Estimation Estimation

Material Material 52 M

Limit Fit Limit Properties Points psf 3 Properties Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point V Point Point Point Point Point point Point Point Point Point Point Paint Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

WC

i WC

Cal

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Sample Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Num Curve Segment Mv Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Liquid Diameter B Saturated Sample Saturated

perrtnaebiity

Estimation Model Function Porosity Data

Estimation

Section

Low el

Lst Leval

svfl u

si=qacn X

na 7L F

rs€• •

zero tal

Z Ze Znr0 Lenx

r• 1

` 42 U ti a L • 4c3 c 52 56 47 • 53 19 1ai 37 41 s5 OC 45 52 45 63 332 03 i3 2S 43 67 63 72

1 3 a 1 T

Cv 43 42 i0 52 So 57 I5 S9 57 G• GO 73 c3 7a 7t 23 4 S 62 • n 5 3 2i72

15

15 11t

• V Z

•R 62 Ss 5 73 71 76 lC Z3 V

e E ft B n n nn I• fW

3t rle o• I e

LII Iiy Line LI Ue Lo L223 •z==• i area U L L E P

Seclion

I

¢

s

1

e

1GLI 1509 15

d150 l

LY

rad Haad I••a

r`c o

UK uX

zu•

Aux

Fux

3 ES

Gna

c Cors•nEea 2e Conn O•3rsU Ra Cora••fed LesC Zc I

7 1

11 n 7 12 1 1 2 12 1 if 17 20 1Los 14 2 26 IEl 333 1° 3a 32 33 30 X15 37 43 y I

•

SO 3 d y 3 h 3 7 2 G 5 10 I2 22 mac 23 2 24 27 3Z 33 121 36 31 3L 4 47

3 35 4 q +6

7 J 1 2 s 3

37 ID 12 14 14 125 2=1 s1 54 35 dl 41 44 15 47 43 53 51 S 5 16 i 35 1 B rz r n n n re ne IIt ne re

Ye me One

one Jr In nr na Ins Un L1 Lrni Lela L1fl2 6ae L•ne Ln pan Un• Lino I LIP3e Line L L ff

Seclion m

0 svni

gr

sand

with

gravel 0211D4

ft t`Jft7

slay

sarld

Ash

fragment clayey

silt

with

sift e2

345 0

Dike

shell clayey d

Ash

sandy

shale

slit

sandy dy Ash

Dikeclay

Outer Tee gravel Original Cornpactna

shcll ul Content Content and r

and

Unsaturutnd Unssturat Jnsatocsted • tJ with manly U Cviy

Ofgirn 5

iiO Cvmpactvd sift

Water Water

sand

silt

Function

Function Function Function

1 I ted

I 1 ilt

ps`

•• U

WC WC WC WC tura 2

Saturated Sstrated Satoratec Saturated SattratedUnsairatec S

sandy

Dikeclay

KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KFunctionFoesar Vol KRatio KDirection KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KFunction Vol KRatio KDirection KSat Mv KResin KDirection KSat Mv KRatio KDirection C Volumetric Volumetric

ttionCray

shellsilty

RaisingCompacted

Model Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Model Hydraulic Hydraulic Hydraulic Model Hydraulic

ash

Section Materials First

Outer Tcuegray Original Fly 7Fount

Ltd

1821

International

rilssr

GEOSLOPE

Riv

ccl

19912003 9 5

Anaiytis

ysisC 25

No

operight

Erra

Reviews resr

5ega5d Li

711 Direct of

Cite 1 It

pc` Iterations K 1

KuUfk31

FistO

sion ard of Stepping

Tabs in K in Max C

624 Pko

Parsie Method

hr

in hr

2007 0

Yes

Darr R€vrY

gw tlr Time

213 ps

Slate

i Flow J Every

Analysis tent itt 120

Number Change

Ai Change

8hrac32anci of Water FiCC

Seepage

1C Rotas Solver

Time

Air

G Change

45 of Clinch

Units Geo5ludia Svforae2anci

By PWP 2 Runoff

C3nv•u

Steps

Units of Generation

ng Units

Units Steps Adaptive

Number Settings Trrrlslent

Units By

=•ij

psi Units

Settings 2 3 D of

Flux Analysis SEEPd

Initial Include Maximum Tolerance Maximum Rate Minimum Equation Starting Duration Step Save Use Apply Potential

Weight

Edited C Name

information

Last Created Date Time File Directory LengthL ForcnlF Mass Description Method Convergence Revision Pressurepl MassM

generated Timet Unit View Kind Settings Control Time

Section

SEEPW Repoli Vile Project SEEPW

Analysis ftFr

vity

rres5ure

5

ft It

XConduct

3 05

ft It C105

0 005 4£L ft ft 5 0051

PyreWater

ft it 12

1CC

585

i3915

vs

1510 35345

3R 100 i3D5 1510 8

5 1 1518 1435

C sand

23237

2 V1

Function

115 1335 21 i8 1 IS 77 274 Data to

001 €>101110t153 €ve1533521 D 102252315 11375255 05951035

lO Tables

103

head to educteiry

Curvature

015

1503 h Eoin

tlux Table Fit i 2 3 clayey

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

Ktic

Data

nta

Fetid

Head negative

Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Coordinate Curve Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data C alter Segment

Water shell

Sections

Flux

Section Section SectioD

Type Type` Type Max Coordinates Coordinates Coordinates Coordinates KSaturation Data Model Function

Functions

Section Initial Floes Flux Flux Flux K

Content Zero initial Outer

sand

permeability

>tIfr °ft

ft€t=

ens

0ft

41

lower

C2

i 034

shell At r

tear

2UDS 1

per

r OIUD18

lute

Content Content Content Content

shell

rockfill tJhr

V Fi

loft

ni Uvaturaed S

sand 6c

ftfir Face

Owiy 0 On 0 Only 2 f clay

Deter Water Water Water Water O

3Gy

e0tfhr rocP tnvel i I Function I

psf phf

00101 2Ie Conditions =`x 50 r

ont

Level

watec

edify

P`pf 8 shale n WC u Poet

te

Satrater S2traLOd Sater=tec Sosled

Seepage

Total

KDirection KDirection KDirection KDirection

Volumetric KSat Mv KRatio KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio KFunction Vol KRatio KSat Volumetric Mv KRatio KDirection C Raisingshale Pool

Rock

Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Hydraulic Model Function Model Hydraulic Hydraulic

Review Type

Section

Bed Foundationclayey Second Foundation Boundary Potential Raising

Weathered 3rave

vith

Function

fl7`i3r fthr

Dikeclay

006

vsty

0351

CredlundXing

067

Prurnure

Pressure

Original

7132OC6

ODs

XConduct X0onductvity

Method

43951Gfse406

itt 343350542006 34935915c 3487374720063

Se005i Se6S 5r 60=5

500> SeDUOS 10955783o 549121455005 3

C r Oftft 5

3337457n006 34345 155393242OrE 3

36595238206 32050099if6 81166E35e 5cOOS 31923969c000 332274252005 301213952506 2i233337e3051 1

Function

PareWar OIl 34745401e000

Yt PoreWater psfl psf 9

807

Dr 00Ithr 100 9

vs

vs

grave 2

182674135107

100 350 1390 SeSOS 3

Estimation

3E

Content Content

Content

5uciion Suction

Furcion 2r

20 Furction with is

Data Data

X001 X0018329307 00=33590183 0051584621 011283379 020031331 0379151502 0695926 1274275 23357215 4261134 76775907 14354493 26356529 t43329342 385587426913947e009 16237767 29763514 54€555928 1302 Sat activier 0141 3018 00033515153 006155 011235379 120891361 33182590 A695F32S

10130 K 001

to Curvature to

Water Water Curvature

351eCOO Water 5c005

Matrix Point eoint

Matr

Fit Fit

Points Properties Points

Paint Point Point Point Point Point point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Paint Point Point Point lan

KFunction Point Point Paint Point Point Point Paint Point XCfndaivi X

silt

Data

Daa

Dikeclay

Residual Segment Paints Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Hyd Minimum Residua Num Curve Hydraulic Maximum Num Curve C Volume Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data

final Model Function KSaturation Data Estimation Model KSaturation Data Function

Section

Tesesazidy

sand

Punctic_

Function

hr

Ash

clayey

ft

shah

ivity

Fedlundking Frrdlundling

Pressure

12

Outer

354 Conrpatted

3y5a

XCondsc

Method Method

fzft

003 003 005

025472014

000000001 0079999999 007390990

51 0

005 0050013002 00 005 0050020734 0049555672 05111943151 008600012 0090142 01063011121 41557455000 0046828892 0080016687 06327982505

Function Function

PoreWater 0030000204

psf

fthr fthr

100

vs

129476103347 0033722573

103

0681

3775701010237 X5940

Estimation Estimation

Content 0v3 005

Content

Content

2742756 Suction

018329307 061364501

20

Function

33329362

=5237767 303393011

23357215 4203324 78475997 2636150900500005061 81336579 1070 Data it

i 143844990049999979 4110112355 l 29753514 54555948 Sat 061 4 0 011280079 020591301 037926307 fi25r35`920 1734275 23357215007959444 42313324 7£474597 143344990077314544 25362503 855`3005000148712 157 20783514 345 1010 Sat

1000 1001

001 K 0021 K

to Curvature

Water

Water

D03 Water

Point ftivtric

Fit

Points

Properties Properties

Pont point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point KFunction Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Paint Point Point Paint Point Point Point Point Paint Point

KFunction

Ash XConductivity

Data

Num

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hyd Maximum Minimum Residual Segment Paints Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hyd Maximum Minimum C Hydraulic Curve Hydraulic

Estimation Model KSaturation Estimation Function

Data

Scotian

Compacted ftft

Pressure Content 1

1Naer

ft

t1t

303121

PoreWater Vol

21 ftft 0 1 030009131 0030003121 0300031

0 013003121 0307032 050003121

i4 °

vs

730703721 03000312 03 021754077 030043123 051005121 025952737 027707147

Functions flead

043003121 030003121

1 Functions 3psi

50

100

110

Function i

35541 1557 2558 3555 2559 020504089

Time

16

48 030003

Total

Content 595050300031219

Content v5 Content

53514 1510 4

year Paint Suction

20 Function

sand

hr is

Data 0 Data

it5000 43Bon 52510 61320 8000 38007 001 10020591311 00SESl657C 1718309307 1737925904 €078875917 tct3767 1331=8118 6451928 i143544990330003122 129 61534121 1274275 f2Es3 54555945 1229837 29597215 453252112 10000

•tcr

Hz7c

Water

to Curvature V to Curvature

Water per Data

Content

Point Mat

1510 Time

Fit Fit

Points Boundary psf

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point 0 Point Point

Total Vol

clayey J30222i6

loft

Spline rata

Num Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Curve Segment Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Residual Data Mv C Saturated

shell

Water

Level

Model Function YIntercept Model Function Porosity Data Data

Section Hydraulic Pool

Vol Outer

uad

Function Furctiun

clayey

silt

IftFr

l 2151 i sandy erllund€ng 1

COS i Frdlutrdling

E 8051

Pressure

fee t2Utrr

i070906

001v005

X19°QSCr71

2111125

Method vConductivity 0005

r Method

00005 110005 0 025

00049316412

0 000503=L

000051 0 56 00005

Se005 50000003 5000 S00CO44e075 49998015055

499920545075 441 5006 49519933cf1C5 50103c3e0051 020D5 CCfl05 00005 000050100002 0iVtti 00015000079 13tGt C0te1a55921

Ph Function Function

ftSr

Sif700= 00105 PereWater psi i 9

100 7

vs

514

2849707120125 permeability 000033722572

100

000115

3324

Estimation 55545

Estimation

Content 00005

OtaltS1

Content 5816 Content

Suction C

4354409 20 FunnIien 8 47 00

Data fc C 18

03357215 78471997 1263E6509 43329302 23SS6679 19237767 54555948 1000 42513324

11274275 42 2970 SatSetiCS 1000 0013329S07 0013359183 0051SS4521 011288379 037921902 C6951928 124275 233571 78475997 141344950110049999978 25356503 4339302 I1Fx37757 2qE35140 5 0000 Sat 12

001 O4 K lower K

to Curvature

Water

Water

00005 Water

Point

Mutric

Fit

Properties Points silt Properties

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point KFunction Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point KFunction

1rCer2uctiitv

Data

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Hydraulic Hyd Maximum Minimum Num Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Residual Data

Volume Curve Segment Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Volume Hydraulic Points Minimum C Hyd Maximum

shell

Estimation Model KSaturation Estimation Function Data

Section

Outer tt

13 ftfr

Pressure

Function

Confeni Content

9 Sire

1071

Water tJater

ft

ftft

37534

Grain

`t ftft

Vol Voi

PareWater

4411997334 Sx97514 032953707 0 045997384 045497384

04S G 2379537071

00214 0325

045597354 032953707 0 055`3 0 032951 1329017D7

vs

04599734 345907354 0655973541 043997S81 345967334 045907384 0398034 328306335 622407735 052953707

0459973844 045997394

rSf

pa u SI

104 100

313047544 Method

6902

50 045927334

50 312953707

Content Clay

Content passing passing Content

Content

39833

Suction Suction

Furution 251 042313324032553707

i 42

Data 10 60

E001 l0020591335 0042313324 2086536579 018329867 037926902 073475997 53 Data 16237757

6951923 14554419 23713514 61534521 12774575 25365509 54556940045894415 11233379 23357216 48329301 0000 1291 10020691331 0033535979 1015520801 4379 0764753397 11237767

10600

001

Water Water Water

at at

to

Curvature to Curvature

Water

995153 Estimation

Material

Point

pst Mat Matric

Fit Limit Fit

Points

Properties jP4

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Pont Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point it

33244001 Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point

0 34 WC Vol si

Data

Segment Mv Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Saturated Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Num Segment Mvv Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Curve Data Data Data Data Curve Data

Sample Saturated Points C Vol

Porosity

Data Estimation sandy Model Function Porosity Data

Section

Toe

ftft

Function Pressure Pressure

Content Function

i

Size 56 Site

Water

052556

ft

ftf`

Grain Grain

4852025

ftft

PoreWater Vol POreWater

J14

04 040052555 0400525561 40052536

03 04

0003 07 fi D 042

030549722 040052555 0

04026

vs vs

042052555 04005`=50 040052555 040052555l 114350272 0255049923 0025143662 032075503 005 0

046432556 013225704 Sand 1

St

v 100

Method 0023464593 Method

gravel

7225

Sile 50 340152006

passing passing Silt

Content Content0 Content passing passing

Content

toot

35

Suction J5931133

20 Function 01 4354491 20 Function

35 with

10 60 Data 015 10 60

018529307 •73475957 t `0000 0 0O2OL91385 0042313324 00535856>° 237926902 111237757 a 6901928 23763514 61554322 1274275 26566509 545559=8 121235379 i 4852950 10200

10304

501 0101

Water Water

at at Water

at at

Water to Curvature

Water

Estimation Estimation

Material

Posit Material PcV

Matric

Limt

Fit Limit

Properties Points Ps

Properties Points

Point Point Point Paint Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Paint Point

WC Ash Vol Vnl

0 WC

040913014

Data Data

Num Dikec3oy

Vol Sample Saturated Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Curve Segment Mv Saturated Points Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Sample Saturated Liquid Diameter Minimum Num C Data Diameter Maximum

Model Estimation Function

Porosity Data Estimation Model Function

Section

Compacted

Original 09175

370

4540E25 397 468125

3

136533

13

52404143525 50544851 10 3L•555445 t

3503 1503 1343 1663 1503 1523

Boundary

fragment Hears Head Head Head Here Heau e x

°•a

nt iSitz t Flax 312

shalt Hydraulic e

O1UDIF Ccrtant Zeo Cor Sec

ero Contact Contant Coniant

ero

11UD1fi

and

7Ero

clay

sand

Paint

Contant

rity 2

17 21 End Ea 7 11 10 12 13 14 1 12 18 18 17 21 25 2 29 13 3 4 5 1 4 3 1 7 26 20 33 € L L

5lel=si4

dak5ncsiltyclay

ash V

Point

14

Outer Sly Pcu Foundation 1 7 8

21 23 25 3 6 7 f 16 9 22 14 16 12 20 19 22 22 24 23 26 27 23 30

Start 2 4 5 8 2 ` 3 31 32

2 S 3 r 1 a

15 26 29 1 3 6 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 17 18 39 20 21 22 25 7 28 3 32 35 3 96 0 n

C s7

•a ne

r•

17 tn•

Region Seoul Regloi 21 Une Lnc4 Line Line Line Lane Lire Lire Lie Line line Line sine Line lirn Line Line Lre Lm Line Line 20 Line Region L L L L

Tin •tne F e

Section Lines

ft

`k122 9003

7s57

35 •7J

73125

Area

1225 38935 103 3335 4184375 1596 75 38931726 76 3L3161905 3557337

•c• =391375 683125 559375

3343535

32

i92 iz s

Poirts z

1110

r142

9r 51 x33r73 35973839262523 4 •

A1511i3 7 °

11722 7 f993459530

1G11•21314

121191155510 423252272L57 6178 333435312 22192 3837 37403235 41 33377052

4743454351

silt silt 3ra9rret eut

Function

h F€

Size

shale Bale

Sandy sandy

r ate s

Ash

332uDo

307

grave t

ftfta

ec rd and

and and

Grain

nd a

mued ertz nd

with tai

12958737 G33 Or silt

00013 32955737 15

Material

sand

sa

0a••53747 0329937271 027757133 0229732531 sit 0 032353767 €3 032270525

032953

032953707

Clay ciay

Coin ce•

rluyy

93 share

019655349 Method F 3o F

72i usedy

Silty

Content _Skecey s€ty

335943 36 is t RaFSiqShaCGCiti

933 163144 f

al

dationGray R

33 Roca Raising=onpacted Rais

29 55 10passing ay

33595133 60passing Y f 611Fs821 25356504 11250379 123H 43329302 ash asn

6351928032953737 qi4 I74275 145 1000 10300

0l

Water riwi

at at Ondaioi

Estimation Fed Weutheind 34srdstianGray LD4 UN TSc Cn First 3151 rrtt iJ Sly Second Qutrr5nil3lry l Guts

Material

Limit I

Properties Points I

Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point Point WC I 3 4 a 7 S 9

Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Data Vol Sample Saturated Liquid Diameter Diameter Maximum Minimum Num

C nn

gion

F •gmn Region Reeion2 02Region 02Regi•3n5 Region Region 5 Region

R Region Region Region Region Reyn37n eginn 21 Sxgian

Estimation

Section

Regions Face Face

Seepage seepag•r

ial

Pn

f

9465 7 4392

93 27 10 0 r

06 40 595 f 5C Co

gC 15 1586 l=7r 149 144 14985 1495 lac 353 151 11 1`>i 154 1 15 15695 1 152 1113

1470 1494 1492 149d 3100 1300 1497 i5Cv1 1 1520 150 1137 1514 1500 Iq40 1512 J 1 1576 14775 7 1 1540 1514 1560 L5L

€ 10025

2• S K

3 27

354 0 S 53 p 50 1 182 1572 113 532 181 254 0 no 1 Ci 133 140 106 94 3755 342 2335 2981 266 266 2911 236 25i 2685 273 323 29041533 310373 32 311 •4`3

400 474

73 E 253

2211 li313 121 J 1 1

13 la r 3

4 S 7 S 1C 11 12 13 113 22 24 25 26 27 28 30 37W r3 34 46 37 39 40 41 52 44 46 47 4E l0

rl nt nt C n1

ir E oint •

Point Pain Pent P7111 r Fein Point Point Point Faint Po

Point PoE Point Point f FinI4 f••l Point1a Poin20 Pain point Fin Pin F6In Point Pais Point Poi Poin PoinM Pint Perot Poin Pair Point Poin Iciet Pcint F67 Poin

on

3 521 3 E

Secti

r Point

Foss •

Pair

Boundary

W

Level Level Level

c2

5eE

Po eat Pool Pool a t

5i•x Fux

flax Flux Plus MIX Plus Flux ng c Hydraulic

tex

sc+

H ero 7 f

Rz zero Zxro Raising lero ZeC Raising homing Zero

eft Z Y

0 1 7461

35 24 37 38 35 4 4 1C

45 34 36 35 40 32 44 41 44 3 45 47 43 45 41 46 51 52 3 52 54 43 55 3 57 24

ft x

3 113

5 25

53 34 31 35 37 17 30 13 36 3 9 4

37 40 4C 41 43 46 43 45 42 47 45 41 4T 50 40 52 5C 3L 54 15 1 28 Sr

49 54 37 33 39 40 41 42 43 44 4 46 47 49 SG 51 52 53 53 51 53 10 61 62 64 o 67 ER 59 70 71 74 75

5 60 72 75 C e Eqs ne re n ne n ne ne3

Ene me

Mtl ine En

Ii sne

Line Line Cme One lire Ore Une Lope Lne Lno Im •ne rive One Line Line Lns L1ne tans One iine Line Line gcint2 Points Line 93e L u one

on

nts

Secti

Poi islo

262

323 3x27549 >30 8525 €

i3 55 55E 57

5u C i t u •OE`i cirt `

Section APPENDIX 5

STABILITY ANALYSIS REPORT AND RESULTS

Figures 51 through 56 Stability results of Section A

Figures 57 through 513 Stability results of Section A

Figures 513 through 519 Stability results of Section A Figure 51 Stability of Section A under steadystate condition with a deep failure surface

Figure 52 Stability of Section A under steady state seepage condition using block failure mode Figure 53 Stability of the outer shell of Section A under steady state seepage

Figure 54 Critical failure surface and the corresponding factor of safety under seismic loading condition for Section A using drained material properties Figure 55 Critical failure surface and the corresponding factor of safety under seismic loading condition for Section A using consolidated undrained material properties

of Section after 7 raise in the water levels Figure 56 Stability A ft piezometric 17

v

Figure 57 Stability of Section B under steadystate condition with a deep failure surface

20

Figure 58 Stability of Section B under steady state seepage with a block failure mechanism under state Figure 59 Stability of the outer shell of Section B steady seepage

Figure 510 Stability analysis results of Section B under seismic loading using drained material properties Figure 511 Stability analysis results of Section B under seismic loading using consolidated undrained material properties

Figure

512 The warning water level for Section B was determined to be approximately 7

raise in the current levels ft piezometric 012

indicated about 12 raise in the Figure 513 The critical water level for Section B is by ft

water levels at the crest about 10 raise in the water levels at piezometric or ft piezometric the toe

Figure 514 Stability of Section C under steadystate seepage condition with a deep failure surface Figure 515 Stability of the outer shell of Section C under steadystate seepage condition

Figure 516 Stability of Section C under seismic loading condition using drained material

shear strength Figure 517 Stability of Section C under seismic loading condition using consolidated undrained shear strengths

518 results for Section C after 7 increase of the Figure Stability analysis ft phreatic water levels 519 for Section C after 28 increase in the levels Figure Stability analysis ft piezometric

APPENDIX A

Document 6

Ash Pond 2 Design Summary for Final Closure, by BBC&M Engineering

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 6: ASH POND 2 DESIGN SUMMARY FOR FINAL CLOSURE, BY BBC&M ENGINEERING

January 15 2009 00111497007 BBC11 SOLUTIONS TO BUILD ON

American Electric Power Mr Gary Zych PE 1 Riverside Plaza Columbus Ohio 43215

Re Design Summary Ash Pond 2 Final Closure Clinch River Power Plant

Carbo Virginia

Dear Mr Zych

In accordance with our June 272008 proposal and written authorization on July 1 2008 BBCM Engineering Inc has completed engineering and design services associated with the final closure of Ash Pond No Clinch 2 at the River Power Plant near Carbo Virginia

of work consisted of BBCMs scope engineering design and permitting the for

of cap system final closure under Virginia regulations generally following the intent of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality VADEQ regulations and guidelines for Industrial Waste Disposal Facilities

Design Summary

to close Clinch River It is proposed Ash Pond No 2 through regrading and the application of a

and cover The surface will be and filled cap vegetative existing regraded to achieve a gently surface sloping 5 to promote surface water runoff The regraded ash surface will be covered with a flexible covered geomembrane by a geocomposite drainage layer and 2feet of

fill soil The surface of the soil fill will be seeded and mulched to promote the growth of a vegetative cover Surface water runon from the adjacent slope will be diverted and runoff from the capped areas will be directed into one of two sediment ponds prior to being discharged into Dumps Creek

Drawings

close association with Working in AEP drawings have been prepared for bidding and construction The drawings contain an Existing Site Plan Phasing Plan Final Grading Plan Cross Sections Details and an Erosion Sediment Control Plan and Details The drawings were with developed in conjunction geotechnical and surface water considerations

Part 1 Geotechnical Analyses

In of the final closure support plan BBCM performed a subsurface investigation to assess the overall of the stability site with respect to the proposed cap geometry Soil and rock borings were performed to augment previous borings which were used to define the subsurface

6190 Enterprise Court ® Dublin OH 43016 3293 a Phone 614793 2226 Fax 614 793 2410 conditions at the site Soil and rock samples were obtained and laboratory testing was on selected recovered the field performed samples in

Geotechnical analyses were performed by BBCM using the results of the boring program and

laboratory testing The analyses covered slope stability liquefaction and settlement based on

the new geometry and loads imposed by the capping Results of the analyses indicate that the proposed final grades are stable under ordinary conditions as well as under seismic conditions

Results of the Subsurface included Part 1 of

investigation including geotechnical analyses are in

this submittal

Part 2 Cover System Stability

The stability of the proposed final cover system was evaluated by BBCM considering the impact of rainfall These calculations included as Part 2 demonstrate that the cover system exhibits adequate factors of safety against surficial failure modes

Part 3 Surface Water Controls

A series of runoff control structures including diversion berms ditches channels sediment ponds and spillways were designed by BBCM for the final closure of Ash Pond 2 Storm water runoff was computed using National Resource Conservation Service NRCS methodology

including TR55 This methodology was used to determine peak discharge from a given drainage area under a given rainfall amount

Rainfall events were obtained from NOAA Atlas 14 given the coordinates for the site The 24hour storm event was the basis for design of surface water control structures The storm for this area 423 inches Surface water control such as ditches and 25yearis structures 25yearberms were designed to pass the peak runoff from a 25year 24hour storm event

Sediment ponds were designed to contain 134 cubic yards of runoff per acre of drainage area below the level of the principal spillway Sediment pond principal spillways have been sized to the runoff from pass a 2year 24hour storm event without flows entering the emergency spillway Sediment Pond emergency spillways have been designed to pass the 25year storm without overtopping the banks of the pond and maintaining at least 1foot of freeboard Runoff

from the various storm events were routed through the ponds using the HEC1 computer

program using computed storagedischarge relationships and watershed characteristics for each pond

Calculations for and contained Part 3 of this submittal runoff discharge pond sizing are in

Part 4 Estimated Quantities

BBCM developed estimated quantities for the various construction components and waste volume This information summarized

is as Part 4

Design Summary Pond No 2 ClosureClinch River Power Plant

Russell County Virginia 1 the to be of service to this have We appreciate opportunity you on project If you any questions please feel free to contact us at any time

Respectfully Submitted

BBCM ENGINEERING INC Dublin Office ``••©

IYII•HAEL51

COrt •5 D

IL tpl AN

Michael G Rowland PE WJ Senior Engineer

4

Stephen J Loskota P E

Senior Project Engineer

Submitted 1 Copy

Attachments Part 1 Geotechnical Analysis Report

Part 2 Cover System Stability Part 3 Surface Water

Part 4 Quantity Estimate

Design Summary Pond No 2 ClosureClinch River Power Plant

Russell County Virginia 2 PART 1

GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS REPORT

December 2008 GEOTECHNICAL ANALYSIS REPORT CLINCH RIVER POWER PLANT POND NO 2 FINAL CLOSURE CARBO VIRGINIA

Report to

AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER SERVICE CORP COLUMBUS OHIO

Prepared by

BBCM ENGINEERING INC GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERS COLUMBUS OHIO

December 2008 December 12 2008 00111497007 BBGG1 SOLUTIONS To BUILD ON

American Electric Power Mr Gary Zych PE

1 Riverside Plaza Columbus Ohio 43215

Re Geotechnical Analysis Report Pond 2 Closure Plans Clinch River Power Plant

Carbo Virginia

Dear Mr Zych

accordance with our 2008 and written authorization on 1 In June 27 proposal July

2008 BBCM Engineering Inc has completed the geotechnical analysis in support of the design for the closure of Ash Pond No 2 at the Clinch River Power Plant near Carbo Virginia

BBCMs scope of work consisted of engineering design and permitting of the cap system for final closure under Virginia regulations generally following the intent of the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality VADEQ regulations and guidelines for

Industrial Waste Facilities The following report a summary our

Disposal is of geotechnical analyses consisting of slope stability liquefaction potential and settlement These focus on seated modes of failure The the analyses analyses deep stability of final cover system was assessed separately

be of service to on this have We appreciate the opportunity to you project If you any questions please feel free to contact us at any time

Respectfully Submitted

BBCM ENGINEERING INC Dublin Office

Michael G Rowland PE Stephen J Loskota P E

Senior Engineer Senior Project Engineer

Submitted 1 Electronic Copy

® 6190 Enterprise Court a Dublin OH 43016 3293 9 Phone 6147932226 Fax 614 7932410 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1

Project Description 1

Purpose of This Work I Available Geotechnical Data 1

CURRENT SUBSURFACE

FIELD WORK LABORATORY TESTING GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

DESIGN CROSS SECTION FOR

Geometry 3 4 Soil Layers 2 5 4 6 Strength Parameters Groundwater Level 7 ANALYSES AND RESU Liquefaction Potential 77 Global Slope Stability Analysis 8 Settlement 9

CONCLUSIONS

APPENDICES

APPENDIX A Subsurface Investigation Plate

Plan of Explorations I Explanation of Symbols and Terms Used on Boring Logs Soil 2

i a Explanationplanation of Symbols and Terms Used on Boring Logs Rocl• 3 Boring Logs B1 through 419 B8Summaryof Laboratory Test Results 2021 Atterberg Limits 22

ResultsLogsof Shelby Tube Samples 23 Gradation Curves 2445

APPENDIX B Slope Stability Analysis

APPENDIX C Settlement Analysis INTRODUCTION

Project Description

BBCM Engineering Inc BBCM has been retained by AEP to provide design services for the final closure of the inactive Ash Pond No 2 Pond 2 at the AEP Clinch River Power Plant near Russell Services included a surface and Carbo Virginia in County

subsurface site investigation engineering and design The permit application itself will be prepared by AEP The design of the final cover generally follows the intent of the and for Virginia Department of Environmental Quality VADEQ regulations guidelines

Industrial Waste Disposal Facilities This report addresses the Geotechnical Analysis

portion of the design

Pond 2 consists of a three tiered dike system constructed to impound coal combustion with byproducts both bottom and fly ash To be consistent previous reports performed by AEP the dikes were termed Lower Level Middle Level and Upper Level dikes Dikes although they are also known as 1 2 and 3 respectively Based on information provided by AEP BBCM understands operations at Pond No 2 which began around discontinued 1997 and the has been inactive since that time 1954 were in pond During active sluiced into operations fly ash and bottom ash were the pond areas Over the years the capacity of Pond 2 was increased through vertical expansions consisting of first increasing the height of the lower dike then subsequently constructing the middle

and upper dikes At this time the upper portion of the impoundment remains open to the environment A cover system will provide final closure of the facility

The proposed pond closure design will utilize dry coal ash placed as structural fill to achieve a 5 grade sloping away from the hillside to allow surface water to drain from

As much 30 feet of fill will be areas to achieve the the 20 acre site as required in some final grade The completed pond will then be capped with a flexible membrane liner geocomposite drainage layer and cover soil

Purpose of This Work

The purpose of this work was to assess the impact of the proposed final cover system

on the stability of the existing ash pond as well as to generally assess the long term

that this will be included with the

of the overall It understood stability system is report this permit application prepared by AEP The geotechnical analyses summarized in seismic report consist of an evaluation of potential for the existing ash to liquefy under a under the of the cover event the stability of the overall pond weight new system under

both normal and seismic conditions and to estimate the settlement of the existing ash

and foundation soils under the weight of the proposed cover system Each of these

analyses are dependent upon the existing subsurface conditions To this end BBCM the the performed a limited subsurface investigation at facility to supplement existing extensive data Please note that only analyses dealing with the existing subsurface

included this Other such and conditions have been in report analyses as hydrologic

of the final itself have been documented a hydraulic and the surficial stability cover in separate design report

Available Geotechnical Data

AEP 1990 An extensive analysis of the stability of Ash Pond No 2 was performed by in

this entitled of Clinch River Ash Pond Dikes dated January

In report Stability Analysis

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 1 1990 the construction and operation of the facility was reviewed and the results of a

subsurface investigation were summarized As part of this investigation five soil borings

and piezometers were installed and a large number of consolidatedundrained triaxial shear tests and direct shear tests were performed

As BBCM reviewed the AEP the AEP examined part of our work report In report

various combinations of circular and block failure surfaces for the existing dike

configuration as well as a progressive failure mode AEP also performed a sensitivity analyses by reducing the drained friction angle of the dikes by 2 degrees and found this

had little effect on the failure surface and its factor of safety Overall AEP determined

the stability of the clay dike system at Pond 2 was satisfactory and operations could continue without modification Additionally BBCM understands that no major problems have occurred at Pond 2 since the time of the report Some time after Ash Pond 2 was taken out of service portions of the upper dike Dike 3 which had not been filled to capacity were removed to prevent surface water ponding otherwise the existing the same as was at the time of the 1990 geometry is largely it report

the Limit equilibrium slope stability analyses in 1990 report were generally performed

along a single crosssection generated through the facility Such analyses provide a factor of safety as an output which represents the resisting forces soil strength divided forces A factor of of 10 that the state of by the driving safety implies slope is in a

incipient failure AEPs lowest computed factor of safety was 13 for the middle dike

CURRENT SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION

As part of the design of the final closure of Pond 2 BBCM performed a limited

subsurface investigation which was intended to supplement the available information

The focus of this investigation was to confirm the condition of the lower and middle

dikes to confirm the top of bedrock elevation across the site and to investigate the

condition of the impounded ash which will become the foundation for the final cover

The details of this described the sections system investigation are in following

FIELD WORK

the of 22 During period July through August 6 2008 AEP personnel performed eight 8 soil borings designated B1 through B8 that were extended to depths ranging from 236 to 818 feet below A Professional existing grades project geologist Certified in the state of Virginia from BBCM was onsite between July 22 and 23 to meet with AEP of the overall the the plant personnel perform a reconnaissance site position borings in field log Borings B3 and B4 and coordinate survey work The remaining borings were logged by AEP personnel

Borings B3 and B4 were located on the crest of the lower and middle dikes

respectively Borings B1 and B8 were located between the middle and upper dikes and Borings B2 B6 and B7 were located between the upper dike partially removed at this time and the hillside The boring locations as shown on the Plan of Borings and

Plate 1 the were selected and field located BBCM presented as in Appendix A by of personnel The ground surface elevations the borings were initially estimated from recent topographic mapping provided by AEP for preliminary analyses and later

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 2 recorded site of all submitted the as during a survey Logs borings are in appendix Plates 4 through 19

All borings were performed with a truck mounted drill rig and were advanced between sampling attempts using 34inch ID hollowstem augers At regular intervals

disturbed but representative samples were obtained by lowering a 2inch 0D

the bottom of the hole and into the soil blows from a splitbarrelsampler to driving it by hammer freely falling 30 inches Standard Penetration Test ASTM D1586 Split 140pound of barrel samples were examined immediately after recovery and representative portions and retained for each sample were placed in air tight jars subsequent laboratory testing

refusal B3 and a was made to Upon encountering auger in Borings B6 changeover

rock coring techniques to verify the presence and condition of the bedrock At these locations bedrock core were obtained by using a NQ rock coring techniques with water

the fluid Recovered rock cores were the field and as circulating catalogued in boxes and delivered to our for inspection preserved in compartmented laboratory accordance with ASTM D classification and testing The rock coring was performed in 2113

During drilling procedures personnel from BBCM or AEP performed the following

specific duties

® examined all samples recovered from the borings

cleaned soil of and samples cuttings preserved representative portions in airtight

glass jars

® bedrock core

preserved samples in boxes

® prepared a log of each boring

soil ® made handpenetrometer measurements in samples exhibiting cohesion and

provided liaison between the field personnel and the Project Manager so that the

field could be modified the event that subsurface investigation in unexpected conditions were encountered

At the completion of drilling all recovered samples were transported to the BBCM laboratory for further examination and testing

LABORATORY TESTING

the the were identified and on representative samples

In laboratory samples visually moisture contents liquid and plastic limit determinations and grainsize analyses were performed Results of these index tests permit an evaluation of strength and compressibility characteristics of the soil by comparison with similar soils for which these characteristics have been previously determined Based upon the results of the laboratory visual identifications and testing program soil descriptions contained on the field and are submitted as logs were modified if necessary laboratorycorrected logs Plates 4 19 A Results of the tests are shown

through in Appendix laboratory graphically

the individual and a of test results on Plates 20 on boring logs summary is presented

The results of the size are in curve and 21 in Appendix A grain analyses presented 45 A form on Plates 24 through in Appendix

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 3 Soils described this have been classified accordance with the

in report basically in Unified Soil Classification System but this system has been augmented by the use of

special adjectives to designate the approximate percentages of minor soil components

for the naturally occurring soils Definitions of these special adjectives and an

explanation of the symbols and terms used on the boring logs are presented on Plates 2 and 3 in Appendix A

GENERAL SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS

Consistent with the purpose of the ash pond coal ash fill was predominantly encountered the B6 and B8 encountered coal ash at in borings Borings B1 B2 B5 the surface to depths of boring completion or near auger refusal upon bedrock The coal of with of ash generally consisted veryloose to loose fly ash zones bottom ash Borings

B5 and B6 encountered between 25 and 50 feet of medium stiff silty clay and clayey

silt just above the bedrock surface Borings B3 and B4 were drilled on top of the lower and middle The dike material encountered these was

dike respectively in borings

primarily composed of mediumdense to dense fine to coarse gravel consisting of shale

with of of fine to fragments zones hard silty clay and clayey silt and zones coarse sand Natural soils encountered lower dike of were in Boring B3 beneath the consisting

organic clayey silt and fine to medium sand above the bedrock surface Beneath the

middle dike Boring B4 encountered coal ash consisting of approximately 12 feet of mediumdense to very dense ash followed by 30 feet of loose to mediumdense ash

Bedrock was encountered B2 at elevations from 14912 in Borings through B7 ranging to 1522 4 feet above Mean Sea Level MSL Based on descriptions of the rock core and rock obtained the bedrock at the site consists of fragments in split spoon samples

verysoft to soft gray shale and hard gray limestone Generally bedrock encountered beneath the dike system consisted of the verysoft to soft shale Both rock types

exhibited massive bedding with many diagonal fractures Rock Quality Designation of RQD of the limestone ranged between 26 to 64

Groundwater observations were made as each boring was being advanced and

measurements were made at the completion of drilling During drilling groundwater was

encountered within the borings at depths of 115 to 244 feet below the existing grade with groundwater elevations generally decreasing as the borings approached Dumps Creek

DESIGN CROSS SECTION FOR ANALYSES

Geometry

The three tiered dike created from vertical of Pond 2

system subsequent expansions is demonstrated the section AEP 1990 As on design developed by in previously noted

however the upper dike was intentionally partially removed to prevent surface water

ponding Thus the upper dike is no longer well defined Based on topographic data provided by AEP BBCM developed a cross section of the surface topography through the pond Since only the surficial topography has changed since AEPs analysis the subsurface stratigraphy and geometry of the dikes as shown on BBCMs design cross section were created based on AEPs design crosssection as well as information from

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 4 the new borings The ash pond site stratigraphy consists principally of the clay dike and the Beneath the system impounded fly ash fly ash a layer of bottom ash placed

directly over the bedrock serves as a drainage layer although this layer was not well defined the The section

in cross B with the

borings design is presented in Appendix

slope stability analysis

Soil Layers

Cover System

The proposed cover system extends up from the crest of the middle dike at a 5 slope

until the will soil it intersects hillside The cover consist of 24 inches of cover over a

geocomposite drainage system and a 30MIL PVC geosynthetic liner The soil cover

will consist mainly of existing onsite soilrock spoils processed to obtain a maximum 6 inch size particle Dry fly ash will be placed as structural fill to bring the existing ground surface up to the planned elevation before the cover system can be constructed Additional material information can be found the Cover and in System design package details of the cover system are shown on the design plans

Coal Ash

The existing impounded coal ash consists mainly of loose fly ash with zones of bottom ash and pond ash Deposits of ash range from 30 feet beneath the middle dike to 60 feet the approximately in area between the middle dike and the hillside As part of the 1990 report AEP performed two direct shear tests on the impounded ash and into of delineated the ash two separate layers based the time placement The upper fly ash at Elevation which the bottom layer begins 1539 is elevation of the middle dike The direct shear tests performed on the fly ash samples yielded drained friction angles of 30 and 27 degrees for the lower and upper fly ash layers respectively Based on information available literature and Nuzzo and the fact in DiGioia 1972 that actual

laboratory testing was performed on these samples BBCM believes that these values to are reasonable represent the longterm strength of the inplace fly ash

ClayShale Dikes

The dikes constructed of mixture of existing were a compacted clay shale and rock fill

likely excavated from the hillside which used to contain the ash The dikes nearby is

have historically performed well without any major stability or seepage problems The middle dike was constructed inside of the lower dike and founded on the ponded coal

ash retained by the lower dike AEP assumed a drained friction angle of 32 degress with

a cohesion value of 200 psf for their stability analyses

the correlations between Utilizing index properties and fully softened shear strength included Stark et al estimated the shear of the dike material in 2005 BBCM strength

based on liquid limit and clay size fraction values obtained from during laboratory testing The limit for obtained this material from 19 to while the

liquid samples in ranged 29

average clay size fraction finer than 005 mm was 24 Adjusting for the impact of

ball milling and using an effective normal stress between 50 and 100 kPa approximately to the effective stress equal range in the clay dikes the correlation suggests a fully softened friction angle between 30 and 33 degrees Therefore the assumed friction angle of 32 degrees appears reasonable

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 5 Bottom FiH

Historical drawings detail a layer of bottom ash constructed beneath Pond 2 and directly

over bedrock to serve as a AEPs this modeled drainage layer In stability report layer is with a thickness of 10 to 12 feet and described as the same material as the clay dikes

and exhibiting the same strength characteristics Based on the new borings this layer

was shown to be inconsistent thickness and extent Based in on a

consolidatedundrainedtriaxial shear test AEP a friction of 285 a assigned angle degrees and cohesion of 200 psf to model the strength of this layer For BBCMs analyses the value

of 285 degrees was maintained but the cohesion value was reduced to 0 psf the inconsistencies associated with this the recognizing defining layer in borings

Bedrock

Rock obtained B3 core samples in Borings and B8 show that the bedrock surface at

the site consists of verysoft to soft shale beneath the dike system Borings B2 through B5 to hard limestone at the base of the hillside Boring B6 With the exception of these also indicate that the of bedrock Boring B6 borings top is relatively flat varying from El 14912 to 14967 across the site Based on the site topography BBCM believes that Pond 2 was constructed the old river of and that in valley Dumps Creeks Dumps

Creek may have actually been rerouted as part of construction thus the reason for the

flat bedrock surface

The shear of these rocks function of the of strength is largely a presence joints and of particular importance slickenside surfaces However the factors of safety computed for both circular and translational failure surfaces were shown to be independent of the

strength of the bedrock as all slip surface passed well above the bedrock

Strength Parameters

Shear strength parameters for the fly ash the clayshale dikes the bottom ash fill layer

and the fill were the 1990 riprap developed in report These parameters were developed

based on laboratory testing performed as part of the analyses With exception of the shear of strength the clay dikes BBCM used AEPs values to carry out the stability

A of the values used are shown Table 1 below analyses summary in

Table 1 Summary of material shear strength parameters for stability analyses

Ywet Drained Strength t ial D i f Ma er escr p ti on R e erence pcf 0 c psf

Proposed Ash Fill and Cover 100 32 0 Assumed Value

Upper Ash Layer 101 27 0 AEP Direct Shear

Lower Ash Layer 92 30 0 AEP Direct Shear

ClayShale Dikes 134 32 1002 AEP Assumed value

Bottom Fill 129 285 AEP 02 CU Triaxial Shear

RipRap 125 35 0 AEP Section 1

Value confirmed Index correlations for through fully softened shear strength

2Value reduced from 200 psf

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 6 Groundwater Level

active the fly ash considered to be `full saturation due to the During operations was in

nature of the placement of the material implying the groundwater level was equivalent

with the of the fly ash the active AEPs this top in filling areas analysis incorporated elevated groundwater level as operations at Pond 2 were planned to continue for

several years However since operations at the plant have become inactive the groundwater level has fallen to lower levels BBCM estimated groundwater levels within

the existing ash impoundment based on the groundwater levels encountered during within drilling the new borings Existing piezometer wells at the site were checked but

satisfactory data was not attainable as they have generally stopped functioning

As shown the Cross the in Design Section groundwater levels encountered between

B3 fall succession as the distanced further from the Borings through B6 in borings are hillside and the groundwater level approaches the normal pool elevation of Dumps Creek The level beneath the middle dike located 44 feet

groundwater is approximately

below the top of the dike and approximately 23 feet below the bottom of dike The surface shown Cross groundwater is on Design Section in Appendix B

With the design of the final closure plans groundwater recharge from rainfall events will be significantly reduced with the only possible source of groundwater impact from the

potential seepage emanating from the existing hillside For these reasons BBCM

believes that the assumed surface the phreatic incorporated in following analyses is reasonable to represent long term conditions

ANALYSES AND RESULTS

Liquefaction Potential

AEP evaluated the design seismic parameters using GeoSlopes QuakefW software as

part of the final closure analysis The following paragraphs were submitted by AEP to summarize their findings

A numerical model was developed to assess the potential of liquefaction of the

saturated fly ash at the ash pond 2 for the long term conditions after the closure

of the Clinch River Plant The conducted pond in analysis was using QuakelW

2007 program a component of GeoStudio 2007 built by GeoSlope International Ltd

The model was prepared by BBCM using SlopelW program based on a review of available data and the field exploration program performed for this study one critical crosssection was developed showing the various material zones of Dynamic material properties saturated fly ash were based on cyclic traiaxial tests results Ohio performed at State University OSU Equivalent linear analysis was conducted with strain dependent modulus and damping relationships for

other materials were estimated using published relationships Table 1

summarizes the static and material used this

dynamic properties in analysis

No historical record available be used the Earthquake was to in analysis however USGS 2002 Interactive Deaggragations website provides the most

Geotechnica Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 7 likely synthetic seismograph record for the specified location The obtained

accelerationtime was used as the force this history loading in analysis AEP used a horizontal acceleration coefficient of 0 187 for this analysis

The performed dynamic analyses using QuakeW program provides details on earthquakeinduced porewater pressure stresses and other important parameters for various within the model the points In addition program

highlights location where liquefaction occurs According to the results of the

dynamic analysis there was no liquefaction within the fly ash under the applied

earth uake loading Maximum horizontal and vertical movement at the ground surface deformation on the existing dikes were less than 02 inch

Table 2 Strength Parameters Used in the Liquefaction Analysis

Unit Friction Cohesion Gmax Damping Material weight angle psi psi ratio c

Proposed Ash fill 100 32 0 4x105 003

Upper Ash Layer 101 27 0 4x 10 003

5 Lower Ash Layer 92 30 0 1x10 005 ClayShale Dikes 134 32 100 8x10 004

Bottom Fill 129 285 0 6x10 003

RipRap 125 37 0 Tx 10 002 Shale 140 15 1100 8x10 001

Global Slope Stability Analysis

an examination of Following the previous slope stability analyses by AEP BBCM performed a limited number of slope stability analyses to assess what impact the

proposed cover system and associated fill would have on the computed factors of safety Limit equilibrium slope stability analyses were performed using the aforementioned

design crosssection which was based on the original design crosssection developed

by AEP Please note that this work focused on the potential for failure surfaces to

develop through the existing dike system The veneer stability of the proposed cover

of soil system which is independent borings was assessed separately

The slope stability analyses were performed using the 2D limit equilibrium computer program Slide V 5035 developed by Rocscience Inc Both circular and translational block type deepseated failure surfaces were examined under static longterm and pseudostatic conditions for the final loading slope configuration with the analysis focused on the stability of the middle dike of the lower which not Stability dike is being modified as part of the proposed cover system design was considered a

only in translational failure in combination with the middle dike The graphical computer output for these has been included with this analyses report in Appendix B Army Corps of Engineers ACOE specifications for earthen embankment dams require a minimum factor of safety of 15 with respect to shear failure for static conditions and 10 for conditions factors of pseudostatic loading Overall safety computed during this analysis were higher than those AEP 1990 due to the lowered computed by in mainly

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 8 level the The groundwater in impoundment following table shows the computed factors of for each safety stability analyses performed for this report

Table 3 Summary of slope stability safety factors for final ash pond configuration

Load Case Computed FS FSREQ D

Static Loading with Final Slopes 1 67 15 Circular Failure Surface

Static Loading with Final Slopes

Translational Failure Surface 267 1 5 Middle Dike

Static Loading with Final Slopes Translational Failure Surface 229 15 Lower and Middle Dikes

PseudoStatic Loading with Final Slopes 113 1 0 Circular Failure Surface

Settlement

BBCM used the design cross section to estimate the maximum settlement due to the

surcharge from the ash fill for the proposed cover Settlements estimates were performed using the onedimensional compression software FoSSA version 20

developed ADAMA Inc which intended for the by Engineering is analyses of embankments and foundations Typical consolidation parameters of fly ash were used for the preliminary calculations The lower fly ash layer was assigned a slightly lower

index value correlation its compression in with higher shear strength derived from the direct shear test

of Table 5 Consolidation parameter impounded fly ash

Poisons Material Ywet Compression Recompression Void Ratio Ratio Description pct Index cr Index Cr eo v

Upper Ash Layer 101 05 020 03 08

Lower Ash Layer 927 05 015 03 08

Results of the indicate that settlement of the fly ash foundation the of analysis in range 18 to 27 feet be areas of the foundation to the thickest may expected in subjected cover Although modeled as a consolidation response settlement should occur construction due to the relatively quickly during permeability characteristics of the fly ash and therefore settlement not is expected to adversely affect the cover system Output from the

analysis is presented in Appendix C

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 9 CONCLUSIONS

BBCM performed slope stability analyses examined liquefaction potential and

estimated the maximum foundation settlement of our cover for in support system design

Pond No 2 at the Clinch River Power Plant BBCM believes the stability of the dike system has improved since operations at Pond 2 became inactive The additional

driving forces on the middle dike created from the proposed fill and cover system had a smaller affect on the factor of the the level safety in comparison to drop in groundwater As was concluded that the would not be initiated under the discussed it liquefaction

load settlement affect the design earthquake Additionally is not expected to adversely

cover system as the majority of settlement should occur during placement of the fill

layer prior to constructing the final cover system

Geotechnical Analysis Report Clinch River Power Plant Pond No 2 Closure

Russell County Virginia 10 APPENDIX A Subsurface Investigation EXPLANATION OF SYMBOLS AND TERMS USED ON BORING LOGS FOR SAMPLING AND DESCRIPTION OF SOIL SAMPLING DATA

Blockedin SAMPLES column indicates sample was attempted and recovered within this depth interval

Sample was attempted within this interval but not recovered

259 The number of blows required for each 6inch increment of penetration of a Standard driven distance of OD splitbarrel sampler a 18 inches by a 140pound hammer freely 30 inches Addition of one of the indicates the of falling2inchfollowing symbols use a splitbarrel other than the 2 OD sampler

2S 22O D splitbarrel sampler

3S 3 OD splitbarrel sampler

P Shelby tube sampler 3 O D hydraulically pushed

R Refusal of dense resistant sampler in veryhard or soil or on a surface

502 Number of blows to drive certain of 50 a splitbarrel sampler a number inches 2 other than the normal 6inch increment

SID Splitbarrel sampler S advanced by weight of drill rods D

SH advanced of drive Splitbarrel sampler S by combined weight rods and hammer H

SOIL DESCRIPTIONS

All soils have been classified accordance with the basically in Unified Soil Classification System but this system has been augmented by the use of special adjectives to designate the approximate percentages of minor components as follows

Adlective Percent by Weight

trace 1 to 10

little 11 to 20

some 21 to 35

and 36 to 50

The following terms are used to describe density and consistency of soils

Term Granular Soils Blows per foot N6o

Veryloose Less than 5

Loose 5 to 10

Mediumdense 11 to 30

Dense 31 to 50 Verydense Over 50

Term Cohesive Soils Qu tsf

Verysoft Less than 0 25 Soft 025 to 05

Mediumstiff 05 to 10

Stiff 10 to 20

Verystiff 20 to 40 Hard Over 40

PLATE 2 EXPLANATION OF SYMBOLS AND TERMS USED ON BORING LOGS FOR SAMPLING AND DESCRIPTION OF ROCK

SAMPLING DATA

When bedrock encountered and rock the is core samples are attempted

SAMPLING EFFORT column used to record the of core barrel used

is type NXM the percentage of core recovered REC for each run of the sampler and the Rock Quality Designation RQD value Rockcore barrels can be of either

single or doubletube construction and a special series of doubletube barrels

the suffix used to obtain maximum core designated by M is commonly recovery in or fractured rock Three basic of barrels used most often verysoft groups are in

subsurface investigations for engineering purposes and these groups and the diameters of the cores obtained are as follows

AX AW AXM AWM 1118 inches BX BW BXM BWM 158 inches NX NW NXM NWM 218 inches

Rock and obtained

Quality Designation is as a the total RQD expressed percentage is by summing of all core which at least length pieces are 4 inches long and then dividing this sum by the total length of has been found that core run It there a between the RQD value is reasonably good relationship

and the general quality of rock for This shown as follows

engineering purposes relationship is

RQD General Quality

025 Verypoor 25 50 Poor

50 75 Fair 75 90 Good 90 100 Excellent

ROCK HARDNESS

THE FOLLOWING TERMS ARE USED TO DESCRIBE ROCK HARDNESS Mohs Term Meaning Hardness

Verysoft Rock such as shale can be easily picked apart by the Less

Sandstone cemented and friable The than 1 fingers is poorly very rock resembles hard clay or dense sand but has rock structure

Soft Rock such as shale siltstone or limestone can be scratched 1 to 112 or Sandstone

powdered by fingernail pressure is mostly poorly cemented and individual sand grains can be from separated the main rock mass by a fingernail

Mediumhard Rock cannot be scratched by a fingernail but can be 22 to 52 a knife Sandstone well

powdered by is mostly cemented but individual grains can be removed by scratching with a knife

Hard Rock well cemented and cannot be knife 52 is powdered by a to 612 Rock can be powdered by a steel file

Veryhard Rock cannot be scratched by a steel file and the core Greater sample rings when struck with a hammer than 6

PLATE 3 LOG OF BORING NO B1 Page I of I CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 72808 CARBO VIRGINIA I

BB 0• >W

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 35219572 E1040420658 ELEVATION 15584

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 283

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

LQ NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST

Gam U 0 DESCRIPTION w g i i I RESULTS CIO v W 0vt• PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT FILL Mediumdense 0 VII5M to dense gray fly ash intermixed with bottom ash dry

31 100

5

15 100

1548 4 10 FILL to loose ash ILSM Veryloose grayfl y

con t ai ns zones of bottom as h moi st

100

15

100

20

15366 ash WSM FILL Veryloose gray fly contains zones 100 C=55 of bottom ash contains few shale fragments G wet

25

67 15301

30 Boring logged by AEP personnel

Bli d drill e d 3 14 no n augers groun di ng procedures on this boring Static Water Level 00 used 100 gallons of quick grout to grade

35 TO

USED INDICATESYMBOLS TEST RESULTS WATER LEVEL 00 G Gradation See H Penetrometer tsf Q Uncon Comp WATER NOTE SWL W Unit Dry Wt pcf T Triax CoFapSeparate 72808 D DATE C Consol Carves Relative Dens

JOB 01111497007 PLATE 4 LOG OF BORING NO B2 Page 1 of 3 CLINCH CLOSURE 8608 DATE CARBOVIRGINIA BB i

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINAIES N 352209054 E 1040466072 ELEVATION 15596

DRILLING METHOD 3114 ID Hollowstem COMPLETION DEPTH 684 AugerSAMPLERS2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

w W NAIURAL CONSISIENCY INDEX NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST DESCRIPTION RESULTS w >

v¢ PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT 40 s FILL Veryloose to loose gray fly ash intermixed with bottom ash dry

60

5

100

10i t t 15477

to I4L i FILL sI Veryloose loose gray fl y ash 3 100 intermixed with bottom ash wet

15i

100

20I

5 100

25•

15327 FILL MLSMi Veryloose to loose gray fly ash MC=66 100 contains zones of bottom ash wet G

17

v mM 30I

C vr v 5 7 3 15 00

35 S YMBOLS USED T O IN DI CATE TE ST RESU LTS WATER LEVEL E 354 Y Gradation J G See Penetrometer tsf Caved at 641 Q Uncon WATER NOTE e N Unit Dry Wt pcf T Triax Comp 86708 CompSeparat Relative Dens z DATE C Consul Curves D CONTINUED°JOB 01111497007 PLATE 5 LOG OF BORING NO B2 Page 2 of 3 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 8608 CARBO VIRGINIA

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINAIES N 352209054 E 1040466072 ELEVATION 15596 DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 684

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbay rel Sampler

W V4 NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX

a w• U NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST O DESCRIPTION RESULTS C Z z PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT 35 10 20 Q 40 FILL Veryloose to loose gray fly ash contains zones of bottom ash wet

100

40•

9

MC=83

10 100 G

50•

11 100

55

12 100

13 100

654922 14 73 sM FILL Mediumdense bottom ash

I5 darkgray 4912 50i1171 wet

SYMBOLS USED TO INDICATE TEST RESULTS WAIER LEVEL 354 G Gradation See H Penetrometer tsf Caved at 641 Q on Comp WATER NOTE Separate W Unit Dry Wt pcf T TUnricax Comp 816108 U Relative Dents DATE C Consol Curves 0 JOB 01111497007 PLATE 6 N CONTTNUED1313CPill LOG OF BORING NO B2 Page 3 of 3 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 8608 CARGO VIRGINIA BBC

LOCATTON NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352209054 E 1040466072 ELEVATION 15596

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 684

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

DI W NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX un

NaW 7 NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST a U DESCRIPTION RESULTS an r7 ZPLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT 70 Boring logged by AEP personnel

Blind drilled 314 augers down no grounding procedure used on this boring moved boring 14 southwest

Drilling mud added to boring at 120 Auger refusal encountered at 68 4

80

85

1• N

90

95I

100d

105 w SYMBOLS USED TO INDICATE TEST RESULTS WATER LEVEL 354 G Gradation See B Penetrometer tsf Q Uncon Comp WATER NOTE Caved at 641 N Unit Mt TT Separate Dry pcf 816108 Curves D Relative Dens z DATE C CorinsuaxlCamp I

JOB 01111497007 PLATE 7 LOG OF BORING NO B3 Page 1 of2 CLINCH RNER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 72208 72308 CARBO VIRGINIA

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 35226397 E 1040455748 ELEVATION 15 341

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 544

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler 3 OD Shelby Tube Sampler NQ Rock Core Barrel

WW W NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX F W ° CIO TEST = p• NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT HF R1 aW Rte a o1z DESCRIPTION > > 0 Q¢ P Q RESULTS GO W Z 5 V7 PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT o FILL Mediumdense and Q 40 GCSC to verydense gray 10 0

b to l ist i f sh l e rown fi ne coarse grave cons ng o a fragments little to some varies fine to sand 1 50 80 coarse some clayey silt contains zones 20 o f mediums tiff t o stiff cl ayey s ilt and zones o f fine to coarse sand dry 1710 2 21 20 3010

112D 47 12

g

8 4 18 80 10 7 5X

5 60 16 29 271311 24 6 65 60 I S

1$33

13 7 47 87 15 G 3322

1 8 72 93 35

3r

27 25 20506•R 15101

15 FILL Mediumdense to and 2GCsC verydense gray 10 27 53 25 11 b t l i s f s h l e 21rown fi ne o coarse grave cons ti ng o a 16 fragments little to some varies fine to

coarse sand some clayey silt contains zones

3 of medi mstifftos tiff silt d of u cl ayey an zones 11 17 60 7 1 9 5 fine to coarse wet I sand 12 H=0 P 12 80 ° H=45+

SM FILL Mediumdense gray bottom ash wet 1502613 30 67

15 15

t stiff i l s ilt c Me di ums o gray organ c c ayey 216 J some fine tiffsand wet 500535 SYMBOLS USED TO INDICATE TEST RESULTS WATERLEVEL 241 G Gradation See B Penetrometer 185 encountered Q Uncon comp WATERNOTE Separate W Unit Dry Wt p cf T Triax Comp 722108 P Relative Dens DATE C Conspi Curves 5 R JOB 01111497007LCONTINUED PLATE 8 LOG OF BORING NO B3 Page 2 of 2 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 7122108 7123108 CARBO VIRGINIA

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINAIES N 35226397 E 1040455748 ELEVATION 15341

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 544

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler 3 OD Shelby Tube Sampler NQ Rock Core Barrel

•U NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX U NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST DESCRIPTION

d7 Q zQ RESULTS M 7 con CA Ell PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIM T I TII0G7• 6 Mediumstiff to stiff gray organic clayey silt 6 some fine sand wet SM I5A I00 SH=18 Veryloose gray fine to medium sand some CL M1 15B 42 Asilt wet

Soft to mediumstifff gray silt and fine sand

few lenses of silt slightly organic trace fine to 16A 55 100 coarse sand trace fine gravel wet 16B 85 Verydense brown and gray fine to coarse 44 sand little fine to coarse gravel some silt wet 17 502R 13 Verysoft to soft darkgray shale diagonal

bedding numerous diagonal and irregular NQ few smooth slickenside RQD fractures type 18 0 38 features

RQD 0

19 81

RQD 61

20 98

Encountered water at 241 Encountered cobbles at 55

Sample S2 appeared to be cuttings drove cobble

Drilling mud added at 381 Encountered auger refusal at 420 Casing set at 420 Reamed out bore hole with 278 Tricone bit from 00 to 430

Backfilled boring with bentonite grout at completion

Water at 2 5 at completion influenced by for and water coring drilling mud Boring sounded at 539 at completion

Caved at 19 5after casing pulled

x SYMBOLS 70 V USED TO INDICATE TEST RESULTS WATER LEVEL 241 G GradationQ See H Penetrometer tsf 185 encountered Uncon Comp WATER NOTE Separate H Unit Dry Wt pcf 72208 T Triax Comp DATE C consol Curves D Relative Dens 5 O N JOB 01111497007 PLATE 9 LOG OF BORING NO B4 Page 1 of 2 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 72408 CARBO VIRGINIA BB01A0

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 3522561 E 1040463687 ELEVAI ION 15603

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 669

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

NATURAL CONSISIENCY INDEX f Imo 1=4 • 1 r l a l NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST DESCRIPTION

C6 V3 con > Z O Z v¢ PLASTIC LIMIT LIOUIP LIMIT GCSC FILL Mediumdense to dense and gray IL 21 44 brown fine to coarse gravel consisting of shale

fragments little to some varies fine to

21 93 coarse sand some clayey silt contains zones

of hard silty clay and zones of fine to coarse

sand dry

22 80 H4

17 80

25 67

34 80

21 87

15 53

11 60

59 100

100

15366 3

RESULTS FILL Mediumdense to verydense gray bottom contains of 15 100 ash zones fly ash moist

•M MI•

35 100

26 100

14

66 100

2

35 TO

USED INDICATE TEST RESULTS5fSYMBOLS WATER LEVEL 392 Gradation See H P enetromete r t5f 0 U WATER NOTE Caved at 549 nun Co Separate W Unit T Triax Dry Wt puS 72408 Comp _Relative DATE C Consul J Curves Dens

° JOB 01111497007 CONTINUED PLATE 10 LOG OF BORING NO B4 Page 2 of2 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 72408 CARBO VIRGINIA BBOIRM

NAD 83 VA LOCATION South Zone COORDINATES N 3522561 E 1040463687 ELEVATION 15603 DRILLING METHOD 3114 ID Hollowstem COMPLETION DEPTH 669 AugerSAMPLERSOD 2 Splitbarrel Sampler

NAIURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX

NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT f TEST

PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT 10 4 15241 FILL Loose to mediumdense gray fly ash and bottom ash moist

15163

FILL Loose to mediumdense gray fly ash and bottom ash wet

14941

Encountered seepage at 21 7 Encountered water at 444

Added drilling mud at 507 3 L 70 Y V SYMBOLS USED TO INDICATE WATER LEVEL 392 V G GradationQ See H Penetrometer tsf WATER NOTE Caved at 549` Uncon Comp Separate W Unit Dry Wt pcf 72408 T TriaX Comp DATE C Consol Curves D Relative Dens

° JOB 01111497007 PLATE 11 LOG OF BORING NO B5 Page I of 2 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE 72908 DAIS CARBO VIRGINIA BB01V1

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352249117 E 1040470772 ELEVATION 15557

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 668

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

a a H NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX r7 TEST W Da U NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT a 0 a U DESCRIPTION u RESULTS W Z L rn PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT FILL mediumdense 3Il NILS Veryloose to gray fly 1 19 a ash contains zone ofbottom ash dry

I 12 100

77

2 100

15 100 G

I

15I

1539 0

NIL SI FILL Loose gray fly ash intermixed with 8 100 bottom ash moist

5 FILL Veryloose to loose gray fly ash contains zones of bottom ash wet

LI 0 I

35 USED TO IND ICATE TEST RESULTS WATER LEVEL 475 Gradation G See H Penetrometer tsf Q Uncon Comp WATER NOTE Caved at 667 Separate W Unit Wt 7 T Triax Dry pcf 7129108 Comp Relative z DATE C Consul Curves D Dens 0 CONTINUEDSYMBOLS ° JOB 01111497007 PLATE 12 LOG OF BORING NO B5 Page 2 of 2 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 72908 CARBO VIRGINIA BBC•4it•A0

LOCAIION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352249117 E 1040470772 ELEVAIION 15557

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 668

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

NAIURAL CONSISIENCY INDEX NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TESI DESCRIPTION RESULTS Z PLASTIC LIMIT ZLTOUID LIMIT IGILSIG1 FILL loose 401 Veryloose to gray fly ash 1L contains zones of bottom ash wet

5 100

7 100

MC=55

9 100

2 149902 100

Mediumstiff little CL gray silty clay fine to H=0 8 12 00 coarse sand slightly organic few seams of fine sand wet

60

14940 0 39 13 60 Verysoft gray shale with 60 degree silt filled 565R fractures

65 14899

Verysoft gray shale a 14889 14 501 R Blind drilled 314 augers no grounding procedures in use on this boring Borehole grouted upon completion

70 SYMBOLS USED TO INDICATE TEST RESULTS WATER LEVEL 475 G Gradation See H Penetrometer tsf Caved at 667 Q Uncon Comp WATER NOTE Separate W Unit Dry Wt pcf T Triax C omp 72908 r ro7 Curves _ Relative Dens If

A JOB 01111497007 13

A PLATE LOG OF BORING NO B6 Page 1 of2 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 73008 8408 CARBO VIRGINIA 1313C711

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352224822 E 1040516361 ELEVATION 15667

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTIh 546

SAMPLERS 2 QD Splitbarrel Sampler NQ Rock Core Barrel

wx NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX x F n Cq U NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST O DESCRIPTION ruLrs Z PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT

1 0 30 40 S FILL Loose gray fly ash contains zones of bottom ash

100 3

3

5

100

15551 MC=56

MLSI FILL Veryloose gray fly ash contains zones 100 of bottom ash wet 0

10151

1 100

100

•25•

MC53

100 G

30•

100

SYMBOLS USED TO ND CATE TEST RESULTS WATER LEVEL 347 G See H Penetrometer tsfJ Gradation12Uncon WATER NOTE Caved at 546 Comp Separate W Unit cry wt pcf T Triax Camp 814108 Curves Relative Dens z DATE C Consol D s

° JOB 01111497007 CONTINUED PLATE 14 LOG OF BORING NO B6 Page 2 of2 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE 73008 8408 DATE CARBO VIRGINIA BB0

it A•

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352224822 E 1040516361 ELEVATION 15667

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 546

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler NQ Rock Core Barrel W NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST

EW MW Z U DESCRIPTION

• Cam pw d Z RESULTS U Z Ln PLASTIC LIMIT `7U•U11 LIMIT NLrSM FILL Veryloose gray fly ash contains zones 1 71 O 0 3500 of bottom ash wet

40i

1 5251

MLCL Mediumstiff brown and gray clayey silt 39 100 H1 0 and fine to coarse sand some fine gravel 3 contains limestone fragments

15 22 4

NQ Hard gray limestone massive bedding many 45 10 100 RQD diagonal few near horizontal fractures 26 RQD 64

1501 11 100

15121

Blind drilled 314 augers no grounding

procedures in use on this boring Encountered auger refusal at 44 3 Drove 4 casing to 44 1 and started rock

coring at 443 Borehole grouted upon completion

5560I

65•

70 TO TEST

USED INDICATSYMBOLS RESULTS WATER LEVEL 347 G GradationSee Penetrometer tsf Uncon Comp WATER NOTE Caved at 546 LSeparate N Unit Dry Mt pcf T Triex Com p DRelative Dens z DATE 8408 C Consol Curves

° JOB 01111497007 PLATE 15 LOG OF BORING NO B7 Page 1 of 3 CLINC POND 2 CLOSURE • DATE 73008 8508 CARGO BBOv

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352265409 E 1040520314 ELEVATION 15783

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 818

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX WWW E ao a 4 P V NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT TEST R FW W Fa C 3 DESCRIPTION 1Z W pw dad ¢ Z RESULTS E0 PLASTIC LIMIT LIQUID LIMIT 0 FILL and fine to 10 •n 3n an GM Very dense brown gray coarse gravel limetone and chert fragments

little to some fine to coarse sand little to some 53 silt dry

71 53

4

10

1566 7

s1V1 FILL Loose to dense gray fly ash contains 48 100 f zones of bottom ash moist 2

32 100

1520

10 100

31 100

•2530•

15467

FILL Veryloose fly ash contains zones 87 gray of bottom ash wet

1 SYMBOLS USED TO INDICATE TEST RESULTS WATER LEVEL 712 G See H Penetrometer tsf GsadatiOnQUncon Caved at 813 Comp Unit WATER NOTE Separate W Dry Wt pcf T Triax Comp 8508 Curves DRelative Dens DATE C Consul 5

N 308 01111497007 CONTINUED PLATE 16 LOG OF BORING NO B7 Page 2 of3 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE 7130108 8508 DATE CARBO VIRGINIA BB0NA

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352265409 E 1040520314 ELEVATION 15783

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 818

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

NAIURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX xF NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT FW n aw V z DESCRIPTION RESULTS 0 7 V PLASTIC LIMIT ZLIOUIC LIMIT lmm 0 20 30 40 FILL Veryloose gray fly ash contains zones ofbottom ash wet

100

9 100

10 100

15267

MLSM FILL Loose to mediumdense gray fly ash 11 15 100 contains zones of bottom ash wet

455055

12 10 47

15157 13 100

354028

MLCL brown fine to 2 Verystiff clayey silt and coarse sand trace fine gravel few roots H=225 slightly organic

0 15117

14 44 73 ML Verystiff brown silt little clay some fine to

little fine few roots coarse sand gravel G 2 H=25

TEST

606570 SYMBOLS USED TO INDICATE TEST RESIT WATER LEVEL 712 G Gradation Sea H penetrometer tsf Caved at 813 T Uncon WATER NOTE Separate W Unit Dry Wt pcf C Crux Comp z 8508 Curves D Relative Dens o DATE CONTINUEDTSC Consol JOB 01111497007 PLATE 17 LOG OF BORING NO B7 Page 3 of 3 CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 7130108 8508 CARBO VIRGINIA BB0NVI

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352265409 E1040520314 ELEVATION 15783

DRILLING METHOD 3114 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 818

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

W NA TURAL C ONSIST ENCY IN DEX a a F ° •F + G4 NATUR AL MOI STURE C ONTENT TEST y4 z DESCRIPTION ¢ ¢ ¢ RESULTS q > < PL ASTIC LIMIT Z LI UID LIMIT 70

1 0 zn 4 Ver ystiff brown silt little clay some fine to 2 coarse sand little fine gravel few roots 1506

9 H ard brown cl silt some ne t o coarse CL ayey fi 40 93 sand some fine gravel limestone fragments

13 H 45 L7 1527=

1500 7 16 65 100 25 GM Veryensed brown an d gray fine t o coarse 511fine gravel limestone fragments some to

coarse sand some silt little clay 80

14967 40 13 o t o me umarh ds ha l e R ft di gray

Borin ed b AEP ersonnel glo gg y p Blind drilled 314 17augers no grounding Sthis procedure used on boring

Fill and fly ash interface between 8 11116

ncounE t ered auger ref usal a t 834 85Borehole grouted upon completion

90

95

10

V SYMBOLS USED TO INDI CATE TEST RESULTS WATERLEVEL 712 Y Y G Gradation See H Penetrometer 0 Uncen Comp WA TER NOTE Caved at 813 Separate W Unit Dry Wt pccft TT Triax Comp D Relative Dens DATE 8508 C Connor Curves JOB 01111497007to PLATE 18 LOG OF BORING NO B8 Page 1 of I CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE DATE 72908 CARBO VIRGINIA

LOCATION NAD 83 VA South Zone COORDINATES N 352304068 E 1040504175 ELEVATION 15564

DRILLING METHOD 314 ID Hollowstem Auger COMPLETION DEPTH 232

SAMPLERS 2 OD Splitbarrel Sampler

W NATURAL CONSISTENCY INDEX F` YV O 00 W F NATURAL MOISTURE CONTENT IEST wu DESCRIPTION X x RESULTS PLASTIC LIMIT LIOUID LIMIT 0 FILL Wsm Veryloose to mediumdense gray fly ash contains zones of bottom ash dry

18 100

93

10

100

1515397

2 m S FELL Loose gray fly ash contains zones of 100 bottom ash wet

i 20•

5 10 60

15328

Blind drilled 314 auger no grounding procedures on this boring Sounding 236 SWL 00 Borehole grouted upon completion

25k3011 4

SYMBOLS USED TO INDICATE TEST 35WATER RESULIS LEVEL G Gradation See H Penetrometer tsf Q Uncon WATER NOTE ComSeparate W Unit Dry Wt pcf T Triax Comp Curves flRelative Dens DATE C ConsoI 1

JOB 01111497007 PLATE 19 R 0 CK E L OG

S EI B U B

L OH G

L 0 I

D N sI E R EE L

a i

w 1116108 f I e b i e

w a i r ABILITY g

n o n h e

RME c o h v e

PE

R EM OL D DATE W I H I

U TG Y

NE PCF A I

SG I C

CV PR E N SO D

CLOSURE

RESULTS OCM

U C OPop N NS 2

r e s u a

EA

TEST

SH u n d n POND

CT

d r a e d

DIRE VIRGINIA

ES RIVER

d r a e d

AL URV r p r e s C u d n

CLINCH CARBO 01111497007

c i ST on n d TRIAXI u d n

TE

LABORATORY u s+ nn c L

NO

OF m od ed

CTION

VIDUA

PROJECT LOCATION

JOB sr a a r d

INDI

COMPA

n g SEE

SUMMARY

r Hydrometer FT

ADATION

GR 5 s e v e

STANDARD I 4 7 8 8 6 6

10 12

13

NP

NP

17

18 17 14

15 12 18 17 21 NP

PL NP

27 20 29

19 19 26 25 34 24 NP

LL NP

6 7 7 7 7 5 24

11 64

24 26

66 83 22 SUMMARY

20 55

MC

245 745

235 985 1995 5495 6460

755 1245 2925 4245

1735 2735 2880 3485 3750 3995

2255 2765 4765

APPRO

TESTING

B4 B4 84 B4 B4 B4 B4

B3 B3 83 B3 B3 B4

B1 B2 B3 B3 B3

B1 B2 BORIN 0 R O CK c OR E L G

SH E LBY TU BE L G O F

L I

D N V L AT I VE

R EE

i i w a 1116108 f e e x b e

w a i i r g d

c 0 Ti o n e

c oh e s 1 e

PERMEABILITY

R EM DATE

W I H T

I TG D R Y

U NE

PCF

G I `I Y

S PR EA I FI C

CV CON i I D

C ES CLOSURE

RESULTS FI U CM OP NR NS NO 2

r C $ d u a

EAR

TEST

SH

POND it n d r a n

CT

d r a n e d

DIRE VIRGINIA

RIVER

ES

d r a n ed

AL URV p o p r C n r u7 d no

CLINCH CARBO 01111497007

o l ST RIAXI c n s oar d T u n r n

TE

LABORATORY s u n cd o na L

NO OF m o d f d

CTION

VIDUA

PROJECT LOCATION JOB s + a n d a d

INDI

COMPA

o n g SEE

SUMMARY s h o t

Hydrometer

ADATION

GR s e e

STANDARD 2 3

PI NP

NP

NP

16

21

NP NP

PL NP

19

23

NP

LL NP NP

13 66

25 22

53 59 SUMMARY

55 56

46 58

MC

745

175 525 925

175 525 925 1745

4235 6735 7735

1235 2735

1245 2245 4745

DEPTH

APPRO

TESTING

B7 B7 B8 B8

B6 B6 B7 B7 B7 B7

BS B5B5 B6 B6 B6

B5 BORIN Al ATTERBERG LIMITS RESULTS BBCI1

60

50

P L 40 A S T

30 C

T Y 20

N D 0 E X 10 CLML CIO D

20 40 60 50 100 LIQUID LIMIT LL

Specimen Id Depth MC LL PL P1 Fines ASTM Classification

® B1 755 20 NP NP NP 572 SANDY SILT ML

® B3 235 7 19 15 4

A B3 985 5 19 12 7

7k B3 1735 6 26 18 8 310 CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL SC

B3 2735 22 25 17 8

0 B3 3485 24 34 21 13

O B3 3750 26 24 18 6 574 SANDY SILTY CLAY CLML

A B4 245 7 27 17 10 292 CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL SC

® B4 745 7 20 14 6

® B4 1995 11 29 17 12 385 CLAYEY SAND with GRAVEL SC

_ B4 6460 24 NP NP NP 262 SIL I Y SAND SM

6 B5 1245 46 NP NP NP 705 SIL I with SAND ML

® B5 2245 58 NP NP NP 770 SILL with SAND ML

r B6 2735 53 NP NP NP 982 SILL ML

L3 B7 6735 25 23 21 2 613 SANDY SILT ML

® B7 7735 13 19 16 3

PROJECT CLINCH RIVER POND 2 CLOSURE LOCATION CARBO VIRGINIA JOB NO 01111497007 DATE 116108 Content

Weight Density

Limit

Dry

Sample

Unit Relative

Moisture Slaves

Porosity

Shrinkage

UDW

SL POR MC DR S

Recovery

BBCM

tsf

Limits

Ignition

Gravity

Shear

Penetrometer

on

24 36

Loss

Depth Hand Direct Atterberg SieveHydrometer

Specific

Boring

H Ds 101 MA SG

AL

TUBES

tsion

es

Sample T

Triaxial

SHELBY Compres

OF

Recovery

LEGEND

LOG

t

Nax Tes = j

Unconfined

Compression

36

••

CLOSURE

2 Depth

Boring

LABORATORY

12

POND

sand

Test

Swelling

1500

coarse

gvel

RIVER

VIRGINIA

to

Sample

fine

coarse

to

3000tub

little

01111497007 CLINCH CARBO

Recovery

clay

Horizontal

Browfine

293

dndsilty

FILL

Consolidation

Consolidation Incremental CRS Vertical

to

21

Permeability

UMBER

PROJECT

LOCATION 281

B3

VOID p

07••

JC

000

36 p

121212 ® I CRS

112424

III

Depth

Boring cf

0001

max 53

Cla

t me o

11608

519

CLAY

Silt

PI

NP

BB•i1

OR T 001 L

HYDROMETER

SI

DATE

PL

NP

424

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL NP

VIRGINIA

POND I o

04

200

20

01

Gravel

MC°

RIVER e CARBQ

fin

70

1 CLINCH

1 sand

D10

D 00094

40 4

01111497007 + gravel + fine

fine

NUMBERS

and

medium

MILLIMETERS

trace

IN

SIEVE clay D30

00355

to

sand

SIZE

US

trace

coarse

silt 4 GRAIN coarse

NO

Classification

to

D60

PROJECT LOCATION

brown JOB

00819

10 fine 2 1 and medium

VEL

34

Gray trace

CURVE

INCHES

IN

DI00

15 125000

coarse 2

FLYASH

OPENING 3

t th

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

De De

83

83

US

COBBLES

to to

68 68

cation

D422

S2

Identification

BOULDERS

7 B1 0

ecimen ASTM

1444

10

30 20

90 80 70 6 5 40

100 R C E N T F I N E R BY w j G T Specimen r 0 c

01

00

max 73

r1 o Clay 71 °

t me o

1116108 LAY

C 636

Silt

PI

OR

001

HYDROMETER SILT Ir

DATE

285

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL

VIRGINIA

POND I o

06

200

55

01

Gravel

MC°

RIVER e CARBO

fin to

70

CLINCH

D10

medium

00063

40

09111497007

7 9779 trace

NUMBERS

medium

sand

MILLIMETERS

IN

STEVE D30

fine

00150

10

SIZE

US

gravel

some

coarse

fine

GRAIN

assifzcation

4 clay C NO

trace

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB

trace 00470

fine 10

L sand

silt

12 V

34

Gray coarse

CURVE INCHESI I

GRX

IN

D100

125000

15 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

th

th

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

De

De

233 233

US

COBBLES to

to

215

218

D422

Identification Identification

S5

S5

0 BOULDERS

00

B1

0 B1

ASTM

1 ecimen

10

50 40 30 20

80 70 60

90

100 P R CE N T T I N E R 13 Y W B G T Specimen c

0001

max

73

o Cla °

t nnc a

1116108

AY

704

CL

Silt

P1

BBC1

OR T 001 L

HYDROMETER SI

DATE

PL

174

Sand

CLOSURE H 2

LL

+ VIRGINIA 1 POND

N 49

200

66

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

little

CLINCH

D10

clay

00062

01111497007

ND

trace

silt

NUMBERS

medium

MILLIMETERS

gravel

IN

SIEVE D30

00133

fine

SIZE

US

graybrown

trace

coarse

and

GRAIN

NO

Classification

sand

ra

D60

PROJECT LOCATION

JOB

00397

fine 10

coarse L dark V to

Gray fine

CURVE

INCHESI

IN

D100

190000

coarse

FLYASH

OPENING S

100 LE

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth

Depth

284

284

OBB US C

to to

269 269

D422

LDERS

Identification U Identification

S6

S6

0 BO

00

0 B2 S2 1 ASTM

10

50 30 20

80 70 60 40

90

1D0 Y

Specimen P C E N T F N E R B w H Specimen cf

01

00

max

106

Cla

me

opt

1116108

795

CLAY

Silt

PI

BBOI1

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL

99

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL

VIRGINIA

I POND

200 00

83

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER

e CARBO

fin

70

CLINCH

D10

00048

40

01111497007

sand

ND

NUMBERS

coarse

medium

MILLIMETERS to

IN

SIEVE

D30

00102

fine

10

SIZE

US

trace

coarse

GRAIN

NO

clay

Classification

D60

PROJECT LOCATION

JOB

little 00235

10

fine

silt

12

34

Gray

INCHESI CURVE

GRAVTT

IN

D100

47500

15

2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

th

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

De

Depth

484 484

US

to to

COBBLES 9

469 46

D422

Identification Identification

510

S10 n

0 BOULDERS 0

ASTM

10 10 B2

50 3a 20

70 60 40 90 80 B 100 F

Specimen R CE N T T N E R Y W G T Specimen 01 I pcf

00

max

95

Cla

me

opt

111608 FT

CLAY 215 8 Silt TT PI

BB•I1 I

I OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

18

PL

536

Sand

CLOSURE 2

26

LL

VIRGINIA

i POND

200 6 155

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

CLINCH

D10

shale

00058

40

01111497007

mND

gravel

NUMBERS

mediu

fine

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE

D30

00683

little

10

silt

SIZE

US

sand

coarse

clayey 4 GRAIN

NO

Classification

coarse

little

D60

to PROJECT LOCATION

14413 JOB

10

fine

fine

12

314

Gray fragments

CURVE INCHESI 1

GRAVEL

IN

D100

15 125000 2 wars

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth Depth

179

US

COBBLES

to

166

D422

entification 1

S7

0 BOULDERS 0

B179

o B3

10 ASTM

10

50 30 20

80 70 60 40 90

100

P C E N T F N E R BY w E GH Specimen Specimen r pef 0001

max

160

Cla

me

opt

1116108

413

CLAY 6 Silt

P1

BB•1

OR

001

HYDROMETER SILT

18 DATE

PL

426

Sand

CLOSURE 2

24

LL

VIRGINIA

POND I

01

200

26

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

= fin

70

r to

CLINCH

D10

00018

40

01111497007

ND

L medium

L um 1 NUMBERS I

trace

medi

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE D30

sand F 00219

10

SIZE

US

gravel

fine

coarse

fine 4 GRAIN

NO

and

Classification

trace

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB

clay 00817

10

fine

sand

slt

12

VEL

34

Gra coarse

INCHES 1 CURVE

IN

D100

15 125000 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

374

374 0 Depth Depth

OBBLES

US to C to T

369 369

ERS

D D422

Identification Identification

S15b

S15b

0 BOUL

00

0 0 1 ASTM

20 10

60 50 4 3 B3 83

90 80 7

too

Specimen P R CE N T F N E R BY W Specimen j 01 0 pcf 0

max

Cla

me 1 344

opt

1116108

CLAY 4 Silt

PI

BBOt1 4 OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL

454

Sand

CLOSURE 2

H LL

VIRGINIA

I POND

200

202

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARGO

fin

70

gravel

CLINCH

D10

fine

40

01111497007

SAND

little

NUMBERS

meth•

sand

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE D30

10

silt

coarse

SIZE

US

to

coarse

some

GRAIN 4 fine

NO

Classification

gray

e D60

PROJECT

LOCATION JOB

06968

10

and

fragments

12

4 3

Brown shale

INCHES i CURVE

GRAVEL

IN

D100

15 190000

coarse 2

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

374

374

Depth Depth

US to

to

COBBLES

S

369 369

R Ication

D422

Identification

Identification

S16b S16b

OULDE 0 B

00

1 ecimen ASTM

10

30 20 B3

80 70 60 50 40 B3

90

100 w S P R C E N T F I N E R B Y E G T Specimen c

01

00

max

120

Cla

t me o

11608 LAY

C 172

Silt

PI 10

OR

001

HYDROMETER SILT

DATE

17

PL

513

Sand

CLOSURE 2

27

LL

VIRGINIA

POND I

200 7 195

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

ravel

CLINCH

D10

00036

fine

40

01111497007

AND

little

NUMBERS

medium

silt

sand

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE D30

00859

10

clayey

coarse

SIZE

US

I to

coarse k some

GRAIN 4 fine

1 NO

Classification

gray

D60

LOCATION

PROJECT JOB

16660

ne

10 f

and

fragments

12

4 3

Brown shale

RAVEL

CURVE 1NCHESI 1

IN

D100

i5 190000

coarse 2

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth Depth

31

31

OBBLES US C

to

to

17

17

D422

S1

S1 Identification

Identification

0 BOULDERS

B4 B4 0 00 1 ASTM

20 IO

so 60 50 40 30

70 90

100

Specimen P C E N T F N g R B Y w I H Specimen R O c

01

00

max

168

Clay

me

opt

11608

217

CLAY

Silt

PI 12

BBOi1

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

17 DATE

PL

355

Sand

CLOSURE 2

29

LL

VIRGINIA

POND

200

260

11

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

to

CLINCH

clay

D10

00016

fine

40

01111497007

silty

AND m

some

NUMBERS

and

medi

sand

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE D30

00231

10

coarse

SIZE

US

to

fragments

coarse

GRAIN 4 fine

NO

shale Classification

gray

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB

12594

fine 10

and L gravel

12 V

34

Brown coarse

INCHESI G CURVE

IN

D100

15

250000 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

LES

100

SIEVE B

GRADATION

Depth

Depth

201

201

US

COB

to to

192

192

D422

Identification

Identification

S8

S8

0 BOULDERS 0

0 B4 B4

ASTM

10 10

60 50 40 30 20

00 90 80 70

pecimen 1 w Specimen S P R CE N T F I N E R BY u T 0 ® 01

pcf

00 7

max

Cla

me

252

opt

1116108

CLAY I P Silt

BBO11

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL

640

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL

VIRGINIA

I POND

200

108

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER

e CARBO

fin

70

silt

CLINCH

D10 D some

40

01111497007

m

rave

NUMBERS

meth

fine

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE

D30

01013

little

10

US SIZE

sand

coarse

4 GRAIN

NO

Classification

coarse

D60

PROJECT LOCATION

to JOB

07436

fine 10

fine

12

4

Gray

RAVEL

CURVE INCHESI

13

IN

D100

15

190000 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth

Depth

307 307

US

to to

COBBLES

292

292

D422

Identification

Identification

S12

S12

0 BOULDERS 0 0

B4 ASTM

10 ecimen B4

10

70 60 50 40 30 20

80 90

100 P CE N T F N R Y W T S Specimen R 0 c

01

00

max 99

o Cla

me

opt

176108

CLAY 795

Silt

PI

BB•1

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL

106

Sand

CLOSURE 4 2

LL

VIRGINIA

I POND

200 00

01 64

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

CLINCH

D10

00050

sand

40

01111497007

ND

NUMBERS medium

medium

MILLIMETERS to

IN

SIEVE

D30

fine 00104

10

SIZE

US

little

coarse

4 GRAIN

clay

NO

Classification

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB 0 trace 00246

fine

silt

112

34

Gra

RAVEL INCHESI 1 CURVE

IN

D100

20000

15 2 coarse

FLYASI1

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth Depth

432

432

US

to

to

COBBLES

417 417

D422

Identification

Identification

S17

S17

0 BOULDERS

00

ASTM

1 B4 B4

10

50 30 20

sQ 74 60 40

90

I04

P Specimen Specimen R CE N T N E B Y W E GH cf

001 0

max

Cla

me

t 400 o U 1116108 1

CLAY L Silt

PI

BB•11

OR

001

HYDROMETER SILT

DATE

PL

448

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL

VIRGINIA

POND o

200

153

01

Gravel

MC°

RIVER e CARBO

fn

silt

70

CLINCH

D10 D and

40

01111497007

m

ravel

NUMBERS

medic

tine

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE D30

little

10

SIZE

US

cation

sand

coarse

4 GRAIN

NO

Classi

coarse

D60

LOCATION

to PROJECT JOB

02431

10 1 fine

fine

12

4 3 7

Gray

INCHESI 1 CURVE

GRA`IEL

IN

D100

15 190000 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3 S E

L th

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth

De 557

557

OBB

US

to

C to

542

542

icatzon

RS

D422

DE

enti

I Identification

UL

S21 O S21 B 0

0 00 11 ecimen ASTM

B4 B4

10

30 20

70 60 50 40

00 90 8 1 G S P CE N T F N E R B v W E T Specimen R 0 c

01

00

max 95

Cla

= 1 me

opt 7 11608

167 H CLAY

Silt

PI

NP

BBGI1

E OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE 1 PL NP

737

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL NP

VIRGINIA

I POND

01

200

24

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

trace

CLINCH

D10

00056

40

01111497007

sand

ND

1 coarse

NUMBERS

medium

to

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE D30

clay

00840

10

SIZE

US

1 medium

trace

coarse

GRAIN silt

+ trace 4

NO

Classification

little

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB

sand

02038

fine 10

fine

12

gravel

314

Gray fine

RAVEL

CURVE INCHESI 1

IN

D100

15 125000 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

th

LES

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

650

650

De

Depth

OBB

US C to to

642

642

RS

D422

LDE

Identification

Identification

S23a S23a BOU 0

ASTM

1000

10 B4

60 5 40 30 20 B4

80 70 90

100

Specimen PE R CE N T F N R B v W i G T Specimen ® 01

pef

00

max 78

Clay

me

opt

1116108

CLAY 628

Silt

PI

NP

BBOf1

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL NP

288

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL NP

VIRGINIA

POND o

07 200

01 46

Gravel

MC

RIVER

CARBO

ne fi

70

sand

CLINCH

D10

00064

fine

40

gravel 01111497007

ND

some

fine

NUMBERS

medium

clay

MILLIMETERS

trace

IN

SIEVE

D30

00185

trace

10

sand

SIZE

US

silt

coarse

GRAIN 4 coarse

NO

Classification

to

D60

darkgray PROJECT LOCATION JOB

00525

10

fine

and

medium

12

EL 4

Gray trace

INCHESI • CURVE

GRAY

IN

D100

t5 125000

coarse 2

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

BBLES Depth Depth

132

132

US

CO

to to S

R 117 117 E

D422

Identification Identification

S3 S3

0 BOULD 0

0 B5

B5 0 ASTM

10

50 30 20

80 70 60 40 90

100 P R CE N T F N E BY W E G T Specimen Specimen c

01

00

max 75

Cla

me

opt

11608

i CLAY 695

Silt

PI

NP

B1301

OR

001

HYDROMETER SILT

DATE

PL

NP

225

Sanct

CLOSURE 2

LL NP

7 VIRGINIA T POND

200 05

58

01

Gravei

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fn

70

som

CLINCH

D10

clay

00061

40

01111497007

AND H trace

silt

NUMBERS 1

meth

MILLIMETERS

gravel

IN

SIEVE D30

00140

fine

10

SIZE

US

graybrown

trace

coarse

4 GRAIN and

NO

Classification

sand

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB

00397

me

10

coarse

2 darkgray i

to

34

Gra fine

RAVEL

INCHES CURVE

IN

DI00

15 125000

oarse 2

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

nth

SIEVE

GRADATION

BBLES Depth De

232 232

US

CO

to to

217

217

D422

Identification

Identification

ULDERS

S5 S5

0 BO 0

B5

0 B5

ASTM

10

10

30 20

70 60 50 4

90 80

100 P R CE N T F N E R B Y w I GH T Specimen Specimen 01

pct

Op

max 67

Cla

me

Opt

TA

111608

657 CLAY 1

Silt

BBO11

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL

267

Sand

CLOSURE 2

t LL

VIRGINIA

+ POND I fl

200 H 10

t • 01 55

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin to

70

CLINCH

D1O

medium D 00066

40

01111497007 m

trace

NUMBERS

mediu

sand

MILLIMETERS

IN

SIEVE D30

fine

00156

10

SIZE

US

gravel

some

coarse

fine 4 GRAIN

clay NO

Classification

trace

D60

LOCATION

PROJECT JOB

trace

00460

10

fine

sand

silt

12

314

Gray coarse

RAVEL

INCHESI CURVE

IN

D100

15 125000

coarse 2

FLYASH

OPENING 3

G 100 LES

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth

BB Depth

482

482

US

to

to

CO

467

467

D422

entification

I Identification

ULDERS

S10 O S10 B 0 0 4

B5 ASTM

B5

10 10

30 20

80 70 60 50 40 90

100

Specimen P R C E N T F N E R BY w E T Specimen c

0001

max

111

o Cla °

me

opt

11608

864

CLAY

Silt

PI

BBCI1

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL

26

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL

VIRGINIA

I POND

00

200

56 01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

on

70

to CLINCH

D10

00048

fine

40

01111497007

SAND

trace

NUMBERS

medium

MILLIMETERS

clay

IN

SIEVE

D30

00086

little

10

SIZE

US

silt

coarse

4 GRAIN

NO

Classification

D60

PROJECT LOCATION

darkgray JOB

00172

sand

10

fine

2 and 1

34

Gray medium

RAVEL

CURVE INCHESI 1

IN

D100

20000

15

coarse 2

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth Depth

131

131

US

COBBLES to

to

116

116

D422

Identification

Identification

S3

S3

0 BOULDERS

00

0 0 B6 B6

ASTM 1 ecimen

10

30 20 9 80 70 60 50 4

100

Specimen P R C E N T F I N BY W I H Specimen pqf

0001

max

126

Cla

me

Y opt

A 11608 L

C 856

Silt

PI

NP

BB•11

OR

001

HYDROMETER SILT

DATE

PL

NP

18

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL

NP

VIRGINIA

POND

200 00

01 53

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

to CLINCH

D10

00046

40 fine

01111497007

ND

trace

I

NUMBERS

medium

MILLIMETERS clay

IN

SIEVE D30

00081

little

10

SIZE

US

silt

coarse

GRAIN 4 ra

NO

Classification

D60

LOCATION

dark PROJECT JOB

00146

sand

10 fine

and

12

34

Gray medium

RAVEL

CURVE INCHESI I

IN

D100

20000

15 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3 S

100

SIEVE

BLE

GRADATION

Depth Depth

281 281

US

COB

to

to S

266

266

D422

Identification Identification

ULDER

S6 O S6 B 0

00

B6

0 0 B6 1 ecimen ASTM

10

60 50 40 30 2

90 80 70

100 N S P R CE N F I E Y W E G T Specimen 0 c

01

00

max 90 • o Cla °

me

opt

1116108

849

CLAY

Silt

PI

BBCI1

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL

61

Sand

CLOSURE 2

LL

VIRGINIA

POND

200 00

59

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

trace

CLINCH

D10

ciay

00053

40

01111497007

ND

trace

silt

NUMBERS

medium

MILLIMETERS

ra

IN

SIEVE D30

00105

10

SIZE

US

dark

coarse

and 4 GRAIN

sand

NO

Classification

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB

00290

10

fine

medium

graybrown

12

to

34

Gray fine

INCHESI CURVE

GRAVEL

IN

DIOO

20000

15

2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100 LES

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth Depth

431 431

US

COBB to to

416

416

ERS

D422

LD

Identification Identification

S9

S9

0 BOU 0

B7

0 B7

ASTM

la 10

50 30 20 9 80 70 6 40

100 P R C E N T N E R BY w I G T Specimen Specimen

F 01 F

00

mm

max

139

CIa

t me Y o

A 1116108

CL 474 2 Silt

PI

I3B•I1

OR T

001

HYDROMETER

SIL

21 DATE

PL

264

5and

CLOSURE 2

23 X LL

I VIRGINIA 1 POND

200

123

25

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

little

CLINCH

D10

00030

sand

40

01111497007

AND

i coarse

NUMBERS

to

mediu

MILLIMETERS

IN

fine

SIEVE D30

00176

10

SIZE

US

some

coarse

GRAIN 4 clay

NO

Classification

little

D60

LOCATION

PROJECT JOB

00709

10

fine

silt

12

EL gravel

L4

Brown fine

RA INCHESI 1 CURVE

IN

D100

15 190000

coarse 2

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth Depth

677 677

US

to

to

COBBLES

666

666

D422

Identification

Identification

S14

S14

N 0 BOULDERS 0

ASTM

B7 B7

10 10

30 20

80 7 60 50 40

90

100 Y PE R CE N T F I N E R B w I G H T Specimen Specimen cf

01

00

max 41

o Clay °

me

opt

11608

395

CLAY

Silt

PI

BBCi1

OR

001

HYDROMETER SILT

DATE

PL

515

Sand 7 CLOSURE 2

LL

VIRGINIA

I l POND 200 N 1 48

22

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

trace

CLINCH

D10

00123

40

01111497007

ND sand

lTL

1

NUMBERS

coarse

mediu

MILLIMETERS

clay

IN

SIEVE D30

trace

00437

10

SIZE

US

trace

sand

coarse

silt

4 GRAIN

NO

Classification

medium

and

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB

to 01439

10

fine 2

i fine

gravel

34

Fray fine

RAVEL

CURVE INCHESI i

IN

D100

15 125000 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

th

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth De

81 81

US

COBBLES

to

to S

67 67

D422

S2

S2

Identification Identification

0 BOULDER 0

B8 0 B8

ASTM

10 10

20

80 70 60 50 40 30

90

100

Specimen PE R C E N F N E R BY W 1 T Specimen pcf 0001

73

Cla

7omax

me

opt

11608

CLAY 677

Silt

PI

BBO1

OR

001

HYDROMETER

SILT

DATE

PL

250

Sand 7 CLOSURE 1 2

LL

VIRGINIA

I POND

00

200

66

01

Gravel

MC

RIVER e CARBO

fin

70

to

CLINCH

D10

fine

00065

40

N 01111497007

some

1

NUMBERS

sand

cIa

medium

MILLIMETERS

IN fine

SIEVE

D30

trace 00179

of

10

SIZE

US

silt

coarse

seams

GRAIN 4 gray

NO

few

Classification

and

D60

PROJECT LOCATION JOB

00479

sand

fine 10

12

34

Graybrown

medium

RAVEL

CURVE INCHESI 1

IN

D100

20000

15 2 coarse

FLYASH

OPENING 3

100

SIEVE

GRADATION

Depth

Depth

182

182

OBBLES US C

to

to

167

167

D422

Identification Identification

S4

S4

0 BOULDERS

00

B8

0 B8 0 1 ASTM

10

60 54 4 30 20

80 70 90

100

Specimen P R C E N T F N E R BY w GH Specimen APPENDIX B Slope Stability Analysis Global Stability Analysis

Analyze static and pseudostatic conditions of final dike system and cover Examine circular and translational failure surfaces

Progam Slide V 5035 developed by Rocscience Inc

Groundwater

AEP stability analysis assumed groundwater was equivalent to height of newly placed ash fill above the middle dike since operations were active and ash was being sluiced in Recently performed borings however indicate the groundwater level has lowered since operations have become inactive The cross section shown this design in Appendix shows the levels groundwater as encountered during drilling Generally this lowered groundwater level improved the overall of the dike with

stability system in comparison AEPs report

shown Design parameters are on the graphical output for each stability run

Summary of Results

Computed FS FSREQD Load C ase

Static Loading with Final Slopes 167 15 Circular Failure Surface

Static Loading with Final Slopes Translational Failure Surface 267 15 Middle Dike

Static Loading with Final Slopes Translational Failure Surface 229 15 Lower and Middle Dikes

PseudoStatic Loading with Final Slopes 113 10 Circular Failure Surface c

non

ryu1

PLATE

rniwse

1313C

11

MGR

LAYER LAYER

FILL

SECTION

MTR

100

ASH ASH =

Bv 1

Plant

BEDROCK By

UOTlWM

UPPER

LOWER

CROSS

Closure

Drawn

Approved Scale

Power 2

Virginia

No

River

Carbo

GRADE

DESIGN

Pond

8112008 9192008

Clinch

EXIST

01111497007

Date

Undated

FLYOVER

project Drawing Last

APPROXIMATE FROM

I

GRADE

FINAL =

8503

B5

PROPOSED

FILL I

1•

LAYER LAYER

FILL SECTION

grey

PROPOSED

50

ASH ASH

1=

BEDROCK

BOTTOM I I

DESIGN Or

308

UPPER

LOWER

nn SCALE Fty I

Fly 9

1

B4

PRELIMINARY r •>u r

•zl

DIKE

g•z

NO2

MIDDLE I I 9z P

POND

50 I I

I WI

1=

I SECTION r I I II II I

•c

L6 SCALE

B3

tlYl I 1 in I 1 1 1 I bESIGN

r 1

2eL

Ict

1990

L r l I rl e 1 18

AEP

Y

RIPRAP

nIY•el nr I I I I I I I

Ce

PoeK

t I 1

•••=oo 11 I 1 r

•• I

IIO

00

S •y t

rtt

1650

1600 1550

1500

1450 J

650

I 27 30 32 35

32

9408

285

MTR

degrees

By Date

600 C 0 0 0 0 0

psf 100

550

92

pcf 125

Ym 100 101 134 129

Slopes

Surface

Final

of

500

Failure

Plant

Closure 2 Analysis Strengths

Circular

Power

450

No

Shear

Dike

Stability

River

Seated Material

Pond

Fill

Layer Dikes

Layer

Middle Drained

Clinch Ash Static Deep Ash

Fill

Ash Ash 400

Proposed Upper Lower ClayShale Bottom

1 2 3 4 5 6

Layer

350

300

250

200

50

=

Spencer 1

6000+ 5500 5750 5000 5250

2250 4250 4500 Factor 1500 1750 2000 2500 2750 3000 3250 3500 3750 4000 4750

0500 1250 0000 0250 0750 1000

Method

Scale

Safety

150

C0

0 LO

0i 650

9408

9 32 35

32 27 30

285

MTR

degrees

Date

By

600

C 0 0 0 0 0

psf 100

Surface

Slopes

550

Failure Final Y

92

pcf

100 101 134 129

of

Plant

Closure

Analysis

Strengths 2 500

Translational

Power

No

Shear

Stability

River

Seated

Pond

125

450

Drained

Clinch Ash Static Deep

Material

Fill

kh

Layer Dikes

Layer

Ash

1

Ash Ash 400

om

Proposed Upper Lower ClayShale Po•

1 2 3 4 5

Layer

350

300

250

J

50

= r

Spencer

200

6000+

4750 4500 5000 5250 5500 5750 1

1500 1750 1000 1250 2500 2750 3750 Factor 2000 2250 3000 3250 3500 4000 4250

0500 0750 0000 0250

Method

Scale

Safety

00 t2

Co 650

cp° 32 27 30 32 35

9408

285

MTR

degrees

By Date

600

C 0 0 0 0 0

psf 100

550

92

Ym pct 100 101 134 129 125

Surface

Slopes i

Failure

Final

of

500

Plant

Closure

Analysis 2 Strengths

Translational

Power

450

No

Shear

River Stability

Material

Seated

Pond

Fill

Dikes

Layer Layer

Static Deep Drained Ash

Clinch Ash

Ash 400

Ash

Proposed Upper Lower Bottom

`ClayShale

1 2 3 4 5

Layer

350

300

250

200

50

=

Spencer

5750 6000+

3500 3750 4500 4750 5500 3000 3250 4000 4250 5000 5250 1

1500 2000 2250 Factor 1000 1250 1750 2500 2750

0000 0250 0500 0750

Method

Scale

0 0 0 c2 Ir 150

tn 650

T

32 35

32 27 30

285

degrees

600

9408 cl 0 0 0 0 0

MTR

psf 100

By Date

Slopes

550

V 92

pcf 129 125

Final 100 101 134

of

Surface

500

Analysis

Failure

Plant

Closure

Strengths 2 Stability

Circular

Power

450

No

Shear

Material

River

Seated

Pond Fill

Layer Dikes

Layer

Ash

Clinch Ash PseudoStatic Deep Drained

400

Ash Ash

Pao

Proposed Upper Lower ClayShale

1 2 3 4 5 6

Layer

350

300

250

Undrainedsli

Seismic 2

200

Pond

50

=

6000+

4250 4500 5250 Factor 3500 3750 4000 4750 5000 5500 5750

1500 1750 1000 1250 0500 0750 3250 0250 2000 2250 2500 2750 3000

0000 Spencer 1

Name

Method Scale File

Safety

150

00 FIUREL

SUMMARY

aoLK

l••l•_`S_•

L1 S

F SS

200 731

1 20b

szP

•SLLrS

1910

oj

o•

bikes

DIKE

ILKE F DIKE

DESCRL

comalme

LOWEk MIDDLE VPPE1L

SL•MMa

FPM a

CA56

sg

ar

LA EXD APPENDIX C Settlement Analysis Foundation Settlement Calculations

Compute settlement of foundation ponded ash under surcharge of proposed fill and cover

Progam Foundation Stress and Settlement Analysis FoSSA Version 20

Model fly ash as consolidation response

Find maximum settlement of ash foundation under proposed fill two areas on

design cross section with deep fills

Design Parameters

Poisons Material Vwet Compression Recompression Void Ratio Ratio Description pct Index ce Index Cr eo v

Upper Ash Layer 101 05 020 03 08

Lower Ash Layer 92 05 015 03 08

All other layers assumed incompressible

values for ash to loose The above values are based on typical fly placed in veryloose conditions

Two areas on the design cross section to be analyzed for maximum foundation

settlements These sections correspond to xvalues ranging from 100 to 240 and from 763 the FoSSA 693 to in program K7c3

X=cRs

hiL1

3orm

f P

•Se

X=24

Z

rootitr•

dZ

c=c>7 CCL •

t y97 t

Po2z

CL•ICrI2t

oil FoSSA Foundation Stress Settlement Analysis Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure

Present Datelriene Fri Sep 19 113349 2008 G 0I 19991 1497U 1497007 Pond 2 ClosureCalculationsSettlesn nt01111497007 Section 12ST

t F F •b I 3 3m im 0A SOLUTIONS To BUILD ON

Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure

Report created by FoSSA 20 Copyright c 20032007 ADAMA Engineering Inc

PROJECT IDENTIFICATION

Title Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure

Project Number 01111497 007 Client AEP

Designer MTR Station Number

Description

Companys information

Name BBCM Street

Telephone Fax EMail

Original file path and name GColumbu alculationsSettlement01111497007 Section 12ST

Original date and time of creating this file Fri Sep 19 113236 2008

GEOMETRY Analysis of a 2D geometry

Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Page 1 of 6

Copyright © 20032007 ADAMA Engineering Inc wwwGeoProgramscom License number FoSSA200106 FoSSA Foundation Stress Settlement Analysis Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Present DatdTime Fn Sep 19 113349 2008 G0 19991149711497007 Pond 2 CiosureCalculationsSettlernent01111497007 Section 12ST

INPUT DATA FOUNDATION LAYERS 5 layers

Wet Unit Poissons Ratio Description Weight Y of Soil µ 1113101

1 10100 050 Upper Ash Pond Layer 2 13400 030 Exist Clay Dike 3 9200 050 Lower Ash Pond Layer

4 12900 030 Bottom Fill

5 14000 030 Rock

INPUT DATA EMBANKMENT LAYERS 1 layers

Wet Unit Description Weight y of Soil lbR3

1 10000 New Ash Fill and Cover

INPUT DATA OF WATER

Point Coordinates X Z XZ f ftl

1 000 151200 2 7800 151500

3 21200 153400 4 90000 153400

5 100000 153400

Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Page 2 of 6

Copyright © 20032007 ADAMA Engineering Inc wwwGeoProgramscom License number FoSSA200106 FoSSA Foundation Stress Settlement Analysis Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Pond CiosurcCalculationsSettlcrrc tt01111497007 Section 12ST Present Daterune Fri Sep 19 1 1 3 3 4 9 2008 G 0119991149711497007 2

INPUT DATA FOR CONSOLIDATION a = 12

Layer OCR Cc Cr e0 Cv Drains at Underging = Consolidation Pc Po 2day

ft YesNo

I Yes 100 020 003 080 10000 Top Bot 2 No NA NA NA NA NA NA 3 Yes 100 015 003 080 10000 Top Bet 4 No NA NA NA NA NA NA

5 No NA NA NA NA NA NA

Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Page 3 of 6 number Copyright © 20032007 ADAMA Engineering Inc wwwGeoProgramscom License FoSSA200106 FoSSA Foundation Stress Settlement Analysis Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Preneot Datnrrinn Fri Sep 19 114048 2008 G01199911149711497007 Pond 2 ClosurcCalculationsSet0ement01111497007 Section 12ST m vetu•morsns•<•w6orssaorssUwo•a•m

ULTIMATE SETTLEMENT Sc

Node Original Settlement Final X Y Z Sc Z ft ft ft ft ft

1 10000 000 155759 076 155683

2 11556 000 155687 101 155586

3 13111 000 155616 123 155492

4 14667 000 155600 145 155455

5 16222 000 155600 154 155446

6 17778 000 155600 162 155438

7 19333 000 155600 169 155431

8 20889 000 155600 175 155425

9 22444 000 155600 180 155420

10 24000 000 155600 181 155419

Note Final Z calculated exists is assuming onlyUltimate Settlement

Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Page 2 of 2

Copyright © 20032007 ADAMA Engineering Inc wwwGeoProgramscom License number FoSSA200106 FoSSA Foundation Stress Settlement Analysis Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure 1497007 Pond 2 ClosureCalculationsSettlen nt01111497007 Section 12ST Present Datefrirne Fri Sep 19 113349 2008 G10119991 1497I

ULTIMATE SE1LEMENT Sc

Node Original Settlement Final X Y Z Sc Z ft ft ft ft ft

1 69300 000 156800 262 156538

2 70300 000 156829 265 156564

3 71300 000 156857 267 156591

4 72300 000 156886 268 156618

5 73300 000 156914 269 156645

6 74300 000 156943 270 156673

7 75300 000 156971 269 156702

8 76300 000 157000 266 156734

Note Final Z calculated Settlement exists

is assuming onlyUltimate

Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Page 4 of 6 License number FoSSA200106 Copyright © 20032007 ADAMA Engineering Inc wwwGeoProgramscom Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure FoSSA Foundation Stress Settlement Analysis

Section 1 2ST G011999l 149711497007 Pond 2 ClosurcCalculationsScttlcmcot01111497007 Present DalcTin Fri Sep 19 113349 2008

TABULATED GEOMETRY INPUT OF FOUNDATION SOILS

Found Point Coordinates X Z DESCRIPTION Soil X Z ft ft

153920 Ash Pond 1 1 970 Upper Layer 2 5940 156010

3 7940 156010 4 8400 156000

5 9100 155800

6 13450 155600 7 24500 155600

8 35200 157500

9 59700 157600

10 69300 156800

11 76300 157000 12 80700 158700

13 84070 160500

Exist Dike 2 1 970 153910 Clay 2 5940 156000

3 7940 156000 4 11100 153910

5 84000 153910

Ash Pond 3 1 000 153900 Lower Layer 2 84000 153900

Bottom Fill 4 1 000 150300 2 84000 150300

149400 Rock 5 1 000

2 84000 149400

Page 5 of 6 Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure License number FoSSA200106 20032007 ADAMA Engineering Inc wwwGeoProgramscom Copyright C© FoSSA Foundation Stress Settlement Analysis Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure GA 01 1999I 149711497007 Pond 2 ClosureCalculationsSettlement0I 111497007 Section I2ST Present DateTrime Fri Sep 19 113349 2008

TABULATED GEOMETRY INPUT OF EMBANKMENT SOILS

Embank Point Coordinates X Z Soil X Z DESCRIPTION ft ft

= 1 X1 8400 ft 1 10210 156600 New Ash Fill and Cover X2 = 160500 ft 2 10710 156600

3 11700 156400 4 12260 156400 5 14060 157000

6 84000 160500

Clinch River Power Plant Pond 2 Closure Page 6 of 6

Copyright G 20032007 ADAMA Engineering Inc wwwGeoProgramscom License number FoSSA200106

APPENDIX A

Document 7

Ash Pond 1 Construction of Cutoff Wall, by AEP

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 7: ASH POND 1 CONSTRUCTION OF CUTOFF WALL, BY AEP

APPENDIX A

Document 8

Clinch River Plant, Dike Inspection Checklist 2008

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report Oct 27 2338 758AM AEP lgh No 5739 19

DOCUMENT 8: CLINCH RIVER PLANT, DIKE INSPECTION CHECKLIST 2008

Page ce rthvision 52 093

RIVER DIKE fQlC iQEU Date of ns Inspected by 72L fg54f

Weather

Teniperature

Durin4 Dy

Reservoir elevations at time of inspection

Pond la

Pond 13 tJ

AT PONDS

Please refer to the Ash Area Dike Inspection Location Plan which is found on Page Place number and descriptive sketch on the locatton plan at each problem area Place the numbers next to the appropriate descriptions below BERS

Cracks

Bulges vo

Sliding

Eros Ion

Soft Soil Qe No 5709 29 Oct 27 2008 759AM AEP MatH Undig

Paqe of Revision 09J

eQQWLeaking Pipe Vegetative Cover

onh Slope

Hillside Runoff Drain

Hillside Runoff Drain

Rodent Burrows

Other Please Specify

TNQQ AT POND

IEZ ELEV TOP DEPTH TO WATER WATER OF TUBE OF TUBE Ai A2R

A6 15713 15720 39 12 fQ 15711 1q53 JR B4R 1Q 15714 oQ 31 15718

152985 No 5709 39 Oct 2008 759AM AEP Mat lgh

Page of ReviSion 52093

P2R 152231 I5 18

1R 16

151753 3Q iJ 1521

Pl determkne liflow rate in pe eSh the weirs This cah be done by measuring the head ot water above the apex ot the Vnotch to the nearest 14 inch and mpa it to chart

HEAD FLOW RATE CPM EEAD FLOW RATE GPM RE WEIR WELR RU 75 37 72 314 45 53 65 12 76 QQ 14 17 14 168 12 24 46 12 100 19 34 30 59 34 114 216

Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per minute Vnotch Weir 10 gallons per minute Vnotch Weir gallons per te Vnotch Weir gallons per minute

C0LLECTI0

Please determine the flow rate in gallons per minute the two branches of the French drain at the foot mete seepage collection mp can be done by measuring how much the Oct 27 2008 159AM AEP Hndlg No 5709 49

Page of Revision 5209

level rises while recording the time during period when both pumps are off Flow rate is given by the following fornula

FLOW RATE

in which rise of water level in feet during the unpunped tine interval in seconds

FLOW RATE iv GALLONS PER IN

Please note the conditions with regard to the 1lo

Condition ot concrete

Are available OK

Obstrtctjos Foreign object in pond Qp oW Pedestrian access OK Erosion msh Other Plesj

AT PONDS

Is seepage repair area OK

What is condition of French drain Is white precipitate building up np drainage Good

What is the overall condition of the discharge structure from Pond to Pond 18 gbGd 5109 59 Oct 21 2008 759AM AEP Mail lgh

Page of RevisIon 52093

Are seepage sunp pumps OK

Is entrance to seepage overflow pipe clear of obstructions

18 NO AND COMK INCLUDIN AND REPAIRSMAINTENANCE SINCE LAST cTION AsL

1Q0Nl AT POND

flease tefe to the Ash Area Dike Location flan mQb and descri sketch on the location plan at each problem area Plac the same numbers next to the appropriate descriptions below

ON

Cracks

Bulges

Erosion

Soft Soil

Leaking Pipe

SeepageWetness No 5709 69 Oct27 2003 759AM AEP Mat Hidig

Page of Revision 52093

ipj

Vegetative Cover

Trees on Slope

Rodent Burrows

Other Please Specify

10 READINGS AT POND DEPTH TO PTEZ IT TOP WATER FROM WATER 0h COMN 15558 7h P4 15574 1557

PG 15574

P7 15579

15574

15582

ih 15600 U2 1Q 15600 15600 4Q

L6 15320

L7 15353

L8 15347 No 5709 79 Oct 27 2008 759AM AEP Mat Undig

Page of Revision 52093

PQ ET LOWER LEVEL AND IDDLE LEVEL IK WORKING GOOD C0NDLTW 3u QH

12 DISCRARGE AT

Please note the conditions with regard to the following

Condition of concrete

Gatesvalves operational

Obstructions

Is access clear

Erosion problems

Other Please specify

NOTES AND ENQ IWCWDING JOB ORD AND REMEDIAL WORK DONE SINCE Oct 27 2008 759AM AEP MatH Undig No 5709 89

FACE OF gtvLstcsz TA3tY 14 RTh

00 200

SCAL2 F22

1tSh TER IVRUNOFF

RtJT DIVERSION DAM 12

TQhflE If go

22v

WBR ASH POND IA Q1 VNOTCH EY ICNATURALTh

Pl AREA 5709 99 Oct 27 2008 759AM AEP MatH lg PASE

APRIL 1995 HDFE QDRRUG PIPE tO

PLANTE AREA DI IONUh LOCATION

APPENDIX A

Document 9

Clinch River Plant, Dike Inspection Checklist 2009

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 9: CLINCH RIVER PLANT, DIKE INSPECTION CHECKLIST 2009

Page of Revision 52093

RIVER DIKE INSPECTION ICK

Date of Inspection fE

Inspected by her

Temperature IQlh Psth 7Days

Reservoir elevations at time of inspection rr

Pond IA Pond lB Jr Pond

CONDITION AT PONDS

Please refer to the Ash Area Dike Inspection Location Plan which is found on Page Place number and descriptive sketch on the location plan at each problem area Place the same numbers next to the appropriate descriptions below

LOCATION

Cracks NO

Bulges

Sliding

Erosion

Soft Soil Page of Revision 52093

Leaking Pipe pJO

SeepageWetness

Vegetative Cover

Trees on Slope

Hillside Runoff Drain OK 01 Hillside Runoff Drain tJ Qk

Rodent Burrows

Other Please Specify

PIEZ ELEV TOP DEPTH TO WATER WATER OF TOP OF Ai 15710 1e 15695

15713

15720 3S

15712 iscy B2R 15711 rP

B3R 15709

15711

BSR 15714

66 15718 sa

152985 oO Page of RevisiOn 52 093

152231

pJR 152018

P4R 1519 16 jJ 51 So 151753 0Q P7 1523

1521

ga11on pe for each the Vnotch welts This lQ be done by measuring the head of water above the apex of the Vnotch to the nearest 14 inch and comparing it to the chart below

HEAD FLOW RATE GPM HEAD FLOW RATE GPM WEIR WEIR 1Q 075 37 14 314 45 89

76 14 17 34 14 168 212 24 46 412 100 19 34 30 59 34 114 216

Vnotch Welt dQ gallons per minute Vnotch Welt gallons per minute Vnotch Welt 26 gallons per minute Welt gallons per minute Welt 45 gallons per minute Vnotch Welt gallons per minute

COLLECTION

Please determine the flow rate in gallons per minute of the two branches of the French drain at the foot diameter seepage collection sump This can be done by measuring how zuch the water Page of Revision 52093

leveL rises while recording the time during period when both pumps are off Flow rate is given by the following formula

PLOW

in which rise of water level in feet during the unpumped tine interval in seconds

FLOW RATE GALLONS PER MINDTE

STRUCTURE AT POND

Please note the conditions with regard to the

ionh of concrete

Are available

Obstructions

Foreign object in pond oN

Pedestrian access OK

Erosion Other lepe

AT PONDS

ts seepage repair area OK

is condition of French drain Is white precipitate building up impeding

What is the overall condition of the discharge structure from Pond to Pond 137 4S Page of Revision 52093

Are seepage mph pumps OK

Is entrance to seepage overflow pipe clear of obstructions

PONDS 18 NOTES AND COMMENTS INCLUDING JOB ORDERS WRITTEN AND REPAIRSJMAINTENANCE SINCE LAST INSPECTION zoMth MS

ee oil

CONDITION AT POND

tte Ash Area Dike Location Plan which fd on Place nthnber and descii sketch on the location plan at each problem area Place the same numbers next to the appropriate descriptions below

Cracks ie

Bulges

Sliding

Erosion

Soft Soil

Leaking Pipe

SeepageWetness Page of Revision 52093

Vegetative Cover

Trees on Slope

Rodent Burrows

Other Please Specify

READINGS AT POND AREA DEPTH TO PIEZ ELEV TOP WATER FROM WATER OF Uh TOP OF 15570

15558

P3 15567

P4 15574 PS P6

15579

PS 15574

P9 15582

ih 15600 5j

U2 15611

15600

15600

L5 15320 t2 0h 15353

15347 Page 7of9 Revision 52093

11 PERFORATED DRAIN PIPE BETWEEN LOWER LEVEL AND MIDDLE LEVEL DII WORKING PROPERLY AND IN GOOD

12 STRUCTURE AT POND

Please note the conditions with regard to the following

Condition of concrete at zv

Gatesvalves operational

Obstructions

Is access clear

Erosion prblens

Other Please specify

13 NOTES AND COMMENTS INCLUDING JOB ORDERS WRIflEN RE WORK DONE SINCE lAST it EvEh OF FE3RUARY2 I99

VNOTCH WHIR NORTh

ch 0h

SCALE ET

DENOTES 1E IVDAM

RUNOFF DIVERSION DAM

it

ASH POND

iEh GROUND

VNOTCH

LA iV tQ4 ASH AREA IK PAGE OF

300

APRfl ADDED L2t4 PIPE fl

RIVER PLANT ASH AREA DIKE INSPECTION LOCATION

APPENDIX A

Document 10

Clinch River Plant Ash Pond 1, Annual Dam & Dike Inspection Report, by AEP 2009

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 10: CLINCH RIVER PLANT ASH POND 1, ANNUAL DAM & DIKE INSPECTION REPORT, BY AEP 2009

DAM DIKE INSPECTION REPORT RECLAIM POND ASH POND 1A 1B

CLINCH RIVER PLANT CARBO VA

INSPECTION DATE November 24 2009

PREPARED BY DATE I

Behrad Zand Engineer

REVIEWED BY tdGt• DATE 2 p Gary F ch P

APPROVED BY I ••DATE g zolo Pedro J dmaya PE

Section Manager Geotechnical Engineering

QAQC DOCUMENT NO GERS09048

PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER SEAL SIGNATURE 2009 INSPECTION REPORT RECLAIM POND ASH POND 1A AND 1B

CLINCH RIVER PLANT CARBOVA

January 5 2010

1 Introduction 1

2 Summary of Visual Observations 1

21 General 1 22 Reclaim Pond 2

23 Pond IA 3

24 Pond 1 B 4

3 Assessment of Recent Instrumentation Data 6

31 Pond Water Levels 6

32 Piezometer and Observation Wells 6

33 Flow Measurement Weirs 6

4 Conclusions 7

41 Reclaim Pond 7

42 Pond 1 A 7

43 Pond 1 B 7

5 Recommendations 7

51 Items That Require Attention Beyond the Regular Maintenance Activities 7

52 Regular Maintenance Items 8 521 Reclaim Pond 8

522 Pond 1 A 8

523 Pond 1 B 9 1 INTRODUCTION

AEPSC Civil Engineering administers the companys Dam Inspection and Maintenance Program

staff from the Geotechnical Section conducts dike and dam DIMP As part of DIMP Engineering inspections annually Mr Behrad Zand conducted the 2009 inspection This report has been prepared under the direction of Mr Pedro J Amaya PE and presents a summary of the inspection and assessment of the condition of the facilities

Mr Jimmie Saunders at the Clinch River Plant was the project facility contact The inspection was performed on November 24 2009 Weather conditions were partially cloudy Temperatures ranged from a low of 39°F to a high of 59°F with a mean temperature of 49°F There was no rainfall on

015 the day of inspection and 015 inches of rainfall on the day before inspection day There was inches of rainfall during the ten days prior to the inspection day

At Clinch River Plant the Ash Pond Complex consists of Ash Pond 1A Ash Pond 113 and a

earthen Reclaim Pond as shown in Figures 1 through 5 The two ash ponds are formed by embankments approximately 60ft high on the west south and east sides a splitter embankment in the center and natural high ground along the north side The embankments have interior slopes of

of to approximately 3 Horizontal to 1 Vertical 3 H to 1V and exterior slopes approximately 2H IV

The exterior dike on the south side has an underdrain and finger drain system installed downstream of the toe road to control and collect The Reclaim Pond an excavated seepage is pond

In addition to the Ash Pond there Ash Pond 2 that located across the road from the Complex is is

Ash Pond 2 has been outofservice since 1998 and there no free water in the Complex is pond

Therefore no inspection was performed although the site was visited

2 SUMMARY OF VISUAL OBSERVATIONS

21 GENERAL

describe the condition The summary of the visual observations uses terms to general appearance or of observed structure Their of these terms as follows an item activity or meaning is

Weather data was obtained from wwwweatherunderrtoundcom website for Richland VA

I of 10 HIntern alDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009RPT2doc Good condition or that better or better than what

A activity is generally slightly is

minimally expected or anticipated from a design or maintenance point of

view

Fair or A condition or that meets what activity generally is minimally

Satisfactory expected or anticipated from a design or maintenance point of view

Poor condition that below what A or activity is generally is minimally expected or

anticipated from a design or maintenance point of view

Minor A reference to an observed item eg erosion seepage vegetation etc

where the current maintenance condition below what normal

is is or desired

but which not from is currently causing concern a structure safety or stability

point of view

Excessive A reference to an observed item eg erosion seepage vegetation etc

where the maintenance condition above

current is or worse than what

is

normal or desired and which may have affected the ability of the observer to

evaluate properly the structure or particular area being observed or which

may be a concern from a structure safety or stability point of view

Appendices A B and C contain selected photographs taken during the inspection of the Reclaim

Pond Pond 1 A and Pond 1 B respectively

22 RECLAIM POND

1 The north of the Reclaim and is in condition The

slope pond protected by riprap is good

remaining interior slopes of the pond have been vegetated with sufficient coverage in most

places There are a few areas on the slopes with insufficient vegetative coverage There were no

signs of major erosion on the slopes Minor to moderate erosion gullies were present at several

locations eg Photo 1

HAInternalDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009RPT2doc 2 of 10 2 The Vnotch weir boxes referenced Nos and 5 were fair condition Clear water flow as 2 3 in

downstream of weir was discharging from all the weirs Gray precipitate was observed on the

box No 3 Photo 2 and at the bottom of all the weir boxes

3 The surface of the Reclaim Pond was entirely covered with cenospheres Photo 3

23 POND 1A

1 Herbicide had been applied to the vegetation in the western groin ditch to eliminate heavy

overgrown vegetation presented in this area Dried vegetation was still present along the groin

ditch Photo 4 that limited the extent of the visual inspection

2 The erosion protection for the groin ditch was in satisfactory condition The area on the

abutment within 25 from the center of the ditch was clear of or ft groin any woody overgrown

for tree the crest that 15 from the center of the vegetation except one near was only ft away

groin ditch

3 The exterior slope of the west IA dike was well vegetated and in good condition Riprap

protection has recently been installed along the toe area of the west dike near groin ditch Photo

5 and to the west of the access road There were no signs of erosion or excessive seepage on

the slope or at the toe area

The lower half of the southeast of 1 A downstream of the access covered with 4 slope dike road is

in an inverted filter for seepage and erosion control Photo 6 The riprap of the filter was good

condition with no visual signs of rock deterioration or displacement

5 The portions of the exterior slope of the south 1 A dike above the haul road that was not covered

by riprap inverted filter was well vegetated There were no signs of sloughing bulging wet

patches or settlement on the upper section of the slope The general condition of the slope was

satisfactory Photos 7 No animal burrows were observed on this portion of the slope

6 There was no visual indication of piping or excessive seepage at the toe area of 1 A dike No

signs of erosion were observed at the toe of the ripraped portions of the slope A wet area was

observed approximately at the middle of south IA dike below the access road

There clear flow from Vnotch weir Flow from the weir directed into a 7 was seepage 6 is

stonedlined ditch at the toe of the dike The bottom of the weir box was covered with a layer of

light gray precipitate

HInternalDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009RPT2doc 3 of 10 8 The top of dike road was in good condition with no visual evidence of dike settlement or

misalignment Several areas with minor rutting were observed on the road There were no

signs of instability or settlement on the access road along the toe of the south dike Rutting was

observed at a few areas of the road

in of the drain Photo 9 Reddish to light gray precipitate were present most toe pipes eg 8

There 10 The overflow tower from IA to III ponds was in satisfactory conditions Photo 9 was

no protective railing on the splitter dike around the overflow structure from IA Pond to 1B

Pond The hand rail around the overflow structure was loose

11 Two temporary spillway shafts have been installed to discharge the flow from 1 A to 1 B ponds

to facilitate maintenance of the main spillway shaft Photo 10 shows one of the new spillway

shafts to the north of the overflow tower The second shaft located to the south of the overflow

invert elevation to water from 1 A to I B the tower has a higher pass discharge ponds if pool

level increases to higher than normal levels during a storm event

12 No staff installed for 1 A Pond and the level could not be determined At the time gage is pool

than its normal thus believed that the of inspection the pool level appeared to be lower level it is

freeboard was sufficient Plant personnel indicated that a staff gage will be installed in early

2010

be in stable condition There B The rock slope on the northwest side of 1 A pond appeared to was

no visual indication of major cracks rock deterioration displacement or instable rock blocks

Photo 11

24 POND 1B

1 Clear water was flowing in the east groin ditch below approximate elevation of 1520 ft Clear

seepage flow was present in Vnotch weir 4

2 Heavy vegetation including woody vegetation was present in or near the east groin ditch

covered Photo 12 The portion of the groin ditch that was not with vegetation and could be

inspected was in fair condition with no signs of erosion blockage or instability A portion of

the slope and groin ditch near the crest has riprap protection Photo 13

3 An inverted filter has been installed on the lower half of the south slope of I B dike Photo 14

The riprap was in good condition with no signs of sloughing displacement or deterioration of

the stones

HAlnternalDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009RPT2doc 4 of 10 4 There were no visual signs of piping or excessive seepage at the toe area of 1 A dike No signs

of erosion were observed at the toe area or along the perimeters of the riprap inverted filter

A seep was observed on the slope of the dike near the abutment at approximate elevation of

1540 ft

5 Several small trees were present on the outboard slope 1 B dike near the east abutment eg

Photo 12 A small tree was observed on the inboard slope of the south dike Photo 15

6 The portion of the outboard slopes not covered with riprap had vegetative cover The slope

appeared stable and was in satisfactory condition Photo 13 Several areas on the slope were

noticed to have insufficient vegetative coverage A portion of the slope between piezometers

and A7R had no vegetative cover Photo 16 7 B5RThe area on the outboard slope at approximate elevation of 1533 near the interface with IA that was in the now covered with the inverted filter pond reported previous inspection reports is

8 Four animal burrows were observed on the south lB slope above the inverted filter

dike 9 The inboard slope of the had sufficient vegetative coverage Photo 15

10 The top of dike road was in fair condition with no evidence of dike settlement or misalignment

Several areas with minor rutting were observed on the road

road the of the south 14 There were no signs of instability or settlement on the access along toe

dike Rutting was observed on a few areas of the road

in 11 A layer of cenospheres covered the majority of the water surface 1 B pond Photo 15

12 Minor erosion developments were noticed on the slope of the drainage ditch at several locations

eg Photo 17

13 The outlet structure from the pond was in fair condition Flow under the slide gate was smooth

and the and unobstructed Portions of the outfall tower particularly the interior was rusty tower

was in need of painting Photo 18

14 The exterior of the concrete manholes at the toe of the slope were in good condition Surface

water has appeared to collect in the bottom of the pipe pit structure

15 No functional staff gage was installed in I B pond The plant personnel indicated that a staff

gage will be installed in this pond

16 Settlement cracks were present on the portion of splitter dike that has been constructed recently

Photo 19

17 An old surface sloughing was noticed on the east hillside near the groin ditch Photo 20

HInternalDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009RPT2doc 5 of 10 3 ASSESSMENT OF RECENT INSTRUMENTATION DATA

31 POND WATER LEVELS

Pond water levels as measured on the date of the previous inspections are summarized in Table 1

Due to the lack of a staff gage the pool levels could not be determined during the current inspection

Plant personnel measure the pool levels during the routine inspections performed by the plant on quarterly basis

Pond 7 Aug 7 Jan 31 Oct 3 July 6 Oct 1 Nov 10 Sept 14 Sept 6 Nov

Name 2009 2009 2007 2007 2006 2005 2003 2002 2001

Reclaim Not Not Not Not Not Not Not 42 57

Pond measured measured measured measured measured measured measured

Not 15667 15667 1567 15668 15670 15669 I A Pond 15668 15668

measured approx

15584 15584 1558 15590 155733 155633 15581 1 B Pond 15581 1559

Pond 2 Dewatered

All and elevations feet depths reported in

Depth Measured Below Top of Sump Structure Grating Located on South Slope of Reclaim Pond

Table 1 Pond elevations since 2001

32 PIEZOMETER AND OBSERVATION WELLS

Twenty 20 piezometers located on or near the Ash Complex are being monitored by AEP

Locations of the piezometers are shown on Figure 6 Figure 7 presents the measurements recorded by the plant since 1985 Measurements recorded by the Plant since 2005 appear similar and within their normal historic range Piezometers at the dewatered Ash Pond 2 are not included in the current AEP monitoring program Several new piezometers have been installed on or near the dikes of IA and 113 ponds Plant personnel should monitor these wells along with the other instrumentations

33 FLOW MEASUREMENT WEIRS

Flow through five VNotched Weirs collecting seepage and surface runoff from the Ash Pond 1A and 113 Complex were measured during the inspection Presented in Table 2 are the recorded measurements and previous measurements

HInternalDam Dike lnspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009R PT2doe 6 of 10 Flow Rate GPM Weir No 24 Dec 7 Jan 09 31 Oct 07 03 Nov 05 15 Dec 04 09 Sep 03 14 Sep 02 Size 09

2900 9 8 3 6 7 25 1

3900 1 15 No flow No flow <2 No flow 05

4900 30 88 Unreadable 37 45 24Oct 30

2003

590° 12 37 10 7 12 6 6

62212° 1 66 175 26 59 1 075

Table 2 Seepage flow rates at Vnotch weirs since 2002

4 CONCLUSIONS

41 RECLAIM POND

The side around the Reclaim Pond in fair condition The as desired slopes are pond is performing

42 POND 1A

the embankments Pond 1 A are in condition Measured Overall forming satisfactory seepage is

clear and the flow rates are within their historical ranges There are no signs of instability or piping

Few components are in poor condition and in need of improvement

43 POND 1B

Overall the earthen embankments forming Pond 1B are in satisfactory condition Seepage areas are

stable and there are no signs of increased flowrates or changes in the clarity of the seepage water

Few components are in poor condition and in need of improvement

5 RECOMMENDATIONS

51 ITEMS THAT REQUIRE ATTENTION BEYOND THE REGULAR MAINTENANCE ACTIVITIES

Visual inspection of the Reclaim 1A and 113 ponds did not reveal any issue that would raise an

immediate the of these facilities Below of the concern on safety or stability is a summary

that found to be in condition and need of components were poor in improvement

HInlernalDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009RPT2doc 7 of 10 1 The west and east groin ditches should be cleared of any vegetation In general dried

vegetation shall be removed after each application of herbicide All the trees and woody

vegetation that have grown on the slopes of the dikes should be removed

2 The tree on the west abutment that near the ditch should be removed

is groin

3 All the broken or nonfunctional piezometers should be identified and abandoned properly

Besides the above reconunended that the water levels in the items it is plant begins monitoring newly installed piezometers and wells The quarterly inspection sheet should be updated to include the new wells and piezometers

52 REGULAR MAINTENANCE ITEMS

The recommendations of this section are considered to be regular maintenance items that should be performed on regular basis to assure that the satisfactory condition of the facilities will be

of recommendations below maintained A facilityspecific summary is presented

521 RECLAIM POND

1 Cenospheres should be removed from the surface of the Reclaim Pond on regular basis

2 The erosion rills on the slopes of the Reclaim Pond should be repaired by excavating the

disturbed areas and placing riprap over fabric The riprap protection will prevent

reoccurrenceof the erosion rills

should be 3 The areas with insufficient vegetative coverage seeded

4 Monitoring of the instrumentation should be continued on quarterly basis

522 POND 1A

1 The seepage area on the lower section of the south dike mentioned in the previous inspection

reports remains the primary concern at this facility The plant shall continue monitoring the

seepage flow from the pond for signs of piping or drastic changes in the flow rates or

piezometric water levels The wet area below the access road along the toe should be inspected

frequently for signs of piping

2 Erosion rills that form on the main dike or the splitter dike should be identified and repaired

promptly

HInternalDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009RPT2doc 8 of 10 3 Any large rutting that develops on the crest of the main dike the splitter dike or any of the

access roads should be repaired on a timely manner

4 recommended that the continues to mow the of the dike at least twice a It is plant slopes year

The area of the west hillside that within 25 feet horizontal distance from the center of the

is

groin ditch should be properly seeded and mowed regularly

5 A staff gage should be installed in IA pond to facilitate water level readings

6 Protective railing should be installed around the overflow structure from 1 A to 1 B ponds unless

this structure abandoned is properly

7 The section of the slope not covered by riprap should be thoroughly inspected by the plant

personnel twice a year to identify animal burrows All the animal holes shall be mudpacked

time to and animal burrows The second Generally a good inspect mudpack is early spring

be autumn to the before the inspection can performed early It is a good practice mow slopes

inspections

8 Operation of the seepage collection system and pumps must be maintained to ensure the

structural integrity of the dikes This includes continuing the periodic program to replace the

toe drain system as necessary to prevent build up of chemical precipitates within the stone and

piping system The drainage pipe should be flushed or replaced periodically to prevent

blockage due to accumulation of precipitates

523 POND 1B

1 Seepage areas on the lower section of the dike mentioned in previous inspection reports still

remain the main concern Monitoring of the piezometers should be continued The plant should

continue monitoring the seepage flow from the pond for signs of piping or drastic changes in the

flow rates

the south of 113 2 The increasing number of animal burrows on slope pond is becoming a concern

recommended to install near the animal holes to control the of the It is traps population

burrowing animals Animal burrows on the slopes of the dike should be identified through

regular inspections and mudpacked Two inspections per year are recommended on early

spring and early autumn after each mow

3 The erosion rills that form on the dike should be identified and repaired promptly

the roads should be 4 Any large rutting that develops on the crest or any of access repaired on a

timely manner

HInternalDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch 2009RPT2doc 9 of 10 5 Bare areas on the outboard slope should be seeded to establish a proper vegetative cover

6 recommended that the continues to mow the cover of the slopes twice a It is plant vegetative

year The area of east hillside within 25 feet horizontal distance from the edge of the groin ditch

should be maintained free of any woody vegetation

surface the 7 Cenospheres should be removed from the of pool on regular basis

8 The overflow structure shall be painted

shall be installed 1 B 9 A new staff gage in pond

A good inspection and maintenance program needs to be emphasized especially in the area of

instrumentation monitoring and maintaining routine vegetation and erosion control to preserve the

intent of the design and operation of the facilities Routine inspections monitoring and

maintenance by plant personnel should continue If you have any questions with regard to this

report please do not hesitate to contact Beluad Zand at 614 7162873 audinet 2002873 or Pedro

Amaya at 614 7162926 audinet 2002926

I

HAInternalDam Dike InspectionsDIMP 2009Clinch River 2ReportClinch2009RPT2doc 10 of 10 FIGURES YTm RIIIMP

ASH POND 1B A7R

ASH POND I A 1 VNOTCH £IR 2 Psi

A2R P7 A3

PLANT

Figure 6 Piezometer location map o o

r

i ccrwh + d r 4 si = 1

1• CN ai t FS 45•Ff b o a t e a

T` Jc i a I r 1 ¢1 it f UWo + a tt+ M I i J V •kt

II f1 •yj t t 1 +bJ 0•j c J s tom

A Inc yf e °r II •j I 1 j i t 1 r 1 4 1 • i V1SiY + c u•i Y Q•

t

•Iit a stti 4kT+ J• L 7•j ltC

I+ fo I At 3 • y 1

•• 7 r x f t`` ohs r i •ytY y i Ir •• ¢ + t€7 nrst•ati>x 1 c • • l

+ t• •L 7•Q r 7 Hitt Illi •1 y i J v tA r•

l ti

L Ar A 5•+ k u a o

f a yRt r rfi • y

t• r 1t•l

it t A v

`• ••

va

y Iw z x f JVvS fy•t tt V • •1 1f o t 1 J Ictt

i x 1s S it•LJl 1h 0 c•• vAYC f rl •1 •§ Q f VW1 f l X s f ••fi3I A t z ylt •4 n11

Ju

yd

=z `Ati + W I p S•r t 7 W•+a

arf

siY

r • ill

Y A X C 3 LLJ 2 • f I••kf 7r t•a T•Jk4 t o r+ ra g••RY G• z it 4• s = • I l 1 ti 4•Iri j€ M tvtk•t 8> p r ` t •i $ 1 fF+• 4 1U+ V 1 d I I z vf• + ty •ti ti •s tV1•1 Ff YItsx Z IF11 a tts 4 7•+I•I + t 1 tly SF p r n O 4 ttl • S4 tk4 f4tt 1 r `` r

ka f•ab sa y 1 cY 3 6y4•y

S jA A V

•i iv 17w c b 1A i t yx • 1r to r t 1 4ia•• Y ••V P4 • l • y • 0 E t s rtr N t• q vY kP `• K v 1 F• •sR t `• + It ftk fi§` Vi i• lr y t Y tiI I r f• 1M 11 a `Lr T i t1 53 Ill F1 r 7 G ih l k e t •S t i

tt NR r

It t 0 t y t 1 fi 3 i t j V11 q a2 A w• n tFasf4 a • NY14 3 • A`s x•`• 4A r t r° I pelt` Av••3`x 4 §mp•rstt sy r + A ° 1 • • ° i ` F r •• V`gV aac JI 3 k •ti 9A••••• •f

P • a Y • A is r• •4 JI Vt f• ti` a•iy•tttatwL TA 3 11 yl+ `9 F f a °q U •r Si°I • ll• •tt••ttl t •lyt W E e hP• •N 4 1 t xt + _ • 4 r t •tb if• 3 4 x dI rs4 1 hx ti 1§••• J••Rdn•R•t•rh+N A

•• l •iAt••o r •`ti Zrn w• • v c xi2+ i•••• •7 ii• A• tl • r Ef v •fi

r i X rxa f •1 n v + yy A• >r9 y 4A SV 41 1 t•f A•iYFyp mot h F ` S k • IIII 11 d t Ata$ •fiik

•I1r F • WTI I i H I• 1 C`1 1

rt 5• A r c _ t § t•• • s `

l¢z a ryk I J

III

fix 1 `v1 Y•LY tc `12i1`11111

I t

a=

6• 1 c 3n 4•14 4Yvt7 f t t •r• t t • I A +v st L 1+• I a• s4 •t • aM•

• A s y It i to

F

•••

t I 3 A• a t Y 11 1 t 4 I 1• 1 y +• ` l 9 + § 1

iA

4• 1Faj

•

aql •A

I i s d V 1 I J 1 aX

t+

V I+ 11 11 d e Y

•• +°• •A y y I r • i xs •v • •• v+ R UI I r t t • 3 as t•e YF 9 r r s •6r F n e r J

•a Ala y •y f r •°y• a• a 4 n •C t •• r t A r+ a 1r = `• • fit t y •wcFh•`sr••t<1 r Srky• ij 6kY L 1 If r •f al • t 7 l 11 r3r f 1 fir

t•• • r g 71 ti ` +• J `b ` i 1F•1f •f P T<>

Per ••• C • t • J t _ i A••t Iy n i Fv S h t te §Y i`i t•

j+t

111A

f ` f t ••t s 1F t G yl •• +I l•tiy•l n y It y 11w

j•

S u r 1 •f A t 11• • r1• 1 •°e • T

fp C + r

r it• • A •µ • y I w• Ls X

•+ f

Lr 1 v A A t +v 4 3• •• + u A s

oyy 1 < V q 2 fY Y • S + s I g A • t A tetra> i r li + i 1 t •c +F Fr6 •ry• yt t •y P b t • I v ee Sa A 6B`t• >+ y a ••¢J`CV a 4 K a T 2

if•

• • • •

I

1191 4•m

IS • ••• I • • 2 t x• eLn t S•Ny •• s• 1° r •3 Ai a•

`• Y 1 3 3 `< iyc Y 51• it + J•

11k4v

ts Y P A l s ts df a 4S` r •``vfT•Vt iS t •I 5 li•• Jr

4qI•y •+ + I F z OM re fW t A 91rI1 1 v c • l` q 5 ` v tis +GJItx kG ••3

V•

y S • ° • 1 1 R••

bf I i •

n MY f IY ••A rl ` •£ JIr a 11 rlJ C •I • ii tti i9 °` irr pr 1 1 1 • r1J r k••1 •r L7•1• r7+4 2 • sL 3 j tt il +az•` yt +vI +• •A 1 r I 11 •shrl k •t + I t J e

x i A ti h 13t f r •>IA• jfFi I ri+`J 3` j + rf •s• C tt•41 S 1 A e r•Jr 7 t • rF 6 •I _ L A < 1 vim x

A if t

`y 7

r `47 3YSt a `I ° p ` q j i yti 1 4 t

CS3I A Tr•F KLr+V > r t I cA v

tS Fy

r 11`

`H

As I L AEP SERVICE CORP

1 RIVERSIDE PLAZA COLUMBUS OH 43215 AEP SERVICE CORP 1 RIVERSIDE PLAZA COLUMBUS OH 43215 r

R

CLINCH RIVER POWER STATION DRN BY GRS DWG NO FIGURE 4

4 of 5 DATE SHEET AMERICAN AEP SERVICE CORP PLAZA ELECTRIC 1 RIVERSIDE SCALE1°=200 POND 1A 2 POWER COLUMBUS OH 43215 AEP SERVICE CORP

1 RIVERSIDE PLAZA COLUMBUS OH 43215 R

011812

B5

R

042309

B4

R

B3 P8

072806

R

B2 P7

110103

1985

P6

B1

since

020401

R

Date

P5

A7

readings

051198 8

Time

P4 A6

Piezometer

081595 7

P3

A5

Figure

111892

A3 P2

R

022290

A2 P1

052987

B6

A1

0

090184

1570 1550 1530 1510 1490 1470 RECLAIM POND PHOTOGRAPHS Photo 1 An erosion rill on the slope of the Reclaim Pond

Photo 2 Reclaim Pond viewed from the crest of West 1 A dike • yam M1wE• r •iS•T• w•rvYdw•

Photo 3 Reclaim Pond viewed from the crest of West 1A dike ASH POND 1A PHOTOGRAPHS Photo 4 Groin ditch of the West 1A dike western groin ditch

Photo 5 Riprap protection on the outboard slope of Pond IA near the groin ditch Photo 6 Riprap protection of the outboard slope of the south IA dike

Photo 7 South IA dike above the access road drain Photo 8 Build up of chemical precipitates in the toe pipes

Photo 9 The overflow structure that discharges from 1 A to 1 B Ponds Photo 10 Inlet of the new spillway shaft from 1A to lB ponds

Photo 11 Rock slope on the northeast of 1A pond ASH POND 1B PHOTOGRAPHS Photo 12 Groin ditch of 1B dike at the east side

of the ditch and the next to has Photo 13 A portion east groin slope it riprap protection Photo 14 Outboard slope of south 1B dike The lower half of the slope has riprap protection

i

Photo 15 Inboard slope of lB dike Photo 16 A bare area on the south 1 B slope of the dike above the riprap

This of the to erosion portion slope is susceptible

Photo 17 An erosion development at the toe of 1 B dike Photo 18 Corrosion of the decant structure of lB pond

Photo 19 Settlement cracks on the newly constructed portion of the splitter dike Photo 20 An old slide on the hillside near the east groin ditch above weir box No 4

APPENDIX A

Document 11

AEP Dam and Dike Inspection and Maintenance Program Summary

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 11: AEP DAM AND DIKE INSPECTION AND MAINTENANCE PROGRAM SUMMARY

SUMMARY AEP’S DAM AND DIKE INSPECTIO N AND MAINTENANCE

OF PROGRAM DIMP Inspection Schedule for Plant Formal checklist Inspections

VA

Qlinch Raver FACT lAdil3 nspect Quarterly

Clinch River FAD 2 nspect Quarterly

Glen Lyn FAP nspect Quarterly

Glen Lyn EAF nspect Quarterly

Glen Lyn West Pond Inspect Quarterly

APPENDIX A

Document 12

EPA Impoundment Inventory, in Response to February 2009 Letter

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 12: EPA IMPOUNDMENT INVENTORY, IN RESPONSE TO FEBRUARY 2009 LETTER

* FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY*

COMPANY Appalachian Power Company Appalachian Power Company

PLANT Clinch River Clinch River ASH MANAGEMENT UNIT Bottom Ash Pond 1A 1B Bottom Ash Pond 2

QUESTION 1 Dam Hazard Rating Low Low

Who Established Rating VA DCR VA DCR

Basis for Rating Health Hazard Health Hazard No Rating Assigned NA NA QUESTION 2 Year Commissioned 1964 1964

Year s Expanded Modified 1971 Placed out of service in 1998 closure plan

submitted for regulatory approval in 2009

QUESTION 3 Mark all that apply Fly Ash X X Bottom Ash X X

Boiler Slag

Flue Gas Emission Control Residuals Other Specify

QUESTION 4 Designed by PE Not Available Not Available Constructed under PE Supervision Not Available Not Available Inspection monitoring under PE Supervision Yes Yes QUESTION 5 Date of Last Company Safety Assessment 172009 910 2003 Slope stability liquefaction and

settlement analyses performed in 2008 as

part of final closure design

Describe Evaluator's Credentials VA PE VA PE

Describe Past Followup Corrective Actions Routine maintenance Enhance seepage Routine maintenance

control

Describe Credentials of Corrective Action Implementers Subcontractor under plant supervision Under plant supervision

Describe Planned Followup Actions 1A reassess stability of dike 1B Routine maintenance

Continue seepage control implementation on DS slope Routine maintenance 1A 1B

Date of Next Safety Assessment 2010 None no free water in reservoir

QUESTION 6 Date of Last Regulatory Safety Inspection 319 2008 319 2008 Agency Name Va DCR Va DCR Date of Planned Regulatory Safety Inspection NA NA Agency Name NA NA

Copy of Most Recent Regulatory Inspection Included Yes Yes

QUESTION 7 Safety Issues from Regulatory Inspections win Past Year NA NA Corrective Actions NA NA Documentation Included NA NA QUESTION 8

Surface Area acres 45 acres This pond complex consists of a No active impounding water area No ash is

single pond based on regulation under dam currently sluiced to this inactive pond A

safety rules which has been subdivided closure plan has been submitted to VDEQ for

into two cells approval

Total Storage Capacity 1,240 acre ft 1,332 acre ft

Volume Currently Stored Variable ash is routinely removed for use

in landfill or disposal dry 1,332 acre ft estimated

Date of Volume Measurement NA NA Maximum Height feet 55 73 QUESTION 9

Spills or Unpermitted Release History 10 Years No No

QUESTION 10

All legal owner s and operator s Appalachian Power Company Appalachian Power Company

CLINCH

APPENDIX A

Document 13

AEP’s Annual Inspection Form & Report to VA DCR

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 13: AEP'S ANNUAL INSPECTION FORM & REPORT TO VA DCR

*FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY*

American Electric Power EE idQah Plaza lQ OH 15E www sap corn

Thomas Robeits Region Dam Satbty Engineer

Virginia Department of Conservation and Recitation Dam Sat Program

Radfbrd St

Christiansburg Virginia 24073

April 2009

Re Clinch River Fly Ash Dike No 116703 Clinch River Fly Ash Dike No l6702 Glen Lyn Fly Ash Dam 07101 Glen Lyn Bottom Ash Dam 07102

Dear Mr Roberts

Enclosed please find the completed Annual Inspection Report ar the Clinch River facility Ash Ponds and

lB Fly Ash Dike No and the Glen Lyn facility Fly Ash Dam and Bottom Ash Dam for 2009

If you have any questions or if can be of rrt assistance please do not hesitate to contact me at 614 716 2906

Sincerely

Williani mi

AEP Service Corp Civil Engineering

Attachments 2009 Annual Dam Inspection Report Clinch River Plant 2009 Annual Dam Inspection Repoit Glen Lyn Plant cc Saunders Clinch River wi Clinch River attachments Ryder Glen Lyn Glen Lyn attachments ArnayaAEP Service Corp lhEngineering lo attachments File Date Piepared iedh By hra Zand

State Parks Suit Water at er eca Bay Local sta land urQa tean aQ Dam lo ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORT FOR IQN REGULATED IIQIN STRUCTURES Reference Impounding Stnicmres Regulations 4VAC 502010 et seq including 4VAC 5020105 Soil and Water Conservation Board

Owners Information

Name of Dam Clinch River Ash Pond and Inventory Number 16703 Owners Name Appalachian Power Co County Russell tQ Contact Per son if Pedro Amaya different fiom above Owners Address PO Box 2021Clinch River Hazard Classification Name of Roanoke VA 24022

Purpose of reservoir

Telephone No Residential Business 2678897324

Other means of communication

Owners Engineer

Name of Engineering Firm and Engineer Electric Power Service Corporation Pedro Amaya

Professional Engineer Virginia License Number

Mailing Address Riverside Plaza Columbus OH 43215

Telephone No Business

Directions Make note of all pertinent conditions and changes since the last inspection or if this is the irinspection since the filing of design report

Date of This Inspection

Date of Last Inspection

EMBANKMENT Any alteration made to the embankment

Erosion on embankment erosion on the slope the drainage

Settlement misalignment or cracks in embankment

If flow rate location observed color within the Seepage so seepage and describe any turbidity and flow

at the toe area The facility has seepage collection system and seepage quantifies are measured on regular basis

UPSTREAM SLOPE

Woody vegetation discovered No Rodent burrnws discovered No Remedial work imed No

INTAKE STRUCTURE NOTE The intake structure consists of steel decant tower and concrete culvert Deterioration of concrete No

Exposure of aQr reinforcement No

Is there need to repair or replace the trash rack No

Any problems with debris No Was the thawdown valve operated No

098h 0908 Page of ABUTMENT CONTACTS

If estimate the flow and of the Any seepage so rate describe the location seep or damp areas describe any turbidity and observed color within the flow No

ARTifEN EMERGENCY SPILLWAY

Obstructions to flow If so describe plans to ire NA

Rodent burrows discovered NA

Any detenoxation in the approach or discharge channel NA

CONCRETE EMERGENCY SPILLWAY Deterioration of concrete NA Exposed steel th cement NA Any leakage below ihetc lway NA

Obstructions to flow If so lists plans to correct NA

DOWNSTREAM SLOPE

Woody vegetation discovered No Rodent burrows discovered Yes Are seepage dxains flowing No

Any seepage or wet areas No All the wet areas reported in the previous inspection reports are now

covered and protected by riprap over fabric

OUTLET PIPE

Any water flowing outside of discharge pipe flu ough the No Impounding Structure

Describe any deflection or damage to the pipe No

STILLING BASIN

Deteriotation of concrete structures NA Exposure of ih ieinforcement NA Deterioration of the basin slopes NA rsh made NA Any obstruction to flow NA

10 GAT ES

Gate malfunctions or repairs NA

Corrosion or damage NA Were If any gates operated so how often and to what extreme NA

11 RESERVOIRJWM ERSIIED

New developments upstream of dam No

Slides or erosion of lake banks around the rim No

General comments to include silt algae or other influence factors No

DCR199098 08 Page of INSTRUMENTS

List all instruments piezometers and Vnotched

Any readings of instruments taken on

Any installation of new instiuments

13 SQIQIQI ISSUES New development in downstream inundation zone No

Note the maximum storm water discharge or peak elevation during the previous year Was general maintenance performed on dam If so when were removed fiom abutment area on Jan

List actions that need to be accomplished fbr the next inspection

Continue placing rap on the downstream slope of dike Reclassify the facility based on the new code and

3Reasses the safety of the facility according to the new regulations

OF OVERALL TEh ION IMPOUNDING STE RUCT AN APPURTENANCES

Check one EXCELLENT GOOD POOR

General Comments the Impounding iuc Regulations been updated and based the be new regulations Hazard Classification of this facility should most likely updated to Significant In response to

and is correspondence we received from DCR on October 2008 new study was started in progress to reassess the

hazard classification of the facility

Continue to place on the downstream slope Continue to the slopes basis Continue the instrumentation pac the burrows Continue annual

inspections and continue the general maintenance

DCR199098 0908 Page of CERTIFICATION BY OWNERS ENGINEER required only when an inspection by an engineer is required

that the in this has been examined and found be and in ieb certify imati provided by me to true iect my professional judgment

Signed igiNumber Professional Engineers Signature Print Name

This day of 20

Engineers Virginia Seal

CERTIFICATION BY OWNER

heieby certify that the in this report has been examined by me

Signed

Signature

This day of

Mall the executed form to the approprIate Department of Conservation and Recreation Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Regional Engineer

DCR199098 09OS Page of Date Prepared

Prepared By

Stare Parks ilrhop eh cQ Bay local lsta land nQ ionl sQrQ Qt ANNUAL INSPECTION REPORT FOR VIRGINIA Ih IMPOUNDING STRUCTURES Reference Impounding Structures Regulations 4VAC 502010 et seq including 4VAC 5020105 Virginia Soil and Water Conservation Board

Owners Information

Name of Dam River Inventory Number

Owners Name Power LocationCountyCity

Contact Person if Pedro Amaya different fiom above

Owners Address Box 2021Clinch Hazard Classification

Name of reservoir VA

Purpose of reservoir

Telephone No Residential Business Other means of communication

Owners Engineer

Name of Engineering Firm and Engineer Electric Power Service Corporation Pedio Amaya PE

Professional Engineer Virginia License Number Mailing Address Riverside Plaza lumOil 43215

No Business

Directions Make note of all pertinent conditions and changes since the last inspection or if this is the first inspection since the filing of design report

Date of This Inspection

Date of Last Inspection

EMBANKMENT

Any alteration made to the lcrnen

Erosion on embankment

Settlement misalignment or cracks in embankment

Seepage If so seepage flow rate and location describe any turbidity and observed color within the flow NA

UPS IREAM SLOPE

Woody vegetation discovered Rodent burrows discovered

Remedial work per fbrmed

INTAKE STRUCTURE Deterioration of concrete

Exposure ofrebar reinforcement

Is there need to repair or replace the trash rack

Any problems with debris Was the drawdown valve operated

098h 0908 Page ABUTMENT CONTACTS

If estimate the flow the location of the Any seepage so rate and descnbe seep or damp areas describe any turbidity and observed color within the flow NA

lh lIEN EMERGENCY SPILLWAY

Obstructions to flow If so descnbe plans to correct

Rodent burrows discovered

Any deterioration in the approach or discharge channel NA

CONCRETE EMERGENCY SPILLWAY Deterioration of concrete NA

Exposed steel reinforcement

Any leakage below concrete spillway

Obstructions to flow If so lists plans to correct NA

DOWNSTREAM SLOPE

Woody vegetation discovered NA Rodent burrows discovered NA

Are seepage drains flowing NA

Any seepage or wet areas NA

OUTLET PIPE

Any water flowing outside of discharge pipe through the NA Impounding Structure Describe any deflection or damage to the pipe NA

STILLING IQN Deterioration of concrete structures NA

Exposure of rebar reinforcement NA Deterioration of the basin slopes NA

Repairs made NA

Any obstruction to flow NA

GATES Gate lfOr repair Corrosion or damage

Were any gates operated If so how often and to what extreme

RESERVOIRWATERSHED

New developments upstream of dam

Slides or erosion of lake banks around the rim

General comments to include silt algae or other influence factors

098h 0908 Page of List all iumen

Any ieadings of instntments Any installation of new iumen l3 QTAZAR1 ISSUES New development in earn inundation zone NA

the maximum elevation Note storm water discharge or peak during the previous year NA dam If Was geneial maintenance ifo on so when List actions that need to be accomplished before the next inspection

OVERALL LATIO OF IMPOUNDING STRUCTURE AND APPURTENANCES NA Check one fl EXCELLENT GOOD fl POOR

ne Comments

This facility was dewatered in 1998 and has been out of service since then An application for the permanent closure of the

facility has been filed with the regulator authorities

098h 0Q Page of FICAIBY OWNERS ENGINEER required only when an inspection by an engineer is required

hereby certify that the information provided in this report has been examined by me and found to be true awl correct in my

professional judgment

Signed Virginia Number

Professional Engineers Signature Print Name

This dayof

Engineers Virginia Seal

CERTIFICATION BY OWNER

hereby certify that the inthimation provided in this report has been examined by me

Signed CL4S

Signature Print Name

This day of 20

Mail the executed form to the appropriate Department of Conservation and Recreation

Division of Dam Safety and Floodplain Management Regional Engineet

I99Q 09OS Page of

APPENDIX A

Document 14

Clinch River Plant Aerial Survey, Ash Pond 1

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 14: CLINCH RIVER PLANT AERIAL SURVEY, ASH POND 1 *FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY*

geo hydrosite ashpond2006 dgn 612 2009 816 31 AM

APPENDIX A

Document 15

Clinch River Plant Aerial Survey, Ash Pond 2

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 15: CLINCH RIVER PLANT AERIAL SURVEY, ASH POND 2 *FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY*

Pond 2dgn 262008 234 58 PM

APPENDIX A

Document 16

Draft Letter, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Dam Safety Region 4, dated December 29, 2011, #16703 (Flyash Dam No. 1)

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report

APPENDIX A

Document 17

Draft Letter, Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Dam Safety Region 4, dated December 29, 2011, #16702 (Flyash Dam No. 2)

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report

APPENDIX B

Document 18

Ash Pond 1, Dam Inspection Check List Form

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 16: ASH POND 1, DAM INSPECTION CHECKLIST FORM US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Site Name: Clinch River Plant Date: February 17, 2011 Unit Name: ASH POND 1 Operator's Name: Appalachian Power (Ponds 1A /1B) Unit I.D.: VA16703 Hazard Potential Classification: High Significant Low Inspector's Name: Scott Clarke, P.E. and Lorainne Ramos Nieves, P.E., CFM

Check the appropriate box below. Provide comments when appropriate. If not applicable or not available, record "N/A". Any unusual conditions or construction practices that should be noted in the comments section. For large diked embankments, separate checklists may be used for different embankment areas. If separate forms are used, identify approximate area that the form applies to in comments.

Note: Comments regarding each issue number have been listed below as needed.

Issue # Yes No Issue # Yes No 1. Frequency of Company's Dam Inspections?
18. Sloughing or bulging on slopes?
2. Pool elevation (operator records)?
19. Major erosion or slope deterioration?
3. Decant inlet elevation (operator records)?
20. Decant Pipes: 4. Open channel spillway elevation (operator records)? N/A Is water entering inlet, but not exiting outlet?
5. Lowest dam crest elevation (operator records)?
Is water exiting outlet, but not entering inlet?
6. If instrumentation is present, are readings recorded
Is water exiting outlet flowing clear?
(operator records)? 21. Seepage (specify location, if seepage carries 7. Is the embankment currently under construction?
fines, and approximate seepage rate below): 8. Foundation preparation (remove vegetation, stumps,
From underdrain?
topsoil in area where embankment fill will be placed)? 9. Trees growing on embankment? (If so, indicate
At isolated points on embankment slopes?
largest diameter below) 10. Cracks or scarps on crest?
At natural hillside in the embankment area?
11. Is there significant settlement along the crest?
Over widespread areas?
12. Are decant trashracks clear and in place?
From downstream foundation area?
13. Depressions or sinkholes in tailings surface or whirlpool
“Boils” beneath stream or ponded water?
in the pool area? 14. Clogged spillways, groin or diversion ditches?
Around the outside of the decant pipe?
22. Surface movements in valley bottom or on 15. Are spillway or ditch linings deteriorated?

hillside? 16. Are outlets of decant or underdrains blocked?
23. Water against downstream toe?
24. Were Photos taken during the dam 17. Cracks or scarps on slopes?

inspection? Major adverse changes in these items could cause instability and should be reported for further evaluation. Adverse conditions noted in these items should normally be described (extent, location, volume, etc.) in the space below and on the back of this sheet.

Issue # Comments

1. Impoundments are inspected quarterly by the plant personnel, and annually through an outside consultant.

2. Operating pool elevations for Pond 1A and Pond 1B are 1565 and 1558, respectively.

Twenty piezometers and a staff gage in both Pond 1A and Pond 1B exist at Ash Pond 1. Readings are monitored 6. in the plant’s Dam Inspection Checklist.

5. The lowest crest elevation for the Ash Pond 1 is 1570.0’.

16. & Pond 1A outfalls into Pond1B. Pond 1B outlets into a Reclaim Pond. Both pipes were completely submerged and 20. not visible for inspection. The Reclaim Pond discharge is piped back to the plant to an onsite water treatment

1 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

facility for continued use onsite.

The side hill embankment of Ash Pond 1 has an elaborate seepage control system, consisting of perforated pipe toe drains that run the length of the embankment, which collects seepage at several areas along the embankment either directly from cross drains or from v-notch weirs that collect seepage discharge. All seepage discharge originating from cross drains and v-notch weirs were notably clear and free of fines or sediment. A rate of 21. discharge was not determined on the site visit; however, a completed quarterly inspection report, titled Dike Inspection Checklist, indicating flow rates for each v-notch weir has been requested. The north outside embankment groin was observed to be conveying some minor clear seepage flow. The south outside embankment groin was dry but was noted to have signs of erosion due to storm runoff.

An animal burrow was observed along the southern most part of the embankment of Pond 1A. The burrow was * small in size and near the crest of the embankment.

2 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Coal Combustion Waste (CCW) Impoundment Inspection

Scott Clarke, P.E. and Lorainne Ramos Impoundment NPDES Permit N/A INSPECTOR Nieves, P.E., CFM

Date February 17, 2011 Impoundment Name Ash Pond 1 (Ponds 1A /1B)

Impoundment Company AEP, Appalachian Power EPA Region 3

State Agency Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation, Division of Dam Safety and (Field Office) Address Floodplain Management; 8 Radford St., Suite 201 Christiansburg, VA 24073 Name of Impoundment Ash Pond 1 (Ponds 1A /1B) (Report each impoundment on a separate form under the same Impoundment NPDES Permit number)

New Update Yes No Is impoundment currently under construction? Is water or ccw currently being pumped into the impoundment? IMPOUNDMENT FUNCTION: Settling pond for bottom ash disposal.

Nearest Downstream Town Name: St. Paul, VA

Distance from the impoundment: 6.0 mi. Location: Latitude 36 Degrees 56 Minutes 14.0 Seconds N

Longitude 82 Degrees 11 Minutes 51.1 Seconds W

State Virginia County Russell

Yes No Does a state agency regulate this impoundment?

Virginia DCR, Division of Dam Safety and If So Which State Agency? Floodplain Management

3 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

HAZARD POTENTIAL (In the event the impoundment should fail, the following would occur):

LESS THAN LOW HAZARD POTENTIAL: Failure or misoperation of the dam results in no probable loss of human life or economic or environmental losses.

LOW HAZARD POTENTIAL: Dams assigned the low hazard potential classification are those where failure or misoperation results in no probable loss of human life and low economic and/or environmental losses. Losses are principally limited to the owner’s property.

SIGNIFICANT HAZARD POTENTIAL: Dams assigned the significant hazard potential classification are those dams where failure or misoperation results in no probable loss of human life but can cause economic loss, environmental damage, disruption of lifeline facilities, or can impact other concerns. Significant hazard potential classification dams are often located in predominantly rural or agricultural areas but could be located in areas with population and significant infrastructure.

HIGH HAZARD POTENTIAL: Dams assigned the high hazard potential classification are those where failure or misoperation will probably cause loss of human life.

DESCRIBE REASONING FOR HAZARD RATING CHOSEN:

Ash Pond 1 is adjacent to State Routes 616 and 665 as well as the Norfolk and Western Railway. In addition, the facility is located immediately upstream of Clinch River and Dump’s Creek. The Clinch River Plant is located immediately south of the facility just across the Clinch River. A failure of this facility would impact State Route 616 and/or State Route 665 and potentially the existing railroad. While no probable loss of human life is expected, economic and environmental damage would be expected.

4 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

CONFIGURATION:

Cross-Valley Side-Hill Diked

Incised (form completion optional) Combination Incised/Diked Embankment Height (ft) 55 ft Embankment Material Silty clay soil, mix. of shale and sandstone fragments, fly ash and bottom ash. Pool Area (ac) 21 acre-ft Liner None Current Freeboard (ft) 5 ft/12 ft (Normal Freeboard) Liner Permeability None

5 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

TYPE OF OUTLET (Mark all that apply)

Open Channel Spillway Trapezoidal

Triangular

Rectangular

Irregular

depth (ft)

average bottom width (ft)

top width (ft)

Outlet 30-inch inside diameter / Pond 1A 36-inch inside diameter / Pond 1B Material corrugated metal

welded steel

concrete

plastic (hdpe, pvc, etc.)

other (specify):

Yes No Is water flowing through the

outlet? No Outlet

Other Type of Outlet

(specify):

The Impoundment was Designed By AEP Engineers

6 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Yes No

Has there ever been a failure at this site?

If So When?

If So Please Describe :

7 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Yes No Has there ever been significant seepages

at this site?

If So When? On-going but mitigated

If So Please Describe :

The side hill embankment of Ash Pond 1 has an elaborate seepage control system, consisting of perforated pipe toe drains that run the length of the embankment, which collects seepage at several areas along the embankment either directly from cross drains or from v-notch weirs that collect seepage discharge. All seepage discharge originating from cross drains and v-notch weirs were notably clear and free of fines or sediment. A rate of discharge was not determined on the site visit; however, a completed quarterly inspection report, titled Dike Inspection Checklist, indicating flow rates for each v-notch weir has been requested. The north outside embankment groin was observed to be conveying some minor clear seepage flow.

8 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Yes No Has there ever been any measures undertaken to monitor/lower Phreatic water table levels based on past seepages or breaches at this site?

If so, which method (e.g., piezometers, gw pumping,...)? Piezometers

If So Please Describe :

A soil-bentonite slurry wall was installed to depths of 60-65 feet along the center of the side hill embankment to help mitigate seepage occurring through the dike, particularly in high water conditions. Approximately 20 piezometers located both at the crest and near the toe of the embankment have been installed to monitor phreatic water table levels. The piezometers were placed on either side of the slurry wall; instrumentation placed on the inside of the slurry wall reaches elevations as high as water surface elevations and crest while those placed on the outside of the slurry wall go down to almost 5 feet from the toe of the embankment.

9 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

ADDITIONAL INSPECTION QUESTIONS Concerning the embankment foundation, was the embankment construction built over wet ash, slag, or other unsuitable materials? If there is no information just note that.

No plans or information were available at the time of the site visit regarding embankment foundation. Information has been requested from AEP and will be provided after clearing AEP legal.

Did the dam assessor meet with, or have documentation from, the design Engineer-of-Record concerning the foundation preparation?

The AEP Senior Civil Engineer and the AEP Geotechnical Engineer for the Clinch River Plant were both present during the site visit, however no plans or information were available at the time of the site visit regarding the design foundation preparation. Information has been requested from AEP and will be provided after clearing AEP legal.

From the site visit or from photographic documentation, was there evidence of prior releases, failures, or patchwork on the dikes?

No evidence of prior releases, failures, or patchwork on dikes could be noted at the time of the site visit.

10

APPENDIX B

Document 19

Ash Pond 2, Dam Inspection Check List Form

Clinch River Power Plant American Electric Power Coal Combustion Residue Impoundment Carbo, VA Dam Assessment Report DOCUMENT 17: ASH POND 2, DAM INSPECTION CHECKLIST FORM US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Site Name: Clinch River Plant Date: February 17, 2011 Unit Name: ASH POND 2 Operator's Name: Appalachian Power (Inactive) Unit I.D.: VA16702 Hazard Potential Classification: High Significant Low Inspector's Name: Scott Clarke, P.E. and Lorainne Ramos Nieves, P.E., CFM

Check the appropriate box below. Provide comments when appropriate. If not applicable or not available, record "N/A". Any unusual conditions or construction practices that should be noted in the comments section. For large diked embankments, separate checklists may be used for different embankment areas. If separate forms are used, identify approximate area that the form applies to in comments.

Note: Comments regarding each issue number have been listed below as needed.

Issue # Yes No Issue # Yes No 1. Frequency of Company's Dam Inspections?
18. Sloughing or bulging on slopes?
2. Pool elevation (operator records)?
19. Major erosion or slope deterioration?
3. Decant inlet elevation (operator records)?
20. Decant Pipes: 4. Open channel spillway elevation (operator records)? N/A Is water entering inlet, but not exiting outlet? N/A 5. Lowest dam crest elevation (operator records)?
Is water exiting outlet, but not entering inlet? N/A 6. If instrumentation is present, are readings recorded
Is water exiting outlet flowing clear? N/A (operator records)? 21. Seepage (specify location, if seepage carries 7. Is the embankment currently under construction?
fines, and approximate seepage rate below): 8. Foundation preparation (remove vegetation, stumps,
From underdrain?
topsoil in area where embankment fill will be placed)? 9. Trees growing on embankment? (If so, indicate
At isolated points on embankment slopes?
largest diameter below) 10. Cracks or scarps on crest?
At natural hillside in the embankment area?
11. Is there significant settlement along the crest?
Over widespread areas?
12. Are decant trashracks clear and in place? N/A From downstream foundation area?
13. Depressions or sinkholes in tailings surface or whirlpool
“Boils” beneath stream or ponded water?
in the pool area? 14. Clogged spillways, groin or diversion ditches? N/A Around the outside of the decant pipe?
22. Surface movements in valley bottom or on 15. Are spillway or ditch linings deteriorated? N/A
hillside? 16. Are outlets of decant or underdrains blocked?
23. Water against downstream toe?
24. Were Photos taken during the dam 17. Cracks or scarps on slopes?

inspection? Major adverse changes in these items could cause instability and should be reported for further evaluation. Adverse conditions noted in these items should normally be described (extent, location, volume, etc.) in the space below and on the back of this sheet.

Issue # Comments

1. Impoundments are inspected quarterly by the plant personal, and annually through an outside consultant.

Ash Pond 2 is currently inactive and on the day of the assessment had no pooling. According to quarterly 2. inspections, titled Dike Inspection Checklist, a section of the upper level dike was removed in 1998 inhibiting the ability for the impoundment to pool water; no normal pool elevations were available for this impoundment.

The lowest dam crest elevation would be equivalent to the upper level dike of the facility prior to it becoming 5. inactive. The upper level crest elevation was 1570.0’.

9. Along the remaining sections of the upper dike of Bottom Ash Pond 2 there is significant tree growth; largest tree size ranged from 12”- 18” diameter. Additionally, between the toe of the embankment and Dump’s Creek there is

1 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

significant tree growth; largest tree size ranged from 18”- 24” diameter. Virginia DCR requires a 25 ft clear zone (i.e. no trees) beyond the toe of all impounding structures.

Fissures/cracks were observed in an area near the outflow spillway structure on the surface of the impoundment 13. where it was evident that local storm runoff had been draining to.

Ash Pond 2 is currently inactive and on the day of the assessment had no significant pooling. In addition, the inlet of the overflow structure is located at an elevation significantly higher than the current finished grade inside the 20. remaining sections of the upper dike. Discharge through the overflow structure and outfall pipes is not possible at this time.

The entire side-hill embankment of the Ash Pond 2 has a seepage control system, consisting of perforated pipe toe drains that run the length of the embankment, which collects seepage along the crest of the lower level dike. 21. Seepage discharge originating from the toe drain was not accessible/visible during the site visit and although a rate of discharge for ongoing seepage was not determined, the plant personal did indicate that minimal seepage, possibly due to high ground water elevations, outfalls into Dump’s Creek under a general NPDES permit.

23. Ash Pond 2 has Dumps Creek running along the entire stretch of its embankment.

An animal burrow was observed along the middle level dike of Ash Pond 2. The burrow was small in size and near * the crest of the embankment.

2 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Coal Combustion Waste (CCW) Impoundment Inspection

VA 0001015 / Scott Clarke, P.E. and Lorainne Ramos Impoundment NPDES Permit INSPECTOR Outfall 015 Nieves, P.E., CFM

Date February 17, 2011 Impoundment Name Ash Pond 2 (Inactive)

Impoundment Company AEP, Appalachian Power EPA Region 3

State Agency Virginia Department of Conservation & Recreation, Division of Dam Safety and (Field Office) Address Floodplain Management; 8 Radford St., Suite 201 Christiansburg, VA 24073 Name of Impoundment Ash Pond 2 (Inactive) (Report each impoundment on a separate form under the same Impoundment NPDES Permit number)

New Update Yes No Is impoundment currently under construction? Is water or ccw currently being pumped into the impoundment? IMPOUNDMENT FUNCTION: Settling pond for bottom ash disposal.

Nearest Downstream Town Name: St. Paul, VA

Distance from the impoundment: 6.0 mi. Location: Latitude 36 Degrees 56 Minutes 18.6 Seconds N

Longitude 82 Degrees 11 Minutes 27.0 Seconds W

State Virginia County Russell

Yes No Does a state agency regulate this impoundment?

Virginia DCR, Division of Dam Safety and If So Which State Agency? Floodplain Management / Virginia DEQ

3 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

HAZARD POTENTIAL (In the event the impoundment should fail, the following would occur):

LESS THAN LOW HAZARD POTENTIAL: Failure or misoperation of the dam results in no probable loss of human life or economic or environmental losses.

LOW HAZARD POTENTIAL: Dams assigned the low hazard potential classification are those where failure or misoperation results in no probable loss of human life and low economic and/or environmental losses. Losses are principally limited to the owner’s property.

SIGNIFICANT HAZARD POTENTIAL: Dams assigned the significant hazard potential classification are those dams where failure or misoperation results in no probable loss of human life but can cause economic loss, environmental damage, disruption of lifeline facilities, or can impact other concerns. Significant hazard potential classification dams are often located in predominantly rural or agricultural areas but could be located in areas with population and significant infrastructure.

HIGH HAZARD POTENTIAL: Dams assigned the high hazard potential classification are those where failure or misoperation will probably cause loss of human life.

DESCRIBE REASONING FOR HAZARD RATING CHOSEN:

Ash Pond 2 is adjacent to State Routes 616 as well as the Norfolk and Western Railway. In addition, the facility is located immediately upstream of Dumps Creek and Clinch River. The Clinch River Plant is located immediately south of the facility just across the Clinch River. A failure of this facility would impact State Route 616 and/or potentially the existing railroad. While no probable loss of human life is expected, economic and environmental damage would be expected.

4 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

CONFIGURATION:

Cross-Valley Side-Hill Diked

Incised (form completion optional) Combination Incised/Diked Embankment Height (ft) 56 ft Embankment Material Shale fragments, silty clay, clayey silt and sand. Pool Area (ac) 12.5 acre-ft Liner None Current Freeboard (ft) N/A Liner Permeability None

5 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

TYPE OF OUTLET (Mark all that apply)

Open Channel Spillway Trapezoidal

Triangular

Rectangular

Irregular

depth (ft)

average bottom width (ft)

top width (ft)

Outlet 30” inside diameter

Material corrugated metal

welded steel

concrete

plastic (hdpe, pvc, etc.)

other (specify):

Yes No Is water flowing through the

outlet? No Outlet

Other Type of Outlet

(specify):

The Impoundment was Designed By AEP Engineers

6 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Yes No

Has there ever been a failure at this site?

If So When? 1967

If So Please Describe :

Minimal information regarding the failure of the Ash Pond 2 is said to have been recorded. According to AEP, plant records do not indicate the cause of failure or the extent of damages to the affected areas. No photographs were available of the failure and its aftermath; however, the failure is said to have occurred near the northern end of the embankment and may have been due to seepage. In addition to the location and possible cause of the failure, the impact on aquatic wildlife in Dump’s Creek and Clinch River was recalled to have been extensive. Any additional information that can be compiled has been requested from AEP.

7 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Yes No Has there ever been significant seepages

at this site?

If So When? Minor, on-going

If So Please Describe :

The side-hill embankment of Ash Pond 2 has a seepage control system, consisting of perforated pipe toe drains that run the length of the embankment, which collects seepage along the crest of the lower level dike. Seepage discharge originating from the toe drain was not accessible/visible during the site visit and although a rate of discharge for ongoing seepage was not determined, the plant personal did indicate that minimal seepage, possibly due to high ground water elevations, is collected from the system and outfalls into Dump’s Creek under a general NPDES permit.

8 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

Yes No Has there ever been any measures undertaken to monitor/lower Phreatic water table levels based on past seepages or breaches at this site?

If so, which method (e.g., piezometers, gw pumping,...)? Piezometers

If So Please Describe :

Approximately 14 piezometers are located both at the crest and near the toe of both the lower and middle level dikes of the Ash Pond 2 embankment. These piezometers were installed to monitor phreatic water table levels while the pond was active. A design summary for final closure indicates a 15-20 ft drop in the phreatic water levels for this impoundment in 2008. As previously noted, this impoundment is inactive and no record of instrumentation readings or monitoring is kept.

9 US Environmental Coal Combustion Dam Inspection Checklist Form Protection Agency

ADDITIONAL INSPECTION QUESTIONS Concerning the embankment foundation, was the embankment construction built over wet ash, slag, or other unsuitable materials? If there is no information just note that.

No plans or information were available at the time of the site visit regarding embankment foundation. Information has been requested from AEP and will be provided after clearing AEP legal.

Did the dam assessor meet with, or have documentation from, the design Engineer-of-Record concerning the foundation preparation?

The AEP Senior Civil Engineer and the AEP Geotechnical Engineer for the Clinch River Plant were both present during the site visit, however no plans or information were available at the time of the site visit regarding the design foundation preparation. Information has been requested from AEP and will be provided after clearing AEP legal.

From the site visit or from photographic documentation, was there evidence of prior releases, failures, or patchwork on the dikes?

No evidence of prior releases, failures, or patchwork on dikes could be noted at the time of the site visit.

10