Laserfiche WebLink
.~ <br /> <br />d 14101 <br />i • <br />Woodward-Cq~de Consultants <br />at the site is judged to be low. E3ased on theoretical czilcula- <br />tions, we conclude that ground motions generated by movements <br />on faults located away from the damsite are not likely to <br />exceed O.OSg at the damsite. mat magnitude of ground motion <br />is relatively low and should not be sufficient to directly <br />generate large reservoir waves, or slope failures that cauid <br />trigger large reservoir waves, that would overtop the dan~. <br />'PILe risk of reservoir-induced seismicity is judged t.o <br />be low. Case-history information indicates that the planned <br />reservoir is substantially smaller, in terms of depth an<I <br />volume, than almost all the reservoirs that apparently hzrve <br />triggered ground motions. <br />Our detailed assessments of the seismicity of the rE:gion <br />and potential seismic impacts on the damsite and reservoir arQa <br />are presented in Appendix H. <br />SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS <br />Our test holes in the foundation area on the right <br />(eastern) side of the valley generally showed about 5 to <br />25 feet of medium dense to dense clayey or silty sand ov~ar <br />stiff sandy clays to depths of up to 100 feet. Our test holes <br />on the left (western) side generally showed interbedded lenses, <br />2 to 38 feet thick, of medium dense to dense clayey or silty <br />sands, dense clayey or silty gravels and stiff sandy clays, <br />to depths up to 90 feet. Scattered cobbles were found in the <br />upper 25 feet over the entire foundation area. Free water <br />-12- <br />dd <br />T0'd 2114 QfJZ I~f~1QIJ-I Ol IIIW NOS2i.3QN3-I W021d 0£:4T V66L-ST-NIf <br />