1990-11-15_REVISION - M1988112 ‎(2)‎

• Permit No: M1988112
• IBM Index Class Name: Revision
• Doc Date: 11/15/1990
• Doc Name: CONTINUATION OF TRANSCRIPT
• Type & Sequence: AM1
• Media Type: D
• Archive: No

' 69
' 1 So we anal
ze the
h
f th
f
ilit
y
s
ape o
e
ac
y,
' 2 of the embankment, and say, "How stable is that?"
3 And it provides for us a high confidence level that
' 4 we have a stable facility.
5 We also looked at, as Anne menrioned,
' 6 dynamics stability. The seismicity in the area is
7 known. Several documents and several papers have
' 8 b
d
d
th
t
ti
it
f th
l
i
i
t
uce
een pro
on
e po
en
sm
c
y o
a
se
a
' 9 area, as was extensively referenced in one of our
10 responses to a question from one of the staff
' 11 members. That was reviewed in great depth.
12 We have come to a design criteria which
' 13 we believe, under probable and prudent desiu~n
14 concepts, will provide a stable facility even under
' 15 i
i
i
i
tude wh
ch
an earthquake of the k
nd of magn
s
' 16 discussed in the paperwork and the document,: that
17 have been produced.
' 18 THE CHAIRMAN: Any questions by the
19 Board?
' 20 UNIDENTIFIED PERSON: What are the
21 pipeline specs indicated on the return flow? Do
22 you have any way of containing that material if you
23 do have a problem with pipeline? I assume it's
24 pipeline.
' 25 MR. DOREY: Yes, the pipeline -- all of

AGREN, BLANDO G BILLINGS