Regulatory Guide 1.59

Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants
	ML003740388
Person / Time
Issue date:	08/31/1977
From:	; Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
To:	;
References
	-nr, FOIA/PA-2015-0456, FOIA/PA-2015-0458 RG-1.59, Rev 2
	Download: ML003740388 (64)
	v • d • e

Revision 2

-

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

August 1077 C,

REGULATORYGUIDE

OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT

REGULATORY GUIDE 1.59 DESIGN BASIS FLOODS

FOR

NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS

USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES

Regulatory Guides or* ihsed to describe and make available to the public methods acceptable to the NRC staff of Implementing specific parts of the Commission's regulations, to delineate techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems at postulated accidents. or to provide guidance to applicants. Regulatory Guides are not sub*titute& for regulations, and compliance with them ia not required.

Methods and solutions different from those mt out in the guides will be accept able if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance of a permit or license by the Commission.

Comments and suggestions for Improvements In these guides erai ncounrged at ll timnes. end guides will be revised, as appropriale. to accommnodate comments and to reflect new information or experience.

This guide was revised as a result of substantive comments received from the public and additional staff review.

Comments Ohould be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, US. Nuclear Regu latory Commision. Washington, D.C. 2055, Attention: Docketing and Service Branch.

The gluides e issued in the following ten broad divisions:

1. Power Reactors

6. Products

2. Research and Test Reactors

7. Transportation

3. Fuels end Materials Facilities S. Occupational Health

4. Environmental end Siting

9. Antitrust Review S. Materials nd Plant Protection

10. General Requests for single copies of issued guides (which may be reproduced) or for place ment on an automatic distribution list for single copies of future guides in specific divisions should be made in writing to the US. Nuclear Regulatory Commision.

Washington. D.C.

20555. Attention:

Director. Division of Document Control.

I

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 July 30, 1980

ERRATA

Regulatory Guide 1.59, Revision 2, August 1977

"Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants"

New information that affects the Probable Maximum the Upper Ohio River for drainage areas of 10,000

has been identified.

The changes to the isolines in the Upper Ohio River Basin and do not have any the Design Basis Flood for existing plants.

Flood (PMF) isolines for and 20,000 square miles affect only a small area significant impact on As a result of the new information, revised Figures B.6 and B.7 transmitted herewith should be used in future PMF discharge determinations when the simplified methods presented in Appendix B to the Regulatory Guide are being used.

In addition, appropriate changes have been made to the PMF data on pages 28 and 30 of Table B.1, which are also transmitted herewith.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

A. INTRODUCTION

...

........................................

1.59-5

B. DISCUSSION

..

.............................................

1.59-5

C. REGULATORY POSITION

....................................

1.59-7

D. IMPLEMENTATION

........................................

1.59-8 APPENDIX A-Probable Maximum and Seismically Induced Floods on Streams and Coastal Areas 1.59-9 APPENDIX B-Alternative Methods of Estimating Probable Maximum Floods ...........

1.59-11 APPENDIX C-Simplified Methods of Estimating Probable Maximum Surges ............

1.59-41

Lines indicate substantive changes from previous issue.

1.59-3

A. INTRODUCTION

General Design Criterion 2, "Design Bases for Protection Against Natural Phenomena," of Appen dix A, "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants," to 10 CFR Part 50, "Licensing of Produc tion and Utilization Facilities," requires, in part, that structures, systems, and components important to safety be designed to withstand the effects of natural phenomena such as floods, tsunami, and seiches without loss of capability to perform their safety functions. Criterion 2 also requires that design bases for these structures, systems, and components reflect (I) appropriate consideration of the most severe of the natural phenomena that have been historically reported for the site and surrounding region, with sufficient margin for the limited accuracy and quan tity of the historical data and the period of time in which the data have been accumulated, (2) ap propriate combinations of the effects of normal and accident conditions with the effects of the natural phenomena, and (3) the importance of the safety functions to be performed.

Paragraph 100.10(c) of 10 CFR Part 100, "Reactor Site Criteria," requires that physical characteristics of the site, including seismology, meteorology, geology, and hydrology, be taken into account in determining the acceptability of a site for a nuclear power reactor.

Section IV(c) of Appendix A, "Seismic and Geologic Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power Plants,"

to 10 CFR Part 100 suggests investigations for a detailed study of seismically induced floods and water waves. The appendix also suggests [Section IV(cXiii)] that the determination of design bases for seismically induced floods and water waves be based on the results of the required geologic and seismic in vestigations and that these design bases be taken into account in the design of the nuclear power plant.

This guide discusses the design basis floods that nuclear power plants should be designed to withstand without loss of capability for cold shutdown and maintenance thereof. The design requirements for flood protection are the subject of Regulatory Guide

1.102, "Flood Protection for Nuclear Power Plants."

The material previously contained in Appendix A,

"Probable Maximum and Seismically Induced Floods on Streams," has been replaced by American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard N170

1976, "Standards for Determining Design Basis Flooding at Power Reactor Sites,", which has been endorsed as acceptable by the NRC staff with the ex ception noted in Appendix A. In addition to informa tion on stream flooding, ANSI N170-1976 contains methodology for estimating probable maximum sur

'Copies of ANSI Standard N 170-1976 may be purchased from the American Nuclear Society. 555 North Kensington Avenue. La Grange Park, IL 60525.

ges and seiches at estuaries and coastal areas on oceans and large lakes. Appendix B gives timesaving alternative methods of estimating the probable max imum flood along streams, and Appendix C gives a simplified method of estimating probable maximum surges on the Atlantic and Gulf coasts. The Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards has been con sulted concerning this guide and has concurred in the regulatory position.

B. DISCUSSION

Nuclear power plants should be designed to pre vent the loss of capability for cold shutdown and maintenance thereof resulting from the most severe flood conditions that can reasonably be predicted to occur at a site as a result of severe hydro meteorological conditions, seismic activity, or both.

The Corps of Engineers for many years has studied conditions and circumstances relating to floods and flood control. As a result of these studies, it has developed a definition for a Probable Maximum Flood (PMFY and attendant analytical techniques for estimating, with an acceptable degree of conser vatism, flood levels on streams resulting from hydrometeorological conditions. For estimating seismically induced flood levels, an acceptable degree of conservatism for evaluating the effects of the in itiating event is provided by Appendix A to 10 CFR

Part 100.

The conditions resulting from the worst site-related flood probable at the nuclear power plant (e.g., PMF,

seismically induced flood, seiche, surge, severe local precipitation) with attendant wind-generated wave activity constitute the design basis flood conditions that safety-related structures, systems, and compo nents identified in Regulatory Guide 1.291 should be

'Corps of Engineers' Probable Maximum Flood definition appears in many publications of that agency such as Engineering Circular EC 1110-2-27, Change 1, "Engineering and Design-Policies and Procedures Pertaining to Determination of Spillway Capacities and Freeboard Allowances for Dams," dated 19 Feb. 1968. The Probable Maximum Flood is also directly analogous to the Corps of Engineers' "Spillway Design Flood" as used for dams whose failures would result in a significant loss of life and property.

'Reguiatory Guide

1.29,

"Seismic Design Classification,"

identifies structures, systems, and components of light-water cooled nuclear power plants that shouild be designed to withstand the effects of the Safe Shutdown Earthquake and remain func tional. These structures, systems, and components are those neces sary to ensure (1) the integrity of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, (2) the capability to shut down the reactor and maintain it in a safe shutdown condition, or (3) the capability to prevent or mitfgiate the consequences of accidents that could result in poten tial offsite exposures comparable to the guideline exposures of 10

CFR Part 100. These same structures, systems, and components should also be designed to withstand conditions resulting from the design basis flood and retain capability for cold shutdown and maintenance thereof of other types of nuclear power plants. It is expected that safety-related structures, systems, and components of other types of nuclear power plants will be identified in future regulatory guides. In the interim, Regulatory Guide 1.29 should be used as guidance when identifying safety-related structures, systems, and components of other types of nuclear power plants.

1.59-5 I

I

designed to withstand and retain capability for cold shutdown and maintenance therof.

For sites along streams, the PMF generally provides the design basis flood. For sites along lakes or seashores, a flood condition of comparable severity could be produced by the most severe com-.

bination of hydrometeorological parameters reasonably possible, such as may be produced by a Probable Maximum Hurricane4 or by a Probable Maximum Seiche. On estuaries, a Probable Max imum River Flood, a Probable Maximum Surge, a Probable Maximum Seiche, or a reasonable com bination of less severe phenomenologically caused flooding events should be considered in arriving at design basis flood conditions comparable in fre quency of occurrenfe with a PMF on streams.

In addition to floods produced by severe hydrometeorological conditions, the most severe seismically induced floods reasonably possible should be considered for each site. Along streams and es tuaries, seismically induced floods may be produced by dam failures or landslides. Along lakeshores, coastlines, and estuaries, seismically induced or tsunami-type flooding should be considered. Con sideration of seismically induced floods should in clude the same range of seismic events as is postulated for the design of the nuclear plant. For in stance, the analysis of floods caused by dam failures, landslides, or tsunami requires consideration of seismic events of the severity of the Safe Shutdown Earthquake occurring at the location that would produce the worst such flood at the nuclear power plant site. In the case of seismically induced floods along rivers, lakes, and estuaries that may be produced by events less severe than a Safe Shutdown Earthquake, consideration should be given to the coincident occurrence of floods due to severe hydrometeorological conditions, but only where the effects on the plant are worse than and the probability of such combined events may be greater than an individual occurrence of the most severe event of either type. Appendix A contains acceptable combinations of such events. For the specific case of seismically induced floods due to dam failures, an evaluation should be made of flood waves that may be caused by domino-type dam failures triggered by a seismically induced failure of a critically located dam and of flood -waves that may be caused by multiple dam failures in a region where dams may be located close enough together that a single seismic event can cause multiple failures.

Each of the severe flood types discussed above should represent the upper limit of all potential phenomenologically caused flood combinations con sidered reasonably possible. Analytical techniques are available and should generally be used for predic

"See References 2 and 5, Appendix C.

tion at individual sites. Those techniques applicable to PMF and seismically induced flood estimates on streams are presented in Appendices A and B of this guide. For sites on coasts, estuaries, and large lakes, techniques are presented in Appendices A and C of this guide.

Analyses of only the most severe flood conditions may not indicate potential threats to safety-related systems that might result from combinations of flood conditions thought to be less severe. Therefore, reasonable combinations of less-severe flood condi tions should also be considered to the extent needed for a consistent level of conservatism. Such combina tions should be evaluated in cases where the probability of their existing at the same time and hav ing significant consequences is at least comparable to that associated with the most severe hydro meteorological or seismically induced flood. For ex ample, a failure of relatively high levees adjacent to a plant could occur during floods less severe than the worst site-related flood, but would produce condi tions more severe than would result during a greater flood (where a levee failure elsewhere would produce less severe conditions at the plant site).

Wind-generated wave activity may produce severe flood-induced static and dynamic conditions either independent of or coincident with severe hydrometeorological or seismic flood-producing mechanisms. For example, along a lake, reservoir, river, or seashore, reasonably severe wave action should be considered coincident with the probable maximum water level conditions.' The coincidence of wave activity with probable maximum water level conditions should take into account the fact that suf ficient time can elapse between the occurrence of the assumed meteorological mechanism and the max imum water level to allow subsequent meteorological activity to produce substantial wind-generated waves coincident with the high water level. In addition, the most severe wave activity at the site that can be generated by distant hydrometeorological activity should be considered' For instance, coastal locations may be subjected to severe wave action caused by a distant storm that, although not as severe as a local storm (e.g., a Probable Maximum Hurricane), may produce more severe wave action because of a very long wave-generating fetch. The most severe wave ac tivity at the site that may be generated by conditions at a distance from the site should be considered in such cases. In addition, assurance should be provided

'Probable Maximum Water Level is defined by the Corps of Engineers as "the maximum still water level (i.e., exclusive of local coincident wave runup) which can be produced by the most severe combination of hydrometeorological and/or seismic parameters reasonably possible for a particular location. Such phenomena are hurricanes, moving squall lines, other cyclonic meteorological events, tsunami, etc., which, when combined with the physical response of a body of water and severe ambient hydrological con ditions, would produce a still water level that has virtually no risk of being exceeded."

1.59-6 K

S

I

that safety systems necessary for cold shutdown and maintenance thereof are designed to withstand the static and dynamic effects resulting from frequent flood levels (i.e., the maximum operating level in reservoirs and the 10-year flood level in streams)

coincident with the waves that would be produced by the Probable Maximum Gradient Wind' for the site (based on a study of historical regional meteorology).

C. REGULATORY POSITION

1. The conditions resulting from the worst site related flood probable at a nuclear power plant (e.g.,

PMF, seismically induced flood, hurricane, seiche, surge, heavy local precipitation) with attendant wind generated wave activity constitute the design basis flood conditions that safety-related structures, systems, and components identified in Regulatory Guide 1.29 (see footnote 3) must be designed to withstand and retain capability for cold shutdown and maintenance thereof.

a. The PMF on streams, as defined in Appendix A and based on the analytical techniques summarized in Appendices A and B of this guide, provides an ac ceptable level of conservatism for estimating flood levels caused by severe hydrometeorological con ditions.

b. Along lakeshores, coastlines, and estuaries, estimates of flood levels resulting from severe surges, seiches, and wave action caused by hydrometeorological activity should be based on criteria comparable in conservatism to those used for Probable Maximum Floods. Criteria and analytical techniques providing this level of conservatism for the analysis of these events are summarized in Ap pendix A of this guide. Appendix C of this guide pre sents an acceptable method for estimating the still water level of the Probable Maximum Surge from hurricanes at open-coast sites on the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico.

c. Flood conditions that could be caused by dam failures from earthquakes should also be considered in establishing the design basis flood. Analytical techniques for evaluating the hydrologic effects of seismically induced dam failures discussed herein are presented in Appendix A of this guide. Techniques for evaluating the effects of tsunami will be presented in a future appendix.

d. Where upstream dams or other features that provide flood protection are present, in addition to the analyses of the most severe floods that may be in duced by either hydrometeorological or seismic mechanisms, reasonable combinations of less-severe flood conditions and seismic events should also be

6Probable Maximum Gradient Wind is defined as a gradient wind of a designated duration, which there is virtually no risk of ex ceeding.

considered to the extent needed for a consistent level of conservatism. The effect of such combinations on the flood conditions at the plant site should be evaluated in cases where the probability of such com binations occurring at the same time and having significant consequences is at least comparable to the probability associated with the most severe hydrometeorological or seismically induced flood.

For relatively large streams, examples of acceptable combinations of runoff floods and seismic events that could affect the flood conditions at the plant arc con tained in Appendix A. Less-severe flood conditions, associated with the above seismic events, may be ac ceptable for small streams, that exhibit relatively short periods of flooding.

e. The effects of coincident wind-generated wave activity to the water levels associated with the worst site-related flood possible (as determined from paragraphs a, b, c, or d above) should be added to generally define the upper limit of flood potential.

Acceptable procedures are contained in Appendix A

of this guide.

2. As an alternative to designing hardened proteo ton' for all safety-related structures, systems, And components as specified in Regulatory Position 1 above, it is permissible not to provide hardened protection for some of these features if:

a. S ufficientt'warning time is shown to be available to shut the plant down and implement ade quate emergency procedures;

b. All safety-related structures, systems, and components identified in Regulatory Guide 1.29 (see footnote 3) arc designed to withstand the flood condi tions resulting from a Standard Project events with attendant wind-generated wave activity that may be produced by the worst winds of record and remain functional;

c. In addition to the analyses in paragraph 2.b

-above, reasonable combinations of less-severe flood conditions are also considered to the extent needed for a consistent level of conservatism; and

'Hardened protction means structural provisions Incorporated in the plant design that will protect safety-related structures, systems, and components from the static and dynamic effects of floods. In addition, each component of the protection must be passive and In place, as it is to be used for flood protection, during normal plant operation. Examples of the types of flood protection. to be provided for nuclear power plants are contained in Regulatory Guide 1.102.

sFor sites along streams, this event is characterized by the Corps of Engineers' definition of a Standard Project Flood. Such floods have been found to produce flow rates generally 40 to 60 percent of the PMF. For sites along seashores, this event may be characterized by the Corps of Engineers' definition of a Standard Project Hurricane. For other sites, a comparable level, of risk should be assumed.

1.59-7

d. In addition to paragraph 2.b above, at least those structures, systems, and components necessary fbr cold shutdown and molntenance thereof are designed with hardened protective features to remain functional while withstanding the entire range of flood conditions up to and including the worst site related flood probable (e.g., PMF, seismically in.

duced flood, hurricane, surge, seiche, heavy local precipitation) with coincident wind-generated wave action as discussed in Regulatory Position I above.

3. During the economic life of a nuclear power plant, unanticipated changes to the site environs which may adversely affect the flood-producing characteristics of the environs are possible. Examples include construction of a dam upstream or downstream of the plant or, comparably, construc tion of a highway or railroad bridge and embank ment that obstructs the flood flow of a river and con struction of a harbor or deepening of an existing har bor near a coastal or lake site plant.

Significantly adverse changes in the runoff or other flood-producing characteristics of the site environs, as they affect the design basis flood, should be iden tified and used as the basis to develop or modify emergency operating procedures, if necessary, to mitigate the effects of the increased flood.

4. Proper utilization of the data and procedures in Appendices B and C will result in PMF peak dis charges and PMS peak stiliwater levels which will in many cases be approved by the NRC staff with no further verification. The staff will continue to accept for review detailed PMF and PMS analyses that result in less conservative estimates than those ob tained by use of Appendices B and C. In addition, previously reviewed and approved detailed PMF and PMS analyses will continue to be acceptable even though the data and procedures in Appendices B and C result in more conservative estimates.

D. IMPLEMENTATION

The purpose of this section is to provide informa tion to license applicants and licensees regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide.

This guide reflects current NRC practice.

Therefore, except in those cases in which the appli cant or licensee proposes an acceptable alternative method for complying with specified portions of the Commission's regulations, the methods described herein are being. and will continue to be used in the evaluation of submittals for construction permit ap plications until this guide. is revised as a result of sug gestions from the public or additional'staff review.

1.59-8

APPENDIX A

PROBABLE MAXIMUM AND SEISMICALLY INDUCED

FLOODS ON STREAMS AND COASTAL AREAS

The material preiiously contained in Appendix A

has been replaced by American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standard.N170-1976, "Standards for Determining Design Basis Flooding at Power Reactor Sites," with the following exception:

Sections 5.5.4.2.3 and 5.5.5 of ANSI N170-1976 contain references to methods for evaluating the cro- sion failure of earthfill or roekfrdl dams and determin ing the resulting outflow hydrographs. The staff has found that some of these methods may not be conser vative because they predict slower rates of erosion than have historically occurred. Modifications to the models may be made to increase their conservatism.

Such modifications will be reviewed by the NRC staff on a case-by-case basis.

1.59-9

APPENDIX B

ALTERNATIVE METHODS OF

ESTIMATING PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOODS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

B.

I. INTRODUCTION

.....................

B.2 SCOPE

...........................

B.3 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD PEAK DISCHARGE

B.3.1 Use of PMF Discharge Determinations

........

B.3.2 Enveloping Isolines of PMF Peak Discharge.....

B.3.2.1 Preparation of Maps ................

B.3.2.2 Use of Maps .............

B.3.3 Probable Maximum Water Level ............

B.3.4 Wind-Wave Effects ...................

B.4 LIMITATIONS .......................

REFERENCES ...........................

FIGURES ..............................

TABLE

.............................

FIGURES

Page

.......1.59-12

1.59-12

1.59-13

1.59-14

1.59-15

1.59-23

1.59-15

1.59-16

1.59-17

1.59-18

1.59-19

1.59-20

1.59-21

1.59-22 Figure B. I-Water Resources Regions

.....................

B.2-Probable Maximum Flood (Enveloping Isolines)-100 Sq. Mi.

B.3-Probable Maximum Flood (Enveloping Isolines)-500 Sq. Mi.

B.4-Probable Maximum Flood (Enveloping Isolines)-1,000 Sq. Mi.

B.5-Probable Maximum Flood (Enveloping Isolines)-5,000 Sq. Mi.

B.6-Probable Maximum Flood (Enveloping Isolines)-10,000 Sq. Mi.

.B.7--Probable Maximum Flood (Enveloping Isolines)-20,000 Sq. Mi.

B.8-Example of Use of Enveloping Isolines ................

TABLE

Table B.I--Probable Maximum Flood Data

..

1.59-23

1.59-11

.

. .

.

I

g I

D

I

0.1 INTRODUCTION

This appendix presents timesaving alternative methods of estimating the probable maximum flood (PMF) peak discharge for nuclear facilities on non tidal streams in the contiguous United States. Use of the methods herein will reduce both the time neces sary for applicants to prepare license applications and the NRC staff's review effort.

The procedures are based on PMF values deter mined by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, by ap plicants for licenses that have been reviewed and ab cepted by the NRC staff, and by the staff and its con.

sultants. The information in this appendix was developed from a study made by Nunn, Snyder, and Associates, through a contract with NRC (Ref. 1).

PMF peak discharge determinations for the entire contiguous United States are presented in Table B. I.

Under some conditions, these may be used directly to evaluate the PMF at specific sites. In addition, maps showing enveloping isolines of PMF discharge for several index drainage areas are presented in Figures B.2 through B.7 for the contiguous United States east of the 103rd meridian, including instructions for and an example of their use (see Figure B.8). Because of the enveloping procedures used in preparing the maps, results from their use are highly conservative.

Limitations on the use of these generalized methods of estimating PMFs aretidgntified in Section B.4. These limitations should be considered in detail in assessing the applicability of the methods at specific sites.

Applicants for licenses for nuclear facilities at sites on nontidal streams in the contiguous United States have the option of using these methods in lieu of the more precise but laborious methods of Appendix A.

The results of application of the methods in this ap pendix will in many cases be accepted by the NRC

staff with no further verification.

0.2 SCOPE

The data and procedures in this appendix apply only to nontidal streams in the contiguous United States. Two procedures are included for nontidal streams east of the 103rd meridian.

Future studies are planned to determine the ap plicability of similar generalized methods and to develop such methods, if feasible, for other areas.

These studies, to be included in similar appendices, are anticipated for the main stems of large rivers and the United States west of the 103rd meridian, in cluding Hawaii and Alaska.

B.3 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD

PEAK DISCHARGE

The data presented in this section are as follows:

1. A tabulation of PMF peak discharge determina.

tions at specific locations throughout the contiguous United States. These data are subdivided into water resources regions, delineated on Figure B.1, and are tabulated in Table B.1.

2. A set of six maps, Figures B.2 through B.7, covering index drainage areas of 100, 500, 1,000,

5,000, 10,000, and 20,000 square miles, containing isolines of equal PMF peak discharge for drainage areas of those sizes east of the 103rd meridian.

B.3.1 Use of PMF Discharge Determinations The PMF peak discharge determinations listed in Table B.I are those computed by the Corps of Engineers, by the NRC staff and their consultants, or computed by applicants and accepted by the staff.

For a nuclear facility located near or adjacent to one of the streams listed in the table and reasonably close to the location of the PMF determination, that PMF may be transposed, with proper adjustment, or routed to the nuclear facility site. Methods of trans.

position, adjustment, and routing are given in stan dard hydrology texts and are not repeated here.

B.3.2 Enveloping Isollnes of PMF Peak Discharge B.3.2.1 Preparation of Maps For each of the water resources regions, each PMF

determination in Table B.A was plotted on logarithmic paper (cubic feet per second per square mile versus drainage area). It was found that there were insufficient data and too much scatter west of about the 103rd meridian, caused by variations in precipitation from orographic effects or by melting snowpack. Accordingly, the rest of the study was confined to the United States east of the 103rd meri dian. For sites west of the 103rd meridian, the methods of the preceding, section may be used.

Envelope curves were drawn for each region east of the 103rd meridian. It was found that the envelope curves generally paralleled the Creager curve (Ref. 2),

defined as Qi,46.0 CA (0.894A -0.048) -1 where Q is the discharge in cubic feet per second (cfs)

C is a. constant, taken as 100 for this study A is the drainage area in square miles.

1.59-12 K

Each PMF discharge determination of 50 square miles or more was adjusted to one or more of the six selected index drainage areas in accordance with the slope of the Creager curve. Such adjustments were made as follows:

PMF Within Drainage Area Range, sq. mi.

50 to 500

100 to 1,000

500 to 5,000

1,000 to 10,000

5,000 to 50,000

10,000 or greater Adjusted to Index Drainage Area, sq. mil.

100

500

1,000

5,000

10,000

20,000

. The PMF values so adjusted were plotted on maps of the United States east of the 103rd meridian, one map for each of the six index drainage areas. It was found that there were areas on each map with insuf ficient points to define isolines. To fill in such gaps, conservative computations of approximate PMF

peak discharge were made for each two-degree latitude-longitude intersection on each map. This was done by using enveloped relations between drainage area and PMF peak discharge (in cfs per inch of runoff), and applying appropriate probable max imum precipitation (PMP) at each two-degree latitude-longitude intersection. PMP values, obtained from References 3 and 4, were assumed to be for a 48 hour5.555556e-4 days <br />0.0133 hours <br />7.936508e-5 weeks <br />1.8264e-5 months <br /> storm to which losses of 0.05 inch per hour were applied. These approximate PMF values were also plotted on the maps for each index drainage area and the enveloping isolines were drawn as shown on Figures B.2 through B.7.

B.3.2.2 Use of Maps The maps may be used to determine PMF peak dis charge at a given site with a known drainage area as follows:

1. Locate the site on the 100-square-mile map, Figure B.2.

2. Read and record the 100-square-mile PMF peak discharge by straight-line interpolation between the isolines.

3. Repeat Steps 1 and 2 for 500, 1,000, 5,000,

10,000, and 20,000 square miles from Figures B.3 through B.7.

4. Plot the six PMF peak discharges so obtained on logarithmic paper against drainage area, as shown on Figure B.8.

5. Draw a smooth curve through the points.

Reasonable extrapolations above and below the defined curve may be made.

6. Read the PMF peak discharge at the site from the curve at the appropriate drainage area.

B.3.3 Probable Maximum Water Level When the PMF peak discharge has been obtained as outlined in the foregoing sections, the" PMF still water level should be determined. The methods given in Appendix A are acceptable for this purpose.

B.3.4 Wind-Wave Effects Wind-wave effects should be superimposed on the PMF stillwater level. Criteria and acceptable methods are given in Appendihx A.

BA LIMITATIONS

1. The NRC staff will continue to accept for review detailed PMF analyses that result in less con servative estimates. In addition, previously reviewed and approved detailed PMF analyses at specific sites will continue to be acceptable even though the data and procedures in this appendix result in more con servative estimates.

2 .The PMF estimates obtained as outlined in Sec tions B.3.1 and B.3.2 are peak discharges that should be converted to water level to which appropriate wind-wave effects should be added.

3. If there are one or more reservoirs in the drainage area upstream of the site, seismic and hydrologic dam failure' flood analyses should be made to determine whether such a flood will produce the design basis water level. Criteria and acceptable methods are included in Appendix A.

4. Because of the enveloping procedures used, PMF peak discharges estimated as outlined in Sec tion B.3.2 have a high degree of conservatism. If the PMF so estimated casts doubt on the-suitability of a site, or if protection from a flood of that magnitude would not be physically or economically feasible, consideration should be given to performing a detailed PMF analysis, as outlined in Appendix A. It is likely that such an analysis will result in ap preciably lower PMF levels.

'In this contest, "hydrologic dam failure" muama failure caused by a flood from the drainage area upstream of the dam.

1.59-13

REFERENCES

1. Nunn, Snyder, and Associates, "Probable Max imum Flood and Hurricane Surge Estimates," un published report to NRC, June 13, 1975 (available in the public document room).

2. W.P. Creager, J.D. Justin, and J. Hinds,

"Engineering for Dams," J. Wiley and Sons, Inc.,

New York, 1945.

3. U.S. Weather Bureau (now U.S. Weather Service, NOAA), "Seasonal Variation of the Probable Max imum Precipitation East of the 105th Meridian,"

Hydrometeorological Report No. 33, 1956.'

4. U.S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, "All Season Probable Maximum Precipitation-United States East of the 105th Meridian, for Areas from

1,000 to 20,000 Square Miles and Durations from 6 to 72 Hours," draft report, July 1972.2

'Note References 3 and 4 are being updated and combined into a single report by NOAA. This report is expected to be published in the near future as Hydrometeorological Report No. 51 with the ti tle "Probable Maximum Precipitation Estimates, United States East or the 105th Meridian."

1.59-14 K

y FIGURE I.1 WATER RESOURCES REGIONS

K

'0

iS

-ISOLINE

REPRESENTING PEAK-FLOW OF f--4

,

PUF iN 1,000CFS.

I

NOTE: PMF ISO UNIS ON TIS CHART REPRESENT ENVELOPED

V~LESOF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 10"SUARE MILE DRAINAGE

AREA UNDER NATURAL RIVER CONDITIONS. ACCORDINGLY.

PMIF VALUES OBTAINED DO NOT INCLUDE POSSIBLE CONTRISU

TIONS TO PEAK FLOW THAT WOULD RESULT FROM

UPSTREAM DAM FAILURES OR OTHER UNNATURAL EVENTS.

11G

1170

1159

113°

1110

100

1076

106 FIGURE 8.2 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD (ENVELOPING PMF ISOLINES) FOR 100 SQUARE MILES

(

LA

'0

0%

r

83o f

1

79*

770

750

730

710 ms

670

O6r IS- 101dM REPRESENOIN

PEAK FLOW OF

S

PMf IN 1.00

15

!m: P

IJOUNIs OW TWS CHART REPRESENT ENVELOPED

VALUES O PEAK RUIN

FRM

F

00SCOUAREMLE DRAINAGE0A

AREA UNME NATURAL RIVER CONID"IMRS. ACCORDINGLY.

j PU, VALUES OBTAINED 0o NOT INCLUDE POMSSBLE CONTRIMU.

TrONS TO PEAK FLOW THAT WOULD RESULT FROM UPSTREAM

DAM FAILURES OR OTHER UNNATURAL EV*

ETOS.

I

I*

I

IZ3-*

LI

m o 190

1170

11

. 113ie

1110

me

0

1070

105°

103

101°

99W

w7°

95o

3

9

89w

070

or

0

3or FIGURE 8.3 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD (ENVELOPING PMF ISOLINES) FOR 500 SQUARE MILES

K

k

-J

470

4v.

43.

41*

390

370

3s.

33.

310

29*

2r0

2SO

47r

470

[

450

4V.

41

360

37.

33.

310

290

27r

2fie

121'

11g°

117

115°

113.

I!I°

108'

1070

10°

103.

101°

9'

970

9i°

93w

91o

8w o

870

85.

83w FIGURE BA PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD (ENVELOPING PMF ISOLIIES) FOR 1,000 SQUARE MILES

-C

45.

43.

410*

30.

370

35p

33.

310

2B°

270

2r r

-

ISOLINE REPRESENTING PEAK FLOW OF

PMF IN 1.000 CFS.

NOTS: PiF ISOLWINS ON THIS CHART REPRESENT ENVELOPED

VAL WEE OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 1.Q0.04UARE MILE DRAINAGE

LAiREA UNDER NATURAL RIVER CONDITIONS. ACCORDINGLY.

IMF VALUES OBTAINED DO NOT INCLUDE POSSIBLE CONTRIBU

TIONS TO PEAK FLOW THAT WOULD RESULT FROM UPSTREAM

DAM FAILURES OR OTHER UNNATURAL EVENTS.

I

f I

I

A

!

--

t

(

.,p ImO

GO

-

ISOLINE REPRESENTING PEAK FLOW OF

PMF IN 1,000 CFS.

N

'

al

a a

I

NOTE: PMF ISOUNES ON THIS CHART REPRESENT ENVELOPED

VALUES OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 5,000.SQUARE MILE DRAINAGE

AREA UNDER NATURAL RIVER CONDITIONS. ACCORDINGLY,

PMF VALUES OBTAINED DO NOT INCLUDE POSSIBLE CONTRIBU

TIONS TO PEAK FLOW THAT WOULD RESULT FROM UPSTREAM D)

FAILURE Off OTHER UNNATURAL EVENTS.

a a

a I

--

-

1110

IO9

1070 100

103

1010

9 g7o

959 93

91m

90g or

0

8w

81°

790

770

75 FIGURE B.5 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD (ENVELOPING PMF ISOLINES) FOR 5.000 SQUARE MILES

Q

K

"Ip Ga

-"ISOLINE

REPRESENTING PEAK FLOWOF

PMF IN 11000 CFS.

NOTE: PMF ISOLINES ON THIS CHART REPRESENT ENVELOPED

VALUES OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 10.OOO4OUARE MILE DRAINAGE

AREA UNDER NATURAL RIVER CONDITIONS. ACCORDINGLY.

PUF VALUES OBTAINED DO NOT INCLUDE POSSIBLE CONTRIBU.

TIONS TO PEAK FLOW THAT WOULD RESULT FROM UPSTREAM DAM

FAILURES OR OTHER UNNATURAL EVENTS.

..

.

121

1190

117,1 115o

1130

1110

19o

107

1050

1030

1010

990

970

B5e

930

910

o n

870

850

830

FIGURE 8.6 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD (ENVELOPING PMF ISOLINES) FOR 10.000 SQUARE MILES

...

(

r

Q

I M I N 1, 0 IF

0 0 Z 6f i

ý

ROETE: PMF rJOt.NES ON THIS CHART REPRESENT ENVELOPED

1400,

100

VALUES OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 20.000-SUARE MILE DRAINAGE

"Pm VALUE*S OBTAINED 00 NOT INCLUDE POSSIBLE CONTRIt-

%

1IONS T'O PEAK FLOW THAT WOULD RESULT FROM UPSTREAM DAM

P2 DAM FALRSOR OTHER UNNATUAL EVENTS.

ii°

119e

1*7

115°

113°

11 i09°

"

os i0o0°13°

, i01°

99p°

g

95P

g°93°

91°

89

87°

5

3 FIGURE B.7 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD (ENVELOPING PMF ISOLINES) FOR 20,000 SQUARE MILES

y

'a

I

I I I

1 I

-EXAMPLE:

FOR DRAINAGE AREA OF

.2,300 S. MI.AT LAT. 43@,

LONG. 950, DETERMINE PMF

PEAK DISCHAR.GE.

I I II I

I

i'-

.

I-

-I

.4

tI ; ;

i , - 4 -4

4 I * *

I I-

I

Si Wil I

I

ii

-%SLUTIUN:

FOR DRAINAGE AREA OF

2,300 SO. MI., PMF PEAK

4,00CF&.

"

I

I I,

,______....

__

I

I I

11 I...11L..!.

100

1000

10,000

DRAINAGE AREA, SQUARE MILES

FIGURE B.8 EXAMPLE OF USE OF ENVELOPING ISOLINES

S-C

I

jul11 g

iWW

IULm

<

co a

0. u:

,c<

0

00

L1A

.j m

0

i

.

m.

Im,,,

10

100,000

/'If]"POINTS FROM

I

..

."

FIGURES

B;.2-B.7 d

X

I

I I I I

I

air J!*d*

I

ilia

y TABLE B.1 PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD DATA ( )

K

"Drainage Basin Average PM? Peak Project State River Basin Stream Area (n inches)

Discharge North Atlantic Region (Northeast Atlantic Sub-reion)

Ball Mountain Barre Falls Beaver Brook Birch Hill Black Rock Blackwater Buffumville Colebrook Conant Brook East Barre East Branch East Brimfield Edward McDowell Everett Franklin FClas Hal Meadow Hancock Hodges Village Hop Brook Hopkinton Knight**lle Littleville Mad River Mansfield Hollow Nookagee Northfield North Hartland North Springfield Otter Brook Phillips Sucker Brook S

yMountain Thomaston Vt.

Mass.

N. He Mass.

Conn.

N. H.

Mass.

Conn.

Mass*

Vt.

Conne Mass.

N. H.

N. He N.H.

Conne Como.

Mass.

cozme No H.

MaSs.

Mass.

Conn*

Mass.

come Vt.

Vt.

Maass Come.

N. H.

Conn.

Connecticut Connecticut Connecticut Connecticut Housatonic Merrimack Thames Connecticut Connecticut Winooski Housatonic Thames Merrimack Merrimack Merrimack Connecticut Housatonic Thames Housatonic Merrimack Connecticut Connecticut Connecticut Thames Merrimack Housatonic Connecticut Connecticut Connecticut Merrimack Connecticut Connecticut Housatonic West River Ware River Beaver Brook Millers River Branch Brook Blackwater River Little River Farmington River Conant Brook Jail Branch Naugatuck River Quineaaug River Nubanusit River Piseataquog River Pemigewasset River Hall Meadow Brook Hancock Brook French River Hop Brook Contoocook River Westfield River Westfield River Mad River Natchaug River Phillips Brook Northfield Brook Ottauquechee River Black River Otter Brook Phillips Brook Sucker Brook Ashuelot River Naugatuck River

'0

172

55

6.0

175

20

128

26

118

7.8

39

9s2

68

.44

64

1,000

17

12

31

16

426

162

52

18

159

11

5.7

220

158

47

5.0

100

97

20.6

20.1

21*3

18*3

22.2

18.3

26.6

22.?

24.4

21.5

24.0

24.2

19.5

20,7

15.8

24.0

26.2

25.0

17.4

18.8

25.1.

24.0

19.8

21.8

24.4

19.3

20.0

19.1

24.2

22.4

22.2

24.5

18.1

18.9

19.7

17.1

20.6

16,4

25.3

21.1

23.2

18.6

22.8

22.9

18.3

18,,2

13.3

22.8

22.3

23.8

14.7

17.6

22.4

22.8

18.5

20.2

23.2

17.2

18.3

17.9

23.0

21.4

19.6

22.4

190,000

61,000

10,.00

88.500

35,000

95,000

36,500

165,000

11,900

52,500

15,500

73,900

43,000

68,000

300,000

26,600

20,700

35,600

26,400

135,000

160,000

98000

30,000

125,000

17,750

.9000

199,000

157,000

45,000

7,700

6,500

63,000

158,000

a

TABLE 0.1 ( )

River Basin Stream Drainage Area ta m4 I

Basin Average (in inches)

Townshend Trumbull, Tully Union Village Vermont-Yankee Waterbury West Hill West Thompson Westville Whitemanville Wrightsville Vt.

Conn.

Mass.

Vt.

Mass.

Coeme Mass.

Mass.

Vt.

Connecticut Pequonnook Connecticut Connecticut Connecticut Winooski Blackstone Thames Thames Merrimack Winooski West River Pequonnook River Tully River Ompompanoosuc River Connecticut River Waterbury River West River Quinebaug River Quinebaug River Whitman River North Branch North Atlantic Region (Mid-Atlantic Sub-region)

Almond Alvin R. Bush Aquashicola Arkport Aylesworth Baird Beltzville Bloomington Blue Marsh Burketown Cabins Chambersburg Christiana Cootes Store Coiaaesque Curwensavile Dawsonville Douglas Point East Sidney Edes Fort Fairview Foster Joseph Sayers Francis e. Walter N. Y.

Pa.

N. Y,

Pa.

w. Va.

Pa.

Md.

Pa.

Va.

We Va*

Md.

Del.

Va.

Pa.

Md.

N. YO

we Va*

Md.

Pao Pas Susquehanna Susquehanna Delaware Susquehanna Susquehanna Potomac Delaware Potomac Delaware Potomac Potomac Potomaa Delaware Potomac Susquehanna Susquehanna Pot *r*-c Potomac Susquehanna Potomac Potomac Susquehanna Delaware Canacadea Creek Kettle Creek Aquashicola Creek Canister River Aylesworth Creek Buffalo Creek Pohopoco Creek North branch Tulpehockan Creek North River South Branch Conococheague River Christiana River North Fork River Cowanesque River Susquehanna River Seneca Creek Poto mac River Oulelot River Cacapon River Conococleaque Creek Bald Eagle Creek Lehigh River

4r Project State PIF Peak Discharge

--

-

-;%

wg*Ru"W

.

1 R&O I

278

14

50

126

6,266

109

28

74

32

18

68

21.3

23.0

20.0

17.0

18.9

28.0

20.4

25.4

21.4

20.2

22.0

24.0

28.0

22.5

23.8

34.0

27.1

22.2

24.0

24.3

20.8

28.9

32.1

22.5

21.9

22.0

13.4

24.0

21.2

22.9

21.8

22.4

17.2

21.8

16.6

15.8

16.0

25.6

17'.5

22.8

19.8

17.3

18.8

21.1

24.2

17.7

22.0

30.2

25.6

17.6

21.3

21.2

16.8

26.0

28.3

19.1

18.5

18.9

27.1

10.2

22.1

17.3

18.8

19.0

19.8

228,000

26,700

47,000

110,0000

480,000

128.000

26,ooo

85,000

38,400

25,000

74,000

59.000

154,000

42.500

33.400

13,700

14,600

68,000

196,000

11o,600

272,200

l955,900

81,400

39,200

140,200

285,000

205. 000

161,900

1,490,000

99,900

410,800

150,100

251,000

1700000

56

226

66"

31

6.2

10

97

263

175

375

314

141

41

215

298

365s

0l1

13,317

202

679

494

339

288 C

t T"

o

Q

K1 Drainage Basin Average PMF Peak Project State River Basin Stream Area (in inches)

Discharge

(2.so.m

_ Pec. Ruoff (cfs)

Franklin Frederick Front Royal Fulton (Harrisbrg)

Gathright Geun. Edgar Jadwin Great Cacapon Harriston Hawk Mountain Headsvifle John H. Kerr Karo Keyser Kitsmiller Leesburg Leidstown Licking Creek Little- Cacapon Maiden Creek Martinsburg Mikville Moorefield Moorefield Newark North Anna North Mountain Peach Bottom Perryman Petersburg Philpott Prompton Raystown Royal Glen Salem Church Savage River Seneca Sharpeburg V. Va..

Md.

Va, Pa.

We Va.

Va*

Pa.

W. Va.

Va.

V. Va.

V,. Va.

Md.

Va.

Mde W. Va@

W. Va.

Pa.

V, Va.

V, Va, Del*

Va.

we Va.

Pa.

Md, V. Va, Va.

Pat Pa.

Md.

Va.,

Md.

Mde Potomac Potomac Potomac Susquehanna James Delaware Potomac Potomac Delaware Potomac Roanoke Potomac Potomac Potomac Potomac Potomac Potomac Potomac Delaware Potomac Potomac Potomac Potomac Delaware Pamunkey(York)

Potomac Susquehanna Chesapeake Bay Potomac Roanoke Delaware Susqiehanna Potomac Rappahannock Potomac Potomac Potomac South Branch Monocacy River SoFk.Shenandoah River Susquehanna River Jackson River Dyberry Creek Cacapon River South River E.Br. Delaware River Patterson Creek Roanoke River South Branch North Branch North Branch Goose Creek Fishing Creek Licking Creek Little Cacapon River Maiden Creek Opequon Creek Shenandoah River South Branch Soo Pl.

South Branch White Clay River North Anna River Back Creek Susquehanna River Bush River South Branch Smith River Lackawaxen River Juniata River (Br.)

South Branch Rappahannock River Savage River Potomac River Antietem Creek'

T

TABLE B.1 ( )

%0

urn

182

817

1,638

24,100

65

677

222

812

219

7,800

1,577

"495

225

338

7.1

158

101

161

272

3),o01

1,173

283

66

3143

231

27,000

118

642

212

60

960

640

1,598

105

11,400

281

24,2

23.2

18.0

12.7

ý24.11

24.8

21o2

29.6

.16.5

23.4

16.8

18.9

21.5

22.3

26.5

34.8

29.0

29.7

27.3

27.2

16.2

18.0

21.1

29.8

25.0

27.9

12.7

1903

27.5

25.0

21.4

19.3

23.6

26.3

13.5

26.6

20o.6

20.9

114.3

8.2

21.3

17.3

26.5

12.7

19.0

12.9

14.9

16.o

17.1

2*4.2

32.7

26.1

27.4

23.5

24.1

11.7

1*4.0

17.1

26.0

21.3

24.8

8.2

15.3

24*3.

24.2

17.5

15.3

19.6

22.2

10.3

23.5

174,000.

.363,00

419,000

1,750,000

246,000

119,700

373,100

153,700

.202,000

176,000

1,000,000

430,000

2799200

120,200

340,900

12,200

125,800

122,700

118,000

17?4.600

592,000

389,700

173,800

103,000

220,000

256,000

1,750,000

87,400

208,700

160,000

87,190

353,*400

208,700

552,000

107,400

1,393,000

154,900

TABLE B.1 ( )

Drainage Basin Average PMF Peak Project State River Basin Stream Area (in inches)

Discha ge (sq.mi.)

Prec.

Runoff (cfre)

Sherrill Drive Six Bridge Springfield Staunton Stillwater Summit Surry Tioga-Hammond Tocks Island Tonoloway Town Creek Trenton Trexler Tri-Towns Verplanck Washington, D, C,

Wayneaboro West Branch Whitney Point Winchester York Indian Rock Allatoona Alvin W. Vogtle Bridgewater Buford Carters Catawba Cherokee Claiborne Clark Hill Coffeeville Cowans Ford Demopolis Falls Lake Md.

Md.

WO Va.

Va.

Pa.

N. J,

Va.

Pa.

N. Jo Md.

Md.

N. J.

Pa.

We Va.

N. Y.

Mid.

Va.

W. Va.

No Y.

Va.

Pa.

Potomac Potomac Potomac Potomac Susquehanna Delaware James Susquehanna Delaware Potomac Potomac Delaware Delaware Potomac Hudson Potomac Potomac Potomac Susquehanna Potomac Susqueha~nna Rock Creek Monocacy River South Branch South Branch Shen.

Lacawanna River Delaware River James River Tioga River Delaware River Tonoloway Creek Town Creek Delaware River Jordon Creek North Branch Hudson River Potomac River South River Conococheague River Otselie River Opeqnon Creek Codorus Creek South Atlantic-Gulf Region Ca.

Ga, N. C.

Ga.

N. C.

N. C,

Ala.

Ga.

Ala.

N. C.

Ala, N. C.

Albaba-Coosa Savannah Santee Apalachicola Alabama-Coosa Santee Congaree-Santee Alabama-Coosa Savannah Toabigbee Santee Tombigbee Neuse Etowah River Savannah River Catawba River Chattahoochee River Coosawattee River Catawba River Broad River Alabama River Savannah River Black Warrior River Catawba River Tombigbee River Neuse River

62

308

1,471

325

37

11, 100

9,517

"402

3,827

112

144

6,780

52

478

12,65o

11,5460

136

78

255

120

94

1,110

6,144

380

1,040

376

3,020

1,550

21,520

.6,144

18,600

1,790

15,300

76o

30.6

27.1

17.5

25.0

27.3

23.5

13.3

29.9

27.5

25.2

21.6

14.0

13.4

29.6

30.7

20.7

28.9

22.1

28.3

24.0

15.5

21.3

24.1

19.2

10.5

26.8

25.2

22.6

16.4

9.7

10.2

26.5

27.0

19.1

25o8

1707

22.2

19.8

21.8

14.5

21.7

19.7

26.6

22.3

16.6

14.9

21.8

13.6

16.7

23.2

12.3

14,5

11.2

14.3

21.2 C

0%

111,900

225o,00

405, 000

226:000

39,600

1,000,000

318,000

576,300

117,600

102,900

830,000

5500

268,000

1,100,000

1,280,000

116,000

78,700

102,000

142,l00

74,300

44O,000

1,001,000

187,000

428,900

203,100

674,000

560,000

682,500

1,140,000

743,400

636,000

1,068,000

323,000

C

1"

Q

TABLE B.1 ( )

Drainage Basin Average PM? Peak Project State River Basin Stream Area (in inches)

Discharge (soemi.)

Prec, Runoff

(4f8)

k'

Gainsville Hartwell Holt Howards Mill Jim Woodruff John H. Bankhead Jones Bluff Laser Creek Lookout Shoals Lower Auchumpkee MeGuire Millers Ferry Mountain Island New Hope Oconee Oconee Okatibbee Oxford Perkins Randleman Reddies Rhodhiss Shearon Harris Sprewell Bluff Trotters Shoals Walter F. George Warrior West Point V. Kerr Scott Bedford Bristol Fall Creek Ithaca Jamesville Linden Ala.

Ga.

Ala.

N. C.

Fla.

Ala.

Ga.

N. Co Ga.

N. C.

Ala.

N. C.

S. C.

Miss.

N. Co N. Co N. C.

N. C.

Ga.

Ala.

Ga.

N. Co Ohio N. Yo N. Y.

N. Y.

Tombigbee Savannah Warrior Cape Fear Apalachicola Tombigbee Alabama Apalachicola Santee Apalachicola Santee Alabama Santee Cape Fear Savannah Savannah Pascagoula Santee Pee Dee Cape Fear Pee Dee Santee Cape Fear Apalachicola Savannah Apalachicola Tombigbee Apalachioola Pee Dee Cuyahoga Oswego Oswego Oswego Oswego Niagara Tombigbee River Savannah River Warrior River Deep River Apalachicola River Black Warrior River Alabama River Laser Creek Catawba River Flint River Catawba River Alabama River Catawba River New Hope River Keowee River Little River Okatibb"e Creek Catawba River Yadkin River Deep River Red1dies River Catawba River White Oak Creek Flint River Savannah River Chattahoochee River Black Warrior River Chattahoochee River Yadkin River Great Lakes Region Tinkers Creek Mud Creek Fall Creek Six Mile Creek Butternut Creek Little Tonawanda Creek

7,142

2,088

49232

626

17,150

3,900

16,300

1, Ll0

1,450

1,970

1,770

20,700

1,860

1,690

439

148

154

1,310

2,t473

169

94

1I

090

. 79

1,210

2,900

7,460

5,828

3,440

348

91

29

123

43

37

22

19.6

16.8

24.8

18.8

22.1

19.2

26.8

24.2

17.6

12.3

22.3

19.4

14o.2

11.6

24.6

20.7

23.7

19.8

14.7

12.1

22.0

19.4

26.5

23.5

26.6

.33.0

28.4

28.6-

26.0

28.0

24.8

25.8

24.0

16.6

19.5

21.9

25.6

28.6

29.9

17.1

26.9

26.0

30.8

.21.3

19.1

15.2

16.6

17.4

21.5

25.9

28.1

16.1

25.1

24.1

29,0

-J

702,400

875,000

650,000

305.000

1,133,800

670,300

664,000

303,600

492,000

355,600

750.000

844,000

362,000

511,000

450,000

245,000

87,"00

479,000

440,600

126,000

174, 200

379,000

163,500

318,000

800,000

843,000

5549000

440,000

318,000

79,000

64,900

63,400

77,900

35,200

64,400

TABLE 8.1 ( )

Pr ject Mount Morris Onondago Oran Portageville Quanicassee Quanicassee Qouanicassee Standard Corners Alum Creek Barkley Barren Beaver Valley Beech Fork Big Blue Big Darby Big Pine Big Walnut Birch Bluestone Booneville Brookville Buckhorn Burnsvlfle Cae.ar Creek Cagles Mill Carr Fork Cave Run Center Hill Clarence J. Brown Claytor Clifty Creek Dale Hollow Deer Creek Delaware Dewey State N. Y.

N. Y.

Mich.

N. Y.

Ohio Ky.

Ky.

Pa.

W. Va.

Ind.

Ohio Ind.

Ind, we Va.

W. Va.

Ky.

Ind.

Ky.

W. Va.

Ohio Ind.

Ky.

Temn.

Ohio Va.

Tmd.

Tenn.

Ohio Ohio Ky.

River Basin Genesee River Lake Ontario Oswego Genesee Saginaw Bay Saginaw Bay Saginaw Bay Genesee Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio SStream Genesee River Onondigo Greek Limestone Creek Genesee River Saginaw River Tittabawassee River Quanicassee River Genesee River Ohio Region Alum Creek Cumberland River Barren River Ohio River Twelve Pole Creek Big Blue River Big Darby Creek Big Pine Creek Big Walnut Creek Birch River Nea River So. Fk. Kentucky River White.ater River M. Fk.Kentucky River Little Kanawha River Caesar Creek Mill Creek No; Fk. Kentucky River Licking River Caney Fork Buck Creek New River Clifty Creek Obey River Deer Creek Olentangy River Big Sandy River Ara ae Area.

1,077

68

47

983

6,260

2,o40

70

265

123

8,700

940

23,000

78

269

326

197

142

4,565

665

379

408

165

237

295

58

826

2,174

82

2,382

145

935

278

381

207 Basin Average

(,ininches)

7Prec.

Runoff Prec Ruoff (cfsm

17.0

14.6

24.2

23.3

25.1

23.4

17.8

15.8

22.3

20.3

24.6

22.6

17.6

26.4

23.5

24.1

22.4

24-0

28.:4

23.2

24.2

23.8

24.8

24.1

24.6

27.4

22.8

22.-3

29.0

22.3

24.9

23.8

22.9

22.7

25.0

21.8

21.5

16.9

23.5

21.2

21.3

20.4

22.0

25.2

13.8

21.0

22.1

21.5

22.3

21.9

22.7

25.0

20.6

21.8

26.7

18.0

23.0

23.3

20.1

20.4

22.6 r

Go PJ? Peak Discharge

385,000

61,800

80,790

359,000

440,000

270,000

46,000

189,900

3.10,000

1,000,000

531,000

1,500,000

84,000

161,000

294,000

174,000

144,ooo

102,000

410,000

425,000

272,000

239,000

138,800

230,200

159,000

132,500

510,000

696,0oo0

121,000

1,1091000

112,900

435to00

160,000

296,000

75,500

(

r TABLE B.1 ( )

Q

TABLE B.1 ( )

River Basin Drainage stream Area f-

'-

Basin Average (in inches)

Dillon Dyes Eagle Creek N. Br. Clarion East Fork East Lynn Pishtrap Grayson Green River Helm John W. Flannagan J. Percy Priest Kehoe Kinzua Lafayette Laurel Leading Creek Lincoln Logan Louisville Mansfield Martins Fork Meigs Meigs Mill Creek Mississinena Michael J. Kirwin Monroe Nuddy Creek Nolin N. Br. Kokosing N. Fk. Pound River Paint Creek Paintsville Panthers Creek Patoka R. D. Bailey Rough River Ohio Ohio Ky.

Pa.

Ohio w. Va.

Ky.

Ill.

Va.

Tenn.

Ky.

Pa.

Ind.

Ky.

W. Va.

Ill'

Ohio Ill.

Ind.

Ky.

Ohio Ohio Ohio Ind.

Ohio Ind.

Pa.

Ky.

Ohio Va.

Ohio Ky.

V. Va.

Ind.

W. Va.

Ky.

Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Licking River Dyes Fork Eagle Creek E. Br. Clarion River E. Fk. Little Miami River Twelve Pole Creek Levisa Fk. Sandy River Little Sandy River Green River Skillet Fk. Wabash River Pound River Stones River Tygarts Creek Allegheny River Wildcat Creek Laurel River Leading Creek Eabarras River Clear Creek Little Wabash River Raccoon Creek Cumberland River Meigs Creek Meige Creek Mill Creek Mississinewa River Mahoning River Salt Creek Muddy Creek Nolin River N. Br. Kokosing River N. Fk. Pound River Paint Creek Paint Creek, Panther Creek Patoka River Guyandotte River Rough River y

Project State K

PNF Peak PMF Peak Discharge (vcfa

%0

t0

748

44

292

?2

342

133

395

196

682

210

222

892

127

2,180

791

282

146

915

84

661

216

56

72

27

181

809

80

441

61

703

44

18

573

92

24

168

540

454

19.8

30.?

24.?

22.7

23.8

29.4

26.1

27.5

26.5

24.8

27.6

25.9

26.0

16.4

20.6

25.9

25.0

21.2

29.5

22.1

25.9

27.9

29.5

32.2

24.0

20,6

26.0

25.9

22.8

14.2

25.4

35.3

21.8

26.3

36.7

.25.6

23.1

27.6

16.3

27.8

22.1

18.9

21.2

26.5

23.2

24.7

231.9

22.6

24.9

18.8

23.4

12.8

18.5

20.7

22.5

19.0

27.0

19.9

23.0

22.7

26.6

29.3

21.4

18.4

20.1

25.4

19.6

13.2

22.6

32.2

18.8

23.8

33.9

23.5

20.3

25.1 thinnff k

L

246,000

49,500

172,800

41,500

313,200

72,000

320,000

83,300

"109,000

152,800

235,800

430,000

105,900

115,000

182,000

120,000

131,000

502,000

78,000

310,000

175,800

61,800

72,100

45,500

92,000

196,000

51,800

366,000

59,300

158,000

50,000

51,200

305,000

?7,500

59,800

292,000

349,000

358,000

TABLE B.1 ( )

River Basin Stroaa Drainage Area

.~n4 Basin Average t(in inches)

=1 I e a

0

aw t&*E

Rowlesbsrg Salamonia Stonewall Jackson Sumersville Sutton Taylorville Tom Jenkins Union City Utica West Fork West Fk. Mill Ck.

Whiteoak Wolf Creek Woodcock Yatesville Youghiogheny Zimmer, Vm. H.

Bellefonte Browns Ferry Sequoyah Ames Byron Bear Creek Blue Earth Blue Earth Carlyle Clarence Cannon Clinton Coralville Duane Arnold Faradale Fondulac Friends Creek w. Va.

Ind.

W. Va.

V. Va.

W. Va.

Ky.

Ohio Pa.

Ohio W. Va.

Ohio Uhio Ky.

Pa.

Ky.

Pa.

Ohio Ala.

Tenn.

Iowa Ill.

Mo.

Minn.

Hinn.

Ill, Mo.

I Li.

Iowa Iowa Ill.

Ill.

Il1.

Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohlo Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Ohio Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Upper Miss.

Miss.

Cheat River Salamonla River West Fork River Gauley River Elk River Salt River Hocking River French Creek N. Fk. Licking River W. Fk. Little Kanawha Mill Creek Whiteoak Creek Cumberland River Woodcock Creek Blaine Creek Youghiogheny River Ohio River Tennessee Region Tennessee River Tennessee River Tennessee River Upper Mississippi Region Skunk River Rock River Bear Creek Minnesota River Blue Earth River Kaskaskia River Salt River Salt Creek Iowa River Cedar River Farm Creek Fondulac Creek Friends Creek

936

553

102

803

537

353

33

222

112

238

30

214

5789

46

208

"434.

70,800

23.340

27,130

20,650

314

8,000

28

11,250

3,550

2,680

2,318

296

3,084

6,250

26

5,4

133

21.2

21.3

24, N

23.8

20.4

24.8

26.?

20.*3

24.7

24.4

31.9

24.5

20.6

23.5

25.2

18.4

.19.0

22.2

21.1

20.4

22.2

25.8

17.8

22.1

21.8

30.0

21.6

20.0

20.9

22.6

25.4

21.3

18.4

29.0

26.2

14.2

10.9

18.4

14.8

19.2

15.8

21.8

15.7

20.8

14.4

24.0

21.4

27.8

22.1

19.9

21.6 C

Project State PMF Peak Discharge Ut

%0

331.000

201,000

85,500

"412,000

222,400

"426,000

"43000

87,500

73,700

156,4oo

81,600

134,000

9969000

37,700

l8, 000

151,000

2,150,000

1,160,000

1,200,000

1,205,000

87,200

308,000

38o000

283,&00

206,000

246,000

4?76,200

99,500

326,000

316,000

67,300

21,200

83,160

C

Q

TABLE B.1 ( )

River Basin Stream .

Drainage Area (sa.mi. )

Basin Average (in inches)

Prec.

Runoff Jefferson Lapa'ge Mankato Meramec Park Montevideo Monticello New Ulm New Ulm Oakley Prairie Island Red Rock Rend Saylorville Shelbyville Arkabutla Enid Grenada Sardis Union Vappapello Burlington Fox Hole Homoe Kindred Lake Ashtabula Orwell Bear Creek Big Bend Blue Springs Blue Stem Bowman-Haley Branched Oak Iowa Wisc.

Minna Mo.

Minn.

Ill.

Minn.

Iowa Ill.

Iowa Ill, Miss.

Miss.

Mo.

Mot N. D.

N. D.

N. D.o N. D.

Minn.

Colo.

S. D.

Mo.

Nebr.

N. D.

Nebr.

Upper Miss.

Upper Miss..

Upper Miss.

Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Souris Souris Red of Red of Red of Red of Miss.

Miss.

North North North North Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Raccoon River Kickapoo River Minnesota River Meramec River Minnesota River Mississippi River Minnesota River Cottonwood River Sangamon River Mississippi River Des Moines River Big Muddy River

.Des Moines River Kaskaskia River Lower Mississippi Region Coldwater River Yacona River Yalobusha River Tallahatchia River Bourbeuse River St. Francis River Souris-Red-Rainy Region Souris River Des Lacs. River Park River Sheyenne River Sheyenne River dtter Taln River Missouri Region Bear Creek Missouri River Blue Springs Creek Olive Br. Salt Creek Grand River Oak Creek Project State K

PMF Peak Discharge (of s)

"Ih

1,532

266

14,900

1,407

6,180

13,900

9,500

1,280

808

44,755

12,323

"488

5o823

1,030

1,000

560

1,320

'1, 545

771

1,310

9,490

939

229

3,020

983

1,820

2,6

5,840

33

17

446

89

21.7

22.8

13.9

22.9

15.2

14o4

21.2

23.5

12,1

2?.5

13.8

22.1

22.5

25.4

24.0

32.5

25.0

13.0

13.2

19.9

15.2

13.4

12.4

17.1

24.4

26.5

25.0

15.5

20.1

19.0

18.9

10.6

17.5

11.6

11.1

]1.6

17.2

7.5

21.5

10.3

19.1

21o2

24.?

23P1

26.0

19.9

11.7

5.7

12.4

12.3

8,6

9.5

14.7

6.7

9.0

23.8

2J.7

12.7

16.8

267,300

128,000

329,000

552,000

263,0oo

365,000

263,000

128,000

178,000

910,000

613o000

308,200

277,800

142,000

430,000

204,900

310,800

2Q0,400

264,000

344,000

89,100

52,700

35,000

68.700

86,500

25,500

225,000

725,000

42,400

69,200

110,000

93,600

TABLE B.1 ( )

River Basin Stream Drinage Area

1A

Basin Average (in inches)

-'

=-

&

,m-A.I

B*raymar MO.

Brookfield mo.

Bull Hook Mont.

Chatfield Colo.

Cherry Creek Colo.

Clinton Kans.

Cold Brook S. Do Conestoga Nebr.

Cottonwood Springs S. D.

Dry Fork Ko.

East Fork Mo.

Fort Scott Kans.

Fort Peck Mont.

Fort Randall S. D.

Fort St. Vrain Colo.

Garrison No D,

Gavins Point Nebr.

Grove Kans.

Harlan County Nebr.

Ha=y S. Truman Mo.

Hillsdale Kane.

Holmes Nebr.

Kanopolls Kane.

LUnneus Mo.

Long Branch Mo.

Longview Mo.

Melvern Kans.

Mercer Mo.

Milford Kanso Mill Lake Mo.

Oahe So Do Olive Creek Nebr.

Onag Kans.

Pattonsburg Mo.

Pawnee Nebr.

Perry Kano, Pioneer Colo.

Pause do Terre Mo.

Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Hissouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Shoal Creek West Yellow Creek Bull Hook Creek South Platte River Cherry Creek Wakarusa River Cold Brook Holmes Creek Cheyenne River Fishing River Fishing River Marmaton River Missouri River Missouri River South Platte River Missouri River Missouri River Soldier Creek Republican River Osage River Big Bull Creek Antelope Creek smoky Hill River.

Locust River So Fk. Little Chariton Blue River Marias des Cygnes River Weldon River Republican River Mill Creek Missouri River Olive Br. Salt Creek Vermillion Creek Grand River Pawnee Br. Salt Creek Delawre River Republican River Poaue do Terre River

390

140

54

3,018

.385

367

15

26

30.2

19

279

57,725

14:150

4,700

123,215

16,000

259

7,141

7,856

144

5,4

2,560

546

109

50

349

"427

3,620

9.5

62,550

8.2

301

2,232

36

1,U17

918

611

24.7

22.2

24.5

22.0

10.8

13.2

2.0

2309

9.5

23.6

22.4

6.4

25.2

21.9

18.7

11.1

26.1

22.5

25.7

24ol

23.8

22.7

3.2

3.7,

2.7

3.3

23.8

22.7

7.6

2.8

13.1

25.4

24.3

27.1

23.8

6.9

3.6

2397

21.2

4.5

21.9

26.2

23.4

23.1

22.1

21.0

17.8

8.8

5.0

27.7

26.4

6.5

26.0

22o7

23.5

22.2

18.8

16.3

23.5

2O02

21.5

18.4

15.0

8.3

23.9

21.6

.

Project State PM? Peak Discharge U'

173,800

64,5S00

26,2oo

.584,500

350,000

153,500

95,700

52,000

74,700

19,460,

62,700

198.000

360,000

80,000

500,000

1,026,000

642,000

79,800

"485, 000

1,060,000

190,500

41,600

456,300

242,300

66,500

74,800

182,000

274,000

757,400

13,000

946,000

36,650

251,000

400,100

59,000

387,400

390,000

362,000

C

r

Q

TABLE B.1 ( )

River Basin Stroam Drainage Area t.

m.

,4 Basin Average fin Inches)...

Pomona Rathbun Smithville Stagecoach Stockton Thomas Hill Tomahawk Trenton Tuttle Creek Twin Lakes Wagon Train Wilson Wolf-Coffee Yankee Hill Arcadia Bayou Bodcau Beaver Bell Foley Big Hill Big Pine Birch Blakely Mountain Blue Mountain Boswell Broken Bow Bull Shoals Candy Canton Cedar Point Clayton Cleariater Conchas Cooper Copan Council Grove County Line Kans.

Iowa Mo.

Nebr.

Mo.

Kane.

Mo.

Kans*

Nebr.

Kans.

Nebr.

Okla.

La.

Ark.

Kans.

Tex.

Okla.

Ark.

Okla, Okla.

Ark.

Okla, Okla.

Kans.

Okla.

Mo.

N. Mex.

Tex.

Okla, Kan.s Moo Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Missouri Arkansas Red White Arkansas Arkansas Red Arkansas Red Arkansas Red Red White.

Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Red White

.Arkansas Red Arkansas Arkansas.

White

110 Mile Creek Chariton River Little Platte River Hickman Br. Salt Creek Sac River Little Chariton River Tomahawk Creek Thompson River Big Blue River S. Br. Middle Creek Hickman Br. Salt Creek Saline River Blue River Cardwell Br. Salt Creek Arkansas-White-Red Region Deev Fork River Bayou Bodcau White River Strawberry River Big Hill Creek Big Pine Creek Birch Creek Ouachita River Petit Jean River Boggy Creek Mountain Fork White River Candy Creek North Canadian River Cedar Creek Jackfort Creek Black River South Canadian River South Sulphur River Little Caney River Grand River James River Project State K

Discharge refs)~

Ut

322

549

213

9e7

1,160

147

24

1,079

9,556

11

16

1,917

45

8.,4

105

656

1,186

78

37

95

66

1,105

500

2,273

7.54

6,036

43

7,600

119

275.

898

7.409

476

505

246

153

26.2

23.7

23.9

26.o

19.7

25.0

26.4

22.6

14.5

25.9

25.2

20.2

26.1

26.0

28.5

35.3

24.3

26.4

25.4

31.3

29.0

21.5

21.8

27.6

32.5

15.2

29.3

12.4

25.4

31.3

16.0

4,8

30.9

26.2

25.5

27.2

25.2

21.1

20.2

22.7

18.9

23.,0

24.8

20.1

8.1

22.6.

21.9

10.8

24.5

22.7

24.9

33.6

22.4

23.5

23.6

29.3

26.0

19.6

18.2

29,4

1.0

27.5

4.1

22.6

29.3

13.8

3.0

29.2

21.1

22U7

25.3

186,000

188.000

185,000

50,500

4?0,000

?79000

26,800

342,400

798,000

56,000

53,500

252,000

58,000

58,400

144,000

168,?00

480,000

57,000

47,500

86,000

91,000

418,000

258'000

405,000

569,000

?65,000

67,500

371,000

208,000

240,000

432,000

582,000

194,400

169,000

250,000

133,000

A

e It

0

Pvr Rnf

TABLE B.1 ( )

Drainage Basin Average PM? Peak Project State River Basin Stream Area (in inches)

Discharge (S,.Ml.

Prec, Lng.of (cfs)_

DeGray Denison DeQueen Dierks Douglas El Dorado Elk City Efaula Fall River Ferrells Bridge Fort Gibson Fort Supply Gillhaa Great Salt Plains Greers Ferry Heyburn Hugo Hulah John Martin John Redmond Kaw Keystone Lake Kemp Lukfata Marion Milluood Narrows Neodesha Nimrod Norfolk Oologah Optima Pat Mayse Pine Creek Robert S. Kerr Sand Shidler Skiatook Lable Rock Ark.

Okla.

Ark.

Kans.

Okla.

Kans.

Tex.

Okla.

Ark.

Okla.

Ark.

Okla.

Colo.

Kans.

Okla.

Tex.

Okla.

Kans.

Ark.

Kans.

Ark.

Okla, Okla.

Tex.

Okla.

Okla, Okla.

Okla.

Mo.

Red Rod Red Red Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Red Arkansas Arkansas Red Arkansas Red Arkansas Red Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Red Red Arkansas Red Red Arkansas Arkansas White Arkansas Arkansas Red Red Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas White Caddo River Red River Rolling Fork Saline River Little Walnut Creek Walnut River Elk River Canadian River Fall River Cypress Creek Grand River Wolf Greek Cossatot River Salt Fk. Arkansas River Little Red River Polecat Creek Kianichi River Caney River Arkansas River Grand River Arkansas River Arkansas River Wichita River Glover Creek Cottonwood River Little River Little Missouri River Verdigris River Fourche La Fave River North Fork White River Verdigris River North Canadian River Sanders Creek Little River Arkansas River Sand Creek Salt Creek Hominy Creek White River C

U,

453

33,783

169

113

238

234

634

8,405

556

880

9,477

271

3,200

1,146

123

1,709

732

18,130

3,015

7,250

22,351

2,086

291

200

4,144

239

1,160

68o

1,#765

4,339

2,341

175

635

64.386

137

99

354

4,020

28.4

12.9

35.5

36.2

26.7

26.8

23.0

15.9

27.1

31.1

16.2

20.5

34.,6

16.?

17.9

26-3 Z7.1

16.5

7.4

18.2

14.5

12.9

23.7

34.6

24.8

28.4

25.0

18.?

20.2

15.7

17.8

13.8

31.8

32.8

10.0

31.3

27.3

27..8

18.3

26.0

6.5

32.5

33.2

22.9

22.8

20.3

10.9

23.0

28.1

12.6

15.7

31.5

9.3

17.5

24.2

25.8

13.5

2.0

15.6

9.9

6.7

19.2

31.5

21.9

25.3

23.0

16.6

17.2

12.8

13.9

9.0

29.4

29.8

5.8

28.3

24.0

23.8

15.4

397,000

1,830,000

254,000

202,000

156,000

196, ooo

.196,000

319,000

700,000

"442.000

367,000

865,000

54?7000

355,000

412,000

630,000

151,000

339,000

239,000

630.00O

638,000

774.000

1,035,000

566,000

349,000

160,000

"442,000

194,000

287.000

228,000

372,000

451,000

386,000

150,000

523,000

1,884,000

154,000

104,100

147,800

657,000

C

r

Q

Project Tenkiller Ferry Texarkana Toronto Towanda Trinidad Tuskahoma Wallace Lake Vaurika Webbers Falls Vister Addicks Aquilla Aubrey Bardwell Barker Belton Benbrook Big Sandy Blieders Creek Droimwood

.Canyon Lake Carl L. Estes Coleman Comanche Peak Ferguson Gonzales Grapevine Horde Creek Lake Fork Lakeview Laneport Lavon Lewisville Millioan Navarro Minle Navasota State Okla.

Tex.

Kans.

Colo.

Okla.

La.

Okla.

Tex.

Tex*

Tex.

Tex..

Tex.

Tex, Tex.

Tex.

Teax Tax, Tex.

Tex.

Teax Tex*

Tex.

River Basin Arkansas Red Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Red Red Red Arkansas Arkansas

.San Jacinto Brazos Trinity Trinity San Jacinto Bre*zos Trinity Sabine Guadalupe Colorado Guadalupe Sabine Colorado Brazos Brazos Guadalupe Trinity Colorado Sabine Trinity Brazos Trinity Trinity Brazos Trinity Brazos Stream Drainage Area Illinois River Sulphur River Verdigris River Whitewater River Purgatorie River Kiamichi River Cypress Bayou Beaver Creek Arkansas River Poteau River Texas-Gulf Region South Mayde Creek Aquilla Creek Elm Fork Trinity River Waxahachie Creek Buffalo Bayou Leon River Clear Fork Trinity River Big Sandy Creek Blieders Creek Pecan Bayou Guadalupe River Sabine River Colorado River Squaw Creek Navasota River San Marcos River Denton Creek Horde Creek Lake Fork Creek Mountain Creek San Gatriel Pivor Eset Fork, Trinity River Elm Fork, Trinity River Navasota River Riohland Creek Navasota River

1,

610

3,400

730

422

671

347

260

562

"W8,127

99.3

129

2914

692

178

150

3,560

429

196

15

1,544

1,432

1,146

287

64

1,782

1,344

695

48

507

232

/09

770

3,660

2,120

320

1,241 Basin Average In Rnofhes)

Pre

e. Runnff

20.e4

26.6

23.9

24.3

10*0

16.5

38.4

26.5

10.7

25.9

29.7

31.2

28.5

31.1

29.4

28.2

36.2

43.8

27.8

24o5

34.5

30.9

39.1

26.0

24.9

26.5

28.9

33.8

31.6

28.9

26,2

23.2

25.5

33.6

27.2

17.6

20.1

21.1

20.5

4.5

14.6

35.6

22.2

6.1

23.2

27.9

28.6

26.0

28.3

27.9

20.6

21.1

32.2

34.6

21.0

16.9

30.4

24*. 1

34.1

22.4

15.4

21.5

23.4

29.7

28.8

23.7

23.o4

20.5

22.4

30.5

24.2 TABLE B.1 ( )

K

Ut PMF Peak Discharge

406,000

451,000

"400,000

198,000

296,000

188,g400

197,000

354,000

1,518,000

339,000

68,670

283,800

445,300

163,500

55,900

608,400

290,100

125,200

70,300

676,200

687,000

277,000

267,800

149,000

355,800

633,900

319,400

.92,400

247,600

335,000

521,000

430,?00

632,200

393,v40o

280,500

327,400

TABLE B.1 ( )

-Project

North Fork Pecan Bayou Proctor Roanoke

-Rockland Sam Raybrn San Angelo Somerville South Fork Stillhouse Hollow Tennessee Colony Town Bluff Waco Lake Whitney Abiquiu Alamogordo Cochita Jemez Canyon Los Esteroa Two Rivers Alamo Mcoicken Whitlow Ranch Painted Rock Little Dell Mathews Canyon Pine Canyon Applegate Blue River State River Basin'

Tex.

Te,:.

Tex.

Tex, Tea.

Tex, Tex.

Tex.

No N.

N.

Brazos Colorado Brazoa Trinity Neches Neches

-Colorado Brazos Brazos Brazos Trinity Neches Brazoa Brazos Rio Grande Rio Grande Rio Graude Rio Grande Rio Grande Rio Grande me H.

MI

H.

Ariz.

Utah N.y.

No.

Colorado Colorado Colorado Colorado Jordon (Great)

Great Basin Great Basin Oreg.

Rogue Ore&.

Columbia Stream Drainage Area f,.4 N. F

k. San Gabriel River

.Pecan Bayou Leon River Denton Creek Neches River Angelina River North Concho River.

Yogua Creek S. Fk. San Gabriel River Lam pasas River Trinity River Neches River B*sque River Brazos River Rio Grande. Region Rio Grande Pecos River Rio Grande Jemez Canycn Peccs River Rio Hondo Lower Colorado Region Bill Williams River Aqua Fria River Queen Creek Gila River Great Basin Region Dell Creek Mathews Canyon Pine Canyon Columbia-North Pacific Region Applegate River S. Fk. McKenzie River Basin Average (in inches)

D~n D..n

246

316

1,265

604

39557

3,449

1,511

1,006

1 123

1,318

12,687

7,v73

1,670

17,656

3,159

3,917

4,065

1,034

2,434

1,027

4,770

247

143

50,800

16

34

45

223

88

31.7

30.7

27.0

28.9

21.0

23.7

21.2

22.0

32.6

27.?

25.1

18.9

25.7

15.7

4.6

9.2

12.2

26.6

23.8

21.4

17.2

20.6

13.1

13.6

27.4

22.5

20.4,

15.7

20.6

7.7

8.2

1.9

3.7

4.7

12.0

3.5

3.3

11.5

9.7

7.7

2.8

8.1

6.0

6.6

7.4

8.2

6.6

28.9

22.7

(

P1F Peak Discharge

/'-..'_

'0

Ch

265,800

236,200

459,200

313.600

150,400

395,600

614,5c0

4 15,700

145,300

686s400

575o600

326,000

622,900

700,000

130,000

277,000

320,000

.220.000

352,000

281,400

5B0,000

52,000

230,000

620,000

23,000

"35,000

38.000

C

99, 500

.39.500

tC

0

L&Wý*

LIVA&

LCIRI

Q

TABLE B.1 ( )

sin Stream Lrainaee Area

1 4 K

Basin Average P1* Peak

( in inches)

Discharge Prec,_ -noff (efa)

Bonneville Caseadia Chief Joseph Cottage Grove Cougar Detroit Dorena Dworshak Elk Creek Fall Creek Fern Ridge Poster Green Peter Gate Creek Hills Creek Holley

'Howard A. Hanson lee Harbor John Day Libby Little Goose Lookout Point Lost Fork Lower Granite Lower Monumental Lucky Peak MPeNary Mud Mountain Ririe The Dallee Wynoochee Zintel Bear Big Dry Creek Black Butte Brea Oreg.

Oreg.

Wash.

Oreg.

Ida.

Oreg.

Wash.

Ore.

Mont.

Wash.

Oreg.

Wash.

Wash, Ida, Oreg.

Wash, Ida.

Oreg.

Wash.

Cal.

Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Rogue Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Green Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Rogue Columbia Columbia Columbia Columbia Puyallup Columbia Columbia Chechalis Columbia San Joaquin San Joaquin Sacranento Santa Ana Columbia River

240,000

South Santian River

179 Columbia River

7.5,000

Coast F

k. Willamette River

104 S. F

k. McKenzie River

208 North Santiam River

438 Row River

26.

N. F

k. Clearwater River

2,440

Elk Creek

132 Willamette River

184 Long Tom River

252 South Santiam River

4144 Middle Santiam River

27?

Gate C

k. McKenzie River

50

Middle F

k. Willamette River

38q Calapooia River

105 Green River

221ý

Snake River

109,000

Columbia River

226,00O

Kootenai River

9,070

Snake River

10i4900

Middle F

k. Vilaette Aiver

991 Lost P

k. Rogue River

6,7'

Snake River

101,,4O0

Snake River

108,500

Boise River

2,650.

Columbia River

214,000

White River

'400

Willow C

k. Snake River

620

Columbia River

237,000

Wynoochee River

41 Zintel Canyon Snake River IQ

California Region Bear Creek Big Dry Creek Stony Creek Brea Creek

72

]3.b

91

19.0

741

19.?

23

10.6 K

Project State River Bas

22.1

42.2

29.0

29.7

34.2

36.0

34.6

70.5

32.6

33.8

20.3

40.8

41.3

146..3

31.0

35.8

26.8

13.9

2191

3' 5

14,6

10.8

22.7

14*?

1400

32.5

23.0

31.9

21,14

21.1

69.9

7.8

13.6

13.8

12.3

6.6

2,720,000

1159,000

1,550,000

45,000

98,000

203,000

131,600

280,000

63,500

100,000

148,600

260,000

160,000

37,000

197,000

59,000

164,000

95,%000

2,650,000

282,000

850,0C0

360,000

169,0Cc

850.000

850,000

123,000

2,610,000

!86,000

4?,000

2,660,000

52,500

"4O, 500

30,0400

17,000

1 54,000

37000

=

a

9

TABLE B.1 ( )

River Basin Stream Drainage Area (sq.mi.)

Basin Average (in inches)

Prec.

Runoff Buchanan Burns Butler Valley Carbon Canyon Cherry Valley Comanche Coyote Valley Dry Creek Farmington Folsom Fullerton Hansen Hidden Lake Isabella Knights Valley Lakeport Lopes Mariposa Kartis Creek Marysville Mojave River N*ew Dullards Bar New Exchequer New Hogm New Melones Oroville Owens Pine Flat Prado San Antonio Santa Fe Sepulveda Cal.

Cal.

San Joaquin San Joaquin had Santa Ana San Joaquin San Joaquin Russian Russian San Joaquin Sacramento Santa Ana Los Angeles San Joaquin San Joaquin Russian Sacramento Los Angeles San Joaquin Truckee Sacramento Mojave Sacramento San Joaquin San Joaquin San Joaquin Sacramento San Joaquin San Joaquin Santa Ana Santa Ana San Gabriel Los Angeles Chowchilla River Burns Creek Mad River Santa Am River Cherry Creek Mokeluane River Fast Fk. Russian River Dry Creek Little John Creek American River Fullerton Creek Tujunga Wash Fresno River Kern River Franz-Maacama Creek Scotts Creek Pacoima Creek Mariposa Creek Martis Creek Yuba River Mojave River North Yuba River Merced River Calaveras River Stanislaus River Feather River Owens Creek Kings River Santa Ama River San Antonio Creek San Gabriel River Los Angeles River

235

74

352

19

117

618'

105

82

212

1,875

5.0

147

234

2,073

59

52

34

108

39

1,324

215 L489

1,031

362

897

2,600

26

1,542

2,233

27

236

152

26.0

20.1

17.*4

10.6

35.2

10.4

10.3

24.3

23.1

25.0

19.9

22.9

21.3

15.6

11.3

10.9

21.2

17.5

9.0

6.8

9.8

29.9

18.4

27.1

6.5

31.6

28.9

30.9

24.0

20.8

18.6

13.0

26.5

12.7

38.9

27.0

40.4

30.4

38.9

25.7

27.1

15.9

18.3

25.8

16.3

23.3

22.8

14.4

9.2

28.5

14.4

26.3

13.0

35.*5

15.0

r Project State PM? Peak Discharge (ofe)

I.A

00

127,000

26,800

137,000

56.000

60,000

261,000

57,000

"45,000

56,000

615,000

16,000

130,000

114,000

235,000

"44,300

36,100

32,000

"43,000

12,400

460,00oc

186,000

226,ooo

396,000

132,000

355,000

720,000

11.400

437,000

700,000

60,000

194,000

220,000

C

r

Q

River Basin Stream Drain..te Area (sa.mi.)

Basin Average (in Inches)

Pree.

Runoff Success Terminus Tuolumne Whittier Narrows Cale Cal$

cal.

Cal.

San Joaquin San Joaquin San Joaquin San Gabriel Tule River Kaweah River Tuolumne River San Gabriel River TABLE B.1 ( )

K

Pro.iect

'0

State F

Peak Discharve (ofa)

383

560

it 5133

"40.1

25.1

1.*,

i2.6

2468

20. ?

13.7

200,000

290,000

602,000

305,000

APPENDIX C

SIMPLIFIED METHODS OF

ESTIMATING PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGES

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page C.

A. INTRODUCTION

......

....................................

1.59-42 C.2 SCOPE .

.............................................

1.59-42 C.3 PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGELEVELS FROM HURRICANES ...............

1.59-42 C.3.1 Methods Used

.............

........................

1.59-42 C.3'2 Use of Data in Estimating PMS ............

1.59-42 C.3.3 Wind-Wave Effects ......................................

1.59-43 C.4 LIMITATIONS .

..........................................

1.59-43 REFERENCES .

.............................................

1.59-43 FIG URES .. ..............................................

1.59-44 TABLES .

...............................................

1.59.46 FIGURES

Figure C.1-Probable Maximum Surge Estimates, Gulf Coast

....................

1.59-44 C.2-Probable Maximum Surge Estimates, Atlantic Coast ..................

1.59-45 TABLES

Table C. I-Probable Maximum Surge Data ..............................

1.59-46 C. 2-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Port Isabel ..........

1.59.47 C. 3-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Freeport ............

1.59.48 C. 4-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Eugene Island ........

1.59.49 C. 5-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Isle Dernieres .........

1.59-50

C. 6-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Biloxi ....

...........

1.59-51 C. 7-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Santa Rosa Island .....

.1.59-52 C. 8-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Pitts Creek ...........

1.59-53 C. 9-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Naples ....

.........

1.59-54 C.-10-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Miami ..............

1.59-55 C.A I-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Jacksonville

...........

1.59-56 C. 12-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Jeckyll Island ........

1.59-57 C.13-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Folly Island ...........

1.59-58 C.14-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Raleigh Bay ..........

1.59-59 C.15-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Ocean City ...........

1.59-60

C.16-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Atlantic City ..........

1.59-61 C.17-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Long Island ...........

1.59-62 C.18-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Watch Hill Point .......

1.59-63 C.19-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Hampton Beach ......

..

1.59-64 C.20-Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level-Great Spruce Island .

.

. .

1.59-65 C.21-Ocean-Bed Profiles

...........

. ....

............................

1.59-66

1.59-41

C.1 INTRODUCTION

This appendix presents timesaving methods of es timating the maximum stiilwater level of the probable maximum surge (PMS) from hurricanes at open coast sites on the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico.

Use of the methods herein will reduce both the time necessary for applicants to prepare license applica tions and the NRC staff's review effort.

The procedures are based on PMS values deter mined by the NRC staff and its consultants and by applicants for licenses that have been reviewed and accepted by the staff. The information in this appen dix was developed from a study made by Nunn, Snyder, and Associates, through a contract with NRC (Ref. 1).

The PMS data are shown in Tables C.I through C.21 and on maps of the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts (Figures C.I and C.2). Suggestions for interpolating between these values are included.

Limitations on the use of these generalized methods of estimating PMS are identified in Section C.4. These limitations should be considered in detail in assessing the applicability of the methods at specific sites.

Applicants for licenses for nuclear facilities at sites on the open coast of the Atlantic Ocean or the Gulf of Mexico have the option of-using these methods in lieu of more precise but laborious methods contained in Appendix A. The results of application of the methods in this appendix will in many cases be ac cepted by the NRC staff with no further verification.

C.2 SCOPE

The data and procedures in this appendix apply only to open-coast areas of the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean.

Future studies are planned to determine the ap plicability of similar generalized methods and to develop such methods, if feasible, for other areas.

These studies, to be included in similar appendices, are anticipated for the Great Lakes and the Pacific Coast, including Hawaii and Alaska.

C.3 PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGE LEVELS

FROM HURRICANES

The data presented in this appendix consist of all determinations of hurricane-induced PMS peak levels at open-coast locations computed by the NRC

staff or their consultants, or by applicants and ac cepted by the staff. The data are shown in Tables C. 1 through C.21 and on Figures C.I and C.2. All repre sent stillwater levels for open-coast conditions.

SAll PMS determinations in Table C.1 were made by NRC consultants for this study (Ref. 1) or for earlier studies except Pass Christian, Brunswick, Chesapeake. Bay Entrance, Forked River-Oyster

.Creek, Millstone, Pilgrim, and Hampton Beach.

The computations by the consultants were made using the NRC surge computer program, which is adapted from References 2, 3, and 4. Probable max imum hurricane data were taken from Reference 5.

Ocean bottom topography for the computations was obtained from the most detailed available Nautical Charts published by the National Ocean Survey, NOAA. The traverse line used for the probable max imum hurricane surge estimate was drawn from the selected coastal point to the edge of the continental shelf or to an ocean depth of 600 feet. MLW and was one hurricane radius to the right of the storm track.

The radius to maximum winds was oriented at an angle of 1150 from the storm track. The traverse was oriented perpendicular to the ocean-bed contours near shore. The ocean-bed profile along the traverse line was determined by roughly averaging the topography of cross sections perpendicular to the traverse line and extending a maximum of 5 nautical miles to either side. The 10-mile-wide cross sections were narrowed uniformly to zero at the selected site starting 10 nautical miles from shore. It was assumed that the peak of the PMS coincided with the 10% ex ceedance high spring tide' plus initial rise.' Slightly different procedures were used for postulating the traverse lines and profiles for the Crystal River and St. Lucie determinations.

In each case the maximum water level resulted from use of the high translation speed for the hur ricane in combination with the large radius to max imum wind as defined in Reference 5. Detailed data for the computed PMS values are shown in Tables C.1 through C.20. Ocean-bed profile data for Pass Christian, Crystal River, St. Lucie, Chesapeake Bay Mouth, and Hampton Beach are shown in Table C.21.

The water levels resulting from these computations are open-coast stillwater levels upon which waves and wave runup should be superimposed.

C.3.2 Use of Data In Estimating PMS

Estimates of the PMS stillwater level at open-coast sites other than those shown in Tables C.1 through C.21 and on Figures C.1 and C.2 may be obtained as follows:

'The 10% exceedance high spring tide is the predicted maximum monthly astronomical tide exceeded by 10%.of the predicted max imum monthly astronomical tides over a 21-year period.

'Initial rise (also called forerunner or sea level anomaly) is an anomalous departure of the tide level from the predicted axtronomical tide.

1.59-42 C.3.1 Methods Used I

I

I. Using topographic maps or maps showing soundings, such as the Nautical Charts, determine an ocean bed profile to a depth of 600 ft MLW, using the methods outlined above. Compare this profile with the profiles of the locations shown in Tables C.2 through C.21. With particular emphasis on shallow water depths, select the location or locations in the general area with the most similar profiles. An es timate of the wind setup may be interpolated from the wind setup data for these locations.

2. Pressure setup may be interpolated between locations on either side of the site.

3. Initial rise, as shown in Table C.1, may be inter polated between locations on either side of the site.

4. The 10% exceedance high spring tide may be computed from predicted tide levels in Reference 6; it may be obtained from the Coastal Engineering Research Center, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Ft.

Belvoir, Va.; it may be interpolated, using the tide relations in Reference 6; or it may be obtained from Appendix A.

5. An estimate of the PMS open-coast stillwater level at the desired site will be the sum of the values from Steps I through 4, above.

C.3.3 Wind-Wave Effects Coincident wave heights and wave runup should be computed and superimposed on the PMS stillwater level obtained by the foregoing procedures. Accep table methods are given in Reference 2 and in Appen dix A.

CA LIMITATIONS

I. The NRC staff will continue to accept for review detailed PMS analyses that result in less con servative estimates. In addition, previously reviewed and approved detailed PMS analyses at specific sites will continue to be acceptable even though the data and procedures in this appendix result in more con servative estimates.

2. The PMS estimates obtained as outlined in Sec tion C.3.2 arc maximum stillwater levels. Coincident wind-wave effects should be added.

3. The PMS estimates obtained from the methods in Section C.3.2 are valid only for open-coast sites, i.e., at the point at which the surge mikes initial land fall. If the site of interest has appreciably different off-shore bathymetry, or if the coastal geometry dif fers or is complex, such as for sites on an estuary, ad jacent to an inlet, inshore of barrier islands, etc.,

detailed studies of the effect of such local conditions should be made. Reference 2 provides guidance on such studies.

REFERENCES

I. Nunn, Snyder, and Associates, "Probable Max imum Flood and Hurricane Surge Estimates," un published report to NRC, June 13, 1975 (available in the public document room).

2. U. S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center,

"Shore Protection Manual," Second Edition, 1975.

3. B. R. Bodine, "Storm Surge on the Open Coast:

Fundamental and Simplified Prediction," Technical Memorandum No. 35, U.S. Army Coastal Engineer ing Research Center, 1971.

4. George Pararas-Caryannis, "Verification Study of a Bathystrophic Storm Surge Model," Technical Memorandum No. 50, U.S. Army Coastal Engineer ing Research Center, May 1975.

5. U. S. Weather Bureau (now U.S. Weather Service, NOAA), "Meteorological Characteristics of the Probable Maximum Hurricane, Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United States," Hurricane Research Interim Report, HUR 7-97 and HUR 7-97A, 1968.

6. U. S. Department of Commerce, NOAA, "Tide Tables," annual publications.

1.59-43

96°

960

940

329

310

200

27r

260

250

240

93?

92r

910

90p

89W

88e

870

860

840

8r3

820

810

FIGURE Ci PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGE ESTIMATES - GULF COAST

C

34°

340

C

f(

830

820 810 800

790

780 770

760

750

8o

85o-

840

830 820

81

800 70r

780

0

770

760

750

740

730

720

71'

FIGURE C.2 PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGE ESTIMATES - ATLANTIC COAST

1.59-45

TABLE C. 1 PROBABLE MPAXfl04 SURGE DATA

(W)CATIONS INDICATED ON FIGURES C.1 and C.2)

DISTANCE FR0OM

SHORELINE, NAUTICAL MILES,

FOR SELECTED WATER DEPTHS, FEET HIM

OPEN-COAST LOCATION

AND TRAVESE

PORT ISABEL

FREEPORT

EUGENE ISLAND

ISLE DERNIERE

PASS CHRISTIAN (a)

BILOXI

SANTA ROSA ISLAND

PITTS CREEK

CRYSTAL RIVER (a)

NAPLES

MIAMI

ST. LUCIEW()

JACKSONVILLE

JEKYLL ISLAND

FOLLY ISLAND

BRUNSWICK

RALEIGH

CHESAPEAKE BAY

ENTRANCE (a)

OCEAN CITY

ATLANTIC CITY

FORKED RIVER

OYSTER CREEK

LONG ISLAND

MILLSTONE

WATCH HILL POINT

PILGRIM

HAMPTON

EAM (a)

GREAT SPRUCE ISLAND

I

N

TRAVERSE

AZIMUTH

DEG.

-

HIN.

DEPTH, FEET, ALONG TRAVERSE FROM OPEN COAST SHORE LINE

10

20

50

100

200

600

DISTANCE,

NAUTICAL MILES, TO DEPTH INDICATED

1

1 ii

86

152

192

165

160

183

205

248

100

90

108

150

135

30

00

30

00

110

00

146

00

166

115

148

00

no

0.23

0.49

1.94

11.10

33.10

44.0

0.20

0.55

5.50

24.0

55.5

70.9

2.00

20.00

30.00

44.1

60.0

90.0

0.62

1.75

11.90

30.4

45.3

58.5

77.0

3.40

11.20

30.00

50.1

69.2

78.0

0.09

0.18

0.48

11.9

20.9

45.0

8.84

9.23

24.30

69.4

107.0

132.0

2.31

31.40

127.0

0.17

0.79

15.70

45.6

85.8

145.0

0.17

0.94

2.01

2.2

2.7

3.9

0.10

18.7

0.10

0.20

2.58

30.0

55.0

62.5

2.60

4.00

15.60

39.6

64.3

72.6

0.19

2.17

12.00

32.8

47.0

57.6

0.12

0.30

1.75

12.0

25.4

35.2

62.0

0.12

0.26

3.67

17.8

45.0

59.0

0.20

0.85

5.00

23.1

58.4

70.0

0.09

0.07

0.22

0.04

0.18

1.35

0.14

0.64

0.31

0.71

0.08

0.20

4.8

1.6

2.0

1.1

27.2

34.3

7.2

6.1

68.4

"84.0

40.0

1 7R .0

1.

6

1 PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGE AT OPEN COAST SHORE LINB

WIND

SETUP,

FT.

PRESSURE

SETUP,

FT.

10.07

15.99

29.74

18.61

28.87

27.77

.9.12

24.67

26.55

18.47

2.51

8.25

16.46

20.63

17.15

12.94

8.84

17.30(b)

14.30

15.32

18.08(b)

8.73

12.41

10.01

4.25

9.73

3.57

2.89

3.29

2.88

2.98

3.25

2.31

2.65

2.90

3.90

3.80

3.23

3.34

3.23

2.20

3.09 (b)

2.83

2.57 (b)

2.46

2.20

2.42

2.23

1.82 INITIAL 102 EXC.

HIGH

TOTAL

RISE,

TIDE,

SURGE,

FT.

FT. ML

(C) PT. mL (C)

2.50

2.40

2.00

0.80

1.50

1.20

0.60

1.00

0.90

0.98

1.30

1.20

1.00

1.10

1.14

1.10

1.00

0.97

1.00

0.96

0.83

0.56

1.70

2.20

2.30

2.40

2.30

2.50

2.10

4.10

4.30

3,50

3.60

3.70

6.90

8.70

6.80

5.80

4.70

3.80

5.00

5.70

4.70

3.10

3.80

4.00

11.90

10.50

16. OC

17.84

23.48

37.34

26.30

34.85

34.76

15.97

32.28

34.10

25.87

10.91

16.73

27.90

33.87

28.18

21.94

17,63

22.20

23.27

24.70

23.78

15.26

19.41

17.39

19.60

17.81

28.11 a.

See Table C.21 for ocean-bed profile.

b.

Combined wind and pressure setup.

c.

Host values in these columns have been C

updated by the U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center and differ from those in the orilinal documents.

(

'0

0%

I

9.73

Q

Note:

maximm wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

-!/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Stdrm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

OCEAN BED PROFILE

WATER

BELOW

MWM

0

9.0o

20.5

35.0

43.0.

51.0.

58.5.

69.0

95.5

116

138

171

266

6oo

19,850o TRAVERSE

DISTANCE

FROM

SHORE

(NAUT.MI.)

0

0.2

-

0.5

1.0

-

1.5

,

2.0

_

5.0

1O

.15

20

30

40

_4

50

DEGREE AT TRAVERSE

MID-POINr FROM SHORE

T6 600-FOO DanT

K

TABLE C.2 SUMMARY-PERTINT PROBABLE MAXIMIh hURRICANE (*MH), STOR.M SURGE COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND RESULTANT WATER LE

LOCATION PORT ISABEL

T. 26004.3'

LONG. 97 09.41: TRAVERSE-AIMUTH86 0-30

GREEI LENTH 4.2.1 NAUTIICAL MILES

"""&mla K

-J

PROBABLE

MAXIMUM HURRICANE IN

PARCThISTICS

ZONE

C

AT LOCATION

260

04 EREE NOM

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

SLW

MODERATF

HIGH

GEMMEAL PRESSURE IDEX

P0 INCHE

26.412

26.112

2

-

PERIPHERAL PRESSURE

INCHES

31.30

RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

LARGERADIUS RnAU.

MIe.

20

TRANLATION SPEED

V (FORWARD

)KNOTS

I

...

28

,'!xIMUM WIND SPEED)

V

M.P.H.

147

151

161 ATALMRZ D1SrANE-WINDU .NI.

M2OMP20 IND

398

374,

318

' O

TO MlAX.

IN

PMH cCMnPUATIONAL ComD71CrT

AD WATE LEVEL (SURGE) ESTIMATES

CO EFFI CI MNTS

B0TIO

FMICTION FACTOR 0.0030

WIND STRESS CORRECTION FACTOR 1.10

WATER

L.EVEL

DATA

(AT OPEN CanB

SHORELINE)

pM

SpEISD OF TPANMSIATIOVq OOMP0NERTS

H

WIND SETUP

10007 PRESSURE SETUP

35 INITIAL WATER LEV.

.*

ASTRONOMICAL

1.70

TIDETLESM*

TOTAL-SURGE

STILL WATER

Lhs'J.

17.84 PET

LW-

-

TABLE C.3 SuMMARY-PEITINE*rT PRUMBLE MAXIMUI. HURRICANE (FMH).

STORKM S;GIO

COMPUIATIONAL ITA. AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOCATION FREEPOR'.

LUT. 280

56' LONG. 95'

TEXAS

Note: Nax-- wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

--/nitial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

C ) . . . ..

.......

..... .. .

. . .

22' : TRAVERSE-AZIMUTH 152 PROBABLE MAXIMUM HUiRICANE INDEX CHARACTI*$ISTICS

ZONE

C

AT LOCATION

280

561 MHZE NORTH

1 SPEED OF UNSITION

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

SLOW

HODERATF

HIGH

.."

(sT)

NOm'

(Hr,)

CflI!VAL PRESSURE INDEX

Po INCHES

26.69

26.69 PERIPHERAL P

0SRE

P n INCHES

31.25

31.25 ADIUS 70 KMAXDIUM WIND

LiRGE SAhMS iUT.

I.

26.0

TRUN*LATION SPEED

V (voawRD SPEED) I

S

139 U

8.

KiXD= WIND SPEED

Yx M.P.H.

139

143

153 INITIAL DISTAN(CE--&U.I ,* l9 MPH WIND

491

458

390

AT SHORE TO MAX.

WIND

DiXRE, o LENGTH 70.9 NAUTICAL MILES

PMH COUPUTATIONAL C0EWICIENT

AND WATER LEVU (SUGE) ESTIMATES

CooFFIOIENT§

BOT'iM FkICTION FACTOR 0.0030

WIND STRE

CORRCION FACTOR 1.10

WATEH

LVEL

DATA

(AT OPEN COAST SHOP.LIIE)

.

U'

OCEAN BED PROFILE

TRAVERSE

WATE

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

SORE

MI

(

TmI.

(FEw-)

0

"

.1.0

30

_

2.0

32

_

3.0

37

4.0

40

-

5.0

47

10.0

66

_

15.0

78

_

20.0

90

.

_

30.0

114

-

40.0

132

50.0

168

-

60.0

240

_

70.0

570

70.9

600

IATITUDE

280 26'

DEGREE AT TRAVERSE

KID-POINT FROM SHOR9

1'O 600-FOOT DEPTH

PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION

COMPONENTS

ST I

HTr H T

F

E

T

WIND SEiTUP

15.99 PRLSSURE SETUP

2.89 INITIAL WATIR LEV.

2.40

&STRONOMICAL

2.20

TIDE LEVEL.

TOTAL-SURGE

STILL WAT1E Lhl,.

23.48 FELT MLW

-

.....

tC

Q

LOCTION EUGENE

LAT. 29o 20'

LONG. 91'

ISLAND, LOUISIANA

Note:

Maximm wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

- Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels Is approxi mately double the initial distance.

21 . T-RAVmRSE-AZImuTH19230'DE2REEs LENGTH

90

NAUTICAL MILES

OC]AN BED PROFILE

TRAVEiSk WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

SHORE

MKU

NAUT

FEET)

-

0.0

0

-

1.0

5

-

2.0

10

-

3.0

12

-

5.0

15

-

10.0

15

-

15.0

18

-

20.0

20

-

30.0

50

-

40

60

-

50

140

-

60

200

-

70

260

-

80

320

-

90

600.

L&TrTUDE

%2o

4d DEGREE AT TRAVERSE

MID-POINT FROM SHORE

600:=

TABLE C.4 SUMMARY-PERTINENT PROBULE MAXIMLI. HURRICANE (PMH),

STORM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL rATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

K

.ub PROBABLE 1AXIMUM HURRICANE INE

CHARACThWISTICS

ZONE

B

AT LOCATION

29P

20' DGREE NORTH

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

SLOW

TODERATF

HIGH

CENTRAL PRESSURE I*NDE

P0 INCHES

26.87

26.87 PDtIPHEAL PRESSURE

INCHES

31.24

31.24 IUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

J.-ARE RADIUS NUT*. MI.

29.0

T SLATION SPEED

, (FORWARD SPED) KNOTS

I

4

1

28.0

AIMUM WIND SPED

Vx M.P.H.

141

144

153 INITIAL DISTArCE-NMAT.M.I.-/

FROM 20 MPH WIND

534

184

412 AT SHORE To MAX.

WID-1)

PMH OCHPUTATIONAL COEFFICIENT

AND WATER LEVM (SURGE) ESTINATES

ICTJIM 'iFICTION

FACTOR 0.0030

WIND STRESS CORRECTION FACTOR 1.10

WAT E

Lh VEL

DATA

(AT OPEN OCAST SHORELINE)

PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION

COMPONENTS

ST

M

ST

HiT

F

E, T

WIND SETIUP

-29.74 PRESSURE SETUP

3.29 INITIAL WLATER LEV.

2.00

ATRONOMICAL

2.30

hIDE LEVEL

SUAL-RGE

STILL

L

kA .

37.34 SET =L

TABLE C.5 SUMMY-PERTINENT PROALE MAXI M1,. HU*RIlCANE (PMH) ' STORM SMGE 00MFUTTIONAL WA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOIATION ISLE

L&T. 29002.91 LONG. 90"42.5'; "TAVERSE-AzIMUTH 165 DiEEaLe LG

58.5 NAuTICAL muILs DERNIERES, IOUISIAM

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maxlmum wind.

-!/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

C

(

0o PROBLE MAXIDUH HURRICANE INDEX CHARAMTUISTICS

ZONE B

AT LOC&TION

290

3 D0G'EENOTNO

SPEED*OF TMNSL§T:0I.

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

SLOW

14OD91ATF

HIGH

MH

PRESSURE INDEM

P0 INCHES

26.88

26.88 PERIPHERAL PRESSURE

P

INCHES

31.25

31.25 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

IARGZ RADIUS NALT. HI.

29

29 MANSIATION SPEED

? (FORWARD SPME)

KNOTS

4 I

11

\\2 IAXIMUM WIND SPEED

!V

M.P.H.

140

144

153 INITIAL D

=h-N

.MI.1/

PROM 20 MPH WIND

528

48?

394 KT SHORE TO MAX. WIND

I

PMW OCKWPUATION&L COiUVICIERT

AND

AMAE

LEVEL (SUlGE)

ESTIMATES,

COEFFICI-ENTS

"BMiOT

FRICTION FACTOR 0.0030

WIND SRESS, C0HHEION FACTOR 1.10

WATER

LEVEL

DATA

(AT OPEN CCAST sFMlEJNS)

P1W SPEED OF TRANSLI'TIO

COMPONENTS

ST I

-14

!

9 F

E

E" T

WIND SETUP

8b RESSURE SETUP

3 INITIAL

MATES LEW.

2.00

ATRNOMICAL

2.40

TIDE LEME

TOTAL-SURGE

SILL jATa7 LEV.

26.30

=

MHW

K

TABLE C.6 SURY-PFERTINENT PR"OBBLE MAX IMU. hURRICANE (Pml'.

STORM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOTION BIIOXI

LAT. 30023.6'

LONG. 88"53.6't TRAVMsSE-AZIMUTH

160

DECREEs LEVGTH 77 NAUTICAL MILES

MISSISSIPPI

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

1-Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE IN=*

CHARACMISTICS

ZONE

B AT LOCATION

300

24 DECREE NORTH

K

r Lft

'0

OCEAN BED PROFILE

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DET

FROM

BELOW

SHORE

MLW

0

-

0.2

3.0

0.5

2.0

1.0

6.5

1.5

9.0

_

2.0

9.0

_

3.0

9.5.

5.0

12.0

_

9.0

9.5 _

_

9.5 U-.0

_

10.0

14.0

-

10.5

18.5

-

11.0

17.5

_

11.5

23.0

-

12.0

29.0

1

13

34.5

-

15

41.5

20

45.0

25

47.0

30

50.0

40

65.0

50

99.0

60

164

"

70

203

78

6oo

80

7*

LATITUDE

?

290 508 DEGREE AT TRAVERSE

MID-POINT FROM SHORE

TO k00--1 RMP'

ISPEED

OF TRANSATION_

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

SLW

MODERATF

HIGH

METRAL PRESSURE INDEI

o INC=

26.9

26.9 PERIPHERAL PRESSURE

P

INCHES

31.23

31.23 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

laRGE RADIUS NAUT. MI.

30

rRANSLATION SPEED

!

(FORWARD SPEED) KEATS

4

11

28 MAXIMUM WIND SPEED

vx M*.P.H.

139

143

153 INITIAL DiSr~C-niuT.MI.X

FROM 20 MPH WIND

525

498

396 IT SHORE 32 MAX. WIND

-

I

P10

OCCUATIONAL COEFFICIENT

AND WATER LEVEL. (SURGE)

SrIMATES

COEFFICIENTS

WM'OK FRICTION FACTOR 0.0030

WIND STRESS CORRECTION FACTOR 1.10

(ATER L

.VCST

DATA

(AT OPEN OCs sMREiNZ)

TABLE C.7 SUMMARY-YERUNENT ?RUMABLE MAX IMU h1JRRIC&NE (FMH)

STORM SUItGh. OOIPULAT1ONAL IATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOCATION SANTA ROSA

LIT. 30 023.769 LONG. 86"37.7': TR"AVERSE-AZIMUTH

183

=BflE&# LQWGTH 4e4.7 NAUTICAL MILES

ISLAND,

AUEAZAM

l.A

Note: Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

-

Initial distance is.-distance along tra .verse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline. Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE INDEX CHARACMh~ISTICS

ZONE

B

AT LOCATION

300

24' DNEGR N0ORTH

PARMLERDESIGNATION$

SLOWV

I40DM1TFI

HIGH

, (sr)

(N)

(T

CENTRAL PRESSURE INDEX

P0 INCHES

.26.88

26.88

26.88 PEtWIPERAL.PRESSURE

in IziCi~s

31.20

310

3.2 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

IARGE RADIUS HAUT. MI.

29

29 fAnWSIATION SPEED

? (FMonAiiD SPEED) KNOTS

4

11

28 MIAXIMUM WIND. SPEED

V XMeP9*H

140

144

153, INITIAL DIST&NCE-NAUT.H

2

'8

9 PRtOM 20 MPH WIND

47

'9 KT SHORE TO MAX. WIND

1___ -

PMH OMPUTATI0NAL GOiFFICILUT

AND WATER LLY&i (SURiGE)

ESTIMATES

C 0 E F.

F I C I E N T S

10rj'0M FRIICTION FACTORB 0.0030

WIND MSTRSS COURiCYIO

FACTOR 1.10

WATEft LEVEL

DATA

(AT OPENI COAST SI RELINE)

PKH SPEED OF TRANSLATIOIb COMPONENTS

ST I

T

H

___ __E

F

ET

WIND SETUJP

9.12 PRESSURE SETUP

3.25 INITIAL WATER LEV*

1.50

LSTROHORIC&L

2.10

riDE LEVEL

lOTAL-SURCE

STILL WATER LEV.

15.97

ý=7I MLW

___

C

OCEAN BED PROFILE

.TRAVERSE

WATER

DISrANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

swagR

HMW

Nt

.AUT.H.

LF2TL

0

S 0.2

22 S 0.5

5

1.0

66

1.5

66

290

66

-

3.0

73

5.0

76.

10

88

-

15

120

20

182

30377

40

510

-

45

600.

-

0

756 LATITUDE

3601-36 DEG~REE AT TRAVERSE

MID-POINT FROM SHORE

ro600-F

DEPTH

K

Q

LOCATIONPITTs CREEK

LAT. 30001.1' LONG. 83""

FLORIDA

Note:

Maxima wind speed Is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

-/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

.20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm

,diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

53': -TRAVERSE-AZIMUTH

205 DE*EEs LENGITH 110

NAUTICAL MILES

PROBABLE MA*INUM HURRICANE INIM CHARACTERISTICS

ZON.

A

AT WC&TION

300

01o DEGR

NORTH

SLSPEED OF TNSA

TION

PARAMEI

DEINAIN

SLOW

HOIERATF

HIGH

RADIUS

PRESXUME INDEX

Po0 INCHES

26-79

26.79

26.79 PERIPHItA

PRESSURE

SPn INCHES

30.ZZ

30.22

30.22 RADIUýS TO MAIMU

WIND

JAUME RADIUS NAUT.

MI.

26

26 rRANSIATION SPEED

rV (1OiM I)D SPEED) KNOTs

1 4

11

21 AXIMUM WIND SPEED

v_

M.P.H.

138

142

146 naTIAT, DIST-ANCE-NUT.MIX

FROM 20 MPH~ WIN

3514

322

278.

AT MOMK To MAX. WIND-

-

TABLE C.8 SUMART-PERTINENT PROBABLE MAXIMU1. hfJRRIC&NE (PMH),

STORM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL LATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

A

'a I,'

t. h OCEAN BED PROFILE

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

SHORE

MLW

NAUT.MI.

IFEET)

0

_

0.2.

1.0

_

0.5

2.0

_

1.0

3.0

_

1.5

4.o0

_

2.0

5.0.

.

3.0

6.5.

_

5.0

9.0.

_

10

22. 0.

_

15

31.o0

-

20

41.0

_

30

62.0

_

40

78.0

_

50

81.0o

-

60

84.0 .

70

101.0..

-

80

117.0.

_

90

144.0._

_ 100

180.0

_ 110

210.0_

120

280.0

.

130

543.o L.

132

600.0.

140

846 TITUDE

29° 03'

DEREE AT TRAVEMSE,

ID-POINT FROM SHORE

§2L60-=0T

=

PMH OCUTATIONAL COEFFICIENT

AND WATE

UWEL (SURGL)

ESTIMATES

COEFF ICI

ENTS

B

uM FIIcrTION FACTOR 0.0030

WIND STRESS COHREMTION FACTOR 1,10

WA T Eh Lh9VEL

DAT.T

(AT OPEN

CAST SHORELINE)

PIMH SPEED OF TRANSIATION

COMPOONETS

ST

I

MT

I

T

F

E E T

WIND SETUP

24.67 RESSURN SETUJP23 INITIAL WATER LE.

1.20

ASRNOMICAL

4.10

TIDE LEVEL

TOTAL-SURGE

322 STILL VATIr LIU".

32.28 LW

-

TABLE C.9 SUMMARY-PERTINENT PRUbABLE MAX IMt:? HURRICANE (PNJO, STORM SUC

COMPULATIONAL rATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOCATION

NAPLES

FLORIDA

LkT. 26001.41 IONG. 81'46.2'; TRAVERSE-AZINUTH

248 DIUREEa LENGTH 14e NAUTI-CL MILES

1P

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

-!/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

PMH ONPUTATIONAL COXFICIeNT

AND WATER LEVEL (SUiRGE) ESTIMATES

PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE IN=X CHARACeTUISTICS

ZONE

A AT LOCATION

260

01' DEGRE NORTH

SPEED OF

NSLATION

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

. SLOW

MODERATF

HIGH

~(ST)

"T

(0

Sa~RYlAL PRESSURE INDEX

P0 INCHES

26.24'

26.24

26.24 PERIPHERAL PRESSURE

% INCHES

31.30

ADniS TO MAXIMUM WIND

LRGE RAIUS wNAU.

MI.

15

1. i LIANSLATION SPEED

rv (FOAD SPEED) KOTS

4 -

'17

4AXIMUM WIND SPEED

Vx M.P.H*

19)

3ejL

158 ENITIAL DISTAN.-NWUT.MIND

FROKM 20 MPH WIND

2952

270

256 kT SHORE TO MAX.

WIND

-

-C

COJFFI CIENTS

BOIO

FRICTION FACTR 0-0030

WIND STRESS CORETIN FACTOR 1,10

.WATEh LE~VEL

DATA

(AT OPEN OCAST SHORELINE)

PHH SPLWD OF TRANSLATION

COMPONETS

SIT I

mT

HT

F

S E

T

WIND SETUP

13.49

15.87

18.47 PRESSURE SETUP

3.29

2.87

2.90

7NITIAL WATER LEV.

l.0)0

1.00

ASTRON0MICAL

3.60

3.50

TIDE LEVEL

ýVAL-SURGX

TILL WATia L"V.

21.3:8

23.35

25.87 MEE .LW

,

E,,I

(

K

TABLE C.10

SJMMARY-PERTINENT PROBABLE MAXIMUP. hURRICANE (PMH) , STORM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOCATION

MIAMI

LAT. 25%?.2'

LONG. 80'07.8'; TRAVErSE-AZIMUTH

100

DEREEs LENGTH

3-.9 NAUTICAL MILES

FLORIrA

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

-1/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

.P

Ius PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE I

.DEX gCKRACTISTICS

ZONE

1 AT IOCATION

250 47.2 DEGREE NORTH

PARAM

~

SPEE OFIG~TIN IO

1*

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

S

IlW HODERATF

HIGH

... (ST)

(MT)

CHT)

CENTAL PRESSURE INDEX

P INCS

26.09

26.0

PERIPHEAL PRESSURE

Pn INCHES

31.30

31.0,

RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

LARGE RADIUS NAUT.MI.

1

14

14 TNSLATION SPEED

F (FORWARD SPEED)

OTS

1 4

13

17 WMUM WIND SPEED

v M.P.H.

152

156

160

INITIAL DISTANCE-NAUT.MI.YJ

ROM 20 MPH MWIND

274

258

243 AT SHORE TO MAX, WND

-

PMH CCMPUTATIONAL COEFTICIENT

AND WATER LEE (SURGE) ESTIMATES

CON?

I CI ENTS

WFIVM1X

FRICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORRECTION FACTOR 1.10

WATER

LEVEL

DATA

(AT OPEN OCAST SMFRNLINN)

PMH SPEED OF TRANSIATION

COMPONENTS

ST 1I '

HT

S.. [

F

E

T

WIND SETUP

2.06

2.37.

2.51 PRESSURE SETUP

3.97

3.82

3.90

INITIAL WATR LEV.

0.90

ASTRONOM.ICAL

3.6o

3.60

ITDE LEEL

ff UAL-SURGE

STILL WATER IJS.

10.53

10.68

10.91

=V

-

TABLE C.11 SUM

Y-P~iRTINr PROBABLE M&XIMVP. WIRICANS (PMH),

STORM SUNG*r, COMPUI*ATIOMAL rATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL.

LOC&TIONJACKSONVILLELAT.

300

21' LONG. 81"

FLORIDA

PRORARL/ MAXIMUM HURRICANE IND12 CHARACTIhISTICS

ZONE

2 AT LOCATION

300

21' nwRHU NOMTH

AN EG N OF

Q

ITR

ATION

P

ETER

ESIGNATIONS

LOW

HODEATF

HIGH

C01TH&L *PRESSUR

INDEX

P0 INCHES

26.67

26.6?

PENIPHHEAL PRESSURE

-P

INCHES

31.21

31.21 ADIUS 1* MAXIMUM WIND

LAE RAMDUS NAUT. MI.

38

38 TIOU SPEED

v(FORWARD SPEED) KNOTS

1 4

11

22 MAXIMUM WIND SPEED

vX

M.P.H.

138

142

149 INITIAL DIMtNCE-NAJT*.HIJI

PROM 20 MPH WIND

407

372

334 kT SHORE TO MAX. WIND

Note: Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

1Y/Initial distance is distance along traveree froe shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

24*..

rmvEasE-AzimuTH

9o OCEAN BED PhOFILE

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DIETH

FROM

BELOW

SHORE

MIM.

(NAUT.MI. )

FEET

0

0.2

20

0.5

25

1.0

32

1.5

37

2.0

43

3.0

55

5.0

59

10.0

66

"12.0

66

14.0

72

15.0

73

20.0

8o

30.0

100

40.0

117

50.0

131

-

o.o noi r" 60.0

270

62.5

6oo

70.0

9W8 LATITUDE % 300 21'

DE*REE AT TRAVERSE

IMID-POINT FROM SHORE

P600-FOOT Dwri Domes LENGTH 62.5 xL'UiIC&L MILEm PMH (IHUTATIONAL COXYTICIENT

-AN

WATER LEVEL (stihz) ESLTIMTE

COEFFICIENT_4 LOTIVI1 FRICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND SRES CORRECTION FAC!TOR 1.10

WATEh LSVNL

DATA

(AT OPEN OCAST SHORELINE)

PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION

COoMP0MERS

sT

MT

HT

__

_E

E

T

WIND SETUP

16.46 PRESSURE SEUP

3.23 INITIAL

kAT/R LEV.

1.30

NORICAL

6.90

rIDE LEVEL

-

,

-,

tAL-SURGE

ILL WAT12 LLY.

27.90

EET MLW

0'i r

-_

-

j

K

Q

LOCATION JEKYLL

IAT. 310

05' LONG.

81"24.5': TRAVESE-AZImuTH 108 DIXRE',

LENGTH 72.6 NA*TICAL MILES

ISLAND, GEORGIA

PROBBLE MAXIMUM HURICANE INDEX CHARACT10ISTICS

ZONE

2 AT LOCATION

310

56 *DREZ

NORTH

Note:

Maxim=m wind speed is assumed to be on

"the traverse that is to right of storm track a

"distance equal to the radius-to maximum wind.

-!/initial dist ance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline., Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

OCEAN BED PROFILE

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

SHORE

MLW

(NAuT.mi.

(*

c

0

0.2

3.0

0.5

4.o0

1.0

6.o

1.5

6.5

2,0

7.0

3.0

12.0

4.0

20.0

5.0

2365_

6.0

29.5_

7.0

35.5.

8.0

35.0.

10.0

39.5

15.0

49.0.

20.0

57.0.

25.0

65.0

_

30.0

73.0

4.0.0

101.0

50.0

115.0o

60.0

131.0o

"700.

291.0

72.6

600.0

80.0

1,030.0

LATITUD'

300 53'

DRGREE AT TRAVERSE

MID-POINT FROM SHORE

S600-FOOT DEPrT

TABLE C.12 SUMMARY-PERTINENT PROBABLE MAXIMvI. h'URRICAE (PMH).

STORM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL LATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

A"

'0

SPEE

OF TANS ATIONn PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

[LOW

HODERATF

HIGH

_ _

_

_)

(n (HT)

C RAL PRESSURE N X

P0 INCHES

26.72

26.72 PERIPH1RKL PRESSURE

Pn INCHES

31.19

31.19 RDUSe TO MAXIMUM WIND

IARGE RADIUS NAM. MI.

10

40

TRIATrON SPEED

IMUR WIND SPED

yxM.P.H.

135

1541

147 INITIAL DISTAxacT-mW.mI

S20 MPH WIND

400

380

336 TSH

TO

-AX,

pMH O

HPUTATIONAL COODTICIE3T

AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE)

ESTIMATES

CO0 E FF I C I E NTS3 TIMTON

FHICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORRECTION FACTOR 1.10

WAT

B

.LEVEL

DATA

(AT OPEN OCAS

SORELINE)

PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION

COMPONErTS

ST

HT

WT

S~F

E. E _T

WIND SETUP

20.63 PREESUR,

SETUP

3.34 INITIAL WATES LEW.

1.20

ASTRONOMICAL

8.70

IDE LEVEL

AL-SURGE

STILL VTSuv33.87 TILL WATER Lh`V.

EEIT MLW

TABLE C.13 su5mHAY-PjmTINENT PROBaBLE MAXmIMp. hUICIANE (PmIl),

STORM SURGE (OmPUTATIOMAL

rATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOCATION FOLLY ISIANIL&T. 32e 39' LONG. 79"56.6': TRAVIMSE-AZIMUTH 150

SOUTH CAROLINA

-Note:

Maxi'm- wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

!/Initial distance Is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

PROEABLE MAXIMUM HIURRICANE INDEX CHABAC'M"ISTICS

ZONE

2 AT LOCATION

320

39' DOtEES NORTH

J

SPEED OF TASLTION

PARANMET

DESIGNATIONS

SLOW

MODERATF

HIGH

S(ST)

NO'

NO?

MAL PRESSURE INDEX

P 0INCHES

26.81

26.81 PERIPHE*AL PRESSURE

'n INCHES

31.13

31.13 RADIU8 TO MAXIMUM WIND

R09 RADIUJS NAUT.

MI.

40

&RANSIATION SPEED

?v (FAD SPEED) KNOTS

1 4

13

4AXDOJM WIND SPEED

Vx M.P.H.

134

139

148

[NITIAL DISTANIE-NAUT.MI.1

'PROM

20 MPH WIND

400

364

311 kT SHORE TO MAX.

WIND

II

DEGREE$ LENGTH 57.6 NAUTICAL MILES

PMH OCHPUTATIONAL CO

ZICIENT

AND WATER LEVEL (SURGcE)

ESTIMATES

OCEAN BED P"OFIL

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELDW

SHORE

HIM

(NAUT.HI.)

(FEET)

0

0 0.2

10.5

_

0.5

12.0.

_

1.0

14.0

_

1.5

16.5

_

2.0

18.0.

_

3.0

29.5

,

5.0

39.0

-

10.0

460.

_

15.0

56.o

-

20.0

65.o L30.0

85.0.

_

40.0

138.o0

_

50.0

227.0o

-

57.6

6o0.0

_

60.0

1,800.0

LATIT UME

320 25'

DEGREE AT TRAVERSE

MID-POINT FROM SHORE

ro600-= DE

BOT1I0M FRICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS COM=ION FACTOR 1.10

WATEEB

LE~VEL

DATA

(AT OPEN OGAST SHOELINE)

PMHl SPEED OF TRANISLATION

COMPONENTS

ST I

M

__....____

F.E j T

WIND SETUP

17.15 PRESSURE SETUlP

3-*23 INITIAL WATER LEV.

1.00

ST1'ONOOICAL

6.80

rFiD

LEVEL

TOT1AL-SURGE

STILL WATER LW.

28.18 Pwr MLW

_C

(

0,

K.

TABLE C.14 SUMMARy-PETINENT pROBABLE MAXIMUM. hVRRICAMM (PMH),

MWTOM SJRGE COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOCATION RALEIGH BAY,IAT.

340

54' LONG. 76 15.3': TRAVIMSE-AZIMIUTH

135 WOWPH OAROLINA

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

!/lnitial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind whe

n. leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE INDEX CHARACTMISTICS

IZONE

3 AT LOCATION

34°0

54' DEREE VNOTH

DEREE, LENGTH 35.2 NAUTICAL MILES

K

'0

'C

NORTH CAROLINA

0E

OFTAN-5 ION

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

!SLW

OMODERATF

HIGH

IfNtR PRESSURE INDEX

P, INCHES

26.89

26.89 LERIPHEAL PRESSURE

Pn INCHES

31.00

RtADI1US TO MAXIMUM WIND

LARGE RADIUS NlUT. MI.

35

35 IRANS*ATION SPEED

Fv (FOWVARD

SPEED) KNOTS

5

17

38 MAXIMUM WIND SPEED

Vx M.P.H.

130

137

119 INfiTAL DISTANCE-NAUT.I.i

-"

FROM 2O MP

IND

385

346

280

T SHORE TO

MAX WIND

i._.1..1 P111 aCHPUTATIONAL OOE"ICrIIr AnD WATER MMYE (SURGE) ESTIMATES

COEjFFICXXNT-S

BT

FR)ICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORRECTION FACTOR 1.10

WATER

LSVEL

DATA

(AT OPEN OCAST S)ORELINE)

OCEAN BED PROFILE

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

SHORE

MWI

I.

0

-

0.2

16

0.5

28

1.0

1.5

4.6

2.0

514

3.0

614

5.0

72

10.0

92 S15.0

U2

20.0

124

30-0

264

35.2

600

40.0

900

LATITUDE % 3,4o4,fl DEGREE AT TRAVIMSE

MID-POINT FO1 SHORE

TABLE C.15 SUHIAMY-PERTINENT PROBABLE MAXIMUt! hURRICANE (FMH),

STORM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND RESULTANT WATER LLVEL

LOCATION OCEAN CITY, LkT. 38e

20' LONG. 75 04.9'; TRAVERSE-AZIMUTH 110

I=REEM LENGTH 59 NAUTICAL MILES

MARYLAND

PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE INDEX CHARACTUISTICS

ZONE 4 AT LOCATION

380

20' DWEE NORITH

"SPEE OF TRANSLATION

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

SLOW

,ODERATF

HIGH

CENTRAL PRESSURE INDEX

P0 INCHES

27.05

27.05 PERIPHERAL PRESSURE

P

INCHES

30.?7

30.77

30.77 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

LRGE 1ADIUS

IAUT.

MI.

38

1IWSIATION SPEED

? (y o AMUD

SPEE)

[NOTS

1 10

26

48 IXIElUM WIND SPEED

vS

m.P.H.

124

1133

1146 INITIAL DISTAKCE--NUT.MI.*Y

RM 20 MPH WIND

350

293

251 kT SHORE TO MAX.

WIND

I_

I

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

1 Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi matelv double the Initial distance.

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

SHORX

MLW

NA& T.MI

(FEET

0.2

17

0.5

32

.

1.0

29

-

1.5

35

2. 0

4c

-

3.0

38 2

4.0

56

"

-

5.0

61 2

6

71 2

?

56

8

60

9

58

-

10

59

-

11,

65

-

12

64

-

13

70

14

62

214!

II 1i 7 LATITUDE

0 3)8014.~

DEGREE AT TRAVLVS&

MID-POINT FROM SHORE

IR600-FOO

az

--"-K

Ip PMH (THPUTATIONAL CODUICIIVT

AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE) ESTIMATES

C 0 EFF i C

E H NTS

IOT'iM ,,FRICTION

FACTOR 0.0025 WIND SrTRESS CORMION FACTOR 1.10

W AT E

L SVBL

D ATA

(AT OPEN MAST SHORELINE)

PKH SPEED OF TRANSLATION

COMPONENTS

S

I

NT

H T

_________

F

9E

T1 WIND SETUP

14.30

RESSURE SETUP-

2.83 INITIAL WATER LEV.

1.14 ATNOMICAL

5.00

TIDE LEVEL.

TU-&-SURG,

SILL WATER LEV.

23.27 Vw~ MLK

-

(

Q.

LOCATION ATLANTIC

LAT. 39°

21'

LONG. 74"

CITY, NEW JERSEY

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

1/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

25': TRAVERSE-AZIMUTH

146 DE*.EEm LENGTH

70

NAUTICAL MILES

PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE INDEX CHARACTER2ISTICS

ZONE

4 AT LOCATION

39P

21' DEGREE NORTH

TABLE C.16 SUMMARY-PERTINENT PROBABLE MAXIMU,. HURRICANE (PMH),

STORM SUHGE COMPUTATIONAL DkTA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

K

LA

'0

0

OCEAN BED PROFILE

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BEUOW

SHORE

wLx

-

0

_

0.2

10.0

D

0.5

15.0.

_

1.0

22.0

-

2.0

38.0

-

5.0

50.o0

1 10.0

72.0.

-

20.0

90.10

-

30.0

120.0.

_

4o.o

138.0

_

50.0

162.0o

_

60.0

210.0

_

65.0

258.0.

_

70.0

600.0.

-.

0

IATITDE P3

5 DEGREE AT TVERS

MID-POINT FROM SHORE

600-OO

VE

SPEED OF, T_ SLATION

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

SIOW

HODERATF

HIGH

,(sT)

(n)

H)

ENTRAL PRESSURE INDEX

P0 INCHS

27.12 R'IPImUA

PRESSURE

P* INCHES

30.70

RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

LARCE RADIUS NAUT. MI.

40

r1RASIATION SPEED

r! (F*ORWARD

spra)KNOTS

i

49 D(IUM WIND SPEED

V.

K.P.H.

142 INIrIAL DISTAMCE-11A

.MI.A

ROM 20 MPH WIND

A~T MSHORE

TO

. yMAX*WN

PMH OCMPUTATIONAL COOEFICIENT

AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE)

ESTIMATES

"C

0 E F F I C I E N T 5 BOTTOM FRICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORRECTION FACTOR 1.10

WATER

Lh VEL

DATA

(AT OPEN CCAST SHORELINE)

PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION

ODMPONENTS

ST

i MT

Hr F

3 E

T.T

WIND SETUP

15.32 PRESSURE SETUP

2.5?

INITIAL WATER LEV*

1.10

1AUMNOMICAL

5.70

r I IDL L-V

"AL-SURGE

2 STILL WATER L.

ET MLW.

TABLE C.17 SUI4AM

Y-PERTINENT PROBABLE HAXIMUJ. hWHRICANE (PMH),

STORM M:RGE COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND RESULTANT WATER LEVEL

LOCATION LONG ISLAND.LAT. 410 00' LONG. 7i201.8%' TRAVEiSE-AZIMUTH 166 CONNECTICUT

DECREEa LENGTH 68.4 NAUTICAL MILES

r'

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

1/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

OCEAN BED PROFILE

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

SHORE

HMU

(HAUT. mi.)

JFEgrE

0

_ 0.2

22

0.5

38

_

1.0

43

_

1.5

53

2.0

67

-

3.0

82

-

5.0

102

_

10.0

132

_

15.0

145

_

20.0

170

30.0

212

40.0

240

50.0

260

-

60.0

302

68.4

6O0

70.0

870

1ATITUDE

.

400 27'

DEGREE AT TRAVERSE

ID-POINT FHOM SHORE

60o-Foz DFTr'

PMH (XMPUTATIONAL COEWFICIENT

AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE)

ESTIMATES

COEFFIC-1ENTS

BO1`nf FRICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND sbfRESS CORREMION FACTOR 1.10

WATER

LEV EL

DATA

(AT OPEN MAS SWORELINS)

PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION

COMPONENTS

ST I

MT

u S

_ _E

E

T

WIND SETUP

8.73 PRESSURE SETUP

2.46 INITIAL WATIR LEV.

0.97

&STONONICAL

3.10

TIDE LEVEL

WTAL-SURGE

STILL WATER LWV.

15.26 E1EET MLW

(

PROBABLE MAXIMUM HUHRICkNE INDEX CHARAC'IMtISTICS

ZONE

4 AT LOCATION

410

00' DXMEE NORTH

SPEED OF TRANSLATION

PARAMTER DESIGNATIONS

SLOW

HODEATF

HIGH

M2?I1AL PRESSURE INDEX

P0 INCHES

27.26

27.26 PERIPHERAL PRESSURE

P

INCHES

30.56

30.56 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND

LARERADIS NAUT. MI.

.8

48

48 mRANSLATION SPEED

?,v (FORWARD SPEED) KNOTS

115

34

51

1AXlMUM WIND SPEED

vx M.P.H.

115

126

136 INITIAL DISTANCE-NAWTeMIJ/

FROM 20 MPH WIND

346

293

259 kT SHORE TO MAX.

WIND

r

Q

SUMMARY-PERTINENT PRtJBA.LE MAXIMUI,. hhIRICANE

LOCATION WATCH HILL

LAT.

43?18.9w LONG.

71 POINT, RHODE ISLAND

PROBABLE MAX IMUM HURRlCANE INDEX CHARACTISTICS

ZONE

4 AT LOCATION

41

19'

REE NORTH

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the--raverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius to maximum wind.

1/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm

-diameter between 20 mph iaovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

K

TABLE C.18 (nMH),

STORM SUHGE COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND RESULTANT MATER LEVEL

50 : T1RAVERSE-AZIMUTH 166 DE*REE: LENGTH

84 NAUlICAL MILES

OCEAN BED PROFILE;

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BELOW

SHORE

MWI

NAUT

MI

(FELT)

0

0.2

28

_

0.5

40

1.0

77

_

1.5

98

2.0

119

_

3.0

117

4.0

114

_

5.0

128

6.0

114

-

7.0

113

8.0

117

9.0

118

10.0

93

11.0

70

12.0

65 S

3.0

51 L4.o

56

15.0

77?

20.0

131

-0

1

0

2~

gO

0

245 LATITUiE

0 400 38'

DEIREE AT TRAVERSE

MID-POINT FROM SHORE

IT 600-2

=

DEFA

K

'r

6,

""SPEED

F *A

STION

PARAMETER I(SIPNATIOE.OS

5

35

1IGH

, ,, (sT_

)

" N '0

( r)

10 INCHES

27.29

27.29 P a INCHES

30.54

30.54 UaDIS TO

MAXIMUM WIND

IARG RADIUS NAUT. MI.

49

4 XIMUM MIND SPEED

VA

M.P.H.

113

126

134 INITIAL DISTANCE-NAUT.MI .1 FROM 20 MPH WIND

348

284.

255 AT S HO VE IQ MA*X

, WI

-

PMH OC?1PUTATIONAL COOVFICIMN

AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE) ESTIMATES

C O

F F I

E ENT S

IX*OT*IV

YICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORRECTION FACTOR 1.10

WATER

LEVE.L

DATA

(AT OPEN OCAST SHORELINE)

PIH SPEED OF TRANSIATION

COMPONENTS

STI

MT

-IH

F

E

E"

T _.

WIND SETUP

10.01 PRESSURE SETUP

2.42 INITIAL WATER LEV.

0.96

.STRON0MIC.L

4.00

POTAhL-SURGE

STILL WATER LLk.

17.39 T*-r-LW

TABLE C.19 SUPARY-PERTINENT PROBABLE MAXIMUk HURRICANE (PFH),

STORM SUGIO

COMPUIATIONAL LATA AND RESULTANT WATER)LEVEL

LOCATION HAMPTON

LT. 420

57' 1ONG. 70"47.l' 'i TRAVQtSE-AZIML

115 cH

NEW H&HPSHIRE

Note:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to. the radius to maximum wind.

F-Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum wind when leading

20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

C

PROR&BI

MAXIMUM HURRICANE INDEX CHARAC.!tISTICS

ZONE 4 AT LOCATION

420

57' DEGRE NORTh S'

... lSPEE OF THMANS AION

PARAMETER IESIGNATIONS

SIOW

HODESATF

HIGH

.

-(sT)

(,.,r)

,

CElAL PRESSURE INDEX

.-

P 0INCHES

27.44

27.44 PERIPHERAL PRESSURE

Pn INCHES

30.42

30.42 RADIUS T0 NAXIMUM WIND

LARG

RADIUJS FAUT. KI.

57

57 TANSLATIGN SPEED

iy (FOWARD SPEED) KNOTS

1 1?

37

52 MAXINUM WIND SPEED,

Pvx

.. ,.

107o

118 n

1 INITIAL DiAmcE.-RWT.mI.ND

F!ROM 20MPH WIND ,-

353

290

262

4T SHORE TO WA. WIND

1........

DWRE{E

LENG'H

40

NAUTICAL MILS

C

r Uf, OCEAN BED PROFILE

TRAVERSE

WATER

DISTANCE

DEPTH

FROM

BIOW

SHORE

MLN

(k,.TMi.){

(FFE*)

-

0

-

0.2

8

-

0.5

40

-

1.0

64

-

1.5

82

,

2.0

100

-

3.0

105

-

5.0

156

-

10.0

258

-

15.0

336

-

20.0

266

-

25.0

210

-

30.0

322

-

35.0

433

40,0

6OO

IATITUDI

0 42 0 48'

DEIREE AT TRAVERSE

MID-POINT FHOM SHORE

TM 60o-=OOT DEPTm

M OCIPUTTIONAL COiFICIENT

AND WATER LEVEL (StkGE) ESrIMATES

COEFF

I C I ENTS

kOnO' FRICTION FA¥ 02 0.0025 WIND STRESS CGURLCTION FACTOR 1.10

WATER

L-VEL

DATA

(AT OPEN GCAST SHORELINE)

PMH SPEED CF TRANSLATION

COMPONENTS

ST

I

ITT

I

hi F

E

E"

T

WIND SETUP

4.25 PRESSURE S'IMP

2.23 INITIAL WAT1.

LEV.

0.83 M NORICAL

10.50

VIDE LEVEL

TAL-SURGE

TILL WATER L67,.

17.81 EETr MLW

I

K

LOCATION GREAT

LAT.

W$O3304'

LONG.

67'

SPRUCE ISLAND. MAINE

otej:

Maximum wind speed is assumed to be on the traverse that is to right of storm track a distance equal to the radius-to maximum wind.

y/Initial distance is distance along traverse from shoreline to maximum

ind when leading i 20 mph isovel intersects shoreline.

Storm diameter between 20 mph Isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.

30': TRAvERS

OCEAN BE

TRAVERSE

DISTANCE

FROM

SHORE

(NuT.MI.

0

_

0.2

-

0.5

-

1.0

_

1.5

-

2.0

_

3.0

-

4.0

_

5.0

1 0.0

_

15.0

20.0

-

30.0

10.0

50.0

-

60.0

70.0

-

120.0

130.0

1'Ii0

180.0

IATITUDE

DFRFZ AT

MID-POiNT

,E-AZIMUTH

148 ED PROFILE

PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE INDEX CHARACTrERISTICS

I ZO.E

4 AT LOCATION

440

31 DEGREE

NOW'TH

INO 600-FOOT DEPT'

Dif-REEs LFNGTH 178.6 NAUTICAL MILES

K

TABLE C.20

SUMMARY-PERTINENT PROBABLE MAXIMUI. hUWRICANE (PMH).

STOIRM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL DATA AND RESULTANT WATER L*VEL'

K

WATER

DEMT

BELOW

MLW

FEET

0

50

96

"95

125

165

247

188

233

438

570

271

511 NIL

4

1,620

4 o17df TRAVERSE

FROM SHORE

SPEE OF TRANSLTION

PARAMETER DESIGNATIONS

SLOW

HODERATF

HIGH

.EMLPRESSURE

INDEX

-

P0 INCHES

27.61

27.61 PERIPHERAL PRESSURE

Pn INCHES

30.25

ýRDU TO MXMWIND

IARGE RADIUS NAUT.

MI.

64

64

64 TRASIATION SPEED

V (FORWARD SPEED) KNOTS

I 19

39

53

"Vx M.P.H.

102

114

122 TINITIAL DISTANCE-NAUT.MID

"

1P

%A

PMH 001PUTATIONAL COEFFICIE2IT

AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE)

ESTIMATES

C 0 E F F . C I E N T S

BTJOh F'HzICT'ON FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORHEHTION FACTOR 1.10

w.Tz*,

L,'v1L

DATA

(AT OPEN CCAST SHORELINE)

'PMH SPEED OF TRANSIATION

COMPONENTS

ST

I

MT

HT

F

E

T

WIND SETUP

9.73 PRESSURE SLTJP

1.82 INITIAL WATEW LEV.

0.56 ASTRONOMICAL

16.00

TIDE LEVEL-

-

tOTAL-SURGE

28.1 STILL WAT*R LLV.

EETL"

MLW

TABLE C.21 OCEAN BED PROFILES

PASS

CRYSTAL

CHESAPEAKE

CI*RISTI"

RIVER

ST. LUCIE

BAY MOUTH

HAMPTON BEACH*

Nautical Nautical Nautical Nautical Nautical Miles from Depth, Miles from Depth.

Miles from Depth, Miles from Depth, Miles from Depth, Shore ft.

I4LW

Shore ft.

HLW

Shore f

t. MLW

Shore

- ftj MLW

Shore ft, MLW

1

2

5

10

15

20

30

40

50

60

70

77

0.55

2.31

6.25

8.33

31.4

100

113

127

3

9

12

13

35

36

40

52

90

160

335

600

0.1

10

16

18.7

3

10

14

9

50

180

300

600

10

90

390

600

5

10

30

50

55

62

44

56

102

178

240

600

0.5

4

10

25

44

20

120

250

600

As developed for Seabrook r

70

0%

G%

C

t

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, *W0

FIRST CLASS MAIL.

.

POSTAGE 6 FEES PAID

USNRC

PERMIT N&. 0-67

Regulatory Guide 1.59

Contents

1. Power Reactors

6. Products

7. Transportation

A. INTRODUCTION

B. DISCUSSION

C. REGULATORY POSITION

D. IMPLEMENTATION

A. INTRODUCTION

B. DISCUSSION

C. REGULATORY POSITION

D. IMPLEMENTATION

I. INTRODUCTION

e. Runnff

k. San Gabriel River

k. Willamette River

k. McKenzie River

k. Clearwater River

k. McKenzie River

k. Willamette River

k. Vilaette Aiver

k. Rogue River

k. Snake River

A. INTRODUCTION

t. h OCEAN BED PROFILE

1. i LIANSLATION SPEED

n. leading

t. MLW

Navigation menu

Regulatory Guide 1.59

1. Power Reactors

6. Products

7. Transportation

A. INTRODUCTION

B. DISCUSSION

C. REGULATORY POSITION

D. IMPLEMENTATION

A. INTRODUCTION

B. DISCUSSION

C. REGULATORY POSITION

D. IMPLEMENTATION

I. INTRODUCTION

e. Runnff

k. San Gabriel River

k. Willamette River

k. McKenzie River

k. Clearwater River

k. McKenzie River

k. Willamette River

k. Vilaette Aiver

k. Rogue River

k. Snake River

A. INTRODUCTION

t. h OCEAN BED PROFILE

1. i LIANSLATION SPEED

n. leading

t. MLW

Navigation menu

Search