Regulatory Guide 1.59: Difference between revisions
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
StriderTol (talk | contribs) (Created page by program invented by StriderTol) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Adams | {{Adams | ||
| number = | | number = ML003740388 | ||
| issue date = | | issue date = 08/31/1977 | ||
| title = Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants | | title = Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants | ||
| author name = | | author name = | ||
| author affiliation = NRC/RES | | author affiliation = NRC/RES | ||
| addressee name = | | addressee name = | ||
| addressee affiliation = | | addressee affiliation = | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
| license number = | | license number = | ||
| contact person = | | contact person = | ||
| document report number = RG-1. | | case reference number = -nr, FOIA/PA-2015-0456, FOIA/PA-2015-0458 | ||
| document report number = RG-1.59, Rev 2 | |||
| document type = Regulatory Guide | | document type = Regulatory Guide | ||
| page count = | | page count = 64 | ||
}} | }} | ||
{{#Wiki_filter:U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY | {{#Wiki_filter:Revision 2 -U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY | ||
COMMISSION | COMMISSION | ||
August 1077 C, REGULATORYGUIDE | |||
OFFICE OF STANDARDS | |||
DEVELOPMENT | |||
REGULATORY | REGULATORY | ||
GUIDE | 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. | |||
GUIDES | |||
or to provide guidance to applicants. | |||
Washington. | Regulatory Guides are not 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 | |||
4 Environmental | 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. | |||
10 General | |||
Washington. | Washington. | ||
D.C | D.C. 20555. Attention: | ||
Director. | 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== | ==B. DISCUSSION== | ||
......................... | .. ............................................. | ||
....................... | 1.59-5 C. REGULATORY | ||
POSITION .................................... | |||
POSITION ....... | 1.59-7 | ||
.............................. | |||
59-7 | |||
==D. IMPLEMENTATION== | ==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 ........... | ||
.59-8 APPENDIX A -Probable Maximum and Seismically Induced Floods on Streams | 1.59-11 APPENDIX C-Simplified Methods of Estimating Probable Maximum Surges ............ | ||
.59-9 APPENDIX B -Alternative Methods of Estimating Probable Maximum Floods | 1.59-41*Lines indicate substantive changes from previous issue.1.59-3 | ||
.59- | |||
.59- | |||
==A. INTRODUCTION== | ==A. INTRODUCTION== | ||
General Design Criterion | General Design Criterion | ||
2, "Design Bases for | 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 | Criterion | ||
2 also requires that design bases for these structures, systems, and components reflect ( | 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 | Paragraph | ||
100.10(c) | 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 | 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 Hurricane 4 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. | |||
For | 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 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 | C. REGULATORY | ||
POSITION 1. The conditions resulting from the worst site | 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) | ||
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. | ||
with attendant wind | |||
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. | |||
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 | 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 | 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 | 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. | 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' | 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. | definition of a Standard Project Hurricane. | ||
For other sites, a comparable level of risk should be assumed. | 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== | ==D. IMPLEMENTATION== | ||
The purpose of this section is to provide | 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 | 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. | |||
The | ==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 .f.fff.f.fff.f.fff.fffffffffffffff1.59-12 | |||
1.59-12 1.59-12 1.59-12 1.59-12 1.59-12 1.59-13 1.59-13 1.59-13 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 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 hour 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. | |||
The | 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 | |||
(2) | 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 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 ETOS. I I I I 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 I I A ! --t (.,p ImO GO | |||
-ISOLINE REPRESENTING | |||
PEAK FLOW OF PMF IN 1,000 CFS. -----N ' al a a a a a a I NOTE: PMF ISOUNES ON THIS CHART REPRESENT | |||
ENVELOPED | |||
VALUES OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 5,00 | |||
===0. SQUARE === | |||
MILE DRAINAGE AREA UNDER NATURAL RIVER CONDITIONS. | |||
MILE DRAINAGE | |||
ACCORDINGLY, | ACCORDINGLY, PMF VALUES OBTAINED DO NOT INCLUDE POSSIBLE CONTRIBU TIONS TO PEAK FLOW THAT WOULD RESULT FROM UPSTREAM D) FAILURE Off OTHER UNNATURAL | ||
EVENTS. | EVENTS. a a a a 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) | PMF ISOLINES) | ||
FOR | FOR 5.000 SQUARE MILES Q K"Ip Ga | ||
-"ISOLINE | |||
REPRESENTING | REPRESENTING | ||
PEAK | PEAK FLOWOF PMF IN 11000 CFS. NOTE: PMF ISOLINES ON THIS CHART REPRESENT | ||
ENVELOPED VALUES OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM | ENVELOPED | ||
VALUES OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 10.OOO4OUARE | |||
MILE DRAINAGE AREA UNDER NATURAL RIVER CONDITIONS. | MILE DRAINAGE AREA UNDER NATURAL RIVER CONDITIONS. | ||
ACCORDINGLY | ACCORDINGLY. | ||
PUF VALUES OBTAINED DO NOT INCLUDE POSSIBLE CONTRIBU. | |||
TIONS TO PEAK FLOW THAT WOULD RESULT FROM UPSTREAM DAM FAILURES OR OTHER UNNATURAL | |||
EVENTS. | 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) | PMF ISOLINES) | ||
FOR 10 | 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 | ENVELOPED | ||
1400, 100 VALUES OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 20.000-SUARE | |||
MILE DRAINAGE .I | MILE DRAINAGE "Pm 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 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 II i'-: ..I- -I .4;tI ; ; i , -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..!. | |||
I | 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 X I I I I I I I I I I I air 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 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 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 22.8 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. Vt. 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. Pa. N. Y, Pa. w. Va. Pa. Md. Pa. Va. We Va* Md. Del. Va. Pa. 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 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" | |||
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. 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. 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 24.2 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 | |||
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. Ark. Kans. Kans. Kans. Okla. Kans. Tex. Okla. Okla. Ark. Okla. Ark. Okla. Okla. Okla. Colo. Kans. Okla. Okla. Tex. Okla. Kans. Ark. Ark. Kans. Ark. Ark. Okla, Okla. Tex. Okla. 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. Kans. Colo. Okla. La. Okla. Okla. Okla. Tex. Tex* Tex. Tex.. Tex. Tex, Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Teax Tax, Tex. Tex. Tex. Teax Tex* Tex.River Basin Arkansas Red Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Red Red Red Arkansas Arkansas.San Jacinto Brazos Trinity Trinity San Jacinto 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) Pree. 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 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 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. Tex. Te,:. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex, Tea. Tex, Tex. Tex.No N. N. N. 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. H. H.Ariz. Ariz. Ariz. 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. Fk. 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 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 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 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. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Ida. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Wash. Wash. Ore. Mont. Wash. Oreg. Oreg. Wash. Wash, Ida, Oreg. Wash, Ida. Oreg. Wash. Wash. Cal. Cal. Cal. 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 Fk. Willamette River 104 S. Fk. McKenzie River 208 North Santiam River 438 Row River 26. N. Fk. Clearwater River 2,440 Elk Creek 132 Willamette River 184 Long Tom River 252 South Santiam River 4144 Middle Santiam River 27? Gate Ck. McKenzie River 50 Middle Fk. 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 Fk. Vilaette Aiver 991 Lost Pk. Rogue River 6,7' Snake River 101,,4O0 Snake River 108,500 Boise River 2,650. Columbia River 214,000 White River '400 Willow Ck. 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 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 Dullards Bar New Exchequer New Hogm New Melones Oroville Owens Pine Flat Prado San Antonio Santa Fe Sepulveda Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. 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 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 '0 State F Peak Discharve (ofa)383 560 it 5133"40.1 25.1 i2.6 2468 20. ? 13.7 200,000 290,000 602,000 305,000 | |||
APPENDIX C SIMPLIFIED | APPENDIX C SIMPLIFIED | ||
METHODS OF ESTIMATING | METHODS OF ESTIMATING | ||
PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGES TABLE OF CONTENTS Page C. | PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGES TABLE OF CONTENTS Page C. | ||
................. | |||
................................... | ==A. INTRODUCTION== | ||
.. | ...... .................................... | ||
... .................. | 1.59-42 C.2 SCOPE .............................................. | ||
1.59- | 1.59-42 C.3 PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGELEVELS | ||
FROM HURRICANES | |||
............... | |||
1.59- | 1.59-42 C.3.1 Methods Used ............. | ||
1.59- | ........................ | ||
1.59- | 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 | |||
C.2 -Probable Maximum Surge Estimates, Atlantic Coast .......... | .............................................. | ||
TABLES Table C. | 1.59-43 FIG URES .. .............................................. | ||
C. 2 -Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level -Port Isabel ..C. 3 -Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level -Freeport ....C. 4 -Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level -Eugene Island .C. 5 -Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level | 1.59-44 TABLES ................................................ | ||
...C.12 -Probable Maximum Hurricane, Surge, and Water Level - | 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.2 | 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 mad | |||
====e. Reference ==== | |||
2 provides guidance on such studie | |||
====s. 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- | 1.59-43 | ||
96° 960 940 329 310 200 27r 260 250 240 93? 92r 910 90p 89W 88e 870 860 860 840 8r3 820 810 FIGURE Ci PROBABLE MAXIMUM SURGE ESTIMATES | |||
-GULF COAST C 34° 340 C f( | |||
-GULF COAST | 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 | ||
830 820 810 800 790 780 770 760 750 | -ATLANTIC COAST 1.59-45 TABLE C. 1 PROBABLE MPAXfl04 SURGE DATA (W)CATIONS | ||
-ATLANTIC COAST 1.59- | |||
INDICATED | INDICATED | ||
ON FIGURES C. | 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 | |||
ISLAND PITTS CREEK CRYSTAL RIVER (a)NAPLES MIAMI | JEKYLL ISLAND FOLLY ISLAND BRUNSWICK | ||
JEKYLL ISLAND FOLLY ISLAND BRUNSWICK RALEIGH CHESAPEAKE | RALEIGH CHESAPEAKE | ||
BAY ENTRANCE (a)OCEAN CITY ATLANTIC CITY FORKED RIVER | BAY ENTRANCE (a) OCEAN CITY ATLANTIC CITY FORKED RIVER OYSTER CREEK LONG ISLAND MILLSTONE | ||
GREAT SPRUCE ISLAND 86 152 192 165 160 183 205 248 100 90 108 150 135 | 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 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 110 00 146 00 166 166 115 148 00 00 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 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 2.00 0.80 1.50 1.50 1.20 0.60 1.00 0.90 0.98 1.30 1.20 1.00 1.00 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 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. | |||
TABLE C.2 SUMMARY- | 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.) | ||
PROBABLE | 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 STOR.M SURGE COMPUTATIONAL | |||
DATA AND RESULTANT | DATA AND RESULTANT | ||
WATER | WATER LE LOCATION PORT ISABEL T. 26004.3' LONG. 97 09.41: TRAVERSE-AIMUTH86 | ||
0-30 GREEI LENTH 4.2.1 NAUTIICAL | |||
ZONE C AT LOCATION 260 04 | MILES """&mla K-J PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE | ||
PARAMETER | IN PARCThISTICS | ||
ZONE C AT LOCATION 260 04 EREE NOM PARAMETER | |||
DESIGNATIONS | DESIGNATIONS | ||
SLW MODERATF HIGH GEMMEAL PRESSURE IDEX P 0 INCHE 26.412 26.412 26.112 2 -PERIPHERAL | |||
SPEED | PRESSURE INCHES 31.30 31.30 31.30 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND LARGERADIUS | ||
RnAU. MIe. 20 20 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 | |||
TOTAL-SURGE | |||
STILL WATER Lhs'J. 17.84 PET LW- -- | |||
TABLE C.3 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 | |||
ZONE C AT LOCATION 280 561 MHZE NORTH 1 SPEED OF UNSITION PARAMETER | |||
DESIGNATIONS | |||
SLOW HODERATF HIGH NOm' (Hr,) CflI!VAL PRESSURE INDEX Po INCHES 26.69 26.69 26.69 PERIPHERAL | |||
P 0SRE P n INCHES 31.25 31.25 31.25 ADIUS 70 KMAXDIUM WIND LiRGE SAhMS iUT. I. 26.0 26.0 26.0 | |||
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 S20 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 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 | COMPONENTS | ||
ST | ST I HTr H T F E E T WIND SEiTUP 15.99 PRLSSURE SETUP 2.89 INITIAL WATIR LEV. 2.40 &STRONOMICAL | ||
2.20 TIDE LEVEL. TOTAL-SURGE | |||
STILL | 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. | |||
Note: | |||
Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels | 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 | |||
TABLE | WATER LEVEL K.ub PROBABLE 1AXIMUM HURRICANE | ||
INE CHARACThWISTICS | |||
ZONE B AT LOCATION 29P 20' DGREE NORTH PARAMETER | |||
WATER LEVEL | |||
ZONE B AT LOCATION | |||
PARAMETER | |||
DESIGNATIONS | DESIGNATIONS | ||
SLOW | SLOW TODERATF HIGH CENTRAL PRESSURE P 0 INCHES 26.87 26.87 26.87 PDtIPHEAL | ||
PRESSURE | PRESSURE INCHES 31.24 31.24 31.24 IUS TO MAXIMUM WIND J.-ARE RADIUS NUT*. MI. 29.0 29.0 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.-/ | ||
SPEED | FROM 20 MPH WIND 534 184 412 AT SHORE To MAX. WID-1)PMH OCHPUTATIONAL | ||
COEFFICIENT | |||
AND WATER LEVM (SURGE) ESTINATES ICTJIM 'iFICTION | |||
COEFFICIENT | |||
AND | |||
FACTOR 0.0030 WIND STRESS CORRECTION | FACTOR 0.0030 WIND STRESS CORRECTION | ||
FACTOR 1.10 | FACTOR 1.10 WAT E Lh VEL DATA (AT OPEN OCAST SHORELINE) | ||
PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION | PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION | ||
COMPONENTS | COMPONENTS | ||
ST M | ST M ST HiT F E, T WIND SETIUP -29.74 PRESSURE SETUP 3.29 INITIAL WLATER LEV. 2.00 ATRONOMICAL | ||
2. | 2.30 hIDE LEVEL SUAL-RGE STILL L kA .37.34 SET =L : | ||
TABLE C.5 SUMMY-PERTINENT | |||
PROALE MAXI M1,. (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'EENOTNOTMNSL§T:0I. | |||
PARAMETER | PARAMETER | ||
DESIGNATIONS | DESIGNATIONS | ||
SLOW | SLOW 14OD91ATF | ||
HIGH MH PRESSURE INDEM P 0 INCHES 26.88 26.88 26.88 PERIPHERAL | |||
SPEED | PRESSURE P INCHES 31.25 31.25 31.25 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND IARGZ RADIUS NALT. HI. 29 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 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) | |||
AND | P1W SPEED OF TRANSLI'TIO | ||
FACTOR 1.10 WATER LEVEL DATA (AT OPEN CCAST | |||
COMPONENTS | COMPONENTS | ||
ST | 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 | |||
TABLE C.6 | K TABLE C.6 SURY-PFERTINENT | ||
PR"OBBLE MAX IMU. hURRICANE (Pml'. STORM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL | |||
DATA AND | DATA AND RESULTANT | ||
WATER LEVEL | WATER LEVEL LOTION BIIOXI LAT. 30023.6' LONG. 88"53.6't TRAVMsSE-AZIMUTH | ||
160 DECREEs LEVGTH 77 NAUTICAL MILES MISSISSIPPI | |||
160 | 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 CHARACMISTICS | |||
PROBABLE | 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 -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_ | |||
WATER | |||
PARAMETER | PARAMETER | ||
DESIGNATIONS | DESIGNATIONS | ||
SLW MODERATF HIGH METRAL PRESSURE INDEI o INC= 26.9 26.9 26.9 PERIPHERAL | |||
PRESSURE P INCHES 31. | PRESSURE P INCHES 31.23 31.23 31.23 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND laRGE RADIUS NAUT. MI. 30 30 30 rRANSLATION | ||
SPEED | 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 | COEFFICIENT | ||
AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE) | AND WATER LEVEL. (SURGE) SrIMATES COEFFICIENTS | ||
WM'OK FRICTION FACTOR 0.0030 WIND STRESS CORRECTION | |||
FACTOR 0.0030 WIND STRESS | FACTOR 1.10 (ATER L .VCST DATA (AT OPEN OCs sMREiNZ) | ||
FACTOR 1.10 | TABLE C.7 SUMMARY-YERUNENT | ||
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 | ?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 | 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 P 0 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 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 | |||
INDEX | AND WATER LLY&i (SURiGE) ESTIMATES | ||
ZONE | 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 | |||
SPEED | WATER DISrANCE DEPTH FROM BELOW swagR HMW Nt .AUT.H. LF2TL 0 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 | |||
AND WATER | 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. | ||
FACTOR 1.10 | |||
Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi | Storm ,diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.53': -TRAVERSE-AZIMUTH | ||
205 LENGITH 110 NAUTICAL MILES PROBABLE HURRICANE | |||
ST I MT | INIM CHARACTERISTICS | ||
4. | 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 | ||
STILL | PRESSURE SPn INCHES 30.ZZ 30.22 30.22 RADIUýS TO MAIMU WIND JAUME RADIUS NAUT. MI. 26 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 _ 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 | TABLE C.9 SUMMARY-PERTINENT | ||
PRUbABLE MAX IMt:? HURRICANE (PNJO, STORM SUC COMPULATIONAL | |||
rATA AND RESULTANT | |||
WATER LEVEL LOCATION NAPLES FLORIDA | WATER LEVEL LOCATION NAPLES FLORIDA LkT. 26001.41 IONG. 81'46.2'; | ||
TRAVERSE- | 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 distanc | |||
====e. 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 P 0 INCHES 26.24' 26.24 26.24 PERIPHERAL | |||
PRESSURE % INCHES 31.30 31.30 31.30 ADniS TO MAXIMUM WIND LRGE RAIUS wNAU. MI. 15 15 | |||
TABLE C.10 | ===1. i LIANSLATION === | ||
PROBABLE | 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 1.00 ASTRON0MICAL | |||
3.60 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 | DATA AND RESULTANT | ||
WATER LEVEL LOCATION MIAMI | WATER LEVEL LOCATION MIAMI LAT. 25%?.2' LONG. 80'07.8'; | ||
100 | 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 2 | ZONE 1 AT IOCATION 250 47.2 DEGREE NORTH PARAM ~ ~ SPEE OFIG~TIN IO PARAMETER | ||
PARAMETER | |||
DESIGNATIONS | DESIGNATIONS | ||
S IlW HODERATF HIGH ... (ST) (MT) CHT) CENTAL PRESSURE INDEX P INCS 26.09 26.09 26.0 PERIPHEAL | |||
PRESSURE Pn INCHES 31. | PRESSURE Pn INCHES 31.30 31.30 31.0, RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND LARGE RADIUS NAUT.MI. 1 14 14 TNSLATION | ||
SPEED | 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 | |||
AND WATER | CON? I CI ENTS WFIVM1X FRICTION FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORRECTION | ||
FACTOR 1.10 WATER LEVEL DATA (AT OPEN | FACTOR 1.10 WATER LEVEL DATA (AT OPEN OCAST SMFRNLINN) | ||
PMH SPEED OF | PMH SPEED OF TRANSIATION | ||
COMPONENTS | COMPONENTS | ||
ST | ST 1I ' HT S.. [ F E E T WIND SETUP 2.06 2.37. 2.51 PRESSURE SETUP 3.97 3.82 3.90 INITIAL WATR LEV. 0.90 0.90 0.90 ASTRONOM.ICAL | ||
3.6o 3.60 3.60 ITDE LEEL ff UAL-SURGE | |||
STILL WATER | STILL WATER IJS. 10.53 10.68 10.91 =V --- | ||
TABLE C.11 SUM | |||
PROBABLE M&XIMVP. WIRICANS (PMH), STORM | |||
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 INDEX P 0 INCHES 26.67 26.67 26.6? PENIPHHEAL | |||
PRESSURE -P INCHES 31.21 31.21 31.21 ADIUS MAXIMUM WIND LAE RAMDUS NAUT. MI. 38 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. | |||
ZONE | |||
HIGH | |||
SPEED | |||
Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi-mately double the initial distance. | Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.rmvEasE-AzimuTH | ||
9o OCEAN BED PhOFILE TRAVERSE WATER DISTANCE DIETH FROM BELOW SHORE MIM. (NAUT.MI. ) FEET 0 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' 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 MILES ISLAND, GEORGIA PROBBLE MAXIMUM HURICANE INDEX CHARACT10ISTICS | |||
ZONE 2 AT LOCATION 310 56 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. | |||
TABLE C. | (* c 0 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 | LATA AND RESULTANT | ||
WATER LEVEL LOCATION FOLLY | 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 26.72 PERIPH1RKL | |||
PRESSURE Pn INCHES 31.19 31.19 31.19 RDUSe TO MAXIMUM WIND IARGE RADIUS NAM. MI. 10 40 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 | |||
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': | |||
150 SOUTH CAROLINA | 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 | Storm diameter between 20 mph isovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.PROEABLE MAXIMUM HIURRICANE | ||
FROM SHORE | 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 26.81 PRESSURE 'n INCHES 31.13 31.13 31.13 RADIU8 TO MAXIMUM WIND R09 RADIUJS NAUT. MI. 40 40 40 &RANSIATION | |||
FACTOR 1.10 | 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 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 | COMPONENTS | ||
ST I | ST I M __....____ | ||
6.80 | F.E j T WIND SETUP 17.15 PRESSURE SETUlP 3-*23 INITIAL WATER LEV. 1.00 ST1'ONOOICAL | ||
STILL WATER | 6.80 rFiD LEVEL TOT1AL-SURGE | ||
TABLE C.14 | STILL WATER LW. 28.18 Pwr MLW_C (0, | ||
K.TABLE C.14 SUMMARy-PETINENT | |||
pROBABLE MAXIMUM. hVRRICAMM (PMH), MWTOM SJRGE COMPUTATIONAL | |||
WATER LEVEL LOCATION RALEIGH BAY, | DATA AND RESULTANT | ||
135 | WATER LEVEL LOCATION RALEIGH BAY,IAT. 340 54' LONG. 76 15.3': TRAVIMSE-AZIMIUTH | ||
INDEX | 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 when. leading 20 mph isovel intersects shoreline. | ||
PARAMETER | 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 | DESIGNATIONS | ||
!SLW OMODERATF | |||
PRESSURE | HIGH IfNtR PRESSURE INDEX P, INCHES 26.89 26.89 26.89 LERIPHEAL | ||
SPEED | PRESSURE Pn INCHES 31.00 31.00 31.00 RtADI1US TO MAXIMUM WIND LARGE RADIUS NlUT. MI. 35 35 35 SPEED Fv (FOWVARD SPEED) KNOTS 5 17 38 MAXIMUM WIND SPEED Vx M.P.H. 130 137 119 INfiTAL DISTANCE-NAUT.I.i | ||
WIND SPEED | -" FROM 2O MP IND 385 346 280 #T SHORE TO MAX WIND i._.1..1 P111 aCHPUTATIONAL | ||
FROM | OOE"ICrIIr AnD WATER MMYE (SURGE) ESTIMATES | ||
COEjFFICXXNT-S | |||
BT FR)ICTION | |||
FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORRECTION | FACTOR 0.0025 WIND STRESS CORRECTION | ||
FACTOR 1.10 | 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 -0.2 16 0.5 28 1.0 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 | |||
5. | PROBABLE MAXIMUt! hURRICANE (FMH), STORM SURGE COMPUTATIONAL | ||
TABLE C.15 | |||
PROBABLE | |||
DATA AND RESULTANT | DATA AND RESULTANT | ||
WATER | WATER LLVEL LOCATION OCEAN CITY, LkT. 38e 20' LONG. 75 04.9'; TRAVERSE-AZIMUTH | ||
110 | 110 I=REEM LENGTH 59 NAUTICAL MILES MARYLAND PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE | ||
INDEX | INDEX CHARACTUISTICS | ||
ZONE 4 AT LOCATION 380 20' | ZONE 4 AT LOCATION 380 20' DWEE NORITH "SPEE OF TRANSLATION | ||
PARAMETER | PARAMETER | ||
DESIGNATIONS | DESIGNATIONS | ||
SLOW | SLOW ,ODERATF HIGH CENTRAL PRESSURE INDEX P 0 INCHES 27.05 27.05 27.05 PERIPHERAL | ||
PRESSURE P INCHES 30. | PRESSURE P INCHES 30.?7 30.77 30.77 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND LRGE 1ADIUS IAUT. MI. 38 38 38 1IWSIATION | ||
SPEED | SPEED ? (y o AMUD SPEE) [NOTS 1 10 26 48 IXIElUM WIND SPEED vS m.P.H. 124 1133 1146 INITIAL | ||
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 | |||
FROM SHORE | az--"-K Ip PMH (THPUTATIONAL | ||
CODUICIIVT | |||
AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE) ESTIMATES C 0 | AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE) ESTIMATES | ||
FACTOR 1.10 | 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 | COMPONENTS | ||
S I NT H T _________ | |||
5. | 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 LENGTH 70 NAUTICAL MILES PROBABLE MAXIMUM HURRICANE | |||
INDEX CHARACTER2ISTICS | |||
ZONE 4 AT LOCATION 39P 21' DEGREE NORTH TABLE C.16 SUMMARY-PERTINENT | |||
146 | PROBABLE MAXIMU,. HURRICANE (PMH), STORM SUHGE COMPUTATIONAL | ||
INDEX | DkTA AND RESULTANT | ||
ZONE 4 AT LOCATION | WATER LEVEL K LA '0 OCEAN BED PROFILE TRAVERSE WATER DISTANCE DEPTH FROM BEUOW SHORE wLx -0 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 | ||
PARAMETER | FROM SHORE 600-OO VE SPEED OF, T_ SLATION PARAMETER | ||
DESIGNATIONS | DESIGNATIONS | ||
SIOW HODERATF HIGH ,(sT) (n) H) ENTRAL PRESSURE INDEX P 0 INCHS 27.12 R'IPImUA PRESSURE INCHES 30.70 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND LARCE RADIUS NAUT. MI. 40 r1RASIATION | |||
SPEED r! | |||
PRESSURE | spra)KNOTS | ||
SPEED | 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 | |||
AND | 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 _ 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 | |||
AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE) ESTIMATES | |||
FACTOR 0. | |||
PMH SPEED OF TRANSLATION | |||
COMPONENTS | COMPONENTS | ||
ST | 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 | 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 P 0 INCHES 27.26 27.26 27.26 PERIPHERAL | |||
PRESSURE P INCHES 30.56 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 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 | Storm -diameter between 20 mph iaovels is approxi mately double the initial distance.K TABLE C.18 (nMH), STORM SUHGE COMPUTATIONAL | ||
TABLE C.18 | |||
DATA AND RESULTANT | DATA AND RESULTANT | ||
WATER | MATER LEVEL 50 : T1RAVERSE-AZIMUTH | ||
166 LENGTH 84 NAUlICAL MILES OCEAN BED PROFILE; TRAVERSE WATER DISTANCE DEPTH FROM BELOW SHORE MWI NAUT MI (FELT) 0 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 STION PARAMETER | |||
I(SIPNATIOE.OS | |||
5 35 1IGH , ,, (sT_ ) " N '0 ( r) 10 INCHES 27.29 27.29 27.29 P a INCHES 30.54 30.54 30.54 UaDIS TO MAXIMUM WIND IARG RADIUS NAUT. MI. 49 49 4 XIMUM MIND SPEED VA M.P.H. 113 126 134 INITIAL DISTANCE-NAUT.MI | |||
PARAMETER | .1 FROM 20 MPH WIND 348 284. 255 AT S HO VE IQ , WI -PMH OC?1PUTATIONAL | ||
COOVFICIMN | |||
AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE) ESTIMATES | |||
C O F F I E ENT S 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 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 .: (,.,r) , CElAL PRESSURE INDEX .- P 0INCHES 27.44 27.44 27.44 PERIPHERAL | |||
PRESSURE Pn INCHES 30.42 30.42 30.42 RADIUS T0 NAXIMUM WIND LARG RADIUJS FAUT. KI. 57 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.){ -0 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 4 2 0 48' DEIREE AT TRAVERSE MID-POINT | |||
FHOM SHORE TM 60o-=OOT DEPTmOCIPUTTIONAL | |||
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 | |||
INDEX | |||
ZONE 4 AT LOCATION 420 57' | |||
PARAMETER | |||
PRESSURE | |||
SPEED | |||
AND WATER LEVEL ( | |||
FACTOR 1.10 | |||
PMH SPEED | |||
COMPONENTS | COMPONENTS | ||
ST I | 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 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 | 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 | |||
148 | WATER K WATER DEMT BELOW MLW FEET 0 50 96 "95 125 125 165 247 188 233 438 570 271 511 NIL 4 1,620 4 o17df TRAVERSE FROM SHORE SPEE OF TRANSLTION | ||
PARAMETER | PARAMETER | ||
DESIGNATIONS | DESIGNATIONS | ||
SLOW HODERATF HIGH | SLOW HODERATF HIGH .EMLPRESSURE | ||
PRESSURE | INDEX -P 0 INCHES 27.61 27.61 27.61 PERIPHERAL | ||
SPEED | PRESSURE Pn INCHES 30.25 30.25 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 L,'v1L DATA (AT OPEN CCAST SHORELINE) | |||
FACTOR 1.10 | 'PMH SPEED OF TRANSIATION | ||
PMH SPEED OF | |||
COMPONENTS | COMPONENTS | ||
ST I MT HT F E E T WIND SETUP 9.73 PRESSURE | ST I MT HT F E E T WIND SETUP 9.73 PRESSURE SLTJP 1.82 INITIAL WATEW LEV. 0.56 ASTRONOMICAL | ||
16.00 TIDE LEVEL- -tOTAL-SURGE | |||
STILL | 28.1 STILL LLV. EETL" MLW | ||
TABLE C.21 OCEAN BED PROFILES PASS | TABLE C.21 OCEAN BED PROFILES PASS CRYSTAL CHESAPEAKE 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 ft. 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 20 120 250 250 600* As developed for Seabrook r 70 0% G%C t UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY | ||
COMMISSION | |||
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY | WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, *W0 FIRST CLASS MAIL. . POSTAGE 6 FEES PAID USNRC PERMIT N&. 0-67}} | ||
COMMISSION | |||
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 OFFICIAL BUSINESS PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, | |||
{{RG-Nav}} | {{RG-Nav}} | ||
Revision as of 02:27, 21 September 2018
| 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) | |
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 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.
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 Hurricane 4 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 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 .f.fff.f.fff.f.fff.fffffffffffffff1.59-12
1.59-12 1.59-12 1.59-12 1.59-12 1.59-12 1.59-13 1.59-13 1.59-13 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 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 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 ETOS. I I I I 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 I I A ! --t (.,p ImO GO
-ISOLINE REPRESENTING
PEAK FLOW OF PMF IN 1,000 CFS. -----N ' al a a a a a a I NOTE: PMF ISOUNES ON THIS CHART REPRESENT
ENVELOPED
VALUES OF PEAK RUNOFF FROM 5,00
0. 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 a 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 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 I I I I 1 I -EXAMPLE:
FOR DRAINAGE AREA OF .2,300 S. MI.AT LAT. 43@, LONG. 950, DETERMINE
I I II II i'-: ..I- -I .4;tI ; ; i , -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 X I I I I I I I I I I I air 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 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 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 22.8 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. Vt. 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. Pa. N. Y, Pa. w. Va. Pa. Md. Pa. Va. We Va* Md. Del. Va. Pa. 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 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"
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. 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. 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 24.2 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. 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
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. Ala. Ga. N. Co Ga. N. C. Ala. N. C. N. C. S. C. S. C. Miss. N. Co N. Co N. C. N. C. N. C. N. C. Ga. Ga. 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. N. Y. N. Y. Mich. Mich. 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. 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. Ky. 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. 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. Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss. 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 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. Minn. Minn. Minn. Ill. Minn. Iowa Ill. Iowa Ill, Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss. Mo. Mot N. D. N. D. N. D. N. D.o N. D. Minn. Colo. S. D. Mo. Nebr. N. D. Nebr.Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss.. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss. Upper Miss.Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Lower Souris Souris Red of Red of Red of Red of Miss. Miss. Miss. Miss. 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.IMO. 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 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. Mo. Kane. Mo. Kans* Nebr. Nebr. Kans. Kans. Nebr.Okla. La. Ark. Ark. Kans. Tex. Okla. Ark. 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. Ark. Kans. Kans. Kans. Okla. Kans. Tex. Okla. Okla. Ark. Okla. Ark. Okla. Okla. Okla. Colo. Kans. Okla. Okla. Tex. Okla. Kans. Ark. Ark. Kans. Ark. Ark. Okla, Okla. Tex. Okla. 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. Kans. Colo. Okla. La. Okla. Okla. Okla. Tex. Tex* Tex. Tex.. Tex. Tex, Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Teax Tax, Tex. Tex. Tex. Teax Tex* Tex.River Basin Arkansas Red Arkansas Arkansas Arkansas Red Red Red Arkansas Arkansas.San Jacinto Brazos Trinity Trinity San Jacinto 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) Pree. 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 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 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. Tex. Te,:. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex. Tex, Tea. Tex, Tex. Tex.No N. N. N. 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. H. H.Ariz. Ariz. Ariz. 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. Fk. 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 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 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 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. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Ida. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Oreg. Wash. Wash. Ore. Mont. Wash. Oreg. Oreg. Wash. Wash, Ida, Oreg. Wash, Ida. Oreg. Wash. Wash. Cal. Cal. Cal. 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 Fk. Willamette River 104 S. Fk. McKenzie River 208 North Santiam River 438 Row River 26. N. Fk. Clearwater River 2,440 Elk Creek 132 Willamette River 184 Long Tom River 252 South Santiam River 4144 Middle Santiam River 27? Gate Ck. McKenzie River 50 Middle Fk. 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 Fk. Vilaette Aiver 991 Lost Pk. Rogue River 6,7' Snake River 101,,4O0 Snake River 108,500 Boise River 2,650. Columbia River 214,000 White River '400 Willow Ck. 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 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 Dullards Bar New Exchequer New Hogm New Melones Oroville Owens Pine Flat Prado San Antonio Santa Fe Sepulveda Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. Cal. 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 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 '0 State F Peak Discharve (ofa)383 560 it 5133"40.1 25.1 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 mad
e. Reference
2 provides guidance on such studie
s. 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 870 860 860 840 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 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 00 110 00 146 00 166 166 115 148 00 00 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 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 2.00 0.80 1.50 1.50 1.20 0.60 1.00 0.90 0.98 1.30 1.20 1.00 1.00 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 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 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 P 0 INCHE 26.412 26.412 26.112 2 -PERIPHERAL
PRESSURE INCHES 31.30 31.30 31.30 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND LARGERADIUS
RnAU. MIe. 20 20 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
TOTAL-SURGE
STILL WATER Lhs'J. 17.84 PET LW- --
TABLE C.3 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
ZONE C AT LOCATION 280 561 MHZE NORTH 1 SPEED OF UNSITION PARAMETER
DESIGNATIONS
SLOW HODERATF HIGH NOm' (Hr,) CflI!VAL PRESSURE INDEX Po INCHES 26.69 26.69 26.69 PERIPHERAL
P 0SRE P n INCHES 31.25 31.25 31.25 ADIUS 70 KMAXDIUM WIND LiRGE SAhMS iUT. I. 26.0 26.0 26.0
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 S20 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 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 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 P 0 INCHES 26.87 26.87 26.87 PDtIPHEAL
PRESSURE INCHES 31.24 31.24 31.24 IUS TO MAXIMUM WIND J.-ARE RADIUS NUT*. MI. 29.0 29.0 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,. (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'EENOTNOTMNSL§T:0I.
PARAMETER
DESIGNATIONS
SLOW 14OD91ATF
HIGH MH PRESSURE INDEM P 0 INCHES 26.88 26.88 26.88 PERIPHERAL
PRESSURE P INCHES 31.25 31.25 31.25 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND IARGZ RADIUS NALT. HI. 29 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 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 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 -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 26.9 PERIPHERAL
PRESSURE P INCHES 31.23 31.23 31.23 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND laRGE RADIUS NAUT. MI. 30 30 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 P 0 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 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 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 LENGITH 110 NAUTICAL MILES PROBABLE 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 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 _ 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 distanc
e. 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 P 0 INCHES 26.24' 26.24 26.24 PERIPHERAL
PRESSURE % INCHES 31.30 31.30 31.30 ADniS TO MAXIMUM WIND LRGE RAIUS wNAU. MI. 15 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 1.00 ASTRON0MICAL
3.60 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 PARAMETER
DESIGNATIONS
S IlW HODERATF HIGH ... (ST) (MT) CHT) CENTAL PRESSURE INDEX P INCS 26.09 26.09 26.0 PERIPHEAL
PRESSURE Pn INCHES 31.30 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 E T WIND SETUP 2.06 2.37. 2.51 PRESSURE SETUP 3.97 3.82 3.90 INITIAL WATR LEV. 0.90 0.90 0.90 ASTRONOM.ICAL
3.6o 3.60 3.60 ITDE LEEL ff UAL-SURGE
STILL WATER IJS. 10.53 10.68 10.91 =V ---
TABLE C.11 SUM
PROBABLE M&XIMVP. WIRICANS (PMH), STORM
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 INDEX P 0 INCHES 26.67 26.67 26.6? PENIPHHEAL
PRESSURE -P INCHES 31.21 31.21 31.21 ADIUS MAXIMUM WIND LAE RAMDUS NAUT. MI. 38 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.rmvEasE-AzimuTH
9o OCEAN BED PhOFILE TRAVERSE WATER DISTANCE DIETH FROM BELOW SHORE MIM. (NAUT.MI. ) FEET 0 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' 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 MILES ISLAND, GEORGIA PROBBLE MAXIMUM HURICANE INDEX CHARACT10ISTICS
ZONE 2 AT LOCATION 310 56 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 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 26.72 PERIPH1RKL
PRESSURE Pn INCHES 31.19 31.19 31.19 RDUSe TO MAXIMUM WIND IARGE RADIUS NAM. MI. 10 40 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
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 26.81 PRESSURE 'n INCHES 31.13 31.13 31.13 RADIU8 TO MAXIMUM WIND R09 RADIUJS NAUT. MI. 40 40 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 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 when. 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 26.89 LERIPHEAL
PRESSURE Pn INCHES 31.00 31.00 31.00 RtADI1US TO MAXIMUM WIND LARGE RADIUS NlUT. MI. 35 35 35 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 -0.2 16 0.5 28 1.0 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 P 0 INCHES 27.05 27.05 27.05 PERIPHERAL
PRESSURE P INCHES 30.?7 30.77 30.77 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND LRGE 1ADIUS IAUT. MI. 38 38 38 1IWSIATION
SPEED ? (y o AMUD SPEE) [NOTS 1 10 26 48 IXIElUM WIND SPEED vS m.P.H. 124 1133 1146 INITIAL
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 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 OCEAN BED PROFILE TRAVERSE WATER DISTANCE DEPTH FROM BEUOW SHORE wLx -0 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 P 0 INCHS 27.12 R'IPImUA PRESSURE INCHES 30.70 RADIUS TO MAXIMUM WIND LARCE RADIUS NAUT. MI. 40 r1RASIATION
SPEED r!
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 _ 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 P 0 INCHES 27.26 27.26 27.26 PERIPHERAL
PRESSURE P INCHES 30.56 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 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 LENGTH 84 NAUlICAL MILES OCEAN BED PROFILE; TRAVERSE WATER DISTANCE DEPTH FROM BELOW SHORE MWI NAUT MI (FELT) 0 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 STION PARAMETER
I(SIPNATIOE.OS
5 35 1IGH , ,, (sT_ ) " N '0 ( r) 10 INCHES 27.29 27.29 27.29 P a INCHES 30.54 30.54 30.54 UaDIS TO MAXIMUM WIND IARG RADIUS NAUT. MI. 49 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 , WI -PMH OC?1PUTATIONAL
COOVFICIMN
AND WATER LEVEL (SURGE) ESTIMATES
C O F F I E ENT S 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 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 .: (,.,r) , CElAL PRESSURE INDEX .- P 0INCHES 27.44 27.44 27.44 PERIPHERAL
PRESSURE Pn INCHES 30.42 30.42 30.42 RADIUS T0 NAXIMUM WIND LARG RADIUJS FAUT. KI. 57 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.){ -0 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 4 2 0 48' DEIREE AT TRAVERSE MID-POINT
FHOM SHORE TM 60o-=OOT DEPTmOCIPUTTIONAL
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)
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 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 K WATER DEMT BELOW MLW FEET 0 50 96 "95 125 125 165 247 188 233 438 570 271 511 NIL 4 1,620 4 o17df TRAVERSE FROM SHORE SPEE OF TRANSLTION
PARAMETER
DESIGNATIONS
SLOW HODERATF HIGH .EMLPRESSURE
INDEX -P 0 INCHES 27.61 27.61 27.61 PERIPHERAL
PRESSURE Pn INCHES 30.25 30.25 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 L,'v1L DATA (AT OPEN CCAST SHORELINE)
'PMH SPEED OF TRANSIATION
COMPONENTS
ST I MT HT F E 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 LLV. EETL" MLW
TABLE C.21 OCEAN BED PROFILES PASS CRYSTAL CHESAPEAKE 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 ft. 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 20 120 250 250 600* 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