HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 8 PPP 05-06-2020 Operations Committee - Seismic Eval Project Seismic Evaluation
y of Structures at Plant
MIAy. l
Nos . 1 and 2
Project PS15-06
-
r = Kathy Millea, Director of Engineering
Operations Committee
May 6, 2020
MacW
Foster i ng esie n ce y
at OCSD
SEISMIC EVALUATION OF STRUCTURES Orange County
AT PLANTS 1 AND 2
« • « Sanitation District
I.P.a IUaT.1 Climate Resiliency Study
Collections Capacity
Evaluation Study Execu' aryl "-t
/�.��►ya•�� PROJECT NO.PSIS-08 lr If
TUNE u.zms - -
m
4 .,
2019 ASSET F i'
MANAGEMENT 9
• . PLAN
orange counry S—canon D;srnc[caino—
• iRM •
�Long History of
.-
S E I t
eismic va ua ions
r j.
1 � 1
Seismic Risk SP-182: Plant No. 2 PS15-06: Seismic
Analysis Plants 1 Digesters and Evaluation of
and 2 Tunnels Seismic Structures at Plant
Evaluated process Hazard Evaluation Nos. 1 and 2
facilities at Plant Quantify the Evaluated process
Nos. 1 and 2 vulnerability of facilities at Plant
relative to their Plant No. 2 Nos. 1 and 2
performance to digesters and constructed prior to
1991 Building Code associated facilities 2001 Building Code
T�T-
Long
Seismic
IT'M-Id7t%"
Evaluations
'.
.... qjjjljjjjj!!!jjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
Seismic Risk SP-182: Plant No. 2 PS15-06: Seismic
Analysis Plants 1 Digesters and Evaluation of
and 2 Tunnels Seismic Structures at Plant
Evaluated process Hazard Evaluation Nos. 1 and 2
facilities at Plant Quantify the Evaluated process
Nos. 1 and 2 vulnerability of facilities at Plant
relative to their Plant No. 2 Nos. 1 and 2
performance to digesters and constructed prior to
1991 Building Code associated facilities 2001 Building Code
1SMIC Risks
Local Faults Liquefaction Lateral Spread
\Orwa
.nt AeHflowQ �,--ue U11t
en .Palma ; - •r - f�'
�+ Hawiian Gardens tt J
ress Stantoe
s Anaheim
os 4
Lon r - r° a'..� Pt``♦�'
m��r Santa Ana ��,�� o'•��i`'v ;• ':
Fountain +JO*yy�:��� 4-�I
Valley _ 00
.w t
,vi
t f�y
of♦
*j 00
0 ��
:v
� -�
Impact Seismic Hazards
ti ah qSeveral Local Faults
1 LEGEND
e�y hdre MAPPED FAULT TRACES
aS IuwrCRMOALL,19M) \
�/� •�- ,,� — — HIGH ACTIVITY LEVEL
�O LOW TO MODERATE
�000, LEVEL \
���� � ����• ACTIVITY
LOW ACTIVITY LEVEL � `.',.� _ '•t :G'-� .�.
+ i
JUNE 2017 DRAFT p.
P2-98/J-117 FAULT \ ` ) t �%
�� �•� !mod ZONES 1 r � ✓, ~
s` Sao
\n
i
' DAFTs A,B,C,D
♦y, BIOFILTERS]
:v
Potential Liquefaction mm"m.TI
Hazard Zone
.... ............ .............
.............. ......
...............
....I....... r vp
..............
........... ..... ..................
... . ..... ...
. ......
t
................
ti
..........
. ........ :j: —
..
:F"u:n:taiii: �all:e'
{{ s •
E1: ...:
L'
♦ ♦ ♦ .
♦ ♦ ♦ r
Plai - .
•••�' •
Y �. ♦ �+ t.
E
�f
♦ ,�
` ♦ ♦ •00
♦
00
♦0 `0 y
Hunts #bn::Beachi
9. _
Plant 2
Santa Ana eights ::
ill
Ch
` : . :s a Mesa ' N J A v1N i r s
Y
Source:
EPA Li uefaction Hazard Ma
q p ..
Lateral Spread a Risk
LATERAL SPREAD
Before earthquake:
Liquefiable sediment
After earthquake:
1�
Lateral Sa Risk
i►1' 1�- IC. zx ,.
%I�K.-0�2 k
1 `
Mitigation Measures
If this is the problem . . .
Local Faults Liquefaction Lateral Spread
ru a
Anaheim OrJnt �'..
Lnn Sanla Ana �"�� ��jr��� .�•�o:�t j � �
,00 �,
Structural
Mitmigation ,
4 1
Vulnerability Mitigation
Separation of the roof element from Installation of wall anchorage
the wall caused roof to collapse
4W - -
Ex*wV W33X or W 12X Roof Beam
t
Add Through-Bons
_ to Connect Angie
I to WaIL'Pdaster
Stdfener-I
Ref: 1994 Northridge Earthquake. EERI, Earthquake Stiffenerie with
Engineering Research Institute RetrofiWeldedt olEx�istng Steel Beam
Existing Concrete PRlaster
%I�K.-0�2 k
. eotechn 'ical Mit 'igation
Vulnerability Mitigation
Soils became liquified during a Deep soil mixing is one alternative
seismic event, reducing the to stabilize soil by "cementing"
ground's ability to support the sand particles together
loads
1
''�'���.�� fit:�. • _ - �,F,
�0 %A$
07
40
00
Niigata Japan,June 16, 1964
Photo Credit: National Geophysical Data Center
a
Lateral Spread
� 1
iga M t Iionr► '+�
Aid
I
Vulnerability Mitigation
Seismic event causes soil to Installation of closely spaced piles
move laterally towards a free effectively creates a "wall" that is
surface of lower elevation designed to resist lateral soil
(river bed) movement
� M
• __ _ .� Y.I.
kwt It f
Ref: Michael J. Crozier, 'Landslides- Hill country,
regolith and submarine landslides',Te Ara -the
Encyclopedia of New Zealand
� "
Summary of Seismic
4
R Is I qa ion
kMti t
63 Structures Evaluated 1110,
Designed to older Building Codes that do not consider
current seismic performance criteria
48 Structures Identified with Structural Structural $25 M $16 M
and/or Geotechnical Deficiencies Geotechnical $11 M $143 M
Deficiencies from design code changes that influence Lateral Spread $100 M $50 M
loading conditions and building performance during
seismic events
16 Structures Impacted by Lateral Spread
Caused by liquefiable soils and vertical separation
between the plant sites and the Santa Ana River or Talbert
Marsh
13 Structures Improved Under Planned
Projects
Identified in the 2017 Facilities Master Plan; separate
seismic projects will be created for other facilities
3 Structures Require Complete Replacement
The seismic upgrade costs are greater than the value of
the structure /
I /
%I�K-.-0�2 k
Recommendations
Study Summary BudgetProposal
Mitigation Plant 1 Plant 2 MitigationPlant 1 Plant 2
costs Costs
Structural $25 M $16 M Structural $25 M $16 M
Geotechnical $11 M $143 M Geotechnical $9 M $125 M
Lateral Spread $100 M $50 M Lateral Spread $100 M $50 M
A Strategic Seismic Program
;.. .!
4
` L
MM M, 9
l
g T
Will Reduce Lon , erm Risk
Risks
Replacement
costs of critical
facilities that may
be compromised
from a seismic
i event
� Risk
0
Seismic Program
Implementation
Mitigation Cost costs of
performing
seismic
Time rehabilitation of
facilities
■
� q
T WV
lopy
;� r -is