# 7. Conventional Construction and Facilities Stages 1 & 2[^1] 

## 7.1 Geology of the Fermilab Region

The many geologic studies for the Illinois proposal for the SSC
\[SSC-Illinois\] demonstrated that the region around Fermilab provided
an almost ideal medium, Galena-Platteville dolomite, for constructing
the main tunnel (87 km circumference) and experimental facilities. The
only less-than-ideal feature was the depth of construction
(approximately 400 feet below the surface) to reach this dolomite layer.
A subsequent geotechnical study for the Next Linear Collider Project
\[NLC-NS\] and generic site studies for future accelerator facilities at
Fermilab\[FCSS01-2\] also reached the same conclusion. However, due to
its longer circumference (232 km), a VLHC might extend beyond the region
of favorable geology. There has been substantial experience in the
Chicago area \[TARP, NUMI\] in tunneling and underground caverns in hard
rock strata, such as Silurian dolomite, Maquoketa shale, and
Galena-Platteville dolomite. There is a lack of corresponding local
similar experience, or even knowledge of the mechanical/structural
engineering properties of the softer strata such as Glacial drift, the
Ancell layer, the Middle Confining unit, or the Franconia formation.
These may be respectively characterized as clay, sandstone, and two
strata of dolomitic sandstones. At Fermilab, the Ancell, Middle
Confining, and Franconia layers lie below the Galena-Platteville
dolomite.

There is a general sloping of the till, Silurian, Maquoketa,
Galena-Platteville, Ancell, ... sequence of layers from the West (higher
elevation above mean sea level) to the East (lower elevation) to Lake
Michigan. However, to the Northwest and West of Fermilab are located the
Troy and Rock Bedrock Valleys, where the hard rock Silurian, Maquoketa,
and Galena-Platteville layers have been completely cut away by glaciers
and filled to the underlying sandstones with Glacial drift. The Sandwich
Fault Zone lies to the Southwest of Fermilab, passing through Sandwich,
Illinois, and running roughly NW to SE. This fault zone does end
approximately SSE of Fermilab. To the Southwest of the Sandwich Fault
Zone, the underlying Ancell and Middle Confining layers are upthrust to
meet the Glacial drift at the bedrock surface, and even the Franconia
layer can impact tunnels traversing the fault zone.

If we restrict consideration to rings that would be contiguous to the
existing Tevatron, only a VLHC ring with its center oriented to the
North of Fermilab (North Ring) could be completely contained within the
Galena-Platteville dolomite. This ring would have a North-South strike
axis passing through Fermilab with a tilt of approximately 0.2 % grade
to stay within the dolomite. This ring would be bounded by Lake Michigan
and the Wisconsin border. Any ring with its center oriented farther to
the West (even NNW) would be impacted by the bedrock valleys Possible
rings oriented to the South or West would traverse the Sandwich fault
into softer strata, less ideal for tunneling.

In order to undertake a tunnel costing and feasibility study for various
orientations of a VLHC ring, two layouts and vertical strata lampshades
were prepared. The simplest configuration is a tilted (0.2%) North Ring
which stays completely (100%) in Galena-Platteville dolomite. The second
is a flat North Ring which transitions between the following hard rock
media: Maquoketa shale (13%), Silurian dolomite (31%), Maquoketa shale
(15%), Galena-Platteville dolomite (41%), and back into Maquoketa shale.
The third is a tilted South Ring, which crosses the Sandwich Fault (only
once) into the sandstone Ancell aquifer and the dolomitic sandstone
Middle Confining unit and possibly the Franconia formation. The surface
plans and the vertical strata lampshades for these rings are illustrated
in Figures 7.1 -- 7.5.

Another design constraint of this costing exercise deals with the
positioning and depth of the caverns for the two experimental halls. It
is desirable to have these located at the Fermilab site to be able to
cluster the long straight sections (for injection/abort and interaction
regions) and to utilize the Fermilab campus for the related experiment
fabrication and staging buildings, support utilities, and equipment
shaft facilities. This also helps to minimize off-site surface land
requirements.

Structural features and thickness of the strata supporting the spans of
the experimental halls or caverns \[SSC-Illinois-2\] will determine the
elevations at which the caverns can feasibly be sited. This, of course,
implies the elevation of the accelerator tunnel at the site of the
cavern. A general rule of thumb is that there should be a depth of hard
rock (dolomite) strata above the cavern at least equal to the span of
the cavern. The previous study has concluded that for 75 foot high
chambers, roof spans up to 125 feet are feasible using standard methods
of roof arching and rock supports. This assumed that the orientation
axis of the cavern bisects the major joint sets. The joints run
approximately NE-SW x NW-SE so this criteria would be satisfied by VLHC
ring orientations to the North, South, or West. Possible options in
elevation for the experimental caverns are depicted in Figure 7.6.

As a working hypothesis for this study, a time scale of 5 years is
assumed for completion of the underground construction, including main
tunnel, special tunnels, and all caverns and enclosures.

Analogously to the 1997 study of a 34 km VLHC booster tunnel with the
Kenny Construction Company \[TM-2048\], we have entered into a tunnel
costing exercise with (to be named) Company, to study the expected cost
ranges and cost drivers of these three tunnel configurations listed
above. By studying the three different tunnels, we hope to learn the
unit costs (per mile, per shaft, lined/unlined, etc.) of a tunnel in an
excellent media, that of a tunnel transitioning between three different
hard rock media, and that of a tunnel which combines hard rock media,
traversing the Sandwich Fault, and the softer sandstone and dolomitic
sandstones beyond. This data will allow optimizations and tradeoffs with
respect to siting costs. It is anticipated that the final (to be named)
report will be available in mid-May, 2001.

## 7.2 Collider tunnel and enclosures

Since the largest volume of the underground construction is the main
collider tunnel, we will first concentrate on that component. The tunnel
is envisioned to be race-track shaped with circumference of 232 km as in
Figure 7.7. It consists of arcs of radius 35 km and 10 straight sections
(total length 12 km) for injection, abort, RF cavities, Interaction
Regions for experiments, and beam transfers between the Phase 1 and
Phase 2 rings. The ring will be adjacent to the Fermilab Tevatron which
will serve as the injector to the Phase 1 (low field) ring. The major
straight sections will be clustered (5 each cluster) at Fermilab and at
the side opposite. Keeping many of these special tunnels, the abort/beam
stops, and the experimental areas at Fermilab will optimize utilization
of the existing infrastructure and minimize offsite underground
construction and shafts. The cluster opposite will contain only the
Phase 1 to Phase 2 beam transfer (and possibly beam scrapers). Much of
these opposite side straight sections can be reserved for future needs.
The cluster of straight sections near Fermilab is illustrated in Figure
7.8. Although one configuration for Tevatron injection is shown in this
figure, the next section will discuss other possible options.

The main tunnel will have a finished inner clear diameter of 12 feet
with 10 foot wide invert surface(Figure 7.9). The four utility straights
(injection and abort) will likely require additional transverse
dimensions, possibly up to 20 feet x 20 feet square. These can be
finished by drill and blasting techniques after initial tunnel
construction by tunnel boring machine technology. Similarly, the short
straight sections for RF-cavities may need widening (the SSC design had
a 25 foot horseshoe shape). Similarly, at the cryogenics utility
turn-around points, mid-way between the cryogenic plant sites, an extra
5 foot wide x 100 foot long section would be required for cryogenics
specialty devices. These special tunnel configurations are illustrated
in Figure 7.10.

It is anticipated that there be 6 major equipment access shafts
distributed around the ring at the sites of the 6 cryogenics plants.
These will have 30 foot diameter bores, with a clear aperture of

6 foot x 30 foot for lowering high field dipoles for Phase 2. Low field
dipoles for Phase 1 will access the tunnel through the ramps to the
surface. The rest of the aperture of these shafts will be filled with
equipment elevator, cryogenic, power, communications, and sump discharge
utilities, plus an isolated emergency egress staircase. In addition,
there will be a 15 foot diameter clear access shaft (TR500 PS has 6 foot
diagonal) for larger equipment such as magnet power supplies. See Figure
7.10. For emergency egress and tunnel ventilation, there will be
approximately 60 shafts of 15 foot diameter separated by 2.7 miles
maximum (the SSCL standard, see Sec. 7.8.). Does this egress shaft have
elevator?

Is the 30 foot x 6 foot and 15 foot diameter adequate? Do we need more
eq access shafts?

In addition, at each of the 1710 half-cells, separated by 135.5 meters,
there will be a 4 foot diameter x 6 foot deep cubby- hole for
instrumentation and power supplies for the correction elements. The
cubby-hole will be humidity controlled and isolated from the tunnel by a
fire door. A thermal conductor through the fire door will be convection
cooled by the tunnel air flow. The equipment contained in this cubby
hole will be on rolling racks allowing access when extracted into the
tunnel aisle. Is this an egress/rescue hazard? This is illustrated in
Figure 7.11.

What about VACUUM? TR500 PS? Are they fire/smoke hazards? Protection?

Table 7.1 Five straight sections and intervening arcs at Fermilab (top
to bottom in Fig.7.8)

Major arc 174 degrees bend -- to/from far side cluster of straight
sections

Utility Straight CW Phase 1 injection, CW-1 beam scraping, CCW-1 abort,

1.38 km CCW-2 abort, with parallel kicker power supply cavern

20 foot x 20 foot square cross section

Bend Section 28.491 mrad bend @ 35 km radius

1.  km

> IR Straight experimental hall/cavern (100 meters)
>
> 1.64 km with equipment bypass tunnel (0.55 km @ 25 m bypass)
>
> Bend Section 20.668 mrad bend @ 35 km radius
>
> 0.72 km
>
> RF Straight with parallel Klystron gallery
>
> 0.27 km 25 foot horseshoe cross section
>
> Bend Section 20.668 mrad bend @ 35 km radius
>
> 0.72 km
>
> IR Straight experimental hall/cavern (100 meters)

1.64 km with equipment bypass tunnel (0.55 km @ 25 m bypass)

Bend Section 28.491 mrad bend @ 35 km radius

> 1.0 km

Utility Straight CCW Phase 1 injection, CCW-1 beam scraping, CW-1 abort,

1.38 km CW-2 abort, with parallel kicker power supply cavern

20 foot x 20 foot square cross section

Major arc 174 degree bend -- to/from far side cluster of straight
sections

## 7.3 Injection line tunnels (various scenarios), beam abort lines, equipment access ramps, and Phase 2 low-field ring bypass.

Options for injecting from the Tevatron to the VLHC are discussed in
Chapter 4. The Tevatron Complex and Injector, and specifically in
Chapter 4.3. Tevatron Transfer Lines. For whatever option is chosen, the
Tevatron tunnel will have a new line(s) tangential which will then pitch
downward to the elevation of the VLHC as in Figure 7.12. The major slope
of this injection tunnel is approximately 3.5 % grade which will be
sufficiently flat to serve as part of the equipment access ramp(s).
There will be an incentive to cross the boundary between glacial drift
and bedrock surface as steeply as possible to reduce both complexity of
construction and ground water influx at the interface. The less steeply
sloped equipment access tunnel would continue to the surface. The
required tunnel lengths for the three options for injection from the
Tevatron considered in Chapter 4 are listed in Table 7.2.

There also will be straight tunnels connected to the two near-Fermilab
Utility Straight Sections. These will be for the injection lines from
the Tevatron to the Phase 1 low field ring, for the abort beam lines of
both the Phase 1 and Phase 2 high field ring, and equipment access ramps
to the surface. Figure 7.11 illustrates the bi-polar operation and
extraction from the Tevatron. Table 7.2 also includes the length of arcs
for uni-polar operation and extraction from the Tevatron. Some of lines
for injection, abort, and equipment ramps could likely share some common
tunnel sections. However, the lines are now listed independently. The
interfaces between these tunnels have not yet been designed. To
facilitate construction and installation of a VLHC, it will be important
to configure the equipment ramps to allow access while the Tevatron
program is in operation.

It is planned to operate the Phase 1 VLHC with the low field,
super-ferric magnet ring. For Phase 2, a high field superconducting ring
will be added. The low field ring will serve as injector to the high
field ring. This beam transfer is anticipated to occur in the straight
sections opposite Fermilab. In order to reduce crowding and (possibly)
to allow access to the experimental halls/caverns while the low field
ring operates, the low-field ring will move to the inside of the main
tunnel ring between, with extra and stronger bends to match its beam arc
length to that of the high field ring through the main tunnel. In the
current model, stubs will be provided at the 28.4 mrad bend enclosures
to allow later construction of this bypass tunnel for the low field ring
in Phase 2. A larger RF straight section (and another RF Klystron
gallery) will be needed for this bypass, but not new experimental halls.
No such bypass is planned for the far-side cluster of straight sections

All of these special tunnel sections are anticipated to be of the same
inner finished diameter as that of the main tunnel.

Table 7.2 Special Tunnel Sections (same finished diameter as main
tunnel)

Function Number Length each Comments

Access Ramps 2 3.5+ km 3.5 % grade to surface (741' msl)

> at Fermilab, (possibly 1 opposite)

Abort Lines 2 3.7 km at tunnel level

to common abort/beam stop cavern

Injection Lines 2 3.5 km bi-polar to inboard end of Util. Str. Sec.

or 5.7 km uni-polar \@3.5 km radius of curvature

or 3.7 km 69 config

from Tevatron (722.3' msl) to VLHC

Exp. Hall Bypass 2 0.55 km radius = 2.0 km, offset = 25 meters

Low Field Ring Bypass 1 7.0 km Phase 2 construction only

with enlarged RF straight section

and RF Klystron gallery

## 7.4 Accelerator utility caverns (includes special requirements for abort system) *-- shafts -- Figure \#*

### 7.4.1 Beam Stop Enclosure (1)

A single beam stop enclosure will be located on the Fermilab site at the
elevation of the main tunnel. It will house the water cooled (need
cooling specs and mechanical systems, where?) beam stop which will
simultaneously service the four rings: low-field CW, low-field CCW,
high-field CW, and high-field CCW. The beam stop enclosure is fed by
standard diameter tunnels from the inboard ends of the two Utility
Straight Sections at the Fermilab site. By putting all four beam stops
at the same location, this plan minimizes the number of places where
high energy densities and high radiation fields are encountered, and
does this on the existing Fermilab site. The size of the beam stop
enclosure will be 16 m x 16 m x 40 m (WxHxL). It will have the necessary
shielding and water impervious retention linings to prevent radioactive
contamination of the bedrock or groundwater either by prompt or residual
radiation or by coolant leakage. A reservoir cavern (size) below the
cavern elevation will prevent contamination of the tunnels due to
leakage of beam stop coolant. This reservoir cavern will allow
monitoring of the radioactivity and other contamination levels before
proper discharge. There will be a 30 foot diameter equipment access
shaft and a 15 foot diameter personnel access shaft at this enclosure
site.

### 7.4.2 Klystron Tube Enclosure (1 + 1 in Phase 2) (SSC specs)

The Klystron Tube Gallery houses the RF driver tubes and power supplies
for the RF cavities. These RF cavities are located in the 274 meter long
RF straight section on the Fermilab site. For Phase 2, an additional
similar RF straight section and Klystron Tube Enclosure will be required
for the Low-Field Ring Bypass. The Klystron galleries intended to be
accessible by personnel for servicing systems during operation of the
VLHC. The gallery is illustrated in Figure 7.x. The Klystron Gallery is
25 feet x 25 feet x 120 feet long, serviced by a 30 foot diameter
equipment and personnel shaft. It is a minimum of 30 feet from the
accelerator tunnel and is joined to the RF Cavern by four 30" diameter
feed throughs, and a 12 foot diameter labyrinth corridor.

### 7.4.3 Kicker Magnet Power Supply Enclosures (4) (SSC specs)

The Kicker Magnet Power Supply Enclosures house the power supplies for
injection and abort (at the Fermilab site) and for beam transfer from
Low-Field to High-Field Rings (opposite side). These enclosures are
adjacent to the four Utility Straight Sections. For Phase 2, an
additional RF straight will be required for the Low-Field Ring Bypass.
The enclosure is illustrated in Figure 7.x. The Kicker Power Supply
Enclosure is 25 feet x 25 feet x 100 feet long, serviced by a 15 foot
diameter equipment and personnel shaft. It is a minimum of 30 feet from
the accelerator tunnel and is joined to the Utility Straight Section by
four 12" diameter feed throughs, and a 12 foot diameter labyrinth
corridor.

###  7.4.4 Groundwater Collection Caverns and Pumping Stations (6)

The handling of groundwater seepage during the lifetime of the VLHC
project will be a major concern. The tunnel design specifies a maximum
average of 50 gallons per minute per mile, or a total of 7,200 gallons
per minute. This flow will be directed through conduits through the
invert floor to six collection and pumping stations at the sites of the
cryogenics plants. It is necessary to be able to collect at least 1
day's flow of groundwater seepage (1.728 Million gallons = 231,000 cu.
ft. per day for each of 6 pumping sites), in the event of failure of
power or water systems. At each of the 6 pumping sites, there will be
groundwater collection reservoir caverns of dimensions (equivalent to)
62 ft x 62 ft x 62 ft plus volume for pumps (submersible or
maintainable?) How big pipes up shaft are needed? Problems with depth?
If required, any monitoring of groundwater influx for contamination,
either conventional or radioactive, can be sampled at the collection
caverns before discharge. But what if it is contaminated? Or even
suspected to be contaminated? We can't stop discharging without risk of
flooding the tunnel. This task remains over the 40 year operational life
of the project. Do we need greater buffer volumes? Maybe we need to do
everything to exclude water from tunnel.

Need slope to drive the drainage!

###  7.4.5 Power Supply Caverns 

The Phase 2 collider magnet systems will require 6 power supply stations
to be distributed around the ring at the sites of the 6 cryogenics
plants. These will consist of an underground enclosure of dimensions 5 m
x 4 m x 20 m (WxHxL) serviced by a 15 foot diameter personnel access
shaft, a 15 foot (TR500 is 6 foot diagonal) clear equipment access
shaft, and a nominal tunnel diameter corridor to the main tunnel. This
underground cavern will be serviced by LCW cooling water and AC
electrical power (how much?) from the surface. An alternative approach
could be to feed only DC power, possibly through superconducting
transmission lines, from the surface to the main tunnel directly.

## 7.5 Experimental caverns and bypasses (SSC model)

### 7.5.1 In Stage 1

### 7.5.2 In Stage 2 -- *no only one set of Experimental Caverns!*

There is intended to be provision for two experimental caverns and
installations in the IR straight sections at the Fermilab site. These
caverns, major access shafts, and associated surface structures for
experimental apparatus fabrication, staging, and operations, will be
located on the Fermilab site to minimize land procurement. The model
chosen is that of the designs for the caverns for the GEM and SDC
experiments at the SSC \[SSCL94\]. It is understood that these caverns
were optimized for a 20 TeV x 20 TeV collider, analogous to the VLHC
Phase 1 Collider, and specifically [not]{.underline} for the 85 TeV x 85
TeV VLHC Phase 2 Collider. At this stage of this exercise, it is not
fully appreciated how the cavern needs scale with collider energy. The
current model assumes that there is only one pair of experiment caverns,
placed along the tunnel of the Phase 2 ring. During Phase 1, the low
field ring will also follow the Phase 2 tunnel. For Phase 2, the low
field ring will be displaced through its low-field ring bypass tunnel,
away from the Experimental Caverns. There will not be interaction
regions or experimental caverns in the Phase 2 low field bypass. Before
Phase 2, the experiments will have to upgrade to the increased energy
range (\> 4 X), including a vertical change in the position of the
interaction point, due to the difference in elevations of the low-field
and high-field rings.

Cost optimization of the combination of geology, structural strength of
strata, height of dolomite in spans, strength of walls, requirements of
radiation shielding, and equipment access all determine the siting in
elevation of the experimental caverns, and, thus, also the tunnel
elevation at the Fermilab site.

Structural features and thickness of the strata supporting the spans of
the experimental halls or caverns \[SSC-Illinois-2\] will determine the
elevations at which the caverns can feasibly be sited. This, of course,
implies the elevation of the accelerator tunnel at the site of the
cavern. A general rule of thumb is that there should be a depth of hard
rock (dolomite) strata above the cavern at least equal to the span of
the cavern. The previous study has concluded that for 75 foot high
chambers, roof spans up to 125 feet are feasible using standard methods
of roof arching and rock supports. This assumed that the orientation
axis of the cavern bisects the major joint sets. The joints run
approximately NE-SW x NW-SE so this criteria would be satisfied by VLHC
ring orientations to the North, South, or West. Possible options in
elevation for the experimental caverns are depicted in Figure 7.6.

The experimental caverns are envisioned to be 30 m x 40 m x 100 m
(WxHxL) as in the SSC model depicted in Figure 7.13.

*7.5.2.1 Cryogenics facilities, and safety*

A tunnel bypass, to allow free access and transport of accelerator
personnel, utilities, and equipment without entering the experimental
caverns will be included. A 25 meter maximum offset can be accommodated
with 2 km radius bends over a total bypass length of 550 meters
(including the 100 meters). This would be of the same diameter as the
main tunnel, likely constructed by backing up the tunnel boring machine.
*(do we need larger tunnel here? -- don't tell them how to build it,
boring machine, then widen for experiment caverns, or use experiment
access shafts to tunnel height to drop boring machine).*

*7.5.2.2 Special surface buildings for Experimental Facilities*

## 7.6 Survey and alignment (Global, for tunnel) *-- nothing yet*

## 7.7 Surface buildings, footprints, and utilities

### 7.7.1 Stage 1

### 7.7.2 Stage 2

## 7.8 ES&H issues during construction, *installation, and operations* (worker health & safety, wetlands restoration, muck disposal, egress, etc.) *- given to Don Cossairt for review, 13feb01* 

For this exercise, ES&H issues have been merely identified without
detailed study or specification of proposed solutions. Most of the ES&H
issues both during construction and during operations of a VLHC are
discussed for generic new accelerator facilities by the Fermilab
Committee on Site Studies \[FCSS01\]. Although it is anticipated that
much further ES&H work will be needed to optimize the costs and
operations of a VLHC and satisfy standards to be applicable at the
relevant time scales, for the purposes of this study, many of the ES&H
requirements of the Superconducting Super Collider Laboratory \[SSCL94\]
were assumed for the specifications and costing exercises.

VLHC design/specification issues with ES&H impact start with the
finished diameter of the main tunnel. A larger diameter will optimize
installation, operations, and maintenance of the accelerator systems,
and improve emergency egress and response. However, increasing the
tunnel diameter increases the overall project cost. Personnel access and
egress are issues with the number and placement of minor shafts. After
much negotiation, the Department of Energy accepted a minimum
egress/ventilation shaft spacing of 2.7 miles for the final operating
configuration for the SSC. The Chicago area deep reservoir project
(TARP) construction required a temporary personnel access/egress shaft
(serviced by a crane with man-cage, at a maximum of 5000 feet from the
dead-headed boring face. Such temporary egress shafts are filled-in upon
completion and final finishing of that nearby tunnel section.

In this study, it is anticipated that there will be minimum fire and
smoke hazards in the tunnel. Power supplies and electronics will be in
special isolated cubby-holes, and interconnecting cables will be
non-flammable, smokeless, and halogen-free. The envisioned VLHC
cryogenics systems will not use Liquid Nitrogen. The quench reliefs of
the Liquid Helium systems will be through high pressure piping within
the cryogenic transfer lines. What if that proves to be a problem? There
is the possibility of leaks and ruptures at every interconnect. With
reduced fire, smoke, and oxygen deficiency hazards, it is anticipated
that during and after installation of the accelerator components,
personnel entering the tunnel will carry sufficient oxygen supplies (2
hours?) nearby on their motorized access vehicles, removing the need for
safety refuges (SSCL-90: the SSCL had refuges, each with two hour fire
door and two hour emergency air supply for up to 7 people located not
greater than 2500 feet apart, between the emergency egress shafts).

The handling of groundwater issues will be a major environmental concern
throughout the VLHC project. Much of the tunnel, although below the
piezometric surface (water table), will be in the Galena-Platteville
dolomite, which is classified as an aquitard. Still, grouting of cracks
will be required to reduce the post-construction groundwater influx to
workable pumping limits. Other strata such as the sandstone and
dolomitic sandstone, below the water table, of the South Ring
configuration will be problematic from structural and water influx rate
viewpoints and likely will require fully lined tunnel sections.

During tunnel construction, there will be additional water influx rates
before tunnel grouting and lining, especially at the injection/equipment
access ramps where the long and shallow-angle traversal of the glacial
till-bedrock surface interface may be problematic before tunnel lining.
There will be the issues of dewatering the aquifer both during
construction and operations, and aquifer contamination during
construction, and radiological contamination of the soil and aquifer
during accelerator operations. Channeling, storage, pumping, and
disposal of groundwater influx will require an engineered solution. Are
existing creeks nearby capable of accepting the water discharge? The
VLHC specification for groundwater seepage average discharge of 50
gallons per minute per mile of tunnel corresponds to a total of 7,200
gpm total, do be distributed over 6 pumping sites, each at 1,200 gpm.
Optimization studies will have to be undertaken to balance additional
construction costs for water exclusion versus operating costs for
dewatering costs over the 40 year (?) lifetime of the VLHC, including
environmental impacts.

For the Phase 2 -- high field ring VLHC, each of the six remote
cryogenics sites will be consuming approximately 30 MW electrical power,
mainly to run the Helium compressors. This power will have to be
dissipated to the environment, either by air-cooling towers, cooling
ponds (approximately 30 acres each), or combinations of towers and
ponds, depending on the particular environmental needs at each
cryogenics site.

The disposal of spoils or muck from the underground construction will be
an issue. The spoils will have various fractions of clay, dolomite,
shale, sandstone, etc. The Illinois SSC Proposal \[SSC-Illinois-3\]
evaluated four scenarios, three of which were to refill nearby previous
mining operations and the fourth was in landscaping around the shafts
and remote sites. Sale of the dolomite for use as construction material
may, or may not, be feasible, depending on market conditions.

Constructing a tunnel will have major surface impact for personnel and
equipment access and muck removal. Some of these surface sites will not
be needed , or with reduced footprint, after construction. It will be
important to have a plan to return these lands back to the citizens of
Illinois in a useable and environmentally acceptable condition.

#### References: {#references .Reference-heading}

> SSC-Illinois:
>
> -1 Geological- Geotechnical Studies for Siting the Superconducting
> Super Collider
>
> in Illinois: Preliminary Geological Feasibility Report, J.P. Kempton
> et al., ISGS
>
> Environmental Geology Notes, EGN-111 (1985).
>
> -2 Geotechnical Summary to the Proposal to Site the Superconducting
> Super Collider in Illinois, Harza Engineering Company and ISGS,
> (1987).
>
> -3 Disposal of Material to be Excavated from the Illinois SSC, L.M.
> Curran, S. B. Bhadwat, ISGS, (1987).

FCSS01-2: Siting Considerations for Future Accelerator Facilities at
Fermilab, FSCC,

> DRAFT 2, dated XX-XX-XX, Chapter 2. Geology and Underground
> Construction Methodologies.

NLC-NS: Next Linear Collider (NLC) Project, North-South Alignment,
Geotechnical Study, Harza Engineering Company (2000).

> TARP: Chicago [T]{.underline}unnel [a]{.underline}nd
> [R]{.underline}eservoir [P]{.underline}lan.

NUMI: Summary of the NuMI Project, the Fermilab NuMI Project Staff and
the MINOS Collaboration, NuMI-678, Version 5.1 (2000).

TM-2048: Cost Model for a 3 TeV VLHC Booster Tunnel, J. Lach et al.,

FERMILAB-TM-2048 (1998).

FCSS01-4: Siting Considerations for Future Accelerator Facilities at
Fermilab, FSCC,

> DRAFT 2, dated XX-XX-XX, Chapter 4. Potential Environmental, Safety,
> and Health Issues.

SSCL94: Superconducting Super Collider, A Retrospective Summary,
1989-1993,

SSCL-SR-1235, April, 1994, Chapter 28, Environment, Safety, and Health,
and

Quality Assurance.

> SSCL90: SSC Egress Provisions and Features for Evaluation of
> Equivalency as per
>
> Chapter 7 of NFPA 101 M, L. Coulson and T. Toohig, 5/29/90.

**Figures:**

1.  North Ring Surface Plan

2.  Tilted North Ring Lampshade (same as 7.3)

3.  Flat North Ring Lampshade (same as 7.2)

4.  South Ring Surface Plan

5.  Tilted South Ring Lampshade

6.  Elevation Options for Experimental Halls/Caverns need

7.  VLHC main tunnel plan

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
8.  Straight Section Cluster at Fermilab

9.  Main Tunnel Cross Section modify to 12' dia

10. Tunnel Shafts need

11. Special Tunnel Configurations need

12. Injection from Tevatron to VLHC (elevation view) need modification

13. SSC Model of Experimental Caverns needs modification

**Tables:**

1.  Straight Sections at Fermilab

2.  Special Tunnel Sections

[^1]: original source file:
    [\\\\tdserver1\\project\\VLHC\\TDDoc\\DesignStudyReport\\07_Conventional_construction\\Draft1\\7_conventional_construction_v1.doc](../../../../../../../../project/VLHC/TDDoc/DesignStudyReport/07_Conventional_construction/Draft1/7_conventional_construction_v1.doc)