ET 14-0002, Correction to the Response to a Nuclear Regulatory Commission Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ic

Correction to the Response to a Nuclear Regulatory Commission Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi

ML14035A226
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	01/27/2014
From:	Broschak J Wolf Creek
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
ET 14-0002
Download: ML14035A226 (9)

Text

W*o F CREEK NUCLEAR OPERATING CORPORATION John P. Broschak Vice President Engineering January 27, 2014 ET 14-0002 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555

Reference:

1) Letter dated March 12, 2012, from E. J. Leeds and M. R. Johnson, USNRC, to M. W. Sunseri, WCNOC, "Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f)

Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident"

2) Letter dated February 15, 2013, from D. L. Skeen, USNRC, to J. E.

Pollock, NEI, "Endorsement of EPRI Final Draft Report 1025287,

'Seismic Evaluation Guidance"'

3) Electric Power Research Institute Report 1025287, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance: Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic"

4) Letter dated April 9, 2013, from A. R. Pietrangelo, NEI, to D. L. Skeen, USNRC, "Proposed Path Forward for NTTF Recommendation 2.1:

Seismic Reevaluations"

5) Letter dated May 7, 2013, from E. J. Leeds, USNRC, to J. E. Pollock, NEI, "EPRI Final Draft Report XXXXXX, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance: Augmented Approach for the Resolution of Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic," as an Acceptable Alternative to the March 12, 2012, Information Request for Seismic Reevaluations"

6) Letter ET 13-0029, dated September 12, :2013, from J. P. Broschak, WCNOC, to USNRC

Subject:

Docket No. 50-482: Correction to the Response to a Nuclear Regulatory Commission Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f)

Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for CEUS Sites Gentlemen:

This submittal provides a corrected response to a Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) request for information pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) regarding the seismic aspects of recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-P.O. Box 411/ Burlington, KS 66839 / Phone: (620) 364-8831 An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/HCNET

ET 14-0002 Page 2 of 3 ichi Accident. A corrected description of the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) Control Point is provided on page 1 of the attachment and updated velocity profiles are provided in Figure 1 and Table 1 in the attachment. The geotechnical profile data for Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS) is provided in Table 2 in the attachment. Reference 6 provided descriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles pursuant to Reference 5.

This submittal replaces Reference 6 in its entirety.

On March 12, 2012, the NRC issued Reference 1 to all power reactor licensees and holders of construction permits in active or deferred status. Enclosure 1 of Reference 1 requested each addressee in the Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) to submit a written response consistent with the requested seismic hazard evaluation information (items 1 through 7) within 1.5 years. On February 15, 2013, the NRC issued Reference 2, endorsing the Reference 3 industry guidance for responding to Reference 1. Section 4 of Reference 3 identifies the detailed information to be included in the seismic hazard evaluation submittals.

On April 9, 2013, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted Reference 4 to the NRC, requesting NRC agreement to delay submittal of some of the CEUS seismic hazard evaluation information so that an update to the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2004, 2006) ground motion attenuation model could be completed and used to develop that information.

NEI proposed that descriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles (items 3a and 3b in Section 4 of Reference 3) be submitted to NRC by September 12, 2013, with the remaining seismic hazard and screening information submitted to NRC by March 31, 2014. In Reference 5, NRC agreed with this recommendation.

The attachment contains the requested descriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles for WCGS. The information provided in the attachment to this letter is considered an interim product of seismic hazard development efforts being performed for the industry by EPRI. The complete and final seismic hazard reports for WCGS will be provided to the NRC in our seismic hazard submittals by March 31, 2014 in accordance with Reference 5.

This letter contains no commitments. If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact me at (620) 364-4085, or Mr. Michael J. Westman at (620) 364-4009.

Sincerely, John P. Broschak JPB/rlt Attachment cc: M. L. Dapas (NRC), w/a C. F. Lyon (NRC), w/a N. F. O'Keefe (NRC), w/a Senior Resident Inspector (NRC), w/a

ET 14-0002 Page 3 of 3 STATE OF KANSAS )

SS COUNTY OF COFFEY )

John P. Broschak, of lawful age, being first duly sworn upon oath says that he is Vice President Engineering of Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; that he has read the foregoing document and knows the contents thereof; that he has executed the same for and on behalf of said Corporation with full power and authority to do so; and that the! facts therein stated are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.

Jo,. Broschak V'cresident Engineering SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me this .2') day of .l n-*, J ,2014.

[2 GAYLE S:1EPH-EAF`ýD

-Nct.ry Put~ic - Statj cf Kans lzr--ý-'.E;,:-- -1. 7' Expiration Date

Attachment to ET 14-0002 Page 1 of 6 Near Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic - 1.5 Year Response of Central and Eastern United States (CEUS) Plants On April 9, 2013, the Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted Reference 1 to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), requesting NRC agreement to delay submittal of some of the CEUS seismic hazard evaluation information so that an update to the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2004, 2006) ground motion attenuation model could be completed and used to develop that information. NEI proposed that descriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles (items 3a and 3b in Section 4 of Reference 2) be submitted to NRC by September 12, 2013, with the remaining seismic hazard and screening information submitted to NRC by March 31, 2014. In Reference 3, NRC agreed with this recommendation.

Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS) Subsurface Materials and Properties and Base Case Velocity Profiles The basic information used to create the site geologic profile at WCGS is shown in Table 2.

This site geologic profile was developed using information documented in Reference 5. The Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) Control Point is defined to be at the surface at the top of the finished grade at an elevation of 1099.5 feet (335 meters) [Reference 5]. For dynamic properties of soft rock layers, modulus and damping curves were represented with two models.

The first model used rock curves taken from Reference 4, the second model assumed linear behavior. These dynamic property models were weighted equally.

The three base-case shear-wave velocity profiles used to model amplification at WCGS are shown in Figure 1. Profiles 1, 2, and 3 are weighted 0.4, 0.3, and 0.3, respectively.

Thicknesses, depths, and shear-wave velocities (Vs) corresponding to each profile are shown in Table 1.

Attachment to ET 14-0002 Page 2 of 6 Fiaure 1 Shear-Wave Velocities (Vs) for WCGS Vs profiles for Wolf Creek Site Vs (ft/sec) 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000 0

200-400 600 800 1000 -Profile 1 1200 -Profile 2 1400 -Profile 3 1600 1800 2000 __

2200  !

2400 2600 2800

Attachment to ET 14-0002 Page 3 of 6 Table I Layer Thicknesses, Depths, and Velocities (Vs) for 3 Profiles Profile I Profile 2 Profile 3 Thick- Thick- Thick-nesslft) depth (ft) Vs(ft/s) ness(ft) depth (ft) Vs(ft/s) ness(ft) depth (ft) Vs(ft/s) 0 550 0 350 0 863 5.0 5.0 550 5.0 5.0 350 5.0 5.0 863 5.0 10.0 550 5.0 10.0 350 5.0 10.0 863 5.0 15.0 1450 5.0 15.0 928 5.0 15.0 2277 5.0 20.0 1450 5.0 20.0 928 5.0 20.0 2277 5.0 25.0 1450 5.0 25.0 928 5.0 25.0 2277 5.0 30.0 1450 5.0 30.0 928 5.0 30.0 2277 6.0 36.0 1450 6.0 36.0 928 6.0 36.0 2277 6.0 42.0 6200 6.0 42.0 3968 6.0 42.0 9285 6.0 48.0 6200 6.0 48.0 3968 6.0 48.0 9285 6.0 54.0 3500 6.0 54.0 2240 6.0 54.0 5495 6.0 60.0 3500 6.0 60.0 2240 6.0 60.0 5495 4.0 64.0 3500 4.0 64.0 2240 4.0 64.0 5495 6.0 70.0 6200 6.0 70.0 3968 6.0 70.0 9285 6.0 76.0 6200 6.0 76.0 3968 6.0 76.0 9285 6.0 82.0 6200 6.0 82.0 3968 6.0 82.0 9285 3.0 85.0 4000 3.0 85.0 2560 3.0 85.0 6280 18.0 103.0 4000 18.0 103.0 2560 18.0 103.0 6280 18.0 121.0 4000 18.0 121.0 2560 18.0 121.0 6280 18.0 139.0 4000 18.0 139.0 2560 18.0 139.0 6280 18.0 157.0 4000 18.0 157.0 2560 18.0 157.0 6280 18.0 175.0 4000 18.0 175.0 2560 18.0 175.0 6280 18.0 193.0 4000 18.0 193.0 2560 18.0 193.0 6280 18.0 211.0 4000 18.0 211.0 2560 18.0 211.0 6280 18.0 229.0 4000 18.0 229.0 2560 18.0 229.0 6280 18.0 247.0 4000 18.0 247.0 2560 18.0 247.0 6280 12.0 259.0 4000 12.0 259.0 2560 12.0 259.0 6280 1.0 260.0 8000 1.0 260.0 5120 1.0 260.0 9285 2.0 262.0 8000 2.0 262.0 5120 2.0 262.0 9285 5.0 267.0 4250 5.0 267.0 2720 5.0 267.0 6672 18.0 285.0 4250 18.0 285.0 2720 18.0 285.0 6672 18.0 303.0 4250 18.0 303.0 2720 18.0 303.0 6672 18.0 321.0 4250 18.0 321.0 2720 18.0 321.0 6672 18.0 339.0 4250 18.0 339.0 2720 18.0 339.0 6672

Attachment to ET 14-0002 Page 4 of 6 Profile 1 Profile 2 Profile 3 Thick- Thick- Thick-ness ft) depth (ft) Vs(ft/s) ness(ft) depth (ft) Vs(ft/s) ness(ft) depth (ft) Vs(ft/s) 18.0 357.0 4250 18.0 357.0 2720 18.0 357.0 6672 18.0 375.0 4250 18.0 375.0 2720 18.0 375.0 6672 18.0 393.0 4250 18.0 393.0 2720 18.0 393.0 6672 100.0 493.0 8000 100.0 493.0 5120 100.0 493.0 9285 100.1 593.0 8025 100.1 593.0 5136 100.1 593.0 9285 100.1 693.1 8075 100.1 693.1 5168 100.1 693.1 9285 100.1 793.2 8125 100.1 793.2 5200 100.1 793.2 9285 100.1 893.2 8175 100.1 893.2 5232 100.1 893.2 9285 100.1 993.3 8225 100.1 993.3 5264 100.1 993.3 9285 100.1 1093.4 8275 100.1 1093.4 5296 100.1 1093.4 9285 100.1 1193.4 8325 100.1 1193.4 5328 100.1 1193.4 9285 100.1 1293.5 8375 100.1 1293.5 5360 100.1 1293.5 9285 100.1 1393.6 8425 100.1 1393.6 5392 100.1 1393.6 9285 100.1 1493.6 8475 100.1 1493.6 5424 100.1 1493.6 9285 100.1 1593.7 8525 100.1 1593.7 5456 '100.1 1593.7 9285 100.1 1693.8 8575 100.1 1693.8 5488 100.1 1693.8 9285 100.1 1793.8 8625 100.1 1793.8 5520 100.1 1793.8 9285 100.1 1893.9 8675 100.1 1893.9 5552 100.1 1893.9 9285 100.1 1994.0 8725 100.1 1994.0 5584 100.1 1994.0 9285 100.1 2094.0 8775 100.1 2094.0 5616 100.1 2094.0 9285 100.1 2194.1 8825 100.1 2194.1 5648 100.1 2194.1 9285 100.1 2294.2 8875 100.1 2294.2 5680 100.1 2294.2 9285 100.1 2394.2 8925 100.1 2394.2 5712 100.1 2394.2 9285 100.1 2494.3 8975 100.1 2494.3 5744 100.1 2494.3 9285 100.1 2594.4 9025 100.1 2594.4 5776 100.1 2594.4 9285 105.5 2699.8 9075 105.5 2699.8 5808 105.5 2699.8 9285 3280.8 5980.6 9285 3280.8 5980.6 9285 3280.8 5980.6 9285

Attachment to ET 14-0002 Page 5 of 6 Table 2 Summary of Geotechnical Profile Data for Wolf Creek Generating Station (a)

Measured Average Shear Wave Unit Bulk Depth Compressional Wave Poisson's Velocity Weight Density (feet) Geologic Unit(s) Material Description Velocity (ft/sec) Ratio (ft/sec) (pcf) (pcf) 0-10 Residual soil and Silty clay and weathered 2,300 0.463- 500 99 weathered bedrock shale 0.475 600 113 10-36 Heumader Member Somewhat clayey calcareous 6,000 0.467- 1,400- 139 shale 0.471 1,500 36-48 Plattsmouth Member Dense, Fine-grained 14,000 0.378 6,200 160 1 6 6 (b) limestone with shale layers 165 3,500""'d 48-64 Heebner, Leavenworth Interbedded carbonaceous 7,000 0.333 and Snyderville Members shale, limestone, and clayey calcareous shale 64-82 Toronto Member Fossiliferous limestone with 11,700 0.305 6,200 147 165 (b) occasional thin shale layers 153 82-255 Unnamed Lawrence, Interbedded shale, siltstone 7,800 0.322 4,000 150-154 1 60 (b)

Amazonia, Ireland and and sandstone; a thin coal Robbins Members bed and limestone layer occur in the upper 25 feet; pure shale is present in the basal 60 feet 259-262 Haskell Member Dense, fine-grained 0 . 3 0 1 (b) 8 ,0 0 0 (b,c) 16 6 (b) limestone 262-393 Vinland, Tonganoxie and Interbedded siltstone, shale 4 ,2 5 0 (b,d) 148-154 159(b) 0 . 3 3 3 (b)

Weston Members and sandstone; pure shale is prese nt in the basal 30 feet 393-402 South Bend and Rock Dense limestone with shale 16,500 (b) 0 . 3 4 6 (b) 8 ,0 0 0 (b,c) 16 6 (b)

Lake Members and siltstone aDepths and descriptions based on Boring B-4.

b Indicates values obtained from Birdwell Elastic Property Logs, borings B-4, B-5 and B-11.

CShear wave velocity measured by Birdwell.

dShear wave velocity empirically computed by Birdwell.

Attachment to ET 14-0002 Page 6 of 6

References:

1. Letter from A. R. Pietrangelo, NEI, to D. L. Skeen, USNRC, "Proposed Path Forward for NTTF Recommendation 2.1: Seismic Reevaluations" April 9, 2013. ADAMS Accession No. ML13107B386.

2. Electric Power Research Institute Report 1025287, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance:

Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic." ADAMS Accession No. ML12333A170.

3. Letter from E. J. Leeds, USNRC, to J. E. Pollock, NEI, "EPRI Final Draft Report XXXXXX, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance: Augmented Approach for the Resolution of Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic," as an Acceptable Alternative to the March 12, 2012, Information Request for Seismic Reevaluations," May 7, 2013.

ADAMS Accession No. ML13106A331.

4. Electric Power Research Institute Report, TR-102293, Vol. 1 - 5, "Guidelines for DeterminingDesign Basis Ground Motions," 1993.

5. Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation (2013), "Wolf Creek Subsurface Materials,"

an informal report submitted to the Electric Power Research Institute on November 5, 2013.