ML18022A759

Submits Results of Aircraft Hazards Study Associated W/ Proposed Wakesouth Regional Airport & Facility

ML18022A759
Person / Time
Site:	Harris
Issue date:	01/17/1990
From:	Cutter A CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NLS-90-012, NLS-90-12, NUDOCS 9001250346
Download: ML18022A759 (28)

Text

TBHBUTION DEMON WTION SYSTEM REGULATORY INFORMATION DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM (RIDS)

ACCESSION NBR: 9001250346 DOC. DATE: 90/01/17 NOTARIZED: YES DOCKET FACIL:50-400 Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant, Unit 1, Carolina 05000400 AUTH. NAME AUTHOR AFFILIATION CUTTER,A.B. Carolina Power & Light Co.

RECIP.NAME RECIPIENT AFFILIATION Document Control Branch (Document Control Desk)

SUBJECT:

Submits results of aircraft hazards study associated w/ I proposed Wakesouth regional airport & facility.

D' DISTRIBUTION CODE A001D COPIES RECEIVED LTR ENCL SIZE:

TITLE: OR Submittal: General Distribution NOTES:Application for permit renewal filed. 05000400

/

RECIPIENT COPIES RECIPIENT COPIES A ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL ID CODE/NAME LTTR ENCL PD2-1 LA 1 1 PD2-1 PD 1 1 D BECKER,D 5 5 1' -D INTERNAL: ACRS 6 6 NRR/DET/ECMB 9H NRR/DOEA/OTSB11 1 1 NRR/DST 8E2 1 1 NRR/DST/SELB 8D 1 1 NRR/DST/SICB 7E '1 1 NRR/DST/SRXB 8E 1 1 NUDOCS-ABSTRACT 1 1 OC/LFMB 1 0 OGC/HDS1 1 0 1 1 RES/DSIR/EIB 1 1 EXTERNAL: LPDR 1 1 NRC PDR 1 1 NSIC 1 1 D

D D

NOTE TO ALL "RIDS" RECIPIENTS:

PLEASE HELPUS TO REDUCE WASTEI CONTACT THE. DOCUMENT CONTROL DESK, ROOM Pl-37 (EXT. 20079) TO ELIMINATEYOUR NAME FROM DISIRIBUTION LISIS FOR DOCUMENTS YOU DON'T NEEDl TOTAL NUMBER OF COPIES REQUIRED: LTTR 27 ENCL 25

0 '

F

CML Carolina Power & Light Company P.O. Box 1551 ~ Raleigh, N.C. 27602 JAN 1 7 1990 A. B CUTTER SERIAL: NLS-90-012 Vice President Nuclear Services Department United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTENTION: Document Control Desk Washington, DC 20555 SHEARON HARRIS NUCLEAR POWER PLANT DOCKET NO. 50-400/LICENSE NO. NPF-63 WAKESOUTH REGIONAL AIRPORT Gentlemen:

Carolina Power 6 Light Company hereby submits the results of an aircraft hazards study associated with the proposed WakeSouth Regional Airport and the Shearon Harris Nuclear Power Plant. As discussed in a meeting with the NRC staff on December 21, 1989, this information is being submitted under oath and affirmation.

Please refer any questions regarding this submittal to Mr. John Eads at (919) 546-4165.

Yours very trul A. B. Cutter JHE/jhe A. B. Cutter, having been first duly sworn, did depose and say that the information contained herein is true and correct to the best of his information, knowledge and belief; and the sources of his information are officers, employees, contractors, and agents of Carolina Power 6 Light:

Company.

Notary (Seal)

\lit'5111lrgrr My commission expires: 4" 7 g3 cc: Mr. R. A. Becker Mr. S. D. Ebneter Mr. J. E. Tedrow PU

( 9001250346 900ii7 PDR ADOCK 05000400 P PDC rie111111111

\

Carolina Power & Light Company WAKESOUTH REGIONAL AIRPORT AIRCRAFT HAZARDS STUDY

INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND INFORMATION ORIENTATION OF AIRPORT CONCLUSION OF ANALYSIS

HARRlS PIAHT f/

j.8 Mi J

PROPOSED RUNWAY LOCATION SCALE.: 1" = APPROX. 4000' 4000 8000 12,000

P Abbreviations Used in Presentation GAMA General Aviation Manufacturers Association AOPA Aircraft Owners 8 Pilots Association FAA Federal Aviation Administration NTSB National Transportation Safety Board GA General Aviation WSRA WakeSouth Regional Airport SRP Standard Review Plan

PRESENTATION OUTLINE I. Standard Review Plan 3.5.1.6 "Aircraft Hazards"

-Acceptance Criteria

-Prove by:

II. Impact Evaluation & Probability Equation

-SRP Evaluation Method

-Probability Equation

-Results

-NUS Review & Concurrence III. Probability Equation Factors IV. Methodology Overview V. Case-by-Case Analysis of Factors

1. Target Area

2. Crash Rate

3. Number of Operations Vl. Probability Calculation Vll Fire Analysis

~

VIII Conclusion

~

IX . Analysis Conservatisms & Considerations

STANDARD REVlEW PLAN Acce tance Criteria: Probability of Radiological Release exceeding Part100 exposure guidelines resulting from aircraft accidents is less than 1.0E-7/year.

Note: We assume "accident" implies both impacts and fires.

~Pb:

1. Showing probability of structural damage to safety related structures due tc ~irn acts is less than 1.0E-7/year.

(Conservatism: Only a very low percentage of structurally damaging crashes would result in Part 100 releases.)

2. Assessing that potential fires do not adversely affect safe shutdown capability of plant nor radioactive release probability.

II.

IMPACT EVALUATION PROBABILITYE UATION SRP Evaluation Method SRP Proximity Criteria is NA (Plant is less than 5 miles away)

SRP Evaluation Criteria lll.3 was used Civilian 8 Militar Air orts ei- orts actuation from iii.3 to calculate probability, P P = (Crash Rate X (Number of Movements X (Effective Plant per sq mi per year) Target Area) per movement)

P = (C) (A)

P = Sum of [Cx NxA] (For all a licablet esof aircraft)

SRP states that interpretation of factors may vary because of specific conditions or changes in accident statistics.

Analysis performed at)0-year projection from WSRA Master Plan RESULTS'robability of Potentially Damaging Impact < 1.0E-7 per year (Probability is also ( 1.0E-7 per year at 20-year projection)

REVIEW:

NUS (D.G. Eisenhut & E.R. Schmidt) reviewed & concurred with methodology, assumptions, & results.

~

~

PROBABILITYE UATION FACTORS C - Crash Rate o Only fatal crash data used (pilot control factor) o Depends on, type of aircraft o Depends on window of data collection N- Number of Movements or 0 erations (ie, take-offs + landings) o Divided by type of aircraft LATED t4 o Depends on size of impacting aircraft o Used tornado missile analysis for comparison Calculation becomes complex

-Factors are inter-related P

-Methods of data collection change over time

-Types of data collected change over time

-Necessity to "dissect" available data

IV.

METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW Im act Probabilit TARGET AREA SRP Safety-related structures are included in Target Area Resistance to impacts determined using tornado missile analyses

-Penetration & "Equivalent Dead Load" failur'e modes considered

-Planes < 8000 Ib do not exceed dead load nor penetration criteria

-Planes between 8,000 & 12,500 Ib may exceed dead load criteria for most buildings; penetration criteria not exceeded

-Planes > 12,500 Ib are assumed to cause structural damage to any building NUIVIBER OF OPERATIONS Value for each type of aircraft taken from Master Plan CRASH RATE SRP value is from 1964-68; is for ALLGeneral Aviation combined Derived new crash rate values based on: 1985-87 data Type/weight of plane Calculated Annual Impact Probability With SRP Equation and New Factors

V.

CASE-BY-CASE ANALYSIS OF FACTORS TARGET AREA Dependent on

1. Surface area

2. Structural strength Plant Structures Included in Evaluation

-Waste Processing Bldg

-Fuel Handling Bldg

-Reactor Auxiliary Bldg

-Containment

-Condensate Storage Tank

-Control Bldg

-DG Bldg

-Underground, hardened DG Fuel Oil Storage Tanks

-Emergency Service Water Screening Structure

-Emergency Service Water Intake Structure

TARGET AREA (CONT'D)

Calculations Assum tions

-Plan view areas of structures calculated

-Calculated area increased to account for skid & shadow/impact angle effects

-No credit for shadow shielding by Containment

-Shielding of walls by adjacent structures is considered

-All impacts assumed to occur at 90 degrees to impacted surface

-Tornado missile analysis used to assess aircraft impact damage potential

-Both failure modes (puncture & equivalent dead load) were considered

-Target area varies due to aircraft wgt/velocity & building strength

TARGET AREA (CONT'D)

Structural Anal sis Results Target Area for aircraft below 8,000 Ib = ZERO Target Area for aircraft between 8,000 & 12,500 Ib = 0.00708 sq mi Target Area for aircraft over 12,500 Ib = 0.00792 sq mi Difference in areas is because 0.00084 sq mi is OK for all aircraft below 12,500 Ib tie, Containment (13,266 sq ft) + 10,000 more sq ft]

Other PWR studies have target area = 0.005 sq mi

V. CASE-BY-CASE ANALYSIS OF FACTORS 2.

CRASH RATE SRP Crash rate for GA at 4-5 mi. = 1.2E-8 crash per sq. mi. per op'n.

(crash/sm/op)

Basis for SRP Data This value originated from Time Period: 1964-1 968 Total fatal crashes = 2993 Total GA operations = 3.2E+ 8 Current data (from FAA & NTSB): 1985-87 window Total fatal crashes = 1275 Total GA operations = 2.44E+8 Ratio values and 'pro-rate'er SRP Table yields 6.7E-9 crash/sm/op (For overall GA population)

[NOTE: Current Data is 45% lower than SRP Data]

~ ~

CRASH RATE (CONT'D)

Dissection of General Aviation CRASH RATE DATA Aircraft over 12 500 Ib Another data source (Boonin, 1966-70) gave overall GA crash rates nearly identical to SRP Boonin divided data into two aircraft types (by weight)

First category is GA over 12,500 Ib Second category is GA under 12,500 Ib For aircraft over 12,500 lb at 4.3 mi, crash rate is 7.5 times lower than overall GA population Therefore, Crash rate for aircraft over 12,500 Ib = 8.9E-10 crash s mi o

CRASH RATE (CONl"D)

Aircraft between 8000 and 12 500 lb Discussions with GAMA, AOPA, FAA, NTSB, consultants, GA pilots Very similar features to aircraft over 12,500 Ib BETTER PILOTS & BETTER AIRCRAFT

-High cost of purchase

-Cost of insurance

-Corporate ownership

-Business purposes

-More experienced pilots

-Commercial License (req'd if "fly for pay")

-250 hours vs 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> for private license

-Instrument rating required

-Conscientious maintenance

-Better instrumentation, navigation equipment

-Better communication equipment Crash Rate should be similar to aircraft over 12,500 Ib (Factor = 7.5)

Conservatively, a factor of 4.0 was selected (compared to overall GA)

Therefore, Crash rate for aircraft between 8000 and 12,500 Ib =

1.68E-9 crash s mi o

V. CASE-BY-CASE ANALYSIS OF FACTORS 3.

NUMBER OF OPERATIONS Based Aircraft 1988 ~5- r ~10- r ~20- r SE1-3 PL 17 23 29 38 SE4+ PL 31 42 52 71 ME Piston < 12,500¹ 17 24 31 42 ME Piston > 12,500¹ 2 ME TP > 12,500¹ 2 3 Corp. Jet > 12,500¹ 'i 2 Helicopter 2 2 Number of operations per based aircraft 650 700 750 800 per year Annual 0 erati n (calculated from above) 1988 ~5- r ~10- r ~20- r SE1-3 PL 11,050 12,100 21,750 30,400 SE4+ PL 20,150 29,400 39,000 56,800 ME Piston < 12,500¹ 11,050 16,800 23,250 33,600 ME Piston > 12,500¹ 700 750 1)600 ME TP > 12,500¹ 700 'i,500 2,400 Corp. Jet > 12,500¹ 750 1,600 Helicopter 650 700 'i,500 1,600 Source of D t: "Master Plan for the WakeSouth Regional Airport,"

dated October, 1987 prepared by Hobbs, Upchurch, & Associates, P.A.

in Southern Pines, NC.

~4bt I SE Single Engine PL Place (ie, No. of seats)

ME Multiple Engine TP Turbo Prop

¹ Weight in pounds

NUMBER OF OPERATIONS CONT'D MEP between 8000 and 12 500 Ib Discussions with knowledgeable individuals (GAMA, FAA, NTSB, AOPA, pilots) conservatively indicate that less than 15% of MEP <12,500 Ib P

are >8,000 lb.

At 10 year projection (Master Plan),

Number of Operations for 8000< MEP <12,500 Ib =

(.15) x (23,250) = 3 488 Other Cate pries Number of Operations for MEP > 12,500 Ib 750 for ME TP > 12,500 Ib 1,500 for Cor Jet > 12 500 Ib 750 Subtotal for all aircraft > 12,500 = 3 000

Vl.

PROBABILITYCALCULATION For aircraft > 12 500 Ib Cx NxA =

(8.9E-1 0) (3,000) (0.00792) = 2.11E-8 crashes r For aircraft between 8 000 & 12 500 Ib CxNxA=

(1.68E-9) (3,488) (0.00708) = 4.15E-8 crashes r Total Potentiall Dama in Crash Probabilit = 6.26E-8 er ear LESS THAN SRP ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA OF 1.0E-7 er ear

Vll.

FIRE ANALYSIS Basis o Effects of fire associated with structural damage are already included o Fire analysis evaluated impact of aircraft that cause no structural damage Analysis Performed by CP&L Nuclear Engineering Department Items Assessed

-Potential Release of Stored Chemicals

-HVAC Inlets/Ingestion of Burning Fuel Review conducted with Reference 3 of SRP 3.5.1.6 as guidance "Appraisal of Fire Effects from Aircraft Crash at Zion Power Reactor Facility" Chemicals Nitro en Stora e Effects bounded by SRP reference and FSAR Section 2.2.3.3 "Design Basis Toxic Chemicals" HVAC Inlet Features Disclosed no vulnerability to ingestion CONCLUSION No Problems Identified

Vill.

CONCLUSION CONCLUSION: SRP Acce tance Criteria are met IMPACT PROBABILITYis < 1.0E-7 per year at 10-year projection (also at 20-year projection)

FIRE ANALYSIS No effect on radioactive release probability nor on safe shutdown capability.

IX.

UALITATIVECONSERVATISMS IN ANALYSIS 8r. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS '

Conditional probability of radioactive release exceeding Part 100 given an impact is assumed to be 1.0 o Pilot Control o 90 degree impact angle o Master Plan Growth Rate Higher than FAA o Larger Aircraff Take-off & Landing Pattern o Simultaneous Crash and Need for Emergency Equipment o SRP Acceptance Criteria is Stringent

)

t~~

e

FUTURE CONTROL o Potential Administrative Controls o Restrictive Covenants will be incorporated into the Deed of Transfer to assure primary assumptions in the CP &L analysis remain valid.

0 j

~ 5

~O A

1 l