ML18207A550
| ML18207A550 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Callaway  |
| Issue date: | 06/19/2018 |
| From: | Ameren Missouri, Union Electric Co |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18207A460 | List:
|
| References | |
| ULNRC-06442 | |
| Download: ML18207A550 (17) | |
Text
CALLAWAY - SP2.0-iTABLE OF CONTENTSCHAPTER 2.0SITECHARACTERISTICS Section Page2.1GEOGRAPHYANDDEMOGRAPHY..
.................
................
..........................2.1-12.2NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES2.2-12.2.1LOCATIONS AND ROUTES......
..............
..............
..............
.....................2.2-12.
2.2DESCRIPTION
S...........
..............
..............
..............
..............
.....................2.2-12.2.3EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL ACCIDENTS...
.................
.......................2.2-12.3METEOROLOGY............
.................
..............
..............
..............
.....................2.3-12.3.4SHORT-TERM (ACCIDENT) DIFFUSION ESTIMATES......
.....................2.3-12.3.4.1Objective............
................
.................
..............
..............
.....................2.3-12.3.4.2Calculations........
................
.................
..............
..............
.....................2.3-12.
3.5REFERENCES
.............
..............
..............
..............
..............
.....................2.3-22.4HYDROLOGICENGINEERING.......
..............
..............
..............
.....................2.4-12.4.2FLOODS................
................
................
.................
..............
.....................2.4-12.4.2.3EffectsofLocalIntensePrecipitation......
..............
...............
................2.4-12.5GEOLOGY,SEISMOLOGY,ANDGEOTECHNICALENGINEERING...........2.5-12.5.2VIBRATORY GROUND MOTION
.................
..............
...............
................2.5-12.5.2.8ResponseSpectra............
................
.................
..............
.....................2.5-12.5.4STABILITY OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS AND FOUNDATIONS........2.5-12.5.4.9EarthquakeDesignBasis......
..............
..............
..............
.....................2.5-12.5.4.10StaticStability.....
................
.................
..............
..............
.....................2.5-22.
5.7REFERENCES
.............
..............
..............
..............
..............
.....................2.5-3 CALLAWAY - SP2.0-iiRev. OL-13 5/03LIST OF TABLES NumberTitle2.3-1Limiting Atmospheric Dispersion Factor, /Q(sec/m 3)2.3-2Variation of Intake K c with Wind Direction Unit Vent Release2.3-3Relative Concentration (/Q) at Control Building Air Intake2.4-1Design Gr ound Snow Load CALLAWAY - SP2.0-iiiRev. OL-13 5/03LIST OF FIGURES NumberTitle2.3-1Contiguous Building Arrangement Unit Plant2.3-2Variation of Intake K c with Wind Direction2.4-1Snow Load Distribut ions and Coefficients2.5-1SSE Horizontal Design Spectra2.5-2SSE Vertical Design Spectra2.5-3Envelope of Si te SSE Horizontal Design Spectra for 2% Damping2.5-4Envelope of Site SSE Vertical Design S pectra for 2% Damping2.5-5OBE Horizontal Design Spectra 2.5-6OBE Vertical Design Spectra 2.5-7Lateral Earth Pressure Schematic CALLAWAY - SP2.1-1Rev. OL-13 5/03CHAPTER2.0SITECHARACTERISTICS This chapter of the Site Addendum provides detailed information on the geological, seismological, hydrological and meteorological characteristics of the site and vicinity.
Also discussed therein, are si te activities and controls, population distri bution and land use.The discussions provided in Chapter 2.0 of the power blo ck FSAR are those considered necessary to augment the Site Addendum discussions as they pertain to the power block envelopes or the de sign and analyses of power block structures, systems and components.During the PSAR stage, when the power block envelopes were being developed, there were four sites (Callaway, Wolf Creek, Sterling and Tyrone) upon which five plants were to be built. Now, there are two sites upon which two plant s are to be built.
The SNUPPS design envelopes we re developed by use of t he most restrictive site conditions imposed by any one of the four original sites or by generic design criteria which are conservative for each of the sites.
With the cancellation of the Tyrone plant, however, the four site enveloping approach was modified in the seismic design area (development of spectra et. al) for work not yet complet ed to include only the three remaining sites. Refer to Sections 2.5 and 3.7(B) for details. The design envelopes were not revised to reflect the cancellation of Sterling.
The elevations given are based on the 1929 m ean sea level (ms l) datum. The geographic (latitude and longitude) and Universal Transvers e Mercator coordinates given are based on the North American Datu m of 1927. The Missouri State Plane coordinates given are based on the Missouri Coordinate Syst em of 1927 - Central Zone.2.1GEOGRAPHYANDDEMOGRAPHY Refer to the Site Addendum CALLAWAY - SP2.2-1Rev. OL-13 5/032.2NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES2.2.1LOCATIONS AND ROUTESDiscussions and maps indicating the locations of all milit ary bases, missile sites, manufacturing plants, chemical plants and st orage facilities, airports, transportation routes, oil and gas pipelines, military firing ranges, and air traffic patterns are provided in Section 2.2.1 of the Site Addendum.2.
2.2DESCRIPTION
SA description of products manufactured, stored, or transported offs ite is provided in Section 2.2.1 of the Site Add endum. Onsite hazards are discussed in Section 2.2.3. Evaluations of onsite and of fsite hazards of consequenc e are also presented in Section 2.2.3 of the Site Addendum.2.2.3EVALUATION OF POTENTIAL ACCIDENTS For this section, the term "significant hazard" is defined as any hazard against which design provisions must be considered to protect the plan t or which must be assessed in detail for consequences serious enough to affect the safety of the plant.There are no onsite or offsite hazards which are expected to have an adverse effect on the plant structures. Refer to Section 2.2.3 of the Site Addendum for the evaluation of potential accidents.
CALLAWAY - SP2.3-1Rev. OL-13 5/032.3METEOROLOGY2.3.4SHORT-TERM (ACCIDENT) DIFFUSION ESTIMATES2.3.4.1Objective The objective of this section is to provide short-term at mospheric dispersion factors
(/Qs) for the postulated acci dent analyses presented in Chapter 15.0
.2.3.4.2Calculations2.3.4.2.1Site Boundary and LPZThe short-term atmospheric dispersion factors (/Qs) are based on onsite meteorological data for the Callaway Plant site. The diffusion equations and assumptions used in the calculations were those outlined in NRC Re gulatory Guide 1.145, "Atmospheric Dispersion Models for Potent ial Accident Assessment at Nuclear Power Plants." Table 2.3-1 lists the limiting /Qs for the Callaway site. The detailed procedures used in the calculations are given in Section 2.3.4.2 of the Site Addendum.2.3.4.2.2Control Room Intake
The basic model employed for the distri bution of relative concentrations (/Qs) within a building wake at the Callaway control room intakes followi ng an accident is given by Reference 1 to be:
K C is a function of nondimensional space coordinates x/L, y/L, and z/
L, building configuration, wind di rection, and source c onfiguration. The K C field for a given building configuration, source configuration, and wind configuration is considered to be invariant. Accordingly, K C values determined by wind tunnel tests with a model structure are expected to be the same as those that would be obtained with a g eometrically similar building in the full-scale atmosphere in the same wind direct ion, with a similar leak. The Callaway Plant contiguous build ing arrangement is shown in Figure 2.3-1. The K C data (1)Where A=
reference cross-secti onal building area, m 2V =reference wind speed, m/sec K C =nondimensional concentration coefficient Q K C AV--------=
CALLAWAY - SP2.3-2Rev. OL-13 5/03used in the analysis for low le vel release are presented in Figure 2.3-2 and were derived from two sets of tests. One used rectangular prisms (Ref.
2), the other used a model of the EBR-II complex (Ref. 1). Both tests were described and portions of the data presented in Reference 3. The K C data for the unit vent re lease from t he top of the containment were extracted from Figure10 of Reference1 and are presented in Table2.3-2. The value of A used in conjunction with K C in Figure 2.3-2 and Table 2.3-2 is the Callaway Plan t equivalent of the EBR-II area, A = 1.12 D 2 = 2280 m 2 with the diameter of the reactor D = 45.1 m.The value of V used in conjunction with Figure 2.3-2 is the mean velocity of the approach flow at an elevation corresponding to th e anemometer elevation of the EBR-II model tests. Reference 3 reports this elevation to be 62 feet or 0.77D above the top of the dome. The Callaway Plant equivalent height becomes 63.4 + 0.77 x 45.1 = 98.1m above ground. The V values were obtained by extrapolating wind speeds at anemometer elevations equivalent to 98.1 meters by the power law. Values of n were arbitraril y assumed for the various st ability classes as follows:
A cumulative frequency distribution was constructed for the /Q values calculated by equations 1 and 2 above, using 3years combined onsite meteorological data. The corresponding highest 5 percent, 10 percent, 20 percent, and 40 percent /Q values are given in Table 2.3-3
.2.
3.5REFERENCES
1.Halitsky, J., Golden, J., Halpern, P., (1963): "Wind Tunnel Tests of Gas Diffusion From a Leak in the Shell of a Nuclear Power Reactor and from a Nearby Stack," N. Y. University Department of Me
- t. & Ocean, GSL Rep.
63-2 under USWB Contract Cwb-10321 (2)Where u 1=mean speed at elevation z 1 , m/sec z 1 =anemometer elevati on at a given site, m n =atmospheric stability exponentPasquill Stability Class A B C D E F Gn0.200.250.290.330.400.500.60 Vu 1=98.1z 1n CALLAWAY - SP2.3-3Rev. OL-13 5/032.Halitsky, J. (1963): "Gas Diffusion Near Buildings," ASHRAE Trans. 69: pp.
464-4843.Slade, D. H., ed. (1968): "Meteorology and Atomic Energy," U. S. AEC Division of Technical Information TID-24190 CALLAWAY - SP Rev. OL-13 5/03TABLE 2.3-1 LIMITING ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION FACTOR, /Q(sec/m 3)Site Boundary/Q0-2 hr.2.OE-4 Low Population Zone0-8 hr.2.6E-58-24 hr.1.7E-5 24-96 hr.7.2E-6 96-720 hr.2.0E-6 CALLAWAY - SP Rev. OL-13 5/03TABLE 2.3-2 VARIATION OF INTAKE K C WITH WIND DIRECTION UNIT VENT RELEASEWindDirection K cN1.5NNE0.5 NE0 ENE0 E0 ESE0 SE0 SSE0 S0 SSW0 SW0 WSW0 W0 WNW0.5 NW1.5 NNW2.5 CALLAWAY - SP Rev. OL-21 5/15TABLE 2.3-3 RELATIVE CONCENTRATION (/Q) AT CONTROL BUILDING AIR INTAKE**Units for /Qs are 10
-4 sec/m 3 From Low Level ReleasePercentage
(/Q)57.18105.28 201.66 400For Unit Vent ReleasePercentage
(/Q)51.33100.90 200.41 400 CALLAWAY - SP2.4-1Rev. OL-13 5/032.4HYDROLOGICENGINEERING This section of the Site Addendum describes the location and the hydr ologic features of the site and the method of analysis adopted in evaluating th e hydrologic conditions at safety-related structures.2.4.2FLOODS 2.4.2.3EffectsofLocalIntensePrecipitation2.4.2.3.1Site Drainage The storm drainage system at t he site is designed in accordance with the parameters discussed in Section 2.4.2.3 of the Site Addendum. Site drainage is designed to convey local flooding resulting from rainfall on the roofs and th e site area without endangering safety-related structures.The design basis for the roof drainage system is a rainfall intensity of 7.4 inches per hour with a recurrence interval of 100 years. Any rainfall in excess of this design intensity will overflow the roof curb and the building walls to the site drainage system.
During a local probable maximum precipitation, the storm drainage system carries runoff up to the design capacity. Runoff in excess of the design capacity flows outside the system to the natural drainage out let of the site. Provision is made in the design of the plant yard grading to preven t backwater from endangering sa fety-related structures.
Refer to the Site Adde ndum for a discussion of th e site drainage system.2.4.2.3.2Ice and Snow Estimation of the snow load on t he roofs of the safety-related structures is based on a frequency analysis of snowpa ck on the ground combined with a local winter probable maximum precipitation (PMP), which is assu med to occur in the form of snow. The assumption of PMP to occur in the form of snow is very conservative, since snowfall depends on latitude, altitude, and temperature. By combining the antecedent snowpack and the PMP in the form of snow, additional conservatism of the snowpack load is obtained.Historical snowpack depth data at stations near the SNUPPS sites are analyzed statistically for the months of December through March. Frequency analysis of the maximum monthly snowpack is performed on the data, and a 100-year frequency snowpack depth for each month is selected from the analysis.
Based on the analyses presented in the Site Addendum, the months of February and March exhibit the highest combined snowpack and winter PMP load.
In estimating the snow load on the roofs of t he safety-related structures, the effects of wind action on the snowpack and snowfall are considered. This effect tends to decrease CALLAWAY - SP2.4-2Rev. OL-13 5/03 the load on elevated buildings and could increase the load on adjacent low roofs due to snow drifts.
Site drainage and plant yard grading are des igned to handle the runoff from local winter PMP without endangering safety-related structures. In establishing the required grading and outlets, clogging of inlets and certain size culverts by ice is assumed in the design.
The maximum postulated ground snow loads have been developed based on frequency analyses of the maximum snowpack on the ground, combined with the local probable maximum winter precipitation in the form of snow. The roof snow load used in the design of the safety-related structures is determined by multiplying the ground snow load by the appropriate coefficient C s given in Figure 2.4-1. The minimum roof snow load used in design is taken as 0.8 times the ground snow load and is increased on the lower levels of multilevel roofs and on roof areas adjacent to projections to acc ount for wind action and drifting. The maximum drifted snow load is taken as 3 times the enveloping ground snow load.Two snow loading conditions are analyzed in the desi gn of safety-related structures for the standard plant, as described in Section 3.8.4.3. The maximum 100-year-recurrence snowpack from each of the SNUP PS sites is analyzed, in co mbination with other live loads. The envel oping 100-year-recurrence ground snowpack load for the SNUPPS sites is 91 psf, as shown in Table2.4-1. This load is increased or decreased when applied to roofs, in accordance with the coefficients given in Figure2.4-1
.In addition, the probable maximum winter precipitati on, PMP (winter), in the form of snow, coincident with the 100-year-recurrence snowpack, is analyzed in combination with other normal operating live loads. Th e enveloping 100-year-recurrence ground snowpack plus PMP (winter) for the SNUPPS sites is 153psf.
This load is increased or decreased when applied to the roofs in accordance with the coefficients given in Figure2.4-1
.The maximum postulated ground snow load for the site is presented in Section 2.4.2.3 of the Site Addendum. These values are shown in Table 2.4-1. The snow load is combined with other loads, in accordance with the loading combinations presented in Section3.8.4.3
.
CALLAWAY - SP Rev. OL-13 5/03TABLE 2.4-1 DESIGN GROUND SNOW LOAD100-Year RecurrenceSnowpack LoadpsfPMP (Winter) Snow LoadWith 100-Year Recurrence SnowpackpsfStandard plant facilities 91(1)(1)The 91 psf load is based on data from the St erling site and has been retained, even though the Sterling unit has been cancelled.
153 Safety-related site facilities21123 CALLAWAY - SP2.5-1Rev. OL-13 5/032.5GEOLOGY,SEISMOLOGY,ANDGEOTECHNICALENGINEERING This section of the Site Addendum provides detailed info rmation on the geological and seismological characteristics of the site. The Site Addendum also provides the methods, criteria, and findings of the investigations. Based on the results of those investigations, it is concluded that there are no geological, seismological or foundation support conditions that adversely affect the desi gn, construction and operation of the nuclear plant at the site.During the PSAR stage, when the SNUPPS power block structures, systems and components were first being de signed, there were four sites (Callaway, Wolf Creek, Sterling, and Tyrone) upon which five plants were to be built. Now there are only two sites (Callaway and Wolf Creek) upon which two plants are to be built.The final geological and seismological design of the power block structures, systems and components is based on three sites (Callaway, Wolf Creek and Sterling) to ensure conservatism in the seismic design envelope. Certain it ems, whose final design was completed prior to the cancellation of Tyrone (the fourth site), are within the envelope for the four origi nal sites.
The discussions provided bel ow are considered necessa ry to augment the Site Addendum discussions as they pertain to the power block design envelopes and the design and analyses of power block structures, systems and components.2.5.2VIBRATORY GROUND MOTION2.5.2.8ResponseSpectra Response spectra for the SSE and OBE are presented in Section 2.5.2 of the Site Addenda.
Figures 2.5-1 through 2.5-6 present the response spectra for the standard plant facilities and demonstrate that the selected spectra for the standard plant SSE and OBE envelope the bounds of the spectr a for each site.
The response spectra are sca led or normalized to the maximum horizontal ground acceleration for the SSE of 0.20 g and for the OB E of 0.12 g in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.60.
Seismic Category I structures other than the standard plant facilities listed in Section1.2.2.1 are designed using t he applicable response spectra for the site.2.5.4STABILITY OF SUBSURFACE MATERIALS AND FOUNDATIONS2.5.4.9EarthquakeDesignBasis All seismic Category I st andard plant structures are designed for an SSE of 0.20 g maximum horizontal and vertical ground acceleration. T he OBE for the site is a CALLAWAY - SP2.5-2Rev. OL-13 5/03minimum of one-half the ground acceleration of the selected SSE. All seismic Category I standard plant structures ar e designed for an OBE of 0.12 g maximum horizontal and vertical ground acceleration.
Individual systems and structur es for individual sites other than the standard plant structures are desig ned for the SSE and OBE values developed for each site.2.5.4.10StaticStabilityAll standard plant seismic Ca tegory I structures are suppo rted on reinforced concrete mat foundations. These structures, and the maximum static design loads for each, are listed below.The relationships of the founda tions of the various plant bui ldings to each other and to the subsurface materials are shown in the Site Addendum. G eneralized subsurface conditions in the plant area for the site are summarized on Figure 3.7(B)-11A for ease of review. The foundations of the standard plant st ructures and system s are designed for the subsurface conditions that result in the most conser vative foundation thickness and reinforcing steel. The soil and rock parameters used for de sign are given in the Site Addendum. Their der ivation from field and laboratory tests is discussed.2.5.4.10.1Bearing CapacityThe methods and results of the determination of static and dynamic bearing capacity are presented in Section 2.5.4 of the Site Addendum. The mi nimum factor of safety against bearing capacity failure is 3 for static loading and 2 for dynami c loading. Computed safety factors exc eed these values.StructureApplied StaticLoad(psf)Reactor building7,500Auxiliary building7,900 Fuel building10,600 Control building7,900 Diesel generators building5,300 Refueling water storage tank3,700
Emergency fuel oil storage tanks (Buried)4,400 CALLAWAY - SP2.5-3Rev. OL-13 5/032.5.4.10.2SettlementThe methods and results of the determination of settlement for major plant structures are presented in Section 2.5.4 of each Site Addendum.2.5.4.10.3Lateral Earth Pressures
Materials available at the si te location are used for backf ill around the st ructures, as described in the Site Addendum. Compaction criteria are established for the site to result in sound, homogeneous backfills. The parameters used to develop the pressures for each static at-rest condition are given in Section 2.5.4 of the Site Addendum. The dynamic lateral earth pressures are computed based on the theory developed by Mononabe-Okabe as si mplified by Seed and Whitman (Ref. 1).
The subsurface walls for the seismic Category I standard pl ant structures are designed as rigid, restrained walls to resist static at-rest and dynamic pressures. The lateral earth pressures used in the design of these walls are based on the maximum pressures developed at any site. The equations developed for each site, as shown in Figure 2.5-7 , are used in conjunction with the respective site dependent soil parameters and the enveloping earthquake load s to compute the lateral pressu res at the top and bottom of the subsurface walls at each site. The maximum earth pressures thus computed are taken as the enveloping pre ssures and are used in design.
In addition, a minimum surcharge of 250 pounds per square foot is assumed to act over the backfill surface, and the resulting pressures on the subsurface walls are in cluded in the design loads. Similarly, the surcharge load s of foundations located near the subsurface walls are included in the desi gn of the walls.2.
5.7REFERENCES
1.Seed, H. B., and Whitman, R. V., "Design of Earth Retaining Structures for Dynamic Loads," Proceedings of the Specialty Conference on Lateral Stresses in the Ground and Design of Earth-Retaining Structures, Cornell University, Soil Mechanics and Foundation Division, ASCE, June 1970, pp. 103-147.