ML19312A206

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Chapter 2 of S&W SWESSAR-P1, Site Characteristics.
ML19312A206
Person / Time
Site: 05000495
Issue date: 11/29/1978
From:
NEW YORK STATE ELECTRIC & GAS CORP., STONE & WEBSTER, INC.
To:
References
NUDOCS 7909050281
Download: ML19312A206 (49)
v • d • e


Text

SWESSAR-P1 CHAPTER 2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Pace 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAIHY 2.1-1 2.1.1 Site location 2.1-1 2.1.2 Site Description 2.1-1 2.1.3 Population and Population Distribution 2.1-1 2.1.4 Use of Adjacent Lands and Waters 2.1-2 Reference'for Section 2.' 2.1-2 2.2 NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND 2.2-1 MII.ITARY FACILITIES 2.3 METEOROLOGY 2.3-1 2.3.1 Regional Climatology 2.3-1 2.3.2 Local Meteorology 2.3-2 2.3.3 Onsite Meteorological Measurements Program 2.3-2 7 2.3.4 Short Term (Accident) Diffusion Estimates 2.3-2 2.3.5 Iong Term (Routine) Diffusion Estimates 2.3-3 References for Section 2.3 2.3-4 2.4 HYDROIDGIC ENGINEERING 2.4-1 2 .4 .1 Hydrologic Deseription 2.4-1 2.4.2 Floods 2.4-1 2.4.3 Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) On Streams 2.4-2 and Rivers 2.4.4 Potential Dam Failures (Seismically Induced) 2.4-2 2.4.5 Probable Maximum Surge and Seiche Flooding 2.4-2 2.4.6 Probable Maximum Tsunami Flooding 2.4-2 2.4.7 Ice Flooding 2.4-2 2-i Amendment 7 2/28 /75

~

n (:, \ LLI

SNESSAR-P1 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT)

Section Pace 2.4.8 Cooling Water Canals and Reservoirs 2.4-2 2.4.9 Channel Diversions 2.4-2 2.4.10 Flooding Protection Requirements 2.4-2 2.4.11 Low Water Considerations 2.4-3 2.4.12 Environmental Acceptance of Effluents 2.4-3 2.4.13 Groundwater 2.4-3 2.4.14 Technical Specifications and Emergency 2.4-3 Operating Requirements 2.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY 2.5-1 251 Basic Geologic and Seismic Information 2.5-1 2.5.2 Vibratory Ground Motion 2,5-2 2.5.3 Surface Faulting 2.5-2 2.5.4 Stability of Subsurface Materials 2.5-3 2.5.5 Slope Stability 2.5-3 Reference for Section 2.5 2.5-3 g 2.6 INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS 2.6-1 0

2-ii Amendment 8 3/28/75 c o . ,i - {a, ms

SWESSAR-P1 LIST OF TABLES Table 2.3.4-1 Identification of Sites from which Short Term (0-2 Hour) AtIdospheric Dispersion Factors (CHI /p)

Were Obtained for Use as Input for Design of the PWR Standard Plant 2.3.4-2 1/'entification of Sites from which LPZ Atmospheric Dispersion Factors (CHI /Q) Were Obtained for Use 7 as Input for Design of the Reference Plant 2.3.4-3 A Set of Limiting LPZ Outer Boundary Atmospheric Dispersion Factors 2.3.5-1 Identification and Classification of Sites from Which Annual Average Dispersion Factors (CHI /Q) Were Obtained and Used as Input for Design of the PWR Standard Plant 2-iii Amendment 7 66{ [_ ] j 2/28/75

SWESSAR-P1 LIST OF FIGURES O

Figure 2.1-1 Average Population Density in Annular Areas Around River Sites Year 2000 2.1-2 Average Population Density in Annular Areas Around Lake Sites (Land Only) Year 2000 2.1-3 Average Population Density in Annular Areas Around Seashore Sites (Land Only) Year 2000 2.3.4-1 Ground Level Accident Meteorology Dispersion vs Distance (CHI /Q - Worst 5% 0-2 Hr Data) 2.3.4-2 Ground Level Accident Meteorology Dispersion vs Distance, 0-8 Hr, Sheet 1 I 2.3.4-2 Ground Level Accident Meteorology Dispers.on a vs Distance, 8-24 Hr, Sheet 2 2.3.4-2 Cround Level Accident Meteorology Dispersion vs Distance, 1-4 Days, Sheet 3 2.3.4-2 Ground Level Accident Meteorology Dispersion vs Distance, 4-30 Days, Sheet 4 2.3.5-1 Maximum Annual Average CHI /Q Values for Each of 29 River Sites 2.3.5-2 Annual Mean and 95 Percentile CHI /Q Values for 29 River Sites, Determined from Maximum Annual Average CHI /Q Values from Each of the 29 Sites 2.3.5-3 Maximum Annual Average CHI /Q Value for Each of Seven Seashore Sites 2.3.5-4 Annual Fean and 95 Percentile CHI /O Values for Seven Seashore Sites, Determined from Maximum Annual Average CHI /Q Values for Each of the Seven Sites 2.3.5-5 Maximum Annual Average CHI /Q Values for Each of Six Lakeshore Sites 2.3.5-6 Annual Mean and 95 Percentile CHI /Q Value for Six Lakeshore Sites, Determined from Maximum Annual Average CHI /Q Values for Each of the Six Sites 2.3.5-7 FMximum Annual Average CHI /Q Values for Each of 42 Nuclear Sites ii. nO 0 0 ', _;L 2-iv Amendment 7 2/28/75

SWESSAR-P1 LIST OF FIGURES 2.3.5-8 Annual Mean and 95 Percentile Clil/Q Values for 42 Nuclear Sites, Determined f rom Maximum Annual Averace CHI /Q Values for Each of the 42 Nuclear Sites 2-v Amendment 7 2/28/75 bOl JJ

CHAPTER 2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS LIST OF EFFECTIVE PAGES Page, Table (T) , Amendment Page, Table (T) , Amendment or Figure ( F ) ___ No. or Figure (F) No.

2-a 25 2-i 7 2-ii 8 2-iii thru v 7 2.1-1/2 5 F2.1-1 Orig F2.1-2 Orig F2.1-3 Orig 2.2-1 Orig 2.3-1/2 7 2.3-3 24 2.3-4,5 18 T2.3.4-1 5 T2.3.4-2 7 T2.3.4-3 13 T2.3.5-1 Orig F2.3.4-1 7 F2.3.4-2 7 (4 Sheets)

F2.3.5-1 Orig F2.3.5-2 Orig F2.3.5-3 Orig F2.3.5-4 Orig F2.3.5-5 Orig F2.3.5-6 Orig F2.3.5-7 Orig F2.3.5-8 Orig 2.4-1 thru 3 25 2.5-1 thru 2.5-3 6 2.6-1/2 18

,,G h hi I -EU 2-a Amendment 25 4/30/76

4

. 2.1 k ~.

[

E.,

\ .

661 21'r

SWESSAR-P1 CHAPTER 2 SITE CHARACTERISTICS Presented in this chapter are those site-related criteria used in designing the PWR St4ndard Plant to ensure that as low as practicable offsite radiation exposure design objectives are met.

The site-related criteria selected are sufficiently conservative to include a large number of potential sites. Information on specific site characteristics required by Regulatory Guide 1.70,

" Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants," as amended will be provided in the Utility-Applicant's SAR when application for a construction permit is made for a specific site.

2.1 GEOGEAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY 2.1.1 Site Location The PWR Standard Plant is designed for , land site within the United States adjacent to a source of cool?.ng water (or cooling tower system makeup) such as a river, lake, or ocean.

2.1.2 Site Description A description of the specific site will be included in the Utility-Applicantes SAR for each individual site. However, some site-related features have been assumed in order to proceed with design of the PWR Standard Plant.

In relation ' o annual releases of small amounts of radioactivity, a site envelope approach has been adoped in regard to aerodynamic dispersion of gaseous effluents and representative minimal dilution factors have been employed in regard to the liquid effluent releases.

Relative to postulated accident analyses, Regulatory Guide 1.4 has been us ed to evaluate doses in relation to applicable portions of 10CFR100 and appropriate regulatory guides and general design criteria. As the exclusion boundary and low population zone distances are site-specific values, no attempt has been made to report dosa levels for specific distances.

Rather, the approach adopted is to report doses as a function of distance to allow interpretation of these data for a range of potential sites.

The postulated accidents have also been analyzed independent of specific site meteorological data to determine the limiting 5 meteorological conditions for the PWR Standard Plant.

2.1.3 Population and Population Distribution Population data are site-related and will be presented in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.1-1 Amendment 5 12/2/74 bbl 2)b

SWESSAR-P1 However, in order to make population dose estimates for the FWR Scandard Plant (Sections 11.2.9 and 11.3.9), certain population listributions are assumed. The population distributions used are for river sites, late sites, and seashore sites for the year 2,000 as shown on Fig. 2.1-1, 2.1-2, and 2.1-3 taken from Reference 1.

2.1.4 Use of Adiacent Lands and Waters This information is site related and will be presented in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

Reference for Section 2.1

1. U.S. A.E.C. Final Environmental Statement Concerning Proposed Rulemaking Action: Numerical Guides for Design Objectives and LCO 's to Meet the Criterion "ALAP" for radioactive materials in light water cooled nuclear power reactor effluents. WASH 1258, July 1973.

O O

2.1-2 Amendment 5 12/2/74 1 7 i UO! ._ J O

I I I I I I I I I I ao p 800 j .! 226 21 333

_ 34 361 N_ 43 4j$

3 _- -

U Z 600 -

559 a

c. 469 s

b ~

393 398

$ 400 -

D _

o j 315 Z 280 O

p 255 240 230

, 225 D 200 -

O a.

t 4

I i l l I l l I I I O

O 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 83 90 100 110 0 - DISTANCE FRO'M STATION (MILES)

FIG. 2.1 -1 AVERAGE POPULATION DENSITY IN ANNUL AR AREAS AROUND RIVER SITES YEAR 2000 PWR STANDARD PLANT SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

@ SWESSAR - P1

<g) , , -

OUt L5l

1400 g l l l l l l l

~

1200 1165 1142 E '1000 --

E

$ 910 2 -

O

$ $ 826

~

. 800 E

E 8

~

$ 600 -

570 k

\AD p O 12 904 400 i 400 - 23 826 -

( 34 1004 45 586 315 270 245 225 200 -

1 1 I I I I I I I I O 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 D- DISTANCE FROM STATION (MILES)

FIG. 2.1 -2 AVERAGE POPULATION DENSITY IN ANNULAR AREAS AROUND L AKE SITES (L AND ONLY) YE AR 2000 PWR STANDARD PL ANT SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

@ SWESS AR - P1 ,73 (1 b .l CJO

1400 l l l l l l l 1 I i 1296 1200 -

1144 N 1000 -

E d "

h 870 9

800 -

>- 750 760 b

u Z

O_ 600 -

U

_J g 490 o

Q.

I 4 400 -l 355 12 290 392 2-3 416 255 3-4 564 225 203 4-5 204 -

/

I I I I I I 0 I I I I O 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 D-DlSTANCE FROM STATION (MILES)

FIG. 2. I - 3 AVERAGE POPUL ATION DENSITY IN ANNULAR AREAS AROUND SEASHORE SITES (LAND ONLY) YEAR 2000 PWR STANDARD PL ANT SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT SWESS AR - P 1 -

~G GU\ L J

O y.

?-

C22 1

L v  :

a

.]

c si 661 240

SWESSAR-P1 2.2 NEARBY INDUSTRIAL, TRANSPORTATION, AND MILITARY FACILITIES Evaluation of the capability of the plant to withstand effects of potential accidents resulting from operation of industrial or military installations near the specific site will be covered in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

c. .-

2.2-1 6 b '\

(

i I

2.3

(.

'\

5 Pee den

/

b6\ "

l '

SWESSAR-P1 2.3 METEOROLOGY 2.3.1 Regional Climatology The PWR Reference Plant is decigned to operate in meteorological f7 extremes without imposing a hazard to the public.

Meteorolcgical envelope criteria for saf ety related structures, systems, and components include:

1. Ice - ice accumulation on roofs of safety related structures is not a governing design condition (2). The roofs of these structures do not have parapets and are sloped to prevent ponding of water. If the rtof drain gystem is blocked with ice and the site probable maximum (winter) rainfall occurs, water will run of f the edge of the roof. The yard surface drainage (site grading) directs the water away from safety related structures.

The design of the yard surface drainage system assumes that the storm sewer system is inoperative: hence, ice blockage of the sewer system would not flood the station area.

2. Snow - the design basis for snow accumulation is 90 percent of the 100 year recurrence total yearly snow load for the contiguous United States. As represented by snow load on the ground, this is 80 lb/ft2 and includes consideration for snow pack and snow melt.

Converting to snow load on flat roofs, the design snow load for safety related structures is 65 lb/ft2.(2)(3)(*) The maximum rainfall that can be retained by a snow accumulation on the roofs of safety related structures is determined solely by the physical properties of snow, which can retain up to 5 percent by we_igh_t of liquid water (63 The excess water flows off the roof, since there are no parapets. Considering the  ;

condition of rainfall onto a snow pack (equivalent to 90 percent of the 100 year recurrence snow load converted for a flat roof) , an additional 5 lb/ft2 is added to the design snow load of 65 lb/ft2 to account for absorption of rain water. The total design load due to snow and absorption of rein water is therefore 70 lb/ft2 Safety related equipment, such as the air vent for the diesel fuel oil tanks, is designed for the site probable maximum snow depth. This snow depth will be described in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

3. Tornadoes, Hurricanes, and High Winds - the tornado specified in Section 3.3.2 induces the most severe wind conditions throughout the entire United States. The tornado design parameters are given in Section 3.3.2 and conforms to Regulatory Guide 1.76, Region 1.

2.3-1 Amendment 7

,., ,f- 2/28/75 6bI LH)

SWESSAR-P1

4. Maximum Temperature - the dry bulb temperature of 100 F, based on ASHRAE 1 percent design (s), is the d( sign basis maximum temperature.
5. Minimum Temperature - the dry bulb temperature of -40 F, based on ASHRAE 99 percent design (5), is the design basis minimum temperature.

Site specific criteria for meteorological considerations of safety related structures, systems, and components include:

1. huinfall - Safety related structures do not have parapets and are sloped to pre"ent ponding and buildup of water allowing water that exceeds the capacity of the roof drain system to flow over the edge; therefore, rainf all is not a design load in structure design. Yard grade and surface drainage are sloped away from safety related structures preventing temporary ponding of water in the vicinity of these structures. The yard surface drainage system and storm sewer system designs are site specific. These systems will be sized for the site design basis rainfall and runoff which will be presented in the Utility-Applicant 's SAR.
2. high Air Pollution Potential -

The frequency of occurrence of high air pollution potential is site specific and will be discussed in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

3. helative Humidity - Relative humidity affects only site related structures and systems and will be discussed in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.3.2 Incal Meteorology A program of onsite data collection, supplemented by National Weather Service (NOAA) summaries from locations near a specific site, will be conducted. Information from the onsite program will be used to confirm that the design basis accident analysis and annual average CHI /Q values are adequate relative to exclusion radius and low population zone requirements.

2.3.3 Onsite Meteoroloaical Measurements Program The material described in this section is dependent on site conditions and will be provided in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.3.4 Short Term (Accident) Diffusion Estimates The meteorological tactors used for the basic design of the Reference Plant, in terms of accidental releases of activity, are 7 the estimates outlined in Regulatory Guide 1.4, " Assumptions Used O

2.3-2 Amendment 7 2/28/75

..  ?

66\ nL O [E

SNESSAR-P1 for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Loss of Coolant Accident for Pressurized Water Reactors."

The limiting exclusion area boundary short term (0-2 hr) atmospheric dispersion factor, CHI /Q, is approximately 4.5 x 10-* sec/m3 For sites with an exclusion boundary CHI /Q less than or equal to this value, the 0-2 hr doses at the exclusion area boundary will be less than the 150 Rem and 20 Rem thyroid and whole body doses, respectively, as discussed in Regulatory Guide 1.4 (Section 3A.1-1.4) .

Fig. 2.3.4-1 presents the short term exclusion boundary meteorological dispersion factors as a function of distance for each of the 36 nuclear units on a total of 27 sites listed in Table 2.3.4-1.

A set of limiting low population zones (LPZ) outer boundary CHI /Qs for the Option A design of the Reference Plant is given in Table 2.3.4-3. For sites with an LPZ CHI /Q for each time interval less than or equal to the corresponding CHI /Q given in Table 2.3.4-2, the 30 day doses at the LPZ will be less than the 150 Rem and 20 Rem thyroid and whole body doses, respectively, as discussed in Regulatory Guide 1.4 (Section 3A.1-1.4) .

The lower power level for RESAR-3S results in a slight increase in the limiting CHI /Qs.

These are not the only sets of CHI /Q values that satisfy the dose criteria required by Regulatory Guide 1.4. An increase in the CHI /Q value for one or more time intervals along with a compensating decrease for at least one of the remaining intervals could also meet the dose criteria in Regulatory Guide 1.4. Cases such as this are site-related and will be evaluated in the Utility-Applicantes SAR (see Section 2.3.5) .

Fig. 2.3.4-2 presents the LPZ meteorological dispersion f actors as a function of distance for the 0-8 hr, 8-24 hr, .-4 day , and 4-30 day time periods, based on the safety evaluation report for each of the units listed in Table 2.3.4-2. Due to the limited number of data points, Fig. 2.3.4-1 and 2.3.4-2 are included for illustrative purposes only.

This accident will be addressed in the Utility-Applicant's SAR relative to the Ibniting value of CHI /Q.

Sections A2.3.4 and B2.3.4 are provided in Appendixes A and B to discuss the unique short term diffusion estimate modifications when an enclosure building is provided.

2.3.5 Long Term (Routine) Diffusion Estimates An evaluation has been made of the potential range of local long term diffusion estimates. 24 2.3-3 ,- Amendment 24

,2 cr i hb 4/23/76

SWESSAR-P1 Annual average relative dispersion factors (CHI /Q) , determined from local meteorological observations an d assumed ground level releases, were obtained and evaluated for each of 42 nuclear site locations to determine Reference Plant design characteristics for routine emissions. The site locations, identified according to plant name and classified as " River," " Seashore," and "Lakeshore," are listed in Table 2.3.5-1.

For each of the sites listed in Table 2.3.5-1, annual average CHI /Q values for the site boundary distances and distances ranging from 0.5 to 50 miles were identified for each of sixteen 22.5 degree sectors. These data for each site were then analyzed to identify the downwind direction for which the highest CHI /Q value occurred at a distance of 0.5 mile. CHI /Q values for this direction at downwind distances of 0.5 mile and greater were then used for subsequent analyses. These resulting maximum CHI /Q values for each site were then classified by the following types of sites: River, Seashore, Lakeshore, and All, and computations were made to identify mean and 95 percentile values (values equivalent to 12 standard deviations from the mean) for each class. Maximum CHI /Q values for each site, by site class, and the mean and 95 percentile CHI /Q values for each site class (River, Seashore, Lakeshore, and All) are provided in Fig. 2. 3. 5-1 throtrJh 2.3.5-8.

Fig. 2.3.5-1 depicts the CHI /Q values as a function ';f distance for each of the 29 River Sites considered. Additiona' data are also shown for minimum site boundary locations for some of the sites. These data points are plotted with the letter S. The actual data point is at the lower starting point in the formation of the letter.

Fig. 2.3.5-2 pre sents , for the 29 sites shown in Fig. 2.3.5-1, the mean CHI /Q values and the f2 sigma spread about the means based on the assumption of a normal distribution.

Fig. 2.3.5-3 and 2.3.5-4 present data for the 7 Seashore Sites in a manner similar to that described above for the River Sites.

Shnilarly. Fig. 2.3.5-5 and 2.3.5-6 present data for 6 Lakeshore Sites.

It is evident from the CHI /Q values presented in the above figures that meteorological dispersion at the Lakeshore and Seashore Sites is better than that at River Sites. Fig. 2.3.5-7 and 2.3.5-8 depict the combined data from all 42 sites considered. ihe 95 percentile spread indicates that a site falling within this envelope will have CHI /Q values within approximately a factor of 2 of the mean values.

Relative to annual average dispersion meteorology, design characteristics for the Reference Plant are based on the upper 95 percentile values shown in Fig. 2.3.5-8. Further details 2.3-4 Amendment 18 10/30/75 I

bO 246

SWESSAR-P1 describing use of these relative dispersion factors for the Reference Plant design are provided in Chapter 11.

References for Section 2.3:

1. Ludlum, D .M . , " Weather Record Book, United States and Canada," heatherwise, 1971.
2. Thom, H.C.S., " Design Snow Loads for the Contiguous United States," Office of Climatology, U.S. Weather Bureau, 1969.
3. Housing Home Finance Agency, " Snow Load Studies," Housing Research Paper 19, Washington, 1952.
4. Building Code Requirements for Minimum Design Loads in Buildings and Other Structures , American National Standards Institute, 1972.
5. American Society of Heating, Refrigerating, and Air-Conditioning Engineers, Handbook of Fundamentals, 1972.

QC) Lir_sley and Franzini, " Water Resources Engineering," 1972.

2.3-5 Amendment 18 10/30/75 66I ,c9, ,/

SWESSAR-P1 TABLE 2.3.4-1 IDENTIFICATION OF SITES FROM WHICH SHORT TERM (0-2 HOUR)

A'INOSPHERIC DISPERSION FACTORS (CHI /Q) WERE OBTAINED FOR USE AS INPUT FOR DESIGN OF THE PWR STANDARD PLANT Arkansas 1 Douane Arnold Salem 1 Beaver Valley 1 Parley Salem 2 Beaver Valley 2 Grand Gulf 1 Shearon Harris 5

Bellefonte Grand Gulf 2 Summer Braidwood 1 Hatch 1 Sununit 1 Braidwood 2 Indian Point 1 Summit 2 Brown's Ferry Indian Point 2 Three Mile Island Brunswick 1 &2 Indian Point 3 Trojan Catawba 1& 2 New Hope Creek Vogtle Clinton Oconee WPPSS 1 Cooper Quad Cities Douglas Point Rancho Seco 1 of 1 Amendment 5 12/2/74

/s (. i 2' 5

SWESSAR-P1 TABLE 2.3.4-2 IDENTIFICATION OF SITES FROM WHICH 9 LPZ A'IT40 SPHERIC DISPERSION FACTORS (CHI /Q) WERE OBTAINED FOR USE AS 7 INPUT FOR DESIGN OF THE REFERENCE PLAtTr.

River Bend 1 Hatch 2 Grand Gulf 1 and 2 Duane Arnold 1 Catawba 1 and 2 Browns Ferry 1 Bellefonte 1 and 2 Farley 1 Arkansas 1 Beaver Valley 2 Rancho Stro 1 l

@ 1 of 1 Amendment 7 m e, 2/28/75 L. O I

\

SWESSAR-P1 TABLE 2.3.4-3 A SET OF LIMITING LPZ OUTER BOUNDARY ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION FACTORS Time Interval CHI /O (sec/m 5) 0-8 hr 1.3x10-*

8-24 hr 3.5x10-5 33 1-4 days 1.1x10-5 4-30 days 2.4x10-6 1 of 1 Amendment 13 6/30/75

/(1 250

SNESSAR-P1 TABLE 2.3.5-1 IDENTIFICATION AND CLASSIFICATION OF SITES FROM WHICH ANNUAL AVERAGE DISPERSION FACTORS (CHI /Q) WERE OBTAINED AND USED AS INPUT FOR DESIGN OF THE PWR STANDARD PLANT.

River Sites Arkansas 1 Douglas Point Rancho Seco*

Beaver Valley Duane Arnold River Bend 1,2 Farley Salem 1,2 Bellefonte 1 Grand Gulf Shearon Harris Braidwood 1,2 Hatch 1 Summer Browns Ferry Indian Point 2,3 Summit 1,2 Brunswick 1,2 New Hope Creek Three Mile Island Catawba 1,2 North Anna 1,2 Trojan Clinton Oconee Vogtle Cooper Quad Cities WPPSS 1 Seashore Sites Crystal River San Onofre Maine Yankee Seabrook Millstone 3 Shoreham St. Lucie Lakeshore Sites Calvert Cliffs ** Nine Mile Point 2 D.C. Cook Perry 1 Ginna Zion

  • Treated as a river site.
    • Treated as a lakeshore site.

1 of 1

,,-4 mr1 O li l uJi

10

O O

a

- R EG. GUIDE I.4 DATA (0-8 HR.)

-3 10 n

~

n~

O O O O O g -

O o 0

[

O C

b O REG. GUIDE I.4 DATA (0- 8 HR.) O WITH BUILDING WAKE FACTOR O O 0 9 O

10" I I I I I i1 I \ t i  ! I if 3 4 10

  • 10 10 DISTANCE (METERS)

CHl/Q VALUE FOR SITES LISTED IN TABLE 2.3. 4 -I DESIGN ATED BY O FIG.2. 3. 4-1 GROUND LEVEL ACCIDENT METEOROLOGY DISPERSION vs DISTANCE (CHI /Q -WORST 5% 0-2 HR D ATA )

PWR STANDARD PLANT op 9 SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT SWESS AR - PI - '-

{j LJ 1

AMENDMENT 7 2/28/ '5

10

@ REG GUIDE 14 DATA (0-8 HR)

REG GUIDE L4 DATA (0- 8 HR }- O WITH BUILDING W AKE EFFECT O O

O O O O

{

d O I 10

j - c 2

O -

_ O O

5 , , , , , , , , , , g f , , y 3

10' 10 10" DISTANCE (METERS)

CHl/Q VALUE FOR SITES LISTED IN TABLE 2. 3.4-2 DESIGN ATED BY O FIG. 2. 3.4 -2 (SHEET 1 OF 4 )

GROUND LEVEL ACCIDENT METEOROLOGY DISPERSION VS DISTANCE O-8 HR PWR STANDARD PLANT SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

~

SWESSAR-PI AMENOMENT 7 2 / 28 / 75

( h i, R L (U

lO _

O O

10 _

~

O REG. GUlDE 1.4 DATA (8-24 HR) -

{

i _

C R

I o ._

6

-e O m o v

-Q O

,o-5 i i i  ! i eii i 1 ii IO igs 'p DISTANCE (METERS)

FIG. 2.3.4-2 (SHEET 2 OF 4)

CHl/O VALUE FOR SITES GROUND LEVEL ACCIDENT METEOROLOGY USTED IN TABLE 2. 3 4-2 DISPERSION VS DISTANCE 8 - 24 HR DESIGNATED BY O PWR STANDARD PLANT SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 9 SWESSAR - P l

{IgsweNDMENT7 2/28/75

10'*

O O

REG GUIDE I 4 DATA 5 io ' ~

5x -

U -

O O

O ig

-s i i i i i i i i i i i i i i 2 3 10 10 10*

DISTANCE (METERS)

CHl/G VALUE FOR SITES LISTED IN TABLE 2 3 4-2 DESIGNATED BY O FIG. 2.3.4-2 (SHEET 3 0F 4)

GROUND LEVEL ACCIDENT METEOROLOGY DISPERSION VS DISTANCE I 4 DAYS PWP STANDARD PLANT

@ SAFETY ANAL.YSIS REPORT SWESSAR-P'

  • ' b '; AMENOMENT T 2/28,'7S 60\ u-

lod -

O O

~5 \

10 O

,/

^

- REG. GUIDE I.4 DATA d

,E l

O O i O o _

O 4

10

~

O I 1 i t i 1 1 1 1 1 I t  ! I f f lQ*I 10 4 IU2 103 DISTANCE (METERS)

FIG. 2. 3. 4-2 (SHEET 4 OF 4) cai/O VALUE FOR SITES LISTED IN TABLE 2. 3 4- 2 DISPERSION VS DISTANCE 4-30 DAYS DESIGNATED BY O PWR STANDARD PLANT SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

@. SWESSAR - P I AMENOMENT 7 2 /28/ 75

.. A f, p, LJ

'o 5

29 RIVER SITES '

s CHl/0 VS. DISTANCE 5 h,

- d\ 4 g

3 ON\

e ; __ w _

c dikNOx NN A% . 'K\  !

E ML

g QN,(A k3 m  %%NCA 2 Y@k 42h he kf5b, N "41'N " 's XYxdEENw wxx xxxswwwx

\MNNNNM%\

%%9$hW hhMD

,9 S

~

Ot khi 4

?

o 10-' 2 3 4 5 678910 2 3 4 5 678910' 2 3 4 56789 D I ST ANCE ( MILES )

FIG. 2.3. 5-1 MAXIMUM ANNUAL AVERAGE CHl/Q VALUES FOR EACH OF 29 RIVER SITES PWR STANDARD PLANT SAFETY AN ALYSIS REPORT

@ SWESS AR- P I 66i 757

'o 29 RIVER SITES CHl/0 VS. DISTANCE AVERAGE AND 2 SIGka SPREAD X\

'o

~

s i Jh

  • t

\ '% \

\ \\

29

\x x

\

~. .

2 N

N 'n ,,

\

% \

o N  % x N \. \' \

~

\,_ N \

s, \.

\s

\

Io-'o N s s \ a,

's x s N 'N N

\ N. s

\x \

\ \

s

'o l 10- 2 3 4 5 678910 2 3 4 5678910' 2 3 4 56789 DIST ANCE ( MILES )

FIG. 2. 3.5 - 2 ANNUAL ME AN AND 95 PERCENTILE CHI /O VALUES FOR 29 RIVER SITES, DETERMINED FROM MAXIMUM ANNUAL AVERAGE CHI /O VALUES FOR E ACH OF

@ THE 29 RIVER SITES I j PWR STANDARD PLANT , '? g' SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT y h. .i\ '

SWESSAR-Pl

'o I

l 7 SEASHORE SITES CHl/0 VS. DISTANCE e

'o l

b -

5 N

w s iE O'$\\

5h kkNh\

o N

ss ' N'n

"\

xxm s E N  %% K o "

N M% \

b -

\ N %s \-

u m ,

.\x k'\ ww

\

N s N'4 \ \

N- , Y\ 3 1

's ' v"

._ t

'\

SE N

'o 10 'lO i0 10' DIST ANCE ( MILES )

FIG. 2.3. 5- 3 MAXIMUM ANNUAL AVERAGE C Hl/Q VALUES FOR EACH OF SEVEN SEASHORE SITES PWR STANDARD PL ANT ,, (

SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT L d; SWESSAR-P1

[}

'o

~

l I

T SEASHORE SITES CHl/0 VS. DISTANCE _ _

AVERAGE Ar0 2 SIGMA $PREAD l~

'x \

\ \

s N N w \

ro

.- N Nf\ '

. N T ,,

R 'x 'x 2, o --

x g s E \ \ \

h

~

a

\ \ ,

x 'N s so o- s- N 2 N \

x s A N

'\

\ \

\ \

b \ \ >

s _

'o 10 !0~' 10 10' D IST ANCE ( MILES )

FIG. 2. 3.5 -4 ANNUAL MEAN AND 95 PERCENTILE CHI /O VALUES FOR SEVEN SEASHORE SITES, DETERMINED FROM MAXIMUM ANNUAL AVERAGE CHI /Q VALUES FOR E ACH OF

@ THE SEVEN SE ASHORE SITES PWR STANDARD PLANT SAFETY AN ALYSIS REPORT SWESSAR-Pl e m{

L _U' O (O ;i

'o

- e 6 LAKESHORE SITES CHl/0 VS. DISTANCE es

_ \

h _.

\

fs Ns )

\h \

% s's \

Y \\\

\ '

)

_a ee N

s 2

\ N b x, N _ __

2 N

'xN \'s'x'x" "s

x A \ Xca

$ \ 4\<\ r en \'it \\\\

s 's kN \ h O 5 \ \'s\

\

]O \ \ \ \

x 'x 'x',\

s n x x-xx

\ \\h \ %

N \\ \Nc%

\\\\\N N \\% 'a N h N

3 ( '

\

'o 10~' 10-' 10 10' DIST ANCE ( MILES )

FI G. 2.3. 5-5 MAXIMUM ANNUAL AVERAGE CHI /OVALUES FOR E ACH OF SIX LAKESHORE SITES PWR. STANDARD PLANT SAFETY ANALYSIS PEPORT SWESSAR- P l

./- n, 7-00l 1ol

'O 6 LAKESHORE StTES CHl/0 VS, DISTANCE avreast ano a sisua statao ]

a N

7 0 \

- \

"x s s .,

\ \

\ \

, i \

\ kk

-?

C3 s

\ s

\\

l N 's s N N. 'o N '

" \ \ \

w \ S. \

m \ '\ \

[ \ \ \

27 \ '

s 5S \

\ ,

's 's N

\

\. 'x

\ '\ N

\ \ ,

\ \  :

N >

9 \

'o 10-' 10 10 10' DISTANCE (MILES)

FIG. 2. 3.5-6 ANNUAL MEAN AND 95 PERCENTILE CHI /O VALUES FOR SIX LAKESHORE SITES, DETERMINED FROM MAXIMUM ANNUAL AVERAGE CHI /O VALUES FOR EACH OF

@ THE SIX L AKESHORE SITES PWR STANDARD PLANT SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT < - < / ^,

SWESSAR-Pl []hiI .UL

'o 1

42 SITES CONSIDERED CHl/0 VS. DISTANCE e

'o

- e s

s n a

s g y;& s

,' c -

= h .-

m U,shkt's m

  • 5 Aux

'@3 Vem R \ l, iOYN

a. s s

' NX W9 N

%,'s t '

o . n x x \' (~ h\

\ L h 284 $$6< s s

x s

fddNu swww v.

y zsn N ',

x

'o 10" 10 i0 10' D ISTANCE ( MILES )

FIG. 2.3. 5-7 MAXIMUM ANNUAL AVERAGE CHI /QVALUES FOR EACH OF 42 NUCLEAR SITES PWR STANDARD PLANT SAFETY AN ALYSIS REPORT SWESS AR- P l f( .2

'o

~

I 42 StTES CONSIDERED CHl/0 VS. DISTANCE AVERAGE AND 2 SIGWA SPREAD Jt

- \

N \

u <

X \

s \

\ \ \

\ \h

-? s

-e s

x

>\

x x

'2 .

s N 's '

s N

% '\ \

w \ \ \

m \ '\ .

N

X N 4

2- o

\

\

N g

, s s x x

\ Jh

< x x

\ '

\ h

\ \ 'a N \ ,

- Ns N S \

'o 10 10-' 10 10' DISTANCE ( MILES )

FIG. 2.3. 5- 8 ANNUAL MEAN AND 95 PERCENTILE CHI /Q VALUES FOR 42 NUCLEAR SITES, DETERMINED FROM MAXIMUM ANNUAL AVERAGE CHI /O VALUES FOR EACH OF THE 42 NUCLEAR SITES PWR STANDARD Pl. ANT SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT SWESSAR- P l g4j qr3

4 1

1 9

'?

2A k y u-imme

+

u--

O("

/

bbl cu3

SWESSAR-P1 2.4 HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERING

@ The following subsections provide information on hydrologically related design bases, operating procedures, and components important to safety which can be specified without knowledge of the specific hydrologic characteristics of the site. Additional site-related information and analysis will be provided in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.4.1 Hydrologic Description Yard grade (elevation 0 8-O" on Fig. 1. 2-1 ) for safety related structures is set at an elevation above the water level that can be reached by the probable maximum event or that can be adequately protected by means of dikes and dams from their effect for the following phenomena:

1. Runoff from floods
2. Surges or seiches, including wave runup or overtopping of protective structures
3. Tsunamis
4. Artificial floods due to dam failure or landslides The yard grading and drainage systems are designed to carry surf ace runoff from the site probable maximum precipitation away from the site without flooding safety related structures or equipment. See Section 2.3.1 for a discussion of the considerations of the probable maximum precipitation (PMP) .

Components of systems required for safe shutdown of the station are completely protected to above maximum flood levels.

This plant is sited adjacent vo, or conveniently close to, a natural water body, with capacity to provide the safety related nceds of the plant makeup water syetems at all times, including periods of low flow (reference Section 9.2.3.6) .

The following systems (not all of which are safety related) receive makeup water from site related sources:

Demineralized Water Makeup System (Section 9.2.3)

Fire Protection System (Section 9.5.1)

Circulating Water System (Section 10.4.5)

Turbine Plant Service Water System (Section 10.4.11) 25 Ultimate Heat Sink (Section 9.2.5) , which supplies the Reactor Plant Service Water System (Section 9.2.1) .

The rates of water addition to these systems are dependent on the e,uality and volume of the respective water cources, the water conservation requirements of the Utility-Applicant, the type of 2.4-1 Amendment 25 66j {hy 4/30/76

SWESSAR-P1 3 system provided by the Utility-Applicant, and the leakage and evaporative losses of the equipment being served.

2.4.2 Floods The design flood is based on the highest calculated water level elevations, including wave runup, resulting fro.: analysis of the critical combinations of dif ferent hydrometeoro:ogical phenomena.

In addition to floods produced by severe hydrometeorological conditions, the most severe seismically induced floods reasonably possible will also be considered. The types and combinations of hypothetical events to be considered will follow Regulatory Guide 1.59, " Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants,"

issued August 1973, and Regulatory Guide 1.70.17, "Information for Safety Analysis F.eports-Hydrologic Engineering," issued January 1975.

2.4.3 Probable Maximum Flood (PMP) On Streams and Rivers Probable maximum flood levels referred to in Section 2.4.1 will be determined in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.59, " Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants."

2.4.4 Potential Dam Failures (Seismically Induced)

Potential dam failures are site-specific and will be evaluated in the Utility- Applicant's SAR. The worst condition will be assumed as the combination of events specified in Section 2.4.4 of Regulatory Guide 1.70 " Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants."

2.4.5 Probable Maximum Surge and Seiche Flooding Determination of yard grade to provide protection from surge and seiche flooding will be based upon the most severe combination of meteorological parameters considered reasonably possible in the region. For sites on the East and Gulf Coasts, probable maximum hydrometeorological parameters used will be those for the probable maximum hurricane, as reported by the U.S. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration in their unpublished report HUR7-97.

2.4.6 Probable Maximum Tsunami Flooding Ya rd grade is set at an elevation which is either above the water level that can be reached by the probable maximum tsunami or that can be adequately protected from its effects.

2.4.7 Ice Flooding This subject is site-specific and will be covered in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2 . 4 -2 Amendment 25 4/30/76 bbi 2b7

SWESSAR-P1 2.4.8 Cooling Water Canals and Reservoirs This subject is site-specific and will be covered in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.4.9 Channel Diversions This subject is site-specific and will be covered in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.4.10 Flooding Protection Requirements The PWR Reference Plant is designed for a maximum flood level at yard grade elevation. Additional protection is site-related and will be discussed in the Utility-Applicant 's SAR.

2.4.11 Low Water Considerations This subject is site-specific and will be covered in the Utility-Applicant's SAR. These plant systemsthat require makeup water are discussed in Section 2.4.1. 2y 2.4.12 Environmental Acceptance of Ef fluents This subject is site-specific and w131 be covered in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.4.13 Groundwater Safety related structures are provided with protection from natural groundwater. Groundwater level is site-specific and will be covered in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.4.14 Technical Specifications and Emergency Operating Requirements This information is site related and will be presented in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

,, m ! ".

DDk UU 2.4-3 Amendment 25 4/30/76

C

's

' 2.5 N i

\

r, y.,

I !

SWESPAR-P1 2.5 GEOLOGY AND SEISMOLOGY The PWR Reference Plant is designed to accommodate conditions falling within an envelope of design site charac aristics for a large number of potential sites. The site characteristics listed in Section 2.5.2 are the only ones for which a design envelope has been established and tne only ones that are considered in the structural design of building compenants, equipment, and pipina.

The other matters described in Section 2.5 fall into one of two categories. The firs + are those items whose evaluation is necessary to determine the vibritory ground motions or stiffness properties of the foundation . These are the evaluations necessary to determine whether the design envelope has been satisfied. These include most of the regional geologic s tudies ,

site geologic studies, evaluation of properties, and seismicity and seismology. The second category includes such matters as the potential for surface faulting, studies of liquefaction potential, slope stability analyses, and the like. These are items for which the plant structures are not speci fically designed. For example, if it is determined that the soil is 6 potentially liquefiable, the structure is not changed, but the soil is removed or compacted. S imilarly, the plant is not designed to withs tand the possible effects of slope stability failures; instead, the slopes are designed against failure. For these reasons none of the items, in addition to those of Section 2.5.2, will have a direct effect on the structural design of building components, equipment, and piping.

The evaluation of site parameters, in addition to those in Section 2.5.2, which will encompass the largest portion of Section 2.5 of the site evaluation in the Utility-Applicant's saf ety analysis raport, will be done on a site-by-site basis.

Once a specific site has been chosen, the evaluation will be done by a detailed geologic, seismological, and geotechnical investigation and presented in accordance with 10CFR100, Appendix A, Regulatory Guides 1.60, 1.61, 1.70, and 1.70.1 and any other current guides or regulations that may be pro.aulgated in this area. Careful attention will be given to ensure that the results of these investigations do not cause a change in the PWR Reference Plant, as described in SWESSAR-P1.

Where specific envelopes have been developed, they are identified i .1 the following sections:

2.5.1 Basic Geologic and Seismic Information These data are dependent on site conditions and geology and will be developed for each individual site within the U tility-Applicant's SAR. The information will be used to evaluate the suitability of the site for the PWR Reference Plant.

location of structures within the site, planning of construction The l6 o perations , and evaluation of geotechnical construction processes

~

bb} 2b /1 /75

SWESSAR-P1 will be based on this information. The structural design of buildings , other structural components, equipment , and piping will accommodate a broad range of site related parameters.

2.5.2 Vibratory Ground Motion The information required in this section is dependent on site conditions related to geology and seismology and will be presented in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

The information will be collected to establish that:

1. The SSE maximum horizontal ground acceleration is less than or equal to 0.3 g.
2. The SSE horizontal and vertical response spectra are within those described in Ref 1.
3. The OBE maximum horizontal ground acceleration is less 6

than or equal to 0.15 g.

4. The plant does not need to be designed for surface faulting.
5. The shear modulus of the geological material underlying the plant foundations falls within the range of 6,000 to 1,000,000 psi.

The detailed configuration of soil and rock at each site as well as the basic site parameters that relate to seismic analysis such as foundation medium depth, density, water table level, and other parameters that may affect the system seismic response will be presented on a site-by-site basis in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

The safe shutdown earthquake (SSE) and the operating basis earthquake (OBE) will be developed on the basis of the data collected and described under Sections 2.5.1 and 2.5.2.1 through 2.5.2.9 of the Utility-Applicant's SAR. The maximum horizontal 6 ground acceleration for the SSE and the OBE will be less than or L3ual to 0.3 g for the SSE and 0.15 for the OBE. Response spectra for the SSE and OBE will be computed according to the provisions described by Newmark, Blume, and Kapur (Ref 1) .

2.5.3 Surface Faulting 6\ The PWR Reference Plant is not designed for surf ace f aulting and information supporting the validity of this design basis will be presented for each individual site.

3% i 2.5-2 Amendment 6 1/17/75

SWESSAR-P1 2.5.4 Stability of Subsurface Materials The information required in this section is dependent on site conditions and geology and will be provided in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

2.5.5 Slope Stability The information required in this section is dependent on site conditions and geology and will be provided in the Utility-Applicant's SAR.

Reference for Section 2.5

1. Newmark, N.M., Blume, J.A., and Kapur, K.K., " Seismic Response Spectra for Nuclear Power Plants," Journal of the Power Division , ASCE Vol. 00, No. PO2, Proc. Paper 10142, November 1973, pp 287-303.

ti 1 n ' ">

D0i L/L 2.5-3 Amendment 6 1/17/75

4 I

I I

2E k s k:.

r

[:

6

, o77

\ ll

SNESSAn-P1 2.6 INTERFACE REQUIREMENTS

@ The Utility-Applicant should demonstrate that the specific site has Jite parameters within the following envelope:

Snow The.. maximum snow accumulation of 100 year occu::rence:

80.1b/ft2 anow on the ground 65 lb/tt2 snow on flat roofs of safety related structures 70 lb/fta saturated snow pack on flat roofs of safety related structures Tempe ature The dry bulb temperature of:

100 F maximum (based on ASHRAE 1 percent outdoor sumner design temperature)

-40 F minimum (based on ASHRAE 99 percent outdoor winter design temperature) f Atmospheric Dispersion Factor (CHI /0)

The maximum value at the exclusion area bowidary:

4.5 x 10-* sec/m3 The maximum value at the low population zo:1e outer boundary:

Refer to Table 2.3.4-3 (These values are flexible within the limits stated in Section 2.3.4.)

The following relation must hold:

(X/Q), x A 5 1 (X/Q) _ 1 where 18 (X/Q)= X/O for the worst 5 percent meteorology

( X/Q) = X/Q for any wind speed at which 2 exfiltration occurs A = ratio of the iodine release with exfiltration to 2.6-1 '

Amendment 18 uoi "/-d 10/30/75

SWESSAR-P1 the iodine release without exfiltration as given in Fig. 15.1.13-8 18 For maximum CHI /O values when an enclosure building is used, see Sections A2.6 and B2.6 in Appendixes A and B.

Station Yard Grade Set at a level which can be adequate.y protected by means of dikes and dams or which cannot be reached by:

Runoff from floods Surges or seiches, including wave runup or over-topping of protective structures Tsunamis Artificial floods due to dam failure or landslides Seismology SSE 50.3g maximum horizontal ground acceleration OBE 5.15 g maximum horizontal ground acceleration SSE horizontal and vertical response spectra are within the limits of Section 2.5.2.

No surface faulting significant for design (Section 2.5.3)

{r U O ;t a ~< c

._ i J 2.6-2 Amendment 18 10/30/75

3. DESIGN OF STRUCTURES, -__7 COMPONENTS, EQUIPMENT, (,._,

AND SYSTEMS I O ON c_'. .s

~.q O_

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML19312A206&oldid=2497409"