ML20008G341
| ML20008G341 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 06/30/1981 |
| From: | Koester G KANSAS GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| To: | Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| KMLNRC-81-094, KMLNRC-81-94, NUDOCS 8107070335 | |
| Download: ML20008G341 (32) | |
Text
e KANSAS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY THE: ELECTRC COMPANY OLENN L.
NOESTER vrCE FRES4DEas? - souct.g Age June 3 (9
K s
g FN
\\
Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director hj, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation gl U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission JUL 0 619815 I2 Washington, D.C.
20555 En tensAn asswuoss C
MM p
/
KMLNRC 81-094 4
g Re:
Docket Number STN 50-482 W
Reft NRC Letter dated 6/2/81 from RLTedesco, NRC to GLKoester, KG&E
Dear Mr. Denton:
The referenced letter requested additional information in the area of meteorology. Transmitted herewith are responses to questions in the referenced letter. This information will be fonnally incorporated into the Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit No.1 Final Safety Analysis Report in Revision 4.
This information is hereby incorporated into the Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit No.1 Operating License Application.
Yours very truly,
- 10 GLK:bb Attach cc: Dr. Gordon Edison (2)
Division of Project Management Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555 Thomas Vandel Resident NRC Inspector Box 311 Burlington, Kansas 66839 0
9107070335 810630t';
hI I PDR ADOCK 05000482; A
PDRi w
201 N. Market - Wichita, Kansas - Mail Addre!
M. Box 208 l Wichitu, Kansas 67201 - Telephonc: Area Code (316) 261-6451
OATH OF AFFIRMATION STATE CF KANSAS
)
) SS:
COUNTY OF SEDGWICK )
I, Glenn L. Koester, of lawful age, being duly sworn upon oath, do depose, state and affirm that I am Vice President - Nuclear of Kansas Gas and Electric Company, Wichita, Kansas, that I have signed the foregoing letter of transmittal, know the contents thereof, and that all statements contained therein are true.
KANSAS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY By
/,ft 44 G'lenn L. Koester' Vice President - Nuclear W.B. Walker, Secretary SFATE OF KANSAS
)
) SS:
COUi4TY OF SEDGWICK )
BE IT REMEMBERED that on this 30th c
'f June, 1981 before me, Evelyn L. Fry, a Notary, person-agneared Glenn L. Koester, Vice President - Nuclear of Kansas Gas a. ' Ele ric Company, Wichita, Kansas, who is personally known to me and who u -
3d the forego!.ng instrument, and he duly acknowledged the execution of
.e same for and on behalf of and as the act and deed of said corporation.
IN WITNESS WilEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the date and year above written.
g {Lf,.,'%,
g
/)
i v
s s
fft
,1, I.
F[elyn%' Fry, Nota U; 26UG! l
(
k ission expires on August 15, 1981.
r.
SNUPPS-WC-
'451.0 ACCIDENT EVALUATION BRANCH
.Q451.01WC__
Please provide hour-by-hour meteorological data
- for - the periods 6/1/73 5/31/75 and 3/5/79 3/4/80 on magnetic tape using the enclosed guid-ance on format and tape attributes.
R451.01
- A data tape of WCGS meteorological data and in the prescribed format was forwarded to the NRC on 6/1/81.
.i k
t Rev. 4 451-1 7/81
SNUPPS-WC Q451.02WC Describe the status of the onsite meteorological measurements program since_ 3/4/80 and provide additional data for the period 3/5/80 3/4/81, if available.
R451.02 Reduction of the raw meteorological data for the time period 3/5/80 to 3/4/81 is complete.
Addi-tional manipulatioin to prepare the data to the
-format of that requested. in Question 451.01 have not yet been performed and the requested data is presently unavailable.
Per the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 1~.70 Section 2.3.3, three years of onsite meteorological measurements, including a ohe-year recent period, have already been provided to the NRC.
We feel that this data should be ade-quate for the NRC's review of WCGS meteorology.
r I
i f
l l
r Rev. 4 451-2 7/81
~
SNUPPS-WC Q451.03WC Table 2.3-37 (Rev.
1, 2/81) of the PSAR indi-cates that extremely unstable (Pasquill Type A),
moderately stable (Pasquill Type F), and extremely stable-(Pasquill Type G) conditions have persisted for long durations (e.g.,
greater than 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br />) at the WCGS site.
Apparently, extremely unstable conditions persisted for a 24-hour period during the Phase 2 program.
Persistence of these stabil-ity classes for periods. greater than 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> in duration is very unusual.
Discuss the causes of persistent stability conditions for periods great-er than 12 hours1.388889e-4 days <br />0.00333 hours <br />1.984127e-5 weeks <br />4.566e-6 months <br /> for classes A,
F, and G.
Iden-tify the synoptic conditions during the observed periods of persistent stability for periods grea-ter than 12 hcurs. and discuss the possibility of instrument malfunction.
R451.03 The 85-10m differential tempe rature was used as the primary parameter to determine stability at Wolf Creek.
If the 85-10m data - value was not available, then the 60-10m differential tempera-ture value determined stability.
Difficulties were encountered in getting valid data for these parameters for the Phase 2 program (see Response 451.04).
This caused all valid data to come under intensa scruciny.
Before data was allowed into the data base, all calibrations, site logs, and weather maps that were obtained from the U.S.
Department of Commerce were checked against the analog strip chart.
If the data could not be proved invalid, then the data was allowed into the data base.
For these data, stabilities A,
F, and G occurring for greater than a 12-hour consecutive period were identified.
These 16 time periods and stabilities are listed in Table 451.03-1.
All strip chart data and instrument calibration records for th( 10 stable condition periods showed consistent and valid data.
All 10 periods oc-curred during the night time hours under clear skies and high pressure conditions.
Daytime tem-peratures varied from 10 to 30*F.
Radiational cooling near the surface occurs under these condi-tionc creating ~ stable ' meteorological conditions.
As the sun rises and adds heat to the surface layer, stable conditions weaken.
l The first three unstable periods (3/7-8/79, 3/8/79, 3/8-9/79) can be attributed to low pressure sys-tems and frontal movements across the area which l
were being maintained by a polar jetstream maximum located over the midsection of t<.e U.S.
The upper Rev. 4 451-3 7/81
SNUPPS-WC R451.03
- ( continued ')
air flow was strong out_of the north bringing an influx of polar air.
The polar air continued to ' flow over the region h at upper levels during the last three unstable periods
'(3/10/79, 3/11/79, 3/12/79).
. Howeve r,
low aumidity, hitjh pressure and a southerly sur-face _ flow helped to-keep skies clear and create surface heating for unstable conditions near the surface.
i 9
Rev. 4 451-4 7/81
.w
SNUPPS-WC TABLE 451.03-1 OCCURRENCES OF A, F, AND G STABILITIES PERSISTING GREATER THAN 12 HOURS NUMBER OF STABILITY TIME PERIOD CONSECUTIVE HOURS A
79030705 - 79030804 24 A
790';0806 - 79030821 16 79030823 - 79630921 23 A
'A 79031003 - 79031021 19 A
79031104 - 79031119 16 A
79031204 - 79031218 15 G
79091720 - 79091808 13 G
79092520 - 79092608 13
'G 79100620 - 79100708 13 G-79102720 - 79102809 14 G
79111518 - 79111609-16 G
79111619 - 79111708 14 F
79120119 -'79120208 14 G
79120320 - 79120409 14 G
80011321 - 80011409 13 G
80021122 - 80021210 13 l
l l
F 4
i Rev. 4
!~
7/81 l-3
I SNUPPS-WC 0451.04WC Table 2.3-29 (Rev.
1, 2/81) of the FSAR indicates a lower data. recovery for joint frequency distri-butions of wind speed and wind direction by atmospheric stability for the period 3/5/79 3/4/80 than for the previous two years of data collection (6/1/73 5/31/75) despite increased attention to the onsite meteorological program.
The major difference between the Phase 1 (6/1/73 -
5/31/75) program and the Phase 2 program (3/5/79 -
3/4/80) appears to be the type of data recording system, with the Phase 2 system consisting solely of analog charts.
Discuss the reasons for the lower data recovery and indicate whether complete reliance on an analog recording system could be a major factor in reduced data recovery.
Identify pariods of extended instrument outage (e.g.,
for 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> or more) during the Phase 2 program and the cause of the outinge.
Indicate the corrective measures taken to minimize extended outages in the future.
Describe the data availability (e.g.,
remote display in the control room or elsewhere) and data reduction procedures to be used for the mateorological measurements program during plant operation.
R451.04 The problems encountered in the Phase 2 meteorol-ogy data collection program at Wolf Creek were caused primarily by meteorological instrumentation.
Thus, the low data recovery would have occurred even if a redundant data recording system were used.
As Table 451.04-3 shows, most of the lost data for Phase 2 occurred at the 10-meter dew-point, 85-10 meter delta temperature, and 60-10 meter delta temperature sensors.
Instrumentation at the tower during Phase 2 is given in Table 2.3-4 7.
The cooled mirror dewpoint system installed at the start of Phase 2 exhibited design and reliability problems to the extent that considerably Jess than 90 percent valid data were recovered fo' this instrument.
Technicians at the site performed numerous cali-brations and maintenance on tne system in an attempt to make the system more reliable.
On i
December 18, 1979 the cooled mirror dewpoint sys-tem was replaced with a backup Lici dewpoint sys-tem.
KG&B realized at that time even though the LiCl system was not as sensitive as the cooled mirror dewpoint system, the Lic1 system must be installed inorder to obtain a data recovery of greater than 50 percent.
On April 24, 1981 an EG&G cooled mirror dewpoint system was installed Rev. 4 451-5 7/81
m SNUPPS-WC R451.04 (continued) at the tower.
This system has been collecting valid data since that time.
Another problem occurred with the 85-10m and 60-10m differential temperature (new RTD temperature systems installed in Phase 2 to obtain better long-term differential temperature accuracy).
Occasionally the upper level sensors would cause the Delta-T pair to give meteorologically impos-sible differential temperature values such as highly negative and positive values.
This problem persisted until KG&E discovered corroded cable connectors and installed new electrical cabling to the upper levels on September 26, 1979.
Both aspiration systems on the 85-meter and 60-L meter tower level failed in December 1979 causing the temperature sensors to experience solar heat-l ing during daylight hours.
KG&E immediately re-placed the faulty aspiration system with replace-ments obtained from a vendor.
The replacement aspirators, however, had too low an air flow, and consequently did not produce representative dif-ferential temperature measurements.
Problems in obtaining acceptable replacement delayed acquisi-tion of valid data from both systems until the end of January 1980.
Since low data recove ry during the period 3/5/79 to. 3/4/80 of Phase'2 was primarily the result of meteorological instrumentation problems, KG&E and Dames & Moore have not changed any procedures for meteorological data collection because of the loss of data in the Phase 2 year.
Currently the tower is checked each work day by a KG&E technician.
Analog strip charts are taken from the recorders every two weeks.
KG&E then reviews the analog charts before sending them to Dames & Moore.
At Dames & Moore the charts are again reviewed and, if problems are found, KG&E is immediately noti-fied.
By checking the tower frequently and by reviewing the analog strip charts twice, all prob-lems are readily identified and the problems corrected in a timely manner.
KG&D and Dames &
Moore did eve rything practical to prevent data loss.in Phase 2.
Unfortunately, due to the instrumentation problems which occurred, a large amount of data loss did occur during the period 3/5/79 to 3/4/80.
The second year of the Phase 2 data collection has been more successful with all parameters ' reporting a data recove ry of greater than 95 percent (refer to Table 451.04-2).
Rev. 4 451-6 7/81
SNUPPS-WC R451.04 (continued) n.
With respect to the. operational meteorologAcal
. program, it is intended that the system and oper-
. ating procedures.will meet the recommendations of NUREG-0654 and Regulatory Guide 1.23.
A descrip-tion of data availability during plant operation is provided in Section 2.3.3.1 of the FSAR.
A revised description of the operational program reflecting the' requirements of NUREG-0654 and Regulatory Guide 1.23 will be provided by
- December 31, 1982.-
i e
Rev. 4 451-7 7/81
SNUPPS4C TABLE 451.04-1 INVALID DATA PERICDS 24-HOURS OR GREATER MARGI 5, 1979 - MARGI 4, 1980 10 M DEWPOINT REASONS FOR VALIDATION Mard 5,1979 0100 to March 22, 1979 1500 Sensor not installed April 3, 1979 0900 to April 4, 1979 1200 Ex ssive dewpoint oscillation June 25, 1979 0900 to June.26, 1979 1100 Calibration Jum 30,1979 0600 to July 2, 1979-1600 Excessive dewpoint oscillation September 15, 1979 0300 to September 16, 1979 0700 Excessive dewpoint oscillation October 19, 1979 1400 to October 21, 1979_0400 Excessive dewpoint oscillation October 22, 1979 0600 to October 24, 1979 1500 Excessive dowpoint oscillation 85-10 M DELTA TDIPERATURE Mard 13, 1979 1500 to March 28, 1979 1000 Data inconsistent with existing conditions April 3, 1979 1100 to April 4, 1979 1100 Corroded resistan thermal detector connector December 27, 1979 0900 to January 24, 1980 1600 Aspiration failure 60-10 M DELTA TDIPERATURE Mar & 13, 1979 1500 to March 20, 1979 1000 1;ata inconsistent with existing conditions April 3, 1979 1100 to April 4, 1979 1100 Corroded resistan thermal detector connector July 6. 1979 0700 to July 7, 1979 0600 Data inconsistent with existing conditions December 19, 1979 1600 to December 28, 1979 1400 Aspiration failure Rev. 4 7/81
SNOPPS-IC TABLE 451'.04-1 (continued) 35-10 M DELTA TEMPERATURE REASONS FOR 7ALIDATION April 3, 1979 1100 to April 4, 1979 1100 Corroded resistance themal detector connector 35 M WIND DIRECTION September 7, 1979 1700.to September 10, 1979 0800 Ink pen failure February 15, 1980 1000 to February 20, 1980 1600 Sensor frozen by ice storm
' 60 M SIGR d
January 1,.1980 0100 to January _2, 1980 1100 Chart jam 60 l' WIND SPEED, January 19, 1980 2100 to January 21, 1990 1100 Frozen sensor
. January 30, 1980.0900 to January 31, 1980 1300 Frozen sensor February 15, 1980 0300 to % rmry 18, 1980 0900 Sensor frozes by ice storm 35 M WIND SPEFD January 19, 1980 2100 to January 21, 1980 1000 Frozen sensor February 15, 1980 0700 to February 18, 1980 0200 Sensor frozen by ice storm 35 M SIGA February 15, 1980 1000 to February 18, 1980 0600 Sensor frozen by ice storm 10 M WIND SPEED 1
February 15, 1980 0400 to February.18, 1980 0600 Sensor frozen by ice storm 78f
q
- netw,
-,.9
++
+.
\\\\\\\\
IMAGE EVALUATION N
f TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 M EA E4
" " HE
=
5 I.I 1 " E 3
/
18 l.25, 1.4 ji,_1.6
=
(
g,,///f h+<T 4
4,$pr%
Q;.f4 7
'W IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3)
P l.0 5EBE EE E S
l.1 J.'s g2a
/
lg
]
1.25 g jg 1
/
4 6"
{
rfr%
++
i 4,,,,//
D/p,,,k{\\f'
- fh' 'N
,m
'b ~
-x
SNUPPS-WC TABLE 451.04-2 DATA RECOVERY STATISTICS Data recovery statistics for the 15 monitored parameters from March 5, 1980 to March 4, 1981 are as follows:
Darameter.
Data Recovery (%)
~60m wind direction 97.9 60m wind speed 97.7 60m sigma 97.2 35m wind direction 99.6 35m wind speed 99.6 35m sigma 98.5 10m wind direction 99.0 10m wind speed 95.6 10m sigma 99.1 10m temperature 99.4 10m dewpoint 99.6 85-10m delta temperature 99.4 60-10m delta temperature 99.2 35-10m delta temperature-
.99.4 1.3 m precipitation 99.6 e-I f
Rev. 4 l
7/81
SNUPPS-WC 0451.05HC Section 2.3.2.2 (Rev.
1, 2/81) of the FSAR (see also Revision 1,- 4/81 to the Environnontal Report section 5.1.4) presents an analysis of the atmos-pheric impacts of the heat dissipation facilities using the model FOGALL.
This analysis replaces the previous analysis based on the model POND.
a.
Describe-the improvements in the analysis using FOGALL compared to the analysis using POND.
b.
Describe the validation (or verification) of FOGALL for analyzing atmospheric impacts of a 5090 acre cooling lake.
i c.
Describe the meteorological measurements program to be used to evaluate actual meteor-ological impacts of the heat dissipation system once the cooling lake is filled and the plant is operational.
R451.05 a.
The FOGALL model was developed as an alternative to POND model in 1980 by Dames
& Moore.
The objective was to develop a model which was more flexible than POND and to update both the physics and algorithms used.
The basic differences be-tween FOGALL and POND are-listed below:
1.
POGALL uses a more recent formulation (Ryan, 1973)* for the calculation of the heat and moisture fluxes from the heated pond.
2.
FOGALL utilizes a formal area source disper-I sion algorithm, while POND utilizes a more intuitive trajectory approach.
The trajec-tory approach limits POND to 8 discrete wind directions.
In FOGALL the wind varies continucusly.
i 3.
POND uses ambient 3-hour meteorological ob-servations while FOGALL uses hourly data.
4.
FOGALL stimulates the vertical dispersion of vapor and heat from each area source making up the lake by using a Gaussian distribution
- Ryan, E. J.
and D.
R.
F. Harleman, 1973, Analytical and Experimental Study of Transient Cooling Pond Behavior, Report No. 161, Depart-ment of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Rev. 4 451-8 7/81
f:-
SNUPPS-WC R451.05-(continued) using Pasquill-Gifford parameters.
POND uses a uniform distribution to simulate the ver-tical dispersion.
Both water vapor and heat are uniformly distributed between the water surface and a height calculated from upwind fetch and stability class.-
5.
POND uses an 18 x 10 fixed cartesian grid as the basis for its calculations.
This grid is used to define both area sources and receptor points.
In FOGALL each receptor and each area source can be independently positioned.
That is, neither receptor or sources are keyed to a cartesian grid.
The receptor in FOGALL can also be positioned with a vertical coordinate.
This permits receptors in a
visibility analysis to be placed at eye level position along critical highways.
6.
FOGALL utilizes an optimized subroutine to calculate o and a while POND does not.
y z
7.
Input water temperature can be a constant or it can be va ried hourly, daily or monthly in FOGALL.
In POND the input water temperature can not be varied as a function of time.
8.
FOGALL produces frequency distribution of fog, icing, water vapor density, and induced temperature changes for baseline as well as plant induced conditions.
The frequency dis-tributions generated have more resolution than those generated in-POND.
b.
A complete copy of the FOGALL certification / users manual was provided in response to ER(OLS) Ques-tions 450.3 and 450.4.
The procedure used to validate the FOGALL model is described i*t the certification / users manual pro-vided in reLponse to ER Question 450.3.
The verification of FOGALL was performed by executing two test cases and manually calculating the expected results.
One test-case utilized source water temperature constant with time and area.
The second case varied the source water temperature over the source area each hour.
In
- addition, hand calculations were performed to verify that the results of each subroutine con-formed with the ' respective applied theoretical model or mathematical equation.
Rev. 4 451-9 7/81
SNUPPS-WC R451.05 (continued)
The model design is based upon accepted principals of atmospheric physics; computed values were hand verified; and the test cases were designed to detect fog, no fog, ice, and no ice conditions at defined receptors.
The validation procedure, therefore, provides a high degree of confidence that the FOGALL results are representative of actual conditions.
c.
A preoperational fog monitoring program is being planned.
The purpose of the study is to document the frequency of occurrence of na tu ral fog (as opposed to fogs induced by the operation of the cooling lake) along Highway 75 which is located from 0.5 miles to 2.0 miles west of the cooling lake.
Table 2.3-29 shows that the predominant frequency of light wind (less than 3 meters. per second) is from the sectors southeast through south.
This corresponds with the Dames & Moore Program FOGALL analyses which shows the maximum increase in cooling lake induced fogging frequency along High-way 75 to occur approximately 3
miles south through 2
miles north of New Strawn, Kansas.
While the details of the fog monitoring program are not completely defined at this time, it is anticipated that a transmissometer and continuous analog recorder will be installed along Highway 75 at a point within 2 to 3 miles of New Strawn, Kansas.
The instrument will continuously monitor visibility at an elevation of 1.5 to 2 meters above ground level.
Maximum visibility resolution will be at least 100 meters.
The fog monitoring program will be initiated in 1981 and will continue through plant start-up.
An annual analysis will be performed to categorize fogging _ occurrences by visibility classes and to correlate fog occurrences with the meteorological data acquired at the WCGS meteorological tower.
A detailed description of the specific fog moni-toring program will be provided in forthcoming revisions to the WCGS ER(OLS) and FSAR Addendum.
Rev. 4 451-10 7/81
SNUPPS-WC R451.05 (continued)
It is anticipated that the operational fog moni-i toring program would consist of a continuation of the preoperational program described above.
How-ever, details of the operational program will not be established until results of the.preoperational fog monitoring program have been evaluated.
5 l
f
{
I-t 1
i l
i l
Rev. 4 451-11 7/81
SNUPPS-WC 0451.06WC Section 2.3.2.2 (Rev.
1, 2/81) of the FSAR also-discusses the effect of the cooling lake on atmos-
.pheric transport and diffusion and concludes "for winds less than about 6 mph flowing from or into this sector (south-southwest to south-southeast)
(and less than 2 mph in any sector over the lake) modifications in the atmospheric stability of the diffusion properties of the air may be expected. "
Winds less than about 6 mph blowing from or into the south-southwest to south-southeast sector occur about 13% of the time.
Discuss the modifi-cations to transport and dispersion character-istics during these conditions and indicate if the c'alculations in' Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 of the FSAR should be changed to reflect the modified dispersion conditions.
R451.06 The pcimary effect of the cooling lake will be to modify atmospheric stability in the local area of the lake due to different roughness parameters and surface temperatues between land and lake.
To evaluate the cooling lake's impact on the WCGS x/O calculations of the FSAR Section 2.3.4 and 2.3.5, eight combinations of ambient atmospheric stability, air-water temperature differences, and type of release were studied.
These cases are listed in Table 451.06-1.
Case 1 For the case of a stable ambient atmosphere, water temperature warmer than ambient air, and ground level release, the effect of the cooling lake will be to heat the two level atmosphere causing increased turbulence.
Ground level releases
- would, therefore, be more dispersed.
For this
- case, the FSAR analyses of Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5 are conservative.
Case 2 For an elevated release into a stable atmosphere traversing over warmer water, there will be a modi-fication of ground level x/O only if the lake-induced mixing ' reaches plume height within the distance that air flow is over the lak 7 G.
S.
Raynor et all, 1974 present a method tor esti-mating the vertical extent of ' mixing due to the warmer lake surface:
F( A-w)
H = u*-(
i y
- A T/ A Z (1)
Rev. 4 451-12 7/81 l
o
SNUPPS-WC R451.06 (continued) where height of modified layer (m)
H.
=
friction velocity over the water u*
=
(m sec-1)
-1) 0 mean wind speed ( m sec
=
fetch over water (m)
F
=
Tg low-level air temperature in source
=
-region ('C) water temperature ('C)
T
=
y AT/A Z = lapse rate over the source region and above the inversion
('Cm-1)
To estimate the maximum impact of a warmer cooling lake on a stable atmosphere, the inversion height (H) was calculated for:
.21 m/s (appropriate for smooth water u*
=
surface; D.H.
Slade, 1968)
E
= 2 m/s F
= 5.5 km (wind from south or north)
T
- T
= -50*C 3
y A T/ AZ
.015'C/n (E stability)
=
Under the extreme assumptions, the mixing height will reach approximately 450 meters, sufficient height to cause plume f uigations.
Since the fumigation will occur over water or within a short distance of the lake, this situation will cause a greater impact (with rest ect to present analyses) only' within a short discance of the lake itself.
xiw concentrations farther downwind may be lower due to the lake-induced mixing.
Case 3 and 4 For an elevated or ground release with a stable atmosphere traverring a cooler body of water, the effect of the cooling lake -will be to increase the stability of the atmosphere, potentially creating a ve ry - shallow intensification of the Rev. 4 451-13 7/81
SNUPPS-WC R451.06 (continued) existing temperature inversion.
Since this shal-low temperature structure would likely be destroy-ed by mechanically-induced turbulence over the land surfaces, the lake does not have a signifi-cant effect in this case.
Case 5 and 6 For the ca,e 7f an elevated or surface release into an unstable atmosphere traversing a warmer body 'of water, the effect of the cooling lake would be to increase the instability of the atmos-phere producing greater - dispersion of a gro" level release.
Greater dispersion of an elevated release would occur if the lake-induced turbulence extended to plume height.
For these cases, the existing analyses are conservative for a ground release, and are likely somewhat conservative for an elevated release.
Casa 7 For a ground level release into an unstable atmos-phere traversing cooler water, the effect of the cooling lake will be to create a low-level temper-ature inversion which would restrict the disper-sion of the low-level plume, tending to increase ground-level concentrations, until the inversion was destroyed by a
rougher (or warmer) land surface.
(
Case 8 As with Case 7,
a low-level inversion will be L
created over the lake surface.
From Equation 1 with the following variables:
.21 m/s u*
=
u
= 2 m/s F
= 5.5 Km 10*C T
-T
=
3 y
AT/AZ
=
.015*C/m (C stability)
The mixing depth (H) for this conservative case will not exceed approximately 20 meters.
Since l
an elevated release from the 60-meter vent would not easily penetrate to ground level through this l
inve rsion layer, x/Q values would generally be lower than the present analyses.
Rev. 4 451-14 7/81 1
SNUPPS-WC-R451.06 (continued) l Conclusion l
l Only for Cases 2 and 7 would an analysis which considers the presence of the cooling lake tend to be more conservaLive than the existing analysis of WCGS FSAR Sections 2.3.4 and 2.3.5.
For Cases 1,
5,.
8, and perhaps 6 the exisitng analysis should be more conservative.
f Cases 2 and 7 will differ from the present analy-ses only in the immediate vicinity of the cooling lake and then only for wind directions which would produce.the largest over-water fetch (i.e.,
N, S,
NW, and SSE).
From three yeers of onsite data at 10- and 60-meter wind levels (Tables 2.3-29 and 2.3-30) unstable stability classes (E, F,
and G) occur approximately 20 percent of the time and stable classes (A, B,
and C) occur approximately 9 percent of the time.
It is expected that over long ave raging periods
)
effect of Cases 1 and 8 will tend to balance
.;fect of Cases 2 and 7.
The short-term
.u nt analyses presented in Tables 2.3-55 through 2.3-57 show strong stable cases resulting from Case 7.
With respect to Case 2,
it is ex-pected that the resulting fumigation will not result in a K/O value which exceeds the x/Q values of a ground-level release in a stable atmosphere.
Based upon tne above discussion, we consider the existing analyses to be valid.
REFERENCES
- Raynor, G.
S.,
P.
- Michael, R.
M.
Brown, and S.
Sethu Raman, 1974, preprint of Symposium on Atmos-pharic Diffusion and Air Pollution, Sept.
9-13,
- 1974, Santa
- Barbara, California, Sponsored by American Meteorological Society.
- Slade, D.
H.
(ed.), 1968, Meteorology and Atomic Energy
- 1968, TID-24190, National Technical Information Service, Springfield, VA.
c Rev. 4 451-15 7/61
SNUPPS-WC TABLE 451.06-1 CASES TO BE INVESTIGATED TO ASSESS EFFECTS OF COOLING LAKE ON ATMOSPHERIC TRANSPORT AND DIFFUSION CASE STABILITY T water - T Land RELEASE 1
Stable
+
Ground 2
' Stable
+
Elevated 3
Stable Ground 4
Stable Elevated 5
Unstable
+
Ground 6
Unstable
+
Elevated 7
Unstable Ground 8
Unstable Elevated Rev. 4 7/81
SNUPPS-WC 0451.07WC
. Tab les - 2. 3-5 9 and 2.3-60 of the FSAR (Rev.
1, 2/81) present terrain / recirculation correction factors to be applied to a straight-line Gaussian dispersion model to better characterize temporal variations in
!neteorological con 3itions.
These correction factors were estimated based an the results of a va riable-traj ectc ry puff a6 vection model using one year of hour-by-hour meceorolog-ical data from the Wolf Creek site.
Substantial reductions -(up to a factor of 100 lower than the straight-line model) are suggested for distances approc.ching 80 km.-
For several directiens, cor-rection factors of zero are suggested, implying that no release from the site would affect a particular receptor location.
Discuss the reason-ableness and appropriateness of correction factors for receptors greater than 8 km from the source developed by use of a variable trajecton model with only a single source of meteorological data as input.
Indicate the merit of a correction factor calculated to be zero.
R451.07 Dames & Moore's variable-trajectory puff advection model, PUFF, was used, along with a straight-line model, in the derivation of terrain / recirculation correction factors (TCFs).
PUFF tracks the advec-tion and dispersion of up to 500 Gaussian puffs across the study area.
New puffs are emitted con-tinuously at 20-minute intervals throughout the year.
Puffs are discarded when they leave the study area, or when they have become so attenuated that they no longer have a significant impact at any receptor location.
The criterion for discard-ing an attenuated puff is comparison of the puff center x/Q to a user-specified cutoff x/Q value.
In the original analysis, this cutoff was inad-vertently set to an inappropriately high value.
The result was that puffs were discarded too quickly, before they could reach the more distant receptor locations.
The PUFF model analysis has been repeated for ground-level release using a more appropriate x/Q cutoff ~ value.
Revised TCFs are presented in Table 451.07-1 for the 10 receptor ring distances used in the PUFF analysis.
As this table indi-
- cates, the strong systematic under-prediction of PUFF model results in relation to straight-line model results for large source-receptor distances is no longer present.
The - mild overall decrease in TCF values at large downwind distances may be attributed to plume
- meander, accounted for in PUFP but not in the Rev. 4 451-16 7/81
SNUPPT-WC R451.07 (continued) straight-line model.
With wind directions varying hourly, plume elements in PUFF actually cover a greater distance before arriving at a given recep-tor than is assumed in the straight-line model.
They are, therefore, more attenuated on arrival at the receptor than the straight-line model algor-ithm would indicate.
Revised TCFs will be computed for the mixed-mode case as well as the ground-level case.
The re-v,ised TCFs wf il be logarithmically interpolated to provide TCFs for all downwind distances of interest.
This complete set of TCFs will be applied to all straight-line model results pre-sented in the FSAR by September 1, 1981.
Use of a single meteorological station as the data source for the PUFF analysis is justified by the absence of severe terrain within the region of interest and by the fact that only long-term average relative concentrations are Ovaluated.
Absence of seve re terrain implies that deviations from straight-line flow that do occur are not strongly systematic.
Effects of random plume meander and mesoscale recirculation on annual average x/Q values a re adequately represented via PUFF simulations vith single-station onsite meteorological input.
Rev. 4 451-17 7/81
SNUPPS-EC TABLE 451.07-1 TERRAIN /RECIRCUIATION (DRRECTION FACTORS AT TEN STANDARD DISTANCES (GROUND RELEASE) BASED ON JUNE 1, 1973 to MAY 31, 1974 ONSITE DATA DISTANCE (KIIDETERS)
NNE NE ENE E
UNW NW NNW N
0.4 1.14 0.%
0.%
1.10 0.98 0.95 1.08 0.95 1.02 0.99 1.29 1.08.1.04 0.99' 1.00 1.02.
1.2 1.00 1.05 0.94 1.02 1.09 0.91 1.06 0.97 1.04 0.96 1.24 1.28 1.02 1.05 1.02 0.97 2.4 1.08 1.07 1.04.0.99 1.05 0.98 1.07 0.91 1.05 0.97 1.17 1.13 1.03 1.05 1.01 0.95 4.0 1.07 1.01 -0.97 1.03 1.36 0.93 1.19 1.01 1.09 0.89 1.28 1.03' 1.17 1,01 1.03 0.95 5.6 1.12 0.82 0.88 0.84 1.07 0.80 1.11 1.01 1.22 0.96 1.25 1.11 1.14 0.98 1.05 1.00 8.0 1.08 0.91 0.71 0.81 1.10 0.80 1.09 1.06 1.05 0.98 1.31 1.17 1.17 0.98 1.09 0.92 16.0 0.80 1.00 0.00 0.69 1.05 0.75 0.99 1.14 1.12 0.77 1.31 1.09 1.11 0.94 0.38 1.00 32.0 0.76 0.88 'O.58 0.59 0.74 0.70 0.86 0.80 1.00 0.75 1.09 0.93 1.03 0.87 1.02 0.93 56.0 0.73 0.44 0.29 0.63 0.83 0.49 0.65 0.75 0.91 0.55 0.82 0.69 0.84 0.68 0.61 0.87 80.0 0.57 0.28 0.24 0.35 0.55 0.31 0.50 0.61 0.75 0.43. 0.56 0.60 0.75 0,55 0.51 0.70 a.
Rev. 4 7/81
SNUPPS-NC 0451.08WC The expected number of lightning strikes to ground per year in a square mile area surrounding the
' site could be as high as 46 (p. 2.3-8 of the FSAR).
Provide seasonal and annual estimates of lightning strikes to safety-related structures at the site, considering the " attractive area"
'f the struc-tures.
A suggested reference for chis type of analysis is J.
L.
Marshall, Lightning Protection, 1973.
R451.08 The frequency of lightning strike. t an area is related to the number of thunderstorm days in that area.
In order to characterize the expected fre-quency of lightning strikes in the area of the Wolf Creek plant, data from Topeka, Kansas regard-ing the average number of thunderstorm days over a 31-year period were used.
These data were pre-sented in Table 2.3-4 of the FSAR and are summar-ized below.
SEASON THUNDERSTORM DAYS Winter (January through March) 3 Spring (April through June) 26 Summer (July through September) 23 Fall (October through December) 5 ANNUAL TOTAL 57 The following discussion, which estimates the number of lightning strikes to safety-related structures at the site, was developed following the - methodology presented by J.
L.
Marshall in Lightning Protection published in 1973.
The " attractive area" of the structures was deter-mined for a lightning strike with an electrical current magnitude of 20,000 amperes, which corre-sponds to the current magnitude of 50 percent of lighting flashes.
The attractive area (A) of a structure is:
A =.Lw + 4H (w+L +w H), where L = structure length, meters w = structure width, meters H = structure height, meters The grouping of safety-related structures which maximizes the attractive area is composed of six structures:
reactor building, control building, auxiliary
- building, diesel generator
- building, fuel building, and refueling water storage tank.
Rev. 4 451-18 7/81
SNUPPS-WC R451.08 (continued)-
For simplicity, this grouping has been assumed to have the following dimensions:
1 L '= 96.4 m w = 86.5 m H = 62.5 m These dipensions yield an attractive area of 0.103 km.
The number of lightning strikes to earth per thunderstorm day per square kilometer (N ) is given by:
e (0.1 + 0.35 sin z)
(0.40 + 0.20) where N
=
e z = the geographical-latitude Using the approximate plant latitude of 38' 14',
the value of N calculated from the above equation 0.198.
- Thus, the number of lightning is N
=
s trik*e s per square kilometer per year equals:
strikas N
x 57 thunderstorn days = 10.83 year km year Since the safety-related structures f interest 2
have an attractive area -of 0.103 km, the number of lightning strikes per year to safety-related structures at the site is estimated to be:
10.83 strikes x 0.103 km
= 1.12 strikes Y**#
km yr or one lightning strike every 0.89 years (324 days).
From data in Section 2.3.1.2.5 it was seen that the number of strikes to ground per square mile per year is between 0.05 and 0.8 times the number of thunderstorm days per year.
This results in between 3 and 46 lightning strikes per square kilometer per year, which includes the number pre-viously calculated'of 10.83 lightning strikes per square kilomster per year.
The seasonal estimate of lightning strikes to safety-related structures is presented Selow:
Rev. 4 451-19 7/81 i
SNUPPS-WC R451.08 (continued)
SEASON-STRII:ES PER SEASON Winter 0.06 Spring 0.51 Summer 0.45 Fall 0.10 ANNUAL 1.12 R,ef erence :
Lightning Protection, Marshall, J.
L.,
1973.
k.
Rev. 4 451-20 7/81
SNUPPS-WC Q451.09WC The tornado statistics presented in Section 2.3.1.2.6 are based on a regional data base that ended in 1971.
Identify any tornadoes that have occurred in the vicinity of the site since 1971, and provide ~ estimates of the intensity (maximum wind speed) and path area of each.
R451.09 The publication Storm Data, published by the National' Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) was consulted to obtain information con-cerning tornado strikes in the vicinity of the site in the years 1972 thrugh 1980.
The area comprising Coffey County and the seven county area surrounding Coffey County were evaluated.
The counties investigated are Allen, Anderson, Coffey,
- Franklin, Greenwood,
- Lyon, Osage, and Woodson Counties.
The tornadoes recorded in these counties are shown below along with an estimate of'the path area of each.
No estimate of the maximum wind speed that occurred was available from this source.
In order to provide some indications as to the intensity of the tornado, an estimate of property and' crop damage is included which has also been obtained from the NOAA Publication.
LOCATION PATH LENGTH PATH WIDrd ESTIbnTED DAMAGE (COUNTY)
DATE (MILES)
(YARDS)
PROPERTY CROPS Greenwood, Wilson 4/19/72 20 100 4
0 Osage 7/2/72 Brief Touchdown 0
0 Lyon 3/13/73 8.5 220 4
0 Lyon 4/13/73 9 to 10 440 3
0 Greenwood 6/4/73 5
300 5
5 Allen 6/4/73 2
200 4
0 Coffey 11/20/73 1
176 5
0 Greenwood, Chase &
Butler 5/30/74 28 500 6
4
- Lyon, Osage &
Shawnee 6/8/74 38 2640 7
4 Allen 3/11/77 0.5 75 5
0 Allen 5/4/77 0.25 50 3
0 Greenwood 5/11/78 7 yds.
3 4
0 Osage 5/23/78 4
30 5
0 Franklin 6/17/78 Brief Touchdcun 0
0 Osage 6/17/78 8
150 5
0 Greenwood 9/17/78 2
7 4
0 Rev. 4 451-21 7/81 6
- -m
-.-..a m.
m
SNUPPS-WC
-R451.09
.(continued)~
Storm damages ' are ~ placed in categories Note 1 varying from 0-to 9 as follows:
0)'
No damage 1)
'Less than $50 2)
S50 to $500 3)
S500 to $5,000
-4)
S5,000 to $50,000 5).
$50,000 to $500,000 6)
$500,000 to SS million 7,) -
$5 million to $50 million 13 ),
$50 million to $500 million
- 9)-
$500 million to SS billion.
l i
i i
l l
l l
I Rev. 4 451-22 7/81
m SNUPPS-WC Q451.10WC a.
Describe the procedures used for determining "the worst temperature period" and "the worst evapora-tion period".(Table 2.3-9 A and B) used for the analysis of the ultimate heat sink.
b.
Regulatory Guide 1.27 (Rev.
2) recommends that the meteorological conditions used.for analysis of the ultimate heat sink be selected from a recent 30-year period.
Only 16 years of data from Chanute Flight Service Station were used in this evaluation (p.
2.3-12).
Explain why 16 years of data (1949 through 1964) is considered represent-ative of regional climatological conditions for analysis of the ultimate heat sink..
.R451.10 a.
See Section 9.2.5.3 b.
The long-term meteorological data collected at
- However, only 16 years of data were recorded (1949-1964) by the U.S.
National Climatic Center at Chanute, Kansas.
These 16 years of data represent regional climato-logical conditions for analysis for the UHS because included in this 16-year period of record is the worst recorded drought which occurred during 1952 through 1957 and has an estimated re-currence interval of 50 years.
This drought also occurred in many states in the midwest including Illinois and Texas.
For example, the 1952-1955 drought in Illinois was considered to have a re-currence interval of 83 years by Illinois State l
Water Survey (Reference 1).
Also, in Texas this drought was considered to be the worst on record since 1890 (Reference 2).
To date these droughts l
for Illinois and Texas are considered to be the worst on record.
Therefore, the 16 years of Chanute meteorological data for the Ultimate Heat Sink (UHS)
Analysis for WCGS includes the most severe regional climatologicai period on record to date.
Rev. 4 451-23 7/81
~
SNUPPS-WC f
.R451.10 (continued)
The worst 30-day evaporation and temperature periods were selected from this 16-year meteoro-logical data for use in the UHS analysis.
These two 30-day periods occurred close to or within the one-in-fifty year drought (maximum 30-day evaporation period occurred from June 24, 1954 to July 23, 1954, maximum temperature period occurred from July 16,'1951 to August 15, 1951).
Note that this worst evaporation period for the WCGS UHS analysis occurred within the one-in-fifty year drought and the worst temperature period occurred close to the one-in-fif ty year drought.
Analysis of Illinois weather data for 28 years (1948 to 1976) for an UHS located in Illinois developed similar trends, i.e.,
the worst 30-day evaporation and temperature periods also occurred close to or within the one-in-fifty year drought.
By this analogy, the 16 years of Chanute meteoro-logical data used for WCGS UHS analysis are representative of the regional climatological conditions and contain the worst case drought, evaporation, and temperature periods.
Table 9.2-4 will be revised to indicate that 16 years of data from Chanute, Kansas were used as the meteorologim1 conditions for the design of the WCGS UHS.
REFERENCES 1.
- Hudson, H.
E.
Jr.,
and W.
J.
Roberts, 1955, 1952-1955 Illinois Drought with Special Ref-erence to Impounding Reservoir Design -
Bulletin No. 43, State Water Survey Division, State of Illinois.
2.
- Lowry, Jr.,
R.
L.,
1959.
A Study of Droughts in Texas, Bulletin 5914, Texas Board of Water Engineers.
Rev. 4 451-24 7/81
_