ML20031F004
| ML20031F004 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Wolf Creek  |
| Issue date: | 09/22/1981 |
| From: | Youngblood B Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Koester G KANSAS GAS & ELECTRIC CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8110190021 | |
| Download: ML20031F004 (4) | |
Text
_
4 (J/
Dist. ~
? Docket File-bcc:
LB#1 Rdg TERA DEisenhut NRC/PDR SEP 2 21981 BJYoungblood L/PDR GEdison NSIC MRushbrook TIC Docket No.: JSTN 50-482 SHanauer ACRS (16)
RVollmer TMurley
%Qj Mr. Glenn L. Koester RHartfield, MPA / cp3)fbh RMattson q-Vice President - Nuclear
'g? (,y h Kansas Gas and Electric Company 0 ELD 201 North Itarket Street 01E (3) hi OCT1 198
- Wichita, Kansas 67201 Glear JKnight
?
,,,,,g a g *"
S"'"
Dear Mr. Koester:
RWescott s-
Subject:
Request for Additional Infomation for the Review offf.h4 Wolf. Creek Plant " nit 1 Regarding Hydrologic Engineering - Envifondentaid '
As a result cf our continuing review of the Wolf Creek Plant, Environmental Report, we find that we need additional infomation to complete our evaluation. The specific information required is in the area of hydrologic engineering and is presented in the Enclosure.
g To maintain our licensing review schedule for the Wolf Creek Plant ER, we will need responses to the enclosed request by October 2,1981.
If you cannot meet this date, please infom us within seven days after receipt of this letter of the date you plan to submit your responses so that we may review our schedule for any necessary changes.
Please contact Dr. G. E. Edison, Wolf Creek Licensing Project Manager, if you desire any discussion or clarification of the enclosed request.
Sincerely, Original signedW%
- 3.,7. Youngblood B. J. Youngblood, Chief Licensing Branch No. 1 Division of Licensing
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page de f /
/Nf DL:LB#1 F D I I
"B]Q - so omce) vo r"-"
crais5H7pE"-
..g..q.f31........g. g.;....
]81to19oo21e10922 1
' ~ ~ - - -
-' --~~-~~-
DR ADOCK OSo 8
OFFIClAL RECORD COPY usa,o i,.ig,eo
i Mr. Glenn L. Koester Vice President - Nuclear Kansas Gas and Electric Company 201 North Market Street P. O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 cc: Mr. Nicholas A. Petrick Ms. Wanda Christy Executive Director, SNUPPS 515 N. Ist Street 5 Choke Cherry Road Burlington, Kansas 66839 Rockville, Maryland 20750 Eric A. Eisen, Esq.
Mr. Jay Silberg, Esquire Birch, Horton, Bittner & Monroe Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 1140 Connecticut Avenue, N. W.
1800 M Street, N. W.
Washington, D. C.
20036 Washington, D. C.
20036 Kansans for Sensible Energy Mr. Donald T. McPhee P. O. Box 3192 Vice President - Production Wichita, Kansas 67201 Kansas City Power and Light Company 1330 Baltimore Avenue P. O. Box 679 Kansas City, Missouri 64141 Ms. Mary Ellen Salva Route 1, Box 56 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Ms. Treva Hearne, Assistant General Counsel Public Service Commission P. O. Box 360 Jefferson City, Missouri 65102 Mr. Tom Vandel Resident Inspector / Wolf Creek NPS c/c U.S.N.R.C.
P. O. Box 1407 Emporia, Kansas 66801 Mr. Michael C. Kenner I
Wolf Creek Project Director State Corporation Commission State of Kansas Fourth Floor, State Office Bldg.
Topeka, Kansas 66612
.--.,n-,,
n_-.,
~
'~^
~~
HYDROLOGIC ENGINEERIM ~ENVIRONMENTAC QUESTIONS WDLF CREEK GENERATING STATION, UNIT 1 DOCKET NUMBER 50-482 240.0 Hydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch 2hR}6 a)
Secdon 2M.2.2, p. 2.4-8 states that there are 34 water right permits granted for irrigation use along the Neosho River from (2 4 1 2) the mouth of Wolf Creek to Oklahoma.
However, Table 2.1-19 lists only 30 of 'these pemits.
Please update Table 2.1-19 to include the additional 4 irrigation pemits.
b) The maximum rate of appropriated surface water from the John Redmond spillway location to the Oklahoma state line is stated in Section 2.4.1.2.2, p. 2.4-8 to be 239,404 gpm. Table 2.1-19 indicates that the authorized maximum diversion rate from the Neoshos River downstream of the confluence of Wolf Creek is 115,469 gpm.
Please explain the discrepancy in these values.
If the discrepancy is the result of diversions between the John Redmond Reservoir and Wolf Creek please furnish the appropriate information as given in Table 2.1-19.
c) The maximum annual quantity of water authorized to be diverted from the Neosho River as stated in Section 2.4.1.2.2, p. 2.4-8 (117,065
' acre-feet) is four times larger than the total quantity %dicated in Table 2.1-19 (29,989 acre feet).
Please explain the discrepancy as in b) above.
. c >.
240.17 Table 240.14/240.15-1 gives the 100-year peak flood flow for Wolf (ER)
Creek below the cooling lake dam under natural conditions as 8,363 cfs.
(2.4.1)
How does this value compare with the peak flood flow used to arrive at j
the flood prene area due to the 100-year flood found in Flood Hazard Boundary Maps for Coffey County?
240.18 In Section 2.4.2.1.1 influent conditions on the Neosho River.are l
(ER) purported to result in horizontal migration into the alluvium of 100 (2.4.2.1) to 200 feet.
Please provide the data to support this estimate, and what method (s) and parameter values were used.
240.19 In the first sentence of the last paragraph on page 2.4-12 is (ER) written, "where it is saturated, the weathered bedrock (except lime-l (2.4.2.1) stt.ne) has a greater permeability than the overifing soil zone."
l Pleaae provide data to support this statement because comparable values l
for soil and bedrock are not presented in Table 2.4-7 nor anywhere else in relevant position of the text.
Also, it is inferred (in the same l
sentence) that weathered limestone members probably do not exhibit i
pemeability greater than or equal to the soil or bedrock shale members.',
Yet the latter are often confining units of the limestone aquifers.
Furthemore, data presented in Table 2.4-7 show that the Plattsmouth Limestone has permeabilities approximately one to two orders of magnitude greater than some weathered shale members.
Please explain these i
contradictions.
~
w
m 240.20 A water level recorder chart is shown in Figure 2.4-13 for a (ER) monitor well.
Please provide a map showing the wells exact location.
(2.4.2.1)
What depth and stratigraphic interval does the data represent?
240.21 Please provide data to support the effective porosity values used (ER) to determine average linear velocities in the Plattsmouth Limestone (2.4.2.1) and Shale members.
Based on attached references the reported values are unreasonably high.
240.22 Is the Heumader Shale Member considered to be an aquifer or (ER')
aquitard ci-both within and proximal to the cooling lake area? Please (2.4.2.1) support your position with data from tables and/or references.
240.23 You state that in-situ permeability tests were performed using (ER) fallihg head methods.
These methods however, are subject to numerous (2.4.2.1) problems ranging from construction of the ihfiltration sump to chemical incompatability of the water used in the test. To assess the validity of the tests run, please provide a detailed description of the methods, techniques, and an analysis of these tests, including construction, completion and development of test wells.
- 240.24 In Section 2.4.2.4.2 you state that seepage rates from the cooling (ER) lake will not increase due to quarrying of Plattsmouth and Toronto
( 2. 4. 2.1-)
Limestones prior to filling. As most of the restriction to flow-is reportedly caused by the overbyrden matevials which will be removed during quarrying, your conclusion about the seepage rates appears to be unsupported.
Please provide the rationale for this statement.
6 e*
e b
Y
_n..