ML20196H659

Forwards Commitment Associated with TS Amends 179 & 161 Re TS 5.5, Meteorological Tower Location. No Regulatory Commitments Associated with Rept

ML20196H659
Person / Time
Site:	McGuire, Mcguire
Issue date:	11/23/1998
From:	Barron H DUKE POWER CO.
To:	NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM)
References
NUDOCS 9812090136
Download: ML20196H659 (32)

Text

Duke Energy Corporation

{

McGuire Nuclear Station l

12700 Hagers Ferry Road Huntersville. NC 28078-9340 II. B. Barron (704) 875-4800 omCE Vice 1%idast (704) 875-4209 ax i

i November 23,1998 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attention: Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. 20555

Subject:

McGuire Nuclear Station, Units 1 and 2 Docket Nos. 50-369 and 50-370 Commitment associated with Technical Specification (TS) Amendments 179/161 - TS 5.5, Meteorological Tower Location By a letter dated July 30,1998, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission approved Technical Specification Amendments associated with a relocation of the plant's meteorological tower. The meteorological tower has been relocated and the Technical Specification Amendments were implemented on September 2,1998.

I Tr. a letter dated May 7,1998, McGuire Nuclear Station made a commitment to provide the NRC with results of a comparison of meteorological data oPained concurrently from both the old and new meteorological towers. Attached is a report detailing the results of this data comparison.

The results show fairly consistent data trends between the old and new towers. The relatively low location of the old tower with respect to the nearby Cowans Ford Dam and close proximity to nearby plant structures contributed to some data aberrations associated the Delta-T, wind speed, and wind direction as detailed in the repon. The new location has an exposure in all directions therefore will be more representative of the area's meteorological conditions. There are no regulatory commitments associated with this report.

Please contact P.T. Vu at (704) 875-4302 or Marsha Kinley at (704) 373-7896 if you have any questions regarding this repon.

Very truly yours,

\\

ill f

(k H.B. Barron

vo - q

[1 Attachment 9812090136 981123 i/

PDR ADOCK 05000369 :

P PDR6:

l.

l L

U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission November 23,1998 l

Page 2 xc:

L.A. Reyes.

Administrator, Region II U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission l

101 Marietta St., NW, Suite 2900 Atlanta, GA. 30323 l

F. Rinaldi 1

. Senior Project Manager.

i l

Office of U.S. Nuclear Reactor Regulation l-One White Flint North, Mail Stop 14E21 Washington, D.C. 20555 l

S.M. Shaeffer l

NRC Senior Resident Inspector McGuire Nuclear Station l.

R.M. Fry, Director l

Division of Radiation Protection State of North Carolina 3825 Barrett Drive Raleigh, N.C. 27609-7221 l

I l

L 1

i r

I 1

]

t i! '..

I' ~

l l~

l l

McGuire Nuclear Station 1

l l

PIP: M98-1240 l

i i

Corrective Action #1:

l Data is to be collected from the new Met tower and compared with the data from the old Met i

tower.

Due Date:

10/31/98 i

i I

I Responsible Individual:

Marsha C. Kinley Meteorologist Environmental Engineering i

Group Environment, Health and Safety l

l Date:

October 26,1998 File:

ENV-0104 i

l l

l t

l 1

mnsmetwr. doc pg. I i

l' l

I

~.

1.0 Purpose Per NRC request, this evaluation compares hourly averaged onsite meteorological l

measurements at McGuire Nuclear Station, taken concurrently for three weeks from the site's previous meteorological towers (approximately 10m and 40m tall) and the new tower (approximately 60m tall).

2.0 Monitoring Site Descriptions Meteorological data used in this comparison was collected from both the previous and new meteorological towers for a limited period, August 19,1998 (hour 1400) through September 10,1998 (hour 0900). The previous towers were then removed during site preparation for the MNS spent fuel storage area. The new tower was officially placed in service on September 1,1998, with data available on the station's plant computers. Data was retrieved from the onsite dataloggers at both sites for this evaluation. A listing of measurements taken from each tower is provided in Table 1.

The previous towers were located on the west side of the plant at a base elevation of 756 feet. This site was located on the plateau below the eastern embankment of the Cowans Ford Dam but above the Catawba River. The distance to the dam was approximately 350 feet, about 500 feet to the turbine buildings, and approximately 700 feet to the containment buildings. 'Ihe closest buildings to the previous meteorological towers were the Support Office and Warehouse buildings, at respective distances of 253.67 feet and 278.38 feet from the 10m tower. The 40m tower was located 163.67 feet from the Support Office and 174.2 feet from the Warehouse. Photographs I through 3 show the previous meteorological towers at McGuire Nuclear Station.

The new 60m tower is located approximately 1350 feet NNE of station center (i.e. point l

between the two containment buildings), at a base elevation of 767.1 feet. This site is located on the south bank of Lake Norman, with open exposure in all directions. The McGuire discharge canal is situated between the tower and the plant. Photos 4 and 5 show the new meteorological tower during installation.

l l

mnsmetwr. doc pg.2

_ ~. _..

l l

Table 1 McGuire Meteorological Tower Measurements Variab!c Units Previous Towers New Tower Lower Level 10.1 m height 10.6 m height Wind Speed m mph 789.3 feet elevation 801.87 feet elevation Upper Level 41.3 m height 60.3 m height W

Wind Speed mph 891.5 feet elevation 964.96 feet elevation j

Lower Level degrees 10.1 m height 10.6 m height Wind Direction from North 789.3 feet elevation 801.98 feet elevation Upper Level degrees 41.3 m height 60.3 m height Wind Direction from North 891.5 feet elevation 965.07 feet elevation 10.1 m height 9.6 m height l

Temperature C

789.3 feet elevation 798.54 feet elevation Delta-T W :

Vertical C

Approximately 30 m.

Approximately 50 m.

temperature gradient between (41.3m -10.1m = 31.2 m (59.5m -9.6m = 49.9m the upper and separation) separation) lower level temperature sensors f

1 m height I m height l

Precipitation inches 759 feet elevation 767.55 feet elevation l

Notes:

(1)

The range of the wind speed processors was increased on the new tower to 0-90 mph.

The range of the wind speed processors on the previous towers was 0-40 mph.

(2)

The upper level temperature data was/is not stored by the datalogger or plant computers for either site. The upper level temperature sensor on the new tower is located at 962.22 ft elevation, or 59.5 m above ground.

l s

a i

l mnsmetwr. doc pg.3

~.m: w -,

q g-.

e.

- -, ge75ygg7. ;.gp 7pg 1 ;, ; i

-p s 4a W,. r.2' w@@>%x(:p Ad:

w.

i' 9 ' y),9, % pp;g.j;wf

{

, w y x..

.,. m$;.# uy 1D$vj,I.@. ;

,..o 4

.4 ji 24

?@%.-

.s

~

i T?

ni %$:l i

g xxy

)

n

,i a

r, n,,.,<.p,:p,:;

r4,,

+

6. 4A 4

i,

hWV.. 4 I ' "^

ik hPhlhh.

: ',. ' R?[ ' -

.,,.,.u tk 0 ' ATML L ~~ ~ ~ ~

1 j

1

_...._a..

y y

.m M

v. s,,.. :

.:;ryw c,,, e.

=

L' 1...;.,.;.. c South facing view of the previous McGuire meteorological bwers, taken from Photo-1:

i atop the eastern embankment of Cowans Ford Dam.

y - g,m,y u, s s

'L

.' 4

'c}:b

.. e]

l S

l

&l[p

~

I f

rid fg 3

+

4 62 e

30

.d5b ii

. R.

ig

.f.,: g-

~

km j 'y

-fs_.

o

,y 3

p s

i)hoto-2: View of McGuire's previous meteorological towers, looking Southeast.

mnsmetwr. doc pg. 4

l c qp tpp n i

'C

1. 3 "i

r i

' 6:.

(

~ :

6,a,g p,Q,A w-n t

- h..'.,9)g, t.

$kipikFSh w 7 o.

A l

. v.: N t % g% g g 6 q : y 6 :)(;r:

.Q

T; i

..,.} %,;.b ( t.'ggs,,(g[ *yy%s.,.r c s.s,.... '

.'N

..p m.

<' ' g-~

t-

[

i

+y-

,.; y 4

l

_c+.

p-on, paz,y 4pa. p.

3, f' k 's !,<, q"7 lp kb,_i;Q.4 '., yQ% NNp@fy v

w.

.y

. 5'.

...L 1.g

• 33 L wme,..

Ev.

4

[.

s M$

9f / %

g oQg&)k@ibi/@Ny()%l)-

j;2.,. :9 A

?

7q%4c; r My.. L

,n e.

l,..;.' ' y

$l$hk.:.f s;:2po ; ;.

~

e s:, c:;;;_....

t pp w ;

,ew' t,.,-

i

~

,+4

, }

Photo-3: View of the previous Mcguire 10m meteomlogical tower and raingauge, looking l

nonhward at the eastern end of Cowans Ford Dam embankment.

I i

l I,

l I

i l

i l

1 i

1 s

1 mnsmetwr. doc pg. 5

',%, ' s.h Mj

(

1 1,

4

)

1 1

f

{

4 1

}

1 1

1 l

]

y U

l j

i s

l, i

1 i

t j

i 1

1 j'

4-n R

si r:

y y

^

.;:... f ' '

l yy,.

+

{

~..,. : 6-

' ' [. f.e._:.(^. [? *.

.;.:.. -> 3

~ '. '.

s m.

3,

'-("J,_"

i

-[

I y.

-[

h( * "

9 4

Y f.Ilh$xh h

kdh h5 MAQh.+%+MWP!w%%gq4-ww@

(s.sMR"d%aud;p,yng/;gg n c.,.

1. @n,G+MtBNd3 i h.

6 WM D WN1 R%

.? ~

f

. : pc m; gn %w, nn.4m,,a

, g e: r % e9 &

cunaga e m mowr c g v a w m m; ac;y m u aucw n gmgem er ke:4 2

gun m a, p

sy.x

.;.s omga a

g u

n9c;;??vngpn W w ;x &s(i..:%x ; W.

% p'n,b~M; 7%yi

%je gir-QSmg ~ ?h:.qm ?a~5 j,y g a

in L t.R2 e a %; %> sw&r,#

L y

3. \\M:

4::

n

?

7s-g h2rujt 1 M,_ s& +Q M w ;4

%n R ug d wwws -

j v

w;>.s,tg W W?,o M

ti g.4es

~ iv -,+ m y -

y.wu mwp-~..

nr p

i 3%WWy% @5.c+?,. ?e',

XV<a h a,

o f~.

ps 4.

Atv f,M wgi f,.p sx %i W r

t

^

n

.~

'h f

maI 8 /,' p e.7*?wp" ag?o' e s

p[?$fNEMid

'~

j I

' y&W g<,:

't

., - ~ s,p'

.1 sQ Y

?

A Photo-4: View of the new McGuire meteomlogical tower and raingauge during installation, i

facing Southwest.

I l

1 i

a mnsmetwr. doc pg.6

1 M% qj^*+lpq x ?MWY,rs'<

r"?." L

• • n*

s**W'?

a.s. gem i ~ y,"y

, my' e%

u m*wo m e-*yvp v a vr s. t.* w py nynywwtqw4 v

+ :-

c.

s. yc.., o, v

. p y..

g i; y.

m,.

gs, z u,,

y

.w w.w~> e. N y.. m. o. -.

e e..

p

'., f t r,.v. #,*+~-

,s-g

..L r.

sku %

a.L s

i,.

t

, e~p 1 :

, p sy.

c.

R,Rt,

.'lA o

~

s n,.

ly, *; ',

-r k f.rl ;, ' Y a) fa '.u Q J L';.,,

ik'f kt - ' Qk o f', ; s na v', r im ' ' ' % >

vrir m, q'&

'.\\'

^>

f lyr

' l l N'

', L N

'.t' 2

a.

.?

w h ffh'"r:t o:,.e., m,$?k;py

'e< Y ', l,s +, ~'

~

i

-]3

.-. g.

r-a 6

5

• 10

.no g.-

a w%ww, g

'.M + a ' ; ',

,a

_u > f t.

d,,.',

[,[., ( j g,

.a g -..aj

,,d w,

1.,

m+,,

y s,m Y+ ).r

.sr c

~..

<v

,n, y

a..-

' ',. av s D; en s K.g.4v

%?

s'.:p

,fs

• i r

i-i

n. 7..N. ;? j g;f

'^N",s+

__-,'S.

+ '-

4

. '._ kf IA#

">,p g

)

't l,

? '

'h ;s an 4-

'.v N ' '

b d V.- ;.h t:r-c W',g',?. $. ;

.. d. ; s'.

.-l *J '

.-N' &~,-t ' ;(('

• W C'

'.,'3 9

.?

.) 0

.1-

• y L.

. >uC %'y  :.*, E,y a3't-6,'.

r Q.:j'iI #Qg,/ 8(,)y 'T,;j 0

3 l

4

+

hc.

. ++

r i

(, c i < y j.-a,

3 x, 7. n. w.Mxea m..

.s.

p n~.

8 n: e F

v p.. n-O. v vm -

s'> ;e%:

1 y

- c:; ;s w-

- wm.. n '+('% g, -, -Q,..

un <

<A.ag.~1ew,.+ e:xx y,~

\\

iw i,

19.,%+q,

~

p. p ;:p n,?.

o ' :

pC.,y.:.

h ; %.;(..-m s

w,u,.m.

x p

r r..

y,.:

s ra

,. a,

a e g,n :4 5w w; s

-n w,q c

4

~s w-- m,,-.

t- - '

m.A m

+...,.

m -

wrb ' s..c 't c', Ay:f34

?'"' 'n%',.N' s aa p' j ', k ' ;*

( 6l,4.h T

i <

lifl*; v l_ F., - c'j i % %~_?

4 %' ' '

• g

, w T,' N M y'

1. w.g,

x 4

p!t 'M)w[y;D w.

p, n.

v ?.

+

N w,% Q 3 ai 4

.i j

4%

A;y.sf %s-c.s ly'y.h 4 <:.,

r.

s k

fo 4 a. e w-v m'& g q.,.ar!w'c'

.w

-,.*e

-X_'*,'f yu::>

4 ;

- _ 4 p.j g

~~

w;p&a.w"p.. DQ _. c.,g c.

4.? y..

p n gp %.

"n,,,yt.a::

t, w;

w-scap

\\

M t

f pjh...c;%sw y;p., -a :

N,'

v.

4 ; p,m : i t e s.

?'.: Y}

- g Q

c.

lf

f_?<-f.;," n l f.l,.v_

7 ;p, wes, f 3 m ;

5.... p -

e

.g i

e m:.. p., c/ w !.,,

4

-u --

m.-

&g3\\i 'qsd?-

y _:

f.-:a 1

"I {t A

A a

l 1

v..

.s.

.. c mr 1

d

.i 1

+

, i I

'l 1

. a

.qn

+

gl y,

. h;.y ;

w.,

s..

.r.

j Photo-5: View of the new McGuire meteorological tower during tower construction, facing i

Southeast.

4 1

i f

a N

i 1

A mnsmetwr. doc PE 7 m

y

--r

s 3.0 Atmospheric Stability The Delta-T ranges shown below in Table 2 were used to categorize the hourly data into the appropriate stability classes. These ranges were derived from ratioing the values provided in ANSI /ANS-2.5 for a 100m vertical separation to that of each tower (30m separation for the previous towers and 50m for the new tower). For this comparison, stability classes B and C were applied individually to the previous MET site data; however, no distinction was made in the past between these two classes, due to the short separation distance between upper and lower sensors on the old towers. All the stability classes will be used with the new tower.

Table 2 McGuire Delta-T(C) Ranges for Atmospheric Stability Class Stability Class Previous MET Site New MET Site A= Extremely Unstable dT 1-0.57 dT < -0.95.

B= Moderately Unstable

-0.57 < dT 5 -0.51

-0.95 < dT 5 -0.85 C= Slightly Unstable

-0.51 < dT 5 -0.45

-0.85 < dT 5 0.75 D= Neutral

-0.45 < dT 5 -0.15

-0.75 < dT 5 -0.25 E= Slightly Stable

-0.15 < dT 10.45

-0.25 < dT 5 0.75 F= Moderately Stable 0.45 < dT 51.20 0.75 < dT 5 2.00 G= Extremely Stable 1.20 < dT 2.00 < dT Tabic 3 lists the actual frequency of stability classes as determined at each MET site during the three week period. Stability class D is prevalent at both sites. However, there was also a larger occurrence of stability classes A and G at the previous MET site, which was not observed at the new MET site. This is likely due to the local terrain effects on temperature at the previous site, related to nightime drainage flow of cooler air in the river valley, coupled with daytime heating from buildings in close proximity to the previous towers. The former is supported by the large positive Delta-T values observed at the previous site, indicating strong surface temperature inversions below the dam (see Appendix A for maximum and minimum values). The frequency distribution of atmospheric stability class at the new meteorological tower site is, however, more typical of a location free from local terrain effects or extemal influences.

Table 3 htcGuire Stability Class Frequency (%) during 3 weeks Stability Class Previous MET Site New MET Site A= Extremely Unstable 15 %

3%

B= Moderately Unstable 10 %

7%

C= Slightly Unstable 7%

12 %

D= Neutral 27 %

44 %

E= Slightly Stable 13 %

22 %

F= Moderately Stable i1 %

10 %

G= Extremely Stable 17 %

2%

The Pearson correlation coefficient for Delta-T at the previous MET site versus the new MET site was calculated to be 0.88. Composite graphs in Figure I and Figure 2 were constructed from the hourly means, minimums, and maximums of Delta-T.

mnsmetwr. doc pg.8

i Figure 1 MNS Hourly Delta-Temperature Composite: Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 9/10/981109) 0'9 I

0'8

\\

\\

I 0'7

\\/

N

/

E.

0.6 I

I v

E 0.5

\\

I E

0.4

\\

I C

03-

=

= ^-

N A

\\

/

/-

$8 82 g

j

-y

_,T I,

/

I.

28 gg 0

zg f

7 eT 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 N9 \\ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 27 21 22 23 24 g 3 -0 2 gg jj

\\

3

~O'4

.M

\\%

J

/

E

-0.l

\\

W

/,/

=

p

-07 W=

=

= _,/

-0.8

-0.9

-1 Hour of the Day

-+- DT-old Mean -=- New-DT Mean

Figure 2 MNS Delta-Temperature Extremes per Hour from Concurrent Tower Observations (8/1968 H14 - 9/1068 H09) 4.5 4

~~

[ \\.

~

,5 a.

3 5

2.5 x

eg N^

1

/

x is

'N

\\

/

/

1 1 h

'1 -

NA

./ J Eo 5

f o3

~5

> /.

\\1 0

.i

.i i

i,ii i

i i

g

_ % 1 15 mX, 18

• W Zi 22 22 2.d

-0.5 PM 45 5M M

1e a

_._t

-1

- * ' ' - +

R.

=

-1.5 Hour of the Day

-+- DT-old MIN -*- DT-old MAX ~ New-DT MIN -*- New-DT MAX.

m

1 1

These graphs provide a look at the typical diurnal variations in Delta-T at each site, as well as l

the extreme variations per hour of the day, during the three weeks of concurrent l

measurements. These figures support the existence oflocal effects on Delta-T measurements at the previous meteorological site.

5 4.0 Ambient Temperature The Pearson correlation coefficient for the lower level (~ 10m) temperature observations at i

l the previous meteorological site versus the new site is 0.98. The basic statistics listed in l

Appendix A show the median and mean temperatures to be less than 0.5 C different between sites.

The normal diurnal variation in temperature is experienced at both sites, with the previous site being slightly cooler at night and warmer during the day than the new site. In Figure 3, the curves for each site cross at 10am and 8pm (hour 20), coinciding with the mixing up of the surface layer in the river valley during the morning, and the old site entering the drainage l

flow regime of the river valley at night. Figure 4 shows nearly perfect agreement between the composite curves for hourly maximum temperature extremes.

l l

i I

i l

{

1 l

t i

4

?

mnsmetwr. doc pg.11

A Figure 3 MNS Hourly Temperature Composite:

Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09) 30 29 28 27

~~

/

'i

/

NN li. 24 -N

/

N NN

//

N 21 e

20 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour of the Day

-+-T(C)-old Mean -*- New-T(C) Mean

~

Figure 4 MNS Temperature Extremes per Hour from Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09) 34 32 30 78

^

- 26 8

g 24 m

3 22 1

i 1*

^

20 18 16 14 17 N

~

10 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour of the Day j

-+-T(C)-old MIN -*- New-T(C) MIN T(C)-old' MAX + New-T(C) MAX' 1,

p T:Q

5.0 Wind Speeds The Pearson correlation coefficients for wind speeds from the old meteorological towers versus the new tower are 0.94 for the lower level measurements (~ 10m) and 0.93 for the upper level measurements (~ 40m and ~ 60m). Upper level wind speeds were not adjusted to account for the measurement height difference of ~ 20m between the old and new towers.

Median winds (Appendix A) during the entire three week period were around 7-8 mph at the upper level, and 5-6 mph at the lower level for each MET site. Table 4 lists the frequency distribution of wind speeds.

A tight pressure gradient over the Carolinas resulted in maximum wind speeds in the 20-30 mph range on August 26-27,1998, as Hurricane Bonnie made landfall and moved north along the NC coast. Precipitation was limited to the coastal Carolinas, with dry conditions at McGuire.

The composite graphs in Figures 5 through 8 indicate the open exposure of the new meteorological tower site, as evidenced by higher nocturnal winds at the 10m level. The curves for the previous MET site, however, indicate higher afternoon winds at 40m versus the new tower's 60m level. This is probably due to a local speed-up in the flow as it was channeled across the previous MET site, in the narrow passage between the nearby dam and plant buildings.

Table 4 McGuire Wind Speed Frequency Distribution (%) during 3-weeks Wind Speed 10m Old Tower 10m New 40m Old Tower 60m New Class Tower Tower CALM 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 1-4.99 mph 48.28 39.71 20.61 18.60 5-7.99 mph 27.27 34.57 37.17 31.27 8-9.99 mph 7.88 11.52 13.54 17.79 10-11.99 mph 5.05 2.47 10.51 14.02 12-14.99 mph 5.86 4.94 6.26 9.16 15-17.99 mph 3.23 4.94 5.05 4.31 18-i9.99 mph 0.61 1.23 1.82 3.50 20-24.99 mph 1.01 0.62 3.84 1.35 25-29.99 mph 0.00 0.00 1.21 0.00 30 mph ++

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Totals:

100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 i

l t

I mnsmetwr. doc pg y l

Figure 5 MNS Hourly 10m Wind Speed Composite: Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09) 28 2

E

/

7 t

3'--

N bN g

A5 y

4 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour of the Day

-+- LWS-old Mean -*- New-LWS Mean

Figure 6 MNS Lower Wind Speed Extremes per Hour from Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09) 24 j

22 A

./m 2

2

--%\\

gh

\\/

/

-\\

j

\\

16 j k

[

W E I4

/

\\/

12 f

\\/

E N

EI

^

u 8

y o

6 a

4

~.- y w 7

2 y

2

--/

y

,~, 7 0

i 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour of the Day 3

a 3

-+-LWS-old MIN + LWS-old MAX

- New-LWS MIN 2-*- New-LWS MAX j

sed A

Figure 7 MNS Hourly Upper Wind Speed Composite: Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09) 11

^ 10 N

i s

k

~~

A A

{9 V

V g

7 v

6 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour of the Day

_-+- UWS-old Mean -+- New-UWS Mean

Figure 8 MNS Upper Wind Speed Extremes per Hour from Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09) 28

~~

26 24 A

I

~~

2 22 ~~

,F,&h A

A V,/

~^%

N g 20 7

r

)

-~

\\

\\

/

\\/

= 14

.5 12._

y k

~~

10 5

~~

8 n

@6 --

~~

- 7 N'

4 j _Si > +_,

j

+q 4

~~

0 3

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 j'

Hour of the Day 1

1 4

h

+ UWS-old MIN -+- UWS-old MAX -*- New-UWS MIN:-*- New-UWS3 MAX,

+n

-_ a=a j

m

l 6.0 Wind Directions and Sigma Theta The Pearson correlation coefficients for wind directions at the previous versus new meteorological sites are 0.72 for the lower level (~ 10m) wind direction and 0.56 for the upper level wind direction. Wind direction values were not adjusted for shifts across North (e.g. 350 to 10 degrees). The lack of correlation at the upper levels can be mostly attributed to the measurement height difference of about 20m between the two sites. The weak correlation in wind direction at the lower level is a result of terrain effects and obstructions at the old MET site. Timing differences in microscale shifts in wind direction may also be a I

factor in the poor correlations.

l The overall frequency distributions of wind direction for the three week period are shown in Table 5. Windroses are provided in Figure 9 through Figure 12 for the period 8/20/98 -

9/9/98; partial days could not be included in the windroses, due to software limitations.

Prevailing wind directions at both meteorological sites were generally from the SW and NNE. Least frequent wind directions (Table 6) were generally from E and ESE at the old l

site, with ESE and SSE being least frequent at the new site.

l Table 5 McGuire Wind Direction Frequency Distributions (%) during 3-weeks Sector 10m Old Tower 10m New Tower 40m Old Tower 60m New Tower

-CALM 0.81 0.00 0.00 0.00 03 10.10 9.05 12.93 9.16 NNE 10.51 10.70 11.31 11.32 NE 8.69 7.41 4.65 7.01 ENE 3.84 2.47 3.84 2.70 E

1.01 2.26 1.21 3.50 ESE 0.00 1.23 1.41 1.89 SE 0.81 2.47 2.22 2.70 SSE 1.21 1.85 1.62 1.62 S

8.48 4.12 6.06 1.62 SSW 20.81 9.47 17.17 7.82 SW 12.53 20.78 13.54 18.06 WSW 3.03 7.61 4.44 13.75 W

5.45 5.76 2.42 7.28 WNW 3.64 2.47 3.64 3.23 l

NW 3.23 2.88 4.65 2.43 NNW 5.86 9.47 8.89 5.93 Totals 100 100 100 100 1

1 mnsmetwr. doc pg.19 l

. _ _.. -. _ _ _.. _ _ _ _ _. _ _.. ~.

.__.=.__..~-___..m.

_ _ _ _. ~. _ - _ _ _. _.... _.. _ _ _ _ _ _ _..

i 4

i I

C3 l

k m

)

k b

Cn U

1 c3 it wh W

W p

cc z

w m

W W

2 j

3e 0

1 I

J y CD O L

O E

i y"e l

.. u _"

W w

z m

i

..: e i

s O

l

.'1lll C e l

MEJ M

l 4

o 0

w w

u Z

M C

E M

.5 N

m 8

O.r j' x

En n

_J z u 6

M z

Z (n

M3 l

g y

d sli E,,

z m

h sa go oooo o.

, es es es es es aa he hdNNNN dd e

neere e

vvvvvvv a$

au

Logger : 64 Parameter : 10MWS Site : MNSMET Period : 08/20/98 09/0S/98 Class Limita [ MPH)

NNW x

NNE Level : 10

>= 20.00

< 20.00

< 18.00 NW NE

< 15.00

< 12.00

< 10.00

~'

8.00 5.00 ENE WN CALM E

W

=

i WS ESE I

S SE S

SSE s

Figure 10 Windrose from 10m New Tower

s.

w.4

.,.a,,

4 5

_m

-,_4 ma.

aAa

%g a.-m_4_

a 14

-d B>d..-

aJ.e+4.

4 JD BrJ4

~_-__u_2.

A--

.L 4

J,4A

.J.b.6..

9 I

I to

%8 b

~

y 9

0 w@

w d

es z

w m

w W

DNh o

~

8$$

E N

4 u

a=u E

E

• • e E

o tag 9 >G b

b t/5 C= d

~

i o

I h

W W

z in 2

m 2

h g

M 8m 3

.ES E n e

i 2 ~

6 3zZ W

1

)

=..

=

0b5 2

c.

5

)

t m.i si Cd ed td Od Cd-Cd td

~ - -

'fa1

---v-h au

E E

uG s

g W

U$

z W

2m k

W E

=$$

o m

• * 'O,,

Z E

o *$ $

523 M

8 2

w

~

o z

.6 z

k N

ss g

=

3

.ES 2 5 o

W i

3z z

a 3x 3

3 8

2 m

ok5

)

z$

b a.b$$$$$

seena$$

,a a s e,- r-r a e sa y u f '.3 X v v v v v v v h

ac

Table 6 Least Frequent Wind Direction Sectors (during 3 weeks) 10m Old Tower 10m New Tower 40m Old Tower 60m New Tower ESE calm calm calm SE = calm ESE E

SSE E

SSE ESE S

SSE E

SSE ESE The Pearson correlation coefficients for sigma theta (standard deviation of wind direction) are 0.69 for the lower level sigma and 0.81 for the upper level sigma.' The composite graphs (Figures 13 - 16) of hourly mean sigma theta show generally smaller sigmas at the new meteorological site than at the previous site, for both levels of wind direction. This indicates that the winds are more consistent at the new site, with fewer microscale effects than at the previous site.

7.0 Precipitation After lightning damage on 8/31/98 hour 06, the raingauge at the previous meteorological site l

was not restored to service. As a result, there was only one hour of rainfall data collected from both towers for comparison. The rain event occurred on 8/29/98 at hour 21; precipitation registered 0.2 inch at both sites. There was no other rainfall between 8/19/98 and 8/31/98. Rainfall after 8/31/98 war recorded only at the new meteorological site.

The Pearson correlation coefficient for precipitation at the previous meteorological site versus the new meteorological site is 1.0 for 8/19/98 (hour 14) through 8/31/98 (hour 05).

1 l

l 4

1 l

l mnsmetwr. doc pg.24 l

l l

Figure 13 MNS Hourly 10m SIGMA Composite: Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09) 34 A

32 Y

~

30 me*--

/

\\

x 33

/ ^ \\

A/ \\ -

2 h 24

~

.35

~~

/ A

/

W/

'\\

^

/

\\

22 14

^-

// \\/

K\\/

V 20

~~

18 Y

^

16

)'E

~~

k 14 v

g 12 10 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour of the Day

+ LSIG-old Mean -+- New-LSIG Mean

Figure 14 MNS Lower Sigma Extremes per Hour from Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09) 100 90 I

A xl'A il A

//\\ \\

/\\/ / \\\\

r en

/\\/\\

1. \\\\ / lV

\\\\ A

/

.it'- Y\\

/ V/ v N\\//

\\XW la 0 > \\ \\/r U

VT/^

o 40 Aao

?j 30

.g.h Y

=A 20 ce Ms

-~

2 m

10 -v.

y

, g_ __

..m

~

1 0

3 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 ]

Hour of the Day l l nwa il

-+-- LSIG-old MIN -+- LSIG-old MAX -*- New-LSIG MIN + New-LSIG: MAX gff ij

Figure 15 MNS Hourly Upper SIGMA Composite: Concurrent Tower Observations (8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09)

^ 28 26

.e

,e

$ s /

\\

^/\\

a 22 20

/ /

\\\\

~

M '* --

//v u

g.; 16._

f g

h.h 14 u

yo

\\\\

g

~~

V

^

Y 8

1 2

3 4

5 6

7 8

9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Hour of the Day

-+- USIG-old Mean + New-USIG Mean i

Figure 16 MNS Upper SIGMA Extremes per Hour from Concurrent Tower Observations (8/1968 H14 - 9/1068 H09) 90 9

K 80 Q

!! yo --

1. U/ \\\\

/ F W 60

? t 50 --

// V' HX /

/

\\\\

s8 N.

/4 tI H\\

30 Y

l J g 20 r

x a

3 10 y q _. ~

-t 0

i 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 4

Hour of the Day i

.__ m ts

-+- USIG-old MIN -+- USIG-old MAX -+- New-USIG MIN;-*-New-USIG MAX da j, as rpe x.au

1 8.0 Conclusions i The new meteorological site at McGuire Nuclear Station has an open exposure in all t directions. Measurements from the new site will be more representative of fhe areas' meteorological conditions, than was the previous meteorological site. Meteorological conditions in the vicinity of the plant are influenced by proximity to Lake Norman. Data aberrations observed at the previous meteorological site were due to microscale terrain effects of the river valley and influence of nearby structures on temperature extremes and . wind flow. These are explained in more detail within the main body of this report. Dur* g the three week period of concurrent measurements, the prevailing wind directions m t were observed to be SW and NNE at both meteorological sites. Typical diurnal temperature curves were evidenced at both sites. There was no noticeable effect on temperature from proximity to the discharge canal at the new tower during this study. l l t mnsmetwr. doc pg.29

_-_m._ . y I i i APPENDIX A l McGuire Nuclear Station - Meteorology l l Basic Statistics from Concurrent Tower Observations (New Site and Old Site) l 1998 Period: 8/19/98 H14 - 9/10/98 H09 l Variable Label N Missing Mean Std Dev Median MIN MAX j I Hours Hour HOUR 524 n/a n/a n/a n/a 0 23 New 60m Upper NUWS Wind Speed 439 85 8.41 4.15 7.7 2 24.7 4 (mph) Old 40m Upper UWS Wind Speed 496 28 8.7 4.93 7.5 1.6 27.4 l l (mph) t New 10m Lower NLWS i Wind Speed 487 37 6.68 3.98 5.8 1.1 23.2 l (mph) l Old 10m Lower LWS l Wind Speed 496 28 6.05 4.1 5.05 0.6 21.1 [ (mph) New 60m Upper l l Wind Direction NUWD 418 106 179.33 114.1 218.5 0 358 Old 40m Upper Wind Direction UWD 496 28 188.04 113.35 208.0 0 360 New 10m Lower Wind Direction NLWD 487 37 185.7 109.12 217 0 359 i Old 10m Lower j Wind Direction LWD 496 28 177.77 106.89 201.5 0 360 l New Upper J l Sigma (~ 60m) NUSIG 486 38 15.13 11.93 12 2 84 Old Upper Sigma (~40m) US/G 496 28 16.3 13.27 12 2 85 New Lower l Sigma (~ 10m) NLSIG 486 38 20.22 12.89 16 6 92 l Old Lower. Sigma (~ 10m) LSIG 496 28 23.32 14.52 18 7 87 New Delta-T(C) (between 60m NDT 486 38 -0.21 0.75 -0.515 -1.17 2.78 and 10m) Old Delta-T(C) (between 40m DT 495 29 0.22 1.1 -0.28 -0.89 4.03 and 10m) New 10m Temperature (C) NTC 486 38 25.66 4.06 25.7 12.8 33.5 Old 10m Temperature (C) TC 495 29 25.36 4.58 25.4 10.3 33.6 l New Precipitation i (inches) NPOP 487 37 0 0.03 0 0 0.38 Old Precipitation j (inches) POP 276 248 0 0.01 0 0 0.2 mnsmetwr. doc pg.30 l .1}}