ML20366A014
| ML20366A014 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 12/29/2020 |
| From: | NRC/OCIO |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20366A007 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA, FOIA/PA-2017-0690, NRC-2017-000688 | |
| Download: ML20366A014 (37) | |
Text
LIC-15-0129 Enclosure Page 1 Public Discl ova of Enclosure, This Lett Fort Calhoun Station Flood Hazard Reevaluation Report Addendum 1 (SL-013016)
Revision 2 Public Disclosure Under Enclosure C tion.
nclosure, This Letter and its Attachment are
U<illil:cltl F:o::. Pubbc Diwtesa.:c ~ado 10 @fl\\ !3J8, @onmila 8ctdlltpkt&tW Jihbiii&dbii Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT ADDENDUM 1 SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261 October 2015 181 Safety-Related D Non-Safety-Related Serge 55 East Monroe Street
- Chicago, IL 60603 USA
- 312-269-2000 www.sargenuundy.com
\\llitbbold From Pt:hlie Pinhnn Ii ala 10 &fxR l.i99t Ssab::.a 8t:cc:ilJ ftelalat b1fo1awtiu11
Withhold From Public Disclosure r lodes I a CED 2 MIA, GaneaiRo r.11 111it9 A.elated le Es: ::alian Q_m~h~ f>u~l.i~ P.9wer District Fort Calhoun Station.
FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 LEGAL NOTICE SL-013016
- Revision-2 Project No.: 07751-261 This report was prepared by Sargent & Lundy, L.L:C. ("S&L"), expressly for the sole use of Omaha Public Power District
("Client") in accordance with the agreement between S&L and Client. This Deliverable was prepared using the degree of skill and care ordinarily exercised* by engineers practicing under similar circumstance~. Client acknowledges: {I) S&L prepared this Deliverable subject to the particular scope limitations, budgetary and time constraints, and business (!bjectivcs of the Client; (2) infonnation and data provided by others may not have been independently verified by S&L; and (3) the informatii>n and data contained in tllis Deliverable are time-sensitive and changes in the data, applicable codes, standards, and acceptable engineering practices may invalidate the findings of this Deliverable. Any use or reliance upon this Deliverable by third parties shall be at their sole risk.
Legal Notice ii h hhlitld Ftom Public e *11l11ttn Wu~er IC CPR ii 1P01
- a lairs Sea:1Fity Related Infssnatina Sargm~ Luncty***
) /
n ldtlt0td Ptottc Public 9iaels9bls U11d1r 19 QFR a aeo, Contains h'em:cisw Rc1atcd lnfwwation Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station -
FLOOD-HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 Pr~p11rer:.
M. Salehi
.1ol:J.9/ 15 Date SL-01301~
-Revi~ion 2 Projec( ~o.: 07751-261 Reviewer:
lo/,zq /1.r Signatures Iii N.M, Patti Date Approver:
B. E. Jelkt Date Withhold From Public Disclosure Under 10 CFR 2.390, Contains Security-Related Information
, \\\\1i~h1ee1A F:s:a P_slstie Biselusu_zc*ti,,J~r 18 8Pll t.998, &11tains Samit') ltclatccl t.1fb11zmtimt Omaha Public Power District fort Cijlhqun~S.tation:
FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1 TABLlfOF. CONTEi~ts...
.SlA>.13.0.1.6.
Revision 2.
Project No.: 077 51-261
- LEGAL.NOTICE................................................................................. :*******.............................................. II*
SIGNATURES................................. :................. ***............ ~.... ~......... ~.............. ;:............................ ;~........ ***........................ *. I II TABlE *OF *coNTENrs*... ;:.............. :.......... ;................................................................................. :...... ;* **,v
- LIST OF TABLES........ :.... :........................ :.............................. ;......'............................. :... :~................ *...... VI.
LIST OF FIGURES....................................................................... :.:.. :............................................... :;.. VII.
LIST OF ATTACHMENTS..... ;................... ;.... '........................... ~........................................-............,...... VIII LIST OF ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS.......... :..............,... i.....' **.*,.,...,.... -............. -....,............ :.......... IX*
INTRODUCTION/ PURPOSE................................................................................................................. X
- 1... ~J(M. FAILURE HYDROGRAPH DETERMiNATION (HYDROLOGIC EVALUA Tio~*) *................ 1-1
- 2.
DAM FAILURE WSEL AND VELOCITY DETERMINATION (HYDRAULIC EVALUATION)....... 2-1 2.1 Manning's Roughness Coefficient Adjustment.................................................................. 2-1 2.2 One-Dimensional Hydraulic Model...................................................................................... 2-2
- 2.3 One-Dimensional Hydraullc Model Results........................... ;............................................ 2-2 2.4 Two-Dimensional ~each-Scale Hydraulic Model............................................................... :2-3 2.4.1 Land Use Roughness Modiflcations..................................................... '........................ '.. 2.3 2.4.2 Computational Mesh Modifications................................................................................ 2-3 2.4.3 Boundary Conditions........................................................................ *..... :.............,.:......... 2-3 2.4.4 Sensitivity Analysis......................................................................................................... 2-4 2.4.5 Two-Dimensional Hydraulic Model Results :.............. ::... :..... :......... :..... :..... :......... ::... :... :2-4 *
- 3.
REFERENCES.......................................................................................................................,....... 3-1
- 4. -. TABLES ***. :.:.;:: *. :....................... :.:::::.:............... :*::.::.................... :...... '....... :......... '. *.,.....-.............-.... 4-1
- 5. - FIGURES........................................................................................................................................ 5-1 Table of Contents Iv 11/t&Wul* linm J>11~Ue Bisoloswc lf11de1 18 lPtt l.J,o, Cbii&lhS SECUnfy-keiaied lnformat,on
~
sa-ori~ & *
- _ _..__,,,
- - 7.,....._,,
i,\\ 1itldwld fzom r atllc b lSCIOSut@ Oiidef LO Ck R 2.390, Contams Secunty-Related [nfonnatioo Omaha Public Power District fort Calhoun.Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1
&1,.-013016 Revision-2_.
Project No.: 07751-261 6...ATTACHMENT~ *.............*....., *...** _
.............................................................................,................... 6~1 Table of Contents V
Wltiilidid fidiii fabllc !)lsetssmc th1dt1 18 E'FR i?.J5t9, 6 shltt"no 61111 il} J\\t hSt&l lnf.aR*atien
((.
Sarge nt: & Luncty**"'
.Y'
,,\\Sitlal:olel F:ai, Pdlslic if:cleu1 a if ala: 18 '3FR li:!190; ~a1111.in1 (i11111ie:, li\\11111~ '-M"' 1t:i1R Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhouri.Station***..
FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1 LIST OF-TABLES SL-013016
. Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261 Table 1. Land Use Types and Manning's Roughness Coefficients........................................................................................... 4-2 Table 2. Summary of Timing from Dam Failure Initiation at FCS..............................................................................................4-2 Table 3: St,imrpary of Maximum Dlsch9rg~ a.t Ups~am Boundary.and Maxlmu.m WSEL at Downstream Boundary......................... 4-2
~b~~~~~(~}~(~Table4,MonltoringPointSumma,:yEJ Hydrologlc Dam Failure)................................................................................. 4-3 I,I\\
IL \\l--,\\I,-,
List of Tables vi Wilbhc!d From Public Oisclos::re Tin~** 10 QPR i.390; 8eU1ai.:s 8ccmitJ<<tlaccd lihbiiiiLtiblt
Withhold From Rubik Pisc!os:1ce Ilndor IOCFR? 329,Cancains Sectmil§: Rotated I fa sties
. Om11'1!1 Pu~lic P~w<<,r Di_strl~t
.Fort Calhoun Station
.SL-013O16.
.Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261 FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1 LIST OF -FIGURES Figure 1. Spatial Distribution of Land Use Classes to Determine Manning's Roughness Coefficients...................................... 5-2 Figure 2. Study Area Overview................................................................................................................................................. 5-3 Figure 3. Computational Mesh Overview........,........................................................*.......... :.................................................*... 5--4 Figure 4. Computational Mesh Near FCS................................................................................................................................. 5-5 Figure 5. Building Roof Elevations Included in Model (ft NAVDBB)....................*.......*.............................................................. 5-6 Figure 6. (b)(3) 16 USC § Figure 7. 824o* 1 (d),
(b)(4) (b)
Flgure*a. (7)(F)
Figure 9.
Figure 1 ydrologlc Failure Upstream and Downstream Boundary Conditions...........................................*........... 5-7 ydrologlc Failure Velocity at 1/9/3000 23:00 (Time of Max. Velocity at FCS Site), Overview.....*............ 5-8 ydrologic Failure Velocity at 1/9/3000 23:00 (Time of Max. Velocity at FCS Site), Site-Level View........ 5-9 ydrologic Failure WSEL at 1/10/3000 22:40 (Time of Max. WSEL at FCS Site), Overvlew.........*......... 5-10 Hydrologic Failure WSEL at 1/10/3000 22:40 (Time of Max. WSEL at FCS Site), Site-Level View....... 5-11 Figure 11. FCS Site Monitoring Points for WSEL, Depth, and Velocity During the Dam Failure Events................................. 5-12 (b)(3) Hi U 5 t:igure 12.... I_
- _ ___.IHydrologlc Failure WSEL (Point 22) and Velocity (Point 21) at FCS..................................................... 5-13
§ 8240-l(d). (6)
List of Figures vii IUilhhllli in* P 1klic Pisolos::se 1 Jndtr 10 GER 2 390 Coctnirs Secusit)r Relaled Infuarericr
'."il~ltild N_b.a PabHc PllScWsate onaet to Ci-I,< 2.390, ConG1ns Secunty-Related Information
- Qn,J1'1t1 P.1,.1b[c towecJ)i11t.rJct *.
- f.:Qrt-C.alhoun-Sration
- l=LOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT~ ADDENDUM 1 L,sr OF.~T_TAGHMENTS SL-0130:f~*
- Revision*2-Pr0Jec1 *No.: 07751-261 Att1:1chment 1. Superseded s*ectlons of Reference 2................................. :............................................................................... 6-2 List of Attachments viii Withhold From Public Pi6slosum Tioder ]Q GER 2 399, Ce1tein1 [1111*r; n,1 lul f:1fu121:atlo11
~*
Sa~n,,,
Lundy"'
t{\\it.
\\Mitbbo!d From Puk,li1 liliul~l ttH ~~*~.~0-QFR ~.398, @cnfllials 8wmitJ 'llctt.ted* I11ftJ1mat!UU Omaha Public Power District Fort Calh_q~n,Statfon.. -
.SL-01.30.1.6._
_;* * *.*Revisioni2 *.:
FLOOD HAZARD REl!VALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1 Pr9Ject No.: 07751-261
- usT-OF... ACRON'YMS.-AND.-ABBREVIATIONS*-*,
- Ac;onym'or Allbrevlatlon 1-0, 2-0. 3-0 CF.I::
cfs FCS
~_EMA FHR.
FHRR fps or ft/s ft.
1-!Ec'-RAs hr ISFSI NAVD88 NLSWE NRC OPPD PMF RM USACE USGS V&V WSEL List of Acronyms and Abbreviations ix Explanatio'n *
- one-dirpensi<;>r:,al, two-dimensional,. t~ree-dlmensional
- Courant-Frledrichs-Lewy
- ,*.... -**.. -,-..,-.. ',..... _,,_ ~-
cubic feet per second fort Calho.uh Station Federal. !=mergency Management Agency flood hazard reevaluation.*
PHR Report feet per second feet Hydrologlc* Engineerl~g *Cenier River 'Analysis s'ystem hour independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation*
- North American Vertical Datum of 1988 Non~llnear Shallow Water Equation l,J.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Omaha Public Power District,
probable maximurn flood River MIJe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers United States Geological Survey verlflcatlon and validation.
water surface elevation
\\llithhold in* P11llli1 Qi, Lases l!.h:dca 18 @PR I.s,o, em1mu1s secllillY-MiiiCd Jhfonrihtion
,u~tbbold brow Prrblio Picw+/-!oiuric 11 d _ IC QiR 2 200, Ci t irs !iis fiit;r Rel tad t~fomarion Omaha :Public Power P istrjcl
- ~rt _c*aitiouri:sta_tion :-*......
FLOOD HAZARi>Rl!EVALUATION iRi!PORT..:.. ADDENDUM 1
- I NTRODUCT-ION eu.Re,ose.
.SL-013016
,*Revision-2 Project No.: 07751-26f 0
The.F6rt Caihoun Station (FCS) is located O(l the.west (right) bank-of the Missouri River in Washington County-near-Blair, Nebraska, at*approximate*Missouri River Mile (RM} 646.0*.
.In.response tQ th~ U.S. Nu"cle~r Regulatory.Commlssi~n (NRC} request.outlined.in Reference 1, a.
comprehensive stud~ of plausibli3°fldbdin{fmechanisms *vlas*-peiforii'ied/ The associatea Flood *Hazard*
- Reevaluation Report (FH~R) was transmitted to ttie NRC in February 2015 (Reference~). In that report (Refere11ce -.2)! flo9d hazards d~e to hypothetical-fa!lure_ot'the_dams that exist in the drainage area above the FCS were analyzed C!)mbining standard numerical* modeling tools, Hydrologic Engineering Center-River Analysis. System (HEC-RAS) (Reference*:3] and Hydrologic Engineering Center-Hydrologic Modeling System (HEC-HMS) [Reference 4) from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers*
-(USACE}. Aone.-dimensional (1-D} unsteady.HE.C-RAS'basin-scale hydraulic.model approach was
- originally-used to comput~. the water surface elev~tions (WSl;:Ls), depth, and velocities (see Section 2.3
- of, Reference 2): *Subsequ~ritly; *i~:orderto' *develop a *more e)(plicit representation of the* velqcity......
- "distribution between the-channel. and overbank;_ the following studies were performed and are *
. presented in this report:.
- . i-,djus,ing Manning*s*rougtiness coefficiehts:to accounffordepth of flow durin*g the dam failure events.
Updating the 1-D hydraulic model developed a*s.part of the FHRR (Reference 2)
- c*onsidering adjusted *Manning's roughness coefficient.
Developing a reach-scale 2-D (TUFLOW model) to more explicitly represent flow velocities, water depths, and channel/overbank velocity distributions for the dam failure flood simulations.
- This report (SL-013016) is Addendum 1 to the FHRR (Reference 2) and presents the methodology as well as res*ults of the updated 1-D HEC-RAS and 2-D TUFLOW dam failure analyses. This Addendum supersedes Sections 2.3.2.3 and 2.3.2.4 of the FHRR (Reference 2, see Attachment 1 ).
- 1ntroductlon I Purpose X
\\Mithhnld From Puh!ic DiscJosr:m tinder JO CSP 2 3901 Cscs:ins Seo:trill* Relered trfomation
\\1}~11,lu l* Fti1111 Paklit lili_tn!SBnra Pnd1t 10 GER 1190 Contains Scmri9r'Pel2sid ri,fnnreti0o.
.. Q~aJt~. P~b..l!!:i..P!n.*tfiltlU1tricC
- Foi:t,9~1ho~r\\.Station.
FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT-ADDENDUM 1.
SL-0130.16
.Revislon°2
- . Project ~o.: 07751-261
-1.
DAM;FAILUR.E. H~~ROGRAPH-,DETERMINATION... *(HVOROLOGlq*.
. EY!'~~~T.19~).
. Dam failure hycfrcigraphs are the' s*ame as those discussed in Section 2.3.*1 of the }looci Hazard Re.evaluation* Report (Reference 2).
- Dam Failure Hydrograph Determination (Hydro/ogle Evaluation) 1-1 Withhold Fwm P.l,~u. g j11l111i.1,,.~ ** Jg GFR i.398, eeub&ius 9cca1il} :Related flllbiiiiUilOh
wunnold Fm1tt ru611c 01sclbstifc unBEt 10 LFR L390, cooumg S&Mtty:@!oom nnQb.n1ttton
,*.~
. Omal)a.P..u~ii~ P.owei: District..
- Fort Calboun.. Station-..
FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION ~l!PORT-:- ADDENDtiM 1 SL-013016-
., Revlslcin.;t -
Proje~t No.: OTT51*2~1
- 2. DAM... FAILURE:WSELANp.-..vELQCIT:Y1DETER.MINAT_,oN* (HYDRAULIC..
EV~J-~ATI(:>~}__
The hyaraulic cciriditions*in the Missbuii°:River *between GaJinsP6int" Dam (appro><imat~ River Mie
- [RM] 810.0)* and Fort Calhoun Statipn-"([FCS], approximate RM 646.0) during *flood flows are complex
. du~. t9. !tie.P~~sence Qf re_vetrn~nts, rivElr:tra1ning.structures/ levees, roaaway embankments,.river meanders; and bridges. To evaluate this complexity;*a multi-leveled m9deling approach was adopted (s\\milar to the probable ma~*imum flood *[PMF]_ study i!'l Section 2._2 o~ Reference 2), vyhidi is presented in this
~ddendur:n. A 195-mlle:basin-scale*(from*~M.810.to:RM 615) ori_e-0imerisicinal (1-D)'Hydrologic
- Engineeri_ng Center-River An_alysis.Sy_stem.(HEC-RAS)*[R~ference 3] unst~ady model, originally developecf in Reference 2, was used t6 predict translation and atteijuatioil of th~ dam failure hydrograph in. the Missouri ~iver from G~vins Point D~m* to FCS. __ The results from the f~D. basin-scale ro~ting
- model were then used. as upstream and downstream boundary conditions for a reach-scale twos dimensiooai_ (2.:D) liycfr~uJic mqdel. _In :add_it!cm.,Jti.e. r~~l.41ts*trqm t~e*.1.~D basin.:scal~_hydraulic model.
were used to detemiine* the travel time and the flooding dwation.*This.reach-scale:'model,".. _
a*pproximately 20 miles long, was fu_rther used to predict the* con:,plicated interaction between the river channel and*overbank areas that provioes*an estimate of.flow di"stribUtions n*eat'FCS. ThEHesulfs from this 2--*reach-scale niooel were used* to"-preclict *water surface *etevations (WSELs ), depths, and
. velocities at FCS for the dain failure scenarios..
2.1 MANNING'S ROUGHNESS CO.EFFICIENT ADJUSTMENT Figure 1 shows that the land use types are classified into 1 b broad categodes over the model domain.
Research provided by Chow (Reference 5) and Fread*(Refer:ence 6) indicates*that when the channel
- banks are exceeded and shallow flow _exists in the floodplain, the tota! resistance has a tendency to remain the same or increase, since the overbank roughness is generally higher than the channel roughness. However, as flow stages increase in the *overbank, as occur especially in larger systems in the United States, the. resistance* effect c~n: remain the same. or slightly decrease. Based on graphical data provided by Chow and Fread showing Manning's roughness coefficient *(also known as Manning's n) versus discharge on.the Mississippi *River, the Manning's roughness coefficieht can*
remain the same or decrease up to_ 20% for stages* above bankfull. On the Nishnabotna River, Chow provides tabular data that indicate Manning's roughness coefficient for a corn field woultj not decrease for depths greater than 4 feet (ft), while for a pa_sture, Manning's roughness coefficient could decrease approximately 20%. These data suggest that the reduction of Manning's roughness coefficient up to 20% may be appropriate for some land use coverages to account for depth of flow.
Based on the results of the FCS FH R HEC-RAS unsteady model, the depth of flow on the floodplain near the facility could exceed pO ft (Section 2._3 9f Reference 2). Therefore, fo,r purposes of dan,.failure modeling, *the.Manning's *roughness *coefficients. were reduc~d 20% *for llie gra"sslana, wetlands, arid row crops land use areas within the modeled domain. Despite Chow's data, for conservatism, it was assumed that corn and other row crops would be flattened and/or uprooted at the depths expected Dam Fa/lure WSEL anc/ Velocity Determination (Hydraulic Evaluation) 2-1
,u;t1/2cl1 Fmrn Rn1htio Disr!ca:re Jladar 10 C6A 3 lPQ; '10Atein1 Ooemit) R:etalcd 11zfu1_mutio11
'W fl'ld1old,P1tna PUbllt t,u:ctosute t1ndei t& t!P.Pt. 2.390, COli&hiS !a:atlty-Rl!lated ltllbima1.h:.
Qn,Jnil-~4PIJj:,f!p,w.~(.0l~trict :.
~ort Galhoun*statioh*
FLO~D HAZARD, REEVALUATION REPORT-: ADDE.NDUM.1 SL;.'o:t30:16.
-R~visiori '2,-
1
' 1 '....
Project No.: OF51:261 dµ.rl~,Q,'.i;l,,j:t~:it:o/aU\\Jt~::fl<:>9.d, ev,~nt.,:J~~r.ef~re,)h~ -Man~iog's' roughne~s. coeffic_ient.fqr-row cropi-.was al~o
- tj~~rea,~e9~-~Y-.~P/1/oi RqVJs.~rops:pc;:cupy~ove.[-1.S%*.Pf t~eJl9odpJa\\n:land,use,."Yit~in,the:mqdErled:-;~0ma/"'
(Figure. 1 ).. M~nliing'.s rollgh~ess* coefficients were not decreased for' the open~w~ter:land* us~.areas*.
( ch~nnel*and:. othe~0w.ater.:~odies} becatise*the-roughness*would not**change due.. to::depth; 'l't
- iirnlso as'sumed that'the* forest *or urban-lahcl obstructions would remain in place durin*g a dam* failure' event, which "wbi.i'ic:foccupy"'the. majority 9fthe w~ter-coJumn. Thereto.re; their *Manning's.rough~ess'.cbefficients_
were~nqt decreased:'Howevei'; Manning's'roughj'less*coefficients on the site were reduced since*tne*
b1,1jl~ln:gs :w.ei'e_ eXjj{LGltlY,: reptesented,.as:*qlscJssed. in Section 2.4:2.. J:,~ased~on.. valu~s* prdvldEfd *Jn.. '.
Reference.s and ad~ounting for.the presence* of vario1,.1s concrete barriers and appurt~nailces, a value
- ,f o.:025.was ~:elected for paved and gravel areas and a value of 0.028 was selected* (or:_g*ras*sed* areas.
In 'adci'itl9r\\';.the switchyard,areas'were assig'ned.a value bf 0.08 since there are nu'merous concrete foun,datipns. and metal 'structures consistent with treed areas. \\. '
I,
,t Table 1* 'its.ts the Man,:iintts rou'ghness 'coefficient associated with each land use ty~e used in thA FHRR
(~eference.' 2),'aricf in,this 'Addendum.
l 2.i... ONE-DIMENSIONAL**HYDRAULIC MODEL
~
Tti~ *1~0 t-:iEC-RAS.mq~el 'of.the' Missouri. ~iver developed for.the dam*fallur~* ar:ialysis is ful,ly describ~'d in *se-etidn::t3*zof Ref¢reiice 2. Jtie ex.isti~g HEC-RAS model was update<ffor Manning's. roughness...
coefficiel)\\s,' discus*s(;?cl in Section 2.1.. of this Addendum, and re-ruh to establish* the-2-D moijel.
boundary conditions.,The updated 'HEC:RAs unsteady model Is referred to i;IS the Updated Dam.
Failure HEC.iRAS :unsteady Model. In addition, the Updated Dam Failure HEC;RAS Unsteady Model
- was used to determine ttie:.travel time from dam failure Initiation and duration of flooding above the site protection level'. As discussed in Section 2.3.2.1 of the *FHRR, *all Non-System dams were found to be noncritical *and the cumulative effects.of these noncritical dams were carried forward and added to r~fined estimates for: the;critical dams. The following sc~narios were considered:
(b)(3) 16.u s r.*.'... -~-*1.............
W~drologlc Fallu're: ~
is one of the three largest of the System dams.
~}2,~?;;,~~; (b)
T_he. hydrologic. failure.scenarl~
cted because of its high magnitude of peak flow.
due to ea*scadlng failure of the downstream System dams (Reference 2).
(b)(3) 16 US.9.........
- Osunny-Day F~i/ure: This scenario was selected because of its high magnitude of
§ s:i4o 1ldr(b) pe_ ak flow with shorter.I,ead time (Reference 2} compared to the -
Hydrologlc H\\ li-.\\17\\lr\\
Dam Failure: Lead time is considered as the time from initiation o am. a1lure to peak WSEL arrival at FCS.
9 thE!'r da~ failur.e s~enar_i.~s. dis_cus.sed in. ~eference 2. were not considered, as t~~y are (lot limiting for WSEL, velocity, or flooding durations at the site.
- 2.3 ONE-DIMENSIONAL HYDRAULIC MODEL RESULTS The Updated Dam F~ilure HEC-RAS Unsteady Model was executed using both d~m failure* scenarios descri.bed in Section 2.2. Similar to the results previously evaluated in Reference i the (bJ(3) 16 u s c § 8240-1 (d) (b)(4)
Dam Fa/lure WSEL and Velocity Determination (Hydraulic Evaluation) 2-2 WHI!bold From Public Dicclou1m J Jodee 10 GfR 2 399 Contain~ Ssstmtv*Related Jnfo"?'atioo (b)(?)(F)
(b)(3) 16 U SC
"§824o:1(d). (b)
IA\\
/1,,,\\17\\Jr""\\
Wid!bold 5mm Prnhlin Dico,os::i:e 1r d JO G~A a* aOe..Q,ni1ini_lil1i~t, R l~kd lufs11i1411i*9,~*
__ Omaha P.ublic.. Power..District.
SL-0:130.16..
.. Fort*Calhoun,Statlon-
- Revision'-2
- FLOOD HAZARD Rl!EVALUATION REPORT -
ADDl!NDUM 1 Project l'Jo.: 07751-261
- Based *on *the*Updated Dam Failure HEC-HAS*Unsteady _Model;* the peak**stage/ time*to peak* stage, elapsed time_ for fl(?od ~ater 'to e~*ceed _plant_floqd prot~ct.io.n* lev~I, ~nd _thifd11ration_'of flood,above pla11\\
flood protection level_ for.both dam failure scenarios are shown inTable 2.
2.4.:.. *:.TWO;DIMENSIONAL REA.CH-SCALEHYDRAULIC:M()~EL I
~
A detailed 2-D hydraulic model of the Missouri River near FCS was develope~ using TUFLOW.FV software to evaluate the PMF at FCS. That*model is described in detail in Sections 2.2.3.3.1 and 2.2.3.3.2 of *
- Reference 2. The modeled (i.e., 2-0) reach of the Missouri RiYer* extenaed from north of Blair, Nebraska.
(approximate RM 655), to south of Fort Calhoun, Nebraska (approximate RM 635)-:--see Figure 2. The*.
existing 2.:0 model was further revised to better address* hyqrai:IUcs of the study area d~ri,:ig th~ dam failure:
- event and. used to determine spatially and temporally varying information a!Jout WSELs, depths, and
. ve!ocilie~u:)t FCS for.the dam fa!lure.s.cenarios.* Modlficatio,:is tq.the.original.2-D P.MF.model.are.........
desc'ribed in Sections 2.4.1, 2.4.2, and 2.4.3 below. All other parameters were kept unchanged. The modified PMF TUFLOW model is referred tq as the Dam Failure TUFLOW Model.
2;4;1. Land Use* Roughness*Modlflcatlons Adjusted Manning's roughness coefficients, as described in. Section 2.1, were used in the 2-0 dam failure.
study.
2.4.2 Computational Mesh Modifications The study area is represented by a computational niesh containing 116,964 unstructured elements. As illustrated in Figure 3 and Figure 4, the mesh is coarser in areas that are farther away from FCS and finer in areas where more detail is required. Node spacing ranges from approximately 20 ft near FCS to 800 ft on the bluffs surrounding the river valley. The modifications to the original PMF TU FLOW Model to develop the Dam Failure TUFLOW Model (Section 2.2 of Reference 2) included decreasing the mesh resolution in the vicinity of FCS to allow for reasonable runtimes and incorporating building rooftop elevations (see Figure S); rather than representing the buildings as blocked ineffective areas of infinite height, to allow the buildings to be overtopped.
2.4.3 Boundary Conditions I***
The location and type of boundary conditions are shown In Figure 2. Three inflow discharge boundaries were used: one for each overbank and one for the channel. The flow distribution between the overbanks and main channel for the Missouri River was *~etermined using the Updated Dam Failure HEC-RAS Unsteady Model (see Section 2.2) results. As pa'1 of the* HEC-RAS water surface profile calculation procedure,* conveyance **
calculations were performed to detemil~ discharge conveyed in both the overbanks* and main channel. A stage hydrograph from the Updated Dam Failure HEC-RAS. Unsteady Model was used as the downstream Dam Failure WSEL and Velocity Determination (Hydraulic Evaluation) 2-3
'!'ifbbold From Public Disc!osure Tinder 10 GER 2 ?AA, Gontains Sca:rrit)r R1l111t1 l*N*11i1A
.. _*. w'iinhold Fidlh PbbhE b:&t@saie Oii&t 10* erk _.$90, eci:sbcs !Jccmlt, fl clst J hLzia t'
~ '
Omaha Pubiic Power Dlstilct f p~_Ca/.hO!,Jf.l_St~~iQ.i:l,.o. -*-----
FLOOD HAZARD "El!VALUATION R~PcSRT -
ADDENDUM 1
- SL-0.1~ot6.
- Reliisi6n *2.
Project No.: on51-261 i:i9~ri~~.~,P.?~~~~Q: ~ -~tti.P~-~ -t~_il_µ~-J_l,JFLOW.,~9~1, Toe.inft~ an9 -~tage_hydrog~ph for.the (~!~~) i~(~l s(~(?~(~~
40
. q~m fc:!1lvre.:s.cer.iar:io.1s $hown m.f *g~,:~_6..
. on1y:.flo~s.fron,.th*e System.and-Non-system dams-were considered for inflow boundary conditions;*no** --. *
- tributary inflows*were addecllcfthe model.ddmain.below the up.stream boundary. Table 3 provides a summary of the maximonrdis'charge afthtfupstream*oouiidary and maximum WSEL at the downstream boundary for
- both scenarios:
- v,:4** * -serisitivitv* ""ailysis
- . S_ensltivity analyses were perf~ed to esti;ate the Influence of WSEL and vel~city at FCS for _upstream
. bdundary conditions ahq.tor* the $magorinsky *coefficient. For the upstream boundary; discharges we"8
- reduced 20% in the left p~erbank and increased in the right overbank and the main channel such that the
.original.discharge distribution.was *mainta.ined *between the main channel and right overbank. The
~magorinsky.°ooefficient was also changed '(Vithih its acceptable range*. Results showed that their influenCEt on the hydraulic characteristics at the site was limited' to none.
- -r.
~..
2.4.5 Two-Dimensional *Hyd~aulic Model Results (b)(3)16USC
§ 824o-1(d); {n~s discUsse:d in~ectioiis 2!2 *a:~a::t:i[3; ffie hydrologic dam failure hydrograph combined with
"',wl\\lr, *the Non-System dam failure hydrograph *{described In Section 2.3.. o e erence 2) were used as.
- upstream boundary cor'iditlon,s.*_of the.*rea_ ch-sea
.. le 2-0 model. *T.he hydrologic dam-failure............ (lll(3) 16 us C
§ 824o=1(d), (b) simulation produced the.hig~est'peak discharge ~nd thus highest p scnarge through the site * *
{Reference 2).
The discharge approaches FCS fr(!m the.right floodp,lain and flows through the site primarily from
- northwest to southeast; continuing along the right bank'*floodplaln downstream of the site. As a result,
- WSELs generally are the.highest at the northwest corner of the site. Once the site becomes inundated; the flow patterns through tlie site *generally _remain conslsten~ during. the dam failure events.
Contours of maximum velocity are shown* in Figure 7 a'nd Figure 8. Contours of maximum WSELs are shown in Figure 9 and Figure 10. The WSEL, velocity magnitude, and depth were monitored at 22 points throughout the F*cs site model.at key facilities within the protected area and around the site
{see Figure 11.). TIJe W,SEL time series was reported at Monitoring Point 22 on the north side of the new warehouse and the velocity time series was reported at Monitoring Point 21 on the west side of the radwaste building. Figure 12 show the WSELs and velocities at these two monitoring points. A
- summary of grade elevation,. maximum VY_SEL, ma.ximum yelocity, and n:iaximum depth is provi~ed in
'Table 4.
The highest-modeled veloc.ities* on the site are at the corners of buildings, where flow accelerates
- around.the corners and.in.areas. between buildihgs that are.aligned with-the-primary direction-of flow.
The highest velocities in the yicinity of a Priority 1 facility were approximately 5.6 feet per second (fps}
11ear the condens1:1te tank: Maximum velocities on the remainder of the site ranged from less than 1.0 fps to 7.0 fps. At the.Intake Structure, velocities peak around 5.0 fps.
Dam Fa/lure WSEL and Velocity Determination (Hydraulic Evaluation) 2-4 WitiiiiOIU I'?"' I at,Uo ~lsulss_mo W: Jc: JO iFR a 708; C ssa*, a SsanriQs Rcleted Tufonpetioe
,uirhhdd &om B::b!in Pinales II f JO GER 2 300; Q1 1.
Q ** *,, A I t J ( C f
1 Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station.
FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1
. SL-01301.6 Revision-2 Project No.: on51-261 Maximum WSELs ranged fr9m.. 1053.5 ft North American. Vertic,:~I _Datum 1988.(ft NAVD88) at.the.
ups~ream end of the site (near.the Maintenance Building) to 1053._2 ft NAVD88 at.the down~tream end of the site (at the training center).
Dam Failure WSEL and Velocity Determination (Hydraulic Evaluation) 2-5
\\Hi ebb aid From D Lr o*
lit Jt 10 'ifR 81i~Q;Qs::1lli.:s8cca:il) ftelatcd lihbiiii:Ulbii
/(
Sargor\\ti~-Lunclyt
)7
wmino:a 11am t uoac'fJuctatmc !J:idtt 10 e1 R 1.JJO, ecimal.JJ 8ecs:it5 R elstcd h2£ f
Omaha'Publlc *Power Dasmct
.Sb0:13016.
J=ori Calt,ouo:st~tion.* - -*.
.. Revislon-2:
FLOOD HAZARD Rl!i!V~UATION REPORT -ADDE~D~M 1
- Projeci No.: 0TT51-261
- 3.
.Re.~ERENCES,
- 1. u.s*: Nuclear Regulatory Commission,-Request for lnformatio'n Pursuant To Title 10 ofThe
-Code of-Federal Regulat.ions 50.54(f) Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3; And 9.3, of The Near-:rer111 Task Force*Revlew of Insights from-The Fukushima Dai~ichi Accident, March 12,
.2.012.
- 2. Fort Calhoun Station - Flood Hazard Reevaluation Report, SL-012448, Revision 0, Project No.
07751-261,.January 2015. *
- 3. U.S. Army Corps of Engineer~ '(USAGE}. *January 2010. River An~lysis* System *HEC-RAS Version 4. ~. USAGE, Hydrologi'c Engin*eering Center, Davis, California.
- 4. U.S. Army Corps of Engin*eers (USAC~). August.2010:. Hydrologic Modeling System HEC.:HMS
- -Version 3.5. *l:J:S: *Army* Coi'ps *of Engineers,- Hydrologic*Engineering* Center:. Davis, California.
5.. Chow:* _1~59:. Open ~h~nn~! Hy~-~aulics_. McGraw Hill..
- 6. i=read, Danny L. 1989, "Fl~oiRouti~g M*~d~i~ a~d-'the.Mannirig's n." Proceedings of the International Conference on Channel Flow and Catchment Runoff, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, Virginia, May 22-26, 1989,.pp 421-435.
References 3-1
\\Hitbbold Fsorn Prb!is Disslsst n Under JO GER 2 ?M1 Ce t. 1 £ ::sit): Pskted bf f1
Ohhltbld P:toiil i Ubilt b lttlUSdlt UJ.Ma 16 Ci K 2.396, CdllillU:§ S&Wit§-Kefal&i (hlbifilit@il Omaha Public Power District Fo_,tCalhouo~Staticiri...
FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1
- 4.
TAaLES The tables associated with Addendum 1 are presented on the following P!:iges.
Tables 4-1
\\YitbboJd from Public DiscloSJ1m l'ndec 10 GER 2 390 Coereins Secr1rit1c Related fnfcnssioo
... SL-0.13016
. Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261
Withhold from P11h1io Disclosnm finder 19 GER 2 390 Corsairs Sem,ribr Relared 'rfowation Omaha Public Power District
. Fort Calh.ouri"station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT-ADDl!NDUM 1 TaQle _1. L.and Use.Types an_(:! Ma~ning's Roughne~s Coefficients Land Use Cover PMF TUFLOW Model Oam Failure TUFLOW (Reference 2)
Model (this analysis)
Open Water 0.025 0.025 Wetlands 0.040 0.032..
Forest 0.100 0.. 100 Grassland 0.040 0.032 Row Crops 0.040 0.032 Urban 0.120 0.120 Roads 0.015 0,015 Paved and Gravel 0.025*
Areas at Site Swltchyard 0.08 Grassed Areas at Site 0.028 Table 2. Summary of Timing from Dam Failure Initiation at FCS (b)(3) 16 USC § 8?4o-1(d) (b)(4), (b)(7)(F)
. SL-013016
.- Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261 Table 3. Summary of Maximum Discharge at Upstream Boundary and Maximum WSEL at Downstre*am Boundary Tables 4-2 Boundary Condition Fort Peck Hydrologlc Inflow Discharge (cfs) 10,288,214 Downstream WSEL (ft NAVD88) 1050.60 Wilhhoid f rom Pubhc b,sclosurC Under lb CPR 2.596, C&llulilS SttUiltj llclatal f..fu:.:afo
(('
Sor.ganr. &Lundyl,c
_)/
Withhold 5mm P11b]ic Disclos;;se I Judas : OGER a 208; i
- s 8ssuit, Related h11sr111mlu1 O~_a!la Public Power 01,trict SL~13016 Fort Calhoun-8tation Revision 2 FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT-ADDENDUM 1 Project No.: 07751*261 (b)(3) 16 U SC
§ 8240-f{d}:(b)"'
Tables 4-3
~ ydrologic Dam Failure)
Tabhr4: Monitoring* Po'lnt s.ummary ***
- Grade Monitoring Point Elevation (ft NAVD88)
Priority 1 Structures
- 3. Intake Structure - E
- 4. Cond. Tank
- SE 1005.9
- 8. Security BUIiding - NW 1004.2
- 10. Radwaste - SW 1004.3
- 15. West 345 Building - SW 1005.0
- 17. 161 Building - SW 1003.8
- 19. Containment Building - S 1005.7
- 20. Intake Structure - N 1004.2
- 21. Radwaste - W 1004.8 Priority 2 Structures
- 1. New Warehouse - NE 1003.7
- 6. New Warehouse - SW 1005.2
- 9. Building B - NE 1005.2
- 11. Old Warehouse - SW 1003.9
- 12. Admin Building - NE 1006.7
- 13. Building A - SW 1004.4
- 14. Admln Building
- NW 1007.5
- 16. Training Center - SE 1008.7
- 22. New Warehouse - N 1004.1 Miscellaneous Locations
- 2. Maintenance - NE 1003.7
- 7. Base Embankment ISFSI
- SW 1005.6
- 18. Roadway 1008.4 Notes:
- 1.
WSEL on the River side or the Intake structure.
Maximum WSEL (ft NAVD88) 1053.4 (l) 1053.3 1053.4 1053.3 1053.3 1053.4 1053.4 1053.3 1053.4 1053.3 1053.4 1053.4 1053.4 1053.3 1053.3 1053.3 1053.3 1053.2 1053.4 1053.5 1053.4 1053.3
- 2.
Velocity parallel to the intake structure on the River side.
Maxlmu*m Velocity (fps) 12.8 (2) 5.6 3.6 4.1 3.6 2.8 3.6 1.3 5.0 4.7 2.4 2.1 3.7 4.6 4.1 4.1 4.8 6.4 2.3 4.0 2.9 5.1
¥:Iithl:olel F:cm P tr iis 1cc l'1 *
- IC GJiilil 2 ?PO; S111
- 11 Sneuicr R eletsd Information Maximum Depth (ft) 47.4 43.5 49.1 49.0 48.4 49.6 47.6 49.2 48.5 49.7 48.2 48.2 49.4 46.6 48.9 45.8 44.5 49.3 49.8 47.8 44,9
/('
( '
Sargone & Luncfyl
))
./
\\1filld1Ghl fltom l'td,liu Dis'elssuio'U Jet U Oflil:'U!IO~.Oe::l'liii.s 8 i"l!J _II ltli d I f 11° Om~ha 'eubll~--~QW~rJ>.J*trlct
- f:=ort:Calhoun;Sfa~on-FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDl!NDUM.1
- 5. :FIGURES The figures associated with Addendum 1 are presented on the. following pages.
Figures 5-1
\\Mitbho!d From Rrblie Diesi I I d 1 o, &:FR 3 108; is: *. u 8ccmit; fttl&ttd IaiO:Uldilbii
- Si..=0130.1.6
.. sRevision**2
.
- Project No.:.077'5.1-261
ii ill!l!ehl F:c:a p I r iii. I Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station JJ
- o CSP 2 100 Casb:ss Sam,rinr Rc!ated lofnTJD!iM FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 0TT51-261 Figure 1. Spatial Distribution of Land Use Classes to Determine Manning's Roughness Coefficients Figures 5-2 Grassland Row Crop$
Urban Roads FCS Paved and Gravel Areas FCS Swrtchyards W1ffifioid Ffoul fbblk biSUUkdiE 01&1 lb Li it lSJO~ C&IWJM 3t&litJ lttl&tcd 11:fo::ua.:o::
\\ i i.111:eld F. cm Potl I e-. I n 1 10 crn a zoo c o *, Sx:rrist* Rtlsted !sf?naaaa Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 Figures 5-3
\\1/rthb Id 5 D hf D Figure 2. Study Area Overview U I IO ti'JiR J JOU; 6
- 6 it; ftela.ed l::fJ:::.a:ia::
SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261
1\\lnld:eld F P ll Iii II re CSP 7 JOO c r::os Snmtr Rsfasod tef?mnr:oc Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 Figure 3. Computational Mesh Overview Figures 5-4 Wjfhhgld From PuhJis PisrJovrrr I lodes )0 CFB 2 JOO Cas:e*es £ I) Aul 11 fi MIOII SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 0TT51-261 LA..lnc:ty&;.t
Whhhdld I ibid I UOIIL b&!IOSWt btidt. 19 @fiR !J91, 8ans 6
Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1
- 2 1 t d I E Figure 4. Computational Mesh Near FCS Figures 5-5 Hrtbh Id F P tr 9 I
c l4 de 10 @PR!JJO, CUUUfliB samltJ itttStEG iiiiOIIHJUffil SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: ons1-2s1 Lundy*"
Wldlt:Cto I lOlli I dl!Jllt 8txlcsau l!fmte:. 18 @FR il.i98; 0
. S
. ; Pn!st I I sfomat:es Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1 Figures 5-6 Figure 5. Building Roof Elevations Included in Model (ft NAVD88)
\\l/ithhold From !brhr*... Pisclosn 1 'cdes 10 CFS 7 190 Coomins Sr:rriqc Related Infrwatior SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: OTT51-261 Lu.ncty*~*
(b)(3) 16 USC' V\\thltoldf:o:11P bf Ba Is uUmk:t 10 0FA:l.~91, 8sam:a8zzmu; R Is dlnfa:11 Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: ons1-2s1
§ 8240 l(d)'(b)****
Figure 6 ydrologic Failure Upstream and Downstream Boundary Conditions 8,000 7,000 6,000 I
5.000 i 4,000 8,
13.000 2.000 1.000 0,,
~--/
Figures 5.7 1060 1040 1000 990
/'
Dale Ltil~CMcllargt -- MMICll,mejOtclwgl
-R,ghlCMRlnle[),IChlrgt SIIQt Lund\\,'.
llttlt IA lies P kl O:s lesmc~::Ja I0@Flt. SJ0, C&t&ihiS&WitJ.R&ldltiiibih&llotl
ur t t 11 C Ptthl c 0 I ?ados 10 GER 7 JWl Cemains Smmor Related lofumeboo Omaha Public Power District SL-013016 Fort Calhoun Station Revision 2 (b)(3) 16 us C FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATIOtLI-UJ!tOR:X.,.~ -Ao--o-EN_DU_M_1 _____________
Pr_oJ_ec
_ 1 N_o_._: o_n_s_1_-2_s_1
§ 8240-l(dr(b} _____ _
IA\\ lh\\l l\\lC\\
Figures 5-8 Figure 7.
Hydrologlc Failure Velocity at 1/9/3000 23:00
, * "**- -* " ax. Velocity at FCS Site), Overview 6
5 4
3 2
1 0
111 d.1 I~ F P 11 Q
JO CSP 2 290 C re:ns Srurir11 Pala,sd lnf?PP?'ioa Lundy* t
\\Wrbbo!d Ercr Rr:t!is o*sst Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station 10 CFA iOlt Oc.:ahs 8ttSltj Rtl&IW lilibiiiCddll FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1 (b)(3) 16 U SC
§ 8240-l(d} (b)
Figure 8..__ __
...r ydrologlc Failure Velocity at 1/9/3000 23:00 (Time of Max. Velocity at FCS Site), Site-Level View JA\\ IL.\\17\\Jr\\
Figures 5-9 Y:'ifbbo'd from P::b!ir Disrlesuz I rndx to CFR 2 JM, c z s
3 A I d luft..:mtic::
SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261
\\f'i:htsld from Rr:blic Prss'x::a I Inds IA GER 2 JWJ Carr:ins Seamer RtlO'M JnWrratiRP Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 (b)(3) 16 USC
§ 824o-1(d') (bj.
IA\\ th.\\17\\IC\\
Figures 5-10 Fort Calhoun Station WSE (ft, NAVD88) 1054.0 1053.8 1053.6 1053.4 1053.2 1053.0 1052.8 1052.6 1052.4 1052.2 1052.0 Withhold Ernm Pt:hliz Disslem I' d 12 CSP 3 309; g 1053.
A
,, n I I d' fsu a :c::
SL--013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261 Lunctv' '.
W l&IIICIEI 1'"6111 P&l!Ut etszlosmc ~lickt IO OliR UH, I!
Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 (b)(3) 16 USC 0
591 dlf
§ 824-0-f(d)(b)"- - ---------+---
Figure 1oi----.................. Hydrologic Failure WSEL at 1/10/3000 22:40 (T me or Max. WSEL at FCS Site), Site-Level View Figures 5-11 WSE (ft, NAVD88) 1054.0 1053.9 1053.8 1053.7 1053.6 1053.5 1053.4 1053.3 1053.2 1053.1 1053.0
'l:firbho'd From Pt:hfin Nmbs::m It d IA GER 2 JOO Cs ce*ss So
- sg 9 I t d I C SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 07751-261 a.rg.
&Lundy
Wuhho@ Prom Ml6Uc 61§2:lo)dfC Ofi&r lb Lf!k 2396, L&l&ii& SRWl(j4&1JLW iiiiblllllbii Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1 SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 0TT51-261 Figure 11. FCS Site Monitoring Points for WSEL, Depth, and Velocity During the Dam Failure Events Figures 5-12 UC,hho! t 5 am Br hi D U d f 9 GliP 3 390: '7 1
Lundy*.
6
- 15 Ad tad lnftmz::o::
(b)(3) 16 U.S OU IJUIOIJ I lbiil I &Bllt BIRIUSGIC tlii&i id Ci K 096, Cbil&II& SECWhj-K'.6&1&111tldliiUll611 Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEvALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1
§ 824o-1(d),"'(b) * * * -
SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: ons1-2s1 Figure 12.
Hydrologic Failure WSEL (Point 22) and Velocity (Point 21) at FCS 1060 1050 I 1CMO J
~ t 1030 1
~
- 1020 1010 Figures 5-13 60 50 4.0 I
30 I 20 10 W*Sw1-Ele~ -
Vtloaty WitbboJd from R11bl1C O,scJosr !Inds 10 CSP 215¥' Conhins Sr ritr Rnktnd JnCt a: n
IVitbbald 6 D tr D Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station II IC GJiA a Jee, o,,.. 5 0
'1; Ii\\ I led lt:Js:utMIJit FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1
- 6.
ATTACHMENTS Sl-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 0TT51-261 The sections within Reference 2 that are superseded by this Addendum are indicated on the following pages.
Attachments 6-1 11r11J Id f P ~r 9
- I 1 1 I ' I IP iEA 3 lPP1 i S
' 3Al1dlf i'
Ill.11 IJ F Pftht 81wtssae l!f:.d& II @lift -.3)0, E!&i&i.11 lt!C&hj RctsiW illiOllliibii Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -
ADDENDUM 1 SL--013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 0TT51-261 Attachments 6-2. Superseded Sections of Reference 2 Omaha Public: Power Dlaa1Q F 011 C.l'loun Stal10n FLOOD HAzAIIO ftUVALUAflON 11,0IIT SL..012448 Revision 0 level or 1014.5 n NAV088, ell Non-System dams below Gavlns Point Dem end above the FCS s11e were considered as noncr111cat All HEC-RAS model smutebolls executed yielded stable end oonverged results.
2.3.2.2 Route Combined System and Non.system Dam Failure Hydrographt to the FCS Site (b){3) 1 b U S C § 824o-1{d) (b)(4) (b 7){F) 2 :u.3 Water Len is and Time to Peu Water Levels (b)(3) lo US l
~ 824011d) (bi 1) (b1(/l I) 2.3,..,,
Velocities (b)(3) 16 USC § 824o*1[d) (b)(4) {b)(7)(f)
Ill 111 IH P,r Ii'" I I' J IO GFR i JP81 Ii 6
,, n 1 11 JI r 1"1 Lundy* *
'1111 l*F PII Ii' I ll
- 10 GliA ii l08, &
Ii 15 II I 11 f Omaha Public Power District Fort Calhoun Station FLOOD HAZARD REEVALUATION REPORT -ADDENDUM 1 SL-013016 Revision 2 Project No.: 0TT51-261 Attachments 6-3. Superseded Sections of Reference 2, continued Omaha Publlc Power Dlatr1ct Fon CAihoun Station FLOOD HAZAAD ftUVALUAllON llaPollT (b)(3) 1o USC § 8240 l(d) (b)\\4) (b)(7)(F) 2.3.3 Combined Effects SL-0124-48 Revision 0 PNljod No onS1.J11 Impact at the FCS site resulting from wind wave action dur1ng an upstream dam failure In the Missouri River was evaluated. The contribOtJon ot waves to nood levels resulting Q ted wind wave for the Main Building Complex and the Intake Structure was evaluated The ydrok>glo dam fallure, determined to be the bounding scenar1o at the FCS slte based on es e peak now and stage. was used for this evaluation.
The elevation for the top of foundation mat at the Intake Structure Is 965.15 n NAVO68 and this was used for computation of wave runup and total water levels lo< the Intake Structure. The nominal site grade of 1004.00 n NAV088 was used ror the computation or wave runup and total water levels at the plant buildings. Based on the knowledge that the finished site grade Is at elevation 1004.48 fl NAVO88, the lower elevatlon or 1004 ft NAV088 used In combined effects analysts Is considered conservative.
Di m Sreaehel end F1llure*
2-96
~.......,,.
Wlllibdid I ibiii PGOIIC OBi@SW OiitRi lb CPR 25W, C&\\UJhi S&Wit§-kclat&i loiomulUon Lundy* *
(b)(3) 16 U SC
§82-46".'l(d), (b)