ML23144A305
| ML23144A305 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley |
| Issue date: | 05/23/2023 |
| From: | Energy Harbor Nuclear Corp |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML23144A299 | List: |
| References | |
| L-23-055 | |
| Download: ML23144A305 (1) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:Enclosure C L-23-055 BVPS-1 UFSAR, Revision 34, (Public) (3674 pages follow)
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page
1.1 INTRODUCTION
1.1-1 1.1.1 Design Highlights 1.1-3 1.1.2 Power Level 1.1-3 1.1.3 Reactor Coolant Loops 1.1-3 1.1.4 Peak Specific Power 1.1-3 1.1.5 Fuel Clad 1.1-3 1.1.6 Fuel Assembly Design 1.1-4 1.1.7 Moderator Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity 1.1-4 1.1.8 Containment 1.1-4 1.1.9* Xenon Oscillations 1.1-4 1.1.10 Conclusions 1.1-5 1.2
SUMMARY
- STATION DESCRIPTION 1.2-1 1.2.1 General 1.2-1 1.2.2 Site 1.2-1 1.2.3 Structures 1.2-1 1.2.4 Nuclear Steam Supply System 1.2-1 1.2.5 Reactor and Station Controls 1.2-3 1.2.6 Waste Disposal Systems 1.2-3 1.2.7 Fuel Handling Systems 1.2-3 1.2.8 Turbine and Auxiliary Systems 1.2-3 1.2.9 Electrical Systems 1.2-4 1.2.10 Engineered Safety Features System 1.2-4 1.2.11 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) Facility 1.2-5 1.3 SINGLE FAILURE CRITERION, GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA AND SAFETY GUIDES 1.3-1 1.3.1 Single Failure Criterion 1.3-1 1.3.2 General Design Criteria 1.3-2 1.3.2.1 Overall Station Requirements 1.3-3 1.3.2.2 Protection by Multiple Fission Product Barriers 1.3-4 1.3.2.3 Nuclear and Radiation Controls 1.3-7 1.3.2.4 Reliability and Testability of Protection Systems 1.3-12 1.3.2.5 Reactivity Control 1.3-14 1.3.2.6 Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary 1.3-17 1.3.2.7 Engineered Safety Features 1.3-19 1.3.3 Safety Guides 1.3-29 1.3.3.1 Net Positive Suction Head for Emergency Core Cooling and Containment Heat Removal System Pumps (Safety Guide 1) 1.3-29 1-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT'D) Section Title Page 1.3.3.2 Thermal Shock to Reactor Pressure Vessels (Safety Guide 2) 1.3-30 1.3.3.3* 1.3.3.4 Assumption Used for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Loss-of-Coolant Accident for Pressurized Water Reactors (Safety Guide 4) 1.3-30 1.3.3.5* 1.3.3.6 Independence Between Redundant Standby (Onsite) Power Sources and Between Their Distribution Systems (Safety Guide 6) 1.3-30 1.3.3.7 (Deleted) 1.3.3.8 Personnel Selection and Training (Safety Guide 8) 1.3-31 1.3.3.9 Selection of Diesel Generator Set Capacity for Standby Power Supplies (Safety Guide 9) 1.3-31 1.3.3.10 Mechanical Cadweld Splices in Reinforcing Bars of Concrete Containments (Safety Guide 10) 1.3-32 1.3.3.11 Instrument Line Penetrating Primary Reactor Containment (Safety Guide 11) 1.3-32 1.3.3.12 Instrumentation for Earthquakes (Safety Guide 12) 1.3-32 1.3.3.13 Fuel Storage Facility Design Basis (Safety Guide 13) 1.3-32 1.3.3.14 Reactor Coolant Pump Flywheel Integrity (Safety Guide 14) 1.3-33 1.3.3.15 Testing of Reinforcing Bars for Concrete Structures (Safety Guide 15) 1.3-34 1.3.3.16 Reporting of Operating Information (Safety Guide 16) 1.3-34 1.3.3.17 Protection Against Industrial Sabotage (Safety Guide 17) 1.3-34 1.3.3.18 Structural Acceptance Test for Concrete Primary Reactor Containments (Safety Guide 18) 1.3-34 1.3.3.19 Nondestructive Examination of Primary Containment Liner Seam Welds (Safety Guide 19) 1.3-35 1.3.3.20 Vibration Measurements on Reactor Internals (Safety Guide 20) 1.3-35 1.3.3.21 Measuring and Reporting of Effluents From Nuclear Power Plants (Safety Guide 21) 1.3-35 1-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT'D) Section Title Page 1.3.3.22 Periodic Testing of Protection System Actuation Functions (Safety Guide 22) 1.3-36 1.3.3.23 Onsite Meteorological Programs (Safety Guide 23) 1.3-37 1.3.3.24 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Pressurized Water Reactor Radioactive Gas Storage Tank Failure (Safety Guide 24) 1.3-37 1.3.3.25 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Fuel Handling Accident in the Fuel Handling and Storage Facility for Boiling and Pressurized Water Reactors (Safety Guide 25) 1.3-37 1.3.3.26 Quality Group Classifications and Standards (Safety Guide 26) 1.3-37 1.3.3.27 Ultimate Heat Sink (Safety Guide 27) 1.3-37 1.3.3.28 Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Design and Construction) (Safety Guide 28) 1.3-38 1.3.3.29 Seismic Design Classification (Safety Guide 29) 1.3-39 1.3.3.30 Quality Assurance Requirements for the Installation Inspection and Testing of Instrumentation and Electric Equipment (Safety Guide 30) 1.3-39 1.3.3.31 Control of Stainless Steel Welding (Safety Guide 31) 1.3-39 1.3.3.32 Use of IEEE STD-308-1971 "Criteria for Class IE Electric Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations" (Safety Guide 32) 1.3-41 1.3.3.33 Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation) (Safety Guide 33) 1.3-41 1.3.4 Guidelines Used for the Operations Quality Assurance Program 1.3-41 1.3.4.1 Regulatory Guides 1.3-41 1.3.4.2 American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards 1.3-47 1.4 COMPARISON WITH OTHER STATIONS 1.4-1 1.4.1 Design Developments Since Receipt of the Construction Permit 1.4-1 1.5 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS 1.5-1 1.5.1 Programs Required for Issuance of Operating License 1.5-1 1-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT'D) Section Title Page 1.5.2 Other Areas of Research and Development Not Required for Issuance of Operating License 1.5-3 1.5.3 Other Areas Specified by the AEC Staff, ACRS, and ASLB 1.5-3 1.5.4 Verification Tests (17 x 17) 1.5-4 1.5.4.1 Rod Cluster Control Spider Tests 1.5-5 1.5.4.2 Grid Tests 1.5-6 1.5.4.3 Fuel Assembly Structural Tests 1.5-7 1.5.4.4 Guide Tube Tests 1.5-8 1.5.4.5 Prototype Assembly Tests 1.5-10 1.5.4.6 Departure from Nucleate Boiling (DNB) 1.5-12 1.5.4.7 Incore Flow Mixing 1.5-13 1.5.5 LOCA Heat Transfer Tests (17 x 17) 1.5-14 1.5.5.1 Facility Description 1.5-14 1.5.5.2 DzNB Test 1.5-14 1.5.5.3 Single Rod Burst Test (SRBT) 1.5-16 1.5.5.4 Power-Flow Mismatch 1.5-17 1.5.6 Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Facility 1.5-17 1.5.6.1 Introduction 1.5-17 1.5.6.2 Test Loops and Equipment 1.5-18 1.5.6.2.1 A & B- loops. Low-Flow/High Pressure Hydraulic Facilities 1.5-18 1.5.6.2.2 D-Loop. Medium-Flow/High Pressure Hydraulic Facility 1.5-19 1.5.6.2.3 E-Loop. Low-Flow/Low Pressure Hydraulic Facility 1.5-19 1.5.6.2.4 G-Loop. Emergency Core Cooling System Facility 1.5-19 1.5.6.2.5 H-Loop. High-Flow Hydraulic Facility 1.5-20 1.5.6.2.6 J-Loop. Delayed Departure From Nucleate Boiling Heat Transfer Facility 1.5-20 1.5.6.2.7 K-Loop. Boron Therma Regeneration Test 1.5-20 1.5.6.2.8 FLECHT-SET, Emergency Core Cooling System Facility 1.5-20 1.5.6.2.9 Single Rod Test Loop. Heater Rod Development Facility 1.5-20 1.5.6.2.10 Hydraulic Model Testing 1.5-21 1.5.6.2.11 Autoclave Testing 1.5-21 1.5.6.2.12 Mechanical Component and Vibration Tests 1.5-21 1.5.6.2.13 Electronic Component Assembly 1.5-21 1.5.6.2.14 Surveillance System Development 1.5-22 1.5.6.2.15 Engineering Mechanics Laboratory 1.5-22 1-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONT'D) Section Title Page 1.6 IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS 1.6-1 1.6.1 Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation 1.6-1 1.6.2 Westinghouse Electric Corporation 1.6-1 1.6.3 Hansen, Holley, and Biggs 1.6-1 1.6.4 NUS Corporation 1.6-2 1.6.5 Weston Geophysical Research, Inc. 1.6-2 1.6.6 Whitman and Rand 1.6-2 1.7 COMMON FACILITIES 1.7-1 1.7.1 Identification of Shared Systems, Structures and Components 1.7-1 1.8 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 1.8-1 1.8.1 Austenitic Stainless Steel Material Control 1.8-1 1.8.2 Material Equivalency 1.8-5 1.8.3 Historical Information 1.8-5
- Note: Subsections 1.3.3.3 and 1.3.3.5 do not exist in the FSAR.
Section 1.1.9 deleted by Updated FSAR, Revision 0. 1-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF TABLES Table Title 1.1-1 Updated FSAR Guidelines 1.2-1 Description of Modified FORTRAN type Format Used for Writing Equations 1.3-1 Prototype Reactors Internals Assurance Program Status 1.4-1 Comparison of Design Parameters (Initial Ratings) 1.5-1 Effect of Adding Eighth Grid on 17 x 17 Seven Grid Design Tests 1.5-2 DNB Test Facility Columbia University Heat Transfer Laboratory, Loop Characteristics 1.5-3 Reflood Test Facility Initial Conditions 1.5-4 D2NB Phase I Test Parameters 1.5-5 D2NB Phase II Test Parameters 1.5-6 SRBT Internal Pressure and Heat Rates for a 17 x 17 Fuel Assembly 1.5-7 Characteristics of A & B Loops Low Flow/High-Pressure Hydraulic Facilities 1.5-8 Characteristics of D-Loop Medium Flow/High-Pressure Hydraulic Facilities 1.5-9 Characteristics of E-Loop Low Flow/High-Pressure Hydraulic Facility 1.5-10 Characteristics of G-Loop Emergency Core Cooling System Facility 1.5-11 Characteristics of H-Loop High-Flow Hydraulic Facility 1.5-12 Characteristics of J-Loop Delayed Departure from Nucleate Boiling and Heat Transfer Facility 1-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF TABLES (CONT'D) 1.5-13 Characteristics of K-Loop Boron Thermal Regeneration Test 1.5-14 Characteristics of Fletch-Set Emergency Core Cooling System Facility 1.5-15 Characteristics of Single Rod Test Loop Heat Rod Development Facility 1.7-1 Nonessential Common Structures 1.7-2 Nonessential Common Systems, Subsystems and Components 1.7-3 Nonessential Common Electrical Systems 1.8-1 Reactor Coolant System Major Component/Part Materials 1.8-2 Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Materials Class I and II Auxiliary Components 1.8-3 Reactor Vessel Internals for Emergency Core Cooling (All Materials are per ASME Code) 1.8-4 Cleanliness Water Chemistry Requirements 1.8-5 Acceptable Methods for Welding Austenitic Stainless Steel 1-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 1.2-1 Site Plan 1.2-2 (Deleted) 1.2-3 Symbols for Flow Diagrams 1.5-1 Schematic of 17 x 17 Reflood Test Facility 1.5-2 DNB Test Facility Schematic 1-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The Original Final Safety Analysis Report was submitted in support of an application to operate the "Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit No. 1" (BVPS-1) on a site in Shippingport Borough on the Ohio River in Beaver County, Pennsylvania. The United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, (NRC), subsequently issued Facility Operating License No. DPR-66. In July 1980, the NRC amended its regulations to require the licensees to periodically revise the Final Safety Analysis Report, (FSAR). The purpose of periodic revisions is to provide an updated reference document to be used in recurring safety analyses performed by the licensees, the NRC, and other interested parties.(3) The Original FSAR, as amended, is still considered to be the licensing basis for the plant. The Original FSAR and the docket file (Docket No. 50-334) is the final authority if a discrepancy exists, although this updated reference document, which will be referred to as the Updated FSAR, will provide the most convenient reference. The Technical Specifications to the Facility Operating License will henceforth reference the Updated FSAR.(1) The Updated FSAR is therefore submitted in accordance with 10 CFR 50.71(e) to assure that the information submitted to the NRC is the latest material developed. The Updated FSAR contains all the changes necessary to reflect information and analyses submitted to the Commission by BVPS-1 or prepared by BVPS-1 pursuant to the Commissions requirement since the submission of the Original FSAR; or, as appropriate, the latest revision of the Updated FSAR. The Updated FSAR includes the effects of: all changes made in BVPS-1 or programs/procedures as described in the Original FSAR; all safety evaluations performed by BVPS-1, either in support of approved license amendments, or in support of conclusions that changes did not require a license amendment in accordance with 10 CFR 50.59(c)(2); and all analyses of new safety issues performed by or on behalf of BVPS-1 at the Commissions request. These requirements are cited from 10 CFR 50.71(e). References to the previous owner FirstEnergy (FE) and previous licensee, FirstEnergy Nuclear Operating Company (FENOC), have been retained, where appropriate, for historical purposes. Table 1.1-1 provides a list of specific guidelines utilized in updating the FSAR to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 50.71(e) as modified by Reference 1. BVPS-1 includes a pressurized water reactor Nuclear Steam Supply System and turbine generator furnished by Westinghouse Electric Corporation. The balance of the unit was designed and constructed by the Licensee, with the assistance of their agent, Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (S&W). The Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS) was originally designed for a warranted power output of 2,660 MWt, which was the license application rating, with an equivalent unit net electrical output of ~835 MWe. The NSSS output of 2,660 MWt resulted from a core power (i.e., rated thermal power) of 2,652 MWt and 8 MWt from the reactor coolant pumps. The NSSS design was based upon an expected ultimate output of approximately 2,774 MWt. The NSSS output of 2,774 MWt resulted from a core power of 2,766 MWt and 8 MWt from the reactor 1.1-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 coolant pumps. All safety systems, including containment and engineered safety features, were originally designed and evaluated for operation at the higher power level. The initial fuel load commenced in February, 1976 and commercial operation was achieved in September, 1976. The core power level (i.e., rated thermal power) was increased in Fall 2001 to 2,689 MWt, taking advantage of the feedwater flow Measurement Uncertainty Recapture (MUR). The corresponding NSSS thermal power level was 2,697 MWt, which included 8 MWt from the reactor coolant pumps. The licensed core power level was subsequently increased to 2,900 MWt in 2006. The corresponding NSSS thermal power level is 2,910 MWt, which includes 10 MWt of heat from non-reactor sources (primarily reactor coolant pump heat). Analyses and engineering evaluations, as appropriate, at these increased thermal power levels were performed in the areas of thermal-hydraulic and nuclear characteristics of the reactor core, postulated accidents, and plant systems and components. The corresponding uprated gross electrical output is 1014 MWe. The Updated FSAR consists of 15 sections and two appendices. The contents are briefly described below. Section 1 of this report summarizes the principal design features and safety criteria of the unit, emphasizing the similarities and differences with respect to other pressurized water nuclear power stations employing essentially the same technology and basic engineering features as BVPS-1. Appendix lA of Section 1 provides a discussion of BVPS-1's degree of conformance to the General Design Criteria (GDC) Published as Appendix A to 10 CFR 50 in July 1971. Section 2 contains a description and evaluation of BVPS-1 site and environs, prepared at the time of Plant Licensing, and supports the suitability of the site for a reactor of the size and type described. Sections 3 and 4 describe the reactor and the reactor coolant system. Section 5 describes the containment structure and related systems. Sections 6 through 11 describe the other auxiliary systems. Sections 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9 include descriptions of the various systems directly related to safety. Section 12 addresses conduct of operations, including organization and personnel training. Section 13 describes the initial tests and operation. Section 14 relates to safety evaluation and summarizes the analyses which demonstrate the adequacy of the reactor protection system, the containment, and engineered safety features. Section 14 demonstrates that the consequences of various postulated accidents are within the guidelines suggested in the Federal Regulation 10 CFR 100 or 10 CFR 50.67, as applicable. Section 15, Technical Specifications and Bases has been deleted from the Updated FSAR since this section has been superceded by the BVPS-1, Technical Specifications, Appendix A to Operating License No. DPR-66. The Technical Specifications, gives safety limits, limiting safety system setting, limiting conditions for operation, surveillance requirements, design features and administrative controls for the station. Appendix A describes the Quality Assurance program that was followed during all stages of station design and construction. The operations phase quality assurance program is presented in the company Quality Assurance Program Manual. Appendix B describes the seismic design and analysis of structures, systems and components. The AEC Regulatory Staff Questions and Positions raised during the AEC's review of the FSAR have been incorporated into appropriate sections of the Updated FSAR. 1.1-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 With respect to the numbers, graphs and drawings included within this report, it should be understood that normal tolerance permitted by good engineering practice is intended. Where operating parameters are unusually important, it is acknowledged that such items are included in the "Technical Specifications"; the adoption of which is a condition of the BVPS-1 Operating License. The engineering drawings in the Updated FSAR are not intended to accurately depict other than safety related equipment and systems. In any case, the latest revision of the appropriate approved and released engineering drawings should be consulted for the most current information, as the Updated FSAR is only current as of the date of submittal. 1.1.1 Design Highlights The design of BVPS-1 was based upon proven concepts which were developed and successfully applied in the construction of other pressurized water reactor systems. In subsequent paragraphs, certain design features of BVPS-1 are indicated which represented slight variation or extrapolations from units which were approved for construction or operation such as the Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2 (Dockets 50-280 and 50-281), North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2 (Dockets 50-338 and 50-339), Turkey Point Plant Units 3 and 4 (Dockets 50-250 and 50-251), and H. B. Robinson No. 2 (Docket 50-261). The comparison of BVPS-1 with other licensed plants was considered valid at the time of the issuance of the BVPS-1 Operating License. 1.1.2 Power Level The nominal NSSS power level for BVPS-1 is set at 2,910 MWt. Site and engineered safety evaluation is performed at the power levels specified in Section 14 for each particular accident. The maximum calculated rating of the turbine generator corresponds to the NSSS power level. The NSSS power level is achieved by about a 9.4 percent increase in average reactor heat flux over that established for initial operation. 1.1.3 Reactor Coolant Loops The reactor coolant system consists of three loops, each loop having components (steam generator, pumps, and piping) similar to those for the Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2, and including two reactor coolant loop stop valves and a bypass valve in each loop. 1.1.4 Peak Specific Power The reactor core design is based on a maximum steady state peak specific power of 14.3 kw per ft (based on a Heat Flux Hot Channel Factor F(Q) of 2.52) for operation at 2,900 MWt (2,910 MWt NSSS power level) and a corresponding peak power of 22.4 kw per ft for the maximum thermal overpower condition. 1.1.5 Fuel Clad The fuel rod design for the reactor uses zirconium alloy clad material. Zirconium alloy clad material has proven successful in the CVTR and Saxton reactors and Yankee test assemblies, and is used in most Westinghouse reactors now in operation. (2) 1.1-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.1.6 Fuel Assembly Design The fuel assembly incorporates the rod cluster control concept in a canless 17 x 17 fuel and control rod array using Inconel or zirconium alloy spring clip grids to provide support for the fuel rods as used in the 15 x 15 assembly design. Extensive out-of-pile tests have been performed on this concept, successful in-pile tests have been performed in the Saxton reactor, and operating experience is available from the San Onofre and Connecticut-Yankee plants and other Westinghouse designed NSSS plants. 1.1.7 Moderator Temperature Coefficient of Reactivity Burnable absorbers are used in the reactor core to ensure the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity remains within the limits discussed in Section 3.3.2.3.2. As the fuel in the core is depleted and the boron shim concentration is decreased, the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity becomes more negative. 1.1.8 Containment The original reactor containment design concept was based upon the use of a reinforced concrete containment structure, similar to that of the Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2 and North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2. The containment was maintained at subatmospheric pressure during normal operation. Following the postulated loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA), described in Section 14.3, and the Main Steam Line Break (MSLB) accident, described in Section 14.2, the containment peak pressure was reduced to subatmospheric by the use of the containment depressurization system, which contains redundant spray cooling systems, thereby positively terminating outleakage to the environment within 60 minutes after initiation of the accident. In 2006, containment operating conditions were changed from sub-atmospheric to atmospheric. Included in this change to the design basis was the elimination of the design requirement to terminate containment atmosphere leakage within 60 minutes following a LOCA. The design of the containment structure is based on the following criteria:
- 1. The peak calculated containment atmosphere pressure shall not exceed the design pressure of 45 psig.
- 2. The containment pressure shall be reduced to less then 50% of the peak calculated pressure for the design basis loss-of-coolant accident within 24 hours after the postulated accident.
Radioactivity is assumed to leak to the environment at the containment Technical Specification leak rate for the first day, and half that leakage rate for the remaining duration of the accident (i.e., 29 days). No credit is taken for filtering the containment leakage via the safety related ventilation exhaust and filtration system that services the areas contiguous to containment; i.e., the Supplementary Leak Collection System (SLCRS) filters. To ensure bounding values, the atmospheric dispersion factors utilized for the containment release path reflects the worst value between the containment wall release point and the SLCRS release point for each time period. 1.1.9 Xenon Oscillations This section has been deleted by Revision 0. 1.1-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.1.10 Conclusions The pressurized water reactor unit of the type used at BVPS-1 possesses inherent stability characteristics and safety features. These are typified by the Doppler coefficient effect in the fuel and the barriers against fission product release. Engineered safety features systems, such as the safety injection system and containment depressurization system, complement these characteristics. The Licensee's submit that the BVPS-1 can be operated without hazard to the general public, because of the engineered safety features described herein and the analyses that ensure adequacy and conformance to NRC criteria and other regulatory requirements. 1.1-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References to Section 1.1
- 1. "Periodic Updating of Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR's)", D. Eisenhut, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Letter (December 15, 1980).
- 2. J. Skaritka, J. A. Iorii, "Operational Experience with Westinghouse Cores," WCAP-8183, Revision 10, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (May 1981).
- 3. "Periodic Updating of Final Safety Analysis Reports", U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Federal Register, Vol. 45, No. 92, Rules and Regulations, p. 30614 (Friday, May 9, 1980).
1.1-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.2
SUMMARY
- STATION DESCRIPTION 1.2.1 General BVPS-1 incorporates a closed-cycle pressurized water Nuclear Steam Supply System (NSSS),
a turbine generator and their necessary auxiliaries. A radioactive waste disposal system, a fuel handling system, and all auxiliaries, structure and other onsite facilities required for a complete and operable nuclear power station are also provided. The general arrangement of BVPS-1 and the station arrangement are shown in the site plan, Figure 1.2-1. Flow diagrams are included with the systems which are described throughout the Updated FSAR. Symbols and abbreviations used in these diagrams are illustrated in Figure 1.2-3. Some equations in the FSAR are written in a modified FORTRAN type format. A description of this format is given in Table 1.2-1. 1.2.2 Site The site comprising approximately 453 acres is located on the south bank of the Ohio River, in Beaver County, approximately 25 miles northwest of Pittsburgh. The exclusion radius is 2,000 ft. The nearest continuously occupied residence is located about 2,100 ft from the reactor. The Low Population Zone area distance is 3.6 miles. The population center distance is about five miles. The area is primarily agricultural, with some industrial activity. 1.2.3 Structures The major structures are the containment structure, cooling tower, intake structure, auxiliary building, fuel building, decontamination building, turbine building, diesel generator building and service building which includes the main control area. The containment structure is a steel-lined, reinforced concrete cylinder with a hemispherical dome and a flat reinforced concrete foundation mat. The containment which is designed to withstand the internal pressure resulting from the Design Basis Accident (DBA), meets all requirements for leak tightness at this pressure and provides adequate radiation shielding for both normal operation and accident conditions. The seismic criteria used in the design of the structures and equipment for the station are described in Section 2.7. 1.2.4 Nuclear Steam Supply System The NSSS consists of a pressurized water reactor, reactor coolant system and associated auxiliary systems. The reactor coolant system is arranged as three closed reactor coolant loops connected in parallel to the reactor vessel, each containing a reactor coolant pump, isolation and bypass valves, piping and a steam generator. An electrically heated pressurizer is connected to one of the loops on the reactor side of the loop isolation valves. 1.2-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The reactor core includes uranium dioxide pellets, enclosed in Zircaloy tubes with welded end plugs, as fuel. The tubes are supported in assemblies by structures of spring clip grids and suitable end pieces for the support of the assembled rods and restraint of abnormal axial movement. The mechanical control rods consist of clusters of stainless steel clad absorber rods which are guided by tubes located within the fuel assembly. The core consists of these fuel assemblies, loaded in three different enrichment regions. New fuel is introduced into the outer region, and is moved inward in a preset pattern as determined by the reactor manufacturer. The steam generators are vertical U-tube units containing nickel-chromium-iron (NI-Cr-Fe) Alloy 690 tubes. Integral separating equipment reduces the moisture content of the steam at the steam generator outlet to 0.10 percent or less. The reactor coolant pumps are vertical, single stage, centrifugal pumps equipped with controlled leakage shaft seals. The reactor coolant loop stop and bypass valves are motor operated gate valves, remotely controlled from the main control room and permit any loop to be isolated from the reactor vessel. Nuclear auxiliary systems are provided to perform the following functions:
- 1. Accommodate reactor coolant system water requirements
- 2. Purify reactor coolant water
- 3. Introduce chemicals for corrosion inhibition
- 4. Introduce and remove chemicals for reactivity control
- 5. Cool system components
- 6. Remove residual heat during the reactor cooling period, and also when the reactor is shut down
- 7. Cool the spent fuel pool water
- 8. Permit sampling of reactor coolant water
- 9. Provide for emergency safety injection
- 10. Vent and drain the reactor coolant system and the auxiliary systems
- 11. Provide emergency containment spray
- 12. Provide containment ventilation and cooling
- 13. Dispose of liquid and gaseous wastes, and provide for disposal of solid wastes.
1.2-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.2.5 Reactor and Station Controls The reactor is controlled by a coordinated combination of chemical shim and mechanical control rod assemblies. The control system permits the unit to accept step load increases of 10 percent and ramp load increases of 5 percent per minute over a load range of 15 percent to, but not exceeding, 100 percent power under normal operating conditions subject to xenon limitations. Control of both the reactor and turbine generator is accomplished from the main control room as supervised by NRC licensed personnel. 1.2.6 Waste Disposal Systems The waste disposal systems provide all equipment necessary to collect, process and prepare for disposal of radioactive liquid, gaseous and solid wastes produced as a result of station operation. Radioactive liquid wastes are collected for disposal. After sampling, some liquids are processed through an ion exchanger. The water is analyzed before discharge to the river through the cooling tower blowdown to ensure concentrations are below appropriate limits established by: 10 CFR 20 and the guidelines of Appendix I to 10 CFR 50; the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual; radiation protection procedures; and applicable regulations. Evaporator residues and noncombustible solid wastes are placed in disposable containers, and combustible solid wastes are baled or packaged for shipment to an authorized offsite disposal location. Nonaerated gaseous wastes are collected, passed through charcoal beds to holdup radioactive isotopes and a fraction stored until radioactivity level permits discharge to the environment, after air dilution, at concentrations below the limits set forth in: 10 CFR 20 and the guidelines of Appendix I to 10 CFR 50; and the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual and radiation protection procedures. Aerated gaseous wastes are filtered in charcoal and HEPA filters. 1.2.7 Fuel Handling Systems The reactor is refueled with equipment designed to handle spent fuel under water from the time it leaves the reactor vessel until it is placed in a cask for on-site dry storage or for shipment from the site. NOTE: Throughout this document shipping cask is used interchangeably with storage cask. Underwater transfer of spent fuel enables the use of an optically transparent radiation shield, and provides a reliable source of coolant for removal of residual heat. 1.2.8 Turbine and Auxiliary Systems The turbine is a tandem-compound, four-flow, 1,800 rpm unit. Four combination moisture separator-reheaters are employed to dry and superheat the steam between the high and low pressure turbines. The condensate-feedwater cycle is composed of the following equipment:
- 1. A single-pass, deaerating, surface condenser installed in two sections 1.2-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 2. Two 100 percent design capacity steam jet air ejectors (40 SCFM each)
- 3. Two 50 percent design capacity condensate pumps (9,700 gpm each)
- 4. Two 50 percent design capacity steam generator feedpumps (15,200 gpm each)
- 5. Two 100 percent capacity heater drain pumps (8,360 gpm each)
- 6. Six stages of feedwater heating gland steam condenser
- 7. Drain coolers.
Additional auxiliary systems are installed for the reliable operation of BVPS-1 and include compressed air, component cooling water, circulating water, cooling tower, vacuum priming, lubricating oil, secondary water sample, chemical feed, blowdown, hydrogen and C0 2, gland steam and water treatment. 1.2.9 Electrical Systems The main generator is a 1,800 rpm, 22 kv, 3 phase, 60 cycle, hydrogen inner-cooled unit. One main step-up transformer is provided to deliver power to the 345 kv switchyard. The BVPS-1 service system consists of auxiliary transformers, 4,160 v and 480 v switchgear and buses, 480 v motor control centers, 120 v a-c vital buses, and 125 v d-c batteries and equipment and their distribution systems. The normal source of station service power is obtained from the main generator, the high voltage switchyard, or a combination of both. Two diesel engine-driven generators are provided to supply emergency power in the event of complete loss of normal and reserve station service power. Each emergency diesel generator has sufficient capacity for operation of all engineered safety features equipment which must be operated in the event of a loss- of-coolant accident. Adequate independency and physical separation is maintained between redundant power supplies and their distribution systems. The BVPS-1 electrical system is designed in accordance with General Design Criteria 17, "Electric Power Systems", General Design Criteria 18, "Inspection and Testing of Electric Power Systems", Safety Guide 6 "Independence Between Redundant Standby (Onsite) Power Sources and Between Their Distribution Systems", Safety Guide 9, "Selection of Diesel Generator Set Capacity for Standby Power Supplies" and the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, IEEE Std. 308,(1) and IEEE Std. 344.(2) A complete description of the electrical system is presented in Section 8. 1.2.10 Engineered Safety Features Systems The engineered safety features systems have sufficient redundancy and independence of components and power sources, such that, under the conditions of the DBA, the systems can, even when operating with partial effectiveness, maintain the integrity of the containment and hold the exposure to the public within the criteria provided in 10 CFR 50.67. 1.2-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The systems provided are summarized below:
- 1. The steel-lined concrete containment structure provides a highly reliable barrier against the escape of radioactivity when the containment is above atmospheric pressures. The structure and all penetrations, including access openings and ventilation ducts, are of proven design.
- 2. The emergency core cooling system cools the core by injecting borated water into the reactor coolant loops from the accumulators and the safety injection pumps in major loss-of-coolant accidents.
- 3. The quench spray and recirculation spray subsystems of the containment depressurization system provide sprays of borated water to the containment atmosphere. Following the DBA, the containment pressure is rapidly reduced by the containment depressurization system, thereby reducing leakage to the atmosphere. Subsequent long-term maintenance of atmospheric conditions is accomplished by the recirculation spray subsystems.
- 4. The supplementary leak collection and release system (SLCRS) ensures that radioactive leakage from the containment penetrations following a DBA, or radioactive material released in the waste gas storage area is collected, filtered and discharged to the atmosphere via the SLCRS vent. Note that the site boundary and control room dose analyses do not credit the filtration capability of the SLCRS.
1.2.11 Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) Facility BVPS has implemented an on-site ISFSI facility that is used for storage of spent nuclear fuel. The ISFSI site is located within the site Protected Area. The ISFSI utilizes the AREVA/ Transnuclear Spent Fuel Dry Storage system. The ISFSI facility is composed of several components. The main components are the horizontal storage modules (HSM), the HSM concrete support pads, a concrete apron between storage pads, a heavy haul path on which the transporter delivers spent fuel canisters, drainage and electrical systems. The concrete support pads consist of two identical concrete pads that provide storage capacity for a total of 59 HSMs. The HSMs will be arranged in a single row of 30 placed on the southern pad and 29 on the northern pad. The northern pad will store both HSM-H and EOS-HSMs, while the southern pad will store only EOS-HSMs. The pads are separated by a concrete apron that is part of the heavy haul path. Three foot thick concrete shield walls are placed at the end and rear of each row of HSMs. 1.2-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References to Section 1.2
- 1. "IEEE Criteria for Class 1E Power Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations",
IEEE Std. 308, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc.
- 2. "IEEE Recommended Practice for Seismic Qualification of Class 1E Power and Protection Systems", IEEE Std. 344, the Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc.
1.2-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3 SINGLE FAILURE CRITERION, GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA, AND SAFETY GUIDES 1.3.1 Single Failure Criterion All features of BVPS-1 related to public safety are designed to the single failure criterion, defined as follows in Appendix A to 10 CFR 50: A single failure means an occurrence which results in the loss of capability of a component to perform its intended safety functions. Multiple failures resulting from a single occurrence are considered to be a single failure. Fluid and electrical systems are considered to be designed against an assumed single failure if neither (1) a single failure of any active component (assuming passive components function properly) nor (2) a single failure of a passive component (assuming active components function properly) results in a loss of the capability of the system to perform its safety functions. Single failures of passive components in electrical systems should be assumed in designing against a single failure. With respect to fluid systems, the single failure criterion applies only to safety related fluid systems. These fluid systems are designed to ensure that for onsite electric power system operation (assuming offsite power is not available) and for offsite electric power system operation (assuming onsite power is not available), they are able to accomplish their safety functions assuming a single failure occurs within the system. The classes of fluid systems to which the single failure criterion applies, as listed in Appendix A to 10 CFR 50, are (with the appropriate 1971 General Design Criterion (GDC) in parentheses):
- 1. Residual Heat Removal (GDC-34)
- 2. Emergency Core Cooling (GDC-35)
- 3. Containment Heat Removal (GDC-38)
- 4. Containment Atmosphere Cleanup (GDC-41)
- 5. Cooling Water (GDC-44)
- 6. Containment Isolation (GDC-55, 56, & 57)
The onsite electrical power sources, including batteries, and the onsite electrical distribution system are also designed to perform their safety functions assuming a single failure. The protection system, as defined in 1971 GDC-20, is designed so that no single failure results in loss of its protection function. Fluid systems other than those listed above may also be subject to the single failure criterion, if they have a safety function. Each of the above safety related fluid systems or combination of fluid systems are designed to accept only a single active failure in the short term, or to accept a single active or passive failure 1.3-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 in the long term following any accident condition. These systems are not necessarily designed for a passive failure in the short term. The short term is the 24 hours immediately following an accident during which automatic actions are performed, system responses are checked, type of accident is determined and preparation for long term recovery operations are made. This 24 hour criterion applies to each of the above safety related fluid systems or combination of fluid systems. The long term is the remainder of the recovery period following the short term. The long term period involves bringing the BVPS-1 to a condition where access to the containment or other buildings where the major accident has occurred can be gained and repairs effected. An active failure is the failure of a powered component, such as a piece of mechanical equipment, component of the electrical supply system or instrumentation and control system, to act on command to perform its design function. Examples include the failure of a valve to move to its correct position, the failure of an electrical breaker or relay to respond and the failure of a pump, fan, or diesel generator to start. Systems are designed to minimize the effect of equipment such as a motor operated valve, moving spuriously from the proper safety features position. A passive failure is the failure of a static component which limits that component's effectiveness in carrying out its design function. Examples of a passive failure are the rupture of a pipe or a valve body, or the breaking of a cable in an electrical system. A passive failure in a fluid system is considered to occur only in the long term. The failure of a passive component is not considered in the design of fluid systems when it can be demonstrated that the design is accepted on some other defined basis, such as an unusually high quality, high strength or low stress, inspectability, repairability or short term use. Valves are not assumed to fail so as to result in two open pipes. When a passive failure in an electrical or protection system causes an active failure in a fluid system it is considered an active failure. For example, the breaking of a cable in an electrical system is a passive failure; however, it may result in the failure of a pump to start, which is an active failure. 1.3.2 General Design Criteria BVPS-1 has been designed and constructed to comply with the "General Design Criteria for Nuclear Power Plant Construction" published in July, 1967 by the AEC. Each criterion applicable to BVPS-1 is followed by a summary discussion of the design and procedures which are intended to meet the design objectives reflected in the criterion. Since the BVPS-1 construction permit was issued in June 1970, the compliance to the AEC General Design Criteria of July, 1967 is addressed. Appendix lA provides a discussion of BVPS-1's degree of conformance to the AEC General Design Criteria published as Appendix A to 10 CFR 50 in July 1971. Modifications made to the plant satisfy the 1967 and 1971 General Design Criteria as discussed in Section 1.3.2 and Appendix 1A, respectively. 1.3-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3.2.1 Overall Station Requirements Criterion 1 - Quality Standards (Category A) Those systems and components of reactor facilities which are essential to the prevention of accidents which could affect the public health and safety or to mitigation of their consequences shall be identified and then designed, fabricated, and erected to quality standards that reflect the importance of the safety function to be performed. Where generally recognized codes or standards on design, materials, fabrication, and inspection are used, they shall be identified. Where adherence to such codes or standards does not suffice to ensure a quality product in keeping with the safety functions, they shall be supplemented or modified as necessary. Quality assurance programs, test procedures, and inspection acceptance levels to be used shall be identified. A showing of sufficiency and applicability of codes, standards, quality assurance programs, test procedures, and inspection acceptance levels used is required. Answer The structures, systems and components of the station are classified according to their importance in the prevention and mitigation of accidents which could cause undue risk to the health and safety of the public. These classifications are described in Appendix A. A discussion of the codes and standards, quality assurance programs, test provisions, etc., applying to each system is included or referenced in that portion of the FSAR describing that system. Criterion 2 - Performance Standards Those systems and components of reactor facilities which are essential to the prevention of accidents which could affect the public health and safety or to the mitigation of their consequences shall be designed, fabricated, and erected to performance standards that will enable the facility to withstand, without loss of the capability to protect the public, the additional forces that might be imposed by natural phenomena such as earthquakes, tornadoes, flooding conditions, winds, ice, and other local site effects. The design bases so established shall reflect:
- 1. Appropriate consideration of the most severe of these natural phenomena that have been recorded for the site and the surrounding area
- 2. An appropriate margin for withstanding forces greater than those recorded to reflect uncertainties about the historical data and their suitability as a basis for design.
Answer The structures, systems and components designated Seismic Category I are designed to withstand, without loss of capability to protect the public, the most severe environmental phenomena ever experienced at the site with appropriate margins included in the design for uncertainties in historical data. Potential environmental hazards are discussed and analyzed in Sections 2 and 14 of the FSAR and the influence of these hazards on various aspects of the station design is discussed in the sections covering the specific systems and components 1.3-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 concerned. An outline of the design philosophy for Seismic Category I structures, systems, and components is included in Appendix B. Criterion 3 - Fire Protection The reactor facility shall be designed to:
- 1. Minimize the probability of events such as fires and explosions
- 2. Minimize the potential effects of such events to safety. Noncombustible and fire resistant materials shall be used whenever practical throughout the facility, particularly in areas containing critical portions of the facility such as containment, control room, and components of engineered safety features.
Answer Through the use of noncombustible and fire resistant materials wherever practical in the facility and the limitation of combustible supplies (e.g., logs, records, manuals, etc.) in such areas as the main control room to amounts required for operation, the probability of such events as fire and explosion and the effects of such events should they occur are minimized. Fire protection criteria and specific means of meeting these criteria are described in Sections 7.8 and 9.10. Criterion 4 - Sharing of Systems Reactor facilities shall not share systems or components unless it is shown safety is not impaired by the sharing. Answer Systems to be shared between BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 are provided in Section 1.7 of the Updated FSAR. Criterion 5 - Records Requirements Records of the design, fabrication, and construction of essential components of the station shall be maintained by the reactor operator or under its control throughout the life of the reactor. Answer BVPS-1 intends to maintain in its possession or under its control, a complete set of records of the design, fabrication, construction and testing of major Seismic Category I components throughout the life of BVPS-1. Section 12 of the Updated FSAR presents records requirements for: station operation, maintenance, and modification; and review of procedures. 1.3.2.2 Protection by Multiple Fission Product Barriers Criterion 6 - Reactor Core Design The reactor core shall be designed to function throughout its design lifetime, without exceeding acceptable fuel damage limits which have been stipulated and justified. The core design, 1.3-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 together with reliable process and decay heat removal systems, shall provide for this capability under all expected conditions of normal operation with appropriate margins for uncertainties and for transient situations which can be anticipated, including the effects of the loss of power to recirculation pumps, tripping out of a turbine-generator set, isolation of the reactor from its primary heat sink, and loss of all offsite power. Answer The reactor core with its related control and protection system is designed to function throughout its design lifetime without exceeding acceptable fuel damage limits. The core design, together with reliable process and decay heat removal systems, provides for this capability under all expected conditions of normal operation with appropriate margins for uncertainties and anticipated transient situations, including the effects of the loss of reactor coolant flow, trip of the turbine generator, loss of normal feedwater and loss of all offsite power. The reactor control and protection instrumentation is designed to actuate a reactor trip for any anticipated combination of plant conditions when necessary to ensure a minimum Departure from Nucleate Boiling Ratio (DNBR) equal to or greater than the design limit and fuel center temperatures below the melting point of UO 2. Section 3 discusses the design bases and design evaluation of reactor components. The details of the control and protection systems instrumentation design and logic are discussed in Section 7. This information supports the safety analysis presented in Section 14. Criterion 7 - Suppression of Power Oscillations The core design, together with reliable controls, shall ensure that power oscillations which could cause damage in excess of acceptable fuel damage limits, are not possible or can be readily suppressed. Answer Power oscillations of the fundamental mode are inherently eliminated by the negative Doppler and limitations on the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity. Oscillations, due to xenon spatial effects, in the radial, diametral and azimuthal overtone modes are heavily damped due to the inherent design and due to the negative Doppler and limitations on the moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity. Oscillations, due to xenon spatial effects, in the axial first overtone mode may occur. Assurance that fuel design limits are not exceeded by xenon axial oscillations is provided as a result of reactor trip functions using the measured axial power imbalance as an input. Oscillations, due to xenon spatial effects, in axial modes higher than the first overtone, are heavily damped due to the inherent design and due to the negative Doppler coefficient of reactivity. The stability of the core against xenon-induced power oscillations and the functional requirements of instrumentation for monitoring and measuring core power distribution are discussed in Section 3. Details of the instrumentation design and logic are discussed in Section 7. 1.3-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Criterion 8 - Overall Power Coefficient The reactor shall be designed so that the overall power coefficient in the power operating range shall not be positive. Answer Prompt compensatory reactivity feedback effects are ensured when the reactor is critical by the negative fuel temperature effect (Doppler effect) and by the operational limits on moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity. The negative Doppler coefficient of reactivity is ensured by the inherent design using low-enrichment fuel. The limitations on moderator temperature coefficient of reactivity are ensured by administratively controlling either the dissolved neutron absorber concentration, burnable poisons, and/or rod withdrawal limits. These reactivity coefficients are discussed in Section 3. Criterion 9 - Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary The reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be designed and constructed so as to have an exceedingly low probability of gross rupture or significant leakage throughout its design lifetime. Answer The reactor coolant system boundary is designed to accommodate the system pressures and temperatures attained under all expected modes of plant operation, including all anticipated transients, and to maintain the stresses within applicable stress limits. Section 4 has additional details. In addition to the loads imposed on the system under normal operating conditions, consideration is also given to abnormal loading conditions, such as seismic and pipe rupture as discussed in Appendix B. The system is protected from overpressure by means of pressure relieving devices as required by applicable codes. Means are provided to detect significant uncontrolled leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary with indication in the control room as discussed in Section 4. The reactor coolant system boundary has provisions for inspection, testing, and surveillance of critical areas to assess the structural and leaktight integrity. The details are given in Section 4. For the reactor vessel, a material surveillance program conforming to applicable codes is provided. Section 4 has additional details. Criterion 10 - Containment Containment shall be provided. The containment structure shall be designed to sustain the initial effects of gross equipment failures, such as a large coolant boundary break, without loss of required integrity and, together with other engineered safety features as may be necessary, to retain for as long as the situation requires the functional capability to protect the public. 1.3-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Answer The design of the containment structure and associated auxiliary systems is described in Section 5. Other engineered safety features required to limit pressure inside the containment are described in Section 6. Section 14 demonstrates the adequacy of the containment and engineered safety features under various accident conditions, including a rupture of the largest reactor coolant pipe. 1.3.2.3 Nuclear and Radiation Controls Criterion 11 - Control Room The facility shall be provided with a control room from which actions to maintain safe operational status of the station can be controlled. Adequate radiation protection shall be provided to permit access, even under accident conditions, to equipment in the control room or other areas as necessary to shut down and maintain safe control of the facility without radiation exposures of personnel in excess of 10CFR20 limits. It shall be possible to shut the reactor down and maintain it in a safe condition if access to the control room is lost due to fire or other cause. Answer A main control room is provided which contains all controls and instrumentation necessary for operation of the reactor, turbine- generator and auxiliary and emergency systems under normal or accident conditions. The main control room is designed and equipped to minimize the possibility of events which might preclude occupancy. In addition, provisions are made for bringing BVPS-1 to and maintaining it in a hot shutdown condition for an extended period of time from an auxiliary shutdown panel located outside the main control room. Materials used in the construction of the main control room equipment, and furnishings, are discussed in Section 7.8. Section 9.13 discusses the main control room ventilation system. Section 11.3 discusses main control room shielding. Criterion 12 - Instrumentation and Control Systems Instrumentation and controls shall be provided as required to monitor and maintain variables within prescribed operating ranges. Answer Plant instrumentation and control systems are provided to monitor significant variables in the reactor core, coolant systems, and reactor containment building over their anticipated range for all conditions as appropriate to assure adequate safety. The installed instrumentation provides continuous monitoring, warning and initiation of safety functions. 1.3-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The following processes are controlled to maintain key variables within their normal ranges:
- 1. Reactor power level (controlled manually or automatically by controlling thermal load)
- 2. Reactor coolant temperature (controlled manually or automatically by rod cluster control assembly (RCCA) motion, in sequential groups)
- 3. Reactor coolant pressure (controlled manually or automatically by heaters and spray in the pressurizer)
- 4. Reactor coolant water inventory, as indicated by the water level in the pressurizer (controlled manually or automatically by charging flow)
- 5. Reactor coolant system boron concentration (controlled manually or automatically by make-up of charging flow)
- 6. Steam generator water inventory on secondary side (controlled manually or automatically by feedpump flow through feedwater control valves).
The reactor control system is designed to automatically maintain a programmed average temperature in the reactor coolant system during steady state operation and to ensure that plant conditions do not reach reactor trip settings as the result of a transient caused by a design load change. The reactor protection system trip setpoints are selected so that anticipated transients do not cause a DNBR of less than the design limit. Proper positioning of the control rods is monitored in the control room by bank arrangements of individual meters for each RCCA. A rod deviation alarm alerts the operator of deviation of one RCCA from its bank position. There are also insertion limit monitors with visual and audible annunciation to avoid loss of shutdown margin. Each RCCA is provided with a sensor to detect positioning at the bottom of its travel. This condition is also alarmed in the control room. Four excore ion chambers also detect asymmetrical flux distribution indicative of rod misalignment. Movable in-core flux detectors and fixed in-core thermocouples are provided as operational aids to the operator. Overall reactivity control is achieved by the combination of soluble boron and RCCA. Long term regulation of core reactivity is accomplished by adjusting the concentration of boric acid in the reactor coolant. Short term reactivity control for power changes is accomplished by the reactor control system which automatically moves RCCA. This system uses input signals including neutron flux, coolant temperature, and turbine load. Containment pressure, pressurizer water level, pressurizer pressure and steam line pressure are monitored to sense accident conditions. Section 7 contains further details of instrumentation and controls. Criterion 13 - Fission Process Monitors and Controls Means shall be provided for monitoring and maintaining control over the fission process throughout core life and for all conditions that can reasonably be anticipated to cause variations 1.3-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 in reactivity of the core, such as indication of position of control rods and concentration of soluble reactivity control poisons. Answer The nuclear instrumentation system described in Section 7 is provided to monitor the reactor power from source range through the intermediate range and power range up to 120 percent of full power. The system provides indication, control and alarm signals for reactor operation and protection. The operational status of the reactor is monitored from the control room. When the reactor is subcritical, the relative reactivity status is continuously monitored and indicated by proportional counters located in instrument wells in the neutron shield tank adjacent to the reactor vessel. Two source range detector channels are provided for supplying information on multiplication while the reactor is subcritical. A reactor trip is actuated from either channel if the neutron flux level becomes excessive. When the reactor is critical, means for showing the relative reactivity status of the reactor is provided by control bank positions displayed in the control room. The position of the control banks is directly related to the reactivity status of the reactor when at power and any unexpected change in the position of the control banks under automatic control or change in the coolant temperature under manual control provides a direct and immediate indication of a change in the reactivity status of the reactor. Periodic evaluation of boric acid concentration provides a long term means of following reactivity status. Criterion 14 - Core Protection Systems Core protection systems, together with associated equipment, shall be designed to act automatically to prevent or to suppress conditions that could result in exceeding acceptable fuel damage limits. Answer The operational limits for the core protection system are defined by analyses of all plant operation and fault conditions requiring rapid rod insertion to prevent or limit core damage. With respect to acceptable fuel design limits, the protection system design bases for all anticipated transients or faults are:
- 1. Minimum departure from nucleate boiling ratio (DNBR) shall not be less than 1.21 (design limit).
- 2. Clad strain on the fuel element shall not exceed 1 percent
- 3. No center melt shall occur in the fuel elements.
A region of permissible core operation may be defined in terms of power, axial power distribution, and coolant flow and temperature. The protection system monitors these process variables (as well as many other process and plant variables). If the region limits are approached during operation, the protection system will automatically actuate alarms, initiate load cutback, prevent control rod withdrawal and/or trip the reactor. 1.3-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Operation within the permissible region and complete core protection is ensured by the Overtemperature T and Overpower T reactor trips in the system pressure range defined by the Pressurizer High Pressure and Pressurizer Low Pressure reactor trips, provided that the transient is slow with respect to piping delays from the core to the temperature sensors. High Nuclear Flux and Low Coolant Flow reactor trips provide core protection in the event that a transient which is faster than the T responses occurs. Finally, thermal transients are anticipated and avoided by reactor trips actuated by turbine trip and primary coolant pump motor low frequency or low voltage on 2 out of 3 buses. The protection system trips the reactor by interrupting power to the rod control power supply. All full length control and shutdown rods insert by gravity as a result. The Westinghouse protection system meets the requirements of IEEE Std. 279-1971. (2) The protection system measures a wide spectrum of process variables and plant conditions. All analog channels which actuate reactor trip, rod stop and permissive functions are indicated or recorded. In addition, visual and/or audible alarms are actuated for reactor trip, partial reactor trip: (any input channel), and any control variable exceeding its setpoint, (any input channel). These measurements and indications provide information upon which corrective actions to prevent the development of abnormal conditions can be based. Automatic actuation of reactor trips will be performed if abnormal conditions reach the plant operational limits. Another important safety function of the reactor protection system is that of processing signals used for engineered safety features actuation and generation of the actuation demand. The conditions leading to engineered safety features actuation are:
- 1. Low pressurizer pressure
- 2. High containment pressure
- 3. High-High containment pressure
- 4. Low steamline pressure
- 5. Manual.
Engineered safety features are discussed further in Section 6 and Section 7. Criterion 15 - Engineered Safety Feature Protection Systems Protection systems shall be provided for sensing accident situations and initiating the operation of necessary engineered safety features. Answer An important safety function of the reactor protection systems is that of processing signals used for engineered safety features actuation and generation of the actuation demand. The conditions leading to engineered safety features actuation are:
- 1. Low pressurizer pressure 1.3-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 2. High containment pressure
- 3. High-high containment pressure
- 4. Low steamline pressure
- 5. Manual Engineered safety features are discussed in Sections 6 and 7.
Criterion 16 - Monitoring Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Means shall be provided for monitoring the reactor coolant pressure boundary to detect leakage. Answer All reactor coolant system components are designed, fabricated, inspected, and tested in conformance with the American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Section 4). Leakage is detected by an increase in the amount of makeup water required to maintain a normal level in the pressurizer. The reactor vessel closure joint is provided with a temperature monitored leak-off between double gaskets. Leakage into the reactor containment is drained to the containment sump where the level is monitored. Leakage is also detected by measuring the airborne activity and activity of the condensate drained from the containment air recirculation units. Monitoring the inventory of reactor coolant in the system at the pressurizer, volume control tank, and primary drain transfer tanks makes available an accurate indication of integrated leakage. These leakage detection methods are described in detail in Section 4. Criterion 17 - Monitoring Radioactivity Releases Means shall be provided for monitoring the containment atmosphere, the facility effluent discharge paths, and the facility environs for radioactivity that could be released from normal operations, from anticipated transients, and from accident conditions. Answer BVPS-1 contains means for monitoring the containment atmosphere, effluent discharge paths and the environs for radioactivity which could be released under any conditions. The details of the effluent discharge paths and containment monitoring methods are contained in Sections 5 and 11, while the environmental radiation monitoring program is described in Section 2.8. 1.3-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Criterion 18 - Monitoring Fuel and Waste Storage Monitoring and alarm instrumentation shall be provided for fuel and waste storage and handling areas for conditions that might contribute to loss of continuity in decay heat removal and to radiation exposures. Answer Sufficient monitoring and alarm instrumentation is provided in waste and fuel storage areas to detect conditions which might contribute to loss of cooling for decay heat removal or abnormal radiation releases. Details of the monitoring systems are included in Sections 9 and 11. 1.3.2.4 Reliability and Testability of Protection Systems Criterion 19 - Protection Systems Reliability Protection systems shall be designed for high functional reliability and inservice testability commensurate with the safety functions to be performed. Answer The protection system is designed for high functional reliability and inservice testability. The design employs redundant logic trains and measurement and equipment diversity. Sufficient redundancy is provided to enable individual end-to-end channel tests with the reactor at power. Built in semi-automatic testers provide means to test the majority of system components very rapidly. The protection system is described in Section 7. Criterion 20 - Protection Systems Redundancy and Independence Redundancy and independence designed into protection systems shall be sufficient to assure that no single failure or removal from service of any component or channel of a system will result in loss of the protection function. The redundancy provided shall include, as a minimum, two channels of protection for each protection function to be served. Answer As detailed in Section 7, sufficient redundancy and independence is designed into the protection systems to ensure that no single failure nor removal from service of any component or channel results in loss of the protection function. In addition, IEEE Std. 279-1971, was employed in the detailed design of the protection systems. Criterion 21 - Single Failure Definition Multiple failures resulting from a single event shall be treated as a single failure. Answer When evaluating the protection systems, the engineered safety features and their support systems, multiple failures resulting from a single event are treated as a single failure. The ability 1.3-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 of each system to perform its function with a single failure is discussed in those sections describing the individual systems. Additional details are found in Section 7. Criterion 22 - Separation of Protection and Control Instrumentation Systems Protection systems shall be separated from control instrumentation systems to the extent that failure or removal from service of any control instrumentation system component or channel, or of those common to control instrumentation and protection circuitry, leaves intact a system satisfying all requirements for the protection channels. Answer The protection system is designed in accordance with IEEE Std. 279-1971, thereby meeting all requirements of this standard. The protection system is separate and distinct from the control system. The control system is dependent on the protection system in that control signals are derived from protection system measurements where applicable. These signals are transferred to the control system by isolation amplifiers which are classified protection system components. The adequacy of system isolation has been verified by testing under conditions of all postulated credible faults. The failure or removal of any single control instrumentation system component or channel or of those common to the control instrumentation and protection circuitry leaves intact a system which satisfies the requirements of the protective system. The protection system and control systems are discussed in Section 7. Criterion 23 - Protection Against Multiple Disability for Protection Systems The effects of adverse conditions to which redundant channels or protection systems might be exposed in common, either under normal conditions or those of an accident, shall not result in loss of the protection function. Answer Physical separation and electrical isolation of redundant channels and subsystems, functional diversity of subsystems and safe failure modes are employed in the design as defenses against functional failure through exposure to common causative factors. The redundant logic trains, reactor trip breakers and engineered safety features are physically separated and electrically isolated. Physically separate channel trays, conduit and penetrations are maintained upstream from the logic elements of each train. The protection system is discussed in Section 7. Criterion 24 - Emergency Power for Protection Systems In the event of loss of all offsite power, sufficient alternate sources of power shall be provided to permit the required functioning of the protection systems. Answer BVPS-1 is supplied with normal, reserve and emergency power to provide for the required functioning of the protection systems. 1.3-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 In the event of a loss of auxiliary power, emergency power is supplied by two emergency diesel generators as described in Section 8. The instrumentation and controls portions of the protection systems will be supplied from the BVPS-1 batteries during the diesel start-up period (detailed in Section 8). Criterion 25 - Demonstration of Function Operability of Protection Systems Means shall be included for testing protection systems while the reactor is in operation to demonstrate that no failure or loss of redundancy has occurred. Answer Each protection channel in service at power is capable of being calibrated and tripped independently by test signals to verify its operation. Individual semiautomatic testers are built in each logic train. These testers provide a very rapid means of testing the majority of protection system components with the reactor at power. Protection systems detailed are found in Section 7. Criterion 26 - Protection Systems Fail-Safe Design The protections systems shall be designed to fail to a safe state or into a state established as tolerable on a defined basis if conditions such as disconnection of the system, loss of energy (e.g., electrical power, instrument air), or adverse environments (e.g., extreme heat or cold, fire, steam, or water) are experienced. Answer The protection system is designed with due consideration of the most probable failure modes of the components under various perturbations of the environment and energy sources. Each reactor trip channel is designed on the de-energized to trip principle so loss of power, disconnection, open channel faults and the majority of channel short circuit faults cause the channel to go into its tripped mode. Additional defenses against loss of function are discussed under Criterion 23. Additional details can be found in Section 7. 1.3.2.5 Reactivity Control Criterion 27 - Redundancy of Reactivity Control At least two independent reactivity control systems, preferably of different principles, shall be provided. Answer Two reactivity control systems are provided. These are control rods and chemical shim (boration). The rod system can compensate for the reactivity effects of fuel/water temperature changes accompanying power level changes over the full range from full-load to no-load at the design maximum load change rate. Automatic control by the rods is, however, limited to the range of 1.3-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 15 percent to 100 percent of power rating for reasons unrelated to reactivity or reactor safety. The rod system can also compensate for xenon burnout reactivity transients over the allowed range of rod travel. The boron system will maintain the reactor in the cold shutdown state independent of the position of the control rods and can compensate for all xenon burnout transients. Details of the construction of the rod cluster control assembly are included in Section 3, with the operation discussed in Section 7. The means of controlling the boric acid concentration is described in Section 9. Criterion 28 - Reactivity Hot Shutdown Capability At least two of the reactivity control systems provided shall independently be capable of making and holding the core subcritical from any hot standby or hot operating condition, including those resulting from power changes, sufficiently fast to prevent exceeding acceptable fuel damage limits. Answer The rod cluster control system is capable of making and holding the core subcritical from all operating and hot shutdown conditions sufficiently fast to prevent exceeding acceptable fuel damage limits as described in Section 14. The chemical shim control is also capable of making and holding the core subcritical, but at a slower rate, and is not employed as a means of compensating for rapid activity transients. The rod cluster control system is, therefore, used in protecting the core from such transients. Details of the operation and effectiveness of these systems are included in Sections 3 and 9. Criterion 29 - Reactivity Shutdown Capability At least one of the reactivity control systems provided shall be capable of making the core subcritical under any condition (including anticipated operational transients) sufficiently fast to prevent exceeding acceptable fuel damage limits. Shutdown margins greater than the maximum worth of the most effective control rod when fully withdrawn shall be provided. Answer BVPS-1 is provided with means of making and holding the core subcritical under any anticipated conditions and with appropriate margin for contingencies. These means are discussed in detail in Sections 3 and 9. Combined use of the rod cluster control system and the chemical shim control system permits the necessary shutdown margin to be maintained during long term xenon decay and plant cooldown. In addition, the reactor can be made subcritical by the rod cluster control system alone for any anticipated operational transient so that fuel damage limits are not exceeded. The single highest worth control cluster is assumed to be stuck full-out upon trip for these determinations. In the event of a loss-of-coolant accident, the safety injection system is actuated and concentrated boric acid is injected into the cold legs of the reactor coolant system. This is in addition to the boric acid content of the accumulators which is passively injected due to a decrease in system pressure. See Section 6 for further details. 1.3-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Criterion 30 - Reactivity Holddown Capability At least one of the reactivity control systems provided shall be capable of making and holding the core subcritical under any conditions with appropriate margins for contingencies. Answer BVPS-1 is provided with the means of making and holding the core subcritical under any anticipated conditions and with appropriate margin for contingencies. These means are discussed in detail in Sections 3 and 9. Normal reactivity shutdown capability is provided within two seconds following a trip signal by control rods. The chemical shim control system permits the necessary shutdown margin to be maintained during longterm xenon decay and plant cooldown. Criterion 31 - Reactivity Control Systems Malfunction The reactivity control systems shall be capable of sustaining any single malfunction, such as, unplanned continuous withdrawal (not ejection) of a control rod, without causing a reactivity transient which could result in exceeding acceptable fuel damage limits. Answer Reactor shutdown by full length rod insertion is completely independent of the normal control function, since the trip breakers interrupt power to the rod mechanisms regardless of existing control signals. The protection system is designed to limit reactivity transients so that DNBR will not be less than the design limit for any single malfunction in either reactor control system. The analysis presented in Section 14 shows that for postulated dilution during refueling, startup, manual or automatic operation at power, the operator has ample time to determine the cause of dilution, terminate the source of dilution, and initiate reboration before the shutdown margin is lost. BVPS-1 reactivity control systems are discussed further in Section 7 and an analyses of the effects of the other possible malfunctions are discussed in Section 14. The analyses show that acceptable fuel damage limits are not exceeded even in the event of a single malfunction of either system. Criterion 32 - Maximum Reactivity Worth of Control Rods Limits, which include considerable margin, shall be placed on the maximum reactivity worth of control rods or elements and on rates at which reactivity can be increased to ensure that the potential effects of a sudden or large change of reactivity cannot:
- 1. Rupture the reactor coolant pressure boundary or
- 2. Disrupt the core, its support structures, or other vessel internals sufficiently to impair the effectiveness of emergency core cooling.
Answer The maximum reactivity worth of control rods and the maximum rates of reactivity insertion employing control rods are limited to values that prevent rupture of the reactor coolant system 1.3-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 boundary or disruptions of the core or vessel internals to a degree that could impair the effectiveness of emergency core cooling. The appropriate reactivity insertion rate for the withdrawal of rod cluster control assemblies (RCCA) and the dilution of the boric acid in the reactor coolant systems are specified in the Technical Specifications for BVPS-1. The specification includes appropriate graphs that show the permissible mutual withdrawal limits and overlap of functions of the several RCCA banks as a function of power. These data on reactivity insertion rates, dilution and withdrawal limits are also discussed in Section 3. The relationship of the reactivity insertion rates to plant safety is discussed in Section 14. Assurance of core cooling capability following accidents, such as rod ejection, steam line break, etc., is given by keeping the reactor coolant pressure boundary stresses within faulted condition limits as specified by applicable ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Codes. Structural deformations are checked also and limited to values that do not jeopardize the operation of needed safety features. 1.3.2.6 Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Criterion 33 - Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Capability The reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be capable of accommodating without rupture, and with only limited allowance for energy absorption through plastic deformation, the static and dynamic loads imposed on any boundary component as a result of inadvertent and sudden release of energy to the coolant. As a design reference, this sudden release shall be taken as that which would result from a sudden reactivity insertion such as rod ejection (unless prevented by positive mechanical means), rod dropout, or cold water addition. Answer The reactor coolant boundary is shown in Section 14 to be capable of accommodating without rupture, the static and dynamic loads imposed as a result of a sudden reactivity insertion such as rod ejection. The operation of the reactor is such that the severity of an ejection accident is inherently limited. Since control rod clusters are used to control load variations only and core depletion is followed with boron dilution, only the rod cluster control assemblies in the controlling group are inserted in the core at power, and these rods are only partially inserted. A rod insertion limit monitor is provided as an administrative aid to the operator to ensure that this condition is met. Criterion 34 - Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Rapid Propagation Failure Prevention The reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be designed to minimize the probability of rapidly propagating type failures. Consideration shall be given to:
- 1. The notch-toughness properties of materials extending to the upper shelf of the Charpy transition curve
- 2. The state of stress of materials under static and transient loadings 1.3-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 3. The quality control specified for materials and component fabrication to limit flaw sizes
- 4. The provisions for control over service temperature and irradiation effects which may require operational restrictions.
Answer As detailed in Section 4, the reactor coolant pressure boundary is designed to minimize the probability of rapidly propagating type failures. To fulfill these requirements, the selection of materials for the systems and the fabrication of components are closely controlled and inspected. The details of the material selection and inspection procedures are contained in Section 4. Criterion 35 - Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Brittle Fracture Prevention Under conditions where reactor coolant pressure boundary system components constructed of ferritic materials may be subjected to potential loadings, such as a reactivity-induced loading, service temperatures shall be at least 120 F above the nil ductility transition (NDT) temperature of the component material if the resulting energy release is expected to be absorbed by plastic deformation or 60 F above the NDT temperature of the component material if the resulting energy release is expected to be absorbed within the elastic strain energy range. Answer Sufficient testing and analysis of materials employed in reactor coolant system components will be performed to ensure that the required NDT temperature limits specified in the criterion are met. Removable test capsules will be installed in the reactor vessel and removed and tested at various times in the plant lifetime to determine the effects of operation on system materials. Details of the testing and analysis programs are included in Section 4. Criterion 36 - Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Surveillance Reactor coolant pressure boundary components shall have provisions for inspection, testing, and surveillance by appropriate means to assess the structural and leaktight integrity of the boundary components during service lifetime. For the reactor vessel, a material surveillance program conforming with ASTM E-185-1966.(3) Answer Provision has been made in the reactor coolant system design for adequate inspection testing and surveillance during the station's service lifetime. The vessel inspection program will conform to ASTM E-185-82. These provisions are discussed in detail in Section 4. 1.3-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3.2.7 Engineered Safety Features Criterion 37 - Engineered Safety Features Basis for Design Engineered safety features shall be provided in the facility to back up the safety provided by the core design, the reactor coolant pressure boundary and their protection systems. As a minimum, such engineered safety features shall be designed to cope with any size reactor coolant pressure boundary break up to and including the circumferential rupture of any pipe in that boundary assuming unobstructed discharge from both ends. Answer The containment structure, the containment isolation system, the emergency core cooling system and the containment depressurization system comprise the engineered safety features for BVPS-1. These systems and their supporting systems (primary plant component cooling water system and river water systems) are designed to cope with any size reactor coolant pressure boundary break up to and including rupture of the largest reactor coolant pipe. The design bases for each system are included in the appropriate portions of Sections 5, 6, 9 and
- 10. An analysis of the performance of the engineered safety features is presented in Section 14.
Criterion 38 - Reliability and Testability of Engineered Safety Features All engineered safety features shall be designed to provide high functional reliability and ready testability. In determining the suitability of a facility for proposed site, the degree of reliance upon and acceptance of the inherent and engineered safety afforded by the systems, including engineered safety features, will be influenced by the known and the demonstrated performance capability and reliability of the systems, and by the extent to which the operability of such systems can be tested and inspected where appropriate during the life of the station. Answer All engineered safety features components are tested in the manufacturer's shop and after installation at BVPS-1 to demonstrate their reliability. Provision has also been made in the system design for periodic testing of engineered safety features during the station lifetime. Details of the tests to be performed and the basis for the determination of system reliability are included in appropriate portions of Sections 5, 6, 9 and 10. Criterion 39 - Emergency Power for Engineered Safety Features Alternate power systems shall be provided and designed with adequate independency, redundancy, capacity and testability to permit the functioning required of the engineered safety features. As a minimum the onsite power system and the offsite power system shall each, independently, provide this capacity assuming a failure of a single active component in each power system. Answer Reliability of electric power supply is ensured through independent connections to the system grid and a redundant source of emergency power from two diesel generators installed in the station. Power to the engineered safety features is ensured even with the failure of a single 1.3-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 active component. The station electrical systems, including network interconnections and the emergency power system, are described in Section 8. Criterion 40 - Missile Protection Protection for engineered safety features shall be provided against dynamic effects and missiles that might result from station equipment failure. Answer Engineered safety features are protected against dynamic effects and missiles resulting from equipment failures. The means of accomplishing this protection are described in Sections 5, 6 and 14. Criterion 41 - Engineered Safety Features Performance Capability Engineered safety features such as emergency core cooling and containment heat removal systems shall provide sufficient performance capability to accommodate partial loss of installed capacity and still fulfill the required safety function. As a minimum, each engineered safety feature shall provide this required safety function assuming a failure of a single active component. Answer Sufficient redundancy and duplication is incorporated into the design of the engineered safety features to ensure that they could perform their function adequately even with the loss of a single active component. Details of the capability of these systems under normal and component malfunction conditions are included in Sections 6 and 9. An analysis of the adequacy of these systems to perform their functions is included in Section 14. Criterion 42 - Engineered Safety Features Components Capability Engineered safety features shall be designed so that the capability of each component and system to perform its required function is not impaired by the effects of a loss-of-coolant accident. Answer The design of the engineered safety features, the materials selected for fabrication of these systems and the layout of the various portions of the systems combine to ensure that the performance of the engineered safety features is not impaired by the effects of a loss-of-coolant accident. Details of the design and construction of the engineered safety features are included in Sections 5, 6 and 9. The ability of these features to perform their functions is analyzed in Section 14. Criterion 43 - Accident Aggravation Prevention Engineered safety features will be designed so that any action of the engineered safety features which might accentuate the adverse after-effects of the loss of normal cooling is avoided. 1.3-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Answer The operation of the engineered safety features will not accentuate the after effects of a loss-of-coolant accident. These considerations are detailed in Sections 1, 4, 6 and 14. Criterion 44 - Emergency Core Cooling Systems Capability At least two emergency core cooling systems, preferably of different design principles, each with a capability for accomplishing emergency core cooling, shall be provided. Each emergency core cooling system and the core shall be designed to prevent fuel and clad damage that would interfere with the emergency core cooling function and to limit the clad metal-water reaction to negligible amounts for all sizes of breaks in the reactor coolant pressure boundary, including the double-ended rupture of the largest pipe. The performance of each emergency core cooling system shall be evaluated conservatively in each area of uncertainty. The systems shall not share active components and shall not share other features or components unless it can be demonstrated that:
- 1. The capability of the shared feature or component to perform its required function can be readily ascertained during reactor operation.
- 2. Failure of the shared feature or component does not initiate a loss-of-coolant accident.
- 3. Capability of the shared feature or component to perform its required function is not impaired by the effects of a loss-of-coolant accident and is not lost during the entire period this function is required following the accident.
Answer By combining the use of passive accumulators with two independent high pressure pumping systems and two independent low pressure pumping systems abundant emergency core cooling is provided even if there should be a failure of any component in any system. The emergency core cooling system employs a passive system of accumulators which do not require any external signals or source of power for their operation to cope with the short term cooling requirements of large reactor coolant pipe breaks. Two independent pumping systems, each capable of the required emergency cooling, are provided for small break protection and to keep the core submerged after the accumulators have discharged following a large break. These systems are arranged so that the single failure of any active component does not interfere with meeting the short term cooling requirements. Two independent pump systems are provided, each capable of fulfilling long term cooling requirements. The failure of any single active component or the development of excessive leakage during the long term cooling period does not interfere with the ability to meet necessary long term cooling objectives with one of the systems. The primary function of the emergency core cooling system is to deliver cooling water to the reactor core in the event of a loss-of-coolant accident. This limits the fuel-clad temperature and thereby ensures that the core will remain intact and in place, with its essential heat transfer geometry preserved. This protection is afforded for: 1.3-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 1. All pipe break sizes up to and including the hypothetical circumferential rupture of a reactor coolant loop
- 2. A loss-of-coolant associated with a rod ejection accident.
The basis criteria for loss-of-coolant accident evaluations are: no clad melting, Zircaloy-water reactions will be limited to an insignificant amount and the core geometry is to remain essentially in place and intact so that effective cooling of the core will not be impaired. The Zircaloy-water reactions will be limited to an insignificant amount so that the accident:
- 1. Does not interfere with the emergency core cooling function to limit clad temperatures
- 2. Does not produce hydrogen in an amount that when burned would cause the containment pressure to exceed the design value.
For any rupture of a steam pipe and the associated uncontrolled heat removal from the core, the emergency core cooling system adds shutdown reactivity so that with stuck rod, no off-site power and minimum engineered safety features, there is no consequential damage to the primary system and the core remains in place and intact. With no stuck rod, off-site power available and all equipment operating at design capacity, there is insignificant cladding rupture. The emergency core cooling system is described in Section 6. Criterion 45 - Inspection of Emergency Core Cooling Systems Design provisions shall be made to facilitate physical inspection of all critical parts of the emergency core cooling systems, including reactor vessel internals and water injection nozzles. Answer Design provisions facilitate access to the critical parts of the reactor vessel internals, injection nozzles, pipes and valves for visual inspection and for nondestructive inspection where such techniques are desirable and appropriate. The components outside the containment are accessible for leak- tightness inspection during operation of the reactor. Details of the inspection program for the reactor vessel internals are included in Section 4. Inspection of the emergency core cooling system is discussed in Section 6. Criterion 46 - Testing of Emergency Core Cooling System Components Design provisions shall be made so that active components of the emergency core cooling systems, such as pumps and valves, can be tested periodically for operability and required functional performance. Answer The emergency core cooling system design permits periodic testing of active components for operability and required functional performance. The test procedures are described in Section 6. 1.3-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Criterion 47 - Testing of Emergency Core Cooling Systems A capability shall be provided to test periodically the delivery capability of the emergency core cooling systems at a location as close to the core as is practical. Answer By recirculation to the refueling water storage tank, the emergency core cooling system delivery capability can be tested periodically. The system can be so tested to the last valve before the piping enters the reactor coolant piping. Details of the system tested are included in Section 6. Criterion 48 - Testing of Operational Sequence of Emergency Core Coolinq Systems A capability shall be provided to test under conditions as close to design as practical the full operational sequence that would bring the emergency core cooling systems into action, including the transfer to alternate power sources. Answer Provision has been made in the emergency core cooling system design for testing the sequence of operation including transfer to alternate power sources. The details of these tests are included in Section 6 and the switching sequence from normal to emergency power is described in Section 8. Criterion 49 - Containment Design Basis The containment structure, including access openings and penetrations, and any necessary containment heat removal systems shall be designed so that the containment structure can accommodate without exceeding the design leakage rate the pressures and temperatures resulting from the largest credible energy release following a loss-of-coolant accident, including a considerable margin for effects from metal-water or other chemical reactions, that could occur as a consequence of failure of emergency core cooling systems. Answer The containment structure and its heat removal system (containment depressurization system) are designed to accommodate the pressures and temperatures associated with a loss-of-coolant accident without exceeding the design leak rate. A considerable margin for unidentified energy sources has been included in the design. The loadings and energy sources considered in the design and the stress and loading criteria are described in Section 5. An analysis of the performance of the containment during a loss-of-coolant accident is included in Section 14. The heat removal systems are described in Section 6. Design of the concrete structure is discussed Section 5. Criterion 50 - Nil Ductility Transition (NDT) Temperature Requirement for Containment Material Principal load carrying components of ferritic materials exposed to the external environment shall be selected so that their temperatures under normal operating and testing conditions are not less than 30 F above NDT temperature. 1.3-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Answer All containment structure ferritic materials are selected to ensure that the NDT temperature for these materials is at least 30 F below normal operating and testing temperatures. Criterion 51 - Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Outside Containment If part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary is outside the containment, appropriate features as necessary shall be provided to protect the health and safety of the public in case of an accidental rupture in that part. Determination of the appropriateness of features such as isolation valves and additional containment shall include consideration of the environmental and population conditions surrounding the site. Answer The reactor coolant pressure boundary is defined as those piping systems and components which contain reactor coolant at design pressure and temperature. With the exception of the reactor coolant sampling lines, the entire reactor coolant pressure boundary, as defined above, is located entirely within the containment structure. All sampling lines are provided with remotely operated valves for isolation in the event of a failure. These valves also close automatically on a containment isolation signal. Sampling lines are only used during infrequent sampling and can be readily isolated. All other piping and components which may contain reactor coolant are low pressure, low temperature systems which would yield minimal environmental doses in the event of failure. The sampling system and low pressure systems are described in Section 9. An analysis of malfunctions in these systems is included in Section 14. Criterion 52 - Containment Heat Removal Systems Where active heat removal systems are needed under accident conditions to prevent exceeding containment design pressure, at least two systems, preferably of different principles, each with full capacity, shall be provided. Answer Two full capacity quench spray subsystems and four 50 percent capacity recirculation spray subsystems are included in the BVPS-1 design as part of the containment depressurization system. These systems are described in Section 6. The performance of the containment depressurization system during a loss-of-coolant accident is described in Section 14. Criterion 53 - Containment Isolation Valves Penetrations that require closure for the containment function shall be protected by redundant valving and associated apparatus. 1.3-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Answer At least two barriers are provided between the atmosphere outside the containment and the containment atmosphere, the reactor coolant system, or closed systems which are assumed vulnerable to accident forces. The valving installed on the various systems penetrating the containment and the other barriers employed in the design are described in Section 5. Criterion 54 - Containment Leakage Rate Testing Containment shall be designed so that an integrated leakage rate testing can be conducted at design pressure after completion and installation of all penetrations and the leakage rate measured over a sufficient period of time to verify its conformance with required performance. Answer Provision is included in the containment vessel design for integrated leak rate testing after completion of construction. The test procedure is described in Section 5 and the Technical Specifications and is formulated to demonstrate that leakage is below the design value of 0.1 percent per day. Criterion 55 - Containment Periodic Leakage Rate Testing The containment shall be designed so that integrated leakage rate testing can be done periodically at design pressure during station lifetime. Answer Provision for full integrated leak rate testing of the containment is incorporated in the design. The testing procedures are discussed in Section 5 and the Technical Specifications. Criterion 56 - Provisions for Testing of Penetrations Provisions shall be made for testing penetrations which have resilient seals or expansion bellows to permit leaktightness to be demonstrated at design pressure at any time. Answer Each containment penetration includes a means to test its leaktightness. These means are described in Section 5. Criterion 57 - Provisions for Testing of Isolation Valves Capability shall be provided for testing functional operability of valves and associated apparatus essential to the containment function for establishing that no failure has occurred and for determining that valve leakage does not exceed acceptable limits. Answer Class B and C tests are performed on containment isolation valves to verify their sealing capability and leaktightness. The tests are discussed in Section 5.6. 1.3-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Criterion 58 - Inspection of Containment Pressure-Reducing Systems Design provisions shall be made to facilitate the periodic physical inspection of all important components of the containment pressure-reducing systems, such as pumps, valves, spray nozzles, torus and sumps. Answer The design of the containment depressurization system includes provision for physical inspection of vital components. The inspectability of the systems is discussed in Section 6. Criterion 59 - Testing of Containment Pressure-Reducing Systems Components The containment pressure-reducing systems shall be designed so that active components, such as pumps and valves, can be tested periodically for operability and required functional performance. Answer The various pumps and valves in the containment depressurization system can be periodically tested. Component testing of the containment depressurization system is discussed in detail in Section 6 and the Technical Specifications. Criterion 60 - Testing of Containment Spray Systems A capability shall be provided to test periodically the delivery capability of the containment spray system at a position as close to the spray nozzles as is practical. Answer Provision is made to permit testing of the containment depressurization system throughout the life of the station to ensure that this is operational. Details of the testing of this system are discussed in Section 6 and the Technical Specifications. Criterion 61 - Testing of Operational Sequence of Containment Pressure-Reducing Systems A capability shall be provided to test under conditions as close to the design as practical the full operational sequence that would bring the containment pressure-reducing systems into action, including the transfer to alternate power sources. Answer Capability for testing of the operational sequence of the containment depressurization system is incorporated into the system design. Details of the containment depressurization system are included in Section 6. The switching sequence from normal to emergency power is described in Section 8. 1.3-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Criterion 62 - Inspection of Air Cleanup Systems Design provisions shall be made to facilitate physical inspection of all critical parts of the containment air cleanup systems, such as ducts, filters, fans and dampers. Answer The air cleanup system is the containment depressurization system. The containment depressurization system sprays a sodium tetraborate decahydrate solution into the containment following a LOCA so as to clean up iodine in the containment atmosphere. Design provisions have been made so that critical portions of this system can be inspected. Criterion 63 - Testing of Air Cleanup Systems Components Design provisions shall be made so that active components of the air cleanup systems, such as fans and damper, can be tested periodically for operability and required functional performance. Answer Provisions have been made so that active components of the containment depressurization system can be tested periodically. Testing of this system is discussed in detail in Section 6 and the Technical Specifications. Criterion 64 - Testing of Air Cleanup Systems A capability shall be provided for insitu periodic testing and surveillance of the air cleanup systems to ensure:
- 1. Filter bypass paths have not developed
- 2. Filter and trapping materials have not deteriorated beyond acceptable limits.
Answer The containment depressurization system does not have any cleanup filter or trapping materials. Criterion 65 - Testing of Operational Sequence of Air Cleanup Systems A capability shall be provided to test under conditions as close to design as practical the full operational sequence that would bring the air cleanup systems into action, including the transfer to alternate power sources and the design air flow delivery capability. Answer Provisions have been incorporated so that the operational sequence of the containment depressurization system can be tested. A discussion of the operational sequence testing of the system is included in Sections 6 and 8. 1.3-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Criterion 66 - Prevention of Fuel Storage Criticality Criticality in new and spent fuel storage shall be prevented by physical systems or processes. Such means as geometrically safe configurations shall be emphasized over procedural controls. Answer Criticality in new and spent fuel storage areas is prevented both by physical separation of new and spent fuel elements and the presence of borated water in the spent fuel pool. Criticality prevention is discussed in detail in Section 9. Criterion 67 - Fuel And Waste Storage Decay Heat Reliable decay heat removal systems shall be designed to prevent damage to the fuel in storage facilities that could result in radioactivity release to station operating areas or the public environs. Answer The fuel pool cooling system provides decay heat removal for the spent fuel pool. Details of the fuel pool cooling system and fuel handling facilities are described in Section 9. Criterion 68 - Fuel Waste Storage Radiation Shielding Shielding for radiation protection shall be provided in the design of spent fuel and waste storage facilities as required to meet the requirements of 10CFR20. Answer Shielding is provided for fuel handling and waste storage areas to reduce radiation doses to levels below the limits specified in 10CFR20. Shielding for these areas and other station shielding requirements and criteria are included in Section 11.3. Criterion 69 - Protection Against Radioactivity Release from Spent Fuel and Waste Storage Containment of fuel and waste storage shall be provided if accidents could lead to release of undue amounts of radioactivity to the public environs. Answer All fuel storage and waste storage facilities are designed to prevent the release of undue radioactivity to the public. Fuel storage facilities are described in Section 9, waste storage facilities are described in Section 11 and analysis of potential accidents in these systems is included in Section 14. Criterion 70 - Control of Releases of Radioactivity to the Environment The facility design shall include those means necessary to maintain control over the station radioactive effluents, whether gaseous, liquid, or solid. Appropriate holdup capacity shall be provided for retention of gaseous, liquid, or solid effluents, particularly where unfavorable 1.3-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 environmental conditions can be expected to require operational limitations upon the release of radioactive effluents to the environment. In all cases, the design for radioactivity control shall be justified on:
- 1. The basis of 10 CFR 20 requirements for normal operations and for any transient situation that might reasonably be anticipated to occur
- 2. The basis of 10 CFR 100 dosage level guidelines for potential reactor accidents of exceedingly low probability of occurrence except that reduction of the recommended dosage levels may be required where high population densities or very large cities can be affected by the radioactive effluents.
Answer Provision is included in the station design for storage and processing of radioactive waste and the release of such wastes under controls adequate to prevent exceeding the limits of 10 CFR 20. BVPS-1 also includes provision to prevent radioactivity releases during accidents from exceeding the limits of 10 CFR 100 or 10 CFR 50.67, as applicable. Descriptions of the radioactive waste disposal systems are included in Section 11. The effects of potential accidents, including a loss-of-coolant accident, are analyzed in Section 14. 1.3.3 Safety Guides The AEC Safety Guides applicable to BVPS-1 design and construction are provided below. Following each Safety Guide is a summary discussion of BVPS-1's method of satisfying each regulatory position. 1.3.3.1 Net Positive Suction Head for Emergency Core Cooling and Containment Heat Removal System Pumps (Safety Guide 1) BVPS-1 complies with the intent but not the letter of Safety Guide 1. The regulatory position expressed in Safety Guide 1 is similar to part of the design bases as presented in Sections 6.3 and 6.4. The operation of the emergency core cooling system is not dependent on containment pressure until after the refueling water storage tank is empty. By the time recirculation safety injection is required, the net positive suction head (NPSH) available to the recirculation pumps is sufficient to ensure satisfactory performance under all conditions. The recirculation spray pumps start following a CIB signal in conjunction with a RWST low level signal and are only required if an increase in containment pressure occurs. Consequently, sufficient NPSH exists throughout their operating range. The original design of the recirculation spray subsystems for the BVPS-1 was similar to that for the Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2 and the North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2. The conformance to Safety Guide 1 was discussed in the design of all these units by specific answers to AEC questions. The basis for achieving sufficient NPSH was presented to the NRC in Reference 1 and shown to be acceptable by issuance of Amendment No. 28 to Facility Operating License No. DPR-66 for BVPS-1. 1.3-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3.3.2 Thermal Shock to Reactor Pressure Vessels (Safety Guide 2) Compliance with Safety Guide 2 for Thermal Shock to Reactor Pressure Vessels is discussed in detail in Section 4 and the Technical Specifications. 1.3.3.4 Assumption Used for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Loss-of-Coolant Accident for Pressurized Water Reactors (Safety Guide 4) BVPS-1 has implemented alternative source term methodology in evaluating the potential radiological consequences of a loss of coolant accident. Regulatory Guide 1.183 provides assumptions and methods that are acceptable to the NRC staff for performing design basis radiological analyses using an alternative source term. The guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.183 supersedes corresponding radiological analysis assumptions provided in other regulatory guides and SRP chapters when used in conjunction with an approved AST and the TEDE criteria provided in 10 CFR 50.67. Refer to the discussion of Regulatory Guide 1.183 in Section 1.3.4.1 of the UFSAR. Accident meteorology is discussed in Section 2.2 and Appendix 2A and the offsite dose calculations for the DBA are discussed in Section 14.3. 1.3.3.6 Independence Between Redundant Standby (Onsite) Power Sources and Between their Distribution Systems (Safety Guide 6) Adequate redundancy and independence exists between standby (onsite) power sources and between their distribution systems in accordance with the AEC regulatory position outlined in Safety Guide 6. The electrical power loads for engineered safety features are separated into redundant load groups fed from separate buses such that loss of one group will not prevent operation of minimum safety functions. The redundant power loads are each connected to buses which may have power fed from an offsite power source or an onsite power source (a diesel generator). Four 125 v d-c systems, each complete with batteries, chargers, switchgear, and distribution equipment, are provided for engineered safety features equipment. These systems are not tied together. A standby source of power for one redundant load cannot be automatically paralleled with the standby source of power for the other redundant load. Each redundant 120 a-c engineered safety features load is supplied with power from a separate emergency diesel generator. Figures 8.5-1 and 8.5-2 illustrate the physical arrangement of the emergency switchgear, 125 v d-c batteries, battery chargers, 125 v d-c distribution panels and 120 v a-c vital bus system equipment. 1.3-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3.3.7 Deleted 1.3.3.8 Personnel Selection and Training (Safety Guide 8) Application of Regulatory Guide 1.8 during the operations phase of BVPS-1 is described in Section 1.3.4. The organization of BVPS-1 is described in Section 12.1. The training program for the various job classifications is listed in Section 12.2. 1.3.3.9 Selection of Diesel Generator Set Capacity for Standby Power Supplies (Safety Guide 9) Each emergency generator set is rated as follows: 2,600 kW 8,760 hr/yr 2,850 kW 2,000 hr/yr 2,950 kW 168 hr/yr 3,050 kW 0.5 hr/yr The basis for this rating is analyzed by emergency diesel generator steady state analysis. Each diesel generator is sized to ensure that the total loads of the engineered safety features required to be powered at any one time does not exceed 90 percent of the 0.5 hour per year rating. Sequence starting of the motors associated with the safety features is provided to reduce the instantaneous load on the diesel generator. This ensures that adequate power is available to start and accelerate to rated speed all engineered safety features and emergency shutdown loads. Each emergency diesel generator is up to speed and capable of accepting load within 10 seconds and energizes designated loads in a stepped sequence operation within an additional 60 seconds. The speed and voltage variations of each emergency diesel generator are within the limits as set forth in Safety Guide 9. During the preoperational test, the predicted engineered safeguard loads were verified by tests. The selection of diesel generator capacity for standby power supply is in accordance with the intent of AEC Safety Guide 9. 1.3-31
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3.3.10 Mechanical Cadweld Splices in Reinforcing Bars of Concrete Containments (Safety Guide 10) Testing and sampling of mechanical splices in reinforcing bars used in the containment and other structures are in compliance with Safety Guide 10. Crew qualifications used differed from those required by Safety Guide 10. During the initial stages of construction, each member of the Cadweld crew was required to make one qualification splice for each 200 Cadwelds made. Later, this qualification requirement was increased to require two qualification splices, one in a vertical, and one in a horizontal position. Qualification requirements for Cadweld crew members, and testing and sampling the mechanical Cadweld splices in reinforcing bars are discussed in Section 5.2.5.3. During the operations phase, splicing reinforcing bars shall be performed in accordance with individual project specifications. Project specifications shall include or reference manufacturers instructions and comply with the applicable requirements of ANSI N45.2.5-1974. The company Quality Assurance Program Manual (QAPM) identifies specific subarticles of ASME Section III Division 2-1995 edition that will be used in lieu of the corresponding requirements in ANSI N45.2.5-1974. 1.3.3.11 Instrument Line Penetrating Primary Reactor Containment (Safety Guide 11) There are seven instrument sensing lines that penetrate the reactor containment as follows:
- 1. Four penetrations for the engineered safety features containment pressure
- 2. Two penetrations for the particulate and gas activity monitor
- 3. One penetration for the pressurizer dead weight calibrator.
The instrument sensing lines that are part of the protection system, Group 1 above, are redundant and independent and provide for testing of the protection system. These lines are provided with restriction orifices inside the containment to limit the inflow of air caused by an external failure of a line, valve body or instrument. This is in accordance with Safety Guide 11. The sensing lines for Group 2 above are equipped with automatic containment isolation valves in accordance with Safety Guide 11. The sensing line in Group 3 is discussed in Section 5.3. 1.3.3.12 Instrumentation for Earthquakes (Safety Guide 12) Instrumentation for earthquake monitoring for BVPS-1 is provided in accordance with Safety Guide 12. This instrumentation is described in Section 5.2.8.1. 1.3.3.13 Fuel Storage Facility Design Basis (Safety Guide 13) The fuel handling and storage facilities are designed to meet the following objectives:
- 1. Prevent loss of water from the fuel pool which could uncover spent fuel 1.3-32
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 2. Provide a safe, effective means of handling fuel, and protect it from mechanical damage
- 3. Provide a means of limiting any potential radioactive release to the environment in the event of a fuel handling accident.
Detailed explanations of how these objectives are met are outlined in the sections provided below. As explained in these sections, the fuel handling and storage facilities are in compliance with the regulatory positions set forth in Safety Guide 13. One exception is to regulatory position C.3 concerning interlocks to prevent cranes from passing over stored fuel when fuel handling is not in progress. However, the fuel handling movable platform is the only hoist operable over the spent fuel storage area. When not in use, administrative procedures require that the fuel handling movable platform have no loads suspended over stored fuel. In addition, the movable platform is designed as a Seismic Category I component. The fuel cask crane is operable over the spent fuel cask laydown area of the spent fuel pool. This crane meets the requirements for single failure proof cranes (NUREG-0554). The following table cross references the Regulatory Positions stated in Safety Guide 13 and related Updated FSAR sections: Regulatory Position Number Related FSAR Section C1 2.5 - Seismology C2 2.7 - Site Design Data C3 9.12.2 - Fuel Handling System C4 11.3.3.6 - Fuel Building Ventilation Monitor C5 9.12.2 - Fuel Handling System C6 9.5.1 - Fuel Pool Cooling and Purification System C7 11.3.4 - Area Radiation Monitoring System C8 9.5.2 - Fuel Pool Cooling and Purification System 1.3.3.14 Reactor Coolant Pump Flywheel Integrity (Safety Guide 14) The design conforms with the intent of Safety Guide 14. The shaft and the bearings supporting the flywheel are capable of withstanding any combination of the normal operating loads, anticipated transients, the design basis LOCA and the Design Basis Earthquake loads. The flywheel integrity is described in Section 4.2.2.5. 1.3-33
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3.3.15 Testing of Reinforcing Bars for Concrete Structures (Safety Guide 15) Testing and inspecting of reinforcing bars are in compliance with provisions stated below. In compliance with the Safety Guide 15, a full diameter specimen for all special chemistry (Grade 50) reinforcing steel was tested in accordance with ASTM A-370-1968. (5) One such test was made for each heat. Acceptance standards for all rebars are in accordance with ASTM A-615-1968(6), as further described in Section 5.2.3.3. During the operations phase, splicing reinforcing bars shall be performed in accordance with individual project specifications. Project specifications shall include or reference manufacturers instructions and comply with the applicable requirements of ANSI N45.2.5-1974. The company Quality Assurance Program Manual (QAPM) identifies specific subarticles of ASME Section III Division 2-1995 edition that will be used in lieu of the corresponding requirements in ANSI N45.2.5-1974. 1.3.3.16 Reporting of Operating Information (Safety Guide 16) Operating reports for the BVPS-1 are submitted to the NRC in accordance with the Technical Specifications. 1.3.3.17 Protection Against Industrial Sabotage (Safety Guide 17) The probability and effects of industrial sabotage are reduced at the Beaver Valley Power Station by:
- 1. Control of access of personnel and material to station within the security fence:
- 2. Control of movements of personnel within the station
- 3. Careful selection and review of station personnel
- 4. The monitoring of vital station equipment
- 5. Design and arrangement of station features.
The methods used comply with the intent of AEC Safety Guide 17. The Security Plan is discussed in Section 12.7. 1.3.3.18 Structural Acceptance Test for Concrete Primary Reactor Containments (Safety Guide 18) The structural acceptance test for the containment structure will equal or exceed the requirements of Safety Guide 18. Changes will be made in the number and location of points for measuring deflections at the largest opening with a thickened ring beam. The points will be located in areas of highest stress. For the largest opening with a thickened ring edge beam, radial deflections will be measured at twelve points, three located at each of 4 azimuthal positions (3, 6, 9, and 12 o'clock). The change in diameter of the thickened ring will be measured on the inside and outside edges, on the horizontal and vertical diameters of the clear opening. 1.3-34
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The procedures for acceptance test for the containment structure are described under Section 5.6. 1.3.3.19 Nondestructive Examination of Primary Containment Liner Seam Welds (Safety Guide 19) The nondestructive examination of containment liner seal welds was done in the following steps. Every liner seam weld was dye-penetrant tested. After the channels were welded, they were air pressurized up to containment design pressure and soap suds applied to the welds; next the channels were air vacuum and halogen pressurized up to containment design pressure for leak detection. On the floor and lower portion of the cylinder (where backing strips are used) the channel to the liner weld was dye-penetrant tested before being air pressurized. Soap bubble and halogen detection were done from one side only. On the rest of cylinder and dome the seam welds were dye-penetrant tested on both sides. The soap bubble test was done on the outside and the halogen test was done on the inside. The deviations from the Safety Guide 19, published after the tests were completed, ensure a more severe test. For example, using pressurized channels to a greater pressure difference than is possible with a vacuum box. By using halogen leak detection instead of pressure drop detection (C.1.d), a more sensitive test was accomplished. Containment liner seam welds on repaired sections of the liner are also nondestructively examined. Visual examination, magnetic particle, and ultrasonic examination of the entire repair weld are utilized. A local leak rate test is performed with a zero leakage acceptance criteria. 1.3.3.20 Vibration Measurements on Reactor Internals (Safety Guide 20) Westinghouse complied with the requirements of Safety Guide 20 (now Regulatory Guide 1.20) for vibration measurements on reactor internals (Section 3.2.2.6). For each prototype reactor internals design, a program of vibration analysis, measurement and inspection was developed and reviewed by the AEC prior to the performance of the scheduled preoperational functional test. Westinghouse has prepared the vibrational analysis and test programs for prototype 2, 3 and 4-loop plants. The status of these programs is given in Table 1.3-1. This subject is discussed in Section 3.3.3. 1.3.3.21 Measuring and Reporting of Effluents from Nuclear Power Plants (Safety Guide 21) BVPS-1 radioactive effluents are reported to the NRC in accordance with the recommendations in Regulatory Guide 1.21, Revision 1 issued June 1974, except for population dose. Population dose as discussed in Regulatory Guide 1.21 Revision 1 will not be calculated on an annual basis. The radiological impact to man will be calculated using the individual receptor as described in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. All normal and potential paths for release of radioactive materials during normal reactor operation are continuously monitored and recorded 1.3-35
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 as detailed in Section 11.3. The sampling system is discussed in Section 9.6. The frequency of sampling and reporting of effluents is discussed in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual. 1.3.3.22 Periodic Testing of Protection System Actuation Functions (Safety Guide 22) The protection system is in accordance with IEEE Std. 279-1971. Safety actuation circuitry is provided with a capability for testing with the reactor at power. The design of the protection system, including the Engineered Safety Features Test Cabinet, complies with Safety Guide 22. Under the present design, there are protection functions which are not tested at power. These are:
- 1. Generation of a reactor trip by tripping the turbine
- 2. Generation of a reactor trip by use of the manual trip switch
- 3. Generation of a reactor trip by manually actuating the safety injection system
- 4. Generation of safety injection signal by use of the manual safety injection switch
- 5. Generation of containment spray signal by use of the manual spray actuation switch.
- 6. Testing of the automatic transfer from safety injection phase to recirculation phase.
The final actuators for this feature will be tested during plant shutdown. Exception to testing the devices listed above is taken, as allowed by Safety Guide 22, where it has been determined that:
- 1. "There is no practicable system design that would permit operation of the equipment without adversely affecting the safety or operability of the plant."
The present position is that it is not a "practicable system design" to provide equipment to bypass a device such as a main steam line stop valve solely to test the device. In the case of manual initiation switches, the design for test capability would require that switches be provided on a train or sequential basis. This increases the operation action required to manually actuate the function.
- 2. "The probability that the protection system will fail to initiate the operation of the equipment is, and can be maintained, acceptably low without testing the equipment during reactor operation."
Probabilities have been established by the use of general failure data based on continuous operation. Specific probability analyses will be provided on a plant basis at the request of the commission.
- 3. "The equipment can routinely be tested when the reactor is shut down."
In all the cases discussed above, it is only the device function that is not tested. The logic associated with the devices has the capability for testing at power. Refer to Sections 7.2 and 7.3 for further discussion. 1.3-36
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3.3.23 Onsite Meteorological Programs (Safety Guide 23) The BVPS-1 onsite meteorological program complies with Regulatory Guide 1.23 as described in Section 2.2.3. 1.3.3.24 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Pressurized Water Reactor Radioactive Gas Storage Tank Failure (Safety Guide 24) The assumptions used for evaluating the potential radiological consequences of radioactive gas storage tank ruptures are provided in Section 11.2.3.4 and Table 11.5-8. 1.3.3.25 Assumptions Used for Evaluating the Potential Radiological Consequences of a Fuel Handling Accident in the Fuel Handling and Storage Facility for Boiling and Pressurized Water Reactors (Safety Guide 25) An alternative radiological source term was used in evaluating the fuel handling accident. Therefore, the assumptions used for evaluating the potential radiological consequences of a fuel handling accident follow the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.183, "Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors," dated July 1, 2000. The fraction of core inventory in the fuel rod gap is based on Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1199. 1.3.3.26 Quality Group Classifications and Standards (Safety Guide 26) Components for BVPS-1 were classified by quality assurance categories, as discussed in Appendix A.1. Compliance with GDC 1 is discussed in Appendix 1A.1. Design and fabrication criteria for the Engineered Safety Feature (ESF) equipment is covered in Section 6.2. The codes and standards applicable to other systems and components are discussed within the respective sections. 1.3.3.27 Ultimate Heat Sink (Safety Guide 27) The ultimate heat sink of BVPS-1 is the Ohio River. The river is the water source of the cooling water system that removes residual heat after reactor shutdown and following an accident. Although the ultimate heat sink consists of a single source, design consideration has been given to the most credible minimum and maximum river levels in compliance with Safety Guide 27. A discussion of how the Regulatory Positions set forth in Safety Guide 27 were implemented are presented below. Identify each exception taken and supply the basis for each exception. Regulatory Position C.1 An analysis of how position C.1 is implemented is provided in Section 2.3.4. 1.3-37
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Regulatory Position C.2 The Ohio River is capable of withstanding the effects of the natural phenomena discussed in this position and a single failure of man-made structural features without loss of the capability specified in position C.1. Supporting information is found in Sections 2.3.1.1, 2.3.3 and 2.3.4. Regulatory Position C.3 The sections referenced in Position C.2 clearly demonstrate that there is an extremely low probability of losing the capability of the Ohio River as the ultimate heat sink. As such a second source of cooling water was not considered. Regulatory Position C.4 As discussed in Section 2.3.11, the minimum water surface elevation of 648.6 ft provides sufficient submergence margin for the safety related pumps located in the intake structure to support normal shutdown and long term cooling. Further, as discussed in Section 9.9.3, a minimum operability level of 654 ft. assures sufficient submergence margin for these pumps to meet design basis accident cooling requirements. Technical Specification limitations have been imposed to require the Unit to shutdown to cold shutdown if the Ohio River water level decreases below an elevation of 654 ft. Sections 2.3.3 and 2.3.4 (and associated documentation from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) discuss the probability and consequences of upstream or downstream dam failures and the resulting maximum and minimum river water levels expected. These sections show that even with a single failure of one dam concurrent with high or low river water flow sufficient cooling water is always available from the Ohio River for residual heat removal. Diversion of the river due to natural or accidental phenomena is not considered credible. Therefore, the following conclusions are presented:
- 1. Severe natural phenomena, such as earthquake, tornado, hurricane, etc., could not cause diversion of the river or loss of the water supply even if these cause a dam single failure.
- 2. Site related events or accidental phenomena could not cause diversion or loss of water for the same reasons as discussed in Section 2.1.7.
1.3.3.28 Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Design and Construction) (Safety Guide 28) The Duquesne Light Company Quality Assurance Program during the design and construction phase is described in Appendix A.2.1. This program was intended to fulfill the intent of Appendix B to 10 CFR 50. The Stone & Webster Quality Assurance Program is described in Appendix A.3. This program implemented the intent of 10 CFR 50, Appendix B. The Westinghouse Quality Assurance Plan described in Appendix A.4 for safety related NSSS (8) equipment complied with the requirements of ANSI N45.2. The requirements provided therein 1.3-38
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 apply to the design and fabrication of safety related equipment, and therefore, satisfies Safety Guide 28. 1.3.3.29 Seismic Design Classification (Safety Guide 29) The seismic design of the BVPS-1 structures and components is discussed in Appendix B. Seismic Category I components, systems and structures are listed in Table B.1-1. The NSSS fluid systems component seismic category list is given in Table B.3-1. The terminology Operational Basis Earthquake (OBE) and Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) is considered comparable to the terms 1/2 Safe Shutdown Earthquake (1/2 SSE) and Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE). 1.3.3.30 Quality Assurance Requirements for the Installation Inspection and Testing of Instrumentation and Electric Equipment (Safety Guide 30) Quality assurance requirements for the installation, inspection and testing of instrumentation and electric equipment was, to the greatest extent possible, in accordance with Safety Guide 30. The quality assurance program is in Appendix A. Application of Regulatory Guide 1.30 during the operations phase of BVPS-1 is described in Section 1.3.4. 1.3.3.31 Control of Stainless Steel Welding (Safety Guide 31) Stone & Webster Position "Based on the control of ferrite in the purchased electrode materials and the controls during procedure qualification, it is Stone & Webster's position that the intent of Safety Guide 31 is being met and that no ferrite measurements of deposited weld metal are necessary. The specifications for ferrite control at BVPS-1 required that the ferrite content purchased in electrodes, as determined by Severn Gage and Schaeffler Diagram, be 5 to 15 percent. Welding procedures in use at BVPS-1 have been qualified using electrodes with 5 to 15 percent ferrite. Weld samples were examined for microfissuring. No unsatisfactory conditions were noted. Heat input is controlled by restricting range of arc voltage and amperes allowed for welding." Westinghouse Position "Safety Guide 31 states that weld deposits should contain between 5 and 12 to 15 percent delta ferrite. It is not practical to specify absolute minimum or even maximum delta ferrite limits as a basis for acceptance or rejection of otherwise acceptable austenitic stainless steel welds. 1.3-39
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The Westinghouse PWR criteria placed control on the actual wire analysis for inert gas welding processes and on the final weld deposit for the fluxing weld process as follows. In the case of the bare wire when used with inert gas processes, although the wire may contain 5 percent ferrite, only about 1 or 2 percent ferrite will be developed in the resultant weld deposits. This is not the case in fluxing processes, such as when using coated electrodes or submerged arc since the flux is enriched with additional ferrite formers resulting in higher ferrite contents in the resultant weld deposits. Similarly, the amount of ferrite that may exist in any given weld will vary across the width of the weld deposit depending on the base materials being joined. For example, when fully austenitic wrought product is welded, the interface regions will be practically zero percent ferrite because of the resultant base metal dilution, but it will progressively increase toward the weld centerline. Conversely, when a two phase (austenite + ferrite) case product that normally contains over 15 percent ferrite is welded, the interface region will be high in delta ferrite content depending on the amount of delta ferrite available and diluted from the casting base material. The ferrite distribution in a weld will also vary depending on the weld position. This is, in areas of the downhand and horizontal position, weld deposit ferrite will be the highest; whereas, in the vertical and overhead position, weld deposit ferrite will be the lowest in a given weld because of different weld or manipulations necessary to overcome effects of gravity. In addition, Type 310 and 330 weld materials are always fully austenitic; yet sound welds are being made every day with these alloys using fine-tuned welding procedures. Also, welds are being made without the use of weld metal such as, electron beam welds and autogenous gas shielded tungsten arc welds. Furthermore, the limits as set are arbitrary because various methods used to measure the percentage of delta ferrite yield widely differing results. The Welding Research Council has recognized this situation and has an organized approach that may result in an acceptable solution. The basis for classifying the low, medium, and high energy input ranges is not given in the guide. Using our conservative welding procedure parameters, the following energy inputs are being applied everyday in producing high quality welds. They are (for American Welding Society designations):
- 1. SMAW 15.4 to 95 kJ/in. using 1/16 to 3/16 diameter electrodes
- 2. GTAW 2.16 to 32.5 kJ/in. using .03 to 1/8 diameter wires
- 3. GMAW 46 to 55 kJ/in. using .03 to 1/16 diameter wires
- 4. SAW 74 to 79 kJ/in. using .09 to 1/8 diameter wires We have a large amount of evidence showing that the above energy input ranges produce fissure-free weldments in shop and on site welding.
Westinghouse PWR does not require in process delta ferrite determination. When the welding material is tested in accordance with the requirements of Section III, to the 1.3-40
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 ASME Code (ASME-III) NB2430, and includes delta ferrite determination that sound welds displaying more than one percent average delta ferrite content by any agreed method of determination will be considered unquestionable. All other sound welds that display less than one percent average delta ferrite will be considered acceptable providing that there is no evidence of malpractice or deviation from procedure parameters. If evidence of the latter prevails, sampling will be required to determine the acceptability of the welds. The sample size shall be 10 percent of the welds in the system or component. If any of these weld samples are defective, that is, fail to pass bend tests as prescribed by ASME Code, Section IX, all remaining welds shall be sampled and all defective welds shall be removed and replaced." 1.3.3.32 Use of IEEE STD-308-1971 "Criteria for Class lE Electric Systems for Nuclear Power Generating Stations" (Safety Guide 32) Class lE electric systems, to the greatest extent possible, comply with Safety Guide 32. Availability of offsite power is discussed in Appendix 1A.17. The capacity of each battery charger supply is based on the largest combined demands of the various steady state loads and the charging capacity to restore the battery to the fully charged state, irrespective of the status of the plant during which these demands occur. 1.3.3.33 Quality Assurance Program Requirements (Operation) (Safety Guide 33) BVPS-1 has formed a Quality Assurance Department. This department is responsible for the administration of the operational quality assurance program. The BVPS-1 Quality Assurance Manual has been revised to incorporate quality assurance for operations. This program complies with AEC Safety Guide 33. ANSI N45.2 and ANSI N18.7(9) (previously ANS 3.2) requirements are referenced within Safety Guide 33. BVPS-1 Quality Control is responsible for the preparation of the quality control procedures necessary to comply with Safety Guide 33. Application of Regulatory Guide 1.33 during the operations phase of BVPS-1 is described in Section 1.3.4. 1.3.4 Guidelines Used for the Operations Phase 1.3.4.1 Regulatory Guides REGULATORY GUIDE 1.8, PERSONNEL SELECTION AND TRAINING See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.8. 1.3-41
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 REGULATORY GUIDE 1.30, QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INSTALLATION, INSPECTION, AND TESTING OF INSTRUMENTATION AND ELECTRIC EQUIPMENT See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.30. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.33: QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS (OPERATIONS) See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.33. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.37: QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR CLEANING OF FLUID SYSTEMS AND ASSOCIATED COMPONENTS OF WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.37. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.38: QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PACKAGING, SHIPPING, RECEIVING, STORAGE, AND HANDLING OF ITEMS FOR WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.38. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.39: HOUSEKEEPING REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.39. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.52, REVISION 2: DESIGN, TESTING, AND MAINTENANCE CRITERIA FOR POST ACCIDENT ENGINEERED-SAFETY-FEATURE ATMOSPHERE CLEANUP SYSTEM AIR FILTRATION AND ADSORPTION UNITS OF LIGHT-WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS (MARCH 1978) Testing criteria for the BVPS Unit 1 Control Room emergency outside air pressurization system meets the intent of Positions C.5 and C.6 of this regulatory guide with the following alternatives: Paragraph C.5.b The airflow capacity and flow distribution test procedure will be developed based on ANSI N510-1980, Testing of Nuclear Air Cleaning Systems, Section 8, except that:
- 1. To avoid damage to system components, an artificial resistance may be used in lieu of the recommendations of Paragraph 8.3.1.1; 1.3-42
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 2. The Paragraph 8.3.1.6 airflow capacity test will be performed with the filter bank at 100 percent of design dirty pressure drop, since the system design and surveillances preclude inadvertent operation of the filter banks with the pressure or flow rate outside of the allowable limits;
- 3. The Paragraph 8.3.1.7 airflow capacity test will be performed at a point between the design dirty and design clean pressure drops; and
- 4. The airflow distribution through the HEPA filters will not be tested since the design employs a single HEPA filter located downstream of the charcoal adsorber.
Paragraph C.5.c The air-aerosol mixing uniformity test in Section 9 of ANSI N510-1980 will not be performed since the Unit 1 emergency ventilation subsystem contains only one HEPA filter. The in-place leak test of the HEPA filters will be performed in accordance with Section 10 of ANSI N510-1980 to confirm a penetration of less than 0.05% at a flow rate of 800 to 1,000 cfm. Paragraph C.5.d The in-place leak test of the carbon adsorber will be performed in accordance with Section 12 of ANSI N510-1980 to ensure that bypass leakage is less than 0.5% at a flow rate of 800 to 1,000 cfm. Paragraph C.6.b The laboratory testing for a carbon adsorbent will be performed at the frequency described in Technical Specifications. The carbon samples not obtained from test canisters will be prepared in accordance with Technical Specification requirements. Laboratory test conditions will be in accordance with ASTM D3803-1989 as described in Technical Specifications. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.54, JUNE, 1973: QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROTECTIVE COATINGS APPLIED TO WATER-COOLED NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS BVPS-1 follows the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.54. Procedures and/or specifications were developed prior to, and implemented concurrent with the start of the operations phase. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.58: QUALIFICATION OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT INSPECTION, EXAMINATION AND TESTING PERSONNEL See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.58. 1.3-43
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 REGULATORY GUIDE 1.64: QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DESIGN OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.64. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.74, QUALITY ASSURANCE TERMS AND DEFINITIONS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.74. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.82, REVISION 3: WATER SOURCES FOR LONG TERM RECIRCULATION COOLING FOLLOWING A LOSS-OF-COOLANT ACCIDENT Design of the sump for Emergency Core Cooling and Containment Spray systems at Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 1 (BVPS-1) meets the intent of this regulatory guide with the following alternatives: Paragraphs C.1.1.1.1 and C.1.1.1.2 require two separate sumps in containment to supply the redundant halves of the ECCS and CSS. BVPS-1 provides a single sump with physical separation by perforated plate between the two halves which supply the redundant ECCS and CSS. Paragraphs C.1.1.1.3 and C.1.1.1.6 require an outer trash rack. The BVPS-1 strainer is constructed of perforated stainless-steel plate. The strength of the plate plus the larger size and complex geometry of the strainer eliminate the need for a separate trash rack. Paragraph C.1.1.1.4 requires that the containment floor slope down away from the sump to minimize debris entering the sump. A portion of BVPS-1 containment floor slopes down toward the sump but a raised lip is provided which directs normal floor drainage to the segmented section of the containment sump and will prevent small debris from being swept directly into the sump due to the slope. Paragraph C.1.3.1.1 states that it is conservative to assume the containment pressure equals the vapor pressure of the sump water when calculating NPSH. The BVPS-1 calculation methodology credits containment overpressure. This approach was found to be conservative and acceptable by the NRC in BVPS-2 License Amendment No. 167. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.88: COLLECTION, STORAGE, AND MAINTENANCE OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANT QUALITY ASSURANCE RECORDS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.88. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.94, QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE INSTALLATION, INSPECTION, AND TESTING OF STRUCTURAL CONCRETE AND STRUCTURAL STEEL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.94. 1.3-44
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 REGULATORY GUIDE 1.116, QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR INSTALLATION, INSPECTION, AND TESTING OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEMS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.116. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.123, QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CONTROL OF PROCUREMENT OF ITEMS AND SERVICES FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.123. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.144: AUDITING OF QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAMS FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.144. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.146, QUALIFICATION OF QUALITY ASSURANCE PROGRAM AUDIT PERSONNEL FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.146. REGULATORY GUIDE 1.155, JUNE 1988: STATION BLACKOUT The utilization of BVPS emergency diesel generators as alternate AC (AAC) power sources for coping with station blackout, and the reliability program for these generators follow the guidance of Regulatory Guide 1.155 (June 1988). (10,11) REGULATORY GUIDE 1.163, SEPTEMBER 1995: PERFORMANCE-BASED CONTAINMENT LEAK TEST PROGRAM This regulatory guide provides guidance on an acceptable performance based leak test program, leakage rate test methods, procedures, and analyses that may be used to comply with the performance based Option B in Appendix J of 10 CFR 50. With the issuance of License Amendment 293, BVPS Unit 1 now complies with Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) topical report NEI 94-01, Revision 3-A, Industry Guideline for Implementing Performance-Based Option of 10 CFR [Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations] Part 50 Appendix J, instead of Regulatory Guide 1.163, Performance Based Containment Leak Test Program. Refer to UFSAR Section 5.6 for additional discussion of containment leakage rate tests. 1.3-45
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 REGULATORY GUIDE 1.183, JULY 2000: ALTERNATIVE RADIOLOGICAL SOURCE TERMS FOR EVALUATING DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENTS AT NUCLEAR POWER REACTORS This regulatory guide provides assumptions, methods and acceptance criteria that are acceptable to the NRC staff for performing design basis radiological analyses using an alternate source term. This regulatory guide is utilized to evaluate the potential radiological consequences of all BVPS-1 design basis accidents with the following exception. The radiological dose consequences of a Waste Gas System Rupture are addressed in UFSAR Section 11.2.3.4 and do not utilize the Regulatory Guide 1.183 methodology. Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1199, October 2009: Alternative Radiological Source Terms for Evaluating Design Basis Accidents at Nuclear Power Reactors Regulatory position C.3.2 The gap fractions provided in Table 3 of draft Regulatory Guide DG-1199 are used for all non-LOCA events other than reactivity initiated accidents, where only the fuel clad is postulated to be breached. (The Control Rod Ejection Accident, CREA, is considered to be reactivity initiated.) The gap fractions used to assess the dose consequences of the Locked Rotor Accident (LRA) and the Fuel Handling Accident (FHA) are as shown in UFSAR Section 14B.2. Table 3 in Regulatory Guide 1.183 specifies the fraction of fission product inventory assumed to be in the fuel rod gap to be used for the Loss of Coolant Accident (LOCA) and the CREA. 1.3-46
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.3.4.2 American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Standards N45.2.5: "SUPPLEMENTARY QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR INSTALLATION, INSPECTION AND TESTING OF STRUCTURAL CONCRETE AND STRUCTURAL STEEL DURING THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS" See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.94. N45.2.8: "SUPPLEMENTARY QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR INSTALLATION, INSPECTION, AND TESTING OF MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT AND SYSTEMS FOR THE CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS" See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.116. N45.2.13: "QUALITY ASSURANCE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONTROL OF PROCUREMENT OF ITEMS AND SERVICES FOR NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS" See the company Quality Assurance Program Manual, Regulatory Guide 1.123. 1.3-47
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 1.3
- 1. "Analysis and System Modification for Recirculation Spray and Low Head Safety Injection Pumps Net Positive Suction Head, Final Report," Beaver Valley Power Station -
Unit No. 1, Docket No. 50-334, License No. DPR-66, Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (November 17, 1977).
- 2. "IEEE Criteria for Protection Systems for Nuclear Power Generation," IEEE Std. 279-1971, The Institute of Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc.
- 3. "ASTM Recommended Practice for Surveillance Tests for Nuclear Reactor Vessels,"
ASTM E-185-1966, The American Society for Testing Materials.
- 4. Deleted
- 5. "ASTM Mechanical Testing of Steel Products Methods and Definitions," ASTM A-370-1968, The American Society for Testing Materials.
- 6. "ASTM Deformed and Plain Billet Steel Bars for Concrete Reinforcement," ASTM A-615-1968, The American Society for Testing Materials.
- 7. "Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants," NUREG-0654/EEMA-REP-1, Rev. 1, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and Federal Emergency Management Agency (November 1980).
- 8. "ANSI Quality Assurance Program Requirements for Nuclear Power Plants," ANSI Std.
N45.2, The American National Standards Institute.
- 9. Deleted
- 10. Letter from A. W. De Agazio (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) to J. D. Sieber (Duquesne Light Company),
Subject:
Safety Evaluation Related to Station Blackout, dated November 23, 1990.
- 11. Letter from J. D. Sieber (Duquesne Light Company) to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Subject:
Response to Safety Evaluation Report for Station Blackout, dated December 20, 1990. 1.3-48
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.4 COMPARISON WITH OTHER STATIONS The comparisons with other stations provided herein reflects the status of BVPS-1 at the time of the issuance of the Operating License. This information is being retained for historical perspectives. Submission of new material in this section is not required since design changes are incorporated in the text throughout the Updated FSAR. Table 1.4-1 presents a summary of the design and operating parameters for the BVPS-1 NSSS. The table compares these data with data available from the Final Safety Analysis Reports of Surry Units 1 and 2, Turkey Point Units 3 and 4, and H. B. Robinson Unit 2. These units are all three loop PWRs (similar reactor power levels) related technically to BVPS-1. Surry, Turkey Point and H. B. Robinson are currently in operation. 1.4.1 Design Developments Since Receipt of the Construction Permit BVPS-1 has been built essentially in conformance with the PSAR and amendments and supplements thereof. However, during the development of the detailed design of the station, the following features have been modified:
- 1. ELECTRICAL AND INSTRUMENTATION:
- a. The logic for the containment high and high-high pressure signals has been changed from a 3-out-of-4 matrix to a 2-out-of-4 matrix for the high-high pressure signal and 2-out-of-3 matrix for the high pressure signal.
- b. The number of station batteries has been increased from two to five which provides for a separate battery for each vital bus and a fifth battery for non-essential loads.
- c. The number of inverters supplying the vital buses has been increased from two to four.
- 2. NUCLEAR:
- a. Fuel density has been increased from 94, 92 and 91 percent of theoretical to 95 percent of theoretical.
- b. Neutron absorbing material in control rods has been changed from B4C to 5 percent Cd-15 percent In-80 percent Ag.
- c. The number of full length control rods has been increased from 45 to 48.
- d. Fuel assemblies have been changed from 15 X 15 to 17 x 17 arrangement.
1.4-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 3. ENGINEERED SAFETY FEATURES:
- a. A jet deflector baffle has been added around the recirculation spray coolers to protect these coolers in the event of a pressurizer surge line failure.
- b. The starting signals for the containment depressurization system have been modified to allow a delay of up to five minutes in actuation of the system. This feature is in response to the interim criteria for emergency core cooling in that it prevents rapid depressurization of the containment during the blowdown phase of the loss-of-coolant accident.
- 4. AUXILIARY SYSTEMS:
- a. A wall has been added across the fuel storage pool to prevent total loss of water from the pool in the event the spent fuel cask is dropped. This wall separates the spent fuel storage area from the cask pit where fuel is loaded into the spent fuel casks.
- b. A number of trip valves have been added to the component cooling water system to isolate portions of the system which are not required to maintain the station in a safe condition.
- c. Auxiliary river water cooled coils have been added to the main control room ventilation system so that the control room air conditioning compressors are not required in order to maintain an acceptable temperature in control room.
- d. The circulating water system for the condenser has been changed from an open cycle using Ohio River water to a closed cycle using a natural draft cooling tower.
This change has resulted in a major modification to the secondary portion of the station but only minor modifications to the primary portion of the station. The addition of the cooling tower has resulted in a revision to the intake structure. The new intake structure is described in Section 9.9. 1.4-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.5 RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS The Research and Development programs provided herein reflects the status of BVPS-1 related research and development at the time of the issuance of the operating license. This information is being retained for historical perspectives. Safety Related Research and Development for Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors (1) presents descriptions of the safety related Research and Development Programs which are being carried out for, or by, or in conjunction with, Westinghouse Nuclear Energy Systems and which are applicable to Westinghouse pressurized water reactors. Each safety related program is first introduced, followed, where appropriate, by background information. There is then, a description of the program which relates the program objectives to the problem and presents pertinent recent results. Finally, a backup position may be given for programs, generally experimental rather than analytical, which have not yet reached a stage where it is reasonably certain that the results confirm the expectation. The backup position is one that might be used if the results are unfavorable; it is not necessarily the only course that might be taken. The term "research and development" as used in this section is the same as that used by the Commission in Section 50.2 of 10CFR50 as follows: (n) Research and development means (1) theoretical analysis exploration or experimentation; or (2) the extension of investigative findings and theories of a scientific nature into practical application for experimental and demonstration purposes including the experimental production and testing of models, devices, equipment, materials and processes. The research and development discussed in the FSAR is to confirm the engineering and design values normally used to complete equipment and system designs. It does not involve the creation of new concepts or ideas. The technical information generated by these research and development programs will be used either to demonstrate the safety of the design and more sharply define margins of conservatism or to lead to design improvements. Progress in these development programs will be reported semiannually. New safety related research and development programs, which include existing programs which become safety related, will also be described. Included in the overall Research and Development effort are the programs below which are applicable to the 17 x 17 fuel assembly. The test programs are scheduled for completion during 1974 in order to support the initial loading of the first 17 x 17 fuel scheduled for early 1976. 1.5.1 Programs Required for Issuance of Operating License There are no remaining research and development programs required for station operation. Previously, two programs had been identified as required for station operation. These are the core stability evaluation and fuel rod burst programs. The research and development has been completed for both programs. 1.5-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The only remaining programs are those that will be used to demonstrate the margin of conservatism of the design. These are the 17 x 17 fuel assembly verification programs and the LOCA heat transfer tests (17x17) which are summarized in Sections 1.5.4 and 1.5.5 below. Core stability Evaluation The purpose of this program was to establish means for the detection and control of potential xenon oscillations and for the shaping of the axial power distribution for improved core performance. The research and development portions of this program have been completed, as discussed below. The development program for power distribution control is divided into four general areas, namely:
- 1. Confirmation of the capability of the out-of-core detector system to indicate axial and diametral gross core power distributions sufficiently to permit control of xenon oscillations within specified operating limits.
- 2. Development of a control system utilizing the out-of-core detector system for axial power shaping with part-length control rods (such a system is used in the Robert Emmett Ginna, Indian Point Unit 2, and all subsequent Westinghouse reactors).
Note: The part length control rods have been removed from the reactor control system. Reference to the part length control rods for axial power shaping has been retained for historical perspectives of the original design.
- 3. Verification that the control system discussed in Item 2 above can control the core power distribution during startup tests at other Westinghouse reactors.
- 4. Verification that adequate margins exist to operate BVPS-1 at the license power rating by measurements taken during the operation of other Westinghouse reactors.
The research and development phases of this program (Items 1 and 2 above) have been completed and the results have been summarized in Reference 13. The remaining work (Items 3 and 4) will be evaluated on a continuing basis for Westinghouse reactors going into operation prior to the BVPS-1. These include Donald C. Cook No. 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-315 and 316), Zion No. 1 and 2 (Docket Nos. 50-295 and 304), Diablo Canyon No. 1 (Docket No. 50-275), and the H. B. Robinson Unit No. 2. Safe operation at the design power level depends upon experimental demonstration, at the time of the BVPS-1 startup, that the actual power shapes at full power are no worse than those used in the calculation of core integrity. Further, the analytical model used to predict these power shapes will have been justified by these and earlier measurements so that a calculation of margin to design limits in a transient or accident situation can be made conservatively. However, it is clear that very similar conditions will exist on earlier plants and that very little, if any, extrapolation will be required. In the unlikely event that the verification phases described above do not show that margins for operation at the proposed power levels are adequate, the margins designed for the BVPS-1 could be achieved by systems modifications or restrictions on operation. 1.5-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Fuel Rod Burst Program (Item 2 in Reference 1, p.2) Fuel rod burst program, a study of the performance of Zircaloy cladding under simulated LOCA conditions, has been completed for the 15 x 15 fuel assembly geometry. It has supplied empirical data from which the effect of the geometric distortion on the ability of the ECCS to meet the LOCA design criteria has been determined using present analytical design techniques. The program included burst and quench tests on single rods and burst tests on rod bundles. As a result of single rod tests, specific design limits have been established on peak clad temperature and allowable maximum metal-water reaction to ensure effective core cooling. The multi-rod burst tests demonstrated that even when rod-to-rod contact does occur after burst, the remaining flow area is always sufficient to ensure adequate core cooling. The program is complete and results are satisfactory. Additional single rod burst test verification testing for the 17 x 17 fuel assembly geometry is discussed below in Section 1.5.4.3. 1.5.2 Other Areas of Research and Development Not Required For Issuance of Operating License Inpile Fuel Densification Recent operating experience with uranium dioxide fuel has indicated that the fuel may densify under irradiation to a greater density than that to which it was manufactured. This densification can lead to shorter active fuel stack lengths, increased initial rod-to-clad radial gaps and pellet-to-pellet axial gaps. The shorter fuel stack lengths gives rise to a small increase in overall average linear power density (kW/ft). Increased radial gap dimensions result in reduced gap conductance and lead to higher pellet temperatures. Axial gaps give rise to local power peaking due to decreased neutron absorption. Westinghouse fuel densification research is directed toward producing fuel with a structure which minimizes inpile densification (hereafter called stable fuel). The objective of the program is to define material characteristics and manufacturing processes which lead to stable fuel. Any residual effects of densification will be evaluated on an appropriate model developed in this program. A more detailed description of the program and results and all other areas of research and development, not required for issuance of the operating license are presented in Reference 1. 1.5.3 Other Areas Specified by the AEC Staff, ACRS, and ASLB The following research and development activities outside Westinghouse scope have been identified in the issuance of the BVPS-1 construction permit. Control of Hydrogen Generation Hydrogen accumulation in the containment atmosphere following the design basis accident is the result of production from several sources. The potential sources of hydrogen that have been identified are the zirconium-water reaction, corrosion of materials of construction and radiolytic decomposition of the emergency core cooling solution. The latter source, solution radiolysis, is appraised from two aspects, core solution radiolysis and sump solution radiolysis. Collectively, this analysis of the various hydrogen sources provides a conservative prediction of hydrogen production following the Design Basis Accident. 1.5-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The quantity of zirconium which reacts with the core cooling solution will, of course, depend on the functioning of the emergency core cooling system. System analysis has shown that the core cooling initiation is sufficiently rapid to limit the zirconium - water reaction to a maximum of less than one percent. For the reference case, however, five percent of the fuel cladding has been conservatively assumed to react with the core cooling solution. Hydrogen recombination is presently regarded as a sufficient means of controlling hydrogen concentrations that might accumulate following a possible loss-of-coolant accident in BVPS-1. The analysis of Section 14 demonstrates that, for assumptions that are regarded as reasonably conservative, the concentration could be maintained below the lower flammability limit with hydrogen recombination. Furthermore, the analysis presents a method of using both recombiners and containment venting. The design flow basis for the post DBA hydrogen control system is presented in Section 14. The system description is given in Section 6.5. Influent DBA operating conditions (saturated, hydrogen-air mixture containing traces of radiolytic halogens) have been simulated and evaluated by the hydrogen recombiner vendor and independent consultants. (References to other sections in this paragraph are in a historical context. Hydrogen recombiners and purge blowers are no longer required. Refer to current Section 6.5.1.) Testing of Emergency Diesel Generator Tests have been conducted at the diesel generator manufacturers plant to confirm the adequacy of the emergency diesel generator design with respect to starting times on simulated loading sequences. Part of the preoperation and startup programs for BVPS-1, as discussed in Section 8, is to demonstrate the ability of the emergency diesel generators to assume their necessary loads in the prescribed time interval in a sequential manner. The Technical Specifications list the inservice testing programs for the emergency diesel generators. 1.5.4 Verification Tests (17 x 17) The design of the reactor described herein uses a 17 x 17 square array of fuel rods and thimbles in a fuel assembly and is conceptually similar to, but geometrically different from the 15 x 15 array used in previous designs. The 17 x 17 design is considered to be a relatively small extrapolation of the 15 x 15 design. Comprehensive testing has been planned, however, to verify that the extrapolation is sufficiently conservative. Preliminary evaluation of the data obtained to date has not revealed any anomalies. Design changes, if necessary, will be made to the reference 17 x 17 hardware in the unlikely event that any of the experimental results fall outside the conservative design values used in analysis. Westinghouse maintains that no plant need be designated a prototype and instrumented to verify the 17 x 17 fuel design. The change in flow induced vibration response of the internals from a 15 x 15 to a 17 x 17 fuel design will be minimal for the following reasons:
- 1. The only structural changes in the internals resulting from the design change from the 15 x 15 to the 17 x 17 fuel assembly are the guide tube and control rod drive line.
1.5-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 2. The guide tube is rigidly attached at the upper core support plate only. The upper core plate serves only to align the guide tubes. Because of this type of support arrangement the guide tube has a minimal contribution to the vibrational response of the core barrel and other internals components.
- 3. The effective flow area of the 17 x 17 guide tube is essentially the same as that of the 15 x 15 and therefore there are no significant differences in the flow distribution in the upper plenum.
- 4. The differences in mass and spring rate between the 15 x 15 and 17 x 17 fuel assemblies are very small (approximately three percent). This ensures that the effects of the fuel on the vibrational response of the reactor internals will remain essentially unchanged. The preoperational hot functional flow testing presented in Chapter 13 is considered the most conservative test condition since higher flow rates exist.
- 5. More adequate and meaningful tests to verify the change from 15 x 15 to 17 x 17 would be to test the new guide tube and fuel assembly designs individually in a special test facility such as the loop test facilities at the Westinghouse Forest Hills site. This type of program is in fact being conducted and is discussed below.
Some of the verification work described herein was conducted using 17 x 17 assemblies of seven grid design whereas, the selected 17 x 17 assembly design has eight grids. Table 1.5-1 provides the 17 x 17 tests which utilized a seven grid geometry and the effect of adding an eighth grid. Table 1.5-1 shows that: (1) additional design changes are not required (e.g. no new fuel assembly holddown spring) due to the addition of a grid and (2) seven grid test information can be used to assess the adequacy of the eight grid design. Additional testing to specifically investigate the eight grid assembly is not required. 1.5.4.1 Rod Cluster Control Spider Tests Test Purpose and Parameters The 17 x 17 Rod Cluster Control (RCC) spider is conceptually similar to, but geometrically different from the 15 x 15 spider. The 17 x 17 spider supports 24 rodlets (the 15 x 15 design support 20) with no vane supporting more than two rodlets (same as the 15 x 15 design). The RCC spider tests verified the structural adequacy of the design. The spider vane to hub joint was tested for structural adequacy by: (1) vertical static load test to failure and (2) vertical fatigue test to approximately three million steps. The static load test was performed by applying tensile and compressive loads to the spider. The load was applied parallel to the spider hub and reacted between the spider hub and fingers. The spider fingers shared the load equally. The number of cycles for the fatigue test was determined from the expected number of steps a control rod drive mechanism would experience during 20 years in a load follow reactor (1.5x106 steps). The test met the recommended cyclic test requirements of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Appendix II, paragraph 1520. 1.5-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The spring pack within the spider hub was tested to determine the spring load-deflection characteristic as a function of the loading cycles seen by the spring. The test was terminated after one thousand cycles compared to a 400 cycle (rod drop) design value. The test loads were equal to and greater than that predicted to result in spring material yielding. These loads were in excess of the design values. The test acceptance criterion was for the spring to retain adequate preload after the repeated cycling. Facility The 17 x 17 spider tests were performed at the Westinghouse Engineering Mechanics Laboratory (Section 1.5.6.2.15). Status Spider tests have been completed. A vertical static load test approximately seven times the design dynamic load did not result in spider vane to hub joint failure. A spider was tested to 2.8 x 106 steps without failure. The spider loading was 110 percent of the design value for 1.8 x 106 cycles and 220 percent of the design loading for lx106 cycles. Design load is 3600 pounds compression and 1800 pounds tension. The spring test resulted in negligible preload loss. 1.5.4.2 Grid Tests Test Purpose and arameters The 17 x 17 grid is conceptually similar but geometrically different from the 15 x 15 "R" grid. The purpose of the grid tests is to verify the structural adequacy of the grid design. Load-deflection tests have been made on the grid spring and dimple. Grid spring radial (normal) stiffness and the grid dimple radial and tangential stiffness were obtained. This information was used to verify that the fuel rod clad wear evaluation has been based on conservative values of these parameters. The fuel rod wear evaluation is conservative as shown by the flow test results presented in Reference 10. The grid buckling strength has been determined from tests. The grid test specimens had short sections of fuel tubing inserted in the cell in place of fuel rods. These tests are used to verify that grid buckling during a postulated seismic occurrence does not interfere with control rod insertion. The grid buckling strength is defined as the maximum load that can be applied without failure. In the case of static tests, the applied load, which is deflection controlled, results in an elastic buckling failure since no permanent deformation is experienced on removing the load. The static test established the lower limit for grid failure. The grid dynamic buckling strength is also defined as the maximum load resulting from an impact, however, some localized permanent deformation occurs before the maximum load is attained. The grids were tested under both static and dynamic loads. The loads were applied uniformly to the face of the outside strap, transmitted directly through the grid and reacted at the grid face opposite the input. Descriptions of the grid impact test and the analytical use of the test parameters are also given in Reference 9. 1.5-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Facility The grid tests were conducted in the Westinghouse Forest Hills Engineering Mechanics aboratory (Section 1.5.6.2.15). The grid tests have been completed. Test results are in agreement with pretest design values. The test results, along with fuel assembly structural test results, are being factored into the seismic analysis.(9) 1.5.4.3 Fuel Assembly Structural Tests Test Purpose and Parameters The 17 x 17 fuel assembly tests were performed to determine mechanical strength and properties. The fuel assembly parameters obtained were as follows:
- 1. Lateral and axial stiffness
- 2. Impact and internal structural damping coefficients
- 3. Vibrational characteristics and
- 4. The lateral and axial impact response for postulated accident loads.
The parameters obtained from the lateral dynamic tests are used for seismic analysis, while those obtained from the axial tests are incorporated on the loss-of-coolant (blowdown) accident analysis. The remaining tests are primarily to demonstrate that the assembly has sufficient mechanical strength to preclude damage during shipment, normal handling and normal operation. The fuel assembly is subjected to both lateral and axial loads to obtain the respective static axial and lateral stiffnesses. The information obtained from these tests are used to establish parameters primarily for accident analysis since these conditions appear limiting. The axially applied loads, which were well in excess of shipment, normal handling and normal operational design loads, did not result in any fuel assembly permanent deformation or damage. Lateral tests were accomplished with both nozzles fixed in place and forces applied to various grids. The lateral stiffness is found by incrementally increasing and decreasing the static load. The fuel assembly was tested in a vertical position using core pins to simulate reactor support conditions. An electrodynamic shaker was attached to the center fourth grid to provide excitation. The fuel assembly mode shapes and corresponding natural frequencies were obtained from displacement transducers. A comparison of analytical and experimental results is given in Reference 9. Experimental vibrational studies of individual fuel rods were also performed. The rods were tested under simulated fuel assembly support condition and as assembled in a prototype fuel assembly. The information obtained from these tests included the fundamental frequencies and mode shapes. A general test description and a summary of the results is presented in Reference 10. 1.5-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The fuel assembly axial stiffness was found by incrementally increasing the static load (compressive) and then incrementally decreasing the static load. Lateral impact tests were performed by displacing the center of the assembly with the nozzles fixed in place. The assembly was released and allowed to impact on lateral restraints at each of the five center grid locations. The axial impact response and damping were found by dropping the fuel assembly from various heights. The axial impact test was performed with the fuel assembly in the upright position. The relevant parameters measured during the lateral and axial impact tests are as follows:
- 1. The impact duration versus impact load
- 2. Impact force versus drop height or initial displacement
- 3. Impact damping or restitution as a function of impact force.
A general description of the test procedure, including a description of use of the parameters as related to accident analysis is presented in Reference 9. There is a general axial test buckling criterion which does not allow local buckling of components which could preclude control rod insertion during an accident. The fuel assembly overall buckling and component local buckling is checked during the axial static and dynamic tests. The lateral displacement associated with the fuel assembly overall (beam type) buckling is constrained by the reactor internals and therefore does not reduce the fuel assembly ultimate strength. Local component buckling was not experienced during either the static or dynamic tests for loads well in excess of the design values. The general acceptance criteria was not violated. Facility These tests were conducted at the Westinghouse Engineering Mechanics Laboratory (Section 1.5.6.2.15). Status The fuel assembly structural tests have been completed. The fuel assembly structural test results are factored into the seismic and blowdown analyses. (9) 1.5.4.4 Guide Tube Tests Test Purpose and Parameters A new rod cluster control guide tube is being designed to accommodate the 24 rodlet pattern adopted for 17 x 17 cores and which is sufficiently strong to assure that the support column function is not impaired and to provide increased margins of safety over present guide tubes. A high degree of interchangeability of parts has been designed into a new guide tube design. The main features of the new design are full length enclosures and cylindrical upper guide tubes. 1.5-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The 17 x 17 rodlet pattern reduced the central area available for drive line passage significantly, thus necessitating a generally tighter design of the rod guidance elements. To verify the structural adequacy of the new guide tubes, an extensive series of tests will be conducted to determine guide tube deflection with simulated blowdown forces comparable to those expected during a loss-of-coolant accident and to determine the maximum acceptable deflection which assures insertion of a control rod by free fall. Additional tests will be conducted to determine fatigue strength, displacement as a function of strain and the natural frequencies of the guide tubes for use in dynamic analysis. The following guide tube tests are considered as engineering tests. These tests, which are used as design tools and are not specifically required for demonstration of plant safety, are described below:
- 1. Upper Internals Scale Model Flow Test
- 2. 17 x 17 Guide Tube Dynamics Characteristics Test
- 3. Full Scale Flow Distribution Test
- 4. Guide Tube Drop and Deflection Test
- 5. 17 x 17 Guide Tube Fatigue Tests (Full Scale).
Upper Internals Scale Model Flow Test In this series of tests, a one-seventh scale model of the upper internals is employed to determine the radial and lateral induced vibration and flow forces on the guide tubes and support columns. This test will be conducted in the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory H-Loop (Section 1.5.6.2.5). 17 x 17 Guide Tube Dynamics Characteristics Test This test will determine the strain versus displacement characteristic and the natural frequency in both air and water. This test is conducted in the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Autoclave Pit (Section 1.5.6.2.11). 17 x 17 Guide Tube Fatigue Tests The fatigue strength will be determined for the new guide tube design. Tests are being conducted in the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Autoclave Pit (Section 1.5.6.2.11). Full Scale Flow Distribution Test Using one full scale 17 x 17 guide tube (96 inch style) and support column, tests will be conducted to determine the flow distribution and pressure balance between the guide tube and support column during normal operation and during blowdown. The normal operation tests will be conducted in the H-Loop and the blowdown tests in the E-Loop, of the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Facility (Sections 1.5.6.2.5 and 1.5.6.2.3 respectively). 1.5-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Guide Tube Drop and Deflection Test In a simulated blowdown condition, tests will be conducted to determine the guide tube deflection and control rod drop time. In addition, the guide tube deflection which prevents control rod drop will be determined. These tests are to be conducted at the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Facility. Status Upper Internals 1/7 Scale Model Flow Test Support column and guide tube calibration tests have been completed, the model assembled and data collection has begun. Approximately 50 percent of the data required to complete the initial phase of testing has been acquired. Preliminary data analysis shows that none of the measured forces exceed the maximum calculated forces. 17 x 17 Guide Tube Dynamics Characteristics Test Dynamic tests to determine mode shapes and natural frequencies have been completed. The first beam mode natural frequency is in good agreement with the calculated value. 17 x 17 Guide Tube Fatigue Tests A fatigue test is in progress. The guide tube has been vibrated for 107 cycles at the initial fatigue test vibratory amplitude and for 106 cycles at twice the initial test amplitude with no damage detected. Testing will be continued at higher amplitudes until damage is detected. Full Scale Flow Distribution Tests The flow distribution tests are in progress. Preliminary analysis shows that the present hardware provides satisfactory flow distribution to the top of the core. Guide Tube Drop and Deflection Tests Static load tests to measure strains and deflections for several support conditions were completed. 1.5.4.5 Prototype Assembly Tests The purpose of these tests is to demonstrate that the 17 x 17 fuel assembly and control rod hardware designs will perform as predicted. Two prototype assemblies will be sequentially tested in order to obtain the required experimental data. A single set of control rod hardware, including driveline, will be used in the tests. The fuel assemblies will be subjected to flow and system conditions covering those most likely to occur in a plant during normal operation as well as during a pump overspeed transient. Seismic testing is not included in the test sequence. These tests will be used to verify the integrated fuel assembly and RCC performance in several areas. Data to be obtained included pressures and pressure drops throughout the system, hydraulic loadings on the fuel assembly and drive line, control rod drop time and stall velocity, 1.5-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 fuel rod vibration and control rod, drive-line, guide tube and guide thimble wear during a lifetime of operation. Specifically, two full-size 17 x 17 fuel assemblies, one control rod, drive shaft and control rod drive mechanism will be installed and tested in the 24 inch ID by 40 foot high D-Loop at the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Facility. Fuel Assembly Life Test (Phase I) The first fuel assembly was subjected to the maximum expected control rod travel during fuel irradiation. The nominal test conditions were a flow velocity based on the design flow rate, temperature of 585F and pressure of 2000 psig. These conditions represent an extreme set of conditions. Using a fully instrumented 17 x 17 prototype fuel assembly, guide tube and RCC drive assembly, tests were conducted in the D-Loop to obtain information on the following:
- 1. Evaluate mechanical integrity and performance
- 2. Determine drop time
- 3. Fuel rod vibration
- 4. Control rod velocity
- 5. Hydraulic lift force
- 6. Guide thimble dashpot pressure.
Following this, the prototype fuel assembly underwent a complete post test evaluation and the guide tubes and drive line were inspected for any abnormal wear conditions. The purpose of this test was basically to determine the effect of the 17 x 17 fuel assembly and control rod configuration on Items 1 through 6 in Phase I (Fuel Assembly Life Test) and Items 1 through 5 in Phase II (Guide Tube and RCC Life Test). The effect on control rod drop due to a seismic disturbance is evaluated analytically for each specific plant. The test procedures, conditions and results for Phase I are described in Reference 10. Guide Tube and RCC Life Test (Phase II) The second fuel assembly will then be installed to continue the test at the same flow and temperature until 3,000,000 total steps of the drive mechanism are accumulated. For Phase II, testing will be run at temperatures between 100F and 585F and at flow rates from 50 percent to 180 percent of the design flow rate. The test includes a program of control rod drops and mechanism stepping that approximates the drive-line duty for the design lifetime of an operating plant. Approximately, 750,000 mechanism steps and 110 control rod drops will be accumulated. The components will then be inspected. Following inspection, testing will be continued until a total of about 3 x 10 6 mechanism steps and about 430 control rod drops have been accumulated over all of the Phase II testing. 1.5-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 These tests will be directed toward:
- 1. Life wear evaluation
- 2. Drop time
- 3. Stepping forces in drive line
- 4. Rod stall
- 5. Guide tube strains.
When about one-third of the life test is completed, the test assembly will be inspected to determine guide tube and drive line wear characteristics. This inspection will be repeated at the end of the test. Facility The above testing is conducted in the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Facility (Section 1.5.6). Status Phase I of the D-loop testing has been completed. The results of the testing are given in Reference 10. 1.5.4.6 Departure from Nucleate Boiling (DNB) Purpose and Parameters The effect of the 17 x 17 fuel assembly geometry on the DNB heat flux has been determined experimentally and has been incorporated in a modified spacer factor for use with the W-3 correlation. The effect of cold wall thimble cells in the 17 x 17 geometry has also been quantified. A similar program was conducted to quantify the DNB performance of the R-type mixing vane grid as developed for the 15 x 15 fuel assembly design(2)(3). The results of that program were used to develop a modified spacer factor which quantifies the power capability associated with the use of the R-type mixing vane grid as well as the change in power capability due to the axial spacing of the grids. The modified spacer factor, along with the W-3 correlation with the cold-wall factor, was shown to be applicable to cold-wall thimble cells in the 15 x 15 geometry (3). The experimental program consisted of three test series employing rod bundles which are representative of the 17 x 17 fuel assembly geometry. Two of the tests employed all heated rods; one test section being eight feet long and the other being fourteen feet long. The third test had one simulated cold-wall thimble tube. All three tests employed a uniform axial heat flux. The applicability of DNB data obtained using a uniform heat flux to a non-uniform heat flux has been well established by use of an axial flux shape factor. Tong (5) first developed the form of the factor. This same form with some minor change in the empirical constants has been 1.5-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 confirmed by Wilson.(6) This method of analysis has proven correct for non-uniform rod bundle data as shown by Rosal(7), Motley(2) and Wilson(6). The concern over comparison of uniform and non-uniform axial heat flux in long bundles is addressed in Reference 11. This compares the 0.422 inch rod diameter uniform axial heat flux data to previous non-uniform axial heat flux data. This should provide a suitable basis for 17 x 17 DNB evaluation for all axial heat fluxes. However, in order to accumulate additional data for non-uniform axial power distributions, an additional test series is planned. This test program will consist of two test series employing a typical cell and a thimble cold-wall cell test section, respectively. The test section and range of test conditions will be the same as those investigated in the 5 x 5, 0.374 inch OD 14 ft uniformly heated length tests of Reference 11. The main difference will be that the 14 ft uniform axial heat flux heater rods will be replaced with non-uniform axial heat flux rods with a chopped cosine distribution. The axial grid spacing will probably reflect the addition of another grid bringing the spacing to approximately 20 inches compared to 26 inches in Reference 11. This test series is scheduled for completion in the 4th quarter of 1974. Facility These tests were conducted in the high temperature and high pressure loop that was constructed by Westinghouse at the Columbia University Heat Transfer Laboratories. Table 1.5-2 provides the loop characteristics of this facility. The 17 x 17 DNB tests have been performed parametrically for various combinations of inlet temperature and flow rate by increasing the bundle power incrementally until DNB occurs. Status The original DNB test program is completed and the results are reported in Reference 11. 1.5.4.7 Incore Flow Mixing Test Purpose and Parameters In the thermal-hydraulic design of a reactor core, the effect of mixing or turbulent energy transfer within the hot assembly is evaluated using the THINC code. The rate of turbulent energy transfer is formulated in the THINC analysis in terms of a thermal diffusion coefficient (TDC). A program(4) to determine the proper value to TDC for the R-type grid vane, as used in the 15 x 15 fuel assembly design, has been completed and showed that a design value of 0.038 (for 26 inch spacing) can be used for TDC. These results also showed that TDC was independent of Reynold's number, mass velocity, pressure, and quality over the ranges tested. A new TDC experimental program employed a geometry typical of the 17 x 17 fuel assembly to determine the effects of the geometry on mixing and to determine an appropriate value for TDC. A uniform axial heat flux was used. There is no analytical reason to expect that the mixing coefficient would be affected by a non-uniform axial heat flux. The THINC computer code considers the mixing in each increment along the heated length and within that increment the heat flux is considered uniform. The tests reported by Cadek(8) indicate that there was no 1.5-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 difference, within experimental accuracy, between a test section with a uniform flux (Pitt) and one half of a cosine flux (Columbia). The heat flux varied between the simulated fuel rods in the test section to create a thermal gradient in the radial direction. Using different flow rates and inlet temperatures, the TDC for the 17 x 17 geometry was determined. Facility These tests were conducted at the Columbia University Heat Transfer Laboratories in the equipment described above. Status The TDC tests are completed and the results are reported in Reference 12. 1.5.5 LOCA Heat Transfer Tests (17 x 17) Extensive experimental programs have been completed or are in progress to determine the thermal hydraulic characteristics of 15 x 15 fuel assemblies, and to obtain experimental heat transfer data under simulated loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) conditions. Complementary experimental programs will be performed with a simulated 17 x 17 assembly to determine its behavior under similar LOCA conditions. The 17 x 17 test will be conducted in a new test loop which is presently being activated. Results from the 17 x 17 programs will be compared with data from the 15 x 15 assembly test programs and will be used to confirm predictions made by correlations and codes based on the 15 x 15 test results. 1.5.5.1 Facility Description The 17 x 17 test facility will provide experimental measurements on the reflooding behavior of a 17 x 17 rod array following a LOCA. The test assembly consists of an array of 336 electrically heated rods and 25 guide tube thimbles arranged in a 17 x 17 array. The heater rod diameter, the active heated length, and pitch spacing is identical to that used in the 17 x 17 fuel. There will be eight Westinghouse production mixing vane grids in the bundle which will also improve the simulation. The reflood test series which will be run will be similar to the FLECHT reflooding tests. There is a high temperature forced flow injection system as shown in Figure 1.5-1 which will be used for constant flooding rate tests and variable flooding rate tests. Table 1.5-3 provides the range of initial conditions which will be examined. The bundle has a 1.66 axial cosine power shape and will use a simulated radial power shape which is representative of the hottest assembly in the core. 1.5.5.2 D2NB Test Test Purpose and Parameters The "Acceptance Criteria for Emergency Core Cooling Systems for Light-Water-Cooled-Nuclear Power Reactors" was issued in Section 50.46 of 10CFR50 on December 28, 1973. It defines the basis and conservation assumptions to be used in the evaluation of the performance of 1.5-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS). Westinghouse believes that some of the conservatism of the criteria is associated with the manner in which transient DNB phenomena are treated in the evaluation models. Transient critical heat flux data presented at the 1972 specialists meeting of the Committee on Reactor Safety Technology (CREST) indicated that the time to DNB can be delayed by several seconds. To demonstrate the conservatism of the ECCS evaluation models, Westinghouse has initiated an accelerated program to experimentally simulate the blowdown phase of a loss-of-coolant accident. The objective of the D 2NB test is to determine the time that DNB occurs under LOCA conditions. The D2NB tests, which are part of this LOCA program, will be used to confirm the predictions made with the new Westinghouse transient DNB correlation. The motivation for conducting the D2NB test is independent of the change over to the 17 x 17 fuel and are being conducted with a 15 x 15 geometry. However, the results of the steady state DNB program, described in Section 1.5.4.6, will be used to assure that the minimal geometric difference between the 17 x 17 and 15 x 15 arrays can be correctly treated in transient correlations. The program is divided into two phases. Phase I will provide data directly applicable to the PWR to permit definition of the time delay associated with onset of DNB. Tests in this phase will cover a range of cold and hot leg breaks, with particular emphasis on the large double-ended guillotine cold leg break. All tests in Phase I will be started upon establishment of typical steady state operating conditions. The fluid transient would then be initiated, and the rod power decayed in such a manner as to simulate the actual heat input of fuel rods. The transient will be required to follow a predetermined behavior as predicted by Westinghouse computer codes and the as-designed system hydraulics. The test would be terminated when the heater rod temperatures reach a predetermined limit (dependent on power level). Table 1.5-4 provides the parameters to be studied under Phase I testing. The Phase II test, which will provide separate effects data to permit heat transfer correlation development, will also start from steady state conditions, with sufficient power to maintain nucleate boiling throughout the bundle. Controlled ramps of decreasing test section pressure or flow will initiate DNB. By applying a series of controlled conditions, investigation of the DNB will be studied over a range of qualities and flows, and at pressures relevant to a PWR blowdown. To obtain qualities higher than in the Phase I tests, a steam generator will be added to the unbroken loop prior to the Phase II tests. Table 1.5-5 provides the parameters to be studied under Phase II testing. The experiments in the D2NB facility will result in cladding temperature and fluid properties measured as a function of time throughout the blowdown range from 0 to 20 seconds. Facility The experimental program is being conducted in the J-Loop at the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Facility with a full length 5 x 5 rod bundle simulating a section of a 15 x 15 assembly to determine DNB occurrence under loss-of-coolant accident conditions. The schematic for the D2NB facility is shown in Figure 1.5-2 (Section 1.5.6.2.6). The heater rod bundles used in this program are assembled using internally-heated rods. The proprietary heater rods are designed for high reliability, long life and high power density. The maximum power is 18.8 KW/ft, and the total power is 136 KW for extended periods over the 12-foot heated length of the rod. Heat is generated internally by means of a varying cross-section, rugged, tubular resistor which approximates a U2 cos U power distribution, skewed to the 1.5-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 bottom. Each rod is adequately instrumented with a total of 20 thermocouples (8 inside resistor, 12 sheath thermocouples). Status The construction of the D2NB facility is complete. Shakedown testing has been completed and all instruments have been calibrated. Phase I testing is presently starting and will continue to the end of 1974. 1.5.5.3 Single Rod Burst Test (SRBT) Test Purpose and Parameters The SRBT results are used to quantify the maximum assembly flow blockage which is assumed in LOCA analyses. Previously, single rod and multi-rod burst test (MRBT) have been completed on 15 x 15 fuel assembly rods under conditions which exist during the loss-of-coolant accident. The conclusion of these tests were that fuel rods burst in a staggered manner so that maximum average assembly wise flow area blockage is 55 percent during blowdown and 65 percent during reflood based on the characteristics of the pressurized PWR fuel rod and the conservative peak clad temperature predicted during the LOCA transient. The SRBT program for the 17 x 17 fuel assembly rods consists of testing specimens at two internal pressures and three heating rates in a steam atmosphere. The specific test parameters are provided in Table 1.5-6. All specimens were then heated 5F per second from 1940F to about 2300F, held for a short time and then cooled 5F per second to 1200F. Metallography is done on specimens to determine the degree of wall thinning and the extent of oxygen embrittlement. In addition, tests were run on 15 x 15 fuel assembly rods to insure reproducibility of the 1972 single rod burst test results. Facility The SRBTs are conducted in the Westinghouse Engineering Mechanics Laboratory in an electrically heated furnace. Status The SRBTs are in progress. Results of initial tests showed that the LOCA behavior of 17 x 17 clad in comparison to that of 15 x15 clad exhibited no significant differences in failure ductility.(11) Because of the result and the geometric scaling, the flow blockage (in percent) as determined by 15 x 15 MRBT simulation can be used for 17 x 17 fuel geometry. 1.5-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.5.5.4 Power-Flow Mismatch Design emphasis has been placed on reliable and effective control and protection systems for the reactor core and engineered safety features to ensure adequate margins within which incidents can be terminated before the onset of fuel failure. For this reason, investigations into the mechanisms of fuel failure and its propagation and phenomena of molten fuel-coolant interaction have been limited. Obtaining complete answers to the question related to fuel rod failure will require extensive testing because of the multiplicity of parameters involved. Such an extensive inpile test program has been proposed by the Aerojet Nuclear Corporation under AEC sponsorship for the Power Burst Facility (PBF) at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory. The proposed PBF program is expected to simulate conditions appropriate to major accidents postulated for reactor systems, i.e., loss-of-flow, loss-of-coolant and reactivity-initiated accidents. Phase I of the proposed PBF program is expected to be completed approximately two years after facility checkout or by the end of 1975. Phase I is expected to concentrate upon establishing the thresholds for, and the consequences of, fuel failure and utilizes fuel rod clusters of various sizes to determine the extent of failure propagation. This program would broaden the experimental basis for evaluating reactor safety, but should not be considered essential for the design and safe operation. Westinghouse will closely follow any such experimental program or analytical studies that may become available. Until such information is available, clearly demonstrating that local fuel melting is an acceptable condition, the emphasis in design will continue to be placed on providing adequate margins to minimize the probability of fuel melting. The margins incorporated in the design within which incidents can be terminated before the onset of fuel failure, provide a sound basis for safe operation. 1.5.6 Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Facility 1.5.6.1 Introduction The Test Engineering Laboratory at Forest Hills, Pennsylvania, has long been the major Westinghouse center for nuclear research and development. The Test Engineering Laboratory is totally involved with the design and implementation of facilities and programs to prove the reliability of Westinghouse PWR concepts and components. The Test Engineering Laboratory has full in-house capabilities to design and construct pressurized water reactor loops for both hydraulic and heat transfer testing programs. The most vital current project is Emergency Core Cooling Systems (ECCS), which involves scale-model tests, run on three separate facilities. The G-Loop consists of a test vessel, which presently contains a 480 heater rod bundle, the largest such test facility in the world. It also has a steam supply to provide the proper environment during system blowdown, and the capability to test high-pressure and low-pressure ECCS. G-Loop operates at pressures up to 2000 psi and temperatures up to 650F. It is designed to start operation at eight seconds after a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA), and is presently capable of investigating the current ECCS, Upper-Head Injection and other spray systems. 1.5-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 J-Loop consists of a test vessel, which contains a 25 heater rod array, a broken loop simulation and an unbroken loop simulation. The loop is designed to operate at 2500 psi and 650F, and is capable of simulating the first 20 seconds of a LOCA with primary emphasis on D 2NB. FLECHT-SET consists of a test vessel, which contains a 100 heater rod and thimble array, which is used to investigate the reflood phase of the current ECCS with plant system effects measured with scaled piping and two scale-model steam generators. The facility is designed to operate at up to 100 psia. Five general purpose hydraulic loops are also involved in the development of improved water reactor components, as well as the reliability testing of current and prototype PWR components. Historically the Test Engineering Laboratory has been in a state of transition, depending upon the current need for its services. Today's great need is for ECCS data and the verification of many new PWR system components. Past needs and accomplishments have included the development of the supercritical heat transfer once through loops, rod cluster control drive mechanisms, fuel assemblies, underwater handling tools and fuel assembly grid design among many other earlier projects. Testing has included air filter tests, water chemistry tests, in-pile testing for fuel rods, single fuel rod burst tests, hydraulic studies on fuel assemblies and corrosion testing of Zircaloy and other PWR components and materials with and without heat transfer. The Test Engineering Laboratory is a very flexible installation, one which will continue to expand and develop as future needs for its services arise. Its staff varies according to requirements. There are currently more than 100 persons involved in Laboratory projects, including 12 electrical and mechanical engineers, more than 75 highly skilled technicians and some 30 specialists from other divisions of Westinghouse. The Test Engineering Laboratory has the option of obtaining personnel from the entire Corporation, depending upon the need for specific skills, knowledge and experience. Ongoing research performed at the Test Engineering Laboratory continues to demonstrate the reliability of Westinghouse PWR plant components and greatly facilitates the development of improved reactor system components. As the test center for Westinghouse Nuclear Energy Systems, the Test Engineering Laboratory is totally committed to the advancement of the nuclear energy industry. 1.5.6.2 Test Loops and Equipment This section contains a brief description of the major test loops and test equipment at the Westinghouse Test Engineering Laboratory Facility. 1.5.6.2.1 A & B-Loops: Low-Flow/High-Pressure Hydraulic Facilities These loops are small, high pressure, stainless steel facilities used for testing small components and individual parts of larger components under normal working conditions. A canned motor pump circulates water in both A-Loop and B-Loop at 150 gpm. Operating temperatures are obtained from the conversion of the pumping power into heat, as well as from external heaters. 1.5-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Typical tests run in these loops are: 1) full-scale gate and check valves, 2) material corrosion-erosion, with variable water chemistry, and 3) corrosion product release and transport properties of crud. The characteristics of the A & B-Loops are provided in Table 1.5-7. 1.5.6.2.2 D-Loop: Medium-Flow/High-Pressure Hydraulic Facility The D-Loop is a flexible test facility used for demonstrating the interplay of reactor subsystems and evaluating component design concepts. It contains a canned motor pump, which produces a 290 ft head at 3000 gpm. All piping (10 inch Schedule 160) in contact with the primary water is stainless steel. Loop pressure is established and maintained by an air driven charging pump operating in conjunction with a gas loaded back pressure valve. Most of the power required to establish and maintain loop temperature is derived from the circulating pump operation, and 75 kW of heat is available from electric strip heaters. The D-Loop services a 24 inch ID by 40 ft long test vessel, which accommodates full-scale models of large PWR core components for operational studies. The characteristics of the D-Loop are provided in Table 1.5-8. 1.5.6.2.3 E-Loop: Low-Flow/Low-Pressure Hydraulic Facility The E-Loop is a low-pressure, six inch, stainless steel loop, with two circulating pumps. These pumps may be connected in parallel, giving 2000 gpm at 130 ft head, or in series, giving 1000 gpm at 260 ft head. Flow and vibration studies are conducted with this loop, and, because of its low pressure, plastic models for visual observation or photography may be used. In addition, a 4 inch Rockwell water meter in a branch line permits the calibration of flow meters up to 800 gpm. The characteristics of the E-Loop are provided in Table 1.5-9. 1.5.6.2.4 G-Loop: Emergency Core Cooling System Facility Loop is a high-pressure, Emergency Core Cooling System (ECCS) test facility designed and fabricated for 2000 psi and 650 F in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section 1. It consists of a main test section and vessel, exhaust system, piping, separators and muffler, flash chamber steam supply system, and high-pressure/low-pressure cooling system. This loop is basically designed to obtain test data for analysis of LOCA, for breaks up to and including double-ended pipe breaks for Pressurized Water Reactors. Tests are initiated at simulated conditions existing eight seconds after the start of a LOCA. A typical run consists of constant power and pressure, followed by pressure blowdown, power decay and Emergency Core Cooling. G-Loop is capable of performing the following methods of Emergency Core Cooling: Upper-Head Injection (UHI) and other core spray systems. It may also be used for constant temperature/pressure small leg break tests (core uncovering tests). These consist of boiling off water at a constant bundle power input until the rods can no longer be cooled. The G-Loop test bundle consists of 480 electrically heated rods, 16 grid support thimbles, and 33 spray thimbles bounded by an octagonal stainless steel baffle and arranged as per a 4 loop 15 x 15 rod bundle configuration. The loop is controlled (fully automated during transients) through a PDP-II-DEC-16K computer with a 600 point Computer Products A-D Converter operating at a sweep rate of 40,000 points/second for data acquisition. The characteristics of the G-Loop are provided in Table 1.5-10. 1.5-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.5.6.2.5 H-Loop: High-Flow Hydraulic Facility The H-Loop constitutes a versatile hydraulic facility, capable of supplying 14,000 gpm of water at a developed head of 600 ft and at temperatures as high as 200F. This 4 loop system can simultaneously handle either full-scale prototype test assemblies or one large-scale reactor model. The major purpose of H-Loop is to permit the use of one-seventh scale reactor models and full-scale fuel assemblies for conducting mixing studies, flow distribution studies, and similar low-temperature/low-pressure hydraulic tests. The characteristics of the H-Loop are provided in Table 1.5-11. 1.5.6.2.6 J-Loop. Delayed Departure From Nucleate Boiling Heat Transfer Facility The J-Loop is a completely instrumented pressurized water test facility for verifying D2NB phenomena during a LOCA, and for conducting steady state heat transfer studies. This test loop is a full-size, single-loop simulation of a typical four loop reactor system; it will accept a full-length 5 x 5 bundle of internally heated "fuel rods." J-Loop is designed to operate at 2500 psia at 650F, and at variable flow rates of up to 450 gpm. During LOCA tests, fluid input to the "reactor vessel" is closely controlled by two servo-controlled mixers which inject a two phase water/steam mixture into the test vessel, to simulate flow from the unbroken loops. The characteristics of the J-Loop are provided in Table 1.5-12. 1.5.6.2.7 K-Loop: Boron Thermal Regeneration Test The K-Loop, Boron Thermal Regeneration System (BTRS) test facility, is used to study the performance and to verify the component sizing of both the currently available THERM I and the improved THERM II BTR systems. The function of this system is to process boron-containing effluents from the Reactor Coolant System (RCS) to yield a high-boron concentration fraction, which can be used to borate the RCS. A relatively boron-free fraction is also processed, which can be used to dilute the RCS, such as that required in load-follow operations. The characteristics of the K-Loop are provided in Table 1.5-13. 1.5.6.2.8 FLECHT-SET: Emergency Core Cooling System Facility The FLECHT-SET is a low-pressure facility, designed to provide experimental data on the influence of system effects on ECCS during the reflood phase of a loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA). The facility consists of a once-through system, including an electrically heated test section ("fuel rods" and housing), accumulator, steam generator simulators, pressurizer, catch vessels, instrumentation and the necessary piping to simulate the reactor primary coolant loop. Data acquisition is accomplished through a PDP-II-DEC-16K Computer with a 256 point Computer Products A-D Converter operating at a sweep rate of 200 points/sec. The characteristics of the FLECHT-SET are provided in Table 1.5-14. 1.5.6.2.9 Single Rod Test Loop: Heater Rod Development Facility The single-rod test loop is used to evaluate prototype heater rods and for in-depth study of isting rods in pressurized water systems. The test section of the loop is easily replaced to facilitate the installation of various length and diameter heater rods. The single-rod loop is electrically controlled and operated by one person. Steady state and blowdown at various conditions can 1.5-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 be simulated in the loop. The main test section can be replaced with a quartz tube, and DNB phenomenon can be observed on a single rod with a remotely operated camera. The characteristics of the single-rod test loop are provided in Table 1.5-15. 1.5.6.2.10 Hydraulic Model Testing Miscellaneous hydraulic tests on mock-ups of reactor system parts and components are routinely performed at the Test Engineering Laboratory. Typical of this type of testing are the two discussed below, which were recently completed: Emergency Core Cooling Flow Distribution: As shown above, a 10 x 10 rod bundle was installed in a plastic housing with a water supply at the top. A grid-collection unit at the bottom of the bundle collected the water as it flowed through the model and diverted it to the measuring tubes at the base. Knowledge of the flow distributed in the bundle was obtained in this manner. Sample System Mixing Test: This test used one thermocouple to measure the temperature of water from four locations in a reactor. The purpose of the procedure was to determine whether the indication from the single thermocouple was representative of the average temperature of the four water supplies. A mock-up of the mixing chamber was constructed so that hot or cold water, at closely controlled pressure, could be supplied to any of the four inlets. By running combinations of hot and cold inlets and making simultaneous recordings of the various temperatures, highly useful information was obtained. 1.5.6.2.11 Autoclave Testing The Test Engineering Laboratory is equipped with autoclaves ranging in size from one-half gallon to 100 gallons. These devices are in constant use to determine the effect of various water chemistries on core components, as well as to perform corrosion tests. The units have also been used as boilers to provide steam for miscellaneous development tests, including acoustic leak detection. 1.5.6.2.12 Mechanical Component and Vibration Tests Full-scale mechanical and vibration tests are performed at the Test Engineering Laboratory on plant and reactor components to prove the reliability of equipment design. Vibration testing of reactor components is also performed in this Laboratory, using electronically excited shaker heads. Three sizes are available (2 lbs, 50 lbs and 150 lbs) for regular scale model testing for frequencies from 5 Hz to 50 Hz. 1.5.6.2.13 Electronic Component Assembly Highly skilled technicians are available at the Test Engineering Laboratory for constructing complex control and instrumentation systems. Work is initiated with engineering ideas and sketches and includes mounting of process controllers, recorders, meters, relay logic, protection circuits, switches and indicators. Point-to-point wiring or PCBs are used, as required. Final "as- built" drawings are prepared, inspection and thorough electrical checkout is performed before installation in a facility. 1.5-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.5.6.2.14 Surveillance System Development Surveillance Systems provide on-line monitoring of pressure vessels for flaws. Electronic components are being developed at the Test Engineering Laboratory for an acoustic emission monitoring system for in-service inspection of operating plant vessels and piping. This system is designed to detect and locate initiation and propagation of cracks at various locations, such as welds and stress risers. Vessel flaw growth and rupture data have been obtained through joint programs at the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory (formerly the National Reactor Testing Station) in Idaho, and at the Oak Ridge National (Laboratories). Pipe rupture data have been obtained from AEC sponsored tests, and hydrostatic test data, operational noise and attenuation characteristics have been measured at various Westinghouse operating plants. 1.5.6.2.15 Engineering Mechanics Laboratory Bench tests are performed in fixtures designed for the particular test using standard test equipment and techniques. 1.5-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 1.5
- 1. "Safety Related Research and Development for Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors, Program Summaries, Spring-Fall 1973," WCAP-8204, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (November 1973).
- 2. F. E. Motley and F. F. Cadek, "DNB Results for New Mixing Vane Grid (R)": WCAP-7695-L (Westinghouse Proprietary) Westinghouse Electric Corporation (July 1972), and WCAP-7958, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (October 1972).
- 3. F. E. Motley and F. F. Cadek, "DNB Test Results for R Grids with Thimble Cold Wall Cells": WCAP-7695-L Addendum 1, (Westinghouse Proprietary) Westinghouse Electric Corporation (October 1972), and WCAC-7958 Addendum 1, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (October 1972).
- 4. F. F. Cadek, F. E. Motley, and D. P. Dominicis, "Effect of Axial Spacing on Interchannel Thermal Mixing with R Mixing Vane Grid," WCAP-7941-L (Westinghouse Proprietary) Westinghouse Electric Corporation (June 1972), and WCAP-7959, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (October 1972).
- 5. L. S. Tong, "Prediction of Departure From Nucleate Boiling for an Axially Non-Uniform Heat Flux Distribution," J. Nucl. Energy, 21, pp. 241-248 (1967).
- 6. R. H. Wilson, L. J. Stanek, J. S. Gellerstedt, & R. A. Lee, "Critical Heat Flux in a Non-uniformly Heated Rod Bundle," in Two-Phase Flow and Heat Transfer in Rod Bundles, pp. 5662, ASME New York (November 1969).
- 7. E. R. Rosal, et al., "Rod Bundle Axial Non-Uniform Heat Flux Tests and Data," WCAP-7411 (Westinghouse Proprietary) Westinghouse Electric Corporation (December 1969), and WCAP-7813, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (December 1971).
- 8. F. F. Cadek, "Interchannel Thermal Mixing with Mixing Vane Grids," WCAP-7667-L (Westinghouse NES Proprietary) Westinghouse Electric Corporation (May 1971),
and WCAP-7755, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (September 1971).
- 9. L. Gesinski, D. Chiang, S. Nakazato, "Safety Analysis of the 17 x 17 Fuel Assembly for Combined Seismic and Loss-of-Coolant Accident," WCAP-8288, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (December 1973).
- 10. E. E. De Mario, S. Nakazato, "Hydraulic Flow Test of the 17 x 17 Fuel Assembly,"
WCAP-8279, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (February 1974).
- 11. K. W. Hill, F. E. Motley, F. F. Cadek, A. H. Wenzel, "Effect of 17 x 17 Fuel Assembly Geometry on DNB," WCAP-8297, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (March 1974).
- 12. F. E. Motley, A. H. Wenzel, and F. F. Cadek, "The Effect of 17 x 17 Fuel Assembly Geometry on Interchannel Thermal Mixing," WCAP-8299, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (March 1974).
1.5-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 1.5 (CONTD)
- 13. "Safety Related Research and Development for Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactors, Program Summaries, Fall 1971 Spring 1972." WCAP-7856, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (May 1972).
1.5-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.6 IDENTIFICATION OF CONTRACTORS No changes have been made to this section based on the fact that all Contractors currently performing work on BVPS-1 are controlled by the company Quality Assurance Program Manual. The list of Contractors described below were performing work on BVPS-1 prior to the issuance of the Operating License. This section is being retained for history purposes. 1.6.1 Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation (S&W) is an engineering construction firm serving the electric utility industry in the design and construction of all types of power stations. Stone & Webster has and is providing engineering services in connection with generating capacity in excess of 40,000,000 kW. Stone & Webster began its early association with the nuclear industry in 1942 with the Metallurgical Laboratory at the University of Chicago. The Company has performed varied design and construction services. Stone & Webster was retained on the Shippingport Atomic Power Project to provide engineering design for the nuclear portion of the plant, including containment, shielding, waste disposal system, fuel handling system and to provide inspection services during plant construction. Subsequently, S&W has had major responsibility for engineering and construction on the Yankee Atomic Electric Plant, completed in 1960; the Carolinas Virginia Nuclear Power Associates Plant, completed in 1963; the Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Plant, completed in 1967; the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Plant, completed in 1972; the Surry Power Station Units 1 and 2, scheduled for completion in 1972 and 1973, respectively; the Shoreham Nuclear Power Station scheduled for completion in 1983; the James A. FitzPatrick Nuclear Power Plant completed 1975; and the North Anna Power Station Units 1 and 2, completed in 1978 and 1980, respectively. In addition, S&W had construction management responsibility for the Nine Mile Point Nuclear Station, completed in 1968. 1.6.2 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Westinghouse Electric Corporation is thoroughly qualified to perform the development, design and manufacturing necessary to fulfill its contractual obligations with Duquesne Light Company in the construction of BVPS-1. Westinghouse has accumulated considerable experience in the design and construction of closed-cycle water reactors. The Westinghouse technical and manufacturing organization has been responsible for projects which require specialized knowledge and positive overall coordination. Its atomic activity dates back to 1936, three years before the discovery of atomic fission, when Westinghouse began its program of research in nuclear physics. 1.6.3 Hansen, Holley, and Biggs This firm is composed of Professors R. J. Hansen, M. J. Holley, Jr. and J. M. Biggs. All are actively associated with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). The firm has acted as structural design and analyses consultant on nuclear power plant work for S&W and others. 1.6-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The S&W nuclear power plants on which it was consulted include Yankee Atomic, Connecticut Yankee, Malibu and Shoreham. 1.6.4 NUS Corporation NUS Corporation is retained to provide general consulting services, to perform surveys, and to prepare sections of the safety analysis report on site meteorology, area population, ecology and radiological monitoring. This corporation is a consulting engineering firm headquartered in Rockville, Maryland that serves utilities, industry and the government in the fields of nuclear engineering, environmental engineering, systems analysis and operations research, plant water technology, nuclear personnel training and manpower planning services. It numbers over eighty utilities among its clients and has provided these clients with a broad spectrum of nuclear related services including reactor safeguards analysis, reactor siting and reactor design services. 1.6.5 Weston Geophysical Research, Inc. Weston Geophysical Research, Inc., has been retained on the Beaver Valley project to provide consulting services on seismicity. Rev. Daniel Linehan, Director of Weston Observatory, is a consultant to Weston Geophysical Research, Inc. and participated in these studies. Father Linehan is also a consultant to the U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey and to numerous reactor projects, including those of Northeast Utilities Service Company, Connecticut Yankee Atomic Power Company, Virginia Electric and Power Company and Boston Edison Company. Weston Geophysical engineers are pioneers in the development of shallow refraction survey techniques, especially shear wave velocity determinations, which are necessary for establishing dynamic soil moduli for use in analysis of structural response to earthquakes. 1.6.6. Whitman and Rand Doctor R. V. Whitman, who is associated with MIT, is an outstanding authority in the field of soil dynamics and has published many papers on the subject. His studies have included significant work on amplification of earthquake motion within the overburden. Mr. J. R. Rand was formerly Chief State Geologist for the State of Maine and assists in geology and ground water hydrology studies. 1.6-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 1.7 COMMON FACILITIES The following identifies and discusses all structures, systems, subsystems and components of BVPS-1 that may be shared with BVPS-2. The discussion identifies those items that are essential in attaining and maintaining a safe shutdown as well as the considerations and protective measures taken to prevent essential systems from functionally being disabled by the failure of other essential and nonessential components. Each of the essential structures, systems and components are discussed in the appropriate Sections of the BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 Updated FSAR. 1.7.1 Identification of Shared Systems, Structures and Components Structures, systems, subsystems and components and electrical systems to be shared between BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 that are considered nonessential because they are not required for attaining or maintaining a safe shutdown are provided in Tables 1.7-1, 1.7-2 and 1.7-3 respectively. The sharing of emergency diesel generators between BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 during a station blackout event is discussed in Section 8.4.6. Common structures, systems and components between BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 considered essential for attaining and maintaining a safe shutdown are discussed below. Intake Structure The Seismic Category I intake structure is a structure common to both BVPS-1 and BVPS-2. The BVPS-1 river water pumps and the BVPS-2 service water pumps housed in this structure, are considered essential systems and are so designed. Refer to Section 9.9 of the BVPS-1 Updated FSAR and Section 9.2 of the BVPS-2 Updated FSAR. Both the river water and service water systems are operated completely independent of each other and are designed to meet the single failure criterion. A cross-connect is provided between one of the two river water and one of the two service water discharge headers. This cross-connect is usually inoperable and is isolated from the two headers by two isolation valves. Catastrophic failure of one river water or service water pump can disable the other pump located in the same bay. However, since three 100 percent pumps are provided for the river water and the service water system and there is a cross-connect that can be used, there is no credible way that failure of one system can disable the other. The possibility of other essential and nonessential equipment failure damaging the essential river water and service water piping and pumps is discussed in Section 5.2.6 and the current high-energy pipe heat study and such a failure mode is not considered credible. Main Control Area The control areas for BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 are located in the same Seismic Category I missile-protected structure. However, the control boards for the individual units are physically and functionally separated within the main control area. 1.7-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1.8 SPECIAL CONSIDERATIONS 1.8.1 Austenitic Stainless Steel Material Control Austenitic stainless steel of the 3xx series are used for components that are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, systems required for reactor shutdown, systems required for emergency core cooling, reactor vessel internals required for emergency core cooling, and reactor vessel internals relied on to permit adequate core cooling. This material must be suitably cleaned and protected against contaminants capable of causing stress corrosion cracking throughout the fabrication, shipment, storage, construction, testing and operation of components and systems. It was required that all austenitic stainless steel materials used in the fabrication, installation and testing of nuclear steam supply components and systems be handled, protected, stored and cleaned according to recognized and accepted methods and techniques. The rules covering these controls were stipulated in Westinghouse Electric Corporation process specifications. These process specifications supplemented the equipment specification and purchase order requirements of every individual austenitic stainless steel component or system which Westinghouse procures for a nuclear steam supply system, regardless of the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code classification. Every possible effort was made to assure that Manufacturers and Installers adhere to the rules in these specifications. This was accomplished through actual surveillance of operations by Westinghouse personnel either in residence at the Manufacturer's plant and the Installer's construction site or, when residency was not practical, during periodic engineering and quality assurance visitations and audits at these locations. The discovery of any deviation from these rules, whether it be during the "act" or as the result of a subsequent "material-rejection," required corrective measures to eliminate the condition or replacement of the material and/or component. The process specifications which establish these rules and which were in compliance with the American National Standards Institute, ANSI N-45 Committee specifications are as follows:
- 1. Requirements for Pressure Sensitive Tapes for Use on Austenitic Stainless Steels
- 2. Requirements for Thermal Insulation Used on Austenitic Stainless Steel Piping and Equipment
- 3. Requirements for Marking of Reactor Plant Components and Piping
- 4. Site Receiving, Inspection and Storage Requirements for Systems, Material and Equipment
- 5. Determination of Surface Chloride and Fluoride on Austenitic Stainless Steel Material
- 6. Packaging and Preparing Nuclear Components for Shipment and Storage 1.8-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 7. Cleaning and Packaging Requirements of Equipment for Use in the NSSS
- 8. Pressurized Water Reactor Auxiliary Tanks Cleaning Procedures
- 9. Cleanliness Requirements During Storage, Construction, Erection, and Startup Activities of Nuclear Power Systems.
Controls were specified during fabrication, construction and operation to minimize exposure of austenitic stainless steel surfaces to contaminants that could lead to stress corrosion cracking. Halogen-bearing compounds were avoided or halogen concentration restrictions imposed for shop and field cleaning procedures, packaging and handling. Precautions were specified for keeping components protected and dry during shipment and storage. Water chemistry controls were required for flushing, testing and operations to minimize the possibility of stress corrosion cracking. Either stainless steel insulation or non-metallic insulation which had been tested in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.36, "Nonmetallic Thermal Insulation for Austenitic Stainless Steel", was used on austenitic stainless steel to minimize the possibility of stress corrosion cracking. Special cleanliness requirements for Nuclear Steam Supply System electrical components, instrumentation, core materials and reactor vessel internals were incorporated into the process specifications. A specification for cleaning and maintaining cleanliness during construction was prepared for the BVPS-1. The specification defines cleaning requirements and criteria for components and systems. Cleanliness requirements were expressed for each of three grades (for the balance of plant). The requirements which must be met to comply with a cleanliness classification were to be specified for a particular component or surface in the cleaning specification. It was the purpose of the cleaning and cleanliness control provisions to minimize post-assembly cleaning of parts and components and minimize preoperational cleaning of components and systems after installation. This required that components, parts and subassemblies be finished cleaned while still in simple geometric form, i.e., without deep internal crevices, undrainable or unflushed spaces or uninspectable surfaces and required that they be carefully protected to prevent recontamination until they were properly packaged, shipped, stored and are ready for installation, and that contamination prior to the final cleaning after field fabrication was minimized. The three grades of cleanliness are:
- 1. Grade A was the final preoperational cleanliness of stainless steel primary components and systems required to have an exceptionally high degree of cleanliness and a very low level of chloride contamination. Grade "A" surfaces shall be free of dust, scale, organic film, soil, grease, oil, rust, preservative, sand, grit, or any other contaminant.
- 2. Grade B clean was the final preoperational cleanliness of non-corrosion and corrosion resistant primary and secondary components and systems required to have a good degree of cleanliness with a low level of chloride contamination. Surfaces shall be clean as in Grade "A" except that light rusting of carbon steel or non-corrosion 1.8-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 resistant material and tarnishing of copper base materials, was allowable. Light dust and tap water residue were also acceptable contaminants.
- 3. Grade C clean was the final preoperational cleanliness of surfaces and components required to be free of all loose particulates, grease, oil, flux, and other contaminants that could adversely affect system operation. Acceptable contaminants were adherent films of rust, scale, tarnish, dust and tap water residues.
Table 1.8-4 summarizes the water requirements for the above cleanliness grades: Heat Treatment All of the austenitic stainless steels listed in Tables 1.8-1, 1.8-2 and 1.8-3 were procured from raw material producers in the final heat treated condition required by the respective ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section II material specification for the particular type or grade of alloy. Material Inspection Program All of the wrought austenitic stainless steel alloy materials which required corrosion testing in the final heat mill treatment were tested in accordance with ASTM A-262 (1) (previously ASTM A-393) using material test specimens obtained from specimens selected for mechanical testing. These materials were obtained in the solution annealed condition. Welding and Sensitization The unstabilized austenitic stainless steels used for core structural load bearing members and component parts of the reactor coolant pressure boundary were processed and fabricated using the most practicable and conservative methods and techniques to avoid partial or local severe sensitization. After the material was heat treated during the final mill heat treatment, the material was not heated above 800 F during subsequent fabrication other than instantaneously and locally by welding operations. Methods and material techniques that were used to avoid partial or local severe sensitization are as follows:
- 1. Nozzle Safe Ends Use of a stainless steel weld deposit containing more than five percent ferrite.
- 2. All welding is conducted using those procedures that have been approved by the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Sections III and IX.
- 3. All welding procedures have been qualified by non-destructive and destructive testing according to the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Sections III and IX.
1.8-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 4. Table 1.8-5 provides a listing of welding methods that have been tested individually and in multiprocess combinations as outlined in the Welding and Sensitation Section, Item number 3, using prudent energy input ranges for the respective method.
- 5. The interpass temperature of all welding methods is limited to 350F maximum.
- 6. All full penetration welds require inspection in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Article NB5000. Welding materials are required to conform and are controlled in accordance with ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section III, Article NB2400.
When these welding procedure tests were being performed on test welds that were made from base metal and weld metal materials which were from the same lot(s) of materials used in the fabrication of components, additional testing was frequently required to determine the metallurgical, chemical, physical, corrosion, etc., characteristics of the weldment. The additional tests that were conducted on a technical case basis are as follows:
- 1. Light and electron microscopy
- 2. Elevated temperature mechanical properties
- 3. Chemical check analysis
- 4. Fatigue tests
- 5. Intergranular corrosion tests using ASTM A-262 "Susceptibility to Intergranular Attack in Stainless Steels, Rec. Practices for Detecting", Practice E
- 6. Static and dynamic corrosion tests within reactor water chemistry limitations.
Post Weld Heat Treatment and Chemistry Control The unstabilized austenitic stainless steel material specifications was used for the:
- 1. Reactor coolant pressure boundary
- 2. Systems required for reactor shutdown
- 3. Systems required for emergency core cooling are listed in Tables 1.8-1 and 1.8-2.
The unstabilized austenitic stainless steel material specifications used for the reactor vessel internals which are required for emergency core cooling for any mode of normal operation or under postulated accident conditions, and for core structural load bearing members are listed in Table 1.8-3. The water chemistry control is described in Section 4.2.8. These chemistry controls coupled with the satisfactory experience with components and internals using unstabilized austenitic steel materials which had been post weld heat treated, show compatibility of these heat treatments for stainless steel in a PWR chemistry environment.(2) Actual observation of post 1.8-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 weld heat treated austenitic stainless steel after actual operation, indicate no effects of such treatments. Internals that were heat treated above 800F and with subsequent service in the following plants have been examined and show acceptable material condition: Robert Emmet Ginna Jose Cabrera Connecticut Yankee San Onofre Beznau, Unit 1 Yankee Rowe Trino Vercellese (Vercelli) For reactor vessel internals the austenitic stainless steel was given a stress relieving treatment above 800F, using a high temperature stabilizing procedure. This was performed in the temperature range of 1,600F to 1,900F, with holding times sufficient to achieve chromium diffusion to the grain boundary regions to limit the effects of sensitization of Cr-carbide precipitation in the grain boundary. The stainless nozzles on the pressurizer were given a post weld treatment associated with fabrication of the head. No intergranular tests are planned because of satisfactory service experience as noted above. 1.8.2 Material Equivalency Materials listed in the UFSAR that are qualified with an "or equivalent" statement may be replaced with an evaluated alternative material. Prior to the replacement of an existing material for a component part, an engineering technical evaluation is performed to determine suitability and acceptability for the application. These technical evaluations are performed utilizing approved procedures which meet the design control requirements of the BVPS Appendix B design control program. The site design control program under which acceptability of alternate materials is evaluated addresses many material properties and their interactions with the system environment. In a typical evaluation, material properties such as tensile strength, yield strength, ductility, fracture toughness, corrosion resistance, surface conditions, hardness, thermal conductivity, heat treatment, and electro-chemical potential are evaluated as appropriate for the application under evaluation. The term "equivalent," however, does not apply to materials specified in the UFSAR that are required by a legally binding commitment described in the license or NRC Safety Evaluation Report (SER). 1.8.3 Historical Information UFSAR sections listed below have been determined to be historical based on Regulatory Guide 1.81 (References 1 and 2). This information is not intended or expected to be updated for the life of the plant. 1.8-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 While information provided in these sections has been designated as historical, associated design bases themselves should not. The original design bases continue to be part of the overall design bases for the facility, and new information may warrant their update. Section Title 1.4 Comparison with Other Stations 1.5 Research and Development Requirements 1.6 Identification of Contractors 2 Site 11A Estimated Radioactive Nuclide Concentrations in Waste Disposal Systems and in Discharge to the Environment 11B Evaluation Of The Doses From Radiation Exposure Due To Normal Operation Of Unit 1 of the Beaver Valley Power Station 13 Initial Tests And Operation 14B-5 Tritium Production Within a Light Water Reactor 14E Generic Sensitivity Study Results For A 3-Loop Plant With 17 x 17 Fuel A.1 Quality Assurance Program (Note: The Operations Phase Quality Assurance Program is described in the company Quality Assurance Program Manual.) A.2 Duquesne Light Company Design and Construction Quality Assurance Program A.3 Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation Quality Assurance Program (Design and Construction Phase) A.4 Westinghouse Pressurized Water Reactor Systems Division Quality Assurance Plan (Design and Construction Phase) A.5 Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel Division Reliability and Quality Assurance Program 1.8-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 1.8
- 1. "ASTM Recommended Practice for Detecting Susceptibility to Intergranular Attack in Stainless Steels," ASTM A-262, The American Society for Testing Materials.
- 2. W. S. Hazelton, "Sensitized Stainless Steel in Westinghouse PWR Nuclear Steam Supply Systems," WCAP-7735, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (August 1971).
- 3. "Content of the Updated Final Safety Analysis Report in Accordance with 10 CFR 50.71(e),"
Nuclear Regulatory Commission Regulatory Guide 1.81 (September 1999).
- 4. "Guidelines for Updating Final Safety Analysis Reports," Nuclear Energy Institute guidance document NEI 98-03 (Revision 1, June 1999).
1.8-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 TABLES FOR SECTION 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 21 Table 1.1-1 UPDATED FSAR GUIDELINES
- 1. The Updated FSAR includes changes made to BVPS-1 up to six months prior to the filing date.
- 2. The Updated FSAR includes a physical description of changes made to BVPS-1 that have been approved for use and are operable. By convention, for future Updated FSAR Revisions, the Operational Acceptance Date associated with each design change, determines when each design change is considered approved for use and is operable, and must therefore be included, if applicable, in the Updated FSAR.
- 3. The Updated FSAR maintains the same level of detail as was provided in the Original FSAR.
- 4. Minor differences between actual and projected population figures or other such changes in the site environment are not reported unless the conclusions of safety analyses relative to public health and safety are affected and BVPS-1 prepared a new analyses as a result of NRC requirements.
- 5. The Updated FSAR includes where applicable, the latest information on specialized studies that has been developed in response to NRC requirements. New analyses which were required during consideration of facility or procedure changes, Technical Specification changes, or other licensing questions, may be incorporated as appendices or otherwise appropriately inserted within the Updated FSAR. No analyses are required other than those already prepared or submitted pursuant to NRC requirements, either originally with the application, or as part of the operating license review process, or those required by 10 CFR 50.59 or other NRC Requirement, or those prepared to support license amendments.
- 6. The Updated FSAR uses the same format as the Original FSAR.
- 7. Comparisons to other plants in the Updated FSAR were considered valid at the time the BVPS-1 Operating License was issued. This information is being maintained for historical perspectives.
- 8. The Updated FSAR references the Security and Emergency Plans that are currently in effect.
- 9. Responses to original AEC Questions are appropriately incorporated into the Updated FSAR.
- 10. The Updated FSAR has maintained information pertaining to programs described in the Original FSAR even though new information is not required to be submitted as part of the initial Updated FSAR. This information is being maintained for completeness and to locate previously submitted information in one document. This is noted in the text where applicable.
1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.2-1 DESCRIPTION OF MODIFIED FORTRAN TYPE FORMAT USED FOR WRITING EQUATIONS SYMBOLS Equals = Greater Than > Less Than < Addition + Subtraction - Multiplication
- Division /
Exponentiation ** (Represents the operation "to raise to a power") 10 Summation, i.e., N1 SUM, N, 1, 10 ( ) Differentiation, i.e., dy/dx dy/dx Integration, i.e., INT, 1, 10 (S) dx Parentheses ( ) Brackets [ ] Square Root SQRT ( ) Sine of an Angle SIN ( ) Cosine of an Angle COS ( ) Tangent of an Angle TAN ( ) Arctangent ATAN ( ) Exponential - e( ) EXP ( ) Natural Logarithm LOG ( ) 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 1.2-1 (CONT'D) DESCRIPTION OF MODIFIED FORTRAN TYPE FORMAT USED FOR WRITING EQUATIONS Absolute Value ABS ( ) Greek Letters Are Written Out, i.e., Alpha, Beta RULES
- 1. All operators (+, -, *, /, **) must be explicitly stated i.e., A
- C must be written, rather than AC.
- 2. No two operators can be juxtaposed, i.e., A/(-2) must be written, rather than A/-2.
- 3. The following is the hierarchy of operators:
All exponentiations are performed first All multiplications and divisions are performed second All additions and subtractions are performed last
- 4. If an expression consists entirely of operators of the same priority, the expression is evaluated in order from left to right, except for exponentiations which are performed from right to left.
- 5. The presence of parentheses overrides the natural order of priority given under Items 3 and 4.
- 6. The following symbols are available in ATS as superscripts: numbers, +, -, (cross),
parentheses, >, and <. Superscripts using other symbols should not be used.
- 7. Subscripts should not be used, i.e., A1 = A1, B5 = B5 EXAMPLE The equation 8
a log F Y .5 X 10 1 is written as (ALPHA ** .8)
- LOG(F)/Y + .5
- X1 = 10 2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.3-1 PROTOTYPE REACTORS INTERNALS ASSURANCE PROGRAM STATUS** PROTOTYPE REACTORS TOPICAL REPORTS No. of Plant WCAP Loops (Operating Utility) Title No. Class Status 2 Robert Emmett Ginna "Westinghouse PWR 7845 2 AEC Accepted (Rochester Gas & Internals Vibration Electric Corporation) Summary, 2-Loop Internals Assurance" 7718 3 AEC Accepted 3 H. B. Robinson No. 2 "Westinghouse PWR 7765-L 2 AEC Accepted with (Carolina Power and Internals Vibration additional information Light Company) Summary, 3-Loop Internals Assurance" 7765 3 AEC Accepted with additional information 7765-L-AR* 2 To be completed by 7765-AR* 3 December 1, 1972 & will constitute the approved AEC documents. 4 Indian Point No. 2 "Four-Loop PWR 7879 2 Submitted to AEC Note: (Consolidated Edison Internals Assurance and Test No notice of acceptance Company of New York) Program" received) To be completed June, 1973.
- AR = Acceptance Review, notation used to designate report with additional information reviewed and accepted by the AEC and now this information is incorporated into the report and the report reissued.
- The information provided herein was considered valid and up-to-date at the time the Operating License was issued.
1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.4-1 COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Thermal and Hydraulic Design Parameters 1 Total Core Heat Output, Mwt 2,652 2,441 2,200 2,200 2 Total Core Heat Output, Btu per hr 9,051 x 106 8,331 x 106 7,479 x 106 7,479 x 106 3 Heat Generated in Fuel, Percent 97.4 97.4 97.4 97.4 4 Maximum Thermal Overpower, Percent 118 112 112 112 5 System Operating Pressure, Nominal psia 2,250 2,250 2,250 2,250 6 System Operating Pressure, Minimum Steady State, psia 2,220 2,220 2,220 2,220 7 Hot Channel Factors: Heat Flux, Fq 2.50 2.80 3.23 3.23 8 Hot Channel Factors: Enthalpy Rise, FH 1.55 1.60 1.77 1.77 9 DNBR at Nominal Initial Rating Conditions 1.86 1.97 1.81 1.81 10 Minimum DNBR for Design Transients 1.30 1.30 1.30 1.30 1 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Coolant Flow 11 Total Thermal Flow Rate, lb per hr 100.9 x 106 100.7 x 106 101.5 x 106 101.5 x 106 12 Effective Flow Rate for Heat Transfer, lb per hr 96.3 x 106 97.0 x 106 97.0 x 106 97.0 x 106 13 Effective Flow Area for Heat Transfer, ft2 41.5 41.8 41.8 41.8 14 Average Velocity along Fuel Rods, ft per sec 14.4 14.2 14.3 14.3 15 Average Mass Velocity, lb per hr - ft2 2.32 x 106 2.31 x 106 2.32 x 106 2.32 x 106 Coolant Temperatures, F (at 100 Percent Full Power) 16 Nominal Inlet 542.5 543 546.2 546.2 17 Maximum Inlet Due to Instrumentation Error and Deadband 546.5 547 550.2 550.2 18 Average Rise in Vessel, F 67.4 62.6 55.9 55.9 19 Average Rise in Core, F 70.3 65.5 58.3 58.3 2 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Coolant Temperatures, F (at 100 Percent Full Power) (Contd) 20 Average in Core, F 579.3 577 575.4 575.4 21 Average in Vessel, F 576.2 574 574.2 574.2 Heat Transfer at 100 Percent Power 25 Active Heat Transfer Surface Area, ft2 48,600 42,460 42,460 42,460 26 Average Heat Flux, Btu per hr - ft2 181,400 191,100 171,600 171,600 27 Maximum Heat Flux, Btu per hr - ft2 453,500 534,100 554,200 554,200 28 Average Thermal Output, kW per ft 5.2 6.2 5.5 5.5 29 Maximum Thermal Output, kW per ft 13.0 17.3 17.9 17.9 Fuel Central Temperature, (BOL) F 31 Maximum at 100 Percent Power 3,400 4,050 4,030 4,030 32 Maximum at Overpower 4,400 4,300 4,300 4,300 3 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Fuel Central Temperature, (BOL) F (Contd) 33 Thermal Output, kW per ft at Maximum Overpower 21.1 20.6 20.0 20.0 CORE MECHANICAL DESIGN PARAMETERS Fuel Assemblies 34 Design Canless 17 x 17 Canless 15 x 15 Canless 15 x 15 Canless 15 x 15 35 Rod Pitch, inches 0.496 0.563 0.563 0.563 36 Overall Dimensions, inches 8.426 x 8.426 8.426 x 8.426 8.426 x 8.426 8.426 x 8.426 37 Fuel Weight (as UO2), lb 181,205 176,200 176,200 176,200 39 Number of Grids per Assembly 7 7 7 7 Fuel Rods 40 Number 41,448 32,028 32,028 32,028 41 Outside Diameter, inches 0.374 0.422 0.422 0.422 42 Diametral Gap, inches 0.0065, 0.0075, 0.0075, 0.0065 0.0065 0.0085 4 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Fuel Rods (Contd) 43 Clad Thickness, inches 0.0225 0.0243 0.0243 0.0243 44 Clad Material Zircaloy-4 Zircaloy-4 Zircaloy Zircaloy Fuel Pellets 45 Material UO2 Sintered UO2 Sintered UO2 Sintered UO2 Sintered 46 Density (Percent of Theoretical) 95 94, 93, 92 94, 92, 91 94, 92, 91 47 Diameter, inches 0.3225 0.3659, 0.3659, 0.3669 0.3669 0.3649 48 Length, inches 0.530 0.6000 0.6000 0.6000 Control Rod Assemblies 49 Neutron Absorber 5 percent Cd- 5 percent Cd- 5 percent Cd- 5 percent Cd-15 percent In 15 percent In 15 percent In 15 percent In 80 percent Ag 80 percent Ag 80 percent Ag 80 percent Ag 50 Cladding Material Type 304 SS Type 304 SS Type 304 SS Type 304 SS Cold Worked Cold Worked Cold Worked Cold Worked 51 Clad Thickness, inches 0.0188 0.019 0.019 0.019 5 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Control Rod Assemblies (Contd) 52 Number of Control Rod Assemblies (Full Length/Part Length) 48/5 48/5 45/8 45/8 53 Number of Rods per Assembly 24 20 20 20 Total Rod Worth (%) See Table See Table See Table See Table 3.3-3 3.3-3 3.2.1-3 3.2.1-3 Core Structure 54 Core Barrel ID/OD, inches 133.875/137.875 133.875/137.875 133.875/137.875 133.875/137.875 55 Thermal Shield ID/OD, inches 142.625/148.000 142.625/148.000 142.625/148.0 142.625/148.0 NUCLEAR DESIGN DATA Structural Characteristics 56 Fuel Weight (as UO2), lb 181,205 176,200 176,200 176,200 57 Clad Weight, lb 38,230 36,300 36,300 36,300 58 Core Diameter, inches (Equivalent) 119.7 119.5 119.5 119.5 59 Core Height, inches (Active Fuel) 143.7 144 144 144 6 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Reflector Thickness and Composition 60 Top - Water plus Steel 10 in. 10 in. 10 in. 10 in. 61 Bottom - Water plus Steel 10 in. 10 in. 10 in. 10 in. 62 Side - Water plus Steel 15 in. 15 in. 15 in. 15 in. 63 H2O/U, Cold Molecular Ratio 3.43 4.18 4.18 4.18 (Lattice) 64 Number of Fuel Assemblies 157 157 157 157 65 UO2 Rods per Assembly 264 204 204 204 Performance Characteristics 66 Loading Technique 3 region, 3 region, 3 region, 3 region, nonuniform nonuniform nonuniform nonuniform Fuel Burnup, MWD per MTU 67 Average First Cycle 13,700 12,600 13,000 13,000 68 First Core Average 33,000 22,300 24,500 24,500 7 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Feed Enrichments, w/o 69 Region 1 2.10 1.85 1.85 1.85 70 Region 2 2.60 2.55 2.55 2.55 71 Region 3 3.10 3.10 3.10 3.10 Control Characteristics Effective Multiplication (Beginning of Life), keff 72 Cold, No Power, Clean 1.25 1.176 1.180 1.180 Boron Concentrations 75 To Shut Reactor Down With No Control Rod Assemblies Inserted, Clean (keff = 0.99) Cold 1,443 1,250 ppm 1,250 ppm 1,250 ppm Hot 1,418 1,240 ppm 1,210 ppm 1,210 ppm 76 To Control at Power With No Control Rod Assemblies Inserted, Clean/Equilibrium Xenon and Samarium 1197/904 700 ppm 1,000 ppm/ 1,000 ppm/ 670 ppm 920 ppm 8 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Boron Concentrations (Cont'd) 77 Burnable Poison Worth, Hot 7.0 6.9 percent k/k 7.3 k/k 7.3 k/k 78 Burnable Poison Worth, Cold 5.5 5.3 percent k/k 5.6 k/k 5.6 k/k Kinetic Characteristics 79 Moderator Temperature Coefficient 0.0 to -0.40 pcm/F +.3 x 10-4 to +0.3 x 10-4 0.3 x 10-4 to
-3.5 x 10-4 -3.5 x 10-4 -3.5 x 10-4 k/k per F k/k per F k/k per F 82 Doppler Coefficient See Figure 3.3-27 -1 x 10-5 to -1 x 10-5 to -1 x 10-5 to and 3.3-28 -1.6 x 10-5 -1.6 x 10-5 -1.6 x 10-5
/k per F k/k per F k/k per F REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM-CODE REQUIREMENTS Component 83 Reactor Vessel ASME III Class A ASME III Class A ASME III Class A ASME III Class A Steam Generator 84 Tube Side ASME III Class A ASME III Class A ASME III Class A ASME III Class A 85 Shell Side ASME III Class C ASME III Class C ASME III Class C ASME III Class C 9 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONTD) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report Steam Generator (Cont'd) 86 Pressurizer ASME III Class A ASME III Class A ASME III Class A ASME III Class A 87 Pressurizer Relief Tank ASME III Class C ASME III Class C ASME III Class C ASME III Class C 88 Pressurizer Safety Valves ASME III ASME III ASME III ASME III 89 Reactor Coolant Piping USAS B31.1 USAS B31.1 USAS B31.1 USAS B31.1 PRINCIPAL DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM (100 PERCENT POWER) 90 Reactor Core Heat Output, MWt 2,652 2,441 2,200 2,200 91 Reactor Heat Output, Btu per hr 9,051 x 106 8,331 x 106 2,479 x 106 7,479 x 106 92 Operating Pressure, psig 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 93 Reactor Inlet Temperature, F 543.5 543 546.2 546.2 94 Reactor Outlet Temperature, F 610.9 605.8 602.1 602.1 95 Number of Loops 3 3 3 3 96 Design Pressure, psig 2,485 2,485 2,485 2,485 10 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONT'D) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report PRINCIPAL DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM (100 PERCENT POWER)(Cont'd) 97 Design Temperature, F 650 650 650 650 98 Hydrostatic Test Pressure 3,107 3,107 3,107 3,107 (Cold, psig) 99 Coolant Volume, Including Total Pressurizer, ft3 9,458 9,458 9,088 9,088 100 Total Reactor Flow, gpm 265,500 265,500 268,500 268,500 REACTOR DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE REACTOR VESSEL 101 Material SA-302 SA-302 SA-302 SA-302 Grade B, low alloy Grade B, low alloy Grade B, low alloy Grade B, low alloy steel, internally steel, internally steel, internally steel, internally clad with clad with clad with clad with Type 304 Type 304 austenitic Type 304 Type 304 austenitic austenitic stainless stainless austenitic stainless stainless steel steel steel steel 102 Design Pressure, psig 2,485 2,485 2,485 2,485 103 Design Temperature, F 650 650 650 650 104 Operating Pressure, psig 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 11 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONT'D) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report REACTOR DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE REACTOR VESSEL (Cont'd) 105 Inside Diameter of Shell, inches 157 157 155.5 155.5 106 Outside Diameter Across Nozzles, inches 247.7/8 252 236 236 107 Overall Height of Vessel and Enclosure Head, ft- 40-5 40-5 41-6 41-6 inches 108 Minimum Clad Thickness, inches 5/32 5/32 5/32 5/32 PRINCIPAL DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE STEAM GENERATORS 109 Number of Units 3 3 3 3 110 Type Vertical Vertical Vertical Vertical U-tube with U-tube with U-tube with U-tube with integral-integral-moisture integral-moisture integral-moisture moisture separator separator separator separator 111 Tube Material Inconel Inconel Inconel Inconel 112 Shell Material Carbon Steel Carbon Steel Carbon Steel Carbon Steel 113 Tube Side Design Pressure, psig 2,485 2,485 2,485 2,485 12 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONT'D) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report REACTOR DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE STEAM GENERATORS (Cont'd) 114 Tube Side Design Temperature, F 650 650 650 650 115 Tube Side Design Flow, lb per hr 33.6 x 106 33.57 x 106 33.43 x 106 33.93 x 106 116 Shell Side Design Pressure, psig 1,085 1,085 1,085 1,085 117 Shell Side Design Temperature, F 600 600 556 556 118 Operating Pressure, Tube Side, Nominal, psig 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 119 Operating Pressure, Shell Side, Maximum, psig 1,005 1,005 1,005 1,005 120 Maximum Moisture at Outlet at Full Load, percent 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.25 121 Hydrostatic Test Pressure, Tube Side, (Cold), psig 3,107 3,107 3,107 3,110 13 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONT'D) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report PRINCIPAL DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE REACTOR COOLANT PUMPS 122 Number of Units 3 3 3 3 123 Type Vertical, single Vertical, single Vertical, single Vertical, single stage mixed flow stage mixed flow stage radial flow stage radial flow with bottom with bottom suction with bottom suction with bottom suction suction and and horizontal and horizontal and horizontal horizontal discharge discharge discharge discharge 124 Design Pressure, psig 2,485 2,485 2,485 2,485 125 Design Temperature, F 650 650 650 650 126 Operating Pressure, Nominal, psig 2,235 2,235 2,235 2,235 127 Suction Temperature, F 549 543 546.5 546.5 128 Design Capacity, gpm 88,500 88,500 89,500 89,500 129 Design Head, ft 280 280 260 260 130 Hydrostatic Test Pressure (Cold), psig 3,107 3,107 3,107 3,107 14 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 1.4-1 (CONT'D) COMPARISON OF DESIGN PARAMETERS* (Initial Ratings) Turkey Point Beaver Valley Surry No. 3 or No. 4 H. B. Robinson Final Report Final Report Final Report Final Report PRINCIPAL DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE REACTOR COOLANT PUMPS (Cont'd) 131 Motor Type A-C Induction A-C Induction A-C Induction A-C Induction single single speed single speed single speed speed 132 Motor Rating 6,000 Hp 6,000 Hp 6,000 Hp 6,000 Hp PRINCIPAL DESIGN PARAMETERS OF THE REACTOR COOLANT PIPING 133 Material Austenitic SS Austenitic SS Austenitic SS Austenitic SS 134 Hot Leg - ID, inches 29 29 29 29 135 Cold Leg - ID, inches 27.5 27.5 27.5 27.5 136 Between Pump and Steam Generator - ID, inches 31 31 31 31 137 Design Pressure, psig 2,485 2,485 2,485 2,485
- The comparison of design parameters provided herein were considered valid at the time the BVPS-1 Operating License was issued.
15 of 15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-1 EFFECT OF ADDING EIGHTH GRID ON 17 X 17 SEVEN GRID DESIGN TESTS Test Parameter Effect
- Fuel Assembly Axial Stiffness Negligible effect at Structural Test blowdown impact forces(9)
Lateral Impact Additional grid shares impact load(9) Prototype Pressure Drop The margin between seven grid Assembly Test design P and D loop results(10) is adequate to cover the additional P resulting from the additional grid (less than five percent increase in P) Lift Force The margin between seven grid design(10) lift force and D loop results is adequate to cover the additional lift force resulting from the additional grid Rod Vibration Decreased span length results in improved vibration characteristics and reduced rod wear Departure from Nucleate DNB Correlation Addition of a grid increases mixing Boiling which increases DNB margin Incore Flow TDC TDC increases as grid spacing Mixing decreases(4)
- References provided in the "Effect" column are located in the References for Section 1.5, pages 1.5-27 and 1.5-28.
1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-2 DNB TEST FACILITY COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY HEAT TRANSFER LABORATORY, LOOP CHARACTERISTICS Flow Rate 400 gpm maximum 40 gpm minimum Working Pressure 3500 psia maximum Test Section Inlet Temperature: 650 F maximum Test Section Outlet Temperature: 700 F maximum Test Section Heated Length: 16 ft. maximum Power Input to Test Section: 7.5 MWe maximum 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-3 REFLOOD TEST FACILITY INITIAL CONDITIONS Flooding rate 0.6 to 6 inch/second, variable Pressure 20 to 100 psia Subcooling 5 to 150 F Peak rod power 0.4 to 1.0 KW/ft Initial Rod temperature 1100 F to 1700 F 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-4 D2NB PHASE I TEST PARAMETERS INITIAL STEADY STATE CONDITIONS Pressure 2250 psia Test section mass velocity 2.5 x 106 lb/hr-ft2 Inlet coolant temperature 560 F TRANSIENT CONDITIONS Simulated breaks Various break sizes will be simulated to cover range of typical large and small breaks 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-5 D2NB PHASE II TEST PARAMETERS INITIAL STEADY STATE CONDITIONS Pressure 1750 to 1900 psia Test section mass velocity 2.0 to 3.0 x 106 lb/hr-ft2 Core inlet temperature 530 to 560 F TRANSIENT RAMP CONDITIONS Pressure decrease 0 to 350 psi/sec (subcooled depressurization) Flow decrease 0 to 100 percent per second Inlet enthalpy Constant 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-6 SRBT INTERNAL PRESSURE AND HEAT RATES FOR A 17 x 17 FUEL ASSEMBLY Heat Rate Internal Pressure (725 F to 1940 F) (psi) 5 F/sec 1200, 1800 25 F/sec 1200, 1800 100 F/sec 1200, 1800 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-7 CHARACTERISTICS OF A & B LOOPS LOW FLOW/HIGH-PRESSURE HYDRAULIC FACILITIES A & B LOOPS DESIGN PARAMETERS Maximum Flow Rate 150 gpm at 300 ft Maximum Pump Head 335 ft at 60 gpm Maximum Allowable Temperature 650 F Normal Working Pressure 2000 psi Normal Working Temperature 600 F 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-8 CHARACTERISTICS OF D-LOOP MEDIUM FLOW/HIGH-PRESSURE HYDRAULIC FACILITIES D-LOOP DESIGN PARAMETERS Maximum Flow Rate 4400 gpm Maximum Allowable Pressure 2400 psi Maximum Allowable Temperature 650 F Normal Working Pressure 2000 psi Normal Working Temperature 600 F Pump Head at 3000 gpm 290 ft Maximum Pump Head 340 ft (at 1500 gpm) Main Loop Flow Measurement 10 inch Venturi Auxiliary Flow Measurement 6 inch Venturis (2 inch Branch Lines) 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-9 CHARACTERISTICS OF E-LOOP LOW FLOW/HIGH-PRESSURE HYDRAULIC FACILITY E-LOOP DESIGN PARAMETERS Maximum Flow Rate 2000 gpm at 130 ft 1000 gpm at 260 ft Maximum Working Pressure Pump Head 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-10 CHARACTERISTICS OF G-LOOP EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM FACILITY G-LOOP DESIGN PARAMETERS Rated Typical Operating Press. Temp. Press. Temp. Component Material (psi) (F) (psi) (F) Test Vessel Carbon 2000 650 1000 545 Steel Downcomer Carbon 2000 650 1000 545 Side Tank Steel In-Line Mixer Carbon 2000 650 1000 545 Steel Mixer Stainless 2500 650 1800 100 Accumulator Steel Flash Chamber Carbon 3000 700 2800 660 Steel Separators Carbon 2000 650 1000 545 Nos. 1 & 2 Steel Spray Carbon 2000 650 1800 150 Accumulators Steel Nos. 1 & 2 Spray Stainless 2500 650 1800 150 Accumulator Steel No. 3 Reflood Tank Stainless Atmos. 212 Atmos. 150 Steel Primary Carbon 2000 650 1000 545 Piping Steel 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-11 CHARACTERISTICS OF H-LOOP HIGH-FLOW HYDRAULIC FACILITY h-LOOP DESIGN PARAMETERS Maximum Flow rate 14,000 gpm Pressure Drop Across Vessel Model 120 psi Minimum Vessel Outlet Pressure 10 psig Flow Accuracy 1/2 percent Water Temperature Range 70 F to 200 F Maximum Loop-to-Loop Temp. Variation 2F Maximum Loop-to-loop Flow Rate Variation 3 percent 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-12 CHARACTERISTICS OF J-LOOP DELAYED DEPARTURE FROM NUCLEATE BOILING AND HEAT TRANSFER FACILITY J-LOOP DESIGN PARAMETERS Test Fluid Demineralized Water Design Pressure 2500 psia Design Temperature 650 F Maximum Flow Rate (hot) 450 gpm Power Input to Test Vessel 3,500,000 watts (maximum) Primary Test Heat Exchanger Rating 11,400,000 Btu/hr 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-13 CHARACTERISTICS OF K-LOOP BORON THERMAL REGENERATION TEST K-LOOP DESIGN PARAMETERS Total Tank Capability 30,000 gal Chiller Capacity 48 ice-tons Maximum Ion Exchange Resin Test 75 ft3 Volume Maximum Test Process Rate 10 gpm/ft2 bed area Capability Maximum Flow Test Capability 200 gpm Minimum Boron Storage Mode Fluid 50 F Temp. Maximum Boron Release Mode Fluid 160 F Temp. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-14 CHARACTERISTICS OF FLETCH-SET EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM FACILITY FLETCH-SET DESIGN PARAMETERS 100 Rod Bundle Maximum Power 1000 kW Maximum Bundle Flooding Rate 86 gpm Water Temperature Range 100 F to 200 F System Pressure 0 to 60 psia 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.5-15 CHARACTERISTICS OF SINGLE ROD TEST LOOP HEATER ROD DEVELOPMENT FACILITY SINGLE ROD TEST LOOP DESIGN PARAMETERS Maximum Operating Pressure 2250 psia Maximum Operating Temperature 650 F Maximum Flow Rate 10 gpm System Capacity 5 gal Maximum Power Available 200 kW Piping Size 1 inch and 3 inches 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 24 Table 1.7-1 NONESSENTIAL COMMON STRUCTURES Decontamination Building Meteorological Tower and Instrument House Solid Waste Disposal Building Service Building (Partial) Portions of Auxiliary Building housing - shared systems Discharge Structure Security Gatehouse Warehouse and Offsite Warehouse Primary Clean Area, Laboratories, Offices, and Personnel Facilities in Service Building Primary Auxiliary Building (Liquid and Gaseous Waste Processing) Primary Water Supply Pumphouse Coolant Recover Area Emergency Response Facility Emergency Response Facility Diesel Generator Building Emergency Response Facility Substation Waste Handling Building Old Steam Generator Storage Facility (OSGSF) 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 24 Table 1.7-2 NONESSENTIAL COMMON SYSTEMS, SUBSYSTEMS AND COMPONENTS Water Treatment System Sewage Conveyance System Waste Disposal System (Liquid Waste, and Steam Generator Blowdown Processing, Gaseous Waste Decay Tanks, Gaseous Waste Process Vent on Unit 1 Cooling Tower, and Spent Resin Disposal Equipment Only) Boron Recovery System (evaporators, associated equipment and same tankage only) Fire Protection System Decontamination System Air Conditioning Systems for common structures Nitrogen System 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.7-3 NONESSENTIAL COMMON ELECTRICAL SYSTEMS 48V Battery and Battery Chargers PAX Telephone System Page Party Telephone System Transmission Lines for Outside Source Station Service Transformer Power Supply Switchyard for Generator (separate generator circuit breaker) Duct Line for Generator 1 and 2 Main Circuit Breaker Control Intake Structure Motor Control Centers and Unit Substations 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.8-1 REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM MAJOR COMPONENT/PART MATERIALS REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM MAJOR COMPONENT/PART MATERIALS Reactor Vessel Components ASME Code, ANSI or AWS Material(2) Shell & Bottom Head Plates SA533 Gr A, B or C, Class 1 or 2 (other than core region) (Vacuum treated) Shell Plates SA533 Gr A or B, Class 1 (Core region) (Vacuum treated) Replacement Closure Head Vessel SA508 Class 2 or 3 Flange & Nozzle Forgings Nozzle Safe Ends SA182 Type F304 or F316 CRDM & Appurtenances - Upper Head SB166 or 167 and SA182 Type F316 Instrumentation Tube SB166 or 167 and SA182 Appurtenances - Lower Head Type F304, F304L, or F316 Closure Studs SA540 Class 3 Gr B23 or B24 Closure Nuts SA540 Class 3 Gr B23 or B24 Closure Washers SA540 Class 3 Gr B23 or B24 Core Support Pads SB166 with Carbon less than 0.10% Monitor Tubes & Vent Pipe SA312 or 376 Type 304 or 316 or SB167 Vessel Supports & Seal Ledge SA516 Gr 70 Quenched & Tempered or SA533 Gr A, B or C, Class 1 or 2. (Vessel supports may be of weld metal buildup or equivalent strength) Cladding Stainless Steel Weld Metal Analysis A-7 (Reactor Vessel) 308L, 309L (Replacement Closure Head) Stainless Weld Rod Type 308, 309 or Type 312 Head Lifting Lugs(1) SA533, Grade B, Class 2 Welds - Submerged Arc Mil-E-18193, Type B-4(3) Welds - Manual Metal Arc SA316 Type 8018-C-3(3) SFA-5.14 CL. ERNiCrFe-7 (Head Vent & RVLIS tube stub to pipe, CRDM tube to CRDM flange) SFA-5.5 CL. E9018M (Lift Lug to Replacement Closure Head) SFA-5.11 CL. ENiCrFe-7 (J-groove) 1 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.8-1 (CONT'D) REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM MAJOR COMPONENT/PART MATERIALS Reactor Vessel Components ASME Code, ANSI or AWS (Cont'd) Material(2) O-Ring Head Seals Inconel 718 (i.e., SB 637 Grade 718) Insulation Stainless Steel Steam Generator Components Pressure Forgings SA508 Class 3 Nozzle Safe Ends SA-336 CL F316LN Channel Heads SA-508 Class 3 Forging Tubes SB-163 Alloy 690 Cladding Alloy 690 & Stainless Steel Closure Studs SA-193 GR B7 (Plasma Bond Treated) Tube Plugs Alloy 690 (when needed) Cladding for Heads Type 309L or 308L Weld Rod Type 316L, Type 308L, or Type 309 Pressurizer Components Pressure Plates SA533 Gr A, B or C, Class 1 or 2 Pressure Forgings SA508 Class 2 or 3 Nozzle Safe Ends SA182 or 376 Type 316 or 316L and Ni-Cr-Fe Weld Metal F-Number 43 2 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.8-1 (CONT'D) REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM MAJOR COMPONENT/PART MATERIALS Pressurizer Components ASME Code, ANSI or AWS (Cont'd) Material(2) Cladding Stainless Steel Weld Metal Analysis A-7 Closure Bolting SA540 Pressurizer Safety SA182 Type F316 Valve Forgings Support Skirt SA516 Grade 70 Instrument Tube Coupling SA182 F316 Internal Plate SA240 Type 304 Instrument Tubing SA213 Type 316 Heater Well Tubing SA213 Type 316 Seamless Heater Well Adapter SA182 F316 Pressurizer Relief Tank(1) Shell ASTM A-285 Grade C Heads ASTM A-285 Grade C Internal Coating Amercoat 55 Reactor Coolant Stop Valves Body and Bonnet SA351 Gr CF8, CF8A or CF8M Stem SA564 Gr 630 Cond 1100F Heat Treatment Reactor Coolant Pump Pressure Forgings SA182 Type 304, 316 or 348 Pressure Castings SA351 Gr CF8, CF8A or CF8M (i.e., impeller, casing) Tube & Pipe SA213, SA376 or SA312 - Seamless Type 304 or 316 3 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.8-1 (CONT'D) REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM MAJOR COMPONENT/PART MATERIALS Reactor Coolant Pump(Cont'd) ASME Code, ANSI or AWS Material(2) Pressure Plates SA240 Type 304 or 316 Bar Material SA479 Type 304 or 316 Closure Bolting SA193 Gr B7 or B8 SA540 Gr B23 or B24, SA453 Gr 660 Flywheel SA533 Gr B, Class 1 Shaft(1) ASTM A-182 Grade F347 Reactor Coolant Piping Reactor Coolant Pipe Code Case 1423-1 Gr F302N or 316N, or SA351 Gr CF8A or CF8M Centrifugal Castings Reactor Coolant Fittings SA351 Gr CF8A or CF8M Branch Nozzles SA182 Gr F304 or 316 or Code Case 1423-1 Gr F304N or 316N Surge Line & Loop Bypass SA376 Type 304 and 316 or Code Case 1423-1 Gr F304N or 316N Auxiliary Piping ANSI B36.19(4) 1/2" through 12" and Wall Schedules 40S Through 80S (Ahead of second isolation valve) All Other Auxiliary Piping ANSI B36.10(4) (Ahead of second isolation valve) Socket Weld Fittings ANSI B16.11(4) Piping Flanges ANSI B16.5(4) Auxiliary Piping Valves SA182 Type 304 or 316 or SA351 (Class I) Gr CF8, CF8A or CF8M Welding Materials SFA 5.4 and 5.9 Type 308 or 308L (except Reactor Coolant Piping welds for Steam Generators) SFA 5.9 ER 316L (Reactor Coolant Piping welds for Steam Generators) 4 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.8-1 (CONT'D) REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM MAJOR COMPONENT/PART MATERIALS Control Rod Drive Mechanism ASME Code, ANSI or AWS Material(2) Pressure Housing SA182, Gr F304-LN; SA-213, GR TP304LN; SA-336, CIF304LN; or SA-479, Type 304LN or SA351 Gr CF8 Bar Material SA479 Type 304 Welding Materials SFA 5.4 and 5.9 Type 308 or 308L NOTES:
- 1. Not required for emergency core cooling.
- 2. Materials listed in this table (except for ANSI material where Note 4 applies) may be replaced with materials of equivalent design characteristics. The term "equivalent" is described in UFSAR Section 1.8.2, "Equivalent Materials."
- 3. No additionally imposed limits on residual elements.
- 4. These components/materials have not been evaluated to permit the use of equivalent material as defined in Section 1.8.2. A 10CFR50.59 evaluation shall be performed prior to changing these materials in the facility.
5 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.8-2 REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY MATERIALS CLASS I AND II AUXILIARY COMPONENTS Valves ASME Code Material(1) Motor and Manual Operated Gate and Check Valves Bodies SA182 Gr F316 Bonnets SA182 Gr F316 Discs SA182 Gr F316 Stems SA564 Type 630 Cond 1100F Heat Treatment Air Operated Valves Bodies SA182 Type F316 or SA351 Gr CF8 or CF8M Bonnets SA182 Type F316 or SA351 Gr CF8 or CF8M Discs SA182 Type F316 or SA564 Gr 630 Cond 1100F Heat Treatment Stems SA182 Type F318 or SA564 Gr 630 Cond 1100F Heat Treatment Auxiliary Relief Valves Forgings SA182 Type F316 Disc SA479 Type 316 Miscellaneous Valves (2 inches and less) Bodies SA479 Type 316 or SA351 Gr CF8 Bonnets SA479 Type 316 or SA351 Gr CF8 Discs SA479 Type 316 Stems SA479 Type 410 or Type 304 1 of 3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.8-2 (CONT'D) REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY MATERIALS CLASS I AND II AUXILIARY COMPONENTS ASME Materials(1) Auxiliary Heat Exchangers Heads SA182 Gr F304 or SA240 Type 304 or 316 Flanges SA182 Gr F304 or F316 Flange Necks SA182 Gr F304 or SA240 Type 316 or SA312 Type 304 Seamless Tubes SA213 TP304 Tube Sheets SA240 Type 304 or 316 or SA182 Gr F304 or SA515 Gr 70 with Stainless Steel Weld Metal Analysis A-7 Cladding Shells SA351 Gr CF8 Pipe SA312 Type 304 Seamless Auxiliary Pressure Vessels, Tanks, Filters, etc. Shells & Heads SA240 Type 304 or SA264 Type 304 Clad to SA516 Gr 70 or SA516 Gr 70 with Stainless Steel Weld Metal Analysis A-7 Cladding Flanges & Nozzles SA182 Gr F304 and SA105 or SA350 Gr LF2 with Stainless Steel Weld Metal Analysis A-7 Cladding Piping SA312 TP304 or TP316 Seamless Pipe Fittings SA403 WP304 Seamless Closure Bolting & Nuts SA193 Gr B7 or B8 and SA194 Gr 2H 2 of 3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 1.8-2 (CONT'D) REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY MATERIALS CLASS I AND II AUXILIARY COMPONENTS Auxiliary Pumps ASME Code Materials(1) Pump Casings & Heads SA351 Gr CF8 or CF8M, SA182 Gr F304 or F316 Flanges & Nozzles SA182 Gr F304 or F316, SA403 Gr WP316L Seamless Piping SA312 TP304 or TP316 Seamless Stuffing or Packing Box SA351 Gr CF8 or CF8M, SA240 Cover TP304 or TP316 Pipe Fittings SA403 Gr WP316L Seamless Closure Bolting & Nuts SA193 Gr B6, B7 or B8M and SA194 Gr 2H or Gr 8M NOTE:
- 1. Materials listed in this table may be replaced with materials of equivalent design characteristics. The term "equivalent" is described in UFSAR Section 1.8.2, "Equivalent Materials."
3 of 3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.8-3 REACTOR VESSEL INTERNALS FOR EMERGENCY CORE COOLING (ALL MATERIALS(1) ARE PER ASME CODE) Forgings SA182 Type F304 Plates SA240 Type 304 Pipes SA312 Type 304 Seamless or SA376 Type 304 Tubes SA213 Type 304 Bars SA479 Type 304 & 410 Castings SA351 Gr CF8 or CF8A Bolting SA Pending Westinghouse PF Spec. 70041EA Nuts SA193 Gr B8 Locking Devices SA479 Type 304 Weld Buttering Stainless Steel Weld Metal Analysis A-7 NOTE:
- 1. Materials listed in this table may be replaced with materials of equivalent design characteristics. The term "equivalent" is described in UFSAR Section 1.8.2, "Equivalent Materials."
1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.8-4 CLEANLINESS WATER CHEMISTRY REQUIREMENTS Grade A B C Fluoride ion, max ppm 0.15 - - Chloride ion, max ppm 0.15 1.0 25 Conductivity, max micromhos/cm 2.0 20 40 pH range* 6-8 6-8 6-8 Visual clarity No turbidity, oil, or sediment (-) Indicates not specified
- When water has been subjected to possible CO2 absorption such as when retained in storage tanks, the pH requirement may be lowered to 5.8 to compensate for C0 2 absorption.
1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Table 1.8-5 ACCEPTABLE METHODS FOR WELDING AUSTENITIC STAINLESS STEEL Energy Input Range, Welding Process Method (Kilojoules/in.) Manual Shielded Tungsten Arc 20 to 50 Manual Shielded Metallic Arc 15 to 120 Semi-Automatic Gas Shielded 40 to 60 Metallic Arc Automatic Gas Shielded 10 to 50 Tungsten Arc-Hot Wire Automatic Submerged Arc 60 to 140 Automatic Electron Beam-Soft Vacuum 10 to 50 Automatic Electroslag (Post Weld Heat Treated) 1 of 1
Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 FIGURE 1.2-1 SITE PLAN BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION \MIT 1 IA>ATED FINM. SMETY AMAi. YSIS REPORT
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 APPENDIX 1A 1971 AEC GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA CONFORMANCE TABLE OF CONTENTS Section* Title Page 1A.1 Quality Standards and Records (Criterion 1) 1A-1 1A.2 Design Basis for Protection Against Natural Phenomena (Criterion 2) 1A-2 1A.3 Fire Protection (Criterion 3) 1A-3 1A.4 Environmental and Missile Design Bases (Criterion 4) 1A-3 1A.5 Sharing of Structures, Systems, and Components (Criterion 5) 1A-4 1A.10 Reactor Design (Criterion 10) 1A-4 1A.11 Reactor Inherent Protection (Criterion 11) 1A-4 1A.12 Suppression of Reactor Power Oscillations (Criterion 12) 1A-5 1A.13 Instrumentation and Control (Criterion 13) 1A-5 1A.14 Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary (Criterion 14) 1A-5 1A.15 Reactor Coolant System Design (Criterion 15) 1A-6 1A.16 Containment Design (Criterion 16) 1A-6 1A.17 Electric Power Systems (Criterion 17) 1A-6 1A.18 Inspection and Testing of Electric Power Systems (Criterion 18) 1A-7 1A.19 Control Room (Criterion 19) 1A-8 1A.20 Protection System Functions (Criterion 20) 1A-9 1A.21 Protection System Reliability and Testability (Criterion 21) 1A-9 1A.22 Protection System Independence (Criterion 22) 1A.10 1A.23 Protection System Failure Modes (Criterion 23) 1A.10 1A.24 Separation of Protection and Control Systems (Criterion 24) 1A-10 1A.25 Protection system Requirements for Reactivity Control Malfunctions (Criterion 25) 1A-11 1A.26 Reactivity Control System Redundancy and Capability (Criterion 26) 1A-11 1A.27 Combined Reactivity Control Systems Capability (Criterion 27) 1A-12 1A.28 Reactivity Limits (Criterion 28) 1A-12 1A.29 Protection Against Anticipated Operation Occurrences (Criterion 29) 1A-12 1A.30 Quality of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary (Criterion 30) 1A-13 1A.31 Fracture Prevention of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary (Criterion 31) 1A-13 1Ai
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (COND) Section* Title Page 1A.32 Inspection of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary (Criterion 32) 1A-14 1A.33 Reactor Coolant Makeup (Criterion 33) 1A-14 1A.34 Residual Heat Removal 1A-14 1A.35 Emergency Core Cooling (Criterion 35) 1A-15 1A.36 Inspection of Emergency Core Cooling System (Criterion 36) 1A-15 1A.37 Testing of Emergency Core Cooling System (Criterion 37) 1A-16 1A.38 Containment Heat Removal (Criterion 38) 1A-16 1A.39 Inspection of Containment Heat Removal System (Criterion 39) 1A-17 1A.40 Testing of Containment Heat Removal System (Criterion 40) 1A-17 1A.41 Containment Atmosphere Cleanup (Criterion 41) 1A-17 1A.42 Inspection of Containment Atmosphere Cleanup Systems (Criterion 42) 1A-18 1A.43 Testing of Containment Atmosphere Cleanup Systems (Criterion 43) 1A-18 1A.44 Cooling Water (Criterion 44) 1A-18 1A.45 Inspection of Cooling Water System (Criterion 45) 1A-20 1A.46 Testing of Cooling Water System (Criterion 46) 1A-20 1A.50 Containment Design Basis (Criterion 50) 1A-21 1A.51 Fracture Prevention of containment Pressure Boundary (Criterion 51) 1A-21 1A.52 Capability for Containment Leakage Rate Testing (Criterion 52) 1A-22 1A.53 Provisions for Containment Testing and Inspection (Criterion 53) 1A-22 1A.54 Piping Systems Penetrating Containment (Criterion 54) 1A-22 1A.55 Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary Penetrating (Criterion 55) 1A-23 1A.56 Primary Containment Isolation (Criterion 56) 1A-24 1A.57 Closed Systems Isolation Valves (Criterion 57) 1A-25 1A.60 Control of Releases of Radioactive Materials to the Environment (Criterion 60) 1A-25 1A.61 Fuel Storage and Handling and Radioactivity Control (Criterion 61) 1A-26 1A.62 Prevention of Criticality in Fuel Storage and Handling (Criterion 62) 1A-27 1A.63 Monitoring Fuel and Waste Storage (Criterion 63) 1A-28 1A.64 Monitoring Radioactive Releases (Criterion 64) 1A-29
- Criteria 1A.6 through 1A.9, 1A.47 through 1A.49, 1A.58, and 1A.59 did not exist in the Original FSAR. To maintain reference consistencies and FSAR text similarities, no change has been made to the Updated FSAR.
1Aii
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 APPENDIX 1A 1971 AEC GENERAL DESIGN CRITERIA CONFORMANCE This appendix provides a discussion of BVPS-l's degree of conformance to the AEC General Design Criteria (GDC) published as Appendix A to 10CFR50 in July, 1971. Section 1.3.2 has previously presented a discussion of Unit l's compliance with the 1967 AEC General Design Criteria. Below is a brief discussion of each applicable 1971 criterion: 1A.1 QUALITY STANDARDS AND RECORDS (CRITERION 1) Criterion Structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be designed, fabricated, erected, and tested to quality standards commensurate with the importance of the safety functions to be performed. Where generally recognized codes and standards are used, they shall be identified and evaluated to determine their applicability, adequacy, and sufficiency and shall be supplemented or modified as necessary to assure a quality product in keeping with the required safety function. A quality assurance program shall be established and implemented in order to provide adequate assurance that these structures, systems, and components will satisfactorily perform their safety functions. Appropriate records of the design, fabrication, erection, and testing of structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be maintained by or under the control of the nuclear power unit licensee throughout the life of the unit. Design Conformance Structures, systems and components important to safety are designed, fabricated, erected and tested to quality standards commensurate with the importance of the safety functions to be performed. Quality standards related to safety related systems, structures and components are generally contained in codes such as the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. The applicability of these codes to structures, systems and components is identified throughout this report. The procedures for identifying and evaluating these codes for applicability and adequacy are given in Appendix A. Where codes are nonexistent or are judged inadequate, the procedures for supplementing, modifying, or establishing new quality standards are also described. Appendix A describes the Project Quality Assurance Program established to provide adequate assurance that safety related structures, systems and components satisfactorily perform their safety functions. This Appendix describes the procedures for generating and maintaining appropriate design, fabrication, erection and testing records throughout the life of the unit. 1A-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.2 DESIGN BASIS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST NATURAL PHENOMENA (CRITERION 2) Criterion Structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be designed to withstand the effects of natural phenomena such as earthquakes, tornadoes, hurricanes, floods, tsunami, and seiches without loss of capability to perform their safety functions. The design bases for these structures, systems, and components shall reflect: (1) appropriate consideration of the most severe of the natural phenomena that have been historically reported for the site and surrounding area, with sufficient margin for the limited accuracy, quantity, and period of time in which the historical data have been accumulated (2) appropriate combinations of the effects of normal and accident conditions with the effects of the natural phenomena and (3) the importance of the safety functions to be performed. Design Conformance The structures, systems and components designated Seismic Category I are designed to withstand, without loss of capability to protect the public, the most severe environmental phenomena ever experienced at the site with appropriate margins included in the design for uncertainties in historical data. The environmental conditions assumed to occur within the containment as a function of time after a postulated LOCA are given in Section 7.1. Potential exterior environmental hazards are discussed and analyzed in Sections 2 and 14 of the FSAR, and the influence of these hazards on various aspects of the BVPS-1 design is discussed in the sections covering the specific systems and components concerned. An outline of the design philosophy for Seismic Category I structures, systems and components is included in Appendix B. References
- 1. Section 2, Site
- 2. Section 3, Reactor
- 3. Section 4, Reactor Coolant System
- 4. Section 5, Containment System
- 5. Section 6, Engineered Safety Features
- 6. Section 7, Instrumentation and Control
- 7. Section 8, Electrical Systems
- 8. Section 9, Auxiliary and Emergency Systems
- 9. Section 11, Radioactive Wastes and Radiation Protection 1A-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.3 FIRE PROTECTION (CRITERION 3) Criterion Structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be designed and located to minimize, consistent with other safety requirements, the probability and effect of fires and explosions. Noncombustible and heat resistant materials shall be used wherever practical throughout the unit, particularly in locations such as the containment and control room. Fire detection and fighting systems of appropriate capacity and capability shall be provided and designed to minimize the adverse effects of fires on structures, system, and components important to safety. Firefighting systems shall be designed to assure that their rupture or inadvertent operation does not significantly impair the safety capability of these structures, systems, and components. Design Conformance The station will be designed on the basis of minimizing the use of combustible materials and of using fire resistant materials to the greatest extent possible. The fire protection system will be designed to furnish the capacity to detect and extinguish any probable fires which might occur at the station. Reference Section 9.10, Fire Protection System 1A.4 ENVIRONMENTAL AND MISSILE DESIGN BASES (CRITERION 4) Criterion Structures, systems, and components important to safety shall be designed to accommodate the effects of and to be compatible with the environmental conditions associated with normal operation, maintenance, testing, and postulated accidents, including loss- of-coolant accidents. These structures, systems, and components shall be appropriately protected against dynamic effects, including the effects of missiles, pipe whipping, and discharging fluids, that may result from equipment failures and from events outside the nuclear power unit. Design Conformance Interior missiles are adequately treated in the Section 5.2.6.1, exterior missiles are treated in Section 5.2.6.2 and the effects of blowdown jet forces and pipe whip are discussed in Section 5.2.6.3. Structures, systems and components defined as Seismic Category I are listed in Table B.1-1 and discussed in Appendix B. Engineered safety features actuation system's components are designed and arranged so that radioactive, mechanical and thermal environments accompanying any emergency situation in which the components are required to function do not interfere with that function. The environmental design criteria assumed to occur within the containment as a function of time after a postulated LOCA are given in Section 7.1. 1A-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.5 SHARING OF STRUCTURES, SYSTEMS, AND COMPONENTS (CRITERION 5) Criterion Structures, systems, and components important to safety shall not be shared among nuclear power units unless it can be shown that such sharing will not significantly impair their ability to perform their safety functions, including, in the event of an accident in one unit, an orderly shutdown and cooldown of the remaining units. Design Conformance The intake structure is designed to accommodate necessary water flow from the Ohio River to BVPS-1 and proposed BVPS-2. BVPS-1 is designed for the addition of a second unit without the sharing of any safety system. 1A.10 REACTOR DESIGN (CRITERION 10) Criterion The reactor core and associated coolant, control, and protection systems shall be designed with appropriate margin to assure that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded during any condition of normal operation, including the effects of anticipated operational occurrences. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 10. Appropriate fuel margins are included in the plant design. 1A.11 REACTOR INHERENT PROTECTION (CRITERION 11) Criterion The reactor core and associated coolant systems shall be designed so that in the power operating range the net effect of the prompt inherent nuclear feedback characteristics tends to compensate for a rapid increase in reactivity. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 11. A negative reactivity coefficient is a basic feature of the design. 1A-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.12 SUPPRESSION OF REACTOR POWER OSCILlATIONS (CRITERION 12) Criterion The reactor core and associated coolant, control and protection systems shall be designed to assure that power oscillations which can result in conditions exceeding specified acceptable fuel design limits are not possible or can be reliably and readily detected and suppressed. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 12. The design includes provisions to detect and control those power oscillations which might exceed acceptable fuel design limits during operation. 1A.13 INSTRUMENtATION AND CONTROL (CRITERION 13) Criterion Instrumentation shall be provided to monitor variables and systems over their anticipated ranges for normal operation, for anticipated operational occurrences, and for accident conditions as appropriate to assure adequate safety, including those variables and systems that can affect the fission process, the integrity of the reactor core, the reactor coolant pressure boundary, and the containment and its associated systems. Appropriate controls shall be provided to maintain these variables and systems within prescribed operating ranges. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 13. Appropriate instrumentation and control systems have been provided to monitor and control pertinent variables and systems over normal and postulated accident conditions. 1A.14 REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY (CRITERION 14) Criterion The reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be designed, fabricated, erected, and tested so as to have an extremely low probability of abnormal leakage, of rapidly propagating failure and of gross rupture. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 14. The design, fabrication, erection and testing employed on the reactor coolant pressure boundaries and the extensive quality control measures employed during each of the above phases ensures that these pressure boundaries have extremely low probabilities of abnormal leakage, rapidly propagating failure and gross rupture. 1A-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.15 REACTOR COOLANT SYSTEM DESIGN (CRITERION 15) Criterion The reactor coolant system and associated auxiliary, control, and protection systems shall be designed with sufficient margin to assure that the design conditions of the reactor coolant pressure boundary are not exceeded during any condition of normal operation, including anticipated operational occurrences. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 15. The design of the reactor coolant system and associated pertinent systems includes sufficient margin to ensure that the appropriate design limits of the reactor coolant pressure boundary are not exceeded during normal operation including transients as defined in Section 14. 1A.16 CONTAINMENT DESIGN (CRITERION 16) Criterion Reactor containment and associated systems shall be provided to establish an essentially leaktight barrier against the uncontrolled release of radioactivity to the environment and to assure that the containment design conditions important to safety are not exceeded for as long as postulated accident conditions require. Design Conformance A steel lined reinforced concrete containment structure will enclose the entire reactor coolant system with an essentially leaktight barrier as described in Section 5. Following a DBA, the containment depressurization system, as described in Section 6.4, will reduce the containment pressure, thereby reducing the driving force for the release of radioactivity. 1A.17 ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS (CRITERION 17) Criterion An onsite electric power system and an offsite electric power system shall be provided to permit functioning of structures, systems, and components important to safety. The safety function for each system (assuming the other system is not functioning) shall be to provide sufficient capacity and capability to assure that (1) specified acceptable fuel design limits and design conditions of the reactor coolant pressure boundary are not exceeded as a result of anticipated operational occurrences and (2) the core is cooled and containment integrity and other vital functions are maintained in the event of postulated accidents. The onsite electric power supplies, including the batteries, and the onsite electric distribution system, shall have sufficient independence, redundancy, and testability to perform their safety functions assuming a single failure. 1A-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Electric power from the transmission network to the onsite electric distribution system shall be supplied by two physically independent circuits (not necessarily on separate rights of way) designed and located so as to minimize to the extent practical the likelihood of their simultaneous failure under operating and postulated accident and environmental conditions. A switchyard common to both circuits is acceptable. Each of these circuits shall be designed to be available in sufficient time following a loss of all onsite alternating current power supplies and the other offsite electric power circuit, to assure that specified acceptable fuel design limits and design conditions of the reactor coolant pressure boundary are not exceeded. One of these circuits shall be designed to be available within a few seconds following a loss-of-coolant accident to assure that core cooling, containment integrity, and other vital safety functions are maintained. Provisions shall be included to minimize the probability of losing electric power from any of the remaining supplies as a result of, or coincident with, the loss of power generated by the nuclear power unit, the loss of power from the transmission network, or the loss of power from the onsite electric power supplies. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 electric power system design includes two offsite power systems and two onsite power systems. Each system provides sufficient capability for operating all engineered safety features equipment which must be operated in the event of the postulated accidents. The BVPS-1 onsite power system, which consists of the a-c onsite power system, 125 v d-c power system, and the 120 v a-c vital bus system has sufficient independence redundancy and testability to perform their safety functions assuming a single failure. The two physically separated BVPS-1 station offsite power systems are fed by two independent circuits from separate buses in a switchyard common to both. Both BVPS-1 offsite power systems are designed to be available immediately upon loss of all onsite a-c power sources since an automatic transfer scheme is provided for this purpose at the 4 Kv bus level, as described in Section 8. The electric power system is designed in accordance with the General Design Criterion 17, as discussed in Section 8. 1A.18 INSPECTION AND TESTING OF ELECTRIC POWER SYSTEMS (CRITERION 18) Criterion Electric power systems important to safety shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic inspection and testing of important areas and features, such as wiring, insulation, connections, and switchboards, to assess the continuity of the systems and the condition of their components. The systems shall be designed with a capability to test periodically (1) the operability and functional performance of the components of the systems, such as onsite power sources, relays, switches, and buses, and (2) the operability of the systems as a whole and, under conditions as close to design as practical, the full operation sequence that brings the systems into operation, including operation of power among the nuclear power unit, the offsite power system, and the onsite power system. 1A-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Design Conformance The availability and proper action of safety related electrical power systems can be tested periodically. Testing of automatic operation of the voltage transfer scheme at the 4,160 v level is performed at refueling frequency. Transfer of power from the unit transformers to system transformers is verified operable in both automatic and manual modes, at the frequency required by the Technical Specifications to the BVPS-1 Facility Operating License. The BVPS-1 batteries which supply control power for operating emergency d-c motor starters and nuclear safety protection systems are kept at a constant voltage and are monitored continuously for voltage variations or undesired ground connections. The BVPS-1 batteries are subjected to periodic inspection. The loading and automatic starting features of the emergency diesel generators are tested periodically. During these tests the diesel generator is loaded by manually initiating a safety injection signal, causing the required loads to be sequenced onto the emergency bus. A preventative maintenance program is followed by BVPS-1 to test periodically the insulation values of equipment and circuits. The inspection and testing of electric power systems is in accordance with General Design Criterion 18 and IEEE Std. 308(1) as more fully discussed in Sections 8.6 and in the Technical Specifications. 1A.19 CONTROL ROOM (CRITERION 19) Criterion A control room shall be provided from which actions can be taken to operate the nuclear power unit safely under normal conditions and to maintain it in a safe condition under accident conditions, including loss-of-coolant accidents. Adequate radiation protection shall be provided to permit access and occupancy of the control room under accident conditions without personnel receiving radiation exposures in excess of 5 rem whole body, or its equivalent to any part of the body, for the duration of the accident. Equipment at appropriate locations outside the control room shall be provided (1) with a design capability for prompt hot shutdown of the reactor, including necessary instrumentation and controls to maintain the unit in a safe condition during hot shutdown, and (2) with a potential capability for subsequent cold shutdown of the reactor through the use of suitable procedures. Design Conformance A main control room is a fully shielded room with special ventilation features to meet radiation requirements. It is equipped to operate BVPS-1 safely under normal and accident conditions and to maintain it in a safe condition after a Design Basis Accident. Redundant equipment, controls and instrumentation mounted on a separate emergency shutdown panel are provided outside the main control room to accomplish a prompt hot shutdown in a safe manner should the main control room become uninhabitable. Also, 1A-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 equipment, controls and instrumentation are located throughout BVPS-1 to provide capability for a subsequent cold shutdown through the use of suitable procedures. The design of the main control room and the emergency shutdown panel area conforms to the above criteria and is described more fully in Section 7.7. 1A.20 PROTECTION SYSTEM FUNCTIONS (CRITERION 20) Criterion The protection system shall be designed (1) to initiate automatically the operation of appropriate systems including the reactivity control systems, to assure that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded as a result of anticipated operational occurrences and (2) to sense accident conditions and to initiate the operation of systems and components important to safety. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 protection system design complies with the intent of criterion 20. The system will automatically initiate the reactivity control systems as described in Section 7. The system will also sense the accident conditions and initiate engineered safety features operation. 1A.21 PROTECTION SYSTEM RELIABILITY AND TESTABILITY (CRITERION 21) Criterion The protection system shall be designed for high functional reliability and inservice testability commensurate with the safety functions to be performed. Redundancy and independence designed into the protection system shall be sufficient to assure that (1) no single failure results in loss of the protection function and (2) removal from service of any component or channel does not result in loss of the required minimum redundancy unless the acceptable reliability of operation of the protection system can be otherwise demonstrated. The protection system shall be designed to permit periodic testing of its functioning when the reactor is in operation, including a capability to test channels independently to determine failures and losses of redundancy that may have occurred. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 protection system design complies with the intent of criterion 21. The protection system is comprised of redundant independent trains of high functional reliability capable of tolerating a single failure without loss of the protection function, or removal from service of a single component or channel without loss of required redundancy. Independent channel tests can be performed with the reactor at power and the majority of system components can be tested very rapidly by use of built in semi-automatic testers. 1A-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.22 PROTECTION SYSTEM INDEPENDENCE (CRITERION 22) Criterion The protection system shall be designed to assure that the effects of natural phenomena, and of normal operating, maintenance, testing, and postulated accident conditions on redundant channels do not result in loss of the protection function, or shall be demonstrated to be acceptable on some other defined basis. Design techniques, such as functional diversity or diversity in component design and principles of operation, shall be used to the extent practical to prevent loss of the protection function. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 protection system design complies with the intent of criterion 22. Independent, redundant and separate subsystems have been provided. Extensive measurement, equipment and location diversity is employed in the design. 1A.23 PROTECTION SYSTEM FAILURE MODES (CRITERION 23) Criterion The protection system shall be designed to fall into a safe state or into a state demonstrated to be acceptable on some other defined basis if conditions such as disconnection of the system, loss of energy (e.g., electric power, instrument air), or postulated adverse environments (e.g., extreme heat or cold, fire, pressure, steam, water, and radiation) are experienced. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 protection system design complies with the intent of criterion 23. The system is designed with due consideration of the most probable failure modes of the components under various perturbations of energy sources and environment. Each trip channel is designed to trip on deenergization. Components of the system are qualified by testing for the environments which might result from postulated accident conditions. 1A.24 SEPARATION OF PROTECTION AND CONTROL SYSTEMS (CRITERION 24) Criterion The protection system shall be separated from control systems to the extent that failure of any single control system component or channel, or failure or removal from service of any single protection system component or channel which is common to the control and protection systems leaves intact a system satisfying all reliability, redundancy, and independence requirements of the protection system. Interconnection of the protection and control systems shall be limited so as to assure that safety is not significantly impaired. 1A-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Design Conformance The BVPS-1 protection and control system design complies with the intent of criterion 24. Failure of or removal from service of any single component or channel of either the protection system or the control system leaves intact a system satisfying the reliability, redundancy and independence requirements of the protection system. The protection system is separate and distinct; control system signals are derived from protection system measurements where applicable. Interconnection is through isolation amplifiers which are classified protection system components. The adequacy of systems isolations has been verified by testing under the conditions of maximum credible faults. 1A.25 PROTECTION SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS FOR REACTIVITY CONTROL MALFUNCTIONS (CRITERION 25) Criterion The protection system shall be designed to assure that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded for any single malfunction of the reactivity control systems, such as accidental withdrawal (not ejection or dropout) of control rods. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design complies with the intent of criterion 25. The reactivity control systems are such that acceptable fuel damage limits are not exceeded even in the event of a single malfunction of either system. 1A.26 REACTIVITY CONTROL SYSTEM REDUNDANCY AND CAPABILITY (CRITERION 26) Criterion Two independent reactivity control systems of different design principles shall be provided. One of the systems shall use control rods, preferably including a positive means for inserting the rods, and shall be capable of reliably controlling reactivity changes to assure that under conditions of normal operation, including anticipated operational occurrences, and with appropriate margin for malfunctions such as stuck rods, specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded. The second reactivity control system shall be capable of reliably controlling the rate of reactivity changes resulting from planned, normal power changes (including xenon burnout) to assure acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded. One of the systems shall be capable of holding the reactor core subcritical under cold conditions. Design Conformances The BVPS-1 design complies, with possible exception to the preferred rod insertion means, with the intent of Criterion 26. Two independent reactivity control systems of different design principles are provided. One of the systems uses control rods; the other system uses dissolved boron. The boron system is capable of maintaining the reactor core subcritical under cold conditions. The rod control system maintains a programmed average reactor temperature with scheduled and transient load changes; the boron system is capable of controlling the rate of 1A-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 reactivity change resulting from planned normal power changes including xenon burnout. The control rods are inserted by gravity. 1A.27 COMBINED REACTIVITY CONTROL SYSTEMS CAPABILITY (CRITERION 27) Criterion The reactivity control systems shall be designed to have a combined capability, in conjunction with poison addition by the emergency core cooling system, of reliably controlling reactivity changes to assure that under postulated accident conditions and with appropriate margin for stuck rods the capability to cool the core is maintained. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design complies with the intent of criterion 27. Appropriate reactivity margin is available under postulated accident conditions to insure that the capability to cool the core is maintained. The margin includes an allowance for the most reactive rod control cluster being stuck out of the core. 1A.28 REACTIVITY LIMITS (CRITERION 28) Criterion The reactivity control systems shall be designed with appropriate limits on the potential amount and rate of reactivity increase to assure that the effects of postulated reactivity accidents can neither (1) result in damage to the reactor coolant pressure boundary greater than limited local yielding nor (2) sufficiently disturb the core, its support structures or other reactor pressure vessel internals to impair significantly the capability to cool the core. These postulated reactivity accidents shall include consideration of rod ejection (unless prevented by positive means), rod dropout, steam line rupture, changes in reactor coolant temperature and pressure, and cold water addition. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design complies with the intent of criterion 28. The maximum reactivity worth of control rods and the maximum rates of reactivity insertion employing both control rods and boron removal are limited to values which prevent rupture of the coolant pressure boundary or disruption of the core or internals to a degree which could impair the effectiveness of ECCS. The appropriate reactivity insertion rate for withdrawal of rods and the dilution of boron in the coolant system are specified in the Technical Specifications. 1A.29 PROTECTION AGAINST ANTICIPATED OPERATION OCCURRENCES (CRITERION 29) Criterion The protection and reactivity control systems shall be designed to assure an extremely high probability of accomplishing their safety functions in the event of anticipated operational occurrences. 1A-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design complies with the intent of criterion 29. The protection and reactivity control systems are designed to ensure an extremely high probability of fulfilling their intended functions. The design principles of diversity and redundancy coupled with a rigorous quality assurance program and analyses support this probability as does operating experience in plants using the same basic design. 1A.30 QUALITY OF REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY (CRITERION 30) Criterion Components which are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be designed, fabricated, erected, and tested to the highest quality standards practical. Means shall be provided for detecting and, to the extent practical, identifying the location of the source of reactor coolant leakage. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 30. The quality levels employed for the reactor coolant pressure boundary are extremely comprehensive. Systems have been included in the plant to detect and to the extent practical, to locate leaks. 1A.31 FRACTURE PREVENTION OF REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY (CRITERION 31) Criterion The reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be designed with sufficient margin to assure that when stressed under operating, maintenance, testing, and postulated accident conditions (1) the boundary behaves in a nonbrittle manner and (2) the probability of rapidly propagation fracture is minimized. The design shall reflect consideration of service temperatures and other conditions of the boundary material under operating, maintenance, testing, and postulated accident conditions and the uncertainties in determining (1) material properties, (2) the effects of irradiation on material properties, (3) residual, steady-state and transient stressed, and (4) size of flaws. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 31. The reactor coolant pressure boundary is designed so that, for all normal operating and postulated accident modes, the boundary behaves in a non-brittle manner and so that the probability of rapidly propagating failure is minimized. Service temperature and pressure, irradiation, cyclic loading, seismic, blowdown and thermal forces from postulated accidents, residual stresses and code allowable material discontinuities have all been considered in the design with appropriate margins for each. 1A-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.32 INSPECTION OF REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY (CRITERION 32) Components which are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be designed to permit (1) periodic inspection and testing of important areas and features to assess their structural and leaktight integrity, and (2) an appropriate material surveillance program for the reactor pressure vessel. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 32. The reactor coolant pressure boundary will be periodically inspected under the provisions of ASME Code Section XI. A reactor vessel metal surveillance program will be employed in accordance with ASTM E-185-82(2) as discussed in detail in Section 4. 1A.33 REACTOR COOLANT MAKEUP (CRITERION 33) Criterion A system to supply reactor coolant makeup for protection against small breaks in the reactor coolant pressure boundary shall be provided. The system safety function shall be to assure that specified acceptable fuel design limits are not exceeded as a result of reactor coolant loss due to leakage from the reactor coolant pressure boundary and rupture of small piping or other small components which are part of the boundary. The system shall be designed to assure that for onsite electric power system operation (assuming offsite power is not available) and for offsite electric power system operation (assuming onsite power is not available) the system safety function can be accomplished using the piping, pumps, and valves used to maintain coolant inventory during normal reactor operation. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 33. The normal flow path for reactor coolant system charging can be used to ensure appropriate makeup supply for small breaks. 1A.34 RESIDUAL HEAT REMOVAL (CRITERION 34) Criterion A system to remove residual heat shall be provided. The system safety function shall be to transfer fission product decay heat and other residual heat from the reactor core at a rate such that specified acceptable fuel design limits and the design conditions of the reactor coolant pressure boundary are not exceeded. Suitable redundancy in components and features, and suitable interconnections, leak detection, and isolation capabilities shall be provided to assure that for onsite electric power system operation (assuming offsite power is not available) and for offsite electric power system operation (assuming onsite power is not available) the system safety function can be accomplished, assuming a single failure. 1A-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 34. The residual heat removal system, consisting of two redundant trains of pumps and heat exchangers, has appropriate heat removal capacity to ensure fuel protection. This system supplements the normal steam and power conversion system which is used for the first stage cooldown. The auxiliary feedwater system complements the steam and power conversion system in the function. The systems together accommodate the single failure criteria. 1A.35 EMERGENCY CORE COOLING (CRITERION 35) Criterion A system to provide abundant emergency core cooling shall be provided. The system safety function shall be to transfer heat from the reactor core following any loss of reactor coolant at a rate such that (1) fuel and clad damage that could interfere with continued effective core cooling is prevented and (2) clad metal-water reaction is limited to negligible amounts. Suitable redundancy in components and features, and suitable interconnections, leak detection, isolation, and containment capabilities shall be provided to assure that for onsite electric power system operation (assuming offsite power is not available) and for offsite electric power system operation (assuming onsite power is not available) the system safety function can be accomplished, assuming a single failure. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms with the intent of criterion 35. Appropriate core cooling systems have been designed so as to provide for the removal of core thermal loads and for the limiting of metal water reactions to an insignificant level. Suitable redundancy is provided in core cooling systems. The charging/safety injection, accumulator and safety injection systems will accommodate a single active failure and still fulfill their intended safety function. 1A.36 INSPECTION OF EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM (CRITERION 36) The emergency core cooling system shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic inspection of important components, such as spray rings in the reactor pressure vessel, water injection nozzles, and piping, to assure the integrity and capability of the system. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design provides for inspection of the emergency core cooling branch line connections to the reactor coolant system in accordance with the provisions of ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code Section XI. These are the areas of principle stress in the system due to temperature gradients. The remainder of the systems will be verified as to integrity and functioning by means of periodic testing as described in the Technical Specifications. On this basis, the design conforms to the intent of criterion 36. 1A-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.37 TESTING OF EMERGENCY CORE COOLING SYSTEM (CRITERION 37) Criterion The emergency core cooling system shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic pressure and functional testing to assure (1) the structural and leaktight integrity of its components, (2) the operability and performance of the active components of the system, and (3) the operability of the system as a whole and, under conditions as close to design as practical, the performance of the full operation sequence that brings the system into operation, including operation of applicable portions of the protection system, the transfer between normal and emergency power sources, and the operation of the associated cooling water system. Design Conformance The BVPS-1 design conforms to the intent of criterion 37. Periodic tests will demonstrate the integrity, operability and performance of each active component. The system as a whole and the entire operational sequence of actuation, power transfer and cooling water operation will be tested in several phases rather than in one phase during periodic testing. 1A.38 CONTAINMENT HEAT REMOVAL (CRITERION 38) Criterion A system to remove heat from the reactor containment shall be provided. The system safety function shall be to reduce rapidly, consistent with the functioning of other associated systems, the containment pressure and temperature following any loss-of-coolant accident and maintain them at acceptably low levels. Suitable redundancy in components and features, and suitable interconnections, leak detection, isolation, and containment capabilities shall be provided to assure that for onsite electrical power system operation (assuming offsite power is not available) and for offsite electrical power system operation (assuming onsite power is not available) the system safety function can be accomplished, assuming a single failure. Design Conformance Four containment recirculation subsystems, described in Section 6.4.2, each with 50 percent capacity, remove heat from the containment following a DBA. Two electrical buses, each connected to both offsite and onsite power sources, feed the pump motors. Suitable, remote reading, water level indication is provided in the safeguards area for leak detection of safeguards equipment. Containment isolation valves provide containment isolation at the penetrations in accordance with the general design criteria. 1A-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.39 INSPECTION OF CONTAINMENT HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM (CRITERION 39) Criterion The containment heat removal system shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic inspection of important components, such as the pumps, heat exchangers, sumps, spray nozzles, and piping to assure the integrity and capability of the system. Design Conformance The containment heat removal system design permits appropriate periodic inspection of its components as described in Section 6.4. 1A.40 TESTING OF CONTAINMENT HEAT REMOVAL SYSTEM (CRITERION 40) Criterion The containment heat removal system shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic pressure and functional testing to assure (1) the structural and leaktight integrity of its components, (2) the operability and performance of the active components of the system, and (3) the operability of the system as a whole, and, under conditions as close to the design as practical, the performance of the full operational sequence that brings the system into operation, including operation of applicable portions of the protection system, the transfer between normal and emergency power sources, and the operation of the associated cooling water system. Design Conformance The containment heat removal system design permits periodic pressure and functional testing as described in Section 6.4. 1A.41 CONTAINMENT ATMOSPHERE CLEANUP (CRITERION 41) Criterion Systems to control fission products, hydrogen, oxygen, and other substances which may be released into the reactor containment shall be provided as necessary to reduce, consistent with the functioning of other associated systems, the concentration and quality of fission products released to the environment following postulated accidents, and to control the concentration the hydrogen or oxygen and other substances in the containment atmosphere following postulated accidents to assure that containment integrity is maintained. Each system shall have suitable redundancy in components and features, and suitable interconnections, leak detection, isolation, and containment capabilities to assure that for onsite electrical power system operating (assuming offsite power is not available) and for offsite electrical power system operation (assuming onsite power is not available) its safety function can be accomplished, assuming a single failure. 1A-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Design Conformance Systems are provided to control fission products and ensure adequate mixing of hydrogen released by DBA (Sections 6.4 and 6.5). These systems are sufficiently redundant to meet the single failure criterion and are operable/functional with either onsite or offsite power sources. 1A.42 INSPECTION OF CONTAINMENT ATMOSPHERE CLEANUP SYSTEMS (CRITERION 42) Criterion The containment atmosphere cleanup systems shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic inspection of important components, such as filter frames, ducts, and piping to assure the integrity and capability of the systems. Design Conformance The containment depressurization system is designed to permit appropriate periodic inspection of the important components, as described in Section 6.4. 1A.43 TESTING OF CONTAINMENT ATMOSPHERE CLEANUP SYSTEMS (CRITERION 43) Criterion The containment atmosphere cleanup systems shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic pressure and functional testing to assure (1) the structural and leaktight integrity of its components, (2) the operability and performance of the active components of the systems such as fans, filters, dampers, pumps, and valves, and (3) the operability of the systems as a whole and, under conditions as close to design as practical, the performance of the full operational sequence that brings the systems into operation, including operation of applicable portions of the protection system, the transfer between normal and emergency power sources, and the operation of associated systems. Design Conformance The containment depressurization system is designed to permit periodic pressure and functional testing of their components, as described in Sections 6.4. 1A.44 COOLING WATER (CRITERION 44) Criterion A system to transfer heat from structures, systems, and components important to safety, to an ultimate heat sink, shall be provided. The system safety function shall be to transfer the combined heat load of these structures, systems, and components under normal operating and accident conditions. 1A-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Suitable redundancy in components and features, and suitable interconnections, leak detection, and isolation capabilities shall be provided to assure that for onsite electric power system operation (assuming offsite power is not available) and for offsite electric power system operation (assuming onsite power is not available) the system safety function can be accomplished, assuming a single failure. Design Conformance The river water system and the primary component cooling water system provide heat removal from various structures, systems and components. The primary component cooling water system transfers heat from heat exchangers containing reactor coolant or other radioactive liquids and from nonradioactive heat exchangers to the river water system. Three pumps and three heat exchangers for the system are located in the auxiliary building. Any one pump and heat exchanger is capable of performing the required safety function under any operating conditions. The primary component cooling water system supplies cooling water to the following safety related items: (1) the residual heat removal heat exchangers and (2) fuel pool heat exchangers. The piping supplying these items, including the primary component cooling water pumps and heat exchangers, is Seismic Category I design. The river water system transfers heat from the primary component cooling water system and other unit systems to the circulating water system which, in turn, transfers heat to the cooling tower. Redundancy is provided throughout the river water system in those portions serving safety-related items. The intake structure is subdivided so that each of the three 100 percent capacity (with respect to those safety functions) river water pumps is separated and missile protected in Seismic Category I cubicles. The intake for each of these pumps is independent with separate screen and suction arrangement. Two 24 inch physically separated and missile protected river water headers from the intake structures provide full redundancy. Each header is underground until it reaches the auxiliary building basement. In the event of a design basis accident (DBA), river water is automatically diverted from the 24 inch primary component cooling water headers to the two 24 inch headers which supply the recirculation spray heat exchangers. River water is available at all times to the control room air conditioners, charging pump lube oil coolers and emergency diesel generators. The recirculation spray heat exchangers and pumps serve to reduce the containment pressure in the event of a DBA. Normal valving of the recirculation spray heat exchangers during unit operation is to permit fully automatic operation of both 100 percent portions of the recirculation spray system during a DBA. Two independent diesel-generators provide emergency onsite power in the event of loss of normal power. Each generator supplies one emergency electrical bus which, in turn, supplies power to those components essential to the safety related operations of the cooling systems. The cooling system safety function is assured with only onsite emergency power available. 1A-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.45 INSPECTION OF COOLING WATER SYSTEM (CRITERION 45) Criterion The cooling water system shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic inspection of important components, such as heat exchangers and piping, to ensure the integrity and capability of the system. Design Conformance Both the river water system and the component cooling system are designed to permit appropriate periodic inspection to ensure the integrity of the components and the systems as a whole. References
- 1. Section 9.4, Component Cooling System
- 2. Section 9.9, River Water System
- 3. Section 10.3.9, Turbine Plant Cooling Water 1A.46 TESTING OF COOLING WATER SYSTEM (CRITERION 46)
Criterion The Cooling Water System shall be designed to permit appropriate periodic pressure and functional testing to assure (1) the structural and leaktight integrity of its components, (2) the operability and the performance of the active components of the system, and (3) the operability of the system as a whole and, under conditions as close to design as practical, the performance of the full operational sequence that brings the system into operation for reactor shutdown and loss-of-coolant accidents, including operation of applicable portions of the protection system and the transfer between normal and emergency power sources. Design Conformance Many components of the river water system and the component cooling system are regularly in service during normal operation and, therefore, provide assurance of the availability and performance of the equipment and system. The design of the river water components and system allows, to the extent practicable, the periodic testing of the operability of the system as required for operation in the loss-of-coolant accident and/or loss-of-unit power. References
- 1. Section 9.8, Primary Component Cooling System
- 2. Section 9.9, River Water System
- 3. Section 10.3.9, Turbine Plant Cooling Water 1A-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1A.50 CONTAINMENT DESIGN BASIS (CRITERION 50) Criterion The reactor containment structure, including access openings, penetrations, and the containment heat removal system shall be designed so that the containment structure and its internal compartments can accommodate, without exceeding the design leakage rate and, with sufficient margin, the calculated pressure and temperature conditions resulting from any loss-of-coolant accident. This margin shall reflect consideration of (1) the effects of potential energy sources which have not been included in the determination of the peak conditions, such as energy in steam generators and energy from metal-water and other chemical reactions that may result from degraded emergency core cooling functioning, (2) the limited experience and experimental data available for defining accident phenomena and containment responses, and (3) the conservatism of the calculational model and input parameters. Design Conformance The containment structure is designed to leak at a rate which is less than 0.1 percent of the containment volume per day under post DBA conditions. The containment is designed to withstand loads above those that are conservatively calculated to result from a DBA (Sections 14.2.5.1 and 14.3.4) by a margin as discussed below. The containment has a design margin of about two percent over the maximum calculated peak pressure. The two percent is based on very conservative limiting assumptions. 1A.51 FRACTURE PREVENTION OF CONTAINMENT PRESSURE BOUNDARY (CRITERION 51) Criterion The reactor containment boundary shall be designed with sufficient margin to ensure that under operating, maintenance, testing, and postulated accident conditions (1) its ferritic materials behave in a nonbrittle manner and (2) the probability of rapidly propagating fracture is minimized. The design shall reflect consideration of service temperatures and other conditions of the containment boundary material during operation, maintenance, testing, and postulated accident conditions, and the uncertainties in determining (1) material properties, (2) residual, steady-state, and transient stresses, and (3) size of flaws. Design Conformance Ferritic materials for the reactor containment boundary are specified so that the nil ductility transition (NDT) temperature of the steel is at least 60F below the lowest of the minimum operating, maintenance, containment building testing or postulated accident temperatures. An applicable technical reference for this subject is provided in Reference 3. Figure 23 of Reference 3 shows the Fracture Analysis Diagram (FAD), which plots stress (as percent of yield strength) vs. the temperature in excess of the NDT temperature. The liner is designed so that no stress exceeds the crack arrest temperature (CAT) curve, as shown in the FAD. This is a very conservative approach, which ensures that flaws of any size will not be propagated to a rapid (i.e., brittle) fracture. 1A-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Uncertainties of determining the NDT temperature are minimized by using the Drop Weight Test DWT, per ASTM E-239(4) (previously ASTM E-208) for material five-eighths inch or thicker. The DWT is widely recognized to determine the true material NDT temperature. Plates thinner than five-eighths inch are impact tested by full or subsized Charpy V or by Drop Weight Tear Test methods. Also, the weld procedure qualification will demonstrate that the NDT temperature of the weld metal and heat affected zones follow the same criteria as for the base metal. 1A.52 CAPABILITY FOR CONTAINMENT LEAKAGE RATE TESTING (CRITERION 52) Criterion The reactor containment and other equipment which may be subjected to containment test conditions shall be designed so that periodic integrated leakage rate testing can be conducted at containment design pressure. Design Conformance The containment structure and related equipment which will be subjected to the containment test conditions, as described in Section 5.6, will be designed so that the periodic integrated leakage rate testing can be conducted at calculated peak containment pressure as per Appendix J to 10CFR50, "Reactor Containment Leakage Testing for Water Cooled Power Reactors." 1A.53 PROVISIONS FOR CONTAINMENT TESTING AND INSPECTION (CRITERION 53) Criterion The reactor containment shall be designed to permit (1) appropriate periodic inspection of all important areas, such as penetrations, (2) appropriate surveillance program, and (3) periodic testing at containment design pressure of the leaktightness of penetrations which have resilient seals and expansion bellows. Design Conformance The design of the reactor containment provides for access to all important areas for periodic inspection. The design includes the placement of leak test channels over most liner seam welds, which are inaccessible after construction, and penetration-liner welds. These channels are not considered as safety related, however, they may be pressurized to containment design pressure to permit inspecting and testing the leaktightness of the covered areas. The operation of the containment provides for a continuous surveillance program of the leaktightness of the containment. The leakage monitoring system is described in Section 5.4.2. 1A.54 PIPING SYSTEMS PENETRATING CONTAINMENT (CRITERION 54) Criterion Piping systems penetrating primary reactor containment shall be provided with leak detection, isolation, and containment capabilities having redundancy, reliability, and performance 1A-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 capabilities which reflect the importance to safety of isolating these piping systems. Such piping systems shall be designed with a capability to test periodically the operability of the isolation valves and associated apparatus and to determine if valve leakage is within acceptable limits. Design Conformance Piping systems penetrating the reactor containment do so in accordance with the design bases set forth for the containment isolation system (Section 5.3.2). This ensures redundancy, reliability and performance capabilities reflecting the importance to safety of isolating the piping systems. Special test connections are provided where required to ensure the capability to determine if individual isolation valve leakage is within acceptable limits. The containment leakage monitoring system (Section 5.4.2.2) also provides the capability of detecting unacceptable containment leakage. 1A.55 REACTOR COOLANT PRESSURE BOUNDARY PENETRATING CONTAINMENT (CRITERION 55) Criterion Each line that is part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary and that penetrates primary reactor containment shall be provided with containment isolation valves as follows, unless it can be demonstrated that the containment isolation provides for a specific class of lines, such as instrument lines, are acceptable on some other defined basis: (1) One locked closed isolation valve inside and one locked closed isolation valve outside containment; or (2) One automatic isolation valve inside and one locked closed isolation valve outside containment; or (3) One locked closed isolation valve inside and one automatic isolation valve outside containment. A simple check valve may not be used as the automatic isolation valve outside containment; or (4) One automatic isolation valve inside and one automatic isolation valve outside containment. A simple check valve may not be used as the automatic isolation valve outside containment. Isolation valves outside containment shall be located as close to containment as practical and upon loss of actuating power, automatic isolation valves shall be designed to take the position that provided greater safety. Other appropriate requirements to minimize the probability or consequences of an accidental rupture of these lines or of lines connected to them shall be provided as necessary to assure adequate safety. Determination of the appropriateness of these requirements such as higher quality in design, fabrication, and testing, additional provisions for inservice inspection, protection against more severe natural phenomena, and additional isolation valves and containment, shall include consideration of the population density, use characteristics, and physical characteristics of the site environs. 1A-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Design Conformance The containment isolation arrangements for all lines that are part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary, and that penetrate primary reactor containment, conform with the design bases listed in Section 5.3.1. These design bases include requiring that one of the arrangements called for in subparagraphs (1) through (4) of criterion 55 be utilized, unless acceptable on some other defined basis (as described in Section 5.3.3). The design bases also include the requirements that isolation valves outside the containment shall be located as close to containment as practical, automatic isolation valves shall take the position providing greater safety upon loss of actuating power, piping associated with the containment isolation system shall be designed, fabricated and tested in accordance with the requirements of piping Class I (Ql) or Class II (Q2), as applicable, (Section 6.2-2), and simple check valves are not acceptable as outside containment isolation valves. The specific General Design Criteria met by piping systems penetrating containment are listed on Table 5.3-1. Where "locked closed" valves are called for by the General Design Criteria, administratively controlled, normally closed, manually operated valves are provided. 1A.56 PRIMARY CONTAINMENT ISOLATION (CRITERION 56) Criterion Each line that connects directly to the containment atmosphere and penetrates the primary reactor containment shall be provided with containment isolation valves as follows, unless it can be demonstrated that the containment isolation provisions for a specific class of lines, such as instrument lines, are acceptable on some other defined basis: (1) One locked closed isolation valve inside and one locked closed isolation valve outside containment; or (2) One automatic isolation valve inside and one locked closed isolation valve outside containment; or (3) One locked closed isolation valve inside and one automatic isolation valve outside containment. A simple check valve may not be used as the automatic isolation valve outside containment; or (4) One automatic isolation valve inside and one automatic isolation valve outside containment. A simple check valve may not be used as the automatic isolation valve outside containment. Isolation valves outside containment shall be located as close to the containment as practical and upon loss of actuating power, automatic isolation valves shall be designed to take the position that provides greater safety. Design Conformance The containment isolation arrangements for all lines that connect directly to the containment atmosphere and penetrate primary reactor containment conform with the design bases listed in Section 5.3.1. These design bases requiring that one of the arrangements called for in subparagraphs (1) through (4) of this criterion be utilized, unless acceptable on some other 1A-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 defined basis (as described in Section 5.3.3). The design bases also include requirements that isolation valves outside the containment shall be located as close to containment as practical; that automatic isolation valves shall take the position providing greater safety upon loss of actuating power, piping associated with the containment isolation system be designed, fabricated and tested in accordance with the requirements of piping Class I (Ql) or Class II (Q2), as applicable, (Section 6.2-2) and that simple check valves are not acceptable as outside containment isolation valves. The specific General Design Criteria met by piping systems penetrating containment are listed on Table 5.3-1. Where "locked closed" valves are called for by the General Design Criteria administratively controlled, normally closed, manually operated valves are provided. 1A.57 CLOSED SYSTEMS ISOLATION VALVES (CRITERION 57) Criterion Each line that penetrates primary reactor containment and is neither part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary nor connected directly to the containment atmosphere shall have at least one containment isolation valve which shall be either automatic, or locked closed, or capable of remote manual operation. This valve shall be outside containment and located as close to the containment as practical. A simple check valve may not be used as the automatic isolation valve. Design Conformance The containment isolation arrangements for all lines that penetrate reactor containment and are neither part of the reactor coolant pressure boundary nor connected directly to the containment atmosphere conform with the design bases listed in Section 5.3.1. These design bases include requiring that the outside isolation valve for such closed systems be either automatic, or normally closed, administratively controlled and manually operated. For normally open lines capable of remote manual operation, the valve shall be located as close to the containment as practical and that simple check valves may not be used as the automatic isolation valve. 1A.60 CONTROL OF RELEASES OF RADIOACTIVE MATERIALS TO THE ENVIRONMENT (CRITERION 60) Criterion The nuclear power unit design shall include means to control suitably the release of radioactive materials in gaseous and liquid effluents and to handle radioactive solid wastes produced during normal reactor operation, including anticipated operational occurrences. Sufficient holdup capacity shall be provided for retention of gaseous and liquid effluents containing radioactive materials, particularly where unfavorable site environmental conditions can be expected to impose unusual operational limitations upon the release of such effluents to the environment. Design Conformance In all cases, the design for radioactivity control is justified (1) on the basis of 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50 requirements for normal operations and for any transient situation that might reasonably be anticipated to occur, and (2) on the basis of 10 CFR 100 or 10 CFR 50.67, as 1A-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 applicable, dosage level guidelines for potential accidents of exceedingly low probability of occurrence. Control of waste gas effluents is accomplished by charcoal delay beds and holdup of waste gases in decay tanks until the activity of tank contents and existing environmental conditions permit discharges within 10 CFR 20 and 10 CFR 50 requirements. In addition, waste gas effluents are monitored prior to discharge for radioactivity and rate of flow. An accidental burst of the gas surge tank does not result in an activity release greater than 10 CFR 100 limits, based on one percent failed fuel. Control of liquid waste effluents is maintained by batch processing of all station radioactive liquids, sampling before discharge, controlling the rate of release, and by preventing inadvertent tank discharge. Liquid effluents are monitored for radioactivity and rate of flow. Liquid waste disposal system tankage and evaporator capacity is sufficient to handle any expected transient in the development of liquid waste volume. Station solid wastes are prepared batchwise for offsite disposal by approved contractors. Solid wastes are prepared for shipment by placement in shielded and reinforced containers which meet Federal Regulation requirements. References
- 1. Section 5, Containment System
- 2. Section 9, Auxiliary and Emergency Systems
- 3. Section 11, Radioactive Wastes and Radiation Protection
- 4. Section 14, Safety Analysis 1A.61 FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING AND RADIOACTIVITY CONTROL (CRITERION 61)
Criterion The fuel storage and handling, radioactive waste, and other systems which may contain radioactivity shall be designed to assure adequate safety under normal and postulated accident conditions. These systems shall be designed (1) with a capability to permit appropriate periodic inspection and testing of components important to safety, (2) with suitable shielding for radiation protection, (3) with appropriate containment, confinement, and filtering systems, (4) with a residual heat removal capability having reliability and testability that reflects the importance to safety of decay heat and other residual heat removal, and (5) to prevent significant reduction in fuel storage coolant inventory under accident conditions. Design Conformance Safety related components of the radioactive waste and fuel storage systems are designed to allow periodic inspection and testing. Process radiation monitors and flow measuring equipment are provided for surveillance or various station waste process streams. The waste disposal and radiation monitoring systems are designed to satisfy the General Design Criteria 1A-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 given in Section 1.3. In addition, these systems are designed to protect the health of station operating personnel and to limit discharge of radioactive materials from the station so as not to exceed the limits of 10CFR20. The waste disposal systems are discussed in detail in Section 11. The spent fuel storage pool is designed to meet the requirements of 10 CFR 20 in providing radiation shielding for operating personnel during fuel transfer and during storage of spent fuel. Work areas adjacent to the spent fuel pool transfer canal wall are shielded for personnel access during actual fuel transfers. The spent fuel pool is permanently flooded to provide a minimum of 100 inches of water above a fuel assembly being transferred within the spent fuel pool. Water height above stored fuel assemblies is a minimum of 23 ft. The sides of the spent fuel pool, three of which also form part of the fuel building exterior walls, are 6 ft thick concrete to ensure a dose rate of no more than 2.5 mrem per hour outside the building. Fuel handling shielding is discussed fully in Section 11.3. The refueling cavity above the reactor vessel is flooded to provide a temporary water shield above the components being withdrawn from the reactor vessel. This height ensures a minimum of 100 inches of water above a withdrawn fuel assembly at its highest point of travel. Under these conditions, the dose rate is less than 50 mrem per hour at the water surface. The spent fuel handling system is designed to preclude gross mechanical failures which could lead to significant radioactivity releases. Floor and trench drain systems provide backup by collecting leakage which might occur. Design of the fuel storage pool ensures that there is no significant loss of fuel storage coolant under accident conditions. Decay heat from spent fuel is dissipated in the water of the storage pool and subsequently removed by a cooling system. If an accident were to damage the fuel pool cooling system, the heat of the spent fuel would have to be removed by evaporation of the spent fuel water. Make-up water can be supplied from the engine driven fire pump. Redundancy of the fuel pool cooling system components is provided to ensure reliability in maintaining the storage pool water cleanliness, level and heat removal ability. The fuel pool cooling and purification systems are described in detail in Section 9.5. Radioactive gases, which may leak from spent fuel or radioactive waste disposal tanks in the decontamination and auxiliary building, are collected by the fuel building system. All discharges from these systems are monitored. All monitoring systems are discussed in Section 11.3. Periodic surveys by Radiation Control personnel using portable radiation detectors ensure that radiation levels outside the shield walls meet design specifications. Section 11.3 describes shielding requirements. The possibility of a fuel handling incident is very remote because of the many administrative controls and physical limitations imposed on fuel handling operations. For a description of the worst possible accident hypothesized refer to Section 14. 1A.62 PREVENTION OF CRITICALITY IN FUEL STORAGE AND HANDLING (CRITERION 62) Criterion Criticality in the fuel storage and handling system shall be prevented by physical systems or processes, preferably by use of geometrically safe configurations. 1A-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Design Conformance The spent fuel storage racks are divided into two physical regions, Region 1 and Region 2. A third administratively controlled region, Region 3, is part of Region 2. Each region is defined by fuel enrichment vs. burnup limitations. The racks, free standing on the floor of the spent fuel pool, are sized to hold 1622 spent fuel assemblies (additionally there are 2 failed fuel assembly canisters). The spent fuel assemblies are placed in vertical cells within the rack, continuously grouped in parallel in both directions. Cell pitch is approximately 10.8" for Region 1 and approximately 9" for Region 2. In addition, Boral panels are installed in the walls of the individual cells to maintain subcriticality. The racks are so arranged that the spacing between fuel elements cannot be less than that prescribed. Borated water (approximately 2000 ppm) is used in the spent fuel pool. Even if unborated water were introduced, the spacing and Boral maintain subcriticality with Keff < 0.95 for stored fuel. The new fuel assemblies are stored dry in a steel and concrete structure within the fuel building. The assemblies are stored vertically in racks in parallel rows, having a fuel assembly center-to-center distance of about 21 inches. There is storage space for one-third (53 assemblies) of a core plus 17 spare assembly spaces. The steel rack construction prevents possible criticality by requiring that the spacing between fuel elements will not be less than that prescribed. In the event of accidental flooding of the fresh fuel racks, the center to center spacing of the fuel assemblies results in Keff 0.95 under full water density conditions and Keff 0.98 under low water density (optimum moderation) and aqueous foam conditions. Criticality prevention is discussed in detail in Section 9.12 and Section 3.3.2.7. During handling, as a result of the hypothetical worst case accident the safeguards are designed such that the consequences of this accident meet 10 CFR 50.67 guidelines. For a complete description of this worst case accident, refer to Section 14.2. 1A.63 MONITORING FUEL AND WASTE STORAGE (CRITERION 63) Criterion Appropriate systems shall be provided in fuel storage and radioactive waste systems and associated handling areas (1) to detect conditions that may result in loss of residual heat removal capability and excessive radiation levels and (2) to initiate appropriate safety actions. Design Conformance Gamma radiation levels in the containment and fuel storage areas are continuously monitored. These monitors provide an audible alarm at the initiating detector indicating an unsafe condition. The fuel pool water temperature is continuously monitored. The temperature is displayed in the main control room where an audible alarm will sound should the water temperature increase above a preset level. The radiation level above the fuel pool is continuously monitored by a radiation detector mounted on the bridge of the fuel handling crane. A dose rate in excess of a preset level initiates an audible and visible alarm locally and in the main control room. Continuous surveillance of radiation levels in the waste storage and handling areas is maintained by two ventilation duct-mounted radiation detectors. Radiation levels in excess of preset levels initiate audible and visible alarms locally and in the control room. 1A-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 For a more detailed description of the above radiation monitoring systems, refer to Sections 9.12 and 11.3. In the event of a high temperature or high radiation alarm, administrative procedures provide for the protection of personnel and for the initiation of maximum fuel pool cooling and/or purification flow. Radiological control procedures, including appropriate radiation control surveys, are initiated as necessary to decontaminate affected areas. Refer to Sections 14.2 and 11.3 for a more detailed description of emergency procedures. 1A.64 MONITORING RADIOACTIVE RELEASES (CRITERION 64) Criterion Means shall be provided for monitoring the reactor containment atmosphere, spaces containing components for recirculation of loss-of-coolant accident fluids, effluent discharge paths, and the plant environs for radioactivity that may be released from normal operations, including anticipated operational occurrences, and from postulated accident conditions. Design Conformance The containment atmosphere is monitored during normal unit operations and accident conditions, using the containment air particulate and gas monitors, which are located in the auxiliary building. In the event of accident conditions, samples of the containment atmosphere are obtained via a bypass sample line arrangement to provide data on existing airborne radioactive concentrations within the containment. The safe guards areas will be monitored by the ventilation vent sample air particulate and gas monitors. Radioactivity levels contained in the normal facility radioactive effluent discharge paths and in the environs are continually monitored during normal and accident conditions by the unit radiation monitoring systems and by the environmental radiological safety program for this facility as described in Section 11.3. 1A-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References to Appendix 1A
- 1. "IEEE Criteria for Class lE Electric Systems for Nuclear Power and Generation Stations,"
IEEE Std. 308, The Electrical and Electronic Engineers, Inc.
- 2. "Standard Practice for Conducting Surveillance Tests for Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Vessels," ASTM E-185-82, The American Society for Testing Materials.
- 3. W. S. Pellini and F. J. Loss, "Integration of Metallurgical and Fracture Mechanics Concepts of Transistion Temperature Factors Relating to Fracture-Safe Design for Structural Steel, Naval Research Laboratory Report 6900 (April 1969).
- 4. "ASTM Test for Locating the Thinnest Spot in Zinc (Galvanized) Coating on Iron or Steel Articles by the Preece Test (Copper Sulfate Dip)," ASTM E-239, The American Society for Testing Materials.
1A-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 SECTION 2 SITE TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Title Page
2.1 DESCRIPTION
AND DEMOGRAPHY 2.1-1 2.1.1 Location and Description 2.1-1 2.1.2 Population 2.1-2 2.1.3 Land and Water Use 2.1-4 2.1.3.1 Industry 2.1-4 2.1.3.2 Transportation 2.1-6 2.1.3.3 Farming 2.1-8 2.1.3.4 Military Installation 2.1-9 2.1.4 Potable Water Sources 2.1-9 2.1.5 Toxic Substances 2.1-9 2.1.6 Stored Gases 2.1-9 2.1.7 Evaluation of Potential Accidents 2.1-10 2.1.7.1 Potential Impact of Barges or Ice on the Intake Structure 2.1-10 2.1.7.2 Accidental Release of Corrosive Liquids or Oil 2.1-11 2.1.7.3 Explosion of Chemicals, Flammable Gases or Munitions 2.1-13 2.1.7.4 Hazard from Natural Gas Pipeline 2.1-17 2.1.7.5 Various Site Hazards 2.1-19 2.1.7.6 Fire in Oil and Gasoline Plants or Storage Facilities, Adjacent Industries, Brush and Forest Fires and Transportation Accidents 2.1-21 2.1.7.7 Accidental Release of Toxic Gas from Onsite Storage Facilities, Nearby Industries and Transportation Accidents 2.1-21 2.1.7.8 Airborne Pollutant Effects on Important Plant Components 2.1-22 2.1.7.9 Potential Cooling Tower Collapse 2.1-22 2.1.7.10 Bruce Mansfield Power Station - Slurry Discharge Pipeline 2.1-22 2.1.7.11 Potential Peak Pressures on Critical Components 2.1-23 ATTACHMENT TO SECTION 2.1 - REPORT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION 2.1-27 A2.1 GENERAL 2.1-27 A2.2 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMODITY LISTS 2.1-27 A2.3 VOLUME OF TRAFFIC AND ACCIDENT REPORTS 2.1-28 2-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTD) Section Title Page A2.4 LEVEL OF ACCIDENTS FOR 1971 2.1-29 A2.5 BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION 2.1-29 A
2.6 CONCLUSION
2.1-32 A2.7 ENCLOSURES 2.1-32 2.2 METEOROLOGY AND CLIMATOLOGY 2.2-1 2.2.1 Summary 2.2-1 2.2.2 Descriptive Climatology 2.2-1 2.2.2.1 Climatic Summary 2.2-1 2.2.2.2 Topographic Factors 2.2-1 2.2.2.3 Climatological Averages 2.2-2 2.2.2.4 Climatological Extremes 2.2-2 2.2.2.5 Severe Weather Phenomena 2.2-2 2.2.3 Onsite Meteorological Monitoring Program 2.2-4 2.2.4 DBA Meteorology 2.2-4 2.2.4.1 Main Control Room Short-Term Diffusion Estimates 2.2-7 2.2.5 Annual Average Release Meteorology 2.2-10 2.3 HYDROLOGY 2.3-1 2.3.1 Surface Water Hydrology 2.3-1 2.3.1.1 River Flow 2.3-1 2.3.1.2 River Stage 2.3-1 2.3.2 Groundwater Hydrology 2.3-1 2.3.2.1 Description and Onsite Conditions 2.3-1 2.3.2.1.1 Aquifers 2.3-1 2.3.2.1.2 Site Condition 2.3-2 2.3.2.2 Usage 2.3-3 2.3.2.3 Accidental Effects 2.3-4 2.3.2.4 Monitoring 2.3-4 2.3.3 Floods and Dam Failure Upstream 2.3-4 2.3.4 Failure of Downstream Dam Gates and Low Flow 2.3-5 2.3.5 Environmental Acceptance of Effluents 2.3-6 2.3.6 Factors Affecting PMF Analysis 2.3-6 2.3.7 Seismically-Induced Flood Potential 2.3-8 2.3.7.1 Conemaugh Dam Significance 2.3-15 2.3.7.2 Concurrent Dam Failure 2.3-16 2.3.8 Wind-Generated Waves Concurrent With Floods 2.3-16 2.3.8.1 Characteristics of Waves on a River 2.3-17 2.3.8.2 Computation of Wave Parameters for the River 2.3-19 2.3.8.3 Computation of Wave Forces on a Vertical Wall 2.3-21 2.3.8.4 Evaluation 2.3-21 2-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTD) Section Title Page 2.3.9 Potential Ice Jam Flooding or Blockage 2.3-22 2.3.10 Storm Drainage 2.3-22 2.3.11 Low River Flow 2.3-24 ATTACHMENT "A" TO SECTION 2.3 ANALYSIS OF FLOOD HEIGHTS OHIO RIVER AT SHIPPINGPORT, PA 2.3-28 ATTACHMENT "B" TO SECTION 2.3 CORPS OF ENGINEERS LETTER DATED AUGUST 26, 1969 2.3-38 ATTACHMENT "C" TO SECTION 2.3 CORPS OF ENGINEERS LETTER DATED MARCH 29, 1973 2.3-39 ATTACHMENT "D" TO SECTION 2.3 DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY LETTER DATED OCTOBER 2, 1973 2.3-40 ATTACHMENT "E" TO SECTION 2.3 CORPS OF ENGINEERS LETTER DATED NOVEMBER 1, 1973 2.3-42 ATTACHMENT "F" TO SECTION 2.3 ICE JAM POTENTIAL - INFORMATION FROM THE PITTSBURGH DISTRICT, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, 1973 2.3-45 2.4 GEOLOGY 2.4-1 2.5 SEISMOLOGY 2.5-1 2.5.1 Seismicity 2.5-1 2.5.2 Amplification Through Overburden 2.5-1 2.5.3 Seismic Design 2.5-3 2.5.3.1 Factors Affecting Spring Constant and Mass 2.5-5 2.5.3.2 Factors Affecting Observed Data 2.5-6 2.6 SOIL MECHANICS 2.6-1 2.6.1 Site Conditions 2.6-1 2.6.2 Subsurface Conditions 2.6-1 2.6.2.1 High Terrace 2.6-1 2.6.2.2 Intermediate Terrace 2.6-2 2.6.2.3 Low Terrace 2.6-3 2.6.3 Foundation Design 2.6-3 2.6.3.1 Foundations 2.6-3 2.6.3.2 Settlement of Structures 2.6-4 2-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTD) Section Title Page 2.6.3.3 Bearing Values 2.6-6 2.6.4 Effects of Dynamic Loading 2.6-7 2.6.4.1 General 2.6-7 2.6.4.2 Liquefaction Potential 2.6-7 2.6.4.3 Relative Displacements 2.6-13 2.6.4.4 Lateral Soil Loads on Structures Below Grade 2.6-14 2.6.4.5 Slope Stability Analyses 2.6-15 2.6.5 Placement of Structural Fills 2.6-16 2.6.6 Summary 2.6-16 2.7 SITE DESIGN DATA 2.7-1 2.7.1 Wind Loading 2.7-1 2.7.1.1 Seismic Category I Structures 2.7-1 2.7.1.2 Other Structures 2.7-2 2.7.2 Tornado Model 2.7-2 2.7.2.1 Design Loading 2.7-3 2.7.2.2 Structures and Systems Requiring Protection 2.7-4 2.7.2.3 Tornado Missile Barriers 2.7-8 2.7.3 Flood-Water Loading 2.7-8 2.7.3.1 General 2.7-8 2.7.3.2 Structures and Systems Design Against Flood Water Effects 2.7-9 2.7.3.2.1 Reactor Containment 2.7-9 2.7.3.2.2 Intake Structure 2.7-9 2.7.3.2.3 Turbine Building 2.7-11 2.7.3.2.4 Electrical Cable Protection 2.7-11 2.7.3.2.5 Other Plant Areas and Equipment 2.7-12 2.7.4 Soils Design Loading 2.7-14 2.7.5 Site Design Considerations for Essential Lines 2.7-14 2.8 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM 2.8-1 2.8.1 Technical Discussion 2.8-1 2.8.2 Preoperational Surveillance 2.8-1 2.8.3 Operational Surveillance 2.8-2 2A THE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM 2A-1 2A.1 Appendix 2A.1 FIRST ANNUAL REPORT - THE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM AT THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION 2A.1-1 2-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS (CONTD) Section Title Page 2A.2 Appendix 2A.2 SECOND ANNUAL REPORT - THE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM AT THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION 2A.2-1 2A.3 ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM FOR JANUARY 1, 1980 - DECEMBER 31, 1980 2A.3i 2B Appendix 2B GEOLOGICAL CONSIDERATIONS 2B-1 2C Appendix 2C SEISMICITY ANALYSIS 2C-1 2D Appendix 2D EFFECTS OF LOCAL SOIL CONDITIONS UPON SEISMIC THREAT TO BVPS 2D-1 2E Appendix 2E REPORT ON SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS - SHIPPINGPORT SITE 2E-1 2F Appendix 2F BORING LOGS AND CALCULATION SHEETS 2F-iv 2G Appendix 2G SEISMIC VELOCITY MEASUREMENTS 2G-1 2H Appendix 2H ADDITIONAL BORING AND SOIL TEST DATA 2H-i 2-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF TABLES Table Title 2.1-1 Distance and Direction from Reactor to Population Centers Having More Than About 20,000 Inhabitants and Located within 50 Miles of the Site 2.1-2 Local Population Distribution 2.1-3 Public Facilities and Institutions in the Vicinity of Beaver Valley Power Station 2.1-4 Major Employers in the Vicinity of the Beaver Valley Power Station 2.1-5 Statistics for Manufacturing Industries Beaver County, 1969 2.1-6 Southwestern Pennsylvania Provisional Employment Forecast 2.1-7 Airports in Vicinity of Beaver Valley Power Station 2.1-8 Beaver County Agricultural Data 2.1-9a Principal Agricultural Products in 1969 2.1-9b Principal Agricultural Products in 1969 2.1-10 Fish Population, Ohio River, at Montgomery Lock and Dam (Mile Point 31.7) for September 19, 1968 2.1-11 Fishing Areas in Vicinity of Beaver Valley Power Station 2.1-12 Downstream Potable Water Intakes 2.1-13 Area Population 1970 With 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010 and 2020 Projections 2.1-14 Standard Gas Basis 2.1-15 Pipeline Leakage Detection and Isolation 2.1-16 Materials Utilizing Crude Oil as the Design Fluid 2-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF TABLES (CONT'D) Table Title 2.1-17 Peak "Side-On" Overpressures and Dynamic Pressures 2.2-1 Climatological Averages 2.2-2 Climatological Extremes (1870 - 1967) 2.2-3 Extreme Mile Winds 2.2-4 Joint Frequency Data 2.2-5 Design Basis Accident and Extended Release Meteorological Conditions 2.2-6 Average Monthly Relative Humidity and Absolute Humidity at Beaver Valley, Based On September 6, 1970 - September 5, 1972 Data 2.2-7 X/Q (sec/m3) for 158 Meter Release - Based on the Joint Frequency of Bendix-Friez 150 Foot Wind Data and T (150'-50') Temperature Data for the period September 5, 1970 - September 4, 1971 2.2-8 X/Q (sec/m3) at the Outer Boundary of the Low Population Zone (3.6 Miles - 5,794 Meters) for a Ground Level Release Based on The Joint Frequency of Packard Bell 50 Foot Wind Data and T (150'-50') Temperature Data for the Period September 5, 1970 - September 4, 1971 2.2-9 Annual Average Atmospheric Diffusion Factors (X/Q) for a 158 Meter Release for 16 Radial Sectors to 50 Miles (Using Site Meteorological Data) 2.2-10 Annual Average Atmospheric Diffusion Factors (X/Q) for a Ground Level Release for 16 Radial Sectors to 50 Miles (Using Site Meteorological Data) 2.2-11 Design Basis LOCA X/Q Values 2.2-11a 0.5% Accident Analysis 0- to 2-Hour X/Q Values at the Exclusion Area Boundary (1/1/86 - 12/31/95) 2.2-11b 0.5% Accident Analysis X/Q Values for Various Time Periods at the Low Population Zone Boundary (1/1/86 - 12/31/95) 2.2-12 (Deleted) 2.2-12A BVPS-1 On-Site Atmospheric Dispersion Factors (sec/m 3) - ARCON96 Methodology 2.2-12B BVPS-2 On-Site Atmospheric Dispersion Factors (sec/m 3) - ARCON96 Methodology 2-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF TABLES (CONT'D) Table Title 2.3-1 Drainage Area Values 2.3-2 Hourly Unit Hydrographic Values and Muskingum Routing Coefficients 2.3-3 Distances from Shippingport to Dam Sites 2.3-4 Flood Forecasting for Dashields Beginning on October 15, 1954 2.3-5 Dams Above BVPS Site - Pertinent Data 2.3-6 Analysis of Liquefaction Potential Kinzua Dam Abutment Section 2.3-7 Ratios Between the Heights, Lengths and Steepness of Waves and in Current of Different Relative Velocities. 2.6-1 Number of Cycles in which Acceleration Equals or Exceeds One-half the Peak Acceleration for Direction Recorded 2.6-2 Relative Densities and Related Soil Properties for Soils Underlying Beaver Valley Power Station Site Vibratory Compaction Tests at 1 psi for 8 min. 2.6-3 Results of Stability Analyses for Natural and Design Conditions 2.7-1 Additive Building Loading 2.8-1 Pre-operational Environmental Radiological Monitoring Program for the Beaver Valley Power Station 2-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 2.1-1 General Site Location 2.1-2 Aerial Photograph 2.1-3 Local Site Topography 2.1-4 Population Distribution 0-5 Miles 2.1-5 Population Distribution 5-50 Miles 2.1-6 Area Highway Map 2.1-7 (Deleted) 2.1-8 Ohio River - Normal River Channel, Sheet 1 2.1-9 Ohio River - Normal River Channel, Sheet 2 2.1-10 Ohio River - Normal River Channel, Sheet 3 2.1-11 Ohio River - Normal River Channel, Sheet 4 2.1-12 Pipeline Location 2.1-13 (Deleted) 2.1-14 Barge Impact Criteria 2.2-1 Topographic Cross Section - Sheet 1 2.2-2 Topographic Cross Section - Sheet 2 2.2-3 Topographic Cross Section - Sheet 3 2.2-4 Topographic Cross Section - Sheet 4 2.2-5 Topographic Cross Section - Sheet 5 2.2-6 Topographic Cross Section - Sheet 6 2.2-7 Topographic Cross Section - Sheet 7 2.2-8 Topographic Cross Section - Sheet 8 2.2-9 Freezing Precipitation Frequency 2-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF FIGURES (CONT'D) Figure Title 2.2-10 Average Annual X/Q (Sec/M3) at Beaver Valley Ground Level Release (Based on 9/6/70 - 9/5/71 Data) 2.3-1 Drought Frequency 2.3-2 Flow-Stage Relation at Site Ohio River - 34.8 2.3-3 Regional Groundwater Map 2.3-4 Pittsburgh District Unit Areas and Routing Reaches 2.3-5 Index Map Flood Control Projects 2.3-6 Ohio River at Shippingport Intake Cross Section 2.3-7 Ohio River Topography (Mile 30.9 to Mile 53.7) Sheet 1 2.3-8 Ohio River Topography (Mile 30.9 to Mile 53.7) Sheet 2 2.3-9 Ohio River Topography (Mile 30.9 to Mile 53.7) Sheet 3 2.3-10 Ohio River Topography (Mile 30.9 to Mile 53.7) Sheet 4 2.3-11 Ohio River Topography (Mile 30.9 to Mile 53.7) Sheet 5 2.3-12 Oio River Topography (Mile 30.9 to Mile 53.7) Sheet 6 2.3-13 Ohio River Topography (Mile 30.9 to Mile 53.7) Sheet 7 2.3-14 Historic High Water Marks 2.3-15 Precipitation vs. Excess 2.3-16 Rainfall Duration vs. Infiltration 2.3-17 Ohio River Profiles for PMF and SPF 2.3-18 Ohio River at Dashields Locks and Dam Comparison of Actual and Reproduced October 1954 Floods 2.3-19 Kinzua Dam - Typical Cross Section 2.3-20 Horizontal Acceleration of Slide Block vs. Factor of Safety 2-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF FIGURES (CONT'D) Figure Title 2.3-21 Relative Density from Standard Penetration Tests 2.3-22 River Configuration Wind Wave Study 2.3-23 Fetch Graph 2.3-24 Rainfall Intensity - Duration Frequency Curves 2.3-25 Site Drainage and Topographical Features 2.5-1 Response Spectra DBE 2.5-2 Response Spectra OBE 2.5-3 Shear Moduli 2.5-4 Response Spectra 0.125g DBE (Based on Soil-Structure Interaction Methodology) 2.5-5 Response Spectra 0.06g OBE (Based on Soil-Structure Interaction Methodology) 2.6-1 Boring Location Plan 2.6-2 Log of Boring 101 2.6-3 Typical Subsurface Section 2.6-4 Standard Penetration Test Results - High Terrace 2.6-5 Recorded Settlements of Turbine Room in the Shippingport Atomic Power Station 2.6-6 Modulus of Foundation Deformation 2.6-7 Shear Stress in Soil for Design Earthquake 2.6-8 Variation of Alpha with Depth 2.6-9 Dynamic Triaxial Test Data 2.6-10 Correlation of Blow Count and Relative Density for Sand and Gravel 2.6-11 Correlation of Blow Count and Relative Density for Intermediate Bench 2.6-12 Correlation of Blow Count and Relative Density for Low Level Bench 2-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF FIGURES (CONT'D) Figure Title 2.6-13 Relative Density from Standard Penetration Tests along Circulating Water Lines after Densification 2.6-14 Total Relative Displacement in Inches for Design Basis Earthquake 2.6-15 Soil Profile Turbine, Service and Containment Buildings 2.6-16 Soil Profile Decontamination, Fuel, Primary Auxiliary, Control and Turbine Buildings 2.6-17 Soil Profile Containment, Decontamination and Fuel Buildings 2.6-18 Soil Profile - Along River Water Pipelines 2.7-1 Typical Section Showing Excavation and Compacted Fill 2.7-2 Ground Level Pressure Variation 2.7-3 Pressure Distribution Base 2.7-4 Pressure Distribution Design 2.7-5 Typical Details for Removable Slab Covers and Plugs 2.7-6 Typical Detail Block Wall 2.7-7 Intake Structures Plans and Elevations 2.7-8 Intake Structure Wall Section Detail 2.7-9 Station Arrangement Elevation 713' - 6" 2.7-10 Electrical Ductlines, Sheet 1 2.7-11 Electrical Ductlines, Sheet 2 2.7-12 Electrical Ductlines, Sheet 3 2.7-13 Conduit Plan Electrical Tunnel, Elevation 720'-0, Sheet 5 2.7-14 Conduit Sleeves and Openings - Service Building 2.7-15 Waterproofing Plates - Service Building 2-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF FIGURES (CONT'D) Figure Title 2.7-16 Cable Bus - Installation Details 2.7-17 Penetration Seals Elevation 713' - 6" 2.7-18 Penetration Seals Elevation 735' - 6" 2.7-19 Penetration Seals - Cooling Tower, Pump House and Intake Structure 2.7-20 Conduit Plan - Auxiliary Building 2.7-21 Conduit Sleeves and Openings - Auxiliary Building 2.7-22 Essential Lines Passing Between Category I Structures, Sheet 1 2.7-23 Essential Lines Passing Between Category I Structures, Sheet 2 2.7-24 Essential Lines Passing Between Category I Structures, Sheet 3 2.7-25 Essential Lines Passing Between Category I Structures, Sheet 4 2-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 SECTION 2 SITE This chapter primarily describes the site characteristics for the Beaver Valley Power Station as they existed when the facility was licensed. As such, current site characteristics may not agree with these descriptions. The site characteristics described here include description and demography, meteorology and climatology, hydrology, geology, seismology, soil mechanics, site structure design data, and environmental radiological monitoring program. This information was gathered to support or develop the original plant design bases. Chapter 2 also contains evaluations of these site characteristics demonstrating how applicable siting criteria were met at the time of original licensing of the facility. This information was accurate at the time the plant was originally licensed, but is considered historical and is not intended or expected to be updated for the life of the plant. In the past, minor changes to site characteristics have been incorporated into Chapter 2. While updates were not required, these changes have not been removed. Therefore, some parts of this chapter reflect more recent information.
2.1 DESCRIPTION
AND DEMOGRAPHY 2.1.1 Location and Description(1) The Beaver Valley Power Station Unit No. 1 (BVPS-1) is located in Shippingport Borough, Beaver County, Pennsylvania, on the south bank of the Ohio River. The site is approximately one mile from Midland, Pennsylvania, five miles from East Liverpool, Ohio, and approximately 25 miles from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The coordinates are 4037' 18" north and 8026' 2" west. The Universal Transverse Mercator coordinates are 547,900 meters east and 4,496,680 meters north. Figure 2.1-1 shows the general site location out to a radius of 200 miles. The site comprises approximately 453 acres including 26 acres of right of way. Also on the site and immediately to the west of the reactor location is the former site of Shippingport Atomic Power Station (SAPS) which was managed by Duquesne Light Company for the Department of Energy (DOE). The SAPS terminated operations October 1, 1982, and was dismantled by the USDOE. Immediately to the east of the BVPS-1 reactor location, and also onsite is the Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 2 (BVPS-2). Figure 2.1-2 is an aerial photograph of the Beaver Valley Power Station site. Local site topography, site boundary and exclusion radii are shown in Figure 2.1-3. The Pennsylvania Department of Transportation has a right-of-way across the easterly end of the property on which is constructed a portion of Route 168 including the southerly approach to the Shippingport Bridge. The site area and adjacent Ohio River provide a minimum exclusion radius of 2,000 ft. The property boundaries also define the nearest approach to the reactor upon which the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual limits on gaseous effluents are based. Gaseous releases will occur at the BVPS-1 primary auxiliary building, containment building, and at the BVPS-1 cooling tower. The shortest distance to the site boundary from the containment building is 2,000 ft to the northeast and from the cooling tower is 1,380 ft to the east-northeast. The nearest occupied residence is approximately 2,100 ft from the reactor location. 2.1-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Phillis Island lies approximately 400 ft off the shoreline of the site. The previous owner of the island, Dravo Corporation, agreed in 1955 not to use or permit the use of the land for any structure, place or area where the public at large can assemble. This agreement was binding on Dravo Corporation and any future purchaser or lessee until March, 1994. A new agreement, extending the expiration date to 2010 and further delineating the uses which can be made of the island, has been negotiated. Phillis Island was sold to the United States of America in 1990 and through the purchase agreement is bound by the uses which can be made of the island as described in the previous agreement. The Freeport Development Corporation purchased approximately 46 acres from DLC in 1995. This land, located along the southern site boundary, includes 7.4 acres which are within the 2000-foot exclusion area boundary. A legal agreement binding on Freeport Development Corporation as on any future purchaser or lessee delineates and restricts the uses which can be made of the land. The site boundary is shown in Figure 2.1-3. Within the site boundary are restricted areas which are areas to which access is limited for the purpose of controlling exposure to radiation and radioactive material. A description of restricted area locations can be found in radiation protection procedures. Periodic monitoring of external dose rate levels and environmental sampling in the area adjacent to the river's edge and around the perimeter of the restricted area are included as part of the surveillance program (see Section 2.8). Gaseous releases from BVPS-1 will occur at the containment building, cooling tower, and auxiliary building. With the exception of the northeast corner of the site, near the center of which the station is located, the site area is very hilly. It rises from the river, which has a normal pool El. 664.5 ft above mean sea level (MSL), to a maximum El. 1160 ft above MSL. Prior to grading, the station location consisted primarily of three terraces: a high level terrace at El. 735 ft on which the reactor containment is located, an intermediate terrace at approximately El. 690 ft, and a low level terrace at El. 675 ft. Site filling has been done to provide a bench at El. 707 ft riverward of the station on which the transformers are placed. Site drainage is primarily to the river, but with some drainage in the northeast portion of the site to Peggs Run, a small stream which enters the river at a point just west of Route 168. 2.1.2 Population The distance and direction to population centers that have more than approximately 20,000 inhabitants and are located within 50 miles of the site are listed in Table 2.1-1. The nearest such population center is East Liverpool, Ohio, with a population in 1970 of 20,020. The population of East Liverpool, and the majority of the other population centers in this area, decreased between the 1960 census and 1970 census primarily because the lack of industrial diversification resulted in a decrease in employment opportunities as the number of employees required in the basic iron and steel industry declined. This decreasing trend is expected to level off in the near future and then employment is projected to gradually increase as more emphasis is placed on nonmanufacturing activities such as trade and services (2). It is therefore possible that the population of East Liverpool might, before the end of the plant life, increase to more than 25,000 and, thereby, meet the criterion for population center as defined in 10 CFR 100.3; hence, East Liverpool is conservatively taken to be the population center. 2.1-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The nearest boundary of East Liverpool is approximately 4.7 miles west northwest of the reactor location. 10CFR100.11 requires that the population center distance be at least 1 1/3 times the distance from the reactor to the outer boundary of the low population zone (LPZ). From this develops the requirement that the outer boundary of the low population zone must be no greater than approximately 3.6 miles, which is the distance taken for the LPZ. It should be noted, however, that 10CFR100 defines an LPZ on the basis of a minimum distance at which certain dose level would be obtained under postulated accident conditions. Rigorous interpretation of 10CFR100 gives an LPZ less than the 2,000 ft exclusion boundary. The approximate distribution of the 1970 population based on census reports, topographic maps, aerial photographs, and field observation is shown in Figure 2.1-4, for 16 directional sectors and radial distances of 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 miles from the station. Incremental and cumulative populations at these distances are listed in Table 2.1-2. Seasonal fluctuations in population are negligible, since there are no parks or recreation areas within five miles of the station. Daily fluctuations in population are also insignificant in this area since the large industries are on three shifts per day and a majority of the employees live close to their jobs. Of the approximately 18,000 persons included within the 5 mile radius, 5,270 live within the Borough of Midland centered approximately 1 1/2 miles to the northwest of the site. The population of this Borough remained virtually constant at about 6,400 from 1940 to 1960. Since 1960, the population has decreased. Although there have been some local increases in population within the 5 mile radius, primarily in the rural areas above the Ohio River Valley, the overall growth rate is estimated to be less than 1 percent per year. Table 2.1-13 provides the population distribution within 50 miles of BVPS-1 for 16 compass directions. The 1970 population is given along with projected population for each decade ending with an estimate for the year 2020. The 1970 population data within 5 miles, as stated previously, is based on census reports, topographic maps, aerial photographs, and field observation. Beyond the 5 mile radius, population estimates were based on 1970 census data (12) and the corresponding State maps, account being taken of the population estimated to be within 5 miles of the site. From the census map, it was determined which census units were within a given area and their corresponding fractions within that area. It was assumed that the population within each such unit was uniformly distributed. Population projections for the years 1980, 1990, 2000, 2010, and 2020 are based on corresponding projections for the counties of three States concerned. It was assumed that each component or fraction of a county had the same decennial rate of growth as that for the county as a whole. The projections for Pennsylvania counties were obtained from the Department of Development, Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. Those for Ohio counties were obtained from the State of Ohio, Department of Development. The West Virginia counties were obtained from the Department of Sociology, West Virginia University. In all three states, only projections from 1970 to 1985 were available. Five year growth rates were determined from 1970 to 1975, 1975 to 1980, and 1980 to 1985. A decennial rate of growth was determined from this and applied to the actual 1970 population and each succeeding decade for that County. 2.1-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The total population of Beaver County was approximately 207,000 in 1960 and 208,400 in 1970. A study prepared in 1970 by the Pennsylvania State Planning Board(6), before the 1970 census data was available, projected a slight decrease in the population of Beaver County between 1960 and 1970 and then an increase to a population of 220,000 in 1990. The final 1970 count indicates that the State Planning Board was conservative in its estimates. The comprehensive economic studies carried out by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission (SPRPC)(5) forecasts a continuing increase in the regional population through the year 2000 with a growth rate of approximately 1.0 percent per year. The population growth in Beaver County is expected to be in the suburban areas in the eastern and central part of the county, largely as a result of new highway development; the growth in the vicinity of the site is expected to be very slight. Figure 2.1-5 shows the 1960 and 1970 censuses and the projected 1990 population in 8 directional sectors out to a 50-mile radial distance from the station. The 1990 projections are based on population trends observed in the 1940 to 1970 period and on State and regional population forecast studies(6)(7)(8) for the counties within the area of interest. The City of Pittsburgh and the other major population centers showed a decrease in population between 1960 and 1970. Increases were registered in the suburban areas surrounding the cities, but the overall trend was for a slight decrease in the regional population. Major public facilities in the vicinity of the site are presented in Table 2.1-3. The only large public facilities within five miles of the site are schools. The effect of the public facilities on population distribution is negligible. These facilities are utilized by the local population. The effect of these facilities, such as schools, is to temporarily concentrate the distributed population. Parks near the site are listed in Table 2.1-3. The largest park is Raccoon State Park, eight miles south of BVPS-1. In 1970, total attendance at the park was 480,000 people. (9) 2.1.3 Land and Water Use BVPS-1 is situated in an area characterized by the sharp contrast in land use between the river valley area transversing the region, and the inland countryside. The Ohio River Valley can be described as being a highly industrialized area in comparison to the inland areas which can be best described as being rural in character. 2.1.3.1 Industry The general area in which BVPS-1 is located is part of the large Pittsburgh industrial complex, which is centered about the City of Pittsburgh. The combination of available raw materials, product markets and transportation facilities led to the development of the region as a major industrial center with the manufacturing of iron and steel being the most important factor in the region's economy. The heavy industries have settled, for the most part, on the flat shelves of land adjacent to the rivers. The steep slopes of the river valley have, for the most part, contained industry close to the banks of the river. This led to the development of the river mill town. The railroads also located next to the river and the commercial and residential areas, restricted by the topography of the river valley, stretched out in a linear pattern along the river. In Beaver County, 67 percent of the total industrial labor force is employed in the primary metals group - blast furnaces, steelworks and rolling mills. The second largest industry, with 11 percent of the labor force, is the fabricated metal products group, especially fabricated structural steel. The electrical equipment industry employs eight percent of the labor force, while the 2.1-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 stone, clay, glass, and concrete industries employ four percent. The other major industrial activity is the chemical group which employ three percent of the labor force. The industrial giant in the region, and by far the largest employer with close to 12,000 employees, is the Jones & Laughlin Steel Corporation in Aliquippa, about ten miles east of the Beaver Valley site. The world's largest electrically controlled railroad classification yard is located at Conway, across the river from Monaca. The Shippingport Atomic Power Station (now decommissioned), operated by the Duquesne Light Company, adjacent to the Beaver Valley Power Station, was the United States' first commercial nuclear power station. The nearest industrial activity to the site is the steel mill complex located in Midland, between one and two miles northwest of the site, where over 6,000 persons are employed. There is one industrial operation located in Shippingport Borough. It is a coal mining company, employing 60 people, which operates a deep mine and coal washing facilities located about one mile southwest of the entrance of the site. The urban complex of East Liverpool, Ohio, including Chester and Newell, West Virginia, begins about five miles west of the site and stretches for several miles down the Ohio River. The East Liverpool area industrial base is dependent on pottery and steel for most of its employment. At one time, East Liverpool was known as the pottery center of the world, but foreign competition and the use of plastic materials for tableware has resulted in a decline in the pottery industry. Table 2.1-4 lists the major employers in the area surrounding the site, while Table 2.1-5 shows statistical data for manufacturing industries in Beaver County. Mineral resources including coal, clay, gas, oil, sand, and gravel are found in the region surrounding the site. Bituminous coal is the most important mineral being extracted and coal reserves are considered to be extensive. However, relatively few workers are engaged in mining operations and the employment forecast is for a decline in mining employment as the use of automated mining techniques increases. In Beaver County, deep mining is the predominant method for getting the coal out of the ground, although extensive areas of strip mining are found within the region especially in northern Beaver County and in northern Washington County. The total number of persons employed in southwestern Pennsylvania is projected to increase 42 percent by the year 2000 according to a study prepared by the Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission (SPRPC). However, not all industry groups will experience this growth. Historically, the southwestern Pennsylvania region has been a heavy industry center dominated by the manufacture of iron and steel. The employment forecast for the region, shown in Table 2.1-6 indicates that in the manufacturing category employment gains in fabricated metals, machinery and transportation equipment will be offset by declines in basic steel production and in the stone, clay, and glass industries. The net result will be a stabilization or even a slight decrease in the number of persons employed in manufacturing production jobs. Employment statistics for the southwestern Pennsylvania region show that this trend has been in effect for the past several years. Factors contributing to this trend have been the increased use of automation, foreign competition, dispersion of markets and the development of steel making capacity in other areas of the country. While employment has decreased in the basic steel industry, the productivity per worker has increased as well as wages and salaries and the value of production. 2.1-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Employment in the non-manufacturing jobs is projected to grow by almost 70 percent in the next three decades. As shown in Table 2.1-6, the largest growth will occur in services and government. Storage tank facilities for gasoline and oil are mostly located along the river. The closest oil tanks are in Midland, Pa. directly across the river from the site. Industrial plants near the site store relatively small quantities of toxic gases such as chlorine. The Midland Water Treatment Plant utilizes chlorine. No significant quantities of propane or LPG are stored within five miles of the site. Up to 1 ton of explosives may be stored by the Peggs Run Coal Company. This supply is replenished about every three weeks. The coal mine is an active project. Dynamite is shipped by a 3/4 ton pickup truck or a small van from the Austin Powder Company in Evans City, Pa., via Route 168. The Peggs Run Coal Company is about one mile southwest of the site and is shielded by the large hill to the south of the site. 2.1.3.2 Transportation The region is served by five transportation systems: waterways, railroads, highways, air and pipelines. The first major transportation system was the rivers. The early economic growth and pattern of development of the region was inextricably tied to the rivers. After 1860, the rivers gradually diminished in importance as a transportation system and the railroads became the primary carriers of industrial materials. However, advances in technology such as, first, steam, and then, diesel power plus a program of building locks and dams to improve navigation led to a revival in river traffic. In 1910 the volume of goods hauled on the rivers was only 7 percent of the combined river and railroad traffic but by 1969 had risen to close to 40 percent. In 1960 the tonnage of freight handled on the upper Ohio River was 22 million tons. By 1969 the tonnage had risen to 33 million tons. The locks at Montgomery Dam, located three miles upriver from the site, recorded 6,574 commercial lockages for 1970. The commodities shipped on the waterways include coal, coke, petroleum, sand and gravel, steel products and chemicals. A map showing the normal river channel used for barge traffic is shown on the U.S. Army Engineer District Charts, Figures 2.1-8, 2.1-9, 2.1-10, and 2.1-11. The bulk of industrial materials are transported by the railroads. The placement of the rail lines was governed by the topography. Because the railroads needed level and continuous corridors, they followed essentially the same courses as the rivers and streams. One of the first rail lines in the region ran from Pittsburgh up the eastern bank of the Beaver River to the Great Lakes region. That line is one of the main Penn Central lines. The world's largest electrically controlled railroad switching yards, capable of handling 10,000 cars per day, is located on this line at Conway about ten miles east of the site. Another heavily traveled Penn Central line follows the north bank of the Ohio across the river from the station site. There is also a Penn Central right-of-way on the site. This line is of minor importance since the line is controlled by the licensee and its use is limited to the servicing of the Beaver Valley Power Station. The railroad west of the site has been abandoned by the Penn Central Railroad. There are no through shipments. The railroad siding is leased by the licensee and serves only the site. The railroad on the north side of the Ohio River is approximately 1,200 ft from the site. 2.1-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The type of quantity of toxic gases that may be transported within one mile of the plant site was not determined at the time of the pre-operational phase investigation because of data availability limitations. Sources consulted in an attempt to secure this information include:
- 1. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Boston Office
- 2. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency - Philadelphia Office
- 3. Interstate Commerce Commission - Philadelphia Office
- 4. Interstate Commerce Commission - Washington, D.C. Office
- 5. U.S. Department of Transportation, Office of Hazardous Materials
- 6. U.S. Department of Transportation, Harrisburg, Pa. - Motor Transportation Dept.
- 7. U.S. Coast Guard - Louisiana
- 8. Union Barge Lines - Pittsburgh, Pa.
All nongovernment information available prior to the operations phase is included in the Attachment to Section 2.1. In the event of transportation accident involving toxic gas, emergency air breathing apparatus is available to control room occupants. These precautions will help minimize the effects of the accident. State Highway 68 provides the main access from the residential areas east of the site to the industrial complexes along the north bank of the Ohio River. State Highway 168 from the south follows roughly along the northeast and east corner of the site and, crossing the Shippingport Bridge, joins Highway 68 immediately across the river from the site. State Highway 18 provides additional access to the east of the site while U.S. Route 30 passes by three miles southwest of the site. The nearest Interstate highway to the site is the Pennsylvania Turnpike (I-76) which runs through the northeastern section of Beaver County about 15 miles northeast of the site. Interstate 79 is located about 18 miles east of the site while Interstate 70 which goes through Wheeling, West Virginia, is about 30 miles to the south. Figure 2.1-6 shows the local area highway map. The modern development of the local area as well as the region as a whole has been hampered by an outmoded highway system. The topography of the area and the location of the communities dictated that the early roads would be located in the river valleys. The intense industrial development and the high population density in the valleys resulted in increasingly congested conditions with the rapid growth in auto and truck traffic. The Beaver Valley Expressway (Route 60) which is presently open from Greater Pittsburgh Airport to 2.5 miles past Vanport, Pennsylvania, will help to alleviate this situation as it will provide the first four-lane, limited access highway between the industrial centers of Beaver County and Pittsburgh. The Expressway traverses north to south about six miles east of the site. 2.1-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The most important airport in the region for passenger and freight service is the Greater Pittsburgh International Airport, located about 15 miles southeast of the site. Local airports in the vicinity of the station are given in Table 2.1-7. The airspace above BVPS-1 is in the direct path of the Victor 103 airway used by aircraft flying between 1,200 and 14,000 ft between Cleveland and Pittsburgh. The area is also served by pipelines carrying natural gas and petroleum products. There are six pipelines crossing the site: One natural gas pipeline and five petroleum product pipelines. The pipelines were completely relocated prior to the initial startup of BVPS-1 in 1976. Figure 2.1-12 indicates the current routing of the various oil and natural gas pipelines in the vicinity of BVPS-1. All of the aforementioned pipelines are provided with a minimum earth cover of two feet of soil. 2.1.3.3 Farming The countryside inland from the river valley in the vicinity of BVPS-1 can be considered rural in character. Of the total land area of Beaver County (282,000 acres), 48 percent is forest and 29 percent is crop and pasture land. Beaver County was never a major agricultural area even when compared to other counties in the region. Before the Industrial Revolution, farming provided sustenance for the early settlers leaving little surplus for sale or export. Most of the farms are located in the rolling hill country where the soil is thin and not as fertile as the bottomlands, but little farming is done in these fertile areas as the floodplains have been usurped for industrial, commercial and residential purposes. Beaver County is considered a semiagricultural area and farming is not of great economic importance. Less than one percent of the labor force is employed on farms and the wages and salaries received there from are about 0.08 percent of the total personal income in the county. Still, as shown in Table 2.1-8, Beaver County farms produced cash receipts in 1969 in excess of 4.5 million dollars. Dairy products ranked first and other livestock and poultry products ranked second in value. The number of farms is declining and in 1969, there were an estimated 750 farms in the county. Although there has been a modest gain in the value of farm production, the number of farms is expected to decline even further in the future as small, marginal farm operations are eliminated and the amount of farm land is reduced by urban expansion. The principal agricultural products grown or produced in Beaver County is presented in Table 2.1-9a and 2.1-9b. The Ohio River is a major natural resource in this region. In addition to supplying water to industry and towns in the valley and transportation for bulk freight in and out of the region, it serves as a source of recreation for fisherman and boaters alike. Pleasure boating takes place during the warm months of the year although access areas and marine facilities are limited along the stretch on the Ohio between Beaver, Pennsylvania and East Liverpool, Ohio. Montgomery Dam locks, 3 miles up river from the site, recorded 2,035 pleasure boat lockages in 1969; however there were undoubtedly a greater number of boats using the river during the year which did not use the locks. Although there is no extensive commercial fishing activity on the Ohio River, there is some sport fishing activity taking place on the Ohio River and other lakes and creeks in the area. This is indicated by the 14,059 fishing licenses sold in Beaver County during 1969. Studies of the fish population have shown that there are 19 species present in the river near the site(10). Most of these, by weight or by 2.1-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 number, are among the coarser varieties such as carp and catfish. Table 2.1-10 lists the FWQA unpublished data on a fish survey at the Montgomery Dam (10). Inspection of this table shows that carp make up over 67 percent of the sample with bullheads, channel catfish and gizzard shad representing approximately 25 percent. Gamefish species make up slightly more than five percent of the sample. Other fishing areas within five miles of the site are listed in Table 2.1-11 including the species of fish found in these areas. 2.1.3.4 Military Installations The nearest military installation is adjacent to the Greater Pittsburgh International Airport, about 15 miles southeast of the station. 2.1.4 Potable Water Sources The nearest user of the Ohio River as a potable water source is Midland Borough Municipal Water Authority. The intake of the water treatment plants is approximately 1.3 miles downstream and on the opposite side of the river from BVPS-1. East Liverpool, Ohio and Chester, West Virginia are the next downstream users of the Ohio River as a potable water source. Table 2.1-12 presents the communities and the population served by municipal water treatment plants which use the Ohio River as their source of potable water. The heavy industries in Midland as well as others further downstream use river water for cooling purposes. Some of these plants also have private treatment facilities of plant sanitary water. Normal operation of BVPS-1 will have no adverse effect on these river water users. There are also some 42 wells (principally drilled wells) within five miles of the plant (11). The nearest wells are to the east in Shippingport Borough. Transport of radioactivity to ground water supplies is prevented by the site drainage to the Ohio River and by the general ground water flow which is also in the direction of the river. 2.1.5 Toxic Substances Based on the 1972 edition of "Toxic Substances" issued by the U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, the following toxic substances will be stored at the Beaver Valley plant site: hydrazine, morpholine, phosphate, boric acid, etc. If the toxic substances are released in an uncontrolled manner, neither the capacity nor location of any toxic substances would prevent or compromise the ability of the facility to shutdown in a safe manner and maintain a safe shutdown condition. Storage areas are located so that they do not compromise any safety-related equipment or the operator's environment in a safety-related area (i.e., the control room). 2.1.6 Stored Gases Table 2.1-14 lists the vessels used for storage of pressurized gas at BVPS-1. The service operating, design and maximum pressure, location of vessel, and total energy stored are shown in the table. 2.1-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 All storage vessels, except for propane gas storage and air storage tanks for the diesel generator, are not located adjacent to equipment essential for maintaining a safe reactor shutdown. Nitrogen makeup is provided by a tank truck supply located adjacent to the South Coolant Recovery Tank Cubicle (BR-TK-4B). Missiles generated by the propane storage tanks and the air storage tanks in the diesel generator structure are discussed in Section 5.2.6. All storage vessels have provisions for relief protection. This protection precludes any missiles generated from accidental rupture of tanks caused by overpressurization. The vessels are protected from truck lanes or heavy vehicle traffic. No heavy loads are transported over vessel storage areas. There are no exceptions or deviations taken to Occupational Health Administration OSHA 29 CFR 1910 Subpart H-Hazardous Material Sections 1910.101 Compressed Gases, 1910.103 Hydrogen and 1910.104 Oxygen, Subpart M-Compressed Gas and Compressed Air Equipment Section, 1910.166 Inspection of Compressed Gas Cylinder, 1910.167 Safety Relief Devices for Compressed Gas Cylinders, 1910.168 Safety Relief Devices for Cargo and Portable Tanks Storing Compressed Gases, 1910.169 Air Receivers. 2.1.7 Evaluation of Potential Accidents The safety evaluations presented in Sections 2.1.7.1 through 2.1.7.11 are intended to show that the plant may be operated safely under the postulated occurrences. The safety evaluation will show that the source of water will withstand loss of safety function:
- 1. Any one of the most severe phenomena expected, taken individually
- 2. The site related events (e.g., transportation accident, river diversion) that historically have occurred or that may occur during the plant lifetime
- 3. A single failure of man-made structural features.
2.1.7.1 Potential Impact of Barges or Ice on the Intake Structure The intake structure is not expected to be subjected to the type of collision damage that might occur as a result of a loose barge floating downstream during normal river flow at or near normal pool level. A barge floating downstream must avoid the state highway bridge abutment and supporting pier and the projection formed by an abandoned barge slip in order to impact on the intake structure when the pool level is within a range of El. 664.5 ft to an approximate flood level of El. 680 ft. For higher flood levels when the south bank is flooded, together with accompanying storm conditions, barges may be postulated to break loose from tows and upstream moorings. Under such conditions, the impact of a single runaway barge may be assumed. The largest possible barge considered for maximum potential impact is the 55 ft by 300 ft jumbo cargo barge with a displacement of 3900 tons. This type is the largest transient barge passing the station at the present time. It is also the largest barge expected to be in this area during the lifetime of the 2.1-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 station because of size limitations imposed by the dams and locks of the flood control system for the Ohio River(13). The characteristics of the postulated impact barges, velocity, elevation, and type of impact producing maximum damage to the structure, as well as other pertinent information and impact criteria, are given in Figure 2.1-14. For the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) with coincident wave action, the air ducts, (both the concrete air intake and portable metal exhaust duct) are designed to withstand the dynamic effects of the postulated dynamic wave loading given in Section 2.3.8. This loading is identified under Section 2.3.8.3 entitled "Computation of Wave Forces on a Vertical Wall." Safety-related facilities at the intake structure such as the ventilation exhaust ducts will be protected against waterborne missiles in addition to the static and dynamic effects of wave action as further discussed in Section 2.3.8. Portions of structures which are tornado missile protected were not considered in this analysis since the tornado missile is more limiting. Larger waterborne missiles are not considered since it is expected that they will not be carried by wave action above El. 730 ft. The roof of the intake structure, two ft thick, is adequately reinforced to carry any surcharge added by the waves. The impact of ice on the intake structure does not present a hazard to the safe operation of the plant. The size of ice blocks that have historically been observed is discussed in Section 2.3.9. 2.1.7.2 Accidental Release of Corrosive Liquids or Oil The Department of Transportation computer printout of hazardous materials incidents in Pennsylvania, from January 1971 through August 1972, is included in the Attachment to Section 2.1. While no incidents are reported as happening at Shippingport, nor in the immediate area of Shippingport, some of the types of corrosive liquids that might be found in the river are: sulfuric acid, benzene, cleaning compound, xylene, hydrochloric acid, hydrogen peroxide, toluol, ammonium nitrate, and caustic soda. These corrosive liquids could come from a postulated barge, rail, or highway accident near the intake structure of the BVPS-1. The plant materials which would be exposed to transient concentrations of these liquids are: 90-10 copper nickel, stainless steel, carbon steel, bronze, and neoprene. For calculation purposes, it is assumed that a slug of spilled soluble chemicals is formed in the river and that this slug does not contain significant concentration gradients. Plant components are assumed to be subjected to a transient homogeneous slug of corrosive liquid diluted by the intake water flow for one unit in operation. It is postulated that, under worst conditions, the entire event will be limited to an exposure of plant components to any single corrosive which has a concentration equivalent to 50 gpm of the concentrated liquid mentioned above in 27,950 gpm of water. Furthermore, it is postulated that the maximum duration of exposure will be 200 minutes (3 hr 20 minutes). Under these postulated conditions, 10,000 gallons of the concentrated corrosive liquid will pass into the plant. The fluid temperature will vary between ambient and 130 F with an average temperature of 106 F. 2.1-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Under these conditions, the concentrations of the specific corrosive chemicals will be:
- 1. Hydrochloric Acid 0.088 weight percent chloride ion 748 ppm 0.024N
- 2. Sulfuric Acid 0.326 weight percent 0.066N
- 3. Sodium Hydroxide 0.066 weight percent 0.016M
- 4. Ammonium Nitrate 0.059 weight percent 0.00737M
- 5. Hydrogen Peroxide 0.059 weight percent 0.0173M Xylene is less dense than water and insoluble. It will not enter the intake structure which is located 5 ft below the normal pool elevation.
Benzene and toluol are also less dense than water, but it is assumed that the intake structure might capture either substance to the limit of their solubilities which are:
- 1. Benzene 0.082 weight percent
- 2. Toluol 0.047 weight percent Due to the low concentrations, temperature, and limited time of exposure, no measurable corrosion would be encountered by any of the components which would be exposed.
The accidental upstream release of oil does not present a hazard to the safe operation of the plant. Oil released from a postulated pipeline break, storage tank rupture, or barge spill will float on the surface of the water rather than enter the intake structure through the intakes which are 5 ft below the normal water surface. In addition, the river water pumps are submerged by 24 ft; the fire pumps are submerged by 21 ft; and the service water pumps are submerged by 23.5 ft. The depth of submergence alone makes it extremely improbable that oil would be drawn into the intake structure. In addition, the approach velocity is a maximum of about 0.2 fps as water passes under the curtain wall. The detection and isolation of the pipelines shown in Figure 2.1-12 is summarized in Table 2.1-15. Thermal Hydraulic Considerations of Oil Ingestion Oil ingestion is extremely unlikely from a subsurface oil line break. The closest subsurface oil line is the 10 inch Buckeye pipeline which has since been abandoned and replaced with a newly routed pipe line; however, the provided evaluation continues to bound all other subsurface oil lines near the site. This line is approximately 300 ft upstream of the intake structure. The oil pipeline will be isolated in one hour or less as described in Table 2.1-15. To evaluate the effects of pipeline failures, it was considered that 100 percent of the normal flow of the Buckeye pipeline, upstream 300 ft, is ingested for 1 hour. The theoretical considerations are those of possibly increased component cooling heat exchanger tubeside fouling and reduced tubeside film heat transfer coefficient, and possibly reduced pumping flowrate. The normal flowrate of the Buckeye pipeline is 1,150 bbl per hr. If 100 percent of the flow from this postulated pipeline break went directly into the intake structure with zero dispersion, it would comprise 2.94 percent of the normal flow. 2.1-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Fouling is a function of time, temperature, and velocity relationship. Since the water flow in the heat exchanger tubes has a sufficiently high design velocity and is being heated slightly while in the tubes, and since the incident under consideration is of such short duration, there will be no measurable change in the fouling resistance. The small percentage of oil in the water (1 to 3 percent) will have no measurable effect on the physical properties of the cooling water. There would be no measurable change in the tubeside film heat transfer coefficient, or the pumping capacity of the service water pumps. Material Consequences of Oil Ingestion Into River and Raw Water Systems The materials selected for the river and raw water systems are: AL-6XN, 304 stainless steel, carbon steel, 90-10 copper nickel, bronze, and neoprene. With respect to corrosion, the material shown in Table 2.1-16 utilize crude oil as the design fluid. The data presented in Table 2.1-16 represents corrosion rates experienced under conditions much more severe than is projected for the postulated accidents. Even under the more severe conditions, the reported corrosion rates demonstrate that plant safety would not be jeopardized since ingestion time is limited to one hour. 2.1.7.3 Explosion of Chemicals, Flammable Gases, or Munitions Explosions due to chemicals, flammable gases, or munitions may be assumed to occur in the normal river channel, along railroad rights-of-way, or along the State Highway. While the plant operating personnel have no control over the transportation of hazardous materials near the site, there are general rules and regulations governing the "Acceptance and Transportation of Hazardous Materials" and "Specifications for Shipping Containers", as discussed in the Attachment to Section 2.1. While these accidents could occur, the normal methods of handling and the normal distances from the plant mitigate the unlikely event of an explosion near the site. It is difficult to postulate an unlikely accident that generates a missile with greater kinetic energy than the design basis missile (a 35-foot utility pole traveling at 150 mph) near enough to any safety-related equipment to cause any significant damage as can be seen below: Safety-Related Structure Separation Control Room 2,065 ft to Penn Central Rail- road Right-of-Way, 710 ft to Intake Structure Intake Structure 800 ft to Ohio River channel, 1,355 ft to Penn Central Rail- road Right-of-Way, 1,170 ft to State Highway, Rt. 168 Auxiliary Building 1,250 ft to State Highway, Rt. 168. Explosives Used in Coal Mines The use of safety explosives(14) is almost universal in coal mining. High explosives are used only when great shattering effect is desired(14). To be ultraconservative, it is assumed that the postulated one ton of explosives are high explosives. Examples of high explosives are TNT and dynamite. From the text and graphs of Reference 15, it appears that peak dynamic pressure 2.1-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 will be much less than 0.1 psig. Therefore, no analysis of these negligible forces on plant structures is presented. Only very new, so-called "camper special" trucks in the 3/4 ton rating have a 9,000 lb gross vehicle weight (GVW) rating. Nearly all are 7,500 lb GVW. A recent 7,500 lb GVW rated 3/4 ton truck, stripped to as light a weight as possible (1 gallon of gas, no spare tire, and no bumpers) weighed 4,312 lb. In road trim, the truck weighed 4,570 lb. A 9,000 lb GVW rated truck will weigh more. However, the referenced 3/4 ton truck is hypothesized to carry 4,500 lb of high explosives such as TNT or dynamite. TNT and dynamite are too insensitive to be detonated by means of impact, friction, or the brief application of heat(16). Despite the existence of administrative procedures and regulations prohibiting simultaneous shipment in the same vehicle of initiators (e.g., blasting caps) and high explosives, the hypothesized accident involves the high order detonation of 4,500 lb of TNT on a plane, perfectly reflecting surface with a target 1,000 ft away. In accordance with Reference 20, a peak dynamic pressure of less than 0.1 psi, a peak overpressure of 1.0 psi under inversion conditions, and 0.4 psi under neutral conditions have been calculated. However, it is considered that the terrain effects are such that the peak overpressure will be, at most, 0.1 psi. Barge and Cargo Tank Combustion The attachment to Section 2.1 gives the capacity of the largest liquid cargo tank barge as 907,000 gallons with a width of 50 ft and a length of 290 ft. Barges of this size have their holds divided into 12 to 24 compartments to reduce sloshing and cargo shifting (17). For purposes of this evaluation, the number of subcompartments will be taken to be 12 instead of 24 so as to yield a final answer which will indicate a higher damage than will actually be the case. Thus, the volume containing a gas and air mixture used as basis for calculation for this evaluation will be taken as: (2.1-1) 3 (907,000 gal) ( 7.481gallon ft 1 barge
) (12 subcompart ments
) 10 ft 4 3 U.S. motor gasolines have average values of Reid vapor pressure ranging from 8.9 to 11.9 psi(16), which results in their Coast Guard classification as Grade B(18). Cargo tank barges, in which Grades A, B, and C liquids are to be transported, are required by the Coast Guard to be fitted with either an approved system of pressure vacuum relief valves, an approved venting system, or an approved inert gas system "for maintaining all cargo tank vapor spaces nonflammable"(18). Documented unequivocal assurance that all empty gasoline barges on the Ohio River will be inerted has not yet been obtained from the Coast Guard; however, it does appear that as the older tank barges are taken out of service and replaced by newer barges that the probability of finding a noninerted empty gasoline barge decreased from already low values.
However, it is assumed that the hypothetical empty gasoline barge is not filled with inert gas. Tank vessels construction prior to July 1, 1951, vented at 4 psig or less, are to be constructed and tested as per Reference 18. Cargo tanks vented at over 4 psig are considered to be "pressure vessels" and are subject to extremely rigid requirements. Tank vessels constructed on, or after July 1, 1951, may be vented at over 4 psig but less than 10 psig only under "special consideration by the Commandant"(18). Over 10 psig vented cargo tanks in post July 1, 1951, cargo tanks are "pressure vessels" and subject to the special restrictions noted in Reference 18, Part 32. Considering the age of most of the cargo barges, 4 psig venting is a reasonable value. To be conservative, venting at 10 Psig was assumed. 2.1-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Composition of the Gas in the Cargo Tank The vapor-liquid ratio of gasoline extrapolates to zero at approximately 130 F(16). As shown in Table 2.2-2, the maximum temperature at Pittsburgh Airport was 103 F in July 1936. Hence, there should be zero volatilization of the gasoline in a barge on the Ohio River. However, the C4-, C5-, and C6-compounds, dissolved in the gasoline to some degree, will come out of solution and form vapors. This mix of hydrocarbon gases and air may be closely approximated in combustion properties by assuming a butane/air mix, since the addition of small amounts of "promoters" (e.g., diethylperoxide, ethyl nitrate, nitrogen peroxide, nitromethane, ether, acetaldehyde, methyl iodide, and ethyl borate), has negligible effect on the physical properties of the mix(19). Tetraethyl lead narrows the range of flammability (19). Burning Rate The maximum intensity of combustion for any gas occurs for a mixture having a composition lying between the theoretical mixture and the mixture having the maximum flame velocity (20). The theoretical mixture is calculated to be 6.15 percent (20). The mixture for maximum flame velocity appears to be near, but lower than the theoretical mixture(20). For light hydrocarbons, the mixture for maximum flame velocity is very near the arithmetic mean of the two limits for downward propagation. These limits are 1.92 vol percent and 5.50 vol percent (21), and their arithmetic mean is 3.71 vol percent. Thus the mixture for maximum velocity will have a gas concentration ranging from 3.7 percent to about 4 percent, and the mixture for maximum intensity ranging from a lower value of 3.7 to 4 percent to an upper value of 6 percent. The mixture is assumed to be five percent. Reference 20 provides basis for estimating the flame velocity for this mixture to be 1 to 1-1/2 fps at atmospheric pressure, while the preferred Reference(22) gives a maximum flame velocity for a butane/air mixture as 1 fps. Thus it appears reasonable to assume a burning rate of 1 to 1-1/2 fps. The burning rate of the hypothetical barge gas tank mixture will not increase beyond the 1 to 1-1/2 fps rate assumed. The lower flammability limits for downward flame propagation for pentane, butane, propane, and ethane show negligible variation as the pressure rises from 750 mm Hg to 4,500 mm Hg(21). The lower flammability limit for butane for horizontal propagation, which should show more variation than for downward propagation, does not vary even when the pressure is increased to 10 atm(21). Since these lower limits of flammability show no variation over a 10 atm pressure range, no change in burning rate should be observed for the 0.3 to 0.7 atm maximum pressure increase possible in the barge tank. Energy Released It has been determined in the previous section that the gas concentration for maximum intensity is about 5 vol percent. The 104 cu ft cargo tank thus would contain the equivalent of 500 cu ft of butane. Assuming stoichiometric composition of 500 cu ft of butane, and 3,200 Btu per cu ft of butane gives an energy release of 1.6 x 106 Btu(22). Pressure vs energy release parameters are readily obtained by means of the graphs in Reference 15 and by proper usage of Reference
- 23. The energy release from the explosion of one kiloton of TNT is accepted as 3.97 x 10 9 Btu(15). On an energy release basis the 1.6 x 106 Btu corresponds to 1.6 x 106/3.97 x 109 =
0.0004 kiloton of TNT, which is 800 lb of TNT. 2.1-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Geometry of the Situation The largest barge are 290 ft long (Attachment to Section 2.1). Tank barges carrying Grades A, B, C, and D liquids must have their cargo tanks segregated and separated from other parts of the barge according to Coast Guard regulations covered in part in Reference 18. U.S. Coast Guard Drawing No. 1, Page 134, in Reference 18, indicates considerable separation between either bow or stern of the barge and any cargo space for Grades A, B, C, or D liquids. There may not be such considerable separation between the cargo tanks and the sides of the barge, although there may be considerable structural protection. Inspection of the various drawings illustrating Coast Guard requirements reveals that the cargo tanks (for Grades A, B, C, and D liquids) are low in the ship, the geometric centers of the tanks being below the waterline. Hull requirements are given throughout Reference 18. Thus, any energy release in a cargo tank reaching the intake structure will be attenuated by the intervening water, as well as the barge structures, hull, subcompartments, bulkheads, etc. However, the energy release is assumed to occur at distances of 150 ft (corresponding to a center tank ignition with bow against the intake structure), 100 ft (forward tank with bow against the structure), and 50 ft (outside tank with side of barge against the structure). Pressures Developed Assuming the distances given in the last paragraph, together with the assumption of zero attenuation by steel, concrete, and water, with the explosive and target on an ideal plane surface, the formula on page 134 of Reference 15 can be used as follows: d = d1 x W1/3; (2.1-2) where: d = 150 ft W = 0.4 x 10-3 150 ft then: d1 = 2,040 ft 0.39 mi (0.4 x 103)1/3 From Reference 23, the maximum dynamic pressure would be 0.16 psig. Similarly, for the 100 ft distance, a maximum pressure of 0.65 psig is obtained. For 50 ft a maximum pressure of 9 psig is obtained. However, these pressures were obtained on the assumption of the 1.6 x 10 6 Btu energy released in the combustion of one cargo tank volume to be equivalent to the energy released in 0.0004 kilotons of TNT, an assumption which is correct on the ratio of energy released, but not on the basis of energy release rate. As previously discussed, the burning rate of the cargo tank gas and air mixture is assumed to be approximately 1 to 1-1/2 fps. TNT has a burning rate of 3,280 fps to 27,900 fps. Since the pressure developed is a function of the energy release rate, as well as total energy release, the pressures approximated by considering energy release only need to be refined by consideration of the energy release rate. Since the burning rate of the gas and air mix several orders of magnitude less than that of the TNT, the pressures of 0.16 psig, 0.65 psig, and 9 psig need to be reduced by several orders of magnitude. The resulting pressures would be further attenuated by interaction with the river surface, structural steel of the barge, etc. 2.1-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Due to the geometry of the real situation, there should be a negligible increase in pressure from reflection. The overpressures corresponding to the previously given dynamic pressures are 2.6 psi, 5.4 psi, and 22 psi, according to Reference 18; however, these pressures should also be reduced by several orders of magnitude. It is concluded that ignition of an empty gasoline compartment on a liquid cargo tank barge cannot develop pressures on the intake structure on the order of magnitude required for damage. In addition, the Corps of Engineers has advised that loose barges will naturally be carried by the river on the opposite side from the intake structure. Of the two incidents involving gasoline barges reported by the Coast Guard in their letter appearing in the Attachment to Section 2.1, no damage or spillage resulted. 2.1.7.4 Hazard From Natural Gas Pipeline The gas line nearest the Primary Auxiliary Building is at a minimum horizontal distance of about 1,000 ft. This line is a 12 inch diameter, 300 psig natural gas line owned at the time of BVPS-1 license by the Peoples Natural Gas Company of Midland, Pennsylvania. The Chief Maintenance Engineer of the Peoples Natural Gas Company advised that it would be overconservative to assume a design basis release to be that quantity of natural gas contained in a 7,200 ft length of pipe. The exact quantity of gas released is a relatively unimportant parameter since the specific gravity of natural gas ranges from 0.57 to 0.71(22). Natural gas will, therefore, disperse upward very rapidly due to the 300 psi differential pressure and the specific gravity of the one atmosphere gas, thereby posing no threat to the BVPS-1. In the unlikely event that a jet of escaping gas should form, ignition of the gas poses a considerable problem. The ignition temperature is 1,200 F to 1,300 F(22). Ignition of the gas will require a heat source having both a temperature sufficiently high to heat the gas to or above the ignition temperature and a heat capacity adequate to maintain the ignition temperature despite the cooling of the heat source by the high velocity jet of natural gas. In the exceedingly unlikely combination of events involving the break itself and the creation of an ignition source capable of igniting the gas-air mixture despite the upward jetting of the gas, the next problem is that of obtaining a gas-air mixture capable of propagating a flame, i.e., a flammable mixture. The Peoples Natural Gas Company advises that the line carries "natural gas". Natural gas varies considerably in composition. Reference 22 gives the composition of the one natural gas as 96 percent CH4, 0.8 percent CO2, and 3.2 percent N2, with a specific gravity of 0.57 and a Btu per cu ft, at 60 F, of 967; another natural gas is given as 80.5 percent CH4, 18.2 percent C2H6, 1.3 percent N2, specific gravity of 0.65, and a Btu per cu ft of 1,131; a third natural gas has a composition of 67.6 percent CH4, 31.3 percent C2H6, 1.1 percent N2, specific gravity of 0.71, and a Btu per cu ft of 1,232. With such variations in composition, one logically expects variations in combustion properties. Table 45 of Reference 21 gives a lower limit of flammability for upward flame propagation for Pittsburgh natural gas of 4.8 volume percent and an upper limit of 13.5 percent. Other natural gases have a lower limit of 3.8 to 6.5 volume percent and an upper limit range of 13 to 17 volume percent. The general observation here is that there is but a 10 percent composition range of flammable mixtures of natural gas and air as contrasted to a more familiar range of 70 percent for hydrogen and air. 2.1-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 For methane, the range for horizontal propagation of flame is 4.5 percent to 14 percent (21). For downward propagation, the range is about 6 percent to 13 percent (21). For ethane, the range for horizontal propagation is 3.2 percent to 13 percent (21). (The same number as reported for horizontal propagation appears to be due to the experimental conditions using narrow tubes.) Thus, the basic components of natural gases, methane and ethane, show decreasing ranges of flammable mixtures as the direction of propagation goes from upward to horizontal, and the range decreases further as the propagation goes to downward. There is only a narrow band of natural gas-air mixtures which are flammable and this band reduces as the flame propagation direction ranges from upward through horizontal to downward. In addition, flammable mixtures of methane are very sensitive to extinction by shock or mild turbulence(21), probably due in no small measure to a very low velocity of propagation of flame front(22). (A stoichiometric mixture has an ignition velocity of less than 2-1/2 fps (22).) This low flame velocity is a contributing factor to difficulties encountered in experimentally achieving the flammability limits for downward flame propagation in other than small closed tubes for methane/ethane mixtures. The physical model of the pipe rupture is considered to be that of a gas leak jetting out of the ground with an initial pressure differential of 300 psi. The gas at one atmosphere pressure has a specific gravity of about 0.6, and forms a gas-air mixture having a concentration gradient ranging from 100 percent gas to 100 percent air in which only the mixture having the range of about 3 to 13 volume percent gas will propagate a flame having a propagation velocity less than that of a vertical rising gas. The resulting picture is that of a rather large Bunsen burner with a flame from only the outer portion of the gas-air mix some distance from the ground. This flame will be easily extinguished by shock or mild turbulence since it could hardly be compared to a properly designed, engineered, and operated proportional gas-air mixer with a fuel air mix in a narrow range to permit flame propagation. This theoretically derived picture is in accordance with the advice of the Maintenance Department, Peoples Natural Gas Company, who anticipate the consequences of a postulated ignition of a postulated pipe break to be a brief torching some distance above the ground, but with no effect at ground level (24). Consideration of Natural Gas Being Ingested Into the BVPS-1 Complex from Peoples Natural Gas Company Pipeline Rupture In order to evaluate this postulated natural gas accident, it is assumed that the 300 psig gas line ruptures and the escaping natural gas has a zero velocity component in the upward direction, is at the same temperature and pressure as the ambient air, and is subject to an upward buoyant force due to the density difference in accordance with the Archimedes Principle. This buoyancy results in an acceleration assumed constant for the short vertical distance under consideration. An element of gas is assumed to be moving at a constant horizontal velocity from the nearest point on the gas line in the direction of the diesel generator building at a value corresponding to the highest wind speed ever recorded for that direction in the site area, and subject to constant vertical acceleration. In this model, all dilution and dispersion by the wind is ignored. Natural gas has a specific gravity ranging from 0.57 to 0.76. A value of 0.64 is assumed for this postulated accident. The density of dry air at 32 F and 760 mm Hg is 0.0807 lb/ft 3. Thus, the vertical acceleration is 0.56 ft/sec2. The maximum wind from due east, the direction from the 2.1-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 gas line to the diesel-generator building is 17 mph according to the onsite meteorological program. (The maximum winds onsite are from the NW quadrant. The Pittsburgh Airport, far more exposed than the Beaver Valley Site, has its highest winds from due west.) The horizontal distance from the gas line to the auxiliary building air intake is about 1040 ft. The auxiliary building is about 45 ft in elevation above the pipeline. At 17 mph, the gas will cover the required 1040 ft in 41.7 seconds. During this time, the vertical distance traveled is 487 ft. This is calculated by the use of the formula: 1 2 S at (2.1-3) 2 where: S = distance a = acceleration t = time Since the vertical distance traveled by the gas is greater than the difference in elevation of the pipeline and control room, by a factor of 10.8, it is concluded that natural gas cannot be ingested and is, therefore, not a problem. 2.1.7.5 Various Site Hazards Consideration of Highway Explosive Cargoes According to Reference 27, Type A explosives (i.e., TNT or dynamite) may be shipped in carload or truckload lots only in individual gross weight packages not exceeding 125 lb. The description of the required packaging is such that the estimated packaging weight is at least 50 lb. For purposes of conservatism, a packaging weight of only 25 lb will be assumed, leaving 100 lb for the Type A explosive. The Commonwealth of Pennsylvania restricts the gross weight of trucks, and the Department of Transportation advises that a payload of 36,000 lb is an upper limit reduced grossly for Type A explosives. However, a full 36,000 lb cargo has been assumed, resulting in 28,800 lb of TNT. A distance of 1,250 ft lies between the Primary Auxiliary Building and Rt. 168. Other vital structures are at a greater distance. The high-order detonation of 14.4 tons of TNT should give a maximum dynamic pressure of 0.011 psi(15). The maximum theoretically possible overpressure would be 0.67 psi according to Reference 23. Therefore, the high-order detonation of the Type A explosives in a quantity equal to the maximum cargo of a truck in Pennsylvania from the nearest point on the secondary transportation route will not create a maximum dynamic pressure or a maximum overpressure which would adversely affect any vital structure. Smokeless powder used for propellant in small arms ammunition has a lower burning rate (the effective burning rate in a cartridge and the pressure developed are interrelated, depending on case free volume, bullet mass, power charge, etc.). However, Reference 16 gives a burning rate of 7 to 12 inches per second for smokeless powder and 4 inches per second for black powder, (both at 25,000 psi) since it is used for propellant, rather than the detonating explosives of Type A. The lower burning rate results in lower pressures, assuming a highway accident could cause smokeless powder combustion to proceed at explosive burning rates. The weight of projectile and case will reduce the percentage of total weight represented by smokeless powder. For the limiting case of entirely high-explosive warheads, the case previously 2.1-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 discussed gave 0.011 psi. The Department of Transportation classifies "munitions" as Type C cargo, of less hazard than the Type A such as TNT. Other truck cargoes will have lower energy releases, and longer energy release times, than the postulated incident involving the high-order detonation of a full truckload of TNT. Consideration of Barge Explosive Cargoes There are no primary manufacturers or primary consumers of high explosives in the site area. There are no known consumers of high explosives that could use the economic scale of shipping by barge. Barge transportation is not geared to handle high explosives. Barges are designed to carry large quantities of bulk cargoes. The Ohio River Commodity Charts do not show high explosives as being transported by barge, and it should be noted that Lockmasters on the Ohio River keep accurate records of all cargo passing through their locks. Records do not indicate barge shipments of explosives, ordinance, liquefied petroleum gas, or liquefied natural gas on the Ohio River. Two of the largest producers of liquefied gas advise that they do not ship liquefied gas via river traffic. The intake structure is designed to withstand tornado loading. The equivalent pressure for the tornado model of 360 mph is 330 psf. The intake structure is capable of withstanding equivalent pressure of 2.3 psi. A maximum overpressure of 2.3 psi will occur from the detonation of 1 kiloton of high explosives at 0.43 miles(25). The distance from the intake structure to the center of the river channel is 800 ft, or 0.152 miles. At this distance, 0.71 kiloton (25) or 1,420,000 lb of TNT would have to detonate in order to create 2.3 psi overpressure. Consideration of Railway Explosive Cargoes The Stone & Webster Traffic Department has extensively reviewed Reference 27. The maximum weight of explosives transported by rail could be 80,000 lb gross, unless state or local regulations require a lower limit. There are no primary manufacturers or primary consumers of high explosives near the site. Even though it would be technically inadvisable and economically unjustifiable to ship such large quantities in one shipment, the hypothetical rail shipment of high explosives is assumed to be 80,000 lb gross. Although the packaging weight of a 125 lb gross weight box probably exceeds 50 lb, a 25 lb packaging weight has been assumed, as was done for the truck shipment case. Thus, the 80,000 lb gross weight becomes 64,000 lb net. The railway of concern across the Ohio River is approximately 1355 ft from the intake structure. From References 15 and 23, the calculated hypothetical detonation of 32 tons of high explosives at a distance of 1355 ft gives a maximum dynamic pressure of 0.018 psi and a maximum overpressure of 0.86 psi. Other potentially hazardous cargoes (carried at the maximum permissible cargo weight) undergoing a hypothetical accident release less energy at lower rates than the postulated detonation of the 32 tons of high explosive. For example, consider a railroad tank car containing LNG at the maximum quantity of 30,000 gallons. The Bureau of Mines' report (References 25 and 26) on fire and explosion hazards associated with LNG, offer background material on the subject. Assume the cryogenic liquid to instantaneously flash to 60 F gas and then form a homogenous stoichiometric mixture with atmospheric air. This mixture is then uniformly and perfectly ignited. If the resulting combustion occurred perfectly, the energy release would be 2.21 x 109 Btu from a burning rate of 40 cm/second(25). The 2.21 x 109 Btu 2.1-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 corresponds to the energy release from 0.554 kiloton of high explosive(15) which has a burning rate of 1000 to 8500 meters/sec(16) some 105 times faster. Thus the 4 psi maximum overpressure and 0.35 maximum dynamic pressure resulting from detonation of 0.554 kiloton of high explosive at a distance of 1355 ft(15) need to be reduced by a factor of some 105 to correct for the lower burning rate. As has been previously indicated, the worst postulated explosion hazard from railroad cargo is the detonation of 80,000 lb gross TNT cargo. This hazard produced acceptable overpressures and dynamic pressures at the intake structure. Missiles None of the postulated accidents are capable of generating a missile with greater target-impacting kinetic energy and momentum than the design basis missile, a 35 ft utility pole impacting at 150 mph. 2.1.7.6 Fire in Oil and Gasoline Plants or Storage Facilities, Adjacent Industries, Brush and Forest Fires, and Transportation Accidents If rupture of an oil line or tank is postulated, the seepage through soil might migrate to the river, but would remain on the river surface rather than enter the intake structure through the intakes which are 5 feet below the water surface. The intake structure is heavy reinforced concrete extending approximately 67 ft above water level. The structure provides adequate fire protection to equipment from an oil or gas line fire on the surface of the ground or on the river water outside. Electrical supply to the intake structure is buried for tornado protection and enters the structure below grade and hence, would be unaffected by fire. Because the intake structure is in essence a concrete box with no openings at grade, below grade, or at the river surface, except the subsurface intake, and with all piping sealed to the structure, seepage of oil or other products into the structure is improbable. In any case, the motors and controls are located in the upper portion of the structure above a concrete floor, and hence, protected from fire in the pump compartment below. The tornado protected ventilation system would prevent formation of an explosive mixture. The plant is physically separated from adjacent land fire hazards to the east by Pegg's Run and State Highway Rt. 168, and to the south and west by the access road and switchyard. Fire from transportation accidents is not expected to have an effect on any safety-related structures because of the physical separation of the railroads and highways mentioned above. 2.1.7.7 Accidental Release of Toxic Gas from Onsite Storage Facilities, Nearby Industries, and Transportation Accidents The only major source of relatively large quantities of toxic gases is a transportation accident. It should be noted that in the calendar year 1971, there were no poison gas or liquid, Class A hazardous material reports in Pennsylvania (See the Attachment to Section 2.1). In the event of a large accidental release of toxic gas, self-contained respiratory equipment will be used, and personnel not necessary for the safe operation of the plant will be evacuated. 2.1-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.1.7.8 Airborne Pollutant Effects on Important Plant Components The available data indicates that low emissions of sulfur, nitrogen oxides, and particulates occur near the site. Ambient concentrations of these pollutants will be relatively low, thus precluding any significant degree of reaction resulting from cooling tower plumes in the atmosphere. Problems such as acid rainout and increased ground level concentrations of pollutant due to cooling tower and stack plumes mixing should not occur in this area. The expected levels will have negligible effects on important plant components. 2.1.7.9 Potential Cooling Tower Collapse The mode of failure of the cooling tower is expected to be inward during a postulated collapse. It is expected that no missiles with greater kinetic energy than the design basis missile could reach safety-related structures or equipment. The only known collapse due to wind loading has been inward. Missiles generated by a tornado are expected only to penetrate the cooling tower locally without causing failure. The design basis missiles impacting on the cooling tower could not generate a missile with greater kinetic energy. 2.1.7.10 Bruce Mansfield Power Station - Slurry Discharge Pipeline The Slurry Discharge Pipeline (see Figure 2.3-25) is intended to transport sludge, in the form of a water slurry, from the Sulphur Dioxide Scrubbers at Bruce Mansfield Power Station to the Little Blue Run Disposal Area. The Disposal Area is located approximately five miles down river from the BVPS-1. The system characteristics of the pipeline are:
- 1. PIPELINE ROUTING: The pipeline will circumnavigate BVPS-1. The routing was purposely chosen to preclude any possible damage to safety-related structures or equipment in the event of a leak. The closest point of approach to any safety-related structure is approximately 1200 ft. The entire length of pipeline will be laid below grade, and a minimum earth cover of 30 inches will be provided.
- 2. PUMPING STATION: The pumping station is located at Bruce Mansfield Power Station. The pumping station is continuously manned and is equipped with audible and visual indicators as well as recording equipment to provide continuous control of pumping operations. The operator has visual indication of system valve position, which lines are in use and which pumps are running, as well as pump discharge pressure and temperature. Magnetic flow meters compare total flow at the discharge of the pumping station to the flow at the discharge to the impoundment area and provide visual and audible alarms at the pumping station should a significant mismatch occur. This allows the operator to identify a ruptured pipeline and switch flow to the standby pipeline. The entire pipeline is visually inspected by daily roving patrols. The roving patrol is radio equipped to ensure rapid transfer of information should damage or leakage be discovered.
- 3. PIPELINE: The pipeline will consist of four pipes, two 12 inch and two 8 inch and four pumps. Each pump has a discharge relief valve, and discharges to a valved manifold which allows various pump combinations to be utilized. The pipeline is 2.1-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 constructed of ASTM-A106-B steel pipe and has a design pressure of 1310 psig. System pressure will vary between 600 psi and 1100 psi for flow rates of 400 to 3600 gpm. Wear is estimated to be 0.008 inch per year. The expected life of the pipe sections is 30-35 years. Manual isolation valves are installed in each of the four pipelines on the east and west sides of the site property as well as between BVPS-1 and the discharge impoundment.
- 4. SLURRY: The slurry is non-toxic, non-flammable and essentially non-corrosive.
Its composition will vary somewhat, depending on power plant operation. Normally, the slurry will be 32.3 percent solids by weight and the composition of the solids will be approximately:
- a. fly ash, 30 percent
- b. inerts, 3 percent
- c. limp grits, 1.2 percent
- d. CALCILOX, 9.7 percent
- e. calcium carbonate, 0.6 percent
- f. calcium sulphate, 20.6 percent
- g. calcium sulphite, 32.6 percent
- h. unreacted lime, 0.6 percent
- i. magnesium hydroxide, 1.3 percent
- j. calcium hydroxide, 0.8 percent The sludge is treated with 1.0 percent lime to increase the pH to 11.0. CALCILOX is added as a solidification aid.
In summary, this pipeline is not considered to be a safety hazard to the plant due to:
- 1. The routing of the pipeline which was purposely laid out to circumvent the plant structures
- 2. The leakage detection measures employed in the design
- 3. Installed capability to isolate any leaking or ruptured slurry line.
2.1.7.11 Potential Peak Pressures on Critical Components As discussed above, it is not considered probable that any missiles generated by site hazards would be more severe than the tornado generated missiles for which these safety-related structures are designed. All critical plant components are located within structures which are tornado protected. As discussed in Section 2.7.2, these safety-related buildings are designed as a minimum to withstand tornado wind pressures of 330 psf, which is equivalent to a pressure of 2.3 psi. The site hazards discussed in Section 2.1.7 includes a gasoline barge explosion at 2.1-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 the intake structure, a rail car explosion across the Ohio River, and a truck explosion on State Highway Rt. 168. The gasoline barge explosion pressures for this analysis are based on one of the 12 barge compartments detonating with the equivalent energy release and resultant pressures of the detonation of 0.004 kilotons of TNT (Refer to Section 2.1.7.3 for energy release equivalency). The peak "side-on" overpressures and dynamic pressures resulting from these postulated site explosions are well below the 2.3 psi for which the safety-related structures are know to be adequate, as summarized in Table 2.1-17. 2.1-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References to Section 2.1
- 1. "Description of the Shippingport Atomic Power Station Site and Surrounding Area",
WAPD-SC-547, Westinghouse Electric Corporation Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory (June, 1957).
- 2. "1970 Census of Population, Pennsylvania", U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Advance Report PC(VI)-40 (January, 1971).
- 3. "1970 Census of Population, Ohio" U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Advance Report PC(VI)-37 (January, 1971).
- 4. "1970 Census of Population, West Virginia", U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Census, Advance Report PC(VI)-50 (December, 1970).
- 5. "Provisional Employment and Population Forecasts", Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission (revised June, 1968).
- 6. "Preliminary Projection of Employment and Population", State Planning Board, Governor's Office, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania (January, 1971).
- 7. "Ohio Population", Ohio Department of Development, Economic Research Division (1968).
- 8. "Guidelines for Regional Growth, Brooke-Hancock Counties, W. Va. and Jefferson County, Ohio", prepared by the West Virginia Department of Commerce and the Jefferson County, Ohio Regional Planning Commission (December, 1969).
- 9. Bureau of State Parks, Department of Forest and Water, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.
- 10. Unpublished Data Upper Ohio Basin Office, Water Quality Office, Environmental Protection Agency.
- 11. "Pre-operational Radiation Survey of the Shippingport Atomic Power Station Site and Surrounding Area", WAPD-CTA(IH)-208, Westinghouse Electric Corporation Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory (January, 1958).
- 12. Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce, 1970 Census of Population:
Number of Inhabitants, Reports PC(1) - A40, Pennsylvania (August, 1971), PC(1) - A37, Ohio (August, 1971), and PC(1) - A50, West Virginia (May, 1971).
- 13. "Planning and Design of Navigation Locks, Walls, and Appurtenances," EM1110-2-2602, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
- 14. Van Nostrand's Scientific Encyclopedia, D. Van Nostrand Co., fourth edition, p. 657, (1968).
- 15. The Effects of Nuclear Weapons, by U.S. Department of Defense and U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Revised Edition, (February, 1964).
- 16. Kirk and Othmer, Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Interscience Publishers, New York, second edition, Vol. 8 and Vol. 10, p. 583.
2.1-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References to Section 2.1 (CONTD)
- 17. Telephone communication, J. Weaver of Gateway Marine Survey, Carnegie, Pennsylvania, to J. McCaleb, Stone & Webster, (May 24, 1973).
- 18. "Rules and Regulations for Tank Vessels," CG-123, U.S. Coast Guard, taken from Subchapter D, of Chapter I, Title 46 CFR, (May, 1969).
- 19. A. Egerton and J. Powling, "The Limits of Flame Propagation at Atmospheric Pressure,"
The Influence of "Promoters", Proceedings of the Royal Society, Vol 193A (1948).
- 20. J. H. Perry, "Chemical Engineers' Handbook," McGraw-Hill Book Co., third edition (1950).
- 21. H. F. Coward, and G. W. Jones, "Limits of Flammability of Gases and Vapors," Bulletin 503, U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines (1952).
- 22. "Hauck Industrial Combustion Data," Hauck Manufacturing Co., Brooklyn, New York, third edition (1953).
- 23. Nuclear Bomb Effects Computer, revised 1962, designed by the Lovelace Foundation for Civil Effects Test Operations, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Division of Biology and Medicine, Contract AT(29-1) 242.
- 24. Senior technical personnel from both Air Products and Chemicals, Inc., Allentown, Pa.,
and Airco/BOC, Murray Hill, N.J., essentially suggest that there should be no significant force at ground level resulting from the postulated ignition of the postulated break of the pipeline.
- 25. D. Burges and M. Zabetakis, "Fire and Explosion Hazards Associated with Liquefied Natural Gas," Report of Investigations 6099, U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Mines (1961).
- 26. "Hazards of LNG Spillage in Marine Transportation, Prepared by U.S. Department of Interior Bureau of Mines, for U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. Coast Guard SRC Report No. S-4105 (February, 1970).
- 27. "Hazardous Materials Regulations" Section 173.63, Subparagraph 3, U.S. Department of Transportation, Tariff 25, (April 24, 1972).
2.1-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Attachment to Section 2.1 REPORT HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION A2.1 GENERAL Hazardous materials, transported in interstate commerce, are subject to regulation by the Department of Transportation under various statutes including: Title 18, Chapter 39, U.S.C. entitled "Explosives and Combustibles," Title 18, Chapter 49, U.S.C. entitled "Department of Transportation Act of 1970," and those laws governing the Federal Aviation Authority, Coast Guard, and miscellaneous carriers. The individual states have adopted the federal statutory regulations for application to intrastate and private transportation within their jurisdiction. The general rules and regulations governing the "Acceptance and Transportation of Hazardous Materials" and "Specifications for Shipping Containers" are published in R. M. Graziano's Tariff No. 25, I.C.C. No. 25, effective April 24, 1972, entitled "Hazardous Materials Regulations of the Department of Transportation." The publishing officer is R. M. Graziano, 1920 "L" Street N.W., Washington D.C. 20036. These rules and regulations apply to all modes of transportation and to all common carriers, contract carriers, and private carriers by rail, motor, air, and water. Additional rules and regulations may be imposed by state and local statutes or by the carriers themselves. The Department of Transportation's (D.O.T.'s) Second Annual Report on Hazardous Materials, (page 21) 1971, states:
"The incident reports received are believed to be only a portion of those that should be reported. However, since a census of carriers who transport hazardous materials is not known, nor the total quantity of hazardous materials being transported available, the degree of compliance cannot be truly determined at this time."
Despite the broad application of the laws and promulgated rules and regulations, there exists a segment of non-regulated shippers and carriers that transport hazardous materials, via motor and water modes of transportation without the approval or knowledge of the reporting agencies. This segment of the industry has not been included in the study since their estimated incident ratio is quite low or nonexistent. A2.2 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMODITY LISTS The items classified as "hazardous materials" are listed in Section 172.5 of Graziano's Tariff and cover all types of explosives, poisons, flammables, oxidizers, corrosives, gases, radioactive materials, etiologic agents, or similar commodities. The tariff is designed to accommodate all possible types of dangerous cargo that may be specified by the Department of Transportation's Hazardous Materials Board. 2.1-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The D.O.T.'s 1971 Annual Report (page 10) states:
"The incident reports involved approximately 250 different commodities with the most frequent ones, in descending order, being: paint and paint related compounds; gasoline; electrolyte, (acid) battery fluid (including sulfuric acid and wet electric storage batteries);
and various liquid cleaning compounds (corrosive and/or flammable). These are merely reported figures, and do not take into consideration the relative amounts of these commodities being shipped." A2.3 VOLUME OF TRAFFIC AND ACCIDENT REPORTS The Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Highway Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, and the United States Coast Guard maintain statistical data on reported incidents of "unintentional release of hazardous materials during the course of transportation." The actual volume of this traffic is impossible to establish since commodity reporting is not required or monitored by a central reporting agency. The Army Corps of Engineers maintains the most detailed data on commodities and transportation equipment passing through its projects and navigation districts. This type of information would be economically unobtainable for the vast network of highways, railroads, and air corridors serving the United States and North America. The D.O.T. has not attempted to establish the volume of hazardous traffic that is handled for each calendar year, but hopes to develop some forecasting ability within the near future. The Corps of Engineers lists the following commodities as "hazardous materials" and are part of the 41 commodity groups included in their reports:
- 1. Crude Petroleum
- 2. Ordinance and Accessories
- 3. Chemicals and Allied Products
- 4. Petroleum and Coal Products.
The primary commodity group is further segregated into the individual items composing the group, and each item is assigned a control number. The Corps of Engineers publish summary information; however, detailed reports may be obtained on a "Government Priority Basis" from the District Engineer, U.S. Army District, New Orleans, P.O. Box 60267, New Orleans, LA 70160. (See also, Part II, Waterborned Commerce of the United States, Calendar Year 1971, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.) 2.1-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 A2.4 LEVEL OF ACCIDENTS FOR 1971 The D.O.T. states that during the calendar year 1971, 328 carriers submitted a total of 2,255 hazardous materials incidents as follows: MODE NUMBER OF REPORTS 3 Air Carriers .................................................................. 5 233 For-Hire Highway Carriers ......................................... 1,633 54 Private Highway Carriers ............................................ 258 28 Rail ............................................................................. 346 10 Water.......................................................................... 13 The following table shows the "classification" breakdown of those reports: CLASSIFICATION NUMBER OF REPORTS Class A explosives ........................................................... 17 Class B explosives ........................................................... 8 Class C explosives ........................................................... 8 Corrosive liquid................................................................. 634 Flammable compressed gas............................................. 76 Flammable liquid .............................................................. 1,090 Flammable solid ............................................................... 21 Nonflammable compressed gas ....................................... 56 Oxidizing material ............................................................. 88 Poisonous gas or liquid, Class A ...................................... 0 Poisonous liquid or solid, Class B ..................................... 203 Radioactive materials ....................................................... 9 Tear gas, Class C ............................................................. 1 None shown (unknown or non-hazardous) ....................... 44 These figures are believed to be only a fraction of the actual number of incidents and carriers involved in this type of accident. Additional water carrier data is available from the Coast Guard covering several specific areas of responsibility (i.e., coastwise, intercoastal, lakes, etc.), however, the reporting criteria are quite different from the D.O.T's. A2.5 BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION The Beaver Valley Power Station is exposed to water, highway, and limited rail transportation services. The site is located on the Ohio River at milepost 34.81, left bank descending from Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania in the Montgomery Pool. Highway Route 168 bounds the site on the eastern and southern property line. The Penn Central's Pittsburgh - Columbus, Ohio right-of-way is located north of the site on the right bank of the Ohio River. The site is served on a private side track by the Pittsburgh & Lake Erie Railroad. 2.1-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Water Transportation The Corps of Engineers reports that tonnage through the Montgomery Pool approximated 18 million tons of cargo for the year 1970. This tonnage included 3 million tons of oil and gas products, 2 million tons of chemicals, and 1 million tons of unclassified commodities. Barge and towboat equipment are used to handle this type of cargo on the Ohio River or its tributaries. The barges are customarily open hopper barges, covered dry cargo barges, or liquid cargo (tank) barges. The capacities of each class of equipment approximate the following "standard" parameters: BARGE LENGTH, WIDTH, DRAFT, CAPACITY CLASS (ft) (ft) (ft) (tons) (gallons) Open Hopper 175 26 9 1000 n.a. 196 35 9 1500 n.a. 290 50 9 3000 n.a. Covered Hopper 175 26 9 1000 n.a. 190 35 9 1500 n.a. 290 50 9 3000 n.a. Liquid cargo 175 26 9 1000 302,000 (tank) barge 190 35 9 1500 454,000 290 50 9 3000 907,000 Based on 7.2 barrels per ton and 42 gallons per barrel The great majority of the barge equipment meets the construction requirements of the American Bureau of Shipping and the United States Coast Guard. The barges are certified for the type of service for which they were constructed (i.e., dry or liquid cargo, inland river service, ocean, limited ocean, lakes, etc.). The towboats (pushboats) used in the Upper Ohio River Navigation District can vary from a length of 117 feet, width of 30 feet, draft of 7.6 feet and 1000 horsepower to a length of 160 feet, width of 40 feet, draft of 8.6 feet and 6000 horsepower. The United States Coast Guard reports that only four "non-serious incidents occurred within the Montgomery Pool during the five year period ending December 1972. A summary of each accident can be found in Commander R. E. Anderson's letter of January 4, 1973, which is included as an attachment to this report. The Beaver Valley Power Station is located in a protected area of the Montgomery Pool and would not be subjected to the type of collision damage that might occur as a result of a "loose" barge floating downstream or pilot error. The power station is located on the "upstream" side of a large pool formed by the movement of the river's current away from the site's intake structure. The natural course of a floating object would be to the right bank of the river, opposite the site. 2.1-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Highway Transportation The tonnage or volume of hazardous materials passing near the site over Pennsylvania Route 168 cannot be determined with any degree of reliable accuracy. However, there are chemical facilities and industrial installations that would utilize this type of product in the immediate area of the power station. Reports on this type of traffic are not kept unless the cargo is involved in an accident. The movement of hazardous materials over public highways near the site does not alter the fact that the probability of a "major accident" involving this classification of cargo is significantly low and the possible effects of such an incident are nominal. The plant is sufficiently isolated from public highway facilities so that explosions, fires, and related incidents would not damage the generating station or interfere with the distribution of power. The D.O.T's data file on incidents involving hazardous materials for the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, for the current period January 1, 1971 to August, 1972, clearly shows that no accidents were reported for the Shippingport area. Mr. H. J. Sonnenberg, Accident Analysis Officer, Office of Hazardous Materials, D.O.T. made this observation:
"You will note [that] none are reported as happening at Shippingport (Midland, Hookstown, Smith's Ferry or Industry). The Pittsburgh and Lake Erie Railroad reported one incident at Aliquippa and Hall's Motor Transit reported three incidents at Mechanicsburg....You will note that all three involved leaks of corrosive liquids at the carrier's dock."
Mr. Sonnenberg's letter is included as an attachment to this report along with the print out for Pennsylvania. The motor carrier industry utilizes all types of mobile transportation equipment to handle hazardous materials. This equipment includes closed vans, bulk trailers, tank type trailers, and open top trailers which are constructed or adapted to meet the requirements of the D.O.T. for handling hazardous materials. Selection of the proper equipment is a factor of the materials to be shipped and the regulations of the D.O.T. Rail Transportation The Penn Central's right-of-way is located on the northern bank of the Ohio River and will not impose any significant effect on the power station if an accident would occur. The D.O.T. ADP file indicates a low incident rate for rail transportation within Pennsylvania; however, these accidents usually involve leaking containers which would result in a very isolated "danger" area. Equipment specifications for tank car construction are promulgated by the D.O.T. and reflect the requirements of each material and shipping condition. Individual items are packaged and handled in accordance with federal regulations and determination of the exact type of rail car used is not possible. The volume of hazardous materials traffic moving over this segment of the Penn Central, or any line of the railroad system, cannot be established due to the fact that the individual railroads do not maintain this type of commodity information. Reporting is only required where an accident occurs. 2.1-31
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 A
2.6 CONCLUSION
Hazardous materials transportation within the proximity of the Beaver Valley Power Station does not seem to be a historically high risk function of the transportation industry. Water transportation evidences the greatest possibility for exposure to this type of traffic since it reflects the inherent advantages of bulk distribution and vehicle capacity. Water transportation is also subject to the greatest concentration of federal regulation and enforcement of all the available modes of hazardous materials transportation. It is impossible to state that a significant or destructive accident, involving hazardous materials, will not occur at the Beaver Valley Power Station area within the life of the plant. It is possible to postulate that in the event of such an incident the summary effect upon the safe operation of the generating station would be nonexistent. A2.7 ENCLOSURES The following are enclosures to the Attachment to Section 2.1:
- 1. Ohio River 1970 commodity flow charts - 3 sheets
- 2. United States Coast Guard letter dated January 4, 1973
- 3. Department of Transportation letter dated January 4, 1973
- 4. ADP print out for Pennsylvania: January 1971 to August 1972
- 5. Three D.O.T. accident reports 2.1-32
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Attachment to Section 2.1
- 1. Waterborne Commerce of the United States - Calendar Year 1971, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, New Orleans, LA 70160
- 2. Second Annual Report of the Secretary of Transportation on Hazardous Materials Control
- Calendar Year 1971, Washington, D.C. 20402
- 3. Hazardous Material Regulation of the Department of Transportation, R. M. Graziano's Tariff No. 25, I.C.C. No. 25, Washington, D.C. 20036 2.1-33
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 20 2.1-34
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-35
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-36
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-37
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-38
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-39
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-40
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-41
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-42
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-43
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-44
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-45
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-46
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-47
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-48
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-49
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-50
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-51
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 20 2.1-52
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.2 METEOROLOGY AND CLIMATOLOGY 2.2.1 Summary Meteorology in the region of the BVPS-1 site has been evaluated to provide a basis for determination of annual average process gas release limits, corresponding estimates of potential exposure from hypothetical accidents, and design criteria for storm protection. Data from the Greater Pittsburgh Airport and from the Weather Bureau studies at the Shippingport Atomic Power Station site were used in the preliminary evaluation; however, an onsite meteorological program has been under way since September, 1969, in order to determine site dispersion factors for both the establishment of permissible annual average process gas release rates and the accident meteorology. It has been found that Pasquill stability Class F and a 0.84 m per second wind speed constitute a conservative set of meteorological conditions to be used as a basis for plant design in the case of an accident involving the release of radioactive gases to the atmosphere. The maximum annual average dilution factor for an elevated release and ground level receptor, based on site meteorological data, is 1.62 x 10-5 sec/m3 2,500 feet from the containment at an elevation of 47 meters above the valley floor. Information is provided in this section to show the adequacy of the design criteria established for storm protection, and the basis for the estimates of effects of routine and accidental releases of radioactive gases. 2.2.2 Descriptive Climatology 2.2.2.1 Climatic Summary The western portion of Pennsylvania in the vicinity of the BVPS-1 site lies on the western slope of the Allegheny Mountains. The site is approximately 90 miles southeast of Lake Erie and 340 miles west of the Atlantic coastline. The climate of the region is of the humid continental variety. During the winter months, cold air from Canadian source regions is somewhat modified by passage over the Great Lakes. The site region is also relatively near the Great Lakes - St. Lawrence storm track, so that there are frequent periods of cloudiness and precipitation during the cooler half of the year. During the warmer months of the year, western Pennsylvania comes under the southerly and southwesterly air flow on the western side of the Bermuda High, causing frequent spells of warm, humid weather. 2.2.2.2 Topographical Factors The BVPS-1 site is located on the south bank of the Ohio River, about 25 miles northwest of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and about 4 miles east of the Ohio - West Virginia state line. The normal pool elevation of the Ohio River at the site is 664.5 ft above MSL. The Ohio River Valley is sharply defined by the hills and bluffs which extend to an average height of 400 to 500 ft above river level within short distances of the river banks. The average width of the Ohio River Valley in the vicinity of the site is approximately 1 mile (1,600 m). 2.2-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Topographic cross sections for the 16 compass point sectors radiating from the plant out to a distance of five miles are shown in Figures 2.2-1, 2.2-2, 2.2-3, 2.2-4, 2.2-5, 2.2-6, 2.2-7, and 2.2-8. The deep, enclosed Ohio River Valley affects the local meteorology in several ways:
- 1. At low levels within the valley, wind channeling occurs extensively. This effect has been studied by Weather Bureau personnel(1) and is discussed in Appendix 2A.
Cold air frequently drains down the valley slopes during the nighttime hours causing a resulting convergence zone over the river. A Weather Bureau group (2) has investigated this aspect of the local atmosphere; the results of this work are also discussed in Appendix 2A.
- 2. Another local effect of topography is daytime solar "shielding" by the high valley walls, which in combination with the nighttime cold air drainage results in a high (approximately 65 percent) annual frequency of occurrence of inversions onsite.
This high frequency of stability is reflected in the modest annual average dilution factor presented in Section 2.2.5. 2.2.2.3 Climatological Averages Table 2.2-1, based on Weather Bureau climatological data from Pittsburgh and other nearby observing stations(3), presents average values of pertinent meteorological parameters. Table 2.2-6 provides monthly summaries of absolute humidity in grams/m3 and relative humidity in percent based on the two-year period from September 6, 1970 to September 5, 1972. 2.2.2.4 Climatological Extremes Month and year of occurrence of climatological extremes have been recorded in the site areas as shown in Table 2.2-2, which is based on Weather Bureau data (3). 2.2.2.5 Severe Weather Phenomena The following extremes of weather phenomena have been examined and evaluated: Extreme Winds The highest wind speed reported in 15 years (1952-1967) of Weather Bureau records for the Pittsburgh Airport was 58 mph from the west in February 1967. The current Weather Bureau listing(3) of historic extremes does not recognize any record of winds exceeding this speed; however, infrequent occurrences of higher wind speeds can be anticipated and have been considered in structure design. Table 2.2-3 lists probabilities and associated recurrence intervals for extreme winds at the BVPS-1 site, according to methods described by Thom (4). Based on the relationship of extreme gusts to extreme winds noted by Huss(5), multiplication of the wind speed by a factor of 1.3 yields a value for the highest gust associated with that wind speed. These are probably quite conservative in view of the relatively sheltered location of the BVPS-1 in relation to the airport exposure. 2.2-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Severe Storms Thunderstorms occur in the area of the site with moderate frequency, with the maximum in June, July, and August. During these peak months, thunderstorms occur at approximately 5 day intervals. These localized storms are occasionally accompanied by high winds, very heavy, but unevenly distributed rainfall, with infrequent hail. According to Weather Bureau information(6)(7) covering the period 1871 through 1972, only 8 tropical storms have moved within 50 miles of the plant site. Essentially all but one of these storms have been in the final dissipation stages and have had little effect on western Pennsylvania other than heavy rainfall. However, in June of 1972 extremely heavy rainfall from Hurricane Agnes caused extensive flooding over much of the eastern United States. In the state of Pennsylvania the flood waters crested in Pittsburgh on June 24, 1972. The flood crest at the site was approximately El. 694 ft, well below the site grade elevation of 735 ft. No damage occurred to any completed safety-related structures, systems, components, or materials. No radioactive materials were released or lost, and no design bases used in the safety evaluations of the facility were exceeded. Tornado Occurrences During the period 1917 through 1970, only 5 tornadoes were reported in Beaver County. The closest observed was in Monaca, Pennsylvania, approximately ten miles from the site. In studies by Thom(8) and Wolford(9), tornadoes reported within a 1 degree square are accumulated over a period of record and divided by the number of years of record to yield a mean annual frequency. For the 1 degree square encompassing the BVPS-1 site, Thom lists 5 tornadoes over ten years (1953-1962) for a mean annual frequency of 0.5, while Wolford lists 4 tornadoes over six years (1953-1958) for a mean annual frequency of 0.67. From 1963 through 1970, 5 tornadoes have been noted(7) for a mean annual frequency of 0.6. According to methods postulated by Thom(8), using values for path width and length of 0.1 mile and 4.0 miles, respectively, and the composite mean annual frequency of 0.6, the average annual probability of a tornado occurring within the 1 degree square in which the site is located and striking the site was calculated to be 6.6 x 10-5, with an equivalent recurrence interval of once in 15,200 years. If an invariant value for a path area of 2.82 square miles, based on Iowa tornadoes, is assumed, as Thom suggests, the average annual probability becomes 4.7 x 10 -4, and the equivalent recurrence interval is once in 2,100 years. The location of the site within the steep-walled valley of the Ohio River offers some measure of protection from tornadoes. An authority(10) on the behavior of these small, violent storms notes that rough country tends to diminish their violence and effects. According to the same source, tornadoes tend to move toward higher elevations, indicating that a tornado in the vicinity of the station would have a tendency to remain at the higher land elevations rather than descend into the valley. Ice Storms Freezing precipitation in the form of freezing rain or freezing drizzle occurs in the vicinity of BVPS-1 when a layer of below freezing air near the ground causes freezing on contact of rain which has passed through a layer of above freezing air overlaying the colder air. This situation occurs most frequently in mid-winter when polar air is overrun by warm, moisture laden air moving northward from the Gulf of Mexico. 2.2-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 An investigation of freezing precipitation frequency was based on ten years (1955-1964) of data taken by the National Weather Service at Greater Pittsburgh Airport. Figure 2.2-9 indicates the average and extreme freezing precipitation frequency for the winter months. Freezing precipitation occurs slightly less than 0.2 percent of the time. Of the 148 hours of freezing precipitation that occurred in ten years, 144 were classified as light (less than 1/10 inch per hr), 4 as moderate (1.10-3.10 inch per hr), and none as heavy (greater than 3.10 inch per hr). Air Pollution Potential (Atmospheric Stagnation) Based on five years of Pittsburgh radiosonde balloon observations only three episode days, of at least two days duration, with mixing height less than or equal to 500 meters, occurred. No episode days of at least five days duration with mixing height less than or equal to 500 meters occurred during the five years. Such episode occurrences are expected to result in increasing plume length and flattening of the plume trajectory. However, no instances of ground level fogging attributable to such occurrences are expected. Mixing height occurrences in excess of 500 meters are expected to have negligible influence on plume behavior because the plume will, in most instances, have evaporated by the time such heights are reached. Ground-based nocturnal inversions are common at the site. Such inversions are shallow (less than 300 meters deep) and the height of plume release and plume buoyancy is expected to render the effect of these inversions negligible. 2.2.3 OnSite Meteorological Monitoring Program The onsite meteorological program for Beaver Valley Power Station is described in BVPS-2 Updated Final Safety Analysis Report, Section 2.3.3. A description of the initial Site Meteorological Program is included in Appendix 2A.1 and 2A.2, together with the results of analysis of data collected onsite between September 1969, and September 1971. The results of the analysis of the data collected onsite for 1980 are included in Appendix 2A.3. For the most recent operating year refer to the annual meteorological report. 2.2.4 DBA Meteorology In the event of an accidental release of radioactive gas into the atmosphere, transport and dispersal will be influenced by the weather conditions at the site for the duration of the incident. The site meteorological data were examined for limiting atmospheric conditions during a postulated accidental release of radioactive gases. According to Weather Bureau sources(11) the following paragraphs describe the worst conditions which might be expected to exist at the site during an accidental release: "Past meteorological studies suggest the following features about atmospheric diffusion for close-in distances (less than one mile) relative to an instantaneous or short period release of air-borne material from the plant site: 2.2-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 1. During inversion conditions when the river is considerably warmer than the air, any air-borne contaminants released at the site will slowly spread out over the plant area, displaying a tendency to remain over land. Eventually, the effluent will be carried out over the river by the drainage flow, where it will travel either up or downstream dictated by the channeled gradient flow. During stable conditions when a pronounced drainage wind flows over the site towards the river, the major plume concentration will probably exist along the river bank and channel. When no well-defined drainage flow exists, the plume can be expected to disperse laterally in all directions, covering the entire plant area. Vertical dispersion at the site area will be restricted to within the first few hundred feet for a release near the ground of material which is not appreciably warmer than the ambient air. For a release at approximately 150 ft above the surface, vertical dispersion to near ridge top elevations may occur. When the river is colder than the air, travel time from the site to over the river will be less.
- 2. Under neutral vertical temperature gradients, atmospheric diffusion becomes primarily a function of wind speed. When winds are very light, appreciable lateral dispersion of the plume over the entire plant area may be expected, similar to that during inversion conditions. During periods of higher wind speeds and more well-defined flow regimes, there will be more rapid dilution of the plume and air-borne material will be more quickly carried away from the plant area. However, within a mile radius of the release point, most of the plume will be vertically contained within the valley depth (approximately 500 ft).
- 3. Synoptic patterns indicate that winds out over the river will blow down-river during most stable regimes. Consequently, a plume originating at the site under inversion conditions may be expected to spread out over the plant area, slowly moving out over the river with an eventual traverse down-river. Transport of air-borne material up-river during inversion conditions will be infrequent.
- 4. During unstable conditions, the path of any released material to the atmosphere will be dictated by the prevailing channeled wind flow of the valley and by the gradient flow at levels above the ridges.
In view of the preceding, it was decided to determine the DBA meteorology for the initial time period following the accident in a way that would include a realistic assessment of both horizontal and vertical dispersion. Using the seven horizontal stability classes (A-G) and seven vertical stability classes (A-G) and the corresponding Sy and Sz values as presented in Reference 12, a computer code was used to determine the combinations of vertical and horizontal stability classes and wind speeds which result in a calculated X/Q value which will not be exceeded more than five percent of the time including period of calm. These calculations of X/Q do not include a building wake effect since the objective was to find the meteorological conditions of stability and wind speed upon which the building wake correction is normally imposed for the Design Basis Accident. Thus the following equation is used for delineation of the ordered values of X/Q and the equivalent stability and wind conditions: 2.2-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 1 X/Q = (3.14SySzu) (2.2-1) where: Sy = horizontal diffusion parameter (m) Sz = vertical diffusion parameter (m) u = mean wind speed (m/sec) For the 0-2 hour period following the accident, the DBA meteorology has been computed for a ground level release at the containment structure to a receptor at the nearest site boundary (610m). A very conservative analysis includes the total calms, both daytime and nighttime, as found by the less responsive Bendix-Friez speed sensors to meet the five percent criterion. On this basis, the total occurrence of calms is 2.4 percent. Thus, five percent less the 2.4 percent calms yields 2.6 percent, the percentage of time during which the design basis meteorological conditions may be exceeded. From Table 2.2-4, it is noted that 2.11 x 10 -3 sec/m3 is the X/Q exceeded 2.6 percent of the time; thus the equivalent design basis meteorological conditions corresponding to this value at 610 meters are Pasquill stability class "F" and wind speed 0.64 m/sec. A somewhat less conservative analysis would include only the 1.5 percent nighttime calms measured by the Bendix instrument. On this basis, the X/Q exceeded 3.5 percent of the time is 1.83 x 10-3 sec/m3; the design basis meteorological conditions are "F" and 0.73 m/sec. Finally, a more realistic analysis would include only the calms found by the more responsive Packard-Bell wind sensors. Whether or not all such calms (0.25 percent) or only the nighttime calms (0.08 percent) are included, the resultant X/Q found from Table 2.2-4 is 1.62 x 10 -3; the equivalent design basis meteorological conditions are stability class "F" and 0.84 m/sec wind speed. These latter values are included in Table 2.2-7 as being the recommended choice for the 0-2 hours periods with an invariant wind. If an independent evaluation of the above values is desired, see Appendix 2A which provides the summary of wind distribution by stability class and wind speed. This distribution is based on 50 foot wind data and 50 to 150 foot temperature data. Now using the meteorological conditions of "F" stability conditions and wind speed 0.84 m/sec, the X/Q calculated from design basis accident meteorology at the nearest site boundary (610m) from the containment for the 0-2 hour period is computed from the following equation (including a building wake factor) to be equal to 7.80 x 10-4 sec/m3: 1 X/Q = (3.14SySz + cA)u (2.2-2) where: X = concentration (units/m3) Q = source release rate (unit/sec) Sy = horizontal diffusion parameter (m) Sz = vertical diffusion parameter (m) u = mean wind speed (m/sec) A = cross-sectional area of containment (1,600 m2) c = building shape factor = 0.5 (dimensionless) 2.2-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 For the period 2-24 hours following the start of a release, it is assumed that the wind direction varies over one sector under "F" stability conditions and 0.84 m/sec wind speed. Inasmuch as the longest observed on-site wind direction persistence under stable conditions ("F" stability) was one occurrence for 24 hours, this assumption is conservative. For the period from 24-96 hours, it is assumed that the mean wind direction is varying within the sector of interest 50 percent of the time. During this time, the stability is assumed to be "D" with a 2.0 m/sec wind speed and "F" with a 0.9 m/sec wind speed. For the period from 4-30 days, meteorological conditions characteristic of the lowest dispersion have been chosen. These conditions, and those for the other time periods, are also presented in Table 2.2-5. The results of the calculations for the four time periods comprising the 30 day model are shown in Figure 2A.2-12 which presents curves of X/Q versus distance. If an independent evaluation of the above results is desired, see Appendix 2A which provides the pertinent data. In support of a re-analysis performed on the design basis loss-of-coolant accident (LOCA) in 1983, the X/Q values for the DBA meteorology were re-determined using the guidance and formulae of Regulatory Guide 1.145.(14)(15) The analyses were performed on hourly averaged meteorological data collected during the period from January 1 to December 31, 1982. The data recoverability for this period was 94.3 percent. As a result of these X/Q analyses, the maximum sector 0.5 percent X/Q value was determined to be more limiting than the 5 percent site X/Q value. Table 2.2-11 tabulates the values used in the re-analysis of the design basis LOCA. In 1996, short-term diffusion estimates were re-calculated using the USNRC computer code PAVAN(15). Input data were hourly meteorological observations collected by the onsite meteorological monitoring program between 0000 1/1/86 and 2300 12/31/95. The 0.5% sector dependent and the 5% sector independent values defined in Regulatory Guide 1.145 (14) were determined and are tabulated in Tables 2.2-11a and 2.2-11b. Data recoverability during this ten year period was 99.6%. The minimum recoverability for any year in this period was 99%. This re-analysis indicated a maximum 0-2 hour exclusion area boundary 0.5% value of 1.04E-3 sec/m3 (NW sector). This value is 17% more restrictive than the value determined in 1983. As such, the values in Tables 2.2-11a and 2.2-11b will be used for radiological consequence analyses performed subsequent to 1996. 2.2.4.1 Main Control Room Short-Term Diffusion Estimates The original licensing basis control room atmospheric dispersion factor (X/Q) values were calculated for both Units 1 and 2 using the methodology described by Murphy and Campe. Releases were postulated from each of the identified release points. The X/Q values were calculated to encompass 95 percent of the meteorological conditions (i.e., that are exceeded for only 5 percent of the meteorological conditions). Stability class G was assumed for conservatism. Adjustments for occupancy were included. In 1991, the X/Q values for the control room were re-analyzed using a newer methodology outlined in NUREG/CR-5055. The updated X/Qs did not include adjustments for occupancy. 2.2-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 In NUREG/CR-5055, Ramsdell considered the methodology of Murphy-Campe and proposed new methodologies to improve the predictive capabilities of calculations of atmospheric dispersion in the presence of building wakes. NUREG/CR-5055 reported on the results of seven field experiments that showed that the Murphy-Campe methodology accounted for little of the variability in concentrations affected by wakes. An empirical model was proposed that showed a significant improvement in predicting centerline concentrations. The model, using multiple-variable linear regression, rotates downwind distance, building cross-sectional area, wind velocity, and stability class to X/Q. Because circulation in building wakes distributes effluents entering the wake more widely than normal atmospheric diffusion, it was recommended that relatively wide wind-direction sectors (perhaps as wide as 90 degrees) be used in applying the methodology to evaluating concentrations affected by these wakes. In reports published subsequent to NUREG/CR-5055, Ramsdell generalized the statistical model into one that had comparable accuracy but had its basis in the physical mechanisms of importance. The concentrations near the source were seen to be directly related to wind speed, rather than the inverse relationship of previous models. For Beaver Valley, Halliburton NUS Environmental Corporation adapted the work of Ramsdell to the site terrain, plant configuration, and site meteorology. As the releases at Beaver Valley are low velocity releases, all releases were treated as ground level releases that are fully entrained in the building wake. For short-term averaging periods of eight hours or less, the methodology assumed that if the wind direction is within 30 degrees to either side of a line (effective centerline width of 60 degrees) between release point and control room intake, the plume centerline passes over the control room intake. For longer term averaging periods (e.g., 8-24, 24-96, 96-720 hours) a Gaussian distribution normal to the centerline is assumed. On-site meteorological data for the 5-year period of 1986-1990 were applied along with the physical parameters appropriate for each release point. Only 1 percent of the individual hourly data contained any missing data. A sensitivity analysis of the input parameters was performed indicating acceptable model performance.(17,18) As part of the plant modifications associated with containment conversion, replacement steam generators and core power uprate, the control room X/Q values were re-calculated using the latest version of the "Atmospheric Relative Concentrations in Building Wakes" (ARCON96) methodology. The control room X/Q values applicable to release points associated with an accident at BVPS-1 or BVPS-2, are presented in Table 2.2-12A and 2.2-12B, respectively. The Emergency Response Facility (ERF) X/Q values for the environmental release paths associated with the Loss-Of-Coolant Accident are also provided. The X/Q values for all of the release-receptor combinations utilized to develop the post-accident control room operator occupancy doses are summarized in Table 2.2-12A. The X/Q values for all of the release-receptor combinations associated with BVPS-2 accidents addressed in Table 2.2-12B are taken into consideration when the dose consequences of the event is established based on an analysis that is bounding for both units. Occupancy factors are not included. Input data consist of hourly on-site meteorological data, release characteristics (e.g., release height and stack flow rate), the cross-sectional building area affecting the release, and receptor information (e.g., distance and direction from the release to the control room air intake and intake height). All input data for the ARCON96 runs were developed in accordance with draft NRC guidance on control room habitability assessments; Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1111, "Atmospheric Relative Concentrations for Control Room Habitability Assessments at Nuclear Power Plants," December 2001. 2.2-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The ARCON96 methodology has the ability to evaluate ground-level, vent, and elevated stack releases and treats building wake effects and stable plume meander effects when applicable. This methodology is also able to evaluate diffuse and area source releases using the virtual point source technique, wherein initial values of the dispersion coefficients are assigned based on the size of the diffuse or area source. The various averaging period X/Q values are calculated directly from running averages of the hourly X/Q values. A continuous temporally representative 5-year period of hourly average data from the BVPS meteorological tower (i.e., January 1, 1990 through December 31, 1994) is used in this calculation. Each hour of data, at a minimum, must have a validated wind speed and direction at the 10-meter level and a temperature difference between the 45- and 10-meter levels. The BVPS meteorological measurement program meets the requirements of RG 1.23 and Regulatory Position C.1.1 of RG 1.145 and is described in detail in Chapter 2.2.3. All releases are conservatively treated as ground-level as there are no releases at this site that are high enough to escape the aerodynamic effects of the plant buildings (i.e., 2.5 times Containment Building height). The applicable structure relative to building wake effects on the releases is based on release/receptor orientation. The distances from the Unit 1 containment building edge to the receptors are determined from the closest edge of the containment building. The release elevations are set equal to the receptor elevations in cases where the releases are not from a clearly defined point, such as the containment edge releases. Where both the release and receptor are not clearly defined points, both elevations are set equal to grade elevation. Only the containment edge release is considered to be a diffuse source as the release is from the entire containment surface. Diffuse source treatment allows the calculation of initial values of the dispersion coefficients. These values are determined by the height and width of the containment building divided by a factor of six based on the draft NRC guidance on control room habitability assessments. All other releases are conservatively treated as point sources. The ARCON96 default wind direction range of 90, centered on the direction that transports the gaseous effluents from the release points to the receptors, is used in the calculation along with values for surface roughness length (i.e., 0.20 meter) and sector averaging constant (4.3) based on draft NRC guidance. The control room air intake X/Q values are representative of the worst case X/Q values for control room unfiltered in-leakage purposes since the distances and directions from the release points to these receptors are very similar. Control room tracer gas tests have indicated that a potential source of unfiltered inleakage into the control room during the post accident pressurization mode are the normal operation dampers associated with the control room ventilation system to which it is reasonable to assign the same X/Q as that of the Control Room air intake. The other source of inleakage is potentially that associated with ingress/egress and leakage via door seals. This inleakage is assigned to the door leading into the control room that is considered the point of primary access. This door is located in between the BVPS-1 and BVPS-2 control room air intakes and is located close enough to the referenced air intakes to allow the assumption that the X/Q associated with this source of inleakage would be reasonably similar to that associated with the air intakes. 2.2-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The X/Q values at the ERF edge closest to Containment is conservatively assumed to be representative of the post-accident X/Q values to the Emergency Response Facility which includes the Technical Support Center (TSC) and the Emergency Operations Facility (EOF). 2.2.5 Annual Average Release Meteorology The annual average X/Q for an elevated release is calculated according to the following equation: (2.2-3) where: X = distance, m Ui = average reciprocal wind speed for sector of interest, sec per m Szi = vertical diffusion parameter for stability class i, m Fi = fraction of time stability class i occurs h = height of stack, m Z = vertical height above valley floor, m fi = fraction of time wind direction is in sector of interest for stability class i In the calculation of X/Q, Szi has been estimated from Pasquill stability curves; (12) Fifi is based on the categorization of temperature difference discussed in Appendix 2A. (The value of S z for G stability is defined as the Sz for class F, divided by SQRT [2.5].) The release of normal process gas is from a vent 522 ft (158 m) above the valley floor. Although it is possible that the process gas exit velocity and the buoyant cooling tower plume would cause the process gas plume to become more elevated than the release height, for a conservative estimate of the highest annual average X/Q, no plume rise is assumed. Thus, for a release height of 158 m, the highest annual average X/Q is 1.42 x 10 -6 sec/m3 for a receptor located 2,000 m southeast of the containment structure at an elevation 158 m above the valley floor. In addition, a X/Q of approximately the same magnitude (1.3 x 10-6 sec/m3) was calculated for a receptor located 1,300 m southeast of the containment structure at an elevation of 158 m. Table 2.2-7 provides calculated atmospheric dispersion factors (X/Q) for an elevated (158 meters) release at the outer boundary of the low population zone for periods of 0-8 and 8-24 hours, 1-4 days, and 4-30 days and at the exclusion area boundary for a 0-2 hour period. Also Table 2.2-8 provides calculated atmospheric dispersion factors (X/Q) for a ground level release 2.2-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 at the outer boundary of the low population zone for periods of 0-8 and 8-24 hours, 1-4 days and 4-30 days. Table 2.2-9 provides calculated annual average atmospheric diffusion factors (X/Q) for an elevated (158 meters) release for 16 radial sectors out to 50 miles using site meteorological data. Figure 2.2-10 shows the X/Q isopleths (similar to Figure 2A.2-13) for a 158 meter release. Table 2.2-10 provides calculated annual average atmospheric diffusion factors (X/Q) for a ground level release for 16 radial sectors out to 50 miles using site meteorological data. Figure 2A.2-13 presents isopleths of ground level annual average X/Q for release from the 158 m vent. WINDVANE computer outputs giving the raw data from which the above calculations are made are provided in Appendix 2A.2. 2.2-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 2.2
- 1. D. H. Pack, C. R. Hosler, and T. B. Harris, A Meteorological Survey of the PWR Site at Shippingport, Pennsylvania, Office of Meteorological Research, U. S. Weather Bureau, Washington, D.C. (December 1957).
- 2. D. H. Pack, et. al., An Investigation of the Three Dimensional Wind Structure Near Shippingport, Pennsylvania, Office of Meteorological Research, U. S. Weather Bureau, Washington, D. C. (August 1956).
- 3. Local Climatological Data and Summaries for Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania, U. S. Weather Bureau Publications.
- 4. H. C. S. Thom, New Distribution of Extreme Winds in the United States, ASCE Environmental Engineering Conference, Dallas, Texas (February 1967).
- 5. P. O. Huss, "Relation Between Gusts and Average Wind Speeds", DGAI Report No. 140 (1946).
- 6. G. W. Cry, Tropical Cyclones of the North Atlantic Ocean, Technical Paper No. 55, U. S.
Weather Bureau (1965).
- 7. Storm Data, National Weather Records Center, Asheville, North Carolina.
- 8. H. C. S. Thom, "Tornado Probabilities", Monthly Weather Review, pp. 730-736 (October-December 1963).
- 9. L. V. Wolford, Tornado Occurrences in the United States, Technical Paper No. 20, U. S.
Weather Bureau, Washington, D. C. (Rev. 1960).
- 10. E. M. Brooks, "Tornadoes and Related Phenomena", Compendium of Meteorology, Boston, Massachusetts (1951).
- 11. C. R. Hosler, D. H. Pack, and T. B. Harris, Meteorological Investigations of Diffusion in a Valley at Shippingport, Pennsylvania, Office of Meteorological Research, U. S. Weather Bureau, Washington, D. C. (April 1959).
- 12. D. H. Slade, Meteorology and Atomic Energy, pp. 408-409.
- 13. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.23, "Onsite Meteorological Programs", Nuclear Regulatory Commission (February 17, 1972).
- 14. Regulatory Guide 1.145, "Atmospheric Dispersion Models for Potential Accident Consequence Assessments at Nuclear Power Plants", Nuclear Regulatory Commission (November 1982).
- 15. USNRC NUREG/CR-2858, "PAVAN: An Atmospheric Dispersion Program for Evaluating Design Basis Accidental Releases of Radioactive Materials from Nuclear Power Stations",
Pacific Northwest Laboratory (November 1982).
- 16. Deleted by Revision 23 2.2-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 2.2 (CONTD)
- 17. Halliburton NUS Environmental Corporation, Control Room X/Q Values for the Beaver Valley Power Station (1991).
- 18. J. V. Ramsdell, Atmospheric Diffusion for Control Room Habitability Assessments, NUREG/CR-5055 (1988).
- 19. Deleted by Revision 23
- 20. Deleted by Revision 23
- 21. Ramsdell, J. V., Jr. and C. A. Simonen, "Atmospheric Relative Concentrations in Building Wakes." Prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, PNL-10521, NUREG/CR-6331, Rev. 1, May 1997.
- 22. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, Draft Regulatory Guide DG-1111, "Atmospheric Relative Concentrations for Control Room Habitability Assessments at Nuclear Power Plants," December 2001.
- 23. Deleted by Revision 23 2.2-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.3 HYDROLOGY 2.3.1 Surface Water Hydrology The BVPS-1 is located on the Ohio River at mile 34.8; that is, 3.1 miles downstream from Montgomery Lock and Dam and 19.6 miles upstream from New Cumberland Lock and Dam. The drainage area above the site is 23,000 sq miles. 2.3.1.1 River Flow The river flow is regulated by several reservoirs on the Allegheny and Monongahela Rivers and their tributaries. Among these, the Allegheny and Conemaugh Reservoirs are the most important. The flow frequency information is based on a January, 1970 study made by the Pittsburgh District of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers aimed at determining the effects of the reservoirs as if they had been in operation over the period of record. As a result of that study, a drought frequency curve was developed by the Corps of Engineers showing the percent of time any river discharge would be equalled or exceeded. This curve is shown in Figure 2.3-1. 2.3.1.2 River Stage The river stage at the power station site is not determined by river flow only, since the operating rules of the New Cumberland Dam gates are such that the stage is maintained at El. 664.5 for a river flow range up to about 20,000 cfs, as shown in the flow-stage relationship curve of Figure 2.3-2. Flood stage profiles have been developed by the Corps of Engineers for the Ohio River reach between Montgomery and New Cumberland Dams, including the effects of all the flood control reservoirs upstream from the site. The following tabulation indicates the characteristic flood stages at the BVPS-1 site, as defined by the Corps of Engineers:
- 1. Ordinary High Water El. 678.5
- 2. Standard Project Flood El. 705.0
- 3. Probable Maximum Flood El. 730.0 2.3.2 Groundwater Hydrology 2.3.2.1 Description and Onsite Conditions 2.3.2.1.1 Aquifers The regional and local groundwater conditions and geology are discussed in Appendix 2B, Geological Considerations Influencing the Proposed Beaver Valley Power Station (Rand, J.R.
and Mayrose, P.J., 1968). These general studies have been supplemented by additional data which were obtained from observation during excavation, well measurements, soil and rock seep localities, and survey of groundwater users. 2.3-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The site is located within the Allegheny Mountains section of the Appalachian Plateaus physiographic province which is characterized by relatively flat upland plateaus with deeply dissected river valleys. The general geology of the area is described in Section 2.4 and Appendix 2B. Briefly, the power station site is located within the bedrock valley of the Ohio River on an alluvial terrace along the south side of the channel. Bedrock under the site consists of horizontally bedded shales, with occasional sandstone and a few small coal seams, all of Pennsylvania age. One thin limestone member, the Vanport limestone, crops out in the valley wall above the elevation of bedrock under the station. The power station is located approximately 600 ft north of the south bedrock wall of the valley. At the power station site, bedrock is at approximately El. 630 ft and drops only slightly toward the north where is underlies the river. It is overlain by a terrace of granular material which extends to approximately El. 735 ft at the power station site. The northerly portion of this terrace was eroded subsequent to its placement and replaced by recent deposits of the river in two low level terraces. These younger terraces are silts and clays overlying the sands and gravels which in turn rest directly on the bedrock. The sands and gravels of the terrace form the only significant aquifers of the area. The Ohio River at this location is controlled by a system of locks and dams for navigation purposes. The navigation pool at the site is normally held at El. 664.5 ft. The upland surface, in the vicinity of the BVPS-1 is above El. 1,100 ft. The groundwater in the bedrock underlying the upland surface occurs in joints and occasional permeable sandstone beds. Migration takes place along bedding and nearly vertical joint planes and along weathered zones. Water well records indicate that normal groundwater flow potential in these rocks ranges from less than 1 to about 10 gallons per minute for each well with 2 to 4 gallons per minute as average. Sixteen seeps were observed to originate from bedrock along the rock wall of the valley above the terrace during a survey undertaken June 13 to June 16, 1972; all but one seep was less than 1 to 2 gallons per minute. The remaining seep at El. 900 ft, 4,000 ft southeast of the station, flowed at 4 to 5 gallons per minute along shale joints overlying a confined sandstone bed. The regional groundwater map Figure 2.3-3 indicates the groundwater occurs under hydrostatic conditions with the phreatic surface having a contour approximating the land surface, but of subdued relief. The topographic divides along the ridge crests also mark the local groundwater basin divides. Groundwater levels under the upland surface lie at depths of 10 to 50 ft below surface, averaging 30 ft. The phreatic surface has a gradient of 50 percent on steep hillsides, 25-30 percent on gentler hillsides, and 15 percent or less along tributary streams. In all areas, the groundwater flows downslope and eventually enters the terrace upstream of the plant site or enters the river, downstream of the site. Groundwater migration in the bedrock appears to be constant and slow. Because of the low permeability of the rocks, recharge from rock to the terrace gravels is negligible. There are no known aquifers in the bedrock under the site. 2.3.2.1.2 Site Condition The station is located on a system of terraces along the south side of the river. The terrace on which the station is located is about 4,000 ft long and 1,800 ft wide at its widest point. Downstream of the station, the terrace pinches out against the steep bedrock valley wall. To the northeast, it is limited by a buried bedrock spur which extends northwesterly almost to the river's edge at a point about 2,500 ft upstream of the station. 2.3-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The soils of the terrace are predominantly sands and gravels except for the younger deposits near the river. The permeable gravels crop out in the river. Groundwater under the terrace is interconnected with the river. Observations during construction showed that groundwater level elevations are very close to river level at normal pool and respond very quickly with changes in river level as the river rises in flood. Recharge to the groundwaters of the terrace in the site area is primarily from precipitation on the immediate area. Assuming an infiltration of about 35 percent which would be expected for these soils, topography, and climatic conditions, this would amount to an average infiltration of about 12 inches of water per year which is about 900 gallons per day per acre. Additional recharge occurs during periods of rising river level as the groundwater rises. This again is discharged as the river falls. Under normal river conditions, the groundwater levels under the terrace on which the station is located slope very gently towards the northwest as shown by the groundwater contours on Figure 2.3-3. 2.3.2.2 Usage Two wells, in the terrace gravels, were drilled to supply cooling water (and augment water supplies) to the Shippingport Atomic Power Station (now decommissioned). They are located relatively close to the river as shown on Figure 2.3-3. A temporary well was drilled to provide water for sanitary uses and construction uses during the construction of the BVPS-1. Production is less than 50 gpm. This will be retained in service for similar purposes for BVPS-
- 2. An additional temporary well will be installed about 1,000 ft upstream of the station to supply water to a concrete mixing plant during construction of BVPS-2. There are no municipal groundwater supplies located in this terrace. Two wells were drilled for the Bruce Mansfield Fossil Fuel Power Plant about 6,000 ft upstream of the station at the location shown on Figure 2.3-3. These wells are close to the river. As indicated, they are upstream of the buried bedrock nose. Consequently, they are effectively isolated from the groundwaters under the station and probably will be recharged largely by infiltration from the river.
There are approximately 48 domestic wells located upstream of the station as shown in Figure 2.3-3. All but three of these are located on or upstream of the buried bedrock nose and are thus isolated from the groundwaters under the station. The nearest domestic well is approximately 2,300 ft upstream of the plant. Groundwater level in this well was found at El. 681 ft, 15 ft above groundwater level in the station area at the time of observation. Bedrock wells in the upland area all serve domestic purposes. Yield of all of these is very low and all terminate at elevations well above yard elevation at the station site. There are no known plans for other future developments upstream of the station. Accordingly, maintenance of existing groundwater gradient is anticipated. The hydraulic gradient in the terrace gravels along a northwest- southeast line along the cooling tower centerline varies from 8.6 percent near the toe of the bedrock scarp to about 0.1 to 0.2 percent in the power station and cooling tower foundation area. The coefficient of permeability is 0.2 to 0.46 ft per minute based on pumping tests from two wells developed for the Shippingport Atomic Power Station. For these gradients and coefficients of permeability, the velocity towards the river would be about 0.3 to 1.5 ft per day at the station. Groundwater incursion, caused by excessive pumping on site, would not affect any domestic or industrial supplies because they all lie upstream and upgradient of the station site. Use of 2.3-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 groundwater on the site is not expected to deplete regional or local supplies because of the alluvium which is part of the Ohio River groundwater regimen, which recharges the system. 2.3.2.3 Accidental Effects As previously discussed, all groundwater passing under the power station site moves into the Ohio River, which acts as a natural barrier to the migration of groundwater contaminants. Groundwater migration is effectively blocked to the southwest where the alluvium pinches out against a bedrock cut scarp covered by relatively impervious colluvium just above river grade. The vent and drain system collects potentially radioactive fluids that could accidentally spill from various systems as described in UFSAR Section 9.7. Even if it were postulated that a spill to ground could occur, the volume of water and low flow rates in the alluvium below the plant site indicate that should liquid waste enter the groundwater, it would be diluted and slowly transported into the river. The time required to reach the river after a pollutant spill at the reactor probably would be between 620 days and 3,000 days, based on a range of gradients of 0.1 to 0.2 ft per 100 ft and a permeability coefficient range of 0.2 to 0.46 ft per minute. This migration rate of 1.7 to 8.2 years assumes steady conditions and an unchanged phreatic surface. Actually, one or more floods could be expected in this period; however, since the alluvium below the site is part of the Ohio River regimen, rising groundwater levels would correspond to rising river level. Therefore, the flood waters would tend to dilute any spilled pollutants and the diluted materials would then be discharged into the river as the river level fell. Migration of contaminants upstream to domestic water supplies could not occur since such wells are upgradient from the station area. 2.3.2.4 Monitoring The vent and drain system collects potentially radioactive fluids that could accidentally spill from various systems as described in UFSAR Section 9.7. Accordingly, there is no hazard of a spill to groundwater. Under these circumstances, monitoring of groundwater to protect users is not considered necessary and will not be provided. 2.3.3 Floods and Dam Failure Upstream The station has the ability to achieve a safe shutdown condition, through the use of design features and procedural controls, before the maximum level of the Ohio River Probable Maximum Flood occurs. All Category I structures are designed for the buoyancy and hydrostatic pressures associated with this flood level. These flood conditions are discussed in the report dated January, 1970 from the Corps of Engineers. The Corps of Engineers concludes that the most critical conditions believed possible would result from the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF). The development of the PMF is not detailed here. A general outline of its development is given in Attachment 2.3A. Information pertaining to further details of river hydrology may be obtainable from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh District Office. Coincident wind wave activity is discussed in Section 2.3.8. The PMF developed by the Corps is considered by them to be a one in a geologic era event and, as such, is extremely conservative without wave activity. 2.3-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Potential dam failures are also discussed in general terms in Attachment 2.3A. Further details may be obtainable from the Corps. Ice is not believed to be of concern here because lock and dam control systems have opened this part of the river to heavy amounts of ship and barge traffic year round. The Corps of Engineers initially set a level of 707.2 ft for the Standard Project Flood. This level was used for initial station design. Subsequently, the analysis by the Corps of Engineers in 1970 revised the Standard Project Flood level downward to 705 ft. No portion of the station has been redesigned just to take advantage of this reduced level. However, portions of the station designed after the latter date, or which required a redesign for other reasons after that date, are designed for a Standard Project Flood of 705 ft. The emergency diesel generators are located at El. 735.5 ft. The containment is waterproofed generally to El. 730.0 ft, and is unaffected by the Probable Maximum Flood. The basement of the service building is at El. 713.5 ft; however, the structure is waterproofed and reinforced so that it is unaffected by floods to El. 730.0 ft. The duration of the Probable Maximum Flood above El. 728.0 ft is about 18 hr, which is insufficient time for soil permeability to provide hydraulic uplift above El. 728.0 ft. The service building is therefore designed for an uplift equivalent to a flood reaching El. 728.0 ft, but to prevent entry of water up to El. 730.0 ft. The turbine building, which contains no equipment or piping credited in accident analyses or meeting the definition of Category I in UFSAR Appendix A.1 (although some equipment may have been procured to that standard), is allowed to flood at water levels above the Standard Project Flood in order to reduce the weight of concrete slab which otherwise would be required to prevent flotation. The portion of the auxiliary building basement which houses safety-related equipment required for safe shutdown (charging pumps) is protected against flooding to El. 730.0 ft. The remainder of the basement is allowed to flood in order to eliminate hydraulic uplift. The portion of the screenwell which houses the safety-related river water pumps and engine-driven fire pump is designed to accommodate a flood to El. 730.0 ft, and operation of the pumps is unaffected by the flood. New fuel is stored in racks in the fuel storage building well above the Probable Maximum Flood level. The bottom of the spent fuel storage basin is at El. 727.3 ft, but the structure is designed so as to be unaffected by the flood. The recurrence frequency of the Standard Project Flood is estimated by the Corps of Engineers to be once in 1,000 to 2,000 yr. The Corps of Engineers considers the Probable Maximum Flood to be so far beyond reasonable projection limits that it might be termed a geologic era event. However, the unit will be able to achieve a safe shutdown condition prior to such a flood affecting any safety-related equipment. 2.3.4 Failure of Downstream Dam Gates and Low Flow The Pittsburgh District of the Corps of Engineers indicates (Attachments 2.3B and 2.3C) that for catastrophic failure of the New Cumberland Dam coincident with minimum flow in the river, the river would revert to an open channel flow condition and the water surface at the intake for the BVPS-1 would therefore drop to a minimum of El. 648.6 ft. The pit floor of the Beaver Valley screenwell is at El. 640.0 ft so that a water depth of 8.6 ft in the screenwell is ensured even for this water extreme condition. This is adequate to supply the required emergency river water flow to meet station safety related system requirements. The limiting credible dam failure is the loss of a single lock gate or tainter gate as described in Attachments 2.3B and 2.3C. 2.3-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Channel diversions are not discussed. Information on river cutoffs and subsidence may be obtainable from the Corps. Information on future probable minimum flow conditions may be obtainable from the Corps. 2.3.5 Environmental Acceptance of Effluents Under normal operating conditions the expected radioactive releases are far below the standards specified in 10CFR20. The effects of these releases are discussed in Section 3.1.7 of the Environmental Report for BVPS-1 and Appendix 11B of the Updated FSAR. The design bases for effluent facilities are described in Sections 2.2.4 and 11.2. Sections 2.1.3 and 2.1.4 discuss surface and groundwater use. A discussion of accidents and their associated radioactive discharges takes place in Section 6 of the Environmental Report for BVPS-2. The BVPS-2 report discusses the total effect of both stations and is therefore, conservative when considering BVPS-1 alone. 2.3.6 Factors Affecting PMF Analysis The Technical Report, Attachment 2.3A, discusses the results of the analysis for determining the standard project and probable maximum flood waters at the BVPS-1 site. This analysis requires establishing three key parameters; the drainage area, rainfall estimate and roughness coefficients for the runoff analyses. Drainage Area Figure 2.3-4 depicts the drainage area subdivisions for which hydrographs have been prepared. Each numbered area represents an uncontrolled area and each shaded area is controlled by a dam, as named. All the dams with the exception of Meander and Chautauqua are operated by the Corps of Engineers. The different routing reaches used in the PMF analysis are indicated by letters. A tabulation of the drainage values is included in Table 2.3-1. Table 2.3-2 provides a tabulation of the hourly unit hydrographic values and Muskingum routing coefficients for the identified drainage areas of Figure 2.3-4. Rainfall The rainfall used in estimating the PMF is discussed in Attachment 2.3A. Since the PMF is a summer type storm it would be most likely to occur during a period when rainfall is normal or below, antecedent stream flow would also be low and infiltration loss to runoff high. The infiltration rates computed for the high intensity storm of August 3, 1964, which occurred over the French Creek basin, were used in the Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) computations. This storm possessed typical antecedent characteristics under which the PMP storm is generated. These infiltration rates were applied to several high intensity summer storms that occurred in or near the Stonewall Jackson Lake area, and the losses were found to be in close agreement to the actual losses. The infiltration rates used for the PMF are shown in Figure 2.3-15. 2.3-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Curves for rainfall-excess plotted against precipitation for six- hour periods, contained in "Interim Report on Storms in the Kansas City District", Appendix C, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Kansas City Engineer District, May-June 1951, were considered suitable for use in the Standard Project Flood study. These curves, shown in Figure 2.3-16, take into account the probable variation in rainfall over a six-hour period. Roughness Coefficient The roughness coefficients were developed using the floods of record. A cross section of the site was drawn and the energy gradient was determined from the flood profiles. A value for "n" in the Manning equation was then computed. The analysis was made at two different sites in the vicinity of Shippingport with a resulting "n" value of 0.035. Analysis Methodology Locations of the flood control projects in effect in 1972 above the BVPS-1 site are shown in Figure 2.3-5. Pertinent data relative to these projects is listed on Table 2.3-5. Detailed information is available in the extracts from Reference 17 which are presented as part of Amendment 2 of the Beaver Valley Power Station Unit 2 PSAR (Docket No. 30-412). The distances from Shippingport to the dam sites is presented in Table 2.3-3. Figure 2.3-6 shows a cross section of the Ohio River at the Shippingport intake. The contours used to estimate the Standard Project Flood and the Probable Maximum Flood may be developed from Figures 2.3-7, 2.3-8, 2.3-9, 2.3-10, 2.3-11, 2.3-12, and 2.3-13. The El. 740 ft and 760 ft contour lines were taken from the 7.5 minute Midland and Hookstown USGS Quadrangles. A plan view of BVPS-1 showing the containment, turbine building, and other structures is shown in Figure 1.2-1. Elevation views of the containment are shown in Figures 5.1-5, 5.1-6 and 5.1-7. Figure 2.3-14 provides a drawing showing historic high water marks. After the flow hydrograph for the probable maximum flood was computed, a stage-discharge relationship was developed which would accommodate this flow while maintaining all of the hydrologic characteristics. These characteristics require that the valley storage reflect inflow and outflow into any reach and that the stage-discharge relationship adequately represent the computed flows. When analyzing a particular reach, the valley storage was the average volume within that reach as defined by an average of the upstream and downstream stages. Stage capacity relationships for these reaches had been developed from which a height was determined which would equal the maximum volume stored within that reach representing the difference between the inflow and outflow. A water surface profile was established from these computations and is shown in Figure 2.3-17. The slope of this profile was then inserted into Manning's equation along with the other known values to compute a discharge. This value is then checked against the probable maximum flood peak to satisfy all of the requirements. The validity of the runoff model used to estimate the Probable Maximum Flood can be demonstrated by Figure 2.3-18 and Table 2.3-4. Figure 2.3-18 shows a comparison of actual and reproduced Ohio River flow rate at the Dashields Lock and Dam during the October 1954 flood. Table 2.3-4 shows one page of the flood forecast. 2.3-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.3.7 Seismically-Induced Flood Potential Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev.34 Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev.34 Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev.34 Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev.34 Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev.34 Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev.34 Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev.34 Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2.3.8 Wind-Generated Waves Concurrent with Floods An analysis of the wind-generated wave activity that might occur coincidentally with the worst flood level estimated at the site (PMF or seismically-induced flood) was performed. The usual analytical practice has been to assume overland sustained wind speeds of approximately 40 miles an hour from the critical direction with respect to safety-related plant facilities which may be affected, in lieu of estimates of worst historical sustained overland wind speeds at the plant site. Analytical techniques for such a wave analysis as are discussed in Corps of Engineers Engineer Technical Letter (ETL) 1110-2-8, dated August 1, 1966, and U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center Technical Report No. 4, Shore Protection, Planning and Design, Third Edition, 1966, are generally employed to make estimates of "significant and maximum" wave heights and static and dynamic effects therefrom. The analysis includes estimates of wave heights and periods, estimates of the static and dynamic consequences of such wave action, and provides assurance of the ability of safety-related structures, systems and components necessary for safe plant shutdown to resist such effects. 2.3-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Extensive studies have established the relationships among meteorological factors, wind velocities at the air-water interface, and wave generation together with the limits on wave growth as they apply to the open ocean(8). Rigorous mathematical development of wave generation theories for open water exist(9)(10). A more limited body of work has established that, for practical purposes, most of the relations which obtain for the ocean apply with suitable restrictions to smaller bodies of water such as bays, lakes, and rivers(11)(12). Waves generated on flowing streams are modified, but the mechanism of their generation is not essentially different from that of waves generated on statistically still water. The modifications have been investigated theoretically(13). For application of the body of our knowledge of wave generation to rivers, it is necessary to consider a number of circumstances that are not pertinent to the ocean. They include the configuration of the river and its surrounding topography together with the roughness and the effects these may have on the wind field. The geometry of the river with its bends and varying depths must also be taken into account since they may dissipate the wave energy concentrations by absorption or by refraction. 2.3.8.1 Characteristics of Waves on a River The Wave Spectrum It is customary to characterize a wind-generated wave field by its energy spectrum. The energy spectrum is associated with the square of the heights of the waves. In general, the wave spectrum is broad-band, but not "white". The broader the band, the more irregular and "confused" are the wave heights, lengths, and periods. At the other extreme, the waves corresponding to a pure line spectrum - the narrowest conceivable narrow-band spectrum - would have the regularity of a pure sinusoid. The wave spectrum for a river is similar to that for the open ocean after certain filters have been applied.
- 1. Significant wave height (Hs): The significant wave height is the arithmetic mean of the heights of the one-third highest waves in a train of waves. It is thus a statistical description of the wave heights which concentrates on the higher waves.
- 2. Maximum wave height (Hmax): As usually used, "maximum" in this sense is also a statistic, one which concentrates even more on unusually high waves. It is defined as the arithmetic mean of the heights of the highest one percent of the waves present. Hmax is approximately 1.67 Hs.
- 3. Wave period corresponding to Hs (Ts): The period for the significant waves is also a statistic. It is the average time interval between passage of the wave crests whose heights were used to construct the average, Hs.
- 4. Wave length (L): Wave length is generally estimated from wave period. In deep water, where the water depth is greater than one-half the wave length, one uses the approximation:
L = 5.12 T2 (2.3-5) where: T = seconds L = feet. 2.3-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 5. Wave steepness (H/L): The wave steepness is defined as the ratio of the wave height to the wave length. Waves for which H/L > 1/17 are theoretically unstable and will break. Thus H/L = 0.143 is an upper bound on wave height for any given length. In reality, with heavy storm conditions, waves will break much sooner and wave steepness as great as the theoretical maximum are for the longer (and higher) waves.
Wind Velocity, Duration, and Wave Height If the wind velocity over a given fetch were to remain constant for a sufficiently long time, the waves would grow until their energy content and distribution by wave-number and frequency reached a statistically steady-state limit. This is the wave spectrum corresponding to the fully aroused sea. For deep water the spectral form and its relation to fetch, wind speed, and wind direction with its consequent implications for wave heights and periods may be considered as well established(8)(9)(14). For rivers, with their universal meanders, it is always the limited fetch which imposes the most stringent limitation on the full development of the fully aroused spectrum. The effect is that of a high-pass filter with an extremely sharp cut-off. Long waves, those which can attain the greatest heights before becoming unstable, cannot be excited in the limited distances available. When this is considered together with the functional form of the spectrum at high frequencies (an f to the -5 power dependence) it is easy to see that most of the energy in the wave system is concentrated at frequencies just above the cut-off. In rivers one has, in effect, a very narrow-band spectrum. Thus, the waves which appear on rivers are far lower, shorter, and more regular than those which would be generated in the open sea by winds of the same force. They will show much less variability than the corresponding ocean waves. The Effective Fetch Since the river is not straight, but rather a series of reaches connected by bends, and since the width of the river is always small compared with the lengths of its reaches, a severe limitation is placed on wave heights which can be generated. A method for evaluating the effect of a narrow channel has been proposed by Saville(15) and used successfully in a number of studies(8)(11). The Effect of Meanders Where the Direction Between Reaches Alters by Less Than 45 Degrees In general, surface winds follow river valleys. However, the waves they generate in a reach run directly before the wind and do not follow the bends. Thus, at each bend the waves tend to run ashore, a tendency reinforced by refraction over the shallow water along the banks. Waves which go ashore are in part broken up and their energy absorbed, and in part, they are reflected. For these reasons, only a part of the wave energy makes it around the bend and is available to the wind for further growth. In a sense, the wind must begin building the wave energy anew at the head of each reach, although not from the zero levels appropriate to undisturbed water. An over estimate of the wave conditions can be found by considering each reach separately and assuming that no substantial energy loss occurs at the bends. Once an estimate of the wave energy, E (ft2), is made for a point of interest, the significant wave height may be found from Hs = 2.83 E. The Effects of River Currents The river current may be either following (in the same direction as the wind) or opposed (in the opposite direction from the wind). A following current increases the wave lengths and 2.3-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 decreases the wave heights (and the steepnesses) while an opposed current decreases the wave lengths and increases the wave heights (and the steepnesses). In either case, the wave periods are unaltered. The size of these modifications is a function of the ratio of the speed of the current (U) to the wave celerity in still water (c). Bigelow and Edmondson (13) studies the effects of following and opposed currents. A summary of their results is shown in Table 2.3-7. 2.3.8.2 Computation of Wave Parameters for the River Wind Velocity and Duration Over land, maximum sustained wind speeds of 40 mph may be taken. The two critical wind directions for the point of interest are east and north. For an east wind, the current would be following, while for a north wind it would be opposed. Of the two, only winds from the east need be considered seriously since the fetch available to a north wind is severely limited. With wind speeds of this magnitude, a duration of about two hours would be enough to bring the waves to their maximum development in the limited fetches available. It has been assumed that these winds will coincide with the worst flood level to be expected at the power station site. Water Depth and Effective Fetch For the flood stage assumed that the power station site would be at El. 730.0 ft. This is 65 ft above normal water level. The mean depth and width of the river under these conditions would be approximately 80 ft and 0.5 mi, respectively. The anticipated river current would be in excess of 6 ft per second. The fetch for an east wind would be the 10 mile section of the river between the Monaca-Rochester Bridge and Shippingport. This section of the river consists of four straight reaches separated by more or less gentle bends as shown in Figure 2.3-22. On the average, each reach is 2.5 miles long. For a narrow channel, the wind cannot generate waves over the full range of direction available to it as in open water, in other words, the width of the fetch places restrictions on the total amount of energy transferred from wind to water until the fetch width exceeds twice the fetch length. For a conservative estimation, the effective fetch in each reach of the river is computed by assuming the wind transfer energy to the water surface in the direction of the wind and in all directions within 20 degrees on either side of the wind direction. The definition sketch of the effective fetch computation is also shown in Figure 2.3-23. Feff = Xi cos / cos = 1.5 mi (2.3-6) Total Energy and Significant Wave Height From the established relations for significant wave height for a 40 mph wind and a fetch of 1.5 mile Hs = 2.1 ft. This corresponds to a total energy, E = 0.55 sq. ft and the two are related by: Hs 2.83 E (2.3-7) The wind would transfer energy in wave form to the water surface proportional to 0.55 sq ft within each 2.5 mile reach. The wave energy developed within each reach would be partially lost at each bend, only part being transmitted to the next reach. If we make the extreme assumption that only 10% of the wave energy is lost at bends and by refraction over the entire 10 mile section of the river, then the E-value at the power station site would be 2.0 sq ft and the corresponding significant wave height would be 4.0 ft. From the Fetch Graph by Pierson, Neuman, and James shown in Figure 2.3-23, the appropriate corresponding wave period is 4.0 2.3-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 second. The wave length from L = 5.12 T2 is 82 ft. Thus, with an average water depth of 80 ft, over most of the river the waves will be in deep water. The Effect of River Currents The celerity of a four-second wave in still water is: c = 5.12 T = 20.5 ft/second (2.3-8) From Table 2.3-7, a following current greater than 5 ft/sec (U/c = 5/20.5 = 0.25) would give a wave height ratio (RH) of 0.76 and a wave length ratio (RL) of 1.43. Applying these modifications, one has for the east wind: Hs = (RH)H = 0.76 x 4 = 3.0 ft and L = (RL)L = 1.43 x 82 = 120 ft with T = 4.0 sec. The maximum wave height in this case is: Hmax = 5.0 ft. A north wind results in a less serious case. The reach to the north of the power plant site is roughly 2.5 miles long and is terminated by a bend of nearly 90 degrees. Thus, the E-value to be expected from north winds is 0.55 sq ft and the corresponding significant height, were there no opposing current, would be: Hs 2.83 E 2.1 ft . (2.3-9) Waves from the north will be much shorter than those from the east, 2 second and 40 ft. The celerity would be c = 20 ft/second. With U = 5, U/c = -5/20 = -0.25 and, from Table 2.3-7, RH = 2.35 and RL = 0.43. Thus: HS = (RH)H = 2.35 x 2.1 = 4.9 ft and L = (RL)L = 0.43 x 40 = 17.2 ft The corresponding steepness would be: H/L = 4.9/17.2 = 0.285, (2.3-10) a value far in excess of the maximum possible steepness of 0.143. As a result, these waves never arrive at the power plant site. With the north wind and the opposing current the entire downstream reach would be a smother of torn water and foam, but compared with the east wind and following current, little wave action would reach the site. 2.3-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.3.8.3 Computation of Wave Forces on a Vertical Wall Using a wave height of 5 ft (Hmax) and an unbroken wave since the water depth at the structure is greater than one and a half times the values of Hmax, the Sainflow method (8) for the determination of pressure due to unbroken waves was used. We have: ho = (3.14 H2/L) coth [2 (3.14) d/L] (2.3-11) and P1 = WH/cosh [2 (3.14) d/L] (2.3-12) where: d = depth from stillwater level H = height of original free wave L = length of wave W = weight per cu ft of water P1 = pressure the Clapotis adds to the stillwater pressure ho = height of orbital center (or mean level) above still water level The maximum over-pressure due to wave action is thus 360 lbs/sq ft at the still water level. 2.3.8.4 Evaluation An evaluation of the static and dynamic consequences of wave action has shown that there will be no loss of ability to maintain a safe shutdown condition, with coincident wave action with the PMF. The forces involved will not cause failure of the safety-related portions of the intake structure. The ventilation air intakes on the intake structure are located at El. 737 ft to allow for the 6.7 ft runup above the standing water level of 730 ft associated with the 5 ft maximum wave. Portable ventilation exhaust chimneys will be available for attachment to the ventilating exhaust slots inside the intake structure to protect against the 5 ft wave and associated runup. All safety-related structures and equipment are protected to El. 730 ft. The intake structure is the only safety-related structure which will be subjected to the effects of coincident waves and associated run up. The safety-related facilities at the intake structure, including the portable ventilation exhaust chimneys and the ventilation air intakes, are designed for the static and dynamic effects of postulated wave action, including waterborne missiles and wave splash. In addition to the static equivalent loading resulting from wave and splash loading, the ventilation exhaust stacks can withstand a postulated waterborne missile consisting of a 4 inch x 12 inch by 12 ft long wood plank, weighing 200 lb, or a 55 gallon drum weighing 512 lb, striking at a velocity of 36 fps within a range of 20 deg to the direction of the river flow. No benefit from the surrounding steel superstructure and siding was considered in the evaluation of the ventilation exhaust chimneys. Permanent safety related structures are protected against tornado generated missiles which are more limiting than the postulated waterbound missile. 2.3-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.3.9 Potential Ice Jam Flooding or Blockage Formation of ice jams on the Ohio River is an almost unknown phenomenon. A significant occurrence of memory in the plant vicinity was in 1936, and that was under circumstances which would not be repeated today. Additional information from the Corps of Engineers is presented in Attachment 2.3F. At that time, all of the nonadjustable wicket-type gates on an old navigation dam were dropped for fear they would be taken out by a large ice flow coming down from the Monongahela River. This resulted in a very low pool with ice grounding on a sand bar and the formation of an ice jam about six miles above Shippingport. All of the old dams in this reach of the river have been removed, and the New Cumberland Dam now regulates the pool in the plant vicinity. This new dam is equipped with tainter gates, some of which are lowered to pass ice runs and then raised to maintain the normal navigation pool. Normally, ice jams form at obstructions and irregularities such as bridge piers, islands, sharp bends, and at the upstream edge of a reach of solid ice. None of these conditions exist right at the intake structure, and there is no reason to believe that the intake would ever be blocked by an ice jam. The Shippingport Bridge is located about 1000 ft upstream of the intake. The three pointed piers in the river supporting this structure do not form a significant channel obstruction, hence there is no reason to conclude that an ice jam would form there. In general, the worst type of ice jam is a dry one which is formed by ice blocks completely plugging the river section down to the channel bottom. The water level behind the jam increases rapidly until the head and/or more ice flow destroys the plug. The case of dry ice jam formation behind a solid ice sheet has been investigated by Mathieu and Michel(16). They have concluded that the size of ice block for this situation must equal or exceed three-quarters the channel depth. For this case, with channel depths which range from 20 to 30 ft, ice blocks of 15 to 23 ft across would be required to start a dry jam. According to observations made by operating personnel at the Shippingport Station, ice flows of 6 to 8 hours duration have occurred every few years at the site, and the maximum block size is about 8 to 10 feet across by 1 foot thick, i.e., about half the minimum size required for starting a dry jam. Other factors which tend to rule out the possibility of ice jam formation in this area are the heavy barge traffic which keeps the river open year-round and the mitigating effect of warm water discharges from industry upstream. Blockage of the intake by accumulation of floating ice on the racks and screens is not expected to occur since the intake openings are protection from ice and trash by a curtain wall extending 5 feet below normal pool elevation of 664.5 ft. Ice cover on the Ohio River generally does not present a great hazard to river structures or navigation. Although freezing will occur during protracted periods having temperature below 20 F, an appreciable ice cover will not develop until occurrence of several days with a minimum temperature of 10 F or less. 2.3.10 Storm Drainage Section 2.2.2.3, Climatological Averages, and Section 2.2.2.4, Climatological Extremes, (Tables 2.2-1 and 2.2-2, respectively) show both the 97 year average monthly precipitation figures and the 97 year maximum daily and monthly precipitation figures. From Table 2.2-2, the maximum 2.3-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 24 hr precipitation between 1870 and 1967 was 4.08 inches. From Table 2.2-1, the highest monthly average amount of precipitation between the same 97 years was 3.91 inches. The roof and yard storm drainage systems are designed for a rainfall intensity as shown in Figure 2.3-24 which is extracted from Technical Paper No. 25, Rainfall Intensity - Duration - Frequency Curves, U.S. Department of Commerce, Weather Bureau. The design rainfall used to calculate drainage capacity has an intensity of 4 inches per hr for a statistical duration of ten minutes and a frequency of five years. Figure 2.3-24 shows that rainfall intensities higher than 4 inches per hr may be obtained at longer frequencies with longer or shorter duration. This increase in rainfall intensity over the design intensity produces a buildup of water level on areas being drained. Conservatively assuming that the capacity of the drainage system does not increase with water level buildup, Figure 2.3-24 shows that even for rainfall intensities greater than design, the water buildup is less than 1 inch. The Probable Maximum Precipitation (PMP) as described in Reference 17, is less than the designed roof drainage capacity. There are a minimum of two roof drains for every roof and as many as 6 roof drains for large roofs. All drains are fitted with screens to prevent clogging of drain lines. The roof screens are inspected periodically and no buildup of water is expected. All structures containing safety-related systems are protected against tornado winds and missiles and are constructed with two feet thick heavily reinforced concrete roof slabs capable of storing water to the height of their parapets. Those structures such as the service building and intake structure, which have steel superstructure above the missile protected areas, have roofs constructed of 20 gage, 1 1/2 inch steel decking supported on steel framing. These roofs are capable of holding the full weight of the Probable Maximum Precipitation, as shown by Reference 17, as 13 inches of rainfall in 72 hr, assuming all drains completely plugged, utilizing design stresses of the decking and framing to 0.9 yield. Prior to full buildup of the water, water would leak through roof openings. Critical equipment located below these areas are set on pads raised above the floor surface. The volume of water that may find its way below the roof is small and the dispersion area great, thereby no buildup above the "housekeeping" pads is probable. During this phenomenon, the plant would be shutting down since this precipitation is associated with the Probable Maximum Flood. The roofs can safely store the full quantity of water associated with the worst storm based on a 100 year return period as shown in Figure 2.3-24 without any threat of water leaking below. The roofs of all structures are generally inspected on a routine basis, ensuring that the screened roof drains are clean and in satisfactory condition. Any material on the roofs not secured will be removed or repaired, thereby eliminating the possibility of external plugging. The screening will eliminate the possibility of internal plugging of the lines. It has been previously stated that all roofs located over Category I components can safely store a minimum of 13 inches of rainfall. In fact, with the exception of a portion of the service building roof, the roofs can safely withstand ponding of water up to their parapet tops. The accumulation incurred by the rainfall given indicates the maximum buildup of water that may be expected would be less than 6 inches. 2.3-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 In the case of the portion of service building roof area over the office and air conditioning rooms, even if it was assumed that only two of the four area roof drains were capable of passing water, the total accumulation would be less than 13 inches. In order for this roof to also provide full storage to the parapets, only a 7.5 percent increase in minimum yield strength of the deck material need be assumed. Even if this roof is assumed to fail, detrimental effects are anticipated since any water deposited in the office and air conditioning areas would run out to the ground level below. In this situation, only minor seepage to the switchgear area would occur through the stairway in the clean shop. All roof and surface drainage around the site passes on directly to the storm drainage system which slopes northward, as shown in Figure 2.3-25, until it discharges into the Ohio River at the intake structure. The site grade of El. 735 ft essentially forms a plateau surrounded on three sides by lower ground; to the north by the lower plant level at El. 705 ft (north of the turbine building) and thereon sloping to the Ohio River (pool level El. 664 ft); to the east by sloping ground to Peggs Run and to the south by a gully formed by the New Cumberland Pennsylvania Railroad. The west end of the plant borders on the former Shippingport Atomic Station site which has a similar site grade of El. 735 ft and the same topographical features to the north and south as for BVPS-1 and sloping ground to the Ohio River to its west. For rainfall intensities greater than the 4 inches per hr used for the design of the yard drainage some puddling will occur. However, since the site pitches through natural drainage lines, to the Ohio River and Peggs Run, surface drainage will aid the yard storm drainage system in minimizing the buildup of water to less than a few inches. 2.3.11 Low River Flow A low flow frequency curve for the Ohio River at Shippingport is shown in Figure 2.3-1. This curve represents the lowest continuous seven day mean flows that would occur. It is based on a statistical analysis of historical flows during the past 44 years (1929-1973) as modified by the present reservoir system. An instantaneous low flow could be slightly lower, but with the large impoundments behind the locks and dams, the seven day flow could be provided continuously by temporarily drawing on the river storage when needed. The lowest flow of record occurred during the extreme drought of 1930. A minimum of 1,250 cfs flowed past Shippingport in August of that year. Since that time eight reservoirs with low flow augmentation capabilities have been constructed. The lowest flow that would have occurred in 1930 with the contemporary reservoir system in 4,000 cfs. Several reservoirs in the authorized or planning stages (in 1973) would have a substantial influence on low flows. Included in this group are Stonewall Jackson, Rowlesburg, and St. Petersburg. Collectively, they would increase the minimum flow to approximately 6,000 cfs at Shippingport. The revised minimum flow of 4,000 cfs, as discussed in Attachment 2.3C, results in a reduction of the minimum water surface elevation at the BVPS-1 site to El. 648.6 ft from the previous El. 649.0 ft. By extrapolating an unregulated low-flow frequency for drought conditions, which may be characterized as the most severe reasonably possible at the plant site, an instantaneous low 2.3-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 flow of about 800 cubic feet per second could occur. This condition was analyzed as discussed below. Information on the regulation of the New Cumberland Pool during extreme low flow conditions was requested from the Pittsburgh District, Corps of Engineers (Attachments 2.3D and 2.3E). At a flow of 800 cfs coincident with lock damage, which could reasonably be expected to occur, the pool would drop 1.8 ft to El. 662.7 ft M.S.L. The New Cumberland Pool is maintained at El. 664.5 ft through the use of locks, dams, and storage reservoirs in the river basin. Records indicate that this elevation can be maintained at flows up to 20,000 cfs. Normal plant operation can be continued at river levels between El. 695 ft and El. 654 ft. Actions to protect safety related equipment are initiated at El. 695 ft, as required by the Licensing Requirements Manual. At El. 654 ft, the river water, raw water and fire water pumps still have adequate NPSH to meet design requirements as summarized below: Minimum Submergence Submergence Pump Required (ft) at El. 654 (ft) River water 4 12.7 Fire 1.6 10.4 Raw water 5 5 Since the raw water pumps minimum NPSH is reached at El. 654 ft, BVPS-1 shutdown will be initiated. The occurrence of river levels below El. 654 ft is highly improbable. Plant operation with river level below 654 ft is prohibited by plant Technical Specifications. For safe shutdown, the ultimate heat sink (Ohio River) must supply only the river water system. The river water pump suction minimum submergence is discussed in Section 9.9. At the minimum possible river elevation (648.6 ft), the river flow assumes open channel flow characteristics at the rate of 800 fps or 360,000 gpm. The river water system flow requirement to maintain safe shutdown is a maximum of 7500 gpm or 2.1 percent of flow available. Therefore, the Ohio River can easily meet the cooling water requirements of BVPS-1. Further, assuming that BVPS-2 requires the same amount of cooling water, less than 5 percent of flow available would be required to maintain safe shutdown of both nuclear power stations. 2.3-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 2.3
- 1. P. J. Barosh, "Use of Seismic Intensity Data to Predict Effects of Earthquakes and Underground Nuclear Explosions in Various Geologic Settings", U.S. Geologic Survey Bulletin 1279, U.S. Government Printing Office, pp 12 (1969).
- 2. H. M. Westergaard, "Water Pressures on Dams During Earthquakes", Transactions of the American Society of Civil Engineers Vol. 98, pp 418-433.
- 3. N. N Ambraseys, and S. K. Sarma, "The Response of Earth Dams to Strong Earthquakes", Geotechnique Vol. 17, pp 181-213 (1967).
- 4. H. B. Speed, and I. M. Idriss, "Soil Moduli and Damping Factors for Dynamic Response Analysis", Report No. EERC 70-10, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley, California (December 1970).
- 5. A. W. Dawson, "LEASE II - A Computerized System for the Analysis of Slope Stability",
Thesis, Department of Civil Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
- 6. Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, "Report on Design and Stability of North Anna Dam", for Virginia Electric and Power Company (1971).
- 7. H. B. Seed, and I. M. Idriss, "A Simplified Procedure for Evaluating Soil Liquefaction Potential", Report EERC-70-9, College of Engineering, University of California, Berkeley (November 1970).
- 8. "Shore Protection Planning and Design: Technical Report No. 4", U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineering Research Center, third edition (1966).
- 9. B. Kinsman, "Wind Waves", Prentice-Hall, Inc. (1965).
- 10. J. J. Stocker, "Water Waves", Interscience Publishers, Inc. (1957).
- 11. "Computation of Freeboard Allowances for Waves in Reservoirs", Engineer Technical Letter ETL 1110-2-8, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (August 1, 1966).
- 12. "Wave in Inland Reservoirs", Summary Report on CWI Projects CW-164 and CW-165, Technical Memorandum No. 132, Beach Erosion Board, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (November 1962).
- 13. H. B. Bigelow, and W. T. Edmondson, "Wind Waves at Sea Breakers and Surf", U.S.
Navy Hydrographic Office, H. O. Pub. No. 602 (1947).
- 14. W. J. Pierson, G. Newmann, and R. W. James, "Practical Methods for Observing and Forecasting Ocean Waves by Means of Wave Spectra and Statistics", U.S. Navy Hydrographic Office, H.O. Pub. No. 603, (1955, reprinted 1960).
- 15. T. Saville, Jr., "The Effect of Fetch Width on Wave Generation", U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Beach Erosion Board, Tech. Memo No. 70 (December 1954).
- 16. B. Michel, "Winter Regime of Rivers and Lakes", CRREL, Hanover, H.H., p. 98, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (April 1971).
2.3-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 2.3 (CONTD)
- 17. "Project Maps and Data Sheets Covering Authorized Project - Volume 2 - Reservoir", U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers, Pittsburgh District (June 1972).
- 18. "Standard Format and Content of Safety Analysis Reports for Nuclear Power Plants" (Revision 1) Nuclear Regulatory Commission (October 1972) 2.3-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 ATTACHMENT 2.3A ANALYSIS OF FLOOD HEIGHTS OHIO RIVER AT SHIPPINGPORT, PA. U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, PITTSBURGH DISTRICT JANUARY, 1970 SCOPE The proposed Shippingport atomic energy plant site of the Duquesne Light Company is located on the left bank of the Ohio River, 35 miles below the head of the Ohio River at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The total drainage area of the river at this site is 22,989 square miles. Thirteen Federal reservoirs control flood runoff from 7,648 square miles of this area. The remaining area is 15,341 square miles. Five additional Federal reservoirs which will control 1,367 square miles or about 9% of the now uncontrolled area should be in operation within about five years. Runoff from the 15,341 square miles below the existing dams will be virtually unaffected by any other structures during floods of maximum proportions. The drainage area limits above the site are shown on Plate 1 as are the areas tributary to the 13 completed reservoirs and the five future reservoirs presently under construction or in an active status for near future construction. ACTUAL FLOODS OF RECORD Actual flood records in the immediate vicinity of Mile 35.0 are only available since 1911. Comparable longer term records, however, have been obtained at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, 35 miles upstream and at Wheeling, West Virginia, about 52 miles downstream. The record at Pittsburgh dates back to 1762. Continuous records, however, did not begin until 1854, thus providing 116 years of records available for mathematical frequency analysis, but a record of 208 years for historical analysis. Continuous records at Wheeling extend from 1838 to 1850 and from 1861 to date with 110 years of uninterrupted data and a historical period of 132 years. Between 1937 and 1967, the flood control reservoirs were consecutively built and flood heights have been progressively reduced. An adjustment for reservoir reduction was required to place all floods of record in a natural or modified-by-reservoir status. Consequently, computations were made for reservoir storage impoundment and release for all floods since 1935, not only to determine the effect by completed reservoirs, but also to develop a relationship between natural and modified peak flood flow magnitude. The natural and modified peaks were used to compute the frequency of natural flooding and by relationship, the frequency of modified flooding. 2.3-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 These computations also showed how effective the reservoir system would have been on the March 1936 flood which was the highest of record. It attained an elevation of 703.1 feet at Mile 35 with a peak flow at 510,000 c.f.s. This flood resulted from average runoff equal to 3.0 inches of precipitation from the whole basin. Maximum precipitation intensity occurred over the Conemaugh River basin in the contiguous areas now predominately controlled by reservoirs. The Conemaugh River is especially well situated near the center of the tributary area above Shippingport so that it was formerly a prime contributor to a great many of the District floods. Because the controlled areas were a source of much of the March 1936 flood runoff, the reduction they could have exerted was above average. The maximum computed reduced flood, therefore, was not the 1936 flood but that of December 1942. This maximum reduced flood flow at Mile 35.0 would be 390,000 c.f.s. having a corresponding elevation 692.9. HYDRAULIC CHARACTERISTICS Analysis of the 1936 and subsequent floods throughout the basin, stream flow measurements, backwater studies, and detailed topographic maps of the navigable portions of the Allegheny, Monongahela, and Ohio Rivers have provided unit graph and flood routing data for use in determination of actual flood factors and development of theoretical flood hydrographs. Unit hydrographs for 61 drainage areas comprising a separation into significant portions of the total uncontrolled basin, and 13 unit graphs for the reservoir inflows have been developed for flood forecasting and reservoir operation. Flood wave routing coefficients for the Muskingum method have been developed for transposition of the unit graph flows downstream through the basin. Valley storage curves 30 to 40 feet above the maximum flood of record profile were determined to check routing values and flood storage volumes. The stage discharge relation curve for the Ohio River at Mile 35 and other critical locations used in the flood routing procedures have been developed by projection of the curves beyond the flood of record by use of established channel roughness, measured cross-sections, and slope values based on various elevations and the related valley storage between rating station reaches. The stage discharge relation for the Ohio River at Mile 35.0 is shown as Plate 2. STANDARD PROJECT FLOOD Although the March 1936 flood is indicated to be the maximum for a period as long as 200 years, undoubtedly higher floods can occur. The Ohio River Standard Project Flood was developed to establish a plausible event in excess of the record. It was to be used for design of riverside structures where an extremely high degree of flood safety was advisable. Its storm rainfall values were those of an actual storm, over a further west location in the Ohio River Basin where rainfall intensities are greater due to closer proximity to the Gulf source of moisture. It was assumed that they could possibly have been more closely centered over this area. Total storm intensities used were as great as 10 inches over portions of the basin. All of the existing reservoirs were assumed to be in flood control operation during the storm. As in the 1936 storm, high intensities occurred over the Conemaugh Reservoir basin and this reservoir was filled by the time the flood had crested downstream. Spillway discharge from this reservoir and several others occurred on the flood recession. This flood has a computed peak flow of 630,000 c.f.s. at Shippingport with a maximum stage at elevation 705.0. This flow is about 60% greater than the maximum reduced flood and would appear to have only a one or two thousand to one change of occurring in any year. 2.3-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 DAM STABILITY The chance of augmentation of flood flows by dam failure superimposes an extreme improbability on remote probability. All of the Pittsburgh District Corps of Engineers dams were designed for localized probable maximum storm runoff. They will not fail from overtopping especially from less intense rainfall of more generalized widespread storms such as the Standard Project Flood. Military personnel also consider it highly improbable to critically breach these dams by sabotage, using conventional means or weapons, because of their mass. The most likely cause of their failure would be from a catastrophic event such as an atomic explosion or an earthquake in the immediate area coincidental with full or near full impoundment. The widespread destruction resulting from an atomic blast, or more significantly from an atomic attack of which it could be a part, could minimize the more local effects that might be caused by dam failure. The Pittsburgh District reservoirs whose failure would most likely have the greatest flooding effect at Shippingport function solely as flood control projects and consequently are usually at minimum storage. The decreased chance of destruction of these reservoirs when full compounds the improbability of flooding from this source. At the World Conference of Earthquake Engineering in Chile, various charts and discussions indicated the improbability of dam failure from earthquakes in this area. Civil Engineering, October 1969, page 73, shows the seismic risk map presented at the conference. It indicates that this basin lies within a zone-one designation where earthquake damage can be only minor. Also presented at this conference was a paper that described an earthquake which produced horizontal cracks through a new 300-foot high concrete gravity dam at Koyna, India, in 1967. The shock was of high magnitude registering 6.5 on the Richter scale. Breaching did not occur (Civil Engineering, March 1969, page 83). A more local example of the relation between stability of our gravity dams and earth shock was observed on 19 November 1969 at Bluestone Dam located in southeastern West Virginia. A tremor registered at 4.75 on the Richter scale occurred about 40 miles from the dam at 8 p.m. of this day. A thorough investigation at the dam showed no effect. Personnel on duty at the dam were not conscious of the tremor although people in nearby homes were alarmed at the vibration in these less substantial structures. Even though breaching is believed to be improbable, especially coincidental with the peak of the Standard Project Flood, it was given consideration and a computation was made to show the effect of failure of the critically located Conemaugh Dam. The attendant wave from this failure would have raised the peak flow at Shippingport to 1,280,000 c.f.s. with a peak stage at elevation 725.2. PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD Despite the extreme magnitude of such theoretical flood conditions, still more critical conditions are conceivable from the Probable Maximum Rainfall. Such a rainfall represents the culmination of combined critical meteorological factors. Meteorologists do not reasonably concur that more critical rainfall can be experienced. The flood runoff resulting from such rainfall, when compared to frequency projections developed by the accepted conventional computation methods, show this maximum event to be in excess of even extreme probability projections, indicating a frequency of once in a geologic age. 2.3-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Although a probable maximum storm had not been previously developed for the tributary area upstream of Shippingport, a study of this type had been made for the Susquehanna River basin which is adjacent to this area and located to the east. This probable maximum precipitation was presented in Weather Bureau Hydrometeorological Report 40. Consultation with the Office of Chief of Engineers and the Weather Bureau Hydrometeorological Section confirmed the assumption that data in this report could be reasonably applied to the Pittsburgh area. This report presented a storm pattern in the form of isohyetal lines (contours of equal precipitation) developed for 24,100 square miles of drainage area in the Susquehanna basin above Harrisburg, Pennsylvania. This area is of about the same size as that above Shippingport. Orientation of the storm pattern over the Pittsburgh District was performed by transposing it 2.5 deg longitude west and 0.8 deg latitude south. This was believed to be not only a logical transposition, but also one conducive to the peak runoff maximization. The isohyetal storm pattern is shown on Plate 1 with the values of intensity and time distribution of the isohyets tabulated on Plate 3. Both the pattern and table were obtained from Report No. 40. Individual hydrographs for each of the 61 subareas in the basin and for the areas above the 13 reservoirs were developed from the unit graphs and the 6-hour rainfall values, applicable to the particular areas, modified by infiltration losses. These losses have been found applicable to storms of similar characteristics and seasonal occurrence in this area. The uncontrolled area hydrographs routed to Shippingport resulted in a combined flood hydrograph of 1,430,000 c.f.s. The reservoir inflow hydrographs were developed in a similar manner with unit graphs and the oriented rainfall values. In no case were these flood flows as great as the spillway design floods which were used to assure the safety of the dam against overtopping and failure. Reservoir storage during the early storm periods was sustained long enough to permit downstream passage of the flood peak before spillway discharge could appreciably add to its magnitude. Ultimate reservoir storage heights were below structural design levels. Reservoir outflows were subsequently routed downstream through the basin and were combined with the uncontrolled flow hydrographs to form the probable maximum flood as modified by the 13 existing reservoirs. This flood so developed has a maximum flow magnitude of 1,500,000 c.f.s. and would attain an elevation of 730.0 at Ohio River Mile 35. It is almost 4 times as great as the maximum reduced flood in our 200 years of record. The hydrograph of this flood is shown as Plate 4. The mean velocity of the peak flood flow is estimated to be ten feet per second or about seven miles per hour. Bank velocities at the proposed structure should not exceed three miles per hour. DURATION OF INUNDATION These floods would not only cause the river to rise to the high peak stages which have been discussed, but would subject the banks and contiguous structures to protracted durations of inundation. 2.3-31
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Plate 5 presents stage-duration curves which show the length of time that various elevations would be equalled or exceeded during the Maximum Probable, Standard Project, and maximum actual reduced floods. The short duration of additional flooding caused by breaching of Conemaugh Dam during the Standard Project Flood can be readily observed. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS
- 1. The most critical conditions which we believe possible would result from the Probable Maximum Flood.
- 2. The Probable Maximum Flood would have a peak flow of 1,500,000 c.f.s. and attain an elevation of 730.0 at Mile 35.0.
- 3. Outflow from the flood control reservoirs would only contribute 70,000 c.f.s. to the flood peak. Reservoirs would operate according to their predetermined schedules and would be in no danger of failure as this flood is not as critical to them as results from their own design criteria.
- 4. Maximum scouring velocities at the structure should not exceed three miles per hour.
- 5. Failure of any of the flood control dams at any time and particularly coincidental with peak flood flow is not believed of practical consideration.
- 6. The probable maximum flow is 400 percent of the comparable maximum reduced flood in the 200-year period of record. Frequency computations which give consideration to the overall pattern of events place this flood as only a 100-year event. The same computations indicate the probable maximum value to be so far beyond reasonable projection limits it might be termed as a geologic era event.
- 7. The Ohio River Standard Project Flood at Mile 35.0 is 630,000 c.f.s. with a maximum elevation of 705.0. This flood has a computed frequency of about once in 1,000 to 2,000 years.
- 8. The Standard Project Flood augmented by breaching of the Conemaugh Dam (an event believed unlikely) is 1,280,000 c.f.s. with an elevation of 725.2 feet.
The studies have been of sufficient depth and detail to assure a degree of accuracy commensurate with the reliability of projections made. 2.3-32
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Plate 1 2.3-33
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Plate 2 2.3-34
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Plate 3 2.3-35
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Plate 4 2.3-36
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Plate 5 2.3-37
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 ATTACHMENT 2.3B 2.3-38
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 ATTACHMENT 2.3C 2.3-39
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 ATTACHMENT 2.3D 2.3-40
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 2.3-41
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 ATTACHMENT 2.3E 2.3-42
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 2.3-43
BVPS Information 654' M.S.L. - Cold Shutdown in 36 hours required by Technical Specifications 648.6' M.S.L. - Minimum Design Basis Level 2.3-44 BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 PLATE 1 Rev. 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 ATTACHMENT 2.3F ICE JAM POTENTIAL - INFORMATION FROM THE PITTSBURGH DISTRICT, U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS Cover on the Ohio River generally does not present a great hazard to river structures or navigation. Although freezing will occur during protracted periods having temperature below 20 F, an appreciable ice cover will not develop until occurrence of several days with a minimum temperature of 10 F or less. Ice conditions at Shippingport have changed since construction of New Cumberland Dam in 1959. Prior to 1914 the river at this point flowed in its natural condition and was subject to the many factors which generate ice formation and ice gorging. Between 1914 and 1959, Dam 7 maintained a navigable pool. This was a wicket type dam. The wickets were lowered to the bottom of the river during periods of high river flow, and sometimes if severe ice conditions existed, the wickets would remain down even after flow had receded. At such times open river gorging conditions could develop. The worst gorge known in this reach of the river was of this type. It occurred in mid-February of 1936 when ice from the Monongahela River moved down into the Ohio and grounded on a shallow sand bar about 6 miles upstream of Shippingport. A subsequent general rise in the river system carried this gorge rapidly on downstream with little damage. Re-occurrence of such a gorge is now impossible as New Cumberland Dam maintains a depth of more than 20 feet of water over the restraining sand bar. Most critical ice conditions since early 1900 occurred during the severe cold spells of January 1918 and January 1940. During these months ice cover persisted for two to three weeks and was reported to be as much as 6 inches to 8 inches thick. This ice deteriorated, was broken by rising river stages and was carried downstream without gorging in the same manner as generally occurred with less freezing. Ice cover above the present gated dams on the Ohio River spans the river some distance above the gates. If this ice cover persists without thermal deterioration and breakage by river traffic, it will move downriver past the dams coincidental with the breakage and higher velocities created by a rise of about 3 to 6 feet in the upstream end of the pools. No gorging will occur. Most critical ice conditions result from the passage of the ice running out the upper Allegheny River where annual winter temperatures are lower and ice formation is greater. These ice flows occur when there is flood runoff in the basin and an ice gorge is carried on the rising flood water prior to the flood crest. The most critical ice gorges moving through the Upper Ohio River in recent years occurred in December 1959 and March 1964. Many barges, towboats and other floating equipment broke loose during the 1964 flood and floated downstream, causing extensive impact damage. Critical damage from an ice gorge will result during passage of such gorges, but will not result from static ice conditions in the local area. Although the momentum of the ice pack moving at a velocity of about 8 miles per hour can exert a great horizontal pressure on a river side structure its impact on such structure is less than could be experienced by a floating river vessel. 2.3-45
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 2.4 GEOLOGY Geology of the site and its environs has been investigated by Mr. John R. Rand, Consulting Geologist, and Mr. Paul J. Mayrose, Geologist, Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation. A copy of their report is included as Appendix 2B. Their findings are summarized below. Bedrock Geology The bedrock of the area consists of sedimentary formations of Pennsylvanian age, composed of shales and sandstone, with a few thin coal members and at least one thin limestone member. They are essentially flat-lying, with regional dips amounting from 15 to 20 ft to the mile. The shales underlying the site are hard and are moderate to thinly bedded. Primary compression wave velocities in this material were measured at 10,000 fps to 12,000 fps, with shear wave velocities of approximately 6,000 fps. The shale is essentially undeformed and very nearly level in position. There are no known faults under the plant or in its immediate vicinity. The nearest known fault lies approximately 60 miles to the southeast and trends in a northeasterly direction tangentially away from the plant site. The only commercial coal in the area is the Upper Freeport Seam, which is located about 150 ft above founding level of the power station. There has been no mining of coal beneath the power station site or its immediate area and none is anticipated, as such seams as exist at this location are very thin and discontinuous, and are not considered commercially mineable. No gas or oil has been produced in the immediate vicinity of the site, nor is such production planned or anticipated. The salt beds of the Salina group of the Cayuga series underlie the area at about a 4,700 ft depth. There has been no mining of salt by any process under or in the vicinity of the station nor is any anticipated, since the beds are relatively thin and very deep, which makes production from them noncompetitive. Overburden Geology The site lies within the bedrock valley of the Ohio River. This is a flat-bottomed, steep-walled valley constructed by erosion. The power station itself is located upon a terrace of alluvial gravels placed against the south bedrock valley wall, probably during the Pleistocene. This terrace was at one time much more extensive, but a portion of it along its north side was removed by erosion. Subsequent to this erosion, sand and gravels overlain by river clay and silts were placed over the surface of the rock and now form two benches or lower terraces between the high terrace and the river. Thus, the site consists of a high early terrace of granular material having a surface elevation of approximately El. 730 to El. 740 ft and to lower terraces consisting of recent river silts and clays underlain by sands and gravels. The material of the older terrace on which the station is founded consists principally of sands and gravels with some cobbles and rock fragments and with some silt and clay intermingled. Distributed irregularly throughout the mass are occasional lenses of medium to fine, uniform sand. The upper portion of the terrace is sandier and somewhat looser than the great bulk of the terrace. These looser materials extend to a depth of about 10 to 20 ft below existing ground grade. 2.4-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 The nuclear portion of the power station, including the containment structure, auxiliary building, fuel building, and main control area, are founded in the granular materials of the high terrace. Under most of the turbine room area, the granular materials of the older high terrace had been partially removed by erosion and covered over by more recent silts and clays. Prior to construction the silts and clays were excavated and replaced by compacted granular fill extending from the surface of the granular materials to the foundation level of the structure. Summary Geologic conditions at the site are relatively simple. The power station is founded upon a gravel terrace having a maximum thickness of about 100 ft. This terrace, in turn, rests directly upon Pennsylvanian age shales which form the bedrock of the area. These gravel materials, which are relatively dense and incompressible soils, form an adequate foundation for the power station. The bedrock is horizontally bedded shale of Pennsylvanian age. It is essentially undeformed, with regional dips of only 15 to 20 ft per mile. There has been no mining of coal, oil, gas or salt from beneath the area nor is any anticipated, since deposits of these materials that exist are not commercially mineable. There are no known faults under or near the site and none are anticipated. The nearest known fault lies approximately 60 miles to the southeast and has a course tangentially away from the power station. 2.4-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 2.5 SEISMOLOGY Historical seismicity of the site area was investigated by Weston Geophysical Research Incorporated of Weston, Massachusetts, Reverend Daniel Linehan, Consultant. A copy of their report is included as Appendix 2C. Also, a detailed study was made of amplification of earthquake motion from the bedrock through the overburden to the foundations of the structures by Dr. R. V. Whitman of Massachusetts Institute of Technology. His report is included as Appendix 2D. 2.5.1 Seismicity The area is quiet seismically. Historically, no earthquake of epicentral Intensity V, or greater, Modified Mercalli, has occurred within 80 miles of the site. The nearest earthquake of epicentral Intensity V, or greater, took place on June 27, 1906 at Fairport, Ohio (near Cleveland), 80 miles northwest of the site. Only one earthquake having an epicenter within 60 miles of the site has been reported. This earthquake reportedly took place at Sharon, Pennsylvania, approximately 40 miles north of the site, on August 17, 1873. Details are limited, but it is estimated that it had an epicentral intensity of Modified Mercalli III and certainly no more than IV. The site has experienced vibratory ground motion as a result of distant earthquakes, most notably the 1812 earthquake at New Madrid, Missouri, and the 1886 earthquake at Charleston, South Carolina. It is estimated that the latter earthquake may have caused ground motions in the vicinity of the site with an intensity of Modified Mercalli IV in the upland areas and possibly as high as V along some of the river banks, where the structures were located on alluvial soils of relatively recent age. Probably the New Madrid, Missouri, earthquakes resulted in much the same level of motion at Pittsburgh and Shippingport areas. Data are fragmentary and uncertain. It is known, however, that the nearest significant damage from the New Madrid earthquakes was at Cincinnati, Ohio, approximately 330 miles from the epicenter and about 250 miles closer to the epicenter than the site. The Attica, New York area, 180 miles northeast of the site, experienced an earthquake of epicentral Intensity VIII Modified Mercalli on August 12, 1929, and two earthquakes of epicentral Intensity VI have also occurred in this Attica area. An earthquake of epicentral Intensity VII to VIII occurred near Anna, Ohio, on March 8, 1937, and three earthquakes of epicentral Intensity VII have occurred in this same area. Anna, Ohio, is approximately 200 miles west of the site. Earthquakes which occurred in the Attica, New York area and the Anna, Ohio area apparently were not perceptible at the site. 2.5.2 Amplification Through Overburden Qualitatively, it has been realized for some time that earthquake motions in the bedrock are modified and frequently amplified in being transmitted through the overburden to structures. For example, in the Mexico City earthquake of 1957, structures within the city founded on deep soft alluvials were damaged, whereas structures located closer to the epicenter, but founded on rock, were left undamaged. In addition, selectivity of damage in relation to the character of the overburden deposit and the character of the structures has been noted. Thus, short, rigid structures have been observed to be more susceptible to damage if founded upon shallow soils or upon firm materials, whereas, long period, high structures are more susceptible to damage if founded upon softer, deeper deposits. 2.5-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 These latter conditions were especially notable in the Caracas earthquake of 1967, where damage was highly selective. Detailed analyses have indicated that, in all probability, damage was limited to structures where natural periods of the damaged structures coincided rather closely to natural periods of shear vibration in the overburden above the rock. Quantitative procedures have only recently become available for analyzing the effects of the overburden material on amplification and on modification of the frequency distribution or spectral content of the earthquake waves transmitted from the rock. Basically, two different procedures have been developed: a continuous wave reflection and refraction procedure which has been developed by Matthiesen(1) and others at U.C.L.A.; and a model procedure in which the soil mass is assumed to be a system of discrete lumps separated by springs and dashpots to account for stiffness and damping, by Seed and Idriss(2) at the University of California. If the number of elements in the model procedure is taken very large, the expressions of the two approaches become identical, assuming that proper cognizance is taken of radiational losses at the rock-soil interface due to differential dynamic impedances between the two materials (3). Assuming that the earthquake motion on rock exposed at the surface or very close to the surface can be defined, using these procedures the amplification within the soil or overburden column can be computed. The amplification ratio expresses the ratio between the bedrock motion and the motion within the overburden; it can be computed readily using the continuous procedure for a steady state wave input. Earthquakes, however, are transient, rapidly varying events rather than steady state phenomena. Detailed analysis has indicated that amplification ratios based on the steady state conditions tend to be high at the fundamental period of the vibration of the soil column and at the second, third, and fourth modes of vibration of the soil column and slightly low between these modal points and at periods longer than the fundamental period of the soil column. The transient effects can be investigated using the time-history records of actual individual earthquakes. Using these procedures, the structural response spectra for structures founded on overburden may be computed for a specific earthquake input to the base of the overburden using the modal technique, cognizance being taken of the effects of the differences in dynamic impedances between the soil and the overburden at the soil-rock interface. By making this analysis for several different earthquakes and for a reasonable range of soil conditions, it is possible to determine the envelope of response spectra for various structural periods. This has been done for the BVPS-1 site by Dr. R. V. Whitman. His report is included as Appendix 2D. Analysis of the records of a number of strong earthquakes shows that the number of cycles of intense motion are quite limited. For example, the number of cycles in which the acceleration equaled or exceeded one-half the peak acceleration for several large earthquakes is as follows:
- 1. Taff S69E 9
- 2. 1952 N21E 8
- 3. El Centro NS 10
- 4. 1940 EW 12
- 5. Olympia 3
- 6. 1949 2.5-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19
- 7. Golden Gate N10E 3
- 8. 1957 S80E 5
- 9. Helena NS 5 Accordingly, the number of cycles of strong shaking to which structures may be subjected is conservatively estimated at 10.
Subsystems which are lightly damped may be excited by the earth- quake and continue to vibrate thus being exposed to several times this number of cycles of motion. Stress levels in subsystems were kept at or below elastic limits, and for the low numbers of cycles of motion expected fatigue would not control. Earthquakes used for input were digitalized records of El Centro, Taft, and Golden Gate earthquakes, and an artificial earthquake generated by statistical techniques. For convenience, the response spectrum at two percent structural damping and five percent structural damping are determined for each earthquake and compared with the response spectrum for that earthquake at the corresponding damping as if the structure was founded upon bedrock. Ratios of acceleration response spectra at bedrock and on the overburden may properly be considered the amplification ratio by which structural response spectra for earthquake motion in the rock should be multiplied to obtain suitable and usable spectra for structures founded upon the overburden. Values obtained in these analyses are shown in Figures 2D-7, 2D-8, 2D-9, 2D-10, and 2D-11. It is noted that the envelope for the several earthquakes analyzed reaches a maximum ratio of about 3.5 between periods of approximately 0.3 seconds and 0.6 seconds, falling very rapidly to values slightly in excess of one for periods less than 0.3 seconds and to values of approximately 1.8 at 0.7 seconds and 1.0 at 1.5 seconds. This illustrates rather clearly the peaking of the amplification ratio in the vicinity of the fundamental period of the soil column. 2.5.3 Seismic Design As previously indicated, the maximum historic earthquake in this area on firm ground on the uplands had an intensity of approximately Modified Mercalli IV. This was for a very distant earthquake for which the longer periods might well be expected to be dominant in the spectrum. The nearest area where earthquakes have occurred of epicentral Modified Mercalli V or greater is in the Cleveland area where four earthquakes of epicentral Modified Mercalli V intensity are recorded. Assuming for the Design Basis Earthquake (DBE) on bedrock, an Intensity of V or, at the most, low VI would seem to be extremely conservative for this site. Based on published correlations, as shown in Appendix 2C, between intensity and maximum ground acceleration, and from experience on other sites, it has been concluded that this intensity would correspond to a maximum acceleration on bedrock of approximately 0.035 g. Using an amplification ratio through the overburden of 3.5, this maximum acceleration would correspond to a maximum surface acceleration at the site of about 0.125 g for the DBE. The analysis thus indicates reasonable agreement with recommendations by Weston Geophysical Research. 2.5-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Accordingly, the design is based on a DBE normalized to 0.125 g and for the Operational Basis Earthquake (OBE) normalized to 0.06 g. Analysis and design are based on response spectra as shown in Figure 2.5-1 and 2.5-2 for the DBE and OBE, respectively. Dynamic amplification factors used for these spectra are such as to give a maximum spectral acceleration of 0.44 g for two percent damping for the DBE with appropriate relative values for other amounts of damping. The spectra are flat from 2 to 5 Hz (0.2 to 0.5 second period) and reduce to an amplification ratio of unity for frequency exceeding 20 Hz. Seismic Category I structures, systems, and components which are designed to resist seismic forces are listed in Table B.1-1 of Appendix B. Vertical accelerations are taken as two-thirds of horizontal acceleration. The response spectra shown in Figure 2.5-1 and 2.5-2 were the basis for the design of all ground supported structures, equipment, and piping prior to 1979. As part of the reanalysis of Seismic Category I piping systems, the response spectra shown in Figures 2.5-4 and 2.5-5 were developed using Soil Structure Interaction Methodology. The licensee now considers that the SSI-ARS forms the present and future design basis of the plant. Amplified response spectra are used for the design of equipment, piping, and instrumentation supported from structures (See Appendix B). The structures, systems and components designated Seismic Category I as defined in Appendix B are designed for seismic loading as represented by the seismic response spectra. Horizontal and vertical loadings are applied simultaneously. The methods employed to obtain the shear moduli, G, at very small strains, of the soils supporting the structures of the station are determined primarily from direct field measurements of shear wave velocities (Appendix 2G). Under earthquake motion, shear moduli are reduced in accordance with the discussion and appropriate figures of Appendix 2D. Figure 2.5-3 shows values of G for structures founded on or in the upper terrace considering earthquake strains. Shown also in this figure are shear moduli computed from observations of settlement of the turbine room, Shippingport Power Station, for a period of two years. Observation of tests has shown the dynamic or very short time modulus to be about 1.5 to 2.0 times the static modulus. The range of these values are shown and agree very well with the data from seismic shear wave measurements. Average reduced shear moduli considering strains under seismic conditions for the structures at the site are as follows:
- 1. Containment Structure G = 22,000 psi
- 2. Fuel Building, Auxiliary Building, G = 17,000 psi and Other Near Surface Buildings
- 3. Intake Structure G = 17,000 psi Shear moduli are incorporated in dynamic analyses using the Bycroft solution for dynamic response of a rigid cylindrical base supported on an elastic half space. In using this solution for a specific problem, consideration must be given to the effects of geometry and assumptions implicit in the solution which affect computation of the spring constants, virtual mass of soil moving with the base and scatter in experimental data.
2.5-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 2.5.3.1 Factors Affecting Spring Constant and Mass Factors affecting spring constant and mass include embedment, effects of limited depth of elastic stratum and effects of actual contact pressure on the base of a structure as compared with distribution assumed in the Bycroft solution. Certain of these factors increase the stiffness and thus, increase the spring-mass ratio while others decrease it. Present technology does not afford definitive solutions. However, the approximate range effect of each has been established. The elastic half space of the Bycroft solution is weightless and thus, the mass of the soil moving with the structure is ignored. For the containment structure, the virtual mass of soil is estimated not to exceed about 30 percent of the total rotary inertia for rocking and about 18 percent for swaying and may be somewhat less. Since the range of each factor and the effect on the spring-mass ratio are known, it is convenient in estimating the overall range of uncertainty to adjust each spring constant or mass by half the range for the selected factor and then add an uncertainty plus or minus to give the full range. This leads to the following: Range of Effect Equivalent Embedment 0 to +20% 1.1*(k1, k2-) 10% Limited Depth Swaying 0 to +20% 1.1*(k1, k2-) 10% Rocking 0 to +10% 1.05*(k1, k2-) 5% Contact Pressure Distribution Swaying 0 to -15% 0.92*(k1, k2-) 8% Rocking 0 to -30% 0.85*(k1, k2-) 15% Virtual Mass (For Reactor Containment) Swaying +10 to +18% 1.14*(M) 4% Rocking +15 to +30% 1.22*(I) 8% Rocking determines the fundamental and dominant mode of the containment structure. Accordingly, for this mode: k/I = 1.1*1.05*0.85*(k1, k2-)/(1.22*I)20% (2.5-1)
= 0.8*(k1, k2-)/I 20%
where k1, k2- are spring constants from the Bycroft solution. Since G (shear modulus) is linear in this solution, a G-equivalent may be computed and used directly in the Bycroft solution. Then for the containment structure: G-equivalent = (0.8) (22,000) psi 20% (2.5-2) 2.5-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19
= 17,000 psi 20%
Use G = 18,000 psi 20% For the fuel building, auxiliary building, and intake structure, similar factors may be applied, although the effect of limited soil depth is somewhat less and virtual mass effect somewhat larger. 2.5.3.2 Factors Affecting Observed Data Factors affecting observed data include scatter in measurement of seismic velocities and in the strain reduction factor used in estimating the effects of seismic strains. Seismic velocity records were reviewed and showed: Elev. Cs Avg, Range in Cs Range in (ft) (Ft/Second) (Ft/Second) (From Avg) Shear Modulus 700-665 1,050 1,000 to 1,100 5% 11% 665-625 1,300 1,250 to 1,400 +7%, -4% +16%, -8% Scatter in the strain reduction factors is estimated to be 20 percent. Combining the random variations by the root mean square gives a range of variation of 31 percent. For conservatism, a range of 1/3 in the value of G is used. Accordingly the following values of G-equivalent are used in analysis using the Bycroft solution:
- 1. Containment Structure 18,000 psi 33%
- 2. Other Seismic Category I Structures 16,000 psi 33%
2.5-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 References for Section 2.5
- 1. R. B. Matthieson, and C. M. Duke, "Earthquake Amplification Spectra Obtained from Site Characteristics", American Society of Civil Engineers.
- 2. H. B. Seed, and I. M. Idriss, "Influence of Soil Conditions on Ground Motion During Earthquakes", American Society of Civil Engineers.
- 3. R. V. Whitman, and J. M. Roesset, "Report No. 5, Effect of Local Soil Conditions Upon Earthquake Damage; Theoretical Background for Amplification Studies," Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Research Report R 69-15, Soils Publication No. 231.
2.5-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 2.6 SOIL MECHANICS 2.6.1 Site Conditions The site is located approximately 550 ft east, that is, upstream of the former Shippingport Power Station. The general site area was investigated for foundation conditions in 1954 for foundations for the Shippingport Power Station. The site occupies three terraces along the south side of the Ohio River. The southernmost terrace is the highest at about El. 735 ft and is composed of granular soils. This is also the oldest terrace. Its northerly position was removed either partially or possibly completely to bedrock prior to emplacement of the intermediate and low terraces, the low terrace being the most recent. These lower terraces have cohesive soils near surface overlying granular soils. Thirty-five dry sample borings were made for the Shippingport Power Station at locations as shown in Figure 2.6-1, under the direction of Stone & Webster Engineering Corporation, and detailed records of the borings and investigations were available for review. These original, rather widely spaced borings have been supplemented by 30 additional borings made specifically for the purpose of the Beaver Valley Power Station. These included 10 dry sample borings on the high terrace, in three of which attempts were made to obtain undisturbed samples with a Denison sampler. The remaining borings were located in the intermediate and low terrace materials, from which undisturbed samples of surface clays and silts were obtained for physical testing. The locations of these various borings are shown on Figure 2.6-1. A log for boring 101, which is typical of the containment structure, is shown in Figure 2.6-2. The Report on Foundations for the Shippingport Power Station, dated August 9, 1954, is included as Appendix 2E. Logs of all borings and results of soil tests made in these investigations are included in Appendixes 2F and 2H. 2.6.2 Subsurface Conditions 2.6.2.1 High Terrace Ground surface in the area of the proposed station location is at approximately El. 735 ft. The ground underlying this portion of the site is an old, high level terrace of the Ohio River. It is composed of granular material, sands, and sands and gravels, containing variable amounts of cobbles and rock fragments. Some of the material has a silt or clay binder. However, no lenses of silt or clay were encountered in the boring operations and the granular soils extend to bedrock. In general, the materials of the terrace are pervious. There was a continuous loss of drilling water or drilling mud during the drilling operations. Blow counts in the standard penetration test indicated the upper 15 ft approximately of the terrace was looser than the deeper lying material and of somewhat finer grain size. Beginning at about the south side of the turbine building, this old terrace was either partially or completely removed by erosion in times past and two lower terraces consisting of silt and clay in their upper portions and sands and gravels below about El. 655 to 660 were emplaced by the river. These are in part overlain by granular fills placed for roads and railroads for construction access during construction of Shippingport Power Station. 2.6-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Bedrock is horizontally bedded shale which was encountered at approximately El. 635 ft. The surface of the bedrock under the station site and out under the river is nearly horizontal. Approximately 1,000 ft south of the station site is the true valley wall where the bedrock surface rises steeply to approximately El. 1,000 ft. A typical subsurface profile section through the station site along an approximately north-south axis looking west is shown in Figure 2.6-3. Similar foundation conditions exist under the Shippingport Power Station site. This station was founded directly upon the gravels of the high level terrace using mat type foundations. Settlements have been nominal and well within acceptable tolerances. Profile drawings of all seismic Category I structures and buried river water lines showing subsurface materials to bedrock are included as Figure 2.6-15, 2.6-16, 2.6-17 and 2.6-18. Attempts made in the investigation to secure undisturbed samples of the soils under the site by using 4 inch diameter Denison samplers were unsuccessful, probably because of difficulties with gravel and rock fragments contained throughout the gravel mass. Accordingly, all conclusions are based on behavior of the existing station and on the results of standard penetration tests made during these and the previous investigations. Plotted in Figure 2.6-4 are the results of standard penetration tests made for the borings located in the high terrace, both for these and for the previous investigations. In general, from the ground surface of the high terrace down to water level, increasing resistance values are shown ranging from approximately 15 near the surface, where the soils were somewhat looser, to approximately 20 at about El. 715 ft and then in a generally increasing trend to the groundwater level at El. 666 ft, where the median blow count is about 57. Approximately at the groundwater table there was a sudden reduction in driving resistance and then a gradual increase in resistance until bedrock was reached. The reason for this marked difference in driving resistance is not known. There is no significant change in character of material above and below the groundwater table. A possible explanation is the fact that many of the soils contain a greater or lesser amount of silt and clay binder and, above the groundwater table, this material was in partially dry state and therefore, more resistant to deformation and to shear than if it were completely submerged. Ground water table at the time of these investigations was El. 666 ft, approximately 1 ft above river level. In general, the lower blow counts both above and below the groundwater table occurred in lenses of uniform, medium sands and the higher blow counts in the more gravelly materials. 2.6.2.2 Intermediate Terrace The intermediate terrace ground surface, about El. 685 to 700 ft, is intermediate in age between the low and high terraces. The upper soils consist of medium clays which extend to about El. 660 ft. This terrace is overlain in part by fill placed in connection with construction of the Shippingport Power Station. It is underlain by sands and gravels which extend to bedrock. 2.6-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 The clay of this terrace north of the turbine building was sampled using 3 inch diameter thin wall samplers (Reference Borings 108 through 113). Quick shear tests made on essentially undisturbed samples of these clays showed shear strengths varying from about 800 to 1,250 psf, with some samples showing shear strengths in excess of 2,000 psf and one sample a shear strength of 500 psf. Stress strain curves from unconfined compression tests are included in Appendix 2F. For several of the samples, the soils were thoroughly remolded at constant water content, formed into cylinders and tested in unconfined compression. Quick shear strengths in the remolded state were about half that of the undisturbed state showing these soils to be of low sensitivity, having a sensitivity ratio of about 2. They are therefore, not susceptible to flow slides under dynamic loadings. 2.6.2.3 Low Terrace The low terrace, ground level about El. 675 ft, is the most recent. Near surface soils consist of soft clays and clayey silts, many showing some organic contents. Soil test data for these soils are shown in Appendix 2H for borings 304 through 310. Included are both unconfined compression tests and consolidated undrained triaxial tests. Quick shearing strengths of the cohesive members of these soils are quite low, ranging from 160 psf to 440 psf and averaging about 250 psf. These recent river silts and clays extend down to about El. 655 ft where they are underlain by sands and gravels which extend to bedrock at about El. 625 ft. 2.6.3 Foundation Design 2.6.3.1 Foundations Approximate founding elevations of the more important structures of the station are shown in relation to the soil structure on Figure 2.6-3. The reactor containment structure is founded on a 10 ft thick reinforced concrete mat at approximately El. 681. ft. This structure has a dead load weight of approximately 7,300 psf over the area of its mat. Relief of load due to excavation of material from the present ground grade of El. 735 ft to El. 681 ft amounts to approximately 6,500 psf. Thus the net added dead load of this structure over its area is only approximately 800 psf. The fuel building, auxiliary building and main control area in the service building are founded upon reinforced concrete mats at about El. 720 ft. As previously indicated, the upper portion of the high level terrace is somewhat lower in density than the remainder. These looser soils, where encountered below founding level, were removed and replaced to founding grade with select compacted granular fill. The dead load of the control area and auxiliary building is approximately 800 to 1,000 psf in excess of the weight of material excavated. These structures therefore, impose small additional loads upon the soil. The average load under the fuel building is approximately 4,000 psf and accordingly it imposes an added load on the soil of approximately 2,000 psf. 2.6-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 As indicated on the section, the surface of the old terrace gravels slopes downward under the turbine building. Surface soils are recent deposits of clay and silt and some fill which has been placed in this area. These were removed to the surface of the stable gravels and replaced with select compacted granular fill under the turbine room and transformers as shown in Figure 2.6-
- 3. This fill material was compacted using heavy vibratory compactors to a minimum density of 95 percent of Modified Proctor, ASTM D1557. Maximum soil pressures for static loadings are 8,000 psf for foundations on granular soils at depths of 8 ft or more below surrounding grades.
Under lateral loadings such as from wind and earthquake, toe pressure under combined dead loads and lateral loads is limited to 12,000 psf. These are conservative and safe values for granular materials of this character. The Shippingport Power Station site and the Beaver Valley Power Station are both located on the same large continuous terrace on the left (south) bank of the Ohio River. The boring program for Shippingport, which was made under the direction of S&W, extended well upstream and downstream of the site and thus bracketed borings for the Beaver Valley Power Station. Soil types and penetration resistances were consistent between the two sets of borings (Refer to Figure 2.6-4 where data from both the Shippingport borings and Beaver Valley borings are plotted). This terrace is a single, continuous structure a11 of the same age and made of deposition. Since it is of fluvial origin, stratification and cross-bedding are to be anticipated and are indicated by the boring records. Thus while variations in character may occur in a few inches vertically and a few feet horizontally, it is statistically uniform over depths and lateral dimensions significant to the foundations of the structures. Maximum bearing values for foundations in the sand and gravel below El. 715 ft at Shippingport and subject to groundwater levels were established at 8,000 psf for footings 8 ft or deeper below surrounding grade. Settlements have been small and performance completely satisfactory. The natural draft cooling tower is located on the northeast corner of the site along the edge of the river. It is founded on well compacted granular fill placed to El. 700 ft. The soft, compressible silts, organic silts and clays were removed in this area to approximately El. 655 ft and/or the top of the lower gravels, prior to the placement of the structural fill under the tower. These precautions insured against any settlements or failure in the poorer soils. The structural fill for this purpose was compacted to 97 percent of a Standard Proctor Density Test, ASTM D698. In some areas surrounding the site, a nonstructural fill was used to fill in the recessed areas. These materials were compacted to 93 percent of a Standard Proctor Density Test. The embankment slope of this fill, exposed to the river, was provided with a concrete slope wall protection to El. 700 ft as a precaution against possible erosion by flooding in this area. 2.6.3.2 Settlement of Structures The procedure for estimating settlements under the various structures is based on techniques developed in studies of the Alternating Gradient Synchrotron (AGS) at Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). Basically, the procedure is analogous to estimating displacements at the surface of an elastic mass due to an applied surface loading. Briefly, the additional stress of any element within the soil mass from the applied load is computed. The compression then of each such an element is equal to the increased stress times the height of the element divided by the modulus of deformation. The sum of the deformation of the elements from the bedrock surface to the founding level gives the total settlement at that point. Essentially, thus the modulus used corresponds to the modulus of elasticity in elastic analysis. Since, however, soils are not truly elastic, we prefer to call it a modulus of deformation and designate it by the symbol M. It is not a coefficient of subgrade reaction. The observed settlements of the turbine room of the Shippingport Power Station, which is founded upon the same soils and at approximately the 2.6-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 same elevation as the containment structure and turbine building of the BVPS-1, provide an excellent large scale load test for determining the deformation modulus. Settlement plates were set under the Shippingport turbine room mat before starting to pour it. Extending up from each settlement plate was a rod which was isolated from the mat by a pipe sleeve. Initial settlement records were taken before the start of pouring the mat which began in September of 1955 and observations were continued on a more or less regular basis until August of 1957, approximately a year after all loads had been placed. Figure 2.6-5 shows the location of the settlement observation points under the Shippingport turbine room, mat and the observed settlements in December 1956, approximately 15 months after start of construction and in August of 1957, approximately 23 months after the start of construction of the mat. Very little settlement occurred between December, 1956 and August, 1957, indicating that both primary and secondary settlements were essentially complete at the time of the last settlement observation. Observations at the Brookhaven National Laboratory on the AGS and other structures and at Shippingport have indicated there is an immediate primary settlement followed by a secondary settlement of some duration even for sand soils. It has been known for some time that the modulus of deformation of granular soils varies with the effective stress. The studies at BNL showed that approximately: M K Z A (2.6-1) where: Z= depth below surface (position down) K= a constant depending on soil properties A= a constant whose value is such that the resulting value of M is approximately 1.5 to 2.0 x 10(6) kips per sq ft at the surface Using the observed long-term settlements at Shippingport, it is possible to compute the modulus of deformation "M" of the soils at Beaver Valley for long-term loadings. This is shown in Figure 2.6-6. Observations made during construction of the conjunction section at the AGS and observations on large scale loading tests at BNL on areas approximately 30 ft square shows that the modulus of deformation for a reloading cycle is approximately twice that of the initial loading. Further, the modulus for primary settlement, that is the settlement under very short time loadings as for dynamic loadings is approximately 1.5 to 2.0 times the modulus for long-term loadings. Using these moduli and relations, average long-term settlements of the principal structures under static loadings have been computed as follows:
- 1. Containment Structure - 0.5 inches
- 2. Auxiliary Building - 0.25 inches
- 3. Fuel Building - 0.25 inches
- 4. Main Control Area - 0.2 inches 2.6-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 The granular soils as indicated by the grading curves contain some silt and clay binder. Such binder material provides a slight cohesive strength which greatly reduces the tendency of individual grains to shift under vibration. It may be noted that the generally higher "N" values in the penetration tests above the groundwater level have also been attributed to such slight cohesive bonds. Further above the water table, surface tension on small water films at points of contact provide additional bonds between grains, an additional factor in preventing densification under small vibrational motions. These effects have been clearly shown in laboratory tests of densification of somewhat silty sands by vibration(6). Considering these factors, it is concluded that settlements due to soil densification under the very small and short duration vibrations of the DBE will be negligible. In addition to the static settlements, the containment structure would rock and vibrate up and down under earthquake loadings. Such motions under the DBE are estimated to be: Vertical translation + 0.12 inches Rocking at edge of mat + 0.25 inches Total + 0.37 inches 2.6.3.3 Bearing Values Foundations for all major structures are continuous mats of reinforced concrete founded on the denser undisturbed gravels or compacted granular fill. The containment structure is founded at El. 680.9 ft on undisturbed gravel with excavation below El. 715 ft made within a circular sheet piling cofferdam. The turbine building mat with bottom at approximate El. 684 ft is located in part on undisturbed gravel and in part on compacted granular fill. The other major structures and equipment are founded on the compacted granular fill as shown in Figure 2.7-1. The allowable design bearing load for footings 8 ft or more below adjoining grade and mats under static loads only is 8 ksf. The total maximum allowable design load for combined static loads and dynamic loads resulting from wind, tornado or earthquake is 12 ksf. Factors of safety for these bearing values for the reactor containment were computed in accordance with Terzaghi's procedures for shallow footings, since the containment diameter of 150 ft is large in relation to the depth of 54 ft of the founding level relative to surrounding grade. Computations were based on an estimated unit density above the water table of 120 pcf and below the water table of 65 pcf and angle of internal friction of 32. These values are reasonable and conservative. Factors of safety were computed on the conservative assumptions that local yielding could develop in the soil(12). Indicated factors of safety are as follows:
- 1. Groundwater Level (GWL) at EL. 666 ft (normal groundwater level)
- a. Static loading 10
- b. Dynamic loading 10 2.6-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19
- 2. Groundwater Level (GWL) at El. 707 ft (Standard Project Flood used)
- a. Static loading 10
- b. Dynamic loading 9+
The method of computation and assumptions used are conservative, especially since the founding grade is only about 60 ft above the rock surface and friction at the rock-gravel interface results in additional lateral resistance to displacement of the soil under the mat in a bearing type failure. 2.6.4 Effects of Dynamic Loadings 2.6.4.1 General The effects of dynamic loadings on structures of nuclear power stations resulting from earthquake are particularly significant and interesting. Among the factors which must be considered are the effects of vibration on shear strength of granular soil, lateral loadings on buried structures under earthquake conditions, and relative displacement between structures for the design of piping and to ensure that adequate rattle space is provided between structures. Shear moduli for the soils underlying the site for small displacements were determined by refraction seismic surveys by Weston Geophysical Engineers, Inc. Their results have been analyzed and detailed by Dr. Whitman (see Appendix 2D) who developed, as a portion of his analysis of the dynamic characteristics of the soils of the site, values for the shear moduli of these soils under strains expected in earthquakes of moderate intensity. These shear moduli related to depth are shown in Figure 2.6-7. Also in the investigations, Dr. Whitman developed curves showing shear stress at various depths in the soil mass under earthquake for the average of the larger peaks and for the maximum pulse in the earthquake record. The seismic studies by Weston Geophysical were made by crosshole, uphole, and downhole measurements in five drillholes located in the reactor area. P and S wave velocities were measured from direct arrival times. A copy of this report is included as Appendix 2G. 2.6.4.2 Liquefaction Potential When subjected to cyclic shearing stresses or to vibration, granular soils tend to reduce in volume. The magnitude and rate of reduction in volume are dependent upon the looseness of the deposit (its density), the magnitude of the cyclic shearing forces, and the grading of the soil, especially the presence of clay or other cohesive materials. This reduction in volume can occur only as fast as fluids contained in the pore spaces between particles can be expelled from the soil mass. If the soil is totally saturated with an essentially incompressible fluid such as water, as is the case below the groundwater table, there is a temporary increase in pressure within the pore water and a decrease in the portion of the total load imposed upon the soil which is carried by the soil's structure, that is, by contact forces between individual grains. If a number of cycles of shearing load are applied relatively quickly compared with the time required for drainage to occur, the increase in pore water pressure may become a significant fraction of, approach, or become equal to the external loads on the soil mass with a corresponding decrease in intergranular pressures or forces. The shearing strength of granular soils is proportional to the contact between grains. Thus, the decrease in contact forces accompanying such a phenomenon results in a decrease of shearing strength of the soil mass. The number of cycles 2.6-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 of load required to result in a significant decrease in shearing strength of a given soil is dependent upon the magnitude of the shearing stresses in relation to the initial contact pressure between grains, which is termed the effective stress, and upon the relative density of the soil at the start of the loading. In very loose granular soils (relative densities of the order of 30 percent) only a few cycles of loading may be required to cause a complete transfer of external loads from the soil structure to increased pressures in the pore water. In such loose soils, heavy vibrations or repeated cyclic shear loading may cause the individual soil grains to become completely separated from each other by films of water and the soil mass to behave as a dense liquid. This is true liquefaction. Liquefaction as defined above cannot occur in soils of the medium dense to dense condition. After a number of cycles in such soils, shear loading results in an increase in pore water pressure which varies cyclically during the load cycle. If cyclic shear loads are continued for a sufficient length of time, pore water pressures will reach peak value momentarily during each cycle equal to the external loads on the soil. The number of cycles necessary for this to occur is dependent upon the relative intensity of the shearing stresses as compared with the initial effective stresses in the soil mass and upon the relative density of the soils. The point when pore water pressure first reaches equality with external loads on the soil mass has been termed by Seed(4) "initial liquefaction." As indicated above, pore water pressure does not remain constant throughout each cycle of loading, but reaches a momentary peak, and during the remainder of the cycle reduces to substantially lower values. During this momentary period of high excess pore pressure, there is a significant reduction in shearing strength. If the soil is under significant shearing stress, appreciable shear deformations may accumulate over a number of cycles of loading, however, as the soil distorts in shear, medium dense or dense granular soils dilate. This dilation causes an immediate reduction in pore water pressures (5). True liquefaction in which the soil behaves as a heavy fluid with great deformations, however, cannot occur in medium dense or denser sands. Accumulative deformations, as discussed above, are of particular interest in the area immediately below the founding level for structures, since this usually is a zone of relatively high shearing stress, and moderate deformations from place to place at such locations possibly would result in significant differential settlements within the structure. Momentary losses of shearing strength in localized zones or lenses in soil of somewhat less than average density located deep within the soil mass beneath the foundations of a structure would be of little significance, since shearing stresses in such zones are modest and only small deformations could occur, even in a number of cycles of loading. Since the power station and its nuclear units are founded in granular soils, it is pertinent to study the safety against liquefaction of these soils beneath the station. Procedures for such analyses have been developed by Seed(3). They require evaluating quantitatively:
- 1. The magnitude of the shearing stresses which may occur at varying depths in the soils beneath the proposed station due to earthquake.
- 2. The resistance of these granular soils to liquefaction, which may be expressed as the ratio of the cyclic shearing necessary to cause either initial liquefaction or a specific amount of deformation in the number of cycles estimated to occur in an earthquake of the intensity selected. For convenience, the cyclic shearing stress may be expressed as the ratio of actual shearing stress to effective stress in the soil mass.
2.6-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 The shearing stresses which may be expected under earthquakes may be computed from two different approaches. The first approach is to compute shears and distortions in the soil mass using a modal analysis technique from appropriate time-histories as shown in Appendix 2D. This is referred to as the DYALS program. Values for shearing stresses in the soil at Beaver Valley computed from this analysis for the high terrace for the DBE are shown in Figure 2.6-7. The resistance to liquefaction is expressed in terms of the ratio of shearing stresses to vertical effective stress, t/Sv, at the elevation of interest. This ratio, for the soil only, is very close to the ratio for soil plus building loads where the weight of the structure equals or exceeds by a modest amount the weight of soil displaced by the structure. These conditions hold for the structures on the high terrace and t/Sv computed from Figure 2.6-7 may be used as one method of evaluating safety of structures in the high terrace against liquefaction. The second approach is to compute the shear stress at any point as the shear at the base of a soil column necessary to accelerate the mass of soil and any superimposed structure to the average acceleration developed in the column during the earthquake considered. Factors of safety given later are based on this procedure since this method of analysis results in higher shearing stresses in the soil than the results from the DYALS program. Thus the shear stress of any depth Z is computed from the relation: t= (ALPHA) (M) (a) (2.6-2) where: M= total mass above point considered including any superimposed structures a= maximum ground acceleration, single pulse peak ALPHA = ratio which gives average acceleration of mass above elevation considering the number of cycles of vibration to be expected and the reduction of acceleration with depth below surface, since at the soil rock interface the soil acceleration must be equal to the rock acceleration. The number of cycles of significant motion in a number of earthquake records has been analyzed. Observation indicates maximum acceleration occurs as a single peak (13) (never appears more than once). Table 2.6-1 shows the number of cycles of motion in which an acceleration of half the peak was equalled or exceeded for a number of earthquake records. These were taken from accelerograms of the earthquakes listed. A decrease in acceleration to one-half the peak value corresponds approximately to a decrease of one order of intensity on the Modified Mercelli scale and, as a result, conservatively defines the number of cycles of significant motion. For this site, the OBE is most probably characterized as a short local earthquake of Intensity IV or less. As indicated in Table 2.6-1, small sharp earthquakes or even greater intensity than anticipated here, such as Golden Gate '57 or Hollister, showed only a few cycles of significant motion. For the DBE, longer duration as well as large accelerations would be expected. Since even for great earthquakes such as El Centro '40 and Taft '52, which were much more intense than anticipated for the Design Basis Earthquake, there are only about 10 cycles of significant motion. Eight cycles for the DBE is reasonable and conservative and is used for the analysis of the hazards of liquefaction. 2.6-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 An ALPHA value of 1.0 assumes eight complete cycles of loading at the maximum surface ground acceleration throughout the entire depth of the overburden. As previously indicated, records show that maximum ground acceleration occurs only in a single pulse. All other peaks of acceleration are smaller and thus the average for eight complete cycles of loading must be less than 1.0. Further, the thickness of the overburden in the high level terrace, for which the dynamic analysis was made, is such that significant amplification of bedrock motion would be expected within the soil column. Acceleration immediately above the bedrock must be the same as that of the rock. Accordingly, accelerations in the soil column reduce with depth below the surface. Figure 2.6-8 shows the ratio of the average acceleration of the mass above the point considered for the single maximum peak to the surface maximum acceleration plotted against the depth below surface. This is from the dynamic analysis of soil amplification made for this site. Evaluation of the vertical effective stress requires determination of the groundwater levels for various conditions. The soils beneath the site are pervious and groundwater levels in them are directly related to river level stages (Section 2.3.3). These may be summarized as follows:
- 1. Normal river level El. 664.5 ft (controlled by downstream dam)
- 2. Ordinary high water level El. 678.5 ft (recurrence frequence approximately 2 yr)
- 3. Standard Project Flood El. 705 ft (1,000 to 2,000 yr occurrence)
- 4. Probable Maximum Flood El. 730 ft (may be termed as a geologic era event)
The hydrograph of the Standard Project Flood is quite sharp, El. 705 ft being exceeded for only 3 days. The recurrence frequency of the DBE is estimated to be 10,000 yr. The probability of simultaneous occurrence of the DBE and a flood exceeding El. 705 ft is estimated to be less than 1 x 10-9. The probability of simultaneous occurrence of the DBE and Probable Maximum Flood is so small as not to warrant evaluation of liquefaction potential under this assumed combination of circumstances. Attempts to obtain undisturbed samples of the soils underlying the site suitable for dynamic triaxial tests were unsuccessful. Seed(3) has presented results of dynamic triaxial tests upon a sand considered extremely susceptible to liquefaction phenomenon. Figure 2.6-9 shows the relation between shearing stresses, expressed as a ratio of shear stress to effective stress, to the number of cycles necessary to cause initial liquefaction for this sand at various relative densities. These curves have been used for computing the factor of safety against initial liquefaction of the soils underlying the several structures which is taken as the cycle where the pore pressures first become equal to the test chamber pressure. This approach is conservative. The sand selected and tested by Seed was especially susceptible to liquefaction, whereas the materials underlying the site are much better graded. As indicated by the grading curves in Appendixes 2F and 2H, these soils contain a significant proportion of clay and silt binders which reduce their susceptibility to liquefaction. The effects of grading and silt and clay binders have been shown in studies by Lee(1). The factors of safety have been computed for "initial liquefaction," whereas a number of additional cycles of loading would be required before significant distortion or deformations developed in the soil mass. In the computation, the factor 2.6-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 of safety is defined as the ratio of the shearing stress at a given effective stress necessary to cause "initial liquefaction" in eight cycles as compared to the shearing stress developed by the earthquake under the structure. This again is a conservative method of expression. Relative densities for computations have been based on the median value of relative density for the soils as determined from the results of the standard penetration tests using the Gibbs and Holts(2) "average curve" for penetration resistance vs. relative density for the effective stresses existing at the time of these investigations. Effective stresses under the structures on the high terrace, reactor containment, fuel building, and office building in the soil at the depths of interest are substantially higher than effective stresses in the Gibbs and Holts tests. From experience, it is believed that for these large effective stresses, actual relative densities for the deeper soils of the high terrace are higher than values shown. Relative densities as determined from the Standard Penetration Tests for the high terrace, intermediate terrace and low terrace are shown in Figure 2.6-10, 2.6-11 and 2.6-12, respectively. The penetration values indicate relative densities in the upper soils of the high level terrace (above El. 675 ft) of about 80 percent. Seven insitu samples were taken of these soils for field density measurement during excavation for the reactor and auxiliary building. Results are shown in Table 2.6-2. They indicate insitu densities of 80 percent to 90 percent, which compares favorably with the penetration test results. These plots indicate median densities for the lower sands and gravels in the high terrace of about 60 percent relative density. During site excavating three small elongated lenses of fine sand were noted in the sands and gravels of the high terrace. These were small, 5 ft to 8 ft wide and 2 ft to 3 ft thick. They appeared to be small stream-cut channels which had filled with fine sand and a fine silt top. Because of their very limited extent, they are considered to not be significant as regards liquefaction hazard. Relatively low blow counts were recorded in some locations under the intermediate and low terraces and accordingly a study was made to determine whether these indicated merely random and erratic variations, in which case the median values of density could be properly used for evaluation of liquefaction potential, or whether they represented continuous strata of loose materials which must be considered separately. Comparison of "N" values in adjoining borings indicated no continuous loose stratum of significant extent. Thus boring 110 shows relatively low "N" values at about El. 655 ft and 640 ft. Boring 20 shows low values at El. 645 ft and El. 632 ft. Boring 310 which is located between them shows no low values. Again, borings 112 and 111 show low values at about El. 655 ft, but boring 8, between them shows appreciably higher "N" values at the same elevations. Accordingly, it was concluded that relative density would be defined by average values of penetration resistance. A detailed analysis of liquefaction potential is given in Appendix 2H, computed for values of ALPHA = 0.72, 0.9, and 1.0. As previously indicated, an average value of ALPHA = 0.6 is correct for eight cycles of loading. Minimum factors of safety, assuming ALPHA = 1.0, are as follows: 2.6-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 GWL at El. 705 ft Standard Project GWL at El. 675 ft Design Flood Containment Structure 2.1 1.7 Auxiliary Building 2.1 1.5 Fuel Building 2.1 1.8 Turbine Building 1.7 1.25 Transformer Area 1.7 1.25 (Intermediate Terrace) The indicated factors of safety are considered to be adequate to ensure a satisfactory level of safety for the following reasons. The probability of simultaneous occurrence of the peak or near-peak of the Standard Project Flood and the DBE is extremely small. These studies indicate no hazard of liquefaction under the containment structure, auxiliary building, fuel building, turbine building, or transformer area, especially considering the fact that the lowest factors of safety computed are about 1.25 for the turbine building for the very conservative assumptions of ALPHA = 1.0 and for simultaneous occurrence of the peak of the Standard Project Design Flood and the DBE. The intake structure for the river water system (Section 9.9) is located along the edge of the river. The river water lines extend from the intake across the low level bench up over the stiff clays of the intermediate bench up to the station. Along the length of these lines all soft, compressible silts, organic silts and clays were removed to the top of the lower gravels. Vibroflotation was then used to compact the lower gravels, the density of these lower gravels after compaction as determined from the Standard Penetration Test is shown in Figure 2.6-13. As shown, the median relative density of these gravels after compaction was approximately 80 percent. These precautions ensure there can be no liquefaction in this area even when flooded. The river water pipes are founded in compacted select granular fill placed over the densified natural soils. Select fill for this purpose was compacted to 95 percent of Modified Proctor density ASTM 1557. The vibroflotation compaction of the lower gravels underlying the river water intake pipe line was contracted to the Vibroflotation Foundation Company, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Compaction to a minimum relative density of 75 percent was specified and achieved. The depth of penetration was to a minimum El. 630 ft and deeper as necessary to provide the required minimum density. Maximum penetration was to El. 620 ft or bedrock surface, whichever was shallower. Onsite inspection ensured penetration and compaction to the proper depths. The compaction pattern layout consisted of 121 penetrations spaced 7 ft center-to-center. The general contractor cleared the site of top soil, trees, brush, and all other obstructions above and below grade before the start of vibroflotation. The area was excavated to granular material at approximately El. 655 ft. The area was then backfilled with select granular fill to establish a working grade at El. 659 ft. This fill material between working grade El. 659 ft and finish grade at El. 655 ft was used as backfill for the vibroflotation compaction work. The select granular fill consisted of well-graded sand and gravel with no more than 5 percent passing the No. 200 sieve and maximum particle size of 2 inches. 2.6-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 The vibroflot machine compacts by simultaneous vibration and saturation. The compactor vibrates granular soil with 10 ton (T) of centrifugal force. The vibrator itself weighs 2 T, is 17 inches in diameter, and 6 ft long. A follow-up pipe, which varies in length depending on compaction depth, is attached to the upper end of the vibrator. The compaction sequence has four basic steps:
- 1. The vibroflot is positioned over the spot to be compacted and its lower jet is opened full
- 2. Water is pumped in faster than it can drain away into the subsoil, which creates a momentary quick condition beneath the jet to permit the vibroflot to settle of its own weight and vibration
- 3. Water is switched from the lower to the top jets and the pressure is reduced enough to allow water to be returned to the surface, eliminating any arching of backfill material and facilitating the continuous feed of backfill
- 4. Compaction takes place during the 1 fpm lifts, which return the vibroflot to the surface.
First the vibrator is allowed to operate at the bottom of the crater. As the granular soil particles densify, they assume their most compact form. By raising the vibrator step-by-step and simultaneously backfilling, the entire depth of soil is compacted into a hard core. As the granular particles vibrate into a dense mass, the excess water floats the finest particles to the surface and washes them away. The surface was then compacted by a vibratory roller over which select granular fill was placed and compacted by vibration. In coordination with the compaction program, relative densities of the materials were checked using standard penetration tests resulting from test borings. An earthboring contractor was employed to conduct standard penetration tests according to ASTM D1586, "Standard Methods for Penetration Tests and Split Barrel Sampling of Soils." This testing was done under the supervision of Stone & Webster engineers, who determined relative densities from these standard penetration tests by correlation with the Gibbs and Holtz plots. The results of these tests showed that the minimum relative density requirement of 75 percent was achieved throughout the compaction area. 2.6.4.3 Relative Displacements Relative displacements between structures for determination of rattle space and for piping design have been estimated by computing the translation at the foundation of each structure using shear moduli under earthquake conditions as developed by Dr. Whitman in Appendix 2D, and then adding to these base translations additional translations or vertical motions, as appropriate, for the structural position of interest, resulting from flexure and rocking of the structure. Relative displacements were taken as the RMS of the displacements so computed plus orbital displacements due either to compression or shear waves as appropriate for the earthquake ground motion using a half-wavelength equal to the distance between centroids of the two structures. This approach is considered conservative. For the containment structure, which is the heaviest and has the largest rotations, the indicated values of vertical displacement at the outside edge of the mat from rotation are of the order of 1/4 inch for the DBE. Residual settlements from the DBE would be negligible. Relative displacements of structures due to 2.6-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 orbital ground motion from the DBE are shown in Figure 2.6-14. Values for the OBE may be taken as half of the values shown. 2.6.4.4 Lateral Soil Loads on Structures Below Grade In order to describe the procedures used for analyzing the lateral soil loads on basement walls of Seismic Category I structures from earthquake, the procedure used for the containment structure is explained in detail. Lateral loading on the containment structure was determined by computing the lateral resistance developed on the soil as the structure responds in flexure, translation, and rocking. In this analysis, the translational restraining force, which determines translational vibrational motion of the structure, has two components, a shear across the base of the structure and lateral soil pressures on the side wall of the containment structure developed by its displacement relative to its static state position. The "spring constraint," that is, force per unit of lateral displacement by shear, for a circular rigid base on an elastic half space is given by Bycroft (14) as: kx = 32 (1-) Gro (2.6-3) (7-8) where: G = shear modulus ro = radius of base
= Poisson's ratio For usual values of , this reduces approximately to:
kx = 5 Gro (2.6-4) In addition to the direct translational motion, the structure rocks and flexes. Since these several motions are coupled, the arithmetic sum of the maximum motion of translation, rotation, and flexure at any elevation above the base is taken as the displacement at that location of the structure from its static state position. Further, the soil adjoining is undergoing orbital particle motion. Relative orbital motion between structure and soil is a maximum for a ground frequency having a half-wavelength equal to the diameter of the structure and is then equal to the orbital displacement. Using this frequency, this maximum orbital ground displacement may be obtained from the ground motion spectrum. To compute the appropriate frequency, the shear wave velocity is used since the S wave displacements normally exceed P wave displacements. For the soil conditions at BVPS-1 and for the containment structure, the indicated orbital particle displacement is about 0.15 inch. 2.6-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Total relative motion at any level is then taken as the RMS sum of the orbital motion plus the vibratory motion of the structure, considering translation, rotation, and flexure. The horizontal pressure on the side wall of the structure for a given relative displacement can be evaluated from the theories of horizontal subgrade reaction. From Terzaghi(15) the relation between horizontal deflection and pressure at any point is given by: kh = p (2.6-5) Yh where: p = horizontal pressure at soil structure interface Yh = horizontal deflection of soil at interface kh = coefficient of horizontal subgrade reaction further: kh = Nh Z/B (2.6-6) where: Nh = coefficient dependent upon physical properties of the soil Z = depth below free surface of soil B = width of loaded area, which may be taken as diameter of containment structure For purposes of this analysis a value of Nh = 40 tons per cu ft was selected from tables presented by Terzaghi. This value is appropriate to dense sand above the groundwater table. It is a conservative value since the higher the coefficient the stiffer the soil and the greater the loads imposed upon the side walls of the structure. In determining these pressures, the side wall of the structure was assumed to be rigid radially, since radial deflection of the side wall would reduce relative soil-structure deflections and thus the soil forces acting. It should be noted that these forces, if included in the seismic loadings on the structure, would reduce the base shear and vertical bending stresses in the shell. Accordingly, they are not included when computing such stresses in the shell and thereby, contribute to the conservatism of the design. 2.6.4.5 Slope Stability Analyses Embankments have been constructed for the transformer area and adjacent to the intake piping for use as a construction laydown area, railroad approach, and access road to the site. The slopes have been analyzed under a number of conditions including the occurrence of a Design Basis Earthquake (0.125 g) after rapid drawdown from the Standard Projected Flood Water El. 705 ft. The analyses were first performed using a computer analysis where the failure surfaces are assumed to be arcs of circles, and the factor of safety is defined as the ratio of the moment of the available shearing forces on the trial failure surface to the net moment of the driving forces. The methods of analyses used were from both Bishop(7) and Fellenius(8). In addition, noncircular slide surfaces have been analyzed using Morgenstern's procedures. (9) 2.6-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 The results of the analyses are indicated in Table 2.6-3, the location of sections analyzed being shown in Figure 2.6-1. Soil parameters used in these analyses were based on tests made on essentially undisturbed samples using unconfined compression and triaxials testing procedures as given in Appendix 2E and 2H. As indicated in Table 2.6-3, factors of safety are adequate for the various conditions analyzed to ensure safety of the critical structures of the station. Even for the extremely unlikely coincidence of the DBE and simultaneous instantaneous drawdown from the standard project design flood, the computed single instantaneous peak factor of safety is 0.8. According to Newmarks(10) analysis, this would result in some very minor slumping. This condition, however, is for the construction laydown area and slumping or movement along this area would not affect safety of the station or river water system and therefore, is of no concern. 2.6.5 Placement of Structural Fills All structural fills are required to be of granular materials placed to minimum densities of 95 percent of the maximum density obtained in the Modified Proctor Compaction test, ASTM-D1557-66. To ensure proper quality control, fill placement was done strictly in accord with Stone & Webster Quality Control Standards. A soils laboratory was set up at the site and staffed with experienced technicians. Field inspectors were assigned to the work to ensure that specified requirements for lift thickness, passes of compactors and types of compactors were met; that compaction was thorough and uniform over all areas; and that segregation was prevented. Control tests were run as necessary to verify compliance of material with specifications, and in place density tests run, as necessary, to verify compliance with compaction requirements. All records were thoroughly documented. In addition to the above an experienced soils engineer from the headquarters office visited the site at intervals to review procedures, tests results and records. All tests were run in accordance with applicable ASTM procedures. In place density tests were run on the basis of a minimum of two tests per day and at a variable rate relative to the total quantity placed varying from about 1 test per 500 yd of material placed at the start of work to about 1 test per 1,500 yd of material placed after procedures had been established and personnel became experienced in behavior and characteristics of the material. The average was about 1 test per 1,200 yd of material placed. 2.6.6 Summary The site of the station is underlain by approximately 100 ft of medium to dense sands and gravels laid in a high level terrace of the Ohio River. These are stable, relatively incompressible soils which provide a safe and adequate foundation for the power station. Settlements during construction were minor and settlements following operation will be negligible. The surface soils of the terrace are slightly looser than the deeper lying soils and these near surface soils were removed beneath the structures and replaced with densely compacted granular fill. The surface of the terrace has been eroded within the limits of the turbine building to below desired foundation grade. Clay soils in this region were removed and replaced under the turbine building and the transformers with densely compacted granular fill to afford a safe and adequate foundation for these structures. There is no hazard of liquefaction for the soils underlying the station under earthquake conditions. 2.6-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Properties of the soil under dynamic loadings have been evaluated and proper cognizance taken of relative displacements between structures for piping design; the effects of earthquake loadings on lateral soil pressures on the containment structure and other earth retaining structures; and stability of slopes under earthquake and fluctuating water levels. 2.6-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 References for Section 2.6
- 1. K. L. Lee, "Special Session on Soil Dynamics," VII International Conference on Soil Mechanics, Mexico City, (May, 1969).
- 2. H. J. Gibbs, and W. G. Holtz, "Research on Determining the Density of Sands by Spoon Penetration Testing," Fourth International Conference on Soil Mechanics and Foundation Engineering, Vol. I, Butterworths, London (1957).
- 3. H. B. Seed, and I. M. Idriss, "Niigata Earthquake Soil Liquefaction," Journal Soil Mechanics and Foundation, American Society of Civil Engineers (May 1967).
- 4. H. B. Seed, and L. K. Lee, "Liquefaction of Sands During Cyclic Loading," Journal Soil Mechanics and Foundation, American Society of Civil Engineers (November 1966).
- 5. G. Castro, "Liquefaction of Sands" Harvard Soil Mechanics Series No. 81 Pierce Hall, Harvard University, (January 1969).
- 6. B. B. Broms, "Proceedings Specialty Conference on Soil Dynamics," VII International Conference on Soil Mechanics, Mexico City (August 1969).
- 7. A. W. Bishop, "The Use of The Slip Circle in The Stability Analysis of Slopes,"
Geotechnique, Volume V (1955).
- 8. W. Fellenius, "Calculations of the Stability of Earth Dams," Trans. 2nd Congress on Large Dams (Washington) Volume 4, p. 445 (1936).
- 9. N. R. Morganstern, and V. E. Price, "The Analysis of the Stability of General Slip Surfaces." Geotechnique, Volume XV.
- 10. N. M. Newmark, "Effects of Earthquakes on Dams and Enbankments," Volume 15, pp.
139-160, Fifth Rankie Lecture (1964).
- 11. D. Taylor, Fundamentals of Soil Mechanics, T. Wiley (1948).
- 12. K. Terzaghi, Theoretical Soil Mechanics, John Wiley and Sons, N.Y. (1943).
- 13. N. H. Ambraseys, and S. K. Sarma, "Response of Dams to Strong Earthquakes,"
Geotechnique (September 1962).
- 14. G. N. Bycroft, "Forced Vibrations of a Rigid Circular Plate on Semi-infinite Elastic Space and on an Elastic Stratum," Philosophical Transaction, Royal Society, London Serie A, Vol. 248, pp. 327-368.
- 15. K. Terzaghi, "Evaluation of Coefficients of Subgrade Reaction" Geotechnique, Vol. 5, pp.
293-326 (1955). 2.6-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.7 SITE DESIGN DATA 2.7.1 Wind Loading 2.7.1.1 Seismic Category I Structures The extreme mile wind at the site for the 100-year recurrent interval is predicted to be 84 mph in Table 2.2-3 of Section 2.2.2.5. Based on a gust factor of 1.3, the highest gust velocity for that wind is 110 mph. As noted in Section 2.2.2.5, the wind velocity values are conservative, due to the sheltered location of BVPS-1 site. From Figure 1(b) of Reference 2 the extreme mile wind velocity based on the 100 year recurrence interval is 80 mph, as determined from the isotach for the station location. As this value agrees essentially with the prediction in Section 2.2.2.5, the American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE) paper is selected as the wind design basis. The maximum normal wind loading for Seismic Category I structures, based on this paper, the 100-year recurrence interval, and a shape factor of 1.3 (0.8 pressure + 0.5 vacuum) for typical rectangular buildings is as follows: Maximum Normal Wind Height Zone Loading on Building Walls (ft) (psf) 0 - 50 21 51 - 150 30 151 - 400 40 Gust coefficients selected on the basis of structure widths are multiplied by the maximum normal wind loading to determine the design wind pressure. As gust factors apply to wind velocity, gust coefficients which apply to the wind loading vary as the square of the applicable gust factor. The gust factors determined from Reference 2 and the resultant gust coefficients are as follows: Width of Structure (ft) Gust Factor Gust Coefficient 0 - 50 1.3 1.7 51 - 100 1.2 1.4 101 - 150 1.1 1.2 Greater than 150 1.0 1.0 Wind loads are reviewed to determine the effect of the pressure and vacuum effects. Average wind pressures on the windward wall are considered to be 0.8 and on the leeward wall -0.5 of the total wind force (1.3) on the rectangular buildings. Since wind forces normally load structures from either direction, the break- down of loads into pressure and vacuum components has very little significance on the design of the structure. 2.7-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Where wind pressures on other than typical building walls are considered, the maximum normal wind loading is adjusted for the appropriate shape or drag factor given in Reference 2 provides the design wind pressure. Roofs are designed for a negative pressure of 1.25, the horizontal wind pressure of the height. Design wind pressures are combined with live and dead loads and other special loadings related to the structure. Wind and earthquake loadings are not considered to apply at the same time. Structures designed for tornadoes are not checked for maximum wind pressures, as the tornado design causes maximum stress conditions. 2.7.1.2 Other Structures Structures, other than Seismic Category I structures listed in Table B.1-1 in Appendix B and those designed for tornadoes listed in Section 2.7.2.2, are designed for wind loading based on Figure 1(a) of Reference 2 for the 50-year recurrence interval. The maximum normal wind pressures for various height zones above the ground, for other than Seismic Category I structures, based on the ASCE Paper and a shape factor of 1.3 are: Maximum Normal Wind Height Zone Loading on Building Walls (ft) (psf) 0 - 50 19 51 - 150 27 151 - 400 33 401 - 700 44 Gust coefficients, given in Section 2.7.1.1, are applied to the normal wind loading to provide the design wind pressure. When wind loadings on other than typical building walls are considered, the maximum normal wind loading is adjusted for the appropriate shape or drag factor. Design of the structures other than the reactor containment is on a working stress basis. When wind is combined with dead, live and other related loads, the allowable design values are increased by 33 percent, provided the resultant section of the member is not less than that required for the combined dead and live loads alone. 2.7.2 Tornado Model In Section 2.2, the probability of tornado occurrence at the site was determined to be once in 2,100 years, as a maximum. Tornado design, therefore, is necessary only for structures and systems required for safe and orderly shutdown of the reactor. These structures and systems are listed in Section 2.7.2.2. The tornado model used for design has the following characteristics:
- 1. Rotational velocity 300 mph (30 ft above ground) 2.7-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 2. Translational velocity 60 mph
- 3. Pressure drop 3 psi in 3 seconds The velocity profile of a typical tornado has wind speeds that vary throughout the tornado's radius relative to the height from the ground at the point considered. It is assumed, as a matter of simplicity, however, that the average wind speed of the design tornado model is the sum of the rotational and translational velocities, totaling 360 mph.
The most critical missile that might be associated with a tornado, is assumed to be a 35 ft long utility pole, 14 inches in diameter, weighing 50 lb per cu ft, and moving with a velocity of 150 mph. BVPS-1 is licensed to the design basis utility pole missile having only a horizontal trajectory. 2.7.2.1 Design Loading The average wind velocity for the tornado model of 360 mph is converted to 330 psf by the formula p = 0.00256v2 (2.7-1) where: p = resulting pressure (psf) v = wind velocity (mph). This pressure is multiplied by applicable shape factors and drag coefficients, (2)(3) and applied to the silhouette of the structure. The tornado wind loading on structures is taken as the loading combination of three factors:
- 1. Rotational velocity
- 2. Translational velocity
- 3. Atmospheric pressure drop.
The effects of the rotational velocity and atmospheric pressure drop loading factors are interrelated relative to the distance from the tornado center, as noted in Figure 2.7-2 and 2.7-3, according to the relationship: V [ rg pr ]1/2 (2.7-2) Where: V = wind speed - rotational r = distance from tornado center g = gravitational acceleration 2.7-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 p = atmospheric pressure
= air density For analysis purposes, structures are assumed to be 350 ft from the tornado center. At this distance, the maximum rotational wind velocity of 300 mph will impact the structure. The corresponding pressure drop at the structure for this distance from the tornado center is seen to be 0.118 atmospheres (1.75 psi). The translational velocity of 60 mph, which is independent of the relationship to the tornado center, is added to the above loading conditions to provide the net effect on the structure from all three factors earlier described.
These results are considered conservative in that the force vectors of the rotational wind speed (300 mph) and the translational wind speed (60 mph) are considered to be additive. The combined dynamic pressure is multiplied by the shape coefficient applicable to the structure (generally 1.3). The combined pressure consists of 0.8 wind pressure on the windward side, 0.5 wind suction on the leeward wall and 0.7 wind suction on the side walls for the general case. These pressure contributions are then added algebraically to the pressure drop effect on the structure to obtain design loads. The method used to combine the pressure differential and tornado wind forces on roofs and walls has been taken by superimposing the loads from Figures 2.7-2 and 2.7-4. This design mode is based on the pressure pattern shown in Reference 4. The Dallas tornado pressure pattern(4) was modified to fit the 3 psi requirement of the design tornado (Figure 2.7-3). The resultant cyclostrophic winds are shown in Figure 2.7-3. These winds were modified to fit the 300 mph maximum requirement of the design tornado (Figure 2.7-4). The uplift on the roofs of the critical structures is based on a negative pressure differential of 3 psi less the dead load of the roof. A reduction of the full negative pressure differential is made when venting of the structures occurs during the time of the external pressure drop. The amount of reduction depends on the area of venting. Two feet of reinforced concrete is generally provided to prevent perforation by the utility pole missile. When less thickness is required, the minimum depth of reinforced concrete is determined by the Modified Petry Formula(1). For the tornado wind pressure and vacuum loading, the allowable design stresses are allowed to reach 90 percent of the minimum yield point stress for reinforcing steel. The allowable design stresses for concrete with ultimate strength design are allowed to reach 75 percent of the ultimate stresses. For concrete with working stress design, the allowable design stresses are increased 66.7 percent over the allowable concrete compressive strength used for working stress design. Loading combinations, including those for tornadoes, are given in Section B.1.4. 2.7.2.2 Structures and Systems Requiring Protection The following structures and systems are designed for wind pressure resulting from a hypothetical tornado and for the associated missile described in Section 2.7.2:
- 1. Structures 2.7-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- a. Reactor containment concrete structure, including access hatches and penetrations
- b. Cable vault and cable tunnel
- c. Pipe tunnel to containment from auxiliary building
- d. Main steam valve area
- e. Pump room below main steam valve area
- f. Safeguards area (only portion surrounding former Post DBA Hydrogen Control System)
- g. Auxiliary building concrete structure below El. 752 ft-6 inches and for the protection of the following components above El. 752 ft-6 inches: Boric Acid Tanks, Volume Control Tanks, Boric Acid Transfer Pumps, Degasifier Vent Chillers, Component Cooling Surge Tank.
- h. Fuel pool concrete structure (for horizontal missiles only)
- i. Structure containing primary plant demineralized water storage tank
- j. Control room
- k. Emergency switchgear and relay room, including battery rooms
- l. Air conditioning equipment room under control room
- m. Diesel generator building
- n. River water pumps and engine-driven fire pump portion of intake structure
- o. Waste gas storage area
- p. Seismic Category I components above El. 752 ft-6 inches.
- 2. Systems
- a. Piping from main steam lines to turbine-driven steam generator auxiliary feedpump
- b. Main steam piping from steam generators inside containment to the main steam trip and nonreturn valves outside the containment
- c. River water piping for equipment required to cool down the station
- d. Carbon dioxide fire protection system for engineered safety features equipment
- e. Piping, valves, and supports from primary plant demineralized water storage tank to steam generator auxiliary feedpumps
- f. Fuel oil piping, valves and supports for emergency diesel generators 2.7-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- g. Electrical systems for fuel oil transfer pumps.
The fuel building, decontamination building, and turbine building superstructures are designed so that the steel framing will not collapse and endanger the structures or systems listed above. The uppermost, heavily reinforced, concrete slabs of the auxiliary building, intake structure, and service building have been checked to accommodate a collapse of the light steel framed structures that exist above them and thereby, do not detrimentally affect the integrity of the Seismic Category I portions below. The layout of these structures are such that the collapse of this framing cannot detrimentally affect adjacent Seismic Category I structures. Non-tornado designed structures are so positioned, both in relative location and stature, so that a collapse of one will not affect the functionability of safety-related equipment or structures to function. The following systems and components are not protected by missile barriers:
- 1. Safety Injection System
- a. Low head safety injection pumps and piping, valves
- b. Supports within the safeguard area.
- 2. Containment Depressurization System
- a. Refueling water storage tank
- b. Chemical addition tank (retired in place)
- c. All piping, valves, and supports associated with and connecting above components
- d. Outside recirculation spray pumps, and piping, valves, and supports within the safeguards area.
- 3. Fuel Pool Cooling System - Complete System
- 4. River Water System - where discharge enters turbine building.
- 5. Fuel Handling System
- a. Movable platform with hoist in fuel building
- b. Fuel handling trolley in fuel building
- c. Fuel transfer tube with blind flange.
- 6. Ventilation and Air Conditioning
- a. Supplementary Leak Collection and Release System
- b. Ventilation vent stack.
2.7-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 7. Fuel Building Ventilation Exhaust Monitors.
- 8. Turbine Driven Aux Feedwater Pump steam exhaust stack above elevation 790 ft.
- 9. Discharge pipes from the atmospheric dump valves, main steam safety valves, and residual heat release valve above the main steam valve area Roof elevation of 790 feet 6 inches.
Missile protection is necessary for equipment and systems required for safe and orderly shutdown and maintaining safe shutdown. With the exception of the river water system, the systems or portions of systems listed above are not considered necessary to attain and maintain a safe shutdown condition and therefore, are not protected from tornado generated missiles. Missile protection is not required for the river water system from where the discharge structure enters the turbine building for the reasons discussed in Section 9.9.3. Missile protection is not required for the steam discharge pipes of the atmospheric dump valves, main steam safety valves, or the residual heat release valve above the main steam valve area roof elevation of 790 feet 6 inches. Refer to Section 10.3.1 for further explanation. Portions of the service building where equipment essential to attaining and maintaining safe shutdown (with the exception of the main control room) are located below El. 735 ft in a watertight and missile-proof concrete structure, capable of withstanding the collapse of the non-Category I portion of the service building structure (shop and lab area) above. The main control room, which is located above El. 735 ft and over the east portion of the emergency switchgear and air-conditioning areas, is similarly protected by a missile-proof concrete structure designed for the collapse of the non-Category I portion of the service building structure (office area) above it. Any missile generated by the "breakup" of a "nontornado" structure is not as severe as the most critical missile stated previously. Therefore, such a missile would be less of a hazard to the integrity of the tornado designed structures and protected equipment and systems. Typical details of removable slabs, hatch covers, and wall plates used in Category I structures are shown in Figure 2.7-5. Removable slabs or plugs protecting missile shielded enclosures are clamped or bolted back to the structure. These anchorages are capable of resisting suction loads as defined in Section 2.7.2.1. Block walls are designed to remain in place by transferring shear either horizontally or vertically depending on height and width ratio of wall. Typical details of block partitions are shown in Figure 2.7-6. The turbine driven auxiliary feedwater pump (TDAFWP) exhaust stacks above elevation 790 feet are not enclosed by a tornado missile resistant structure. The exhaust stacks need not be protected from tornado missiles since the TDAFWP is not required for design basis accidents or other plant transients initiated by a tornado. BVPS-1 has been engineered consistent with its PSAR commitments to provide tornado missile protection to only those engineered safety features necessary to effect and maintain a safe shutdown. The justification for this design is as follows. Tornado missile protection was provided where necessary to prevent the missile from causing a design basis accident; however, a tornado was not assumed to occur subsequent to a design basis accident. 2.7-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.7.2.3 Tornado Missile Barriers The tornado generated telephone pole missile has a 14-inch diameter, 35 ft length, 50 lb per cu ft density, and a 150 mph velocity. The barrier thickness that is required to prevent perforation as calculated by utilizing the modified Petry Formula(1) is 13.0 inches. The Modified Petry Formula assumes an infinitely thick slab. The Modified Petry Formula cannot be used to determine barrier thickness required to stop the missile and prevent spalling. This thickness is determined as follows:
- 1. Determine penetration into an infinite barrier by Equations 4.1.14 and 4.1.15 from Reference 5.
- 2. Determine thickness of concrete to prevent spalling by Equation 31 from Reference 6.
The thickness calculated to stop the missile and prevent spalling from the above steps is 35.6 inches. References 5 and 6 can also be used to determine the thickness required to just prevent perforation. This thickness, 20.7 inches, is calculated as follows:
- 1. Determine penetration into an infinite barrier by Equations 4.1.14 and 4.1.15 from Reference 5.
- 2. Determine thickness of concrete for the missile to just perforate by Equation 30 from Reference 6.
All the tornado missile barriers originally provided are at least 2 ft of concrete and therefore, are adequate to protect systems and components necessary for safe shutdown. 2.7.3 Flood-Water Loading 2.7.3.1 General As concluded in Section 2.3, the following flood stages are possible at the Beaver Valley Power Station site:
- 1. Ordinary high water El. 678.5
- 2. Standard Project Flood El. 705.0
- 3. Probable Maximum Flood El. 730.0 As discussed in Section 2.3.3, portions of the station designed prior to January 23, 1970 are designed for a Standard Project Flood of El. 707.2 ft. Portions of the station designed or redesigned for other reasons after this date are designed for the 705 ft level given above.
2.7-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 All major buildings and structures except the turbine building, the intake structure, and the reactor containment structure are so located, or so constructed, as to be unaffected by the Standard Project Flood or lower flood stages. The turbine building, founded at approximately El. 683 ft, is designed to withstand buoyancy and water pressure of the Standard Project Flood. It is likewise designed to be watertight and operative for that condition. The intake structure is also designed for the water pressure and buoyancy of the Standard Project Flood, assuming that one well is dry at that time. That portion of the Intake Structure housing the river water pumps and allowing for continuous operation of the river water system is designed for the water pressure, buoyant forces, and wave action associated with the PMF. The containment structure is not only designed to be watertight against, and to withstand the buoyancy and water pressure of, the Standard Project Flood, but is also so designed for the Probable Maximum Flood. The emergency switchgear, relay, and battery rooms located in the service building and founded at approximately El. 710 ft and the river water pump and engine driven fire pump cubicles in the intake structure, being essential for orderly shutdown of the reactor, are designed to be sound and operative during the Probable Maximum Flood stage. The turbine building is designed to be flooded when the water stage exceeds the Standard Project Flood level. 2.7.3.2 Structures and Systems Designed Against Flood Water Effects All structures listed in Table B.1-1 and the equipment within these structures essential to attain a safe shutdown are designed against any adverse effects from the Standard Project Flood (SPF - El. 705 ft) and the Probable Maximum Flood (PMF - El. 730 ft). 2.7.3.2.1 Reactor Containment The reactor containment is the only structure with a mat elevation below the Standard Project Flood - El. 705 ft. The reactor containment is protected from the SPF by a waterproof membrane, as explained in Section 5.2.7.3. 2.7.3.2.2 Intake Structure The intake structure and the equipment housed within the intake structure incorporates various design considerations to withstand the adverse effects of flooding. All equipment operating within the intake structure is protected from the SPF by placing the equipment on the operating floor located at El. 705 ft. Equipment required for a safe shutdown, such as the river water pumps, is protected by watertight concrete cubicle enclosures extending above the PMF elevation. The design features of the sump pit, sump pump controls and power supply provided in the intake structure include a 12 inch by 12 inch by 12 inch deep sump pit, a 15 gpm 35 ft head sump pump controlled automatically from an integral float switch and connected to the emergency power source. The pumps discharge through check and gate valves to an elevation above 730 ft. There are seven types of penetrations into the intake structure, all of which are sealed against water leakage during a PMF as described below: 2.7-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 1. VENTILATION OPENINGS: Air enters the compartments through concrete openings in the roof of the compartments. These openings extend to El. 737 ft with no penetrations below that level to prevent water entrance due to wave action coincident with the PMF.
Air exits the compartments through an opening in the roof of the compartment at El. 730 ft. Gasketed seal plates are installed over half of the vent area, and 7 ft high steel box structures are installed over the other half. These are bolted to angles embedded in the concrete around the exit openings. This arrangement provides cubicle flood protection while maintaining air recirculation.
- 2. PUMP COLUMNS AND SHAFTS: All pump columns penetrate the compartment floor with a gasketed or 0-ring sealed double base plate assembly. The assembly consists of a pump base plate which is bolted onto a soleplate, grouted into the floor. A gasket or 0-ring prevents leakage between the two plates. All pumps have shaft seals where the shafts penetrate the pump column. The seals are designed for and normally operate at pressures in excess of that which will be experienced during a PMF; therefore, no inleakage will occur during a PMF.
- 3. PIPES: All pipes that penetrate the compartment floor or compartment walls are either fitted with a water stop or are sealed against inleakage.
- 4. VALVE STUFFING BOX FLOOR PENETRATIONS: There are two stuffing box/curb box assemblies which penetrate the compartment floor in B and C safety related pump cubicles. They were installed for possible future use as valve stem extensions but are unlikely to ever be used for such purpose. Closures are installed to prevent inleakage during times of high river flood level conditions. Removal of the closures at any time is controlled in accordance with Site programs for flood seals.
- 5. SLIDING STEEL CUBICLE FLOOD DOORS: These doors are 1 inch thick steel plate doors, sliding in an enclosed steel frame, which is embedded in the concrete opening, and supported by a track mounted above the door.
Positive sealing is provided by inflating a seal against ground metal contact surfaces by means of a charging air tank mounted on the wall inside the protected compartment. This tank is sized to provide a complete seal fill in addition to makeup for small leakages while in use during the PMF. Figures 2.7-7 and 2.7-8 provide locations and details of the flood door assembly. The flood doors have been shop tested to leak less than 100 cc/hr and will be field tested to leak less than 0.5 cu ft per hr (0.063 gpm). All electrical panels are a minimum of 10 inches above the cubicle floor. Even if the inleakage exceeded ten times the maximum test rate, the water level in a 18.25 ft by 30.61 ft cubicle would be well below the ten inches elevation for the 70 hr duration of the PMF.
- 6. METAL SIDING: The metal siding used on the intake is similar to that used throughout the plant. The siding is box-rib sheet supported by subgirts attached to L2 liner panels.
The liner panels are fastened to the structural girt framing system. The metal insulated siding of the intake structure is not required to protect safe shutdown equipment in the pump cubicles from flood. 2.7-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
- 7. ELECTRICAL CABLES: Electrical cables enter the compartments through the floor and wall sleeves. The sleeves are cast in the concrete with water stops or seals to prevent inleakage around the sleeves.
Flood seal techniques and materials used for the pipe and electrical cable intake structure penetrations shall be qualification tested as described on Figure 2.7-19 to resist the static head of water due to the probable maximum flood. The Probable Maximum Flood waters cannot enter the cubicles protecting the river water pumps. Normal entrances to the four cubicles at El. 705 ft are closed off by the sliding steel flood doors. Pipe and electrical penetrations in cubicle floors and walls are sealed. All hatches in the cubicle roof at El. 730 ft are sealed to preclude water from postulated waves from entering through the hatch joints. Egress from the intake structure pump cubicles after pressurization of the flood door seals will be through the roof hatches which will be removed and replaced before flood water exceeds El. 705 ft. During a flood condition above El. 705 ft (maximum duration of about 100 hours) there will not be any access to the cubicles. The air supply to the flood door seals is more than adequate to supply the seals for the duration of the PMF. In addition, sump pumps have been provided in each cubicle to remove small amounts of leakage into the pump cubicles. Finally, a single failure of any flood door during the flood will only affect one cubicle, and therefore adequate river water pump capability remains for plant cooling. For these reasons, no access to the intake structure is required during the PMF. 2.7.3.2.3 Turbine Building Flooding of the turbine building will allow water to enter into the pipe tunnel and elevator and stair shafts (see Figure 2.7-9). The service building area below El. 730 ft is isolated from these flooded areas by the perimeter concrete walls of the service building. All construction joints below El. 730 ft are water stopped and all through electrical penetrations are sealed. Flooding of the pipe tunnel will result in flooding of the pipe tunnel area of the main steam-cable vault structure, the northern portion of the safeguards structure, and the primary auxiliary building (excepting the charging pump cubicles). Water cannot enter the cable tunnel since this area is isolated from the rest of the main steam-cable vault area below El. 735 ft by concrete walls and is accessible only from the cable vault area at El. 735 ft. 2.7.3.2.4 Electrical Cable Protection The cable tunnel is that portion of the service building allowing for transfer of cable from the cable vault structure to the cable tray area within the service building and is seismically designed as indicated in Table B.1-1. The means for routing cable from the main portions of the plant to the intake structure is through cable ductlines extending from the high level terrace (El. 735 ft) to the lower level terrace (El. 675 ft) which is the ground elevation at the intake structure. 2.7-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Figures 2.7-10, 2.7-11 and 2.7-12 show the cable duct from the plant to the intake structure including all manholes. The manholes are below PMF level and are allowed to flood. However, during normal river conditions, the manholes are dewatered to minimize cable exposure to significant moisture. See Table 16-1, item 11. The protective measures to prevent flooding in areas where essential equipment for cold shutdown is located, will be duct or sleeve sealed. This sealing will be required where ductlines enter the intake structure and on the south end of the ductline at the service building. The water barrier, where the cable tunnel, which is an extension of the ductline from the intake structure to the plant, interfaces with the service building, is shown in Section 1-1 of Figure 2.7-13. All cables for 4 kV service, 480 V service, control and instrumentation for both primary and secondary plant use are of the same high quality construction. Each type of cable has been specified for use in wet and dry locations and will operate satisfactorily if submerged as proven by factory testing. The 4 kV power cable was submerged for a period of 24 hours before testing at the supplier's factory. Where cables or conduits pass through penetrations into an area where safety-related equipment is located, and where these penetrations are below PMF level, sealing methods are implemented. These sealing procedures will make the penetrations leak resistant and will use materials which have been employed in the past, or newly developed methods. The 5 kV cables installed in underground ductlines from the service building to the diesel generator building and to the intake structure are adequate for the intended service when these cables are operating under wet or dry conditions. The same qualification covers any splices. Wet conditions include immersion under water. The cable referred to above has an insulation thickness greater than that required by the Insulated Power Cable Engineers' Association (7). Duquesne Light Company has had several occasions whereby 5 kV cable raceways have been flooded with water and no failure has resulted. This was experienced at the Cheswick Power Station. The Brunot Island Station also has had high voltage cables completely submerged on several occasions, including the 1936 flood, without failures. The cable as selected is suitable for operation in a ductline under wet or dry conditions; wet conditions are considered with cables immersed in water. Cables will be proof-tested prior to initial energization, and no further periodic testing is contemplated unless the cable has been exposed to an abnormal condition. 2.7.3.2.5 Other Plant Areas and Equipment Water from the PMF could enter a 4 inch shake space between the service building and the turbine building. The openings through the service building north wall have wall sleeves as shown in Figure 2.7-14. Details of closures are shown in Figures 2.7-15 and 2.7-16. Closures plates are shown in Figure 2.7-15 with sleeve details shown in Section "A-A". The seals for the 4 kV cable bus, Figure 2.7-16, are Nelson "Multi-Cable Transits" which are watertight. Flood protected areas have been indicated on Figures 2.7-17, 2.7-18, and 2.7-19. Floors and walls within these areas are constructed with concrete. Penetrations, such as pipes, which enter these areas and are embedded in concrete, utilize water stops to prevent inleakage. All penetrations which enter through the openings in the concrete are sealed after installation of the 2.7-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 item. Where banks of wall sleeves for electrical cables enter protected areas, the sleeves are O-ring sealed to a galvanized steel plate. The plate is bolted and gasketed to the wall as shown on Figure 2.7-18. The cables are sealed within the sleeve. Flood seal techniques and materials used for the pipe and electrical cable penetrations shall be qualification tested as described on Figure 2.7-19 to resist the static head of water due to the probable maximum flood. With the exception of pump shaft seals, all water barriers are in a static condition, do not contact rotating parts of equipment, and are not located in a hostile environment. Selected seal materials have a long life under these conditions, and degradation over the life of the plant, which would reduce their adequacy as a water barrier, is not expected. Pump shaft seals which are subject to wear will be replaced as required by operation or testing of these seals. Flood penetration sealing methods that utilize high density cellular concrete as shown on Figure 2.7-19, were preoperationally tested to ensure that the techniques used are adequate. This was accomplished by simulating actual seal configurations and subjecting one side of the seal to a hydrostatic pressure of 125 percent of the PMF conditions. A leakage rate of 0.04 gpm was considered acceptable. This leak rate is based on the worst case which is the service building north wall containing approximately 200 penetrations. This ensures that the sump pump has a capacity with a minimum safety factor of 2 to 1. All pumps in the intake structure are preoperationally and periodically operated during which their seals are checked for seal water leakage. Any abnormal seal water leakage would be noted during testing of the pumps and the seals would be repaired or replaced. All flood protected areas have sumps or 12 inch high curbs along walls containing sealed penetrations. Any inleakage which would occur during a PMF would be collected in these areas. All sumps and curbs contain either a float-actuated sump pump or a level switch and transmitter with a control room alarm. Portable sump pumps are provided which can be used, wherever needed. Emergency power supply connections are located at each wall curb, and each permanent sump pump is connected to the emergency power supply. The control room air conditioning room is protected from flooding by a manually-operated gate valve in series with a check valve in the six-inch drain line from the control room air conditioning room. The gate valve, labeled back water valve VGF-12D, is located in the turbine building at El. 698 ft-6 inch. This valve will be closed when river level reaches El. 695 ft. Since the turbine building does not begin flooding until the river reaches El. 707 ft-6 inch, there is adequate time to operate this valve prior to turbine building flooding when this valve would become inaccessible. During the PMF condition, this valve will not be operated, but will only be opened following the flooding event. Internal flood protection of the control room air conditioning room with the drain line gate valve closed is discussed in Section 9.7.2. Each penetration with a flood seal shall receive a periodic visual inspection. The charging pump cubicles are designed against ingress of water during a PMF. Any penetrations below El. 730 ft are sealed. The ventilation duct enters the charging pump cubicles with the bottom of the duct at El. 731 ft 9 inches. There is also a horizontal slot in the north wall of the charging pump cubicles through which piping passes. The bottom of the slot is at El. 730 ft 6 inches. The charging pumps, Figures 2.7-20 and 2.7-21 (circled), are enclosed by walls that are missile-proof and are extended to El. 730 ft-6 inches, which is 6 inches above the PMF level. 2.7-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.7.4 Soils Design Loading The looser granular material above El. 715 ft in the containment structure area and the silty sands and clays in the turbine building area were removed and replaced by compacted granular material (Section 2.6). The compacted granular fill is composed of selected sands and gravels and compacted in 6 inch layers to a minimum density of 95 percent as determined by modified compaction tests performed in accordance with ASTM D1557. Foundations for all major structures are continuous mats of reinforced concrete founded on the denser undisturbed gravels or compacted granular fill. The containment structure is founded at El. 681 ft on undisturbed gravel and compacted granular material, with excavation below El. 715 ft made within a circular sheet piling cofferdam. The turbine building mat with bottom at approximately El. 683 ft is located in part on undisturbed, inplace gravel and in part on compacted granular fill. The other major structures and equipment are founded on the inplace soil or compacted granular fill as shown in Figure 2.7-1. The allowable design bearing load for footings and mats under static loads only is 8 ksf. The total maximum allowable design load for combined static loads and dynamic loads resulting from tornado or earthquake is 12 ksf. As shown in Table 2.7-1, the removal of earth for structures founded below the original ground level substantially reduced the additive load on the soil. The additional building load placed on the soil for each structure, considering relief of load from excavation, is relatively small compared with the allowable static design load of 8 ksf. Settlement of the structure is expected to be similarly low. The relief of load is based on soil density of 120 pcf. Tests shown in Table 2.6-2 indicate the density of in-place soils below El. 715 ft to vary with depth from approximately 130 to 140 pcf. The nominal density of compacted granular fill is 140 pcf. The angle of friction and cohesive values of the in-place soil and compacted granular fill are as follows: Angle of Internal Cohesion Friction, Coefficient, C (degrees) (ksf) Sand and gravel (in-place) 34 0 Silty clay (in-place) 0 0.4 Compacted granular fill 38 0 2.7.5 Site Design Considerations for Essential Lines Plot plans of the facility indicating and identifying all essential lines (cooling, power sensing and control) that pass between seismic Category I structures are shown in Figures 2.7-22, 2.7-23, 2.7-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2.7-24 and 2.7-25. Essential cooling lines are shown in Figure 2.7-23. Leak collection ducting is shown in Figure 2.7-23. Instrument sensing lines are shown in Figure 2.7-24. Electrical cables are shown in Figure 2.7-25. Various measures have been taken to prevent the loss of those lines required to attain and maintain a safe shutdown due to seismic events, missiles from rotating equipment and tornadoes, fires, floods and the collapse of non-seismic Category I structures. All essential lines shown between buildings have been seismically designed, which includes analysis for adverse building movement. With the exception of (1) river water lines between the intake structure and the auxiliary building, (2) the demineralized water supply to the auxiliary feedwater pumps, (3) the refueling water storage tank supply to the quench spray and low head safety injection pumps, and (4) the diesel generator-switchgear cable ducts, essential lines pass directly from one seismic Category I structure to another seismic Category I structure, through, at most a 4-inch shake space. As such, these lines are not susceptible to loss due to seismic events, missiles from rotating equipment, tornadoes and the collapse of non-seismic Category I structures. The measures taken to prevent the loss of the refueling water storage tank and associated lines are discussed in Section 6.4.2. The demineralized water supply lines are protected from missiles from rotating equipment, tornadoes and the collapse of non-seismic Category I structures as they are buried 5.5 ft below grade between the seismic Category I protected demineralized water storage tank and the cable vault area pipe tunnel. The river water lines between the intake structure and the auxiliary building are buried a minimum of 6 ft below grade, thereby protecting them from the aforementioned hazards. Similarly, the underground diesel generator-switchgear cable ducts are protected by burial a minimum of 5 ft below grade and concrete encased. 2.7-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References for Section 2.7
- 1. A. Amirikian, "Design of Protective Structures," NavDocks P-51, Bureau of Yards and Docks, Department of the Navy (August 1950).
- 2. "Wind Forces on Structures", American Society of Civil Engineers Transactions, Vol.
126, Part II, Paper No. 3269 (1961).
- 3. T. W. Singell, "Forces on Enclosed Structures", Journal of the Structural Division, American Society of Civil Engineers, (July 1958).
- 4. W. E. Hoecker "Three - Dimensional Pressure Pattern of the Dallas Tornado and Some Resultant Indications", Monthly Weather Review (December 1961).
- 5. Amman and Whitney, "Industrial Engineering Study to Establish Safety Design Criteria for Use in Engineering of Explosive Facilities and Operations - Wall Response" (April 1963).
- 6. R. Gwaltney, "Missle Generation in Light Water - Cooled Power Reactor Plants", ORNL-NSIC-22 (September 1968).
- 7. Interim Standard No. 1 to JPCEA Publication No. S-68-516 (March 1971).
2.7-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 2.8 ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM 2.8.1 Technical Discussion The objectives of the environmental radiological monitoring program at the Beaver Valley Power Station are twofold: first, to establish the preoperational levels of radioactivity and radiation in the site environment against which potential operational contributions can be measured; and second, to verify the adequate control of the stations radioactive material releases. The factors that have been considered in the development of the environmental radiological monitoring program include a review of the station environment, a review of the facility's radioactive waste processing systems, an evaluation of the radionuclides anticipated in the normal discharges, and those environmental media that could transport radioactivity. Environmental surveillance involves sampling and determining the radioactivity concentrations in environmental media that could transport radioactivity from its source, both before and after station startup. The analysis and data interpretation required in the environmental radiological monitoring program includes various statistical procedures used in the laboratory and statistical techniques needed in the interpretation of data. Alpha and beta measurements are obtained using a low background proportional counter. Specific gamma emitting radionuclides are determined by sodium iodide or gamma spectrometry detection systems. In the interpretation of the data, various procedures are followed. Data are averaged and reported giving the average and range of the observed values. Where appropriate, the data are compiled according to a number of parameters to show any trends or relationships. Preoperational data will constitute the baseline to which operational data will be compared. In the operational phase, data is compared to the baseline data to determine the influence of the plant on the environment and the resultant doses to the habitants of the area. 2.8.2 Preoperational Surveillance The preoperational monitoring program (initiated in January of 1971) was conducted prior to station startup. The program documents seasonal variations in radioactivity as well as possible annual changes. The preoperational program was terminated prior to fuel load and replaced with the operational program. The media sampled included air, river water, groundwater, drinking water, bottom sediments from the station intake, soil from the station periphery, milk, wildlife, and ambient radiation levels. Species of aquatic organisms that are eaten by man, specifically fish, were also sampled. Algae and other lower forms of aquatic organisms that are not directly a part of man's food chain or exposure route were not sampled, except as their reconcentration effectiveness that was reflected in edible fish of whose diet they may be a part. 2.8-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 The locations, sampling frequencies, and analyses are listed in Table 2.8-1. The number and location of samples was determined by considering the expected spatial distribution of station effluents and points where concentrations of effluents in the environment were expected to be greatest, site meteorological conditions, population distribution, and ease of access to the sampling station. During the preoperational program, the sampling frequency for each type of sample was fixed and was established on the basis of providing enough samples to yield statistically valid results and on the expected frequency of the operational phase of the environmental surveillance program. 2.8.3 Operational Surveillance The operational program was implemented prior to fuel loading. During operation of the station, the contributions of radioactive material to the environment from the station are due to controlled releases of radioactive gases, airborne particulates and liquids. Measurements of radioactivity in the air and water, therefore, serves as one of the earliest means of detecting changes in environmental radioactivity levels. The evaluation of appropriate environmental media and pathways by which radioactivity is transported through the environment take place in this program. The program is periodically reviewed to determine any changes that may be desirable in its content. Therefore, the extent of sampling may be adjusted if warranted. The current environmental radiological monitoring program (REMP) requirements are documented in the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM). The ODCM contains the site number, sector, distance, sample point, description, sampling and collection frequency, analysis, and analysis frequency for various exposure pathways in the vicinity of the Beaver Valley Power Station (BVPS). These are the minimum requirements for the REMP program and may be supplemented with additional samples, increased collection frequency, and increased analysis requirements. Environmental sampling and analyses include air, water, milk, vegetation, river sediments, fish, soil, and ambient radiation levels in areas surrounding the site. The results of the REMP program are documented and submitted to the NRC each year in the Annual Radiological Environmental Operating Report. 2.8-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 TABLES FOR SECTION 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-1 DISTANCE AND DIRECTION FROM REACTOR TO POPULATION CENTERS HAVING MORE THAN ABOUT 20,000 INHABITANTS AND LOCATED WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE SITE(2)(3)(4) Distance(1) and Direction Population Community From the Site (Miles) (1970 Census) East Liverpool, Ohio 4.7 WNW 20,020 Aliquippa, Pa. 7.6 ESE 22,277 Weirton, West Va. 15.2 SSW 27,131 Steubenville, Ohio 19.4 SSW 30,771 Pittsburgh, Pa. 22.1 SE 520,117 New Castle, Pa. 24.8 NNE 38,559 Youngstown, Ohio 29.0 NNW 139,788 West Mifflin, Pa. 32.0 SE 28,070 Wilkinsburg, Pa. 32.0 ESE 26,780 McKeesport, Pa. 35.4 SE 37,977 Monroeville, Pa. 39.0 ESE 29,011 Wheeling, West Va. 39.5 SSW 48,188 Alliance, Ohio 39.2 NW 26,547 Sharon, Pa. 41.0 N 22,653 Warren, Ohio 44.5 NNW 63,494 Canton, Ohio 49.2 WNW 110,053 (1) Distance to nearest boundary, in miles. (2) "Description of the Shippingport Atomic Power Station Site and Surrounding Area", WAPD-SC-547, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, (June, 1957). (3) "1970 Census of Population, Pennsylvania", Bureau of Census, Advance Report PC(VI)- 40, U.S. Department of Commerce, (January, 1971). (4) "1970 Census of Population, Ohio", Bureau of Census, Advance Report PC(VI)-37, U.S. Department of Commerce, (January 1971). 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-2 LOCAL POPULATION DISTRIBUTION Radial Distance Total Estimated Population From Reactor, Miles (1970 Estimates) 0-1 592 1-2 5,772 2-3 3,598 3-4 4,506 4-5 3,644 0-1 592 0-2 6,364 0-3 9,962 0-4 14,468 0-5 18,112 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-3 PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INSTITUTIONS IN THE VICINITY OF BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION From BVPS Average Facility Location Miles Direction Population Hospitals East Liverpool East Liverpool, 7 W 176 patients City Hospital Ohio Osteopathic East Liverpool, 7 W 40 Hospital Ohio Aliquippa Hospital Aliquippa, Pa. 7 3/4 E 160 Rochester General Rochester, Pa. 10 NE 235 Hospital Prisons and Jails Midland Jail Midland, Pa. 2 NW <10 County Prison System Beaver, Pa. 8 NE app. 40 Juvenille Detention Brighton Township 8 1/2 NE 6 Home Schools Midland School Combined - Elementary 1 2/3 NW 1,000 combined District Jr. - Sr. High School 1 1/3 NW 1 of 3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-3 (CONTD) PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INSTITUTIONS IN THE VICINITY OF BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION From BVPS Average Facility Location Miles Direction Population Western Beaver Fairview Elementary 5 NNW 492 School District Snyder Elementary 3 1/3 N 309 Login Elementary 3 1/3 NE 117 (Ohioview) Jr. - Sr. High School 3 1/3 N 928 (Snyder) Green Turnpike School Hookstown Elem. 3 3/4 S 645 District Hookstown Kinder. 3 3/4 S 95 Southside High School 3 3/4 S 610 Potter Township School Potter Township School 2 1/4 NNE 210 District Raccoon Township Raccoon Township School 3 2/3 ESE 327 School District (Elementary) East Liverpool City Elementary Schools 2,809 School District (4 buildings) Junior High School 7 W 1,362 (2 buildings) High School 1,219 Beaver Local School Elementary Schools District (2 buildings) Junior High School 10 NW 951 High School 888 2 of 3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-3 (CONTD) PUBLIC FACILITIES AND INSTITUTIONS IN THE VICINITY OF BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION From BVPS Average Facility Location Miles Direction Population Institutions Beaver County Hospital Brighton Township 8 1/2 NE 550 (old age home) Parks Raccoon Creek St. Park Hanover Township 8 S State Game Land No. 17 Ohioville Township 4 N Brady's Run Cty. Park Brighton Township 9 1/2 NE Beaver Creek St. Park Columbiana County 6 1/2 NNE Tomlinson Run St. Park West Virginia 9 SW 3 of 3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-4 MAJOR EMPLOYERS IN THE VICINITY OF THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION Miles and Number of(1) Product Direction Employees Type Company Location From Site 1960 1969 Steel Jones & Laughlin Steel Company Aliquippa 11 ESE 13,147 11,751 Steel Crucible Steel Company Midland 1 NW 6,492 5,745 Steel Babcock and Wilcox Company West Mayfield 13 NNE 4,078 5,480 Electrical Westinghouse Electric Corporation Borough Township 8 NE 1,960 2,920 Steel U. S. Steel Corporation Ambridge 12 ESE 2,670 2,569 Steel Pipe Armco Steel Corporation Ambridge 12 ESE 1,982 2,111 Zinc St. Joseph Minerals Corporation Potter Township 6 NE 1,151 1,442 Pottery Homer Laughlin China Company Newell, W. Va. 8W 1,500 1,000(2) Plastics Sinclair - Koppers Company Potter Township 5 NE 1,087 991 Steel E. W. Bliss Company Midland 1 NW 300 352 (1)Source: Pennsylvania Department of Commerce (2)East Liverpool Chamber of Commerce Estimate 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-5 STATISTICS FOR MANUFACTURING INDUSTRIES BEAVER COUNTY, 1969 Money Figures in Thousands of Dollars Manufacturing Number of Capital Wages and Value of Industries Establishments Expenditures Employment Salaries Production Primary metal 23 $58,090 29,233 $261,353 $1,082,924 Fabricated metal 25 1,694 4,761 37,954 137,919 Machinery 23 391 663 5,136 17,263 Electrical machinery 3 1,141 3,562 27,224 107,001 Stone, clay, glass 25 662 1,889 12,912 32,984 Chemicals 8 4,498 1,333 10,982 91,292 Food products 34 295 593 3,915 15,295 Printing products 19 106 342 2,230 5,278 Total all industries(1) 180 $67,157 43,330 $336,823 $1,513,549 (1) Total includes minor industries which are not shown in table Source: Pennsylvania Department of Commerce 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-6 SOUTHWESTERN PENNSYLVANIA PROVISIONAL EMPLOYMENT FORECAST (Thousands of Employed Persons) Percent Change Industry Group 1970 2000 1970-2000 MANUFACTURING 342.4 305.1 -11 Selected manufacturing groups Primary metals 138.4 98.1 -29 Fabricated metals & machinery 103.2 116.0 12 Stone, clay and glass 20.6 13.0 -37 Transportation equipment 13.3 20.0 50 Chemicals 9.7 10.0 3 NONMANUFACTURING 643.3 1089.9 69 Selected nonmanufacturing groups Services 196.5 446.0 127 Trade 190.5 295.0 55 Government 79.3 179.0 126 Construction 50.0 42.0 -16 Mining 10.7 3.0 -72 Agriculture 8.6 6.0 -30 TOTAL EMPLOYMENT 985.7 1395.0 +42 SOURCE: Provisional Employment and Population Forecasts, prepared by Southwestern Pennsylvania Regional Planning Commission June, 1968. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-7 AIRPORTS IN VICINITY OF BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION Distance (Miles) Direction Airport From Beaver Valley From Beaver Valley Aliquippa Hopewell (c) 7.5 ESE Herrom (c) 8.5 SSW Beaver Co. (c) 10.5 NNE Black Rock (c) (p) 11.0 NE Johnston (c) (nf) (p) 12.0 W Columbiana (c) (nf) 12.0 WNW Greater Pittsburgh Inter- national 15.0 SE Airport (c) (m) Key to abbreviations c = Civil airport p = Private airport nf = No facilities m = Military airport SOURCE: Sectional Aeronautical Chart, U. S. Coast and Goedetic Survey 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-8 BEAVER COUNTY AGRICULTURAL DATA 1965 1969 Estimated Number of Farms 878 750 Acres Harvested Field and forage crops 25,900 29,600 Vegetable crops 180 150 Livestock and Poultry on Farms All Cattle 13,200 12,500 Hogs 1,800 1,700 Sheep 2,700 1,800 All chickens 116,000 115,000 Average number of cows milked 4,800 4,300 Cash Receipts for Sale of Agricultural Crops Field crops $ 153,000 $ 374,000 Vegetables 63,000 107,000 Forest products 19,000 54,000 Fruits 127,000 88,000 Horticulture specialties 308,000 415,000 Total $ 607,000 $1,038,000 Cash Receipts from Sale of Livestock Products Meat animals $ 694,000 $ 577,000 Dairy products 1,752,000 2,157,000 Poultry products 606,000 637,000 Total $3,052,000 $3,371,000 Government payments 95,000 111,000 Total cash receipts and payments $3,817,000 $4,520,000 Average cash receipts per farm $ 4,347 $ 6,027 SOURCE: Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-9a PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS IN 1969 Acreage Total Products Harvested Yield (1) Production(1) Field Crops Corn, grain 3,800 78B 296,400B Corn, sileage 2,400 14.5T 34,800T Wheat 1,500 32B 48,000B Oats 3,400 54B 184,000B Barley 1,500 49B 73,000B Grass sileage 1,400 57T 8,000T Hay 16,400 20T 32,300T Potato 40 200 cwt 8,000 cwt Fruit Crops Apples _______ 44,400 43E Peaches _______ 1,300 42E Tart Cherries _______ 3,000B Total acres harvested = 29,600 Vegetables ) Snap beans ) Cabbage ) Total acres harvested = 150 Corn ) Tomatoes ) (1) Key to Units B = Bushels T = Tons cwt = Hundredweight 42E = 42 pound equivalent SOURCE: Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-9b PRINCIPAL AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS IN 1969 PRODUCTS Livestock and Livestock Products Milk Number of cows - 4,300 milk cows Milk yield - 8,900 lb/cow/yr Total milk produced - 38,270,000 lb Livestock Inventory Cows - 5,100, 2 year or older Heifers - 3,600 Beef animals - 3,800 Hogs - 1,700 Sheep - 1,800 Poultry Inventory Hens - 55,000 Pullets - 59,000 Other - 400 Farming chickens and turkeys - 50,000 Broilers - 11,000 Eggs Number of layers - 101,000 Egg yield - 203 eggs/yr Total egg production - 20,500,000 eggs SOURCE: Pennsylvania Department of Agriculture 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-10 FISH POPULATION, OHIO RIVER, AT MONTGOMERY LOCK AND DAM (MILE POINT 31.7) FOR SEPTEMBER 19, 1968 Species Number Weight, lb Gizzard shad 79 13.27 Carp 146 78.79 Emerald shiner 7 0.01 Spotfin shiner 1 0.01 Sand shiner 4 0.01 Mimic shiner 19 0.01 Bluntnose minnow 6 0.01 Black bullhead 3 0.09 Yellow bullhead 117 1.87 Brown bullhead 85 11.24 Channel catfish 150 4.78 Golden redhorse 1 0.80 Pumpkinseed(1) 26 0.76 Bluegill(1) 25 0.28 Green sunfish(1) 21 0.41 Rock bass(1) 3 0.04 Largemouth bass(1) 2 0.90 Black crappie(1) 46 3.03 Walleye(1) 1 0.60 Total - 19 species 742 116.86 (1) Game fish represent 6.02 lb or 5.15 percent of the total sample. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-11 FISHING AREAS IN VICINITY OF BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION Distance and Direction Fish Species Name of Fishing Area from BVPS Present(1) Mill Creek 3 SW t, s Brady Run Lake 7-1/2 NE lm, t, sf, b, s, cr, y, c, cc, w, bg Raccoon State Park Lake 8 S lm, w, y, cr, sf, b, s, c, t, bg, sm Traverse Creek 8 S t, s (1) Species of fish are abbreviated. The following is the key to the abbreviations: b Bullhead s Sucker bg Bluegill sf Sunfish c Carp t Trout cc Channel catfish w Walleye cr Crappie y Yellow perch lm Largemouth bass SOURCE: Pennsylvania Fish Commission 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-12 DOWNSTREAM POTABLE WATER INTAKES Downstream Distance, Miles Town Population(1) 1.3 Midland, Pa. 5,271 5 East Liverpool, Ohio 20,020 7 Chester, West Va. 3,614 12 Wellsville, Ohio 5,891 24 Toronto, Ohio 7,705 27 Weirton, West Va. 27,131 30 Steubenville, Ohio 30,771 36 Mingo Junction, Ohio 5,278 52 Wheeling, West Va. 48,188 54 Martins Ferry, Ohio 10,757 59 Bellaire, Ohio 9,655 (1) Based on the 1970 Census 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-13 AREA POPULATION-1970 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 Direction Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles NNE 0 280 212 200 232 7,093 45,103 18,869 13,477 22,332 NE 148 136 400 856 296 20,795 26,384 13,020 17,322 9,341 ENE 84 80 164 200 124 12,697 19,181 19,899 44,868 27,699 E 8 52 428 488 132 8,080 35,547 53,100 111,349 52,407 ESE 32 200 136 304 276 7,726 51,692 585,196 469,216 109,040 SE 4 96 244 104 44 792 12,000 225,484 145,189 101,589 SSE 4 16 52 80 252 783 8,092 35,374 60,087 23,398 S 0 20 208 128 248 431 6,971 7,122 6,947 4,568 SSW 12 36 92 188 707 431 32,795 56,709 40,668 105,109 SW 0 48 406 216 156 4,004 19,954 20,442 12,263 10,474 WSW 0 8 188 96 80 7,145 6,075 5,354 5,802 11,188 W 0 12 48 72 60 23,651 8,132 4,254 14,645 19,751 WNW 16 24 12 310 520 5,717 4,462 8,862 37,052 105,073 NW 264 4,480 808 800 596 1,770 5,358 32,691 14,085 23,297 NNW 20 264 88 80 196 1,566 8,888 37,893 265,416 140,781 N 0 20 112 384 292 2,327 6,418 58,796 26,024 67,644 1 of 6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-13 (CONTD) AREA POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 1980(1) 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 Direction Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles NNE 0 276 209 197 229 6,996 45,579 19,999 14,556 23,820 NE 146 134 395 844 292 20,512 26,508 13,948 19,106 10,276 ENE 83 79 162 197 122 12,524 19,468 21,948 49,490 30,552 E 8 51 422 481 130 7,970 35,485 54,112 112,587 54,175 ESE 32 197 134 300 272 7,621 52,276 594,510 476,134 108,669 SE 4 95 241 103 43 782 12,180 228,765 147,067 101,699 SSE 4 16 51 79 249 772 8,098 35,279 59,907 23,612 S 0 20 205 126 245 425 6,950 7,101 6,935 4,805 SSW 12 36 91 185 727 425 35,951 60,580 42,119 108,301 SW 0 47 400 213 154 4,196 21,139 21,246 12,972 10,952 WSW 0 8 185 95 79 7,888 6,469 5,582 6,188 12,152 W 0 12 47 71 59 25,390 8,723 4,534 15,602 21,847 WNW 16 24 12 306 513 6,128 4,784 9,499 40,639 117,838 NW 260 4,419 797 789 588 1,864 5,744 35,048 15,146 27,922 NNW 20 260 87 79 193 1,554 9,436 40,657 288,641 164,414 N 0 20 110 379 288 2,296 6,465 62,291 28,372 72,537 (1) Projected from 1970 Census data. 2 of 6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-13 (CONTD) AREA POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 1990(1) 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 Direction Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles NNE 0 272 206 195 226 6,901 46,112 21,197 15,727 25,412 NE 144 132 389 833 288 20,223 26,681 14,974 21,074 11,306 ENE 82 78 160 195 121 12,354 19,808 24,209 54,587 33,699 E 8 51 416 475 128 7,862 35,429 55,162 113,892 56,138 ESE 31 195 132 296 269 7,517 52,874 604,004 483,156 108,302 SE 4 93 237 101 43 771 12,363 232,094 148,975 101,821 SSE 4 16 51 78 245 762 8,104 35,184 59,727 23,851 S 0 19 202 125 241 419 6,930 7,080 6,923 5,062 SSW 12 35 90 183 749 419 39,436 64,803 43,654 111,638 SW 0 47 395 210 152 4,400 22,412 22,081 13,725 11,462 WSW 0 8 183 93 78 8,708 6,892 5,820 6,599 13,202 W 0 12 47 70 58 27,259 9,356 4,833 16,625 24,174 WNW 16 23 12 302 506 6,570 5,128 10,181 44,594 132,217 NW 257 4,359 786 778 580 1,966 6,157 37,576 16,295 33,627 NNW 19 257 86 78 191 1,544 10,024 43,624 314,207 192,016 N 0 19 109 374 284 2,264 6,519 65,993 30,989 77,832 (1) Projected from 1970 Census data. 3 of 6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-13 (CONTD) AREA POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 2000(1) 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 Direction Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles NNE 0 269 203 192 223 6,807 46,707 22,468 16,999 27,112 NE 142 131 384 822 284 19,958 26,906 16,109 23,245 12,441 ENE 81 77 157 192 119 12,186 20,204 26,702 60,210 37,170 E 8 50 411 468 127 7,755 35,381 56,252 115,266 58,319 ESE 31 192 131 292 265 7,415 53,487 613,682 490,284 107,936 SE 4 92 234 100 42 761 12,548 235,474 150,912 101,956 SSE 4 15 50 77 242 751 8,110 35,089 59,548 24,118 S 0 19 200 123 238 413 6,909 7,058 6,911 5,342 SSW 12 35 88 180 771 413 43,285 69,415 45,280 115,128 SW 0 46 390 207 150 4,616 23,781 22,949 14,526 12,007 WSW 0 8 180 92 77 9,614 7,348 6,068 7,039 14,344 W 0 12 46 69 58 29,266 10,035 5,152 17,721 26,757 WNW 15 23 12 298 499 7,043 5,497 10,912 48,954 148,432 NW 253 4,300 775 468 572 2,074 6,601 40,286 17,540 40,693 NNW 19 253 84 77 188 1,535 10,655 46,807 342,395 224,254 N 0 19 107 369 280 2,234 6,580 69,916 33,912 83,569
- 1. Projected from 1970 Census data.
4 of 6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-13 (CONTD) AREA POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 2010(1) 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 Direction Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles NNE 0 265 201 189 220 6,175 47,365 23,815 18,380 28,930 NE 140 129 379 810 280 19,686 27,188 17,363 25,639 13,692 ENE 80 76 155 189 117 12,020 20,662 29,453 66,411 40,998 E 8 49 405 462 125 7,649 35,340 57,386 116,718 60,739 ESE 30 189 129 288 261 7,314 54,115 623,550 497,519 107,573 SE 4 91 231 98 42 750 12,736 238,905 152,879 102,104 SSE 4 15 49 76 239 741 8,117 34,994 59,369 24,415 S 0 19 197 121 235 408 6,888 7,037 6,899 5,646 SSW 11 34 87 178 794 408 47,539 74,458 47,007 118,783 SW 0 45 384 204 148 4,847 25,256 23,851 15,376 12,590 WSW 0 8 178 91 76 10,613 7,838 6,328 7,507 15,589 W 0 11 45 68 57 31,422 10,764 5,492 18,896 29,627 WNW 15 23 11 293 492 7,550 5,893 11,695 53,763 166,743 NW 250 4,241 765 757 564 2,192 7,076 43,192 18,893 49,472 NNW 19 250 83 76 186 1,526 11,334 50,222 373,523 261,905 N 0 19 106 364 276 2,203 6,650 74,073 37,183 89,791
- 1. Projected from 1970 Census data.
5 of 6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-13 (CONTD) AREA POPULATION ESTIMATE FOR 2020(1) 0 to 1 1 to 2 2 to 3 3 to 4 4 to 5 5 to 10 10 to 20 20 to 30 30 to 40 40 to 50 Direction Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles Miles NNE 0 261 198 187 217 6,623 48,091 25,245 19,881 30,874 NE 138 127 374 799 276 19,419 27,533 18,750 28,280 15,072 ENE 78 75 153 187 116 11,857 21,189 32,486 73,251 45,221 E 7 49 400 456 123 7,545 35,306 58,566 118,253 63,422 ESE 30 187 127 284 258 7,214 54,758 633,615 504,863 107,212 SE 4 90 228 97 41 740 12,927 242,388 154,877 102,267 SSE 4 15 49 75 235 731 8,125 34,901 59,191 24,744 S 0 19 194 120 232 402 6,867 7,016 6,888 5,976 SSW 11 34 86 176 818 402 52,238 79,978 48,843 122,612 SW 0 45 379 202 146 5,092 26,845 24,790 16,281 13,215 WSW 0 7 176 90 75 11,717 8,366 6,600 8,007 16,944 W 0 11 45 67 56 33,738 11,547 5,855 20,155 32,815 WNW 15 22 11 289 486 8,093 6,318 12,535 49,070 187,451 NW 247 4,184 755 747 557 2,318 7,585 46,306 20,366 60,418 NNW 19 247 82 75 183 1,519 12,062 53,887 407,953 305,881 N 0 19 105 359 273 2,173 6,728 78,477 40,853 96,552
- 1. Projected from 1970 Census data.
6 of 6
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 34 Table 2.1-14 STANDARD GAS BASIS Operating Design Pressure Max Pressure Total Energy Service Pressure (psia) (psia) (psia) Location Stored (Btu's) Nitrogen 2,490 2,490 4,000 S.E. Corner of 9.8X103 (Plant Heating) Service Building Propane 189.7 264.7 264.7 South of 11.11X106 Storage Warehouse & North of Turbine 11.11X106 Building 189.7 264.7 264.7 75 feet south of 36.64X107 the Alternate Intake Structure (4 mo./yr.) Hydrogen 2,014.1 4,000 4,000 Storage Pad Adja- 3.26X104 Makeup cent to South Cool-ant Recovery Tank Cubicle (BR-TK-4B) Hydrogen for 2,314.7 2,464.7 2,464.7 North of 3.75X105 Turbine Turbine Generator Building 1 of 2
BVPS-1-UPDATED FSAR Rev. 34 TABLE 2.1-14 (CONTD) STANDARD GAS BASIS Operating Design Pressure Max Pressure Total Energy Service Pressure (psia) (psia) (psia) Location Stored (Btu's) Air Storage 214.7 289.7 289.7 Diesel 3.58X104 Diesel Generator Generators Building CO2 Storage 314.7 377.7 371.7 1 Unit East of 4.7X105 Turbine Building 1 Unit in Separate 9.4X105 Structure Adjacent to Diesel Generator Building 2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2.1-15 PIPELINE LEAKAGE DETECTION AND ISOLATION Company1 Ashland Pipeline Co. Buckeye Pipeline Co. Laurel Pipeline Co. Mobil Pipeline Co. National Transit
- 1. How is leak 1. Pressure drop and 1. Pressure drop and 1. Pressure drop. Line is 1. Pressure drop. 1. Pressure drop.
detected? visual inspection of routine air patrol. Line monitored continuously Volumetric metering Line is monitored (Pressure or line on regular basis. is monitored from Camp Hill, Pa. and visual inspection continuously from level drop or Line is monitored continuously from and Aliquippa Station, (air patrol) line is Meadowlands, visual indication continuously from Macungie, Pa. Main Beaver Co. Pa. Also monitored Pa. on ground or in Ashland, Ky. and East dispatch center also Volumetric metering. continuously from river.) Sparta, Ohio. Midland, Pa. & Co. Plainfield, N.J. Volumetric metering also.
- 2. Who is to be Refer to Emergency Refer to Emergency Refer to Emergency Refer to Emergency Refer to notified to close Preparedness Plan Preparedness Plan Preparedness Plan Preparedness Plan Emergency isolation valves Implementing Implementing Implementing Implementing Preparedness in leaking oil Procedure 1.1 Procedure 1.1 Procedure 1.1 Procedure 1.1 Plan Implementing line on either Procedure 1.1 side of the river?
2a.Tanks on 2a. Mobile Oil & Exxon 2a. Mobil Oil Tanks Midland side of Tanks supplied by supplied by Mobil river? Buckeye. Pipeline Co.
- 3. How are valves 3. Both manual (local). 3. Both manual (local). 3. Both manual (local). 3. Valve on B.V. site is 3. Both manual closed local or (Nearest pumping (Nearest pumping (Nearest pumping manual. Midland (local). (Nearest remote? stations for line stations for line stations for line valve is remote. pumping station isolation are Rogers, isolation are Midland, isolation are Aliquippa, (Personnel located at for line isolation Ohio, and Freedom, Pa. and Coraopolis, Pa. and Ellsworth, Midland, Pa. and are Meadowlands, Pa.) Pa.) Ohio.) McKees Rocks, Pa. Pa.)
and Irwin, Pa.) 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2.1-15 (CONTD) PIPELINE LEAKAGE DETECTION AND ISOLATION Company1 Ashland Pipeline Co. Buckeye Pipeline Co. Laurel Pipeline Co. Mobil Pipeline Co. National Transit
- 4. How long will it 4. Approx. 1 hour. 4. Less than an hour. 4. Approx. 1 hour. 4. Within an hour. 4. Less than an take to close hour.
valves from time of notification?
- 5. Is oil tank 5. No. No plans located presently for southeast of future use.
bridge approach in use? Note: 1. Pipeline company at time of BVPS-1 licensing. 2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-16 MATERIALS UTILIZING CRUDE OIL AS THE DESIGN FLUID Type 304 Stainless Steel(1) Oil Temperature, F Corrosion Rate (Mils/yr)* West Texas 200 to 250 25 and Michigan Crude Carbon Steel(2) Oil Temperature, F Corrosion Rate (Mils/yr)* Pennsylvania Crude 800 79 Naptha 650 79 Light Gas Oils 775 238 Heavy Gas Oils 825 158 Topped Crude 800 79 90-10 Copper Nickel(3) Oil Temperature, F Corrosion Rate (Mils/yr)* West Texas 290 to 295 74 Crude (with 0.1. w/o (Sulfur)
- This corrosion rate was magnified since the crude oil pH was maintained at 7 to 8 with ammonia which is known to be deleterious to copper alloys.
Bronze Since bronze would be a poor technical-economic choice for the petroleum industry, data is lacking. However, its corrosion rate would approximate, but not exceed, that of carbon steel. Neoprene(4) Neoprene is nearly impervious to crude oils. Neoprene hose is standard dockside equipment for unloading ocean- going tankers carrying crude oils. The projected response of neoprene to crude oils is swelling over a 4 to 5 month period. The maximum swelling would be 15 percent in this period. Under the design accident duration of one hour, no measurable effect is to be expected(5). (1) E. N. Skinner, et al., "High Temperature Corrosion in Refinery and Petrochemical Service," Corrosion, Vol 16, p. 85, (December, 1960). (2) Armstead, Jr., "Safety in Petroleum Refining and Related Industries," John G. Simmonds and Company, Inc., New York, N.Y., first edition, p. 277, (1950). 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-16 MATERIALS UTILIZING CRUDE OIL AS THE DESIGN FLUID (3) F. L. Laque, "Corrosion Resistance of Cupronickel Alloys Containing 10-30 Percent Nickel," Corrosion, Vol 10, p. 396, (November, 1954). (4) "Dupont Neoprene," E. I. Dupont, Engineering, Report A-33448, (revised November, 1969). (5) Personal Communication, Dupont Elastomer Chemical Department, 140 Federal Street, Boston, Mass. 2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.1-17 PEAK "SIDE-ON" OVERPRESSURES AND DYNAMIC PRESSURES Peak Closest Dynamic Peak Safety-Related Distance, Pressure, Overpressure Hazard Structure Ft Psi Psi Railway Control 2,065 .007 .54 Explosion Room Gasoline Control 710 .0022 .29 Barge Room Explosion Highway Auxiliary 1,250 .011 .67 Explosion Building 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-1 CLIMATOLOGICAL AVERAGES(1) Temperature Precipitation Snowfall Average Number Month (F) (Inches) (Inches) Thunderstorms January 28.9 2.97 10.8 <1 February 29.2 2.19 10.5 <1 March 36.8 3.32 9.9 2 April 49.0 3.08 2.0 4 May 59.8 3.91 0.3 5 June 68.4 3.78 0.0 6 July 72.1 3.88 0.0 7 August 70.8 3.31 0.0 6 September 64.2 2.54 0.0 3 October 53.1 2.52 0.2 2 November 40.8 2.24 3.9 <1 December 30.7 2.40 8.4 <1 Annual 50.3 36.14 46.0 35 (1) Based on Pittsburgh data, 1870-1967 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-2 CLIMATOLOGICAL EXTREMES (1870-1967) (1) Pittsburgh Maximum Temperature, F 103 (July, 1936) Minimum Temperature, F -20 (Feb., 1899) Maximum Monthly Precipitation, inches 10.25 (June, 1951) Maximum 24-Hr Precipitation, inches 4.08 (Sept., 1876) Minimum Monthly Precipitation, inches 0.06 (Oct., 1874) Maximum Monthly Snowfall, inches 36.30 (Dec., 1890) Maximum 24-Hr Snowfall, inches 17.50 (Nov., 1950) Fastest Mile Wind, mph 58 (Feb., 1967) (1) Local Climatological Data and Summaries for Pittsburgh and Pennsylvania, U. S. Weather Bureau Publications. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-3 EXTREME MILE WINDS Wind Speed Extreme Gusts Recurrence Interval Probability (mph) (mph) Years 0.50 48 63 2 0.10 62 81 10 0.04 70 91 25 0.02 76 99 50 0.01 84 110 100 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-4 JOINT FREQUENCY DATA 50 ft Level Wind Data 50 and 150 ft Level Temperature Wind Horizontal Vertical Speed Stability Stability X/Q Frequency Cumulative Remarks 1.0 G G 0.05 0.05 1.0 F G 0.21 0.26 1.0 G F 0.08 0.34 2.0 G G 0.0 0.34 1.0 E G 0.73 1.07 1.0 F F 0.17 1.24 1.0 G E 0.04 1.28 1.0 D G 0.69 1.97 3.0 G G 0.0 1.97 2.0 F G 0.59 2.56 2.0 G F 0.02 2.58 1.0 G D 0.0 2.58 2.11x10-3 Using all Bendix calms, effective F and 0.64 1.0 E F 0.27 2.85 4.0 G G 0.0 2.85 1.0 F E 0.35 3.20 1.83x10-3 Using only Bendix nighttime calms, effective F and 0.73 2.0 E G 1.13 4.33 1.0 C G 0.29 4.62 1.62x10-3 Using all P-Bell calms, effective F and 0.84 1.0 D F 3.0 F G 3.0 G F 4.0 G G 2.0 F F 2.0 G E 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-5 DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT AND EXTENDED RELEASE METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS Mean Wind Pasquill Speed Wind Period Class (m/second) Fi*fi Direction 0-2 hours F 0.84 1.0 Invariant 2-24 hours F 0.84 1.0 Sector Average 24-96 hours D 2.0 0.25 Sector Average F 0.9 0.25 Sector Average 4 days D 1.5 0.020 Sector Average 30 days E 1.0 0.020 Sector Average F 0.9 0.020 Sector Average G 1.4 0.025 Sector Average 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-6 AVERAGE MONTHLY RELATIVE HUMIDITY (PERCENT) AND ABSOLUTE HUMIDITY (gm/m3) AT BEAVER VALLEY BASED ON SEPTEMBER 6, 1970 - SEPTEMBER 5, 1972 DATA Relative Absolute Humidity Humidity Month (Percent) (gm/m3) January 89.0 3.1 February 77.3 2.6 March 44.2 2.3 April 56.9 4.7 May 70.4 8.4 June 80.4 14.2 July 76.3 14.6 August 77.7 13.5 September 81.4 13.6 October 78.9 9.2 November 74.5 5.5 December 62.8 3.8 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-7
/Q (SEC/M3) FOR 158 METER RELEASE - BASED ON THE JOINT FREQUENCY OF BENDIX-FRIEZ 150 FOOT WIND DATA AND T (150'-50') TEMPERATURE DATA FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 5, 1970 - SEPTEMBER 4, 1971 Time Period Exclusion Distance, Unit 1 - 610 meters Exclusion Distance, Unit 2 - 456 meters 0-2 hours worst case 2.2 x 10-4 worst case 2.5 x 10-4 5% probability level 8.4 x 10-7 5% probability level 1.5 x 10-7 50% probability level 8.1 x 10-27 50% probability level 8.7 x 10-40 Outer Boundary of Low Population Zone (3.6 miles - 5,794 meters) 0-8 hours worst case 1.0 x 10-5 5% probability level 1.5 x 10-6 50% probability level 1.3 x 10-7 Outer Boundary of Low Population Zone (3.6 miles - 5,794 meters) 8-24 hours worst case 5.1 x 10-6 5% probability level 7.5 x 10-7 50% probability level 1.1 x 10-7 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-7 (CONT'D)
/Q (SEC/M3) FOR 158 METER RELEASE - BASED ON THE JOINT FREQUENCY OF BENDIX-FRIEZ 150 FOOT WIND DATA AND T (150'-50') TEMPERATURE DATA FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 5, 1970 - SEPTEMBER 4, 1971 Time Period Exclusion Distance, Unit 1 - 610 meters Exclusion Distance, Unit 2 - 456 meters Outer Boundary of Low Population Zone (3.6 miles - 5,794 meters) 1-4 days worst case 1.3 x 10-6 5% probability level 6.3 x 10-7 50% probability level 8.2 x 10-8 Outer Boundary of Low Population Zone (3.6 miles - 5,794 meters) 4-30 days worst case (1) 5% probability level (1) 50% probability level (1)
(1) No consecutive observations of 624 hours (26 days); i.e., there was always a missing wind and/or temperature measurement in any 624 hour period. 2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-8
/Q (SEC/M3) AT THE OUTER BOUNDARY OF THE LOW POPULATION ZONE (3.6 MILES - 5,794 METERS) FOR A GROUND LEVEL RELEASE - BASED ON THE JOINT FREQUENCY OF PACKARD BELL 50 FOOT WIND DATA AND T (150'-50')
TEMPERATURE DATA FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 5, 1970 - SEPTEMBER 4, 1971 Time Period 0-8 hours worst case 1.6 x 10-4 5% probability level 2.6 x 10-5 50% probability level 4.0 x 10-6 8-24 hours worst case 8.2 x 10-5 5% probability level 2.3 x 10-5 50% probability level 3.9 x 10-6 1-4 days worst case 2.3 x 10-5 5% probability level 1.3 x 10-5 50% probability level 2.8 x 10-6 4-30 days worst case (1) 5% probability level (1) 50% probability level (1) (1) No consecutive observations of 624 hours (26 days); i.e., there was always a missing wind and/or temperature measurement in any 624 hour period. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-9 ANNUAL AVERAGE ATMOSPHERIC DIFFUSION FACTORS (X/Q) FOR A 158 METER RELEASE FOR 16 RADIAL SECTORS TO 50 MILES (USING SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA)
- ANNUAL AVERAGE **** BEAVER VALLEY 50 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71
**CHI/Q FOR RELEASE HEIGHT OF
- 1.5800E+02 METERS * (IN SEC PER CU METER)**
DIST,M SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 2.0000E+02 8.9518E-13 6.8382E-13 4.0407E-13 3.7299E-14 1.9893E-13 1.8650E-13 1.3676E-13 6.9001E-20 4.0000E+02 6.9423E-09 5.2240E-09 3.0997E-09 3.5460E-10 1.5656E-09 1.4963E-09 1.0712E-09 3.1933E-11 6.0000E+02 1.0547E-08 6.5497E-09 4.1118E-09 1.7820E-09 2.9010E-09 3.3799E-09 1.9177E-09 7.5840E-10 8.0000E+02 9.1642E-09 4.4040E-09 3.0096E-09 3.5528E-09 4.0594E-09 5.9757E-09 2.8522E-09 2.6266E-09 1.2000E+03 7.4859E-09 4.4578E-09 2.7954E-09 5.5965E-09 7.2925E-09 1.2386E-08 5.8840E-09 7.0293E-09 1.6000E+03 6.4680E-09 5.2675E-09 3.0314E-09 6.0127E-09 8.8795E-09 1.5296E-08 7.4276E-09 9.0149E-09 2.4000E+03 5.3659E-09 6.0222E-09 3.4648E-09 6.0581E-09 1.0474E-08 1.6812E-08 8.5350E-09 9.7850E-09 3.2000E+03 5.7131E-09 7.1159E-09 4.5023E-09 7.0596E-09 1.2950E-08 1.8685E-08 9.8442E-09 1.0696E-08 4.0000E+03 7.1610E-09 8.6151E-09 6.0982E-09 8.9174E-09 1.5936E-08 2.0889E-08 1.1237E-08 1.2149E-08 4.8000E+03 9.1219E-09 1.0205E-08 7.9056E-09 1.1105E-08 1.8839E-08 2.2869E-08 1.2428E-08 1.3749E-08 5.6000E+03 1.1084E-08 1.1622E-08 9.5946E-09 1.3167E-08 2.1282E-08 2.4371E-08 1.3310E-08 1.5173E-08 6.4000E+03 1.2767E-08 1.2738E-08 1.0986E-08 1.4864E-08 2.3116E-08 2.5339E-08 1.3872E-08 1.6267E-08 7.2000E+03 1.4075E-08 1.3532E-08 1.2032E-08 1.6127E-08 2.4348E-08 2.5823E-08 1.4154E-08 1.7003E-08 8.0000E+03 1.5020E-08 1.4040E-08 1.2755E-08 1.6984E-08 2.5060E-08 2.5911E-08 1.4212E-08 1.7418E-08 8.8000E+03 1.5653E-08 1.4315E-08 1.3206E-08 1.7499E-08 2.5357E-08 2.5700E-08 1.4101E-08 1.7571E-08 9.6000E+03 1.6038E-08 1.4411E-08 1.3442E-08 1.7742E-08 2.5338E-08 2.5272E-08 1.3870E-08 1.7521E-08 1.0400E+04 1.6231E-08 1.4376E-08 1.3514E-08 1.7778E-08 2.5088E-08 2.4695E-08 1.3558E-08 1.7323E-08 1.1200E+04 1.6281E-08 1.4245E-08 1.3463E-08 1.7661E-08 2.4674E-08 2.4022E-08 1.3192E-08 1.7020E-08 1.2000E+04 1.6225E-08 1.4048E-08 1.3323E-08 1.7433E-08 2.4147E-08 2.3290E-08 1.2795E-08 1.6644E-08 1.2800E+04 1.6092E-08 1.3807E-08 1.3120E-08 1.7127E-08 2.3547E-08 2.2529E-08 1.2382E-08 1.6222E-08 1.4400E+04 1.5679E-08 1.3246E-08 1.2599E-08 1.6376E-08 2.2237E-08 2.0994E-08 1.1549E-08 1.5307E-08 1.5200E+04 1.5427E-08 1.2947E-08 1.2305E-08 1.5963E-08 2.1562E-08 2.0244E-08 1.1142E-08 1.4839E-08 1.6000E+04 1.5157E-08 1.2645E-08 1.2003E-08 1.5540E-08 2.0890E-08 1.9515E-08 1.0747E-08 1.4374E-08 1.6800E+04 1.4877E-08 1.2343E-08 1.1696E-08 1.5115E-08 2.0229E-08 1.8811E-08 1.0365E-08 1.3917E-08 1.7600E+04 1.4592E-08 1.2044E-08 1.1389E-08 1.4693E-08 1.9584E-08 1.8135E-08 9.9991E-09 1.3471E-08 1.8400E+04 1.4304E-08 1.1751E-08 1.1086E-08 1.4277E-08 1.8959E-08 1.7489E-08 9.6485E-09 1.3040E-08 1.9200E+04 1.4017E-08 1.1465E-08 1.0789E-08 1.3871E-08 1.8355E-08 1.6871E-08 9.3139E-09 1.2624E-08 2.0000E+04 1.3733E-08 1.1186E-08 1.0499E-08 1.3476E-08 1.7773E-08 1.6283E-08 8.9949E-09 1.2223E-08 2.0800E+04 1.3453E-08 1.0916E-08 1.0217E-08 1.3093E-08 1.7215E-08 1.5723E-08 8.6913E-09 1.1839E-08 2.1600E+04 1.3177E-08 1.0654E-08 9.9435E-09 1.2724E-08 1.6681E-08 1.5191E-08 8.4025E-09 1.1471E-08 2.2400E+04 1.2908E-08 1.0401E-08 9.6795E-09 1.2368E-08 1.6169E-08 1.4685E-08 8.1280E-09 1.1119E-08 2.3200E+04 1.2645E-08 1.0156E-08 9.4248E-09 1.2025E-08 1.5680E-08 1.4204E-08 7.8670E-09 1.0783E-08 2.4000E+04 1.2388E-08 9.9198E-09 9.1793E-09 1.1696E-08 1.5213E-08 1.3747E-08 7.6189E-09 1.0461E-08 5.0000E+04 7.0631E-09 5.3909E-09 4.6866E-09 5.8137E-09 7.2415E-09 6.2755E-09 3.5289E-09 4.9821E-09 1.0000E+05 3.6104E-09 2.7118E-09 2.3273E-09 2.8635E-09 3.5021E-09 2.9750E-09 1.6804E-09 2.4105E-09 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-9 (CONTD) ANNUAL AVERAGE ATMOSPHERIC DIFFUSION FACTORS (X/Q) FOR A 158 METER RELEASE FOR 16 RADIAL SECTORS TO 50 MILES (USING SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA)
- ANNUAL AVERAGE **** BEAVER VALLEY 50 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71
**CHI/Q FOR RELEASE HEIGHT OF
- 1.5800E+02 METERS * (IN SEC PER CU METER)**
DIST,M NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S 2.0000E+02 4.6624E-14 1.2433E-13 4.9732E-13 3.1083E-13 3.7299E-14 7.4598E-13 6.2165E-14 7.5841E-13 4.0000E+02 4.3094E-10 9.4988E-10 3.8222E-09 2.3746E-09 2.9517E-10 5.7498E-09 4.7497E-10 5.7939E-09 6.0000E+02 1.9807E-09 1.2558E-09 5.2408E-09 3.0240E-09 6.0098E-10 8.0839E-09 6.7214E-10 7.2293E-09 8.0000E+02 3.9089E-09 1.4766E-09 4.3795E-09 2.4889E-09 1.0915E-09 6.1487E-09 1.1986E-09 4.5216E-09 1.2000E+03 6.2659E-09 3.5975E-09 5.3566E-09 4.0372E-09 2.5425E-09 4.3303E-09 3.6907E-09 3.4556E-09 1.6000E+03 6.7599E-09 4.8710E-09 6.1880E-09 5.2443E-09 3.3068E-09 3.7093E-09 5.0254E-09 3.8441E-09 2.4000E+03 6.4382E-09 5.6266E-09 6.6114E-09 6.2513E-09 4.1644E-09 3.7281E-09 5.4307E-09 5.1007E-09 3.2000E+03 6.5724E-09 6.2353E-09 7.2414E-09 7.4556E-09 5.7487E-09 5.3044E-09 6.1866E-09 7.4698E-09 4.0000E+03 7.0587E-09 6.8415E-09 8.0722E-09 8.9303E-09 8.1635E-09 8.1862E-09 8.1167E-09 1.0747E-08 4.8000E+03 7.6161E-09 7.3283E-09 8.8733E-09 1.0396E-08 1.0921E-08 1.1670E-08 1.0725E-08 1.4323E-08 5.6000E+03 8.0914E-09 7.6557E-09 9.5165E-09 1.1646E-08 1.3518E-08 1.5047E-08 1.3368E-08 1.7616E-08 6.4000E+03 8.4249E-09 7.8281E-09 9.9585E-09 1.2589E-08 1.5674E-08 1.7914E-08 1.5659E-08 2.0321E-08 7.2000E+03 8.6112E-09 7.8699E-09 1.0207E-08 1.3221E-08 1.7308E-08 2.0138E-08 1.7458E-08 2.2362E-08 8.0000E+03 8.6694E-09 7.8109E-09 1.0294E-08 1.3582E-08 1.8451E-08 2.1744E-08 1.8766E-08 2.3795E-08 8.8000E+03 8.6262E-09 7.6789E-09 1.0254E-08 1.3725E-08 1.9177E-08 2.2819E-08 1.9647E-08 2.4722E-08 9.6000E+03 8.5076E-09 7.4970E-09 1.0122E-08 1.3703E-08 1.9571E-08 2.3467E-08 2.0181E-08 2.5252E-08 1.0400E+04 8.3356E-09 7.2830E-09 9.9238E-09 1.3558E-08 1.9709E-08 2.3783E-08 2.0445E-08 2.5480E-08 1.1200E+04 8.1277E-09 7.0502E-09 9.6822E-09 1.3326E-08 1.9656E-08 2.3849E-08 2.0504E-08 2.5485E-08 1.2000E+04 7.8972E-09 6.8083E-09 9.4132E-09 1.3036E-08 1.9464E-08 2.3729E-08 2.0411E-08 2.5326E-08 1.2800E+04 7.6540E-09 6.5640E-09 9.1287E-09 1.2707E-08 1.9171E-08 2.3475E-08 2.0207E-08 2.5051E-08 1.4400E+04 7.1566E-09 6.0857E-09 8.5456E-09 1.1991E-08 1.8401E-08 2.2707E-08 1.9587E-08 2.4282E-08 1.5200E+04 6.9110E-09 5.8568E-09 8.2575E-09 1.1623E-08 1.7963E-08 2.2245E-08 1.9211E-08 2.3833E-08 1.6000E+04 6.6712E-09 5.6367E-09 7.9760E-09 1.1258E-08 1.7509E-08 2.1756E-08 1.8813E-08 2.3361E-08 1.6800E+04 6.4388E-09 5.4260E-09 7.7031E-09 1.0898E-08 1.7048E-08 2.1250E-08 1.8400E-08 2.2877E-08 1.7600E+04 6.2148E-09 5.2250E-09 7.4400E-09 1.0548E-08 1.6587E-08 2.0738E-08 1.7981E-08 2.2388E-08 1.8400E+04 5.9997E-09 5.0338E-09 7.1873E-09 1.0208E-08 1.6130E-08 2.0227E-08 1.7562E-08 2.1899E-08 1.9200E+04 5.7939E-09 4.8521E-09 6.9453E-09 9.8802E-09 1.5682E-08 1.9720E-08 1.7145E-08 2.1416E-08 2.0000E+04 5.5972E-09 4.6797E-09 6.7140E-09 9.5648E-09 1.5244E-08 1.9222E-08 1.6735E-08 2.0940E-08 2.0800E+04 5.4097E-09 4.5163E-09 6.4934E-09 9.2623E-09 1.4819E-08 1.8734E-08 1.6333E-08 2.0474E-08 2.1600E+04 5.2311E-09 4.3613E-09 6.2831E-09 8.9725E-09 1.4408E-08 1.8259E-08 1.5941E-08 2.0018E-08 2.2400E+04 5.0611E-09 4.2144E-09 6.0828E-09 8.6953E-09 1.4010E-08 1.7798E-08 1.5559E-08 1.9574E-08 2.3200E+04 4.8992E-09 4.0752E-09 5.8921E-09 8.4304E-09 1.3626E-08 1.7352E-08 1.5188E-08 1.9143E-08 2.4000E+04 4.7452E-09 3.9432E-09 5.7105E-09 8.1774E-09 1.3257E-08 1.6920E-08 1.4829E-08 1.8724E-08 5.0000E+04 2.1955E-09 1.8013E-09 2.6790E-09 8.8750E-09 6.6111E-09 8.8011E-09 7.9118E-09 1.0379E-08 1.0000E+05 1.0479E-09 8.5105E-10 1.2841E-09 1.8716E-09 3.2649E-09 4.4041E-09 3.9855E-09 5.2641E-09 2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-10 ANNUAL AVERAGE ATMOSPHERIC DIFFUSION FACTORS (X/Q) FOR A GROUND-LEVEL RELEASE FOR 16 RADIAL SECTORS TO 50 MILES (USING SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA)
- ANNUAL AVERAGE **** BEAVER VALLEY 50 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71
**CHI/Q FOR RELEASE HEIGHT OF
- 0. METERS * (IN SEC PER CU METER)**
DIST,M NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S 2.0000E+02 2.8208E-05 2.4146E-05 3.6584E-05 5.4822E-05 1.0961E-04 1.4967E-04 1.6045E-04 2.8848E-04 4.0000E+02 7.5850E-06 6.5078E-06 9.8500E-06 1.4778E-05 2.9626E-05 4.0457E-05 4.3496E-05 7.8513E-05 6.0000E+02 3.6260E-06 3.1193E-06 4.7192E-06 7.0892E-06 1.4270E-05 1.9504E-05 2.1047E-05 3.8181E-05 8.0000E+02 2.1942E-06 1.8929E-06 2.8635E-06 4.3068E-06 8.7093E-06 1.1919E-05 1.2913E-05 2.3552E-05 1.2000E+03 1.1243E-06 9.7350E-07 1.4741E-06 2.2234E-06 4.5341E-06 6.2179E-06 6.7779E-06 1.2465E-05 1.6000E+03 7.0618E-07 6.1221E-07 9.2831E-07 1.4036E-06 2.8776E-06 3.9490E-06 4.3182E-06 7.9749E-06 2.4000E+03 3.6746E-07 3.1912E-07 4.8489E-07 7.3570E-07 1.5195E-06 2.0873E-06 2.2927E-06 4.2596E-06 3.2000E+03 2.3164E-07 2.0142E-07 3.0651E-07 4.6619E-07 9.6801E-07 1.3305E-06 1.4662E-06 2.7359E-06 4.0000E+03 1.6219E-07 1.4116E-07 2.1508E-07 3.2776E-07 6.8343E-07 9.3979E-07 1.0382E-06 1.9440E-06 4.8000E+03 1.2137E-07 1.0571E-07 1.6123E-07 2.4609E-07 5.1491E-07 7.0828E-07 7.8411E-07 1.4724E-06 5.6000E+03 9.5079E-08 8.2857E-08 1.2649E-07 1.9333E-07 4.0573E-07 5.5823E-07 6.1913E-07 1.1654E-06 6.4000E+03 7.7023E-08 6.7154E-08 1.0260E-07 1.5701E-07 3.3037E-07 4.5462E-07 5.0503E-07 9.5269E-07 7.2000E+03 6.4014E-08 5.5834E-08 8.5362E-08 1.3078E-07 2.7583E-07 3.7961E-07 4.2232E-07 7.9822E-07 8.0000E+03 5.4288E-08 4.7366E-08 7.2463E-08 1.1114E-07 2.3490E-07 3.2330E-07 3.6015E-07 6.8191E-07 8.8000E+03 4.6797E-08 4.0842E-08 6.2520E-08 9.5980E-08 2.0326E-07 2.7977E-07 3.1203E-07 5.9178E-07 9.6000E+03 4.0887E-08 3.5693E-08 5.4669E-08 8.4003E-08 1.7822E-07 2.4531E-07 2.7391E-07 5.2027E-07 1.0400E+04 3.6130E-08 3.1548E-08 4.8345E-08 7.4350E-08 1.5801E-07 2.1749E-07 2.4311E-07 4.6241E-07 1.1200E+04 3.2236E-08 2.8153E-08 4.3164E-08 6.6436E-08 1.4142E-07 1.9465E-07 2.1779E-07 4.1481E-07 1.2000E+04 2.9001E-08 2.5333E-08 3.8858E-08 5.9856E-08 1.2760E-07 1.7563E-07 1.9670E-07 3.7511E-07 1.2800E+04 2.6280E-08 2.2960E-08 3.5234E-08 5.4314E-08 1.1595E-07 1.5959E-07 1.7890E-07 3.4157E-07 1.4400E+04 2.1980E-08 1.9208E-08 2.9502E-08 4.5542E-08 9.7487E-08 1.3416E-07 1.5064E-07 2.8827E-07 1.5200E+04 2.0259E-08 1.7707E-08 2.7206E-08 4.2028E-08 9.0076E-08 1.2395E-07 1.3929E-07 2.6683E-07 1.6000E+04 1.8757E-08 1.6396E-08 2.5202E-08 3.8958E-08 8.3597E-08 1.1502E-07 1.2936E-07 2.4806E-07 1.6800E+04 1.7438E-08 1.5245E-08 2.3440E-08 3.6257E-08 7.7893E-08 1.0717E-07 1.2061E-07 2.3152E-07 1.7600E+04 1.6271E-08 1.4226E-08 2.1881E-08 3.3868E-08 7.2841E-08 1.0020E-07 1.1286E-07 2.1684E-07 1.8400E+04 1.5233E-08 1.3320E-08 2.0495E-08 3.1741E-08 6.8341E-08 9.4004E-08 1.0595E-07 2.0376E-07 1.9200E+04 1.4305E-08 1.2510E-08 1.9254E-08 2.9838E-08 6.4312E-08 8.8452E-08 9.9763E-08 1.9203E-07 2.0000E+04 1.3471E-08 1.1782E-08 1.8140E-08 2.8128E-08 6.0689E-08 8.3458E-08 9.4193E-08 1.8147E-07 2.0800E+04 1.2720E-08 1.1125E-08 1.7135E-08 2.6585E-08 5.7415E-08 7.8947E-08 8.9159E-08 1.7192E-07 2.1600E+04 1.2038E-08 1.0531E-08 1.6223E-08 2.5185E-08 5.4446E-08 7.4855E-08 8.4592E-08 1.6325E-07 2.2400E+04 1.1419E-08 9.9897E-09 1.5395E-08 2.3913E-08 5.1744E-08 7.1130E-08 8.0432E-08 1.5535E-07 2.3200E+04 1.0854E-08 9.4963E-09 1.4639E-08 2.2751E-08 4.9275E-08 6.7727E-08 7.6632E-08 1.4812E-07 2.4000E+04 1.0338E-08 9.0447E-09 1.3946E-08 2.1687E-08 4.7013E-08 6.4609E-08 7.3147E-08 1.4150E-07 5.0000E+04 3.8458E-09 3.3701E-09 5.2337E-09 8.2663E-09 1.8337E-08 2.5054E-08 2.8817E-08 5.6914E-08 1.0000E+05 1.8501E-09 1.6249E-09 2.5464E-09 4.1266E-09 9.4466E-09 1.2729E-08 1.4995E-08 3.0538E-08 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-10 (CONTD) ANNUAL AVERAGE ATMOSPHERIC DIFFUSION FACTORS (X/Q) FOR A GROUND-LEVEL RELEASE FOR 16 RADIAL SECTORS TO 50 MILES (USING SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA)
- ANNUAL AVERAGE **** BEAVER VALLEY 50 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71
**CHI/Q FOR RELEASE HEIGHT OF
- 0. METERS * (IN SEC PER CU METER)**
DIST,M SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 2.0000E+02 3.0612E-04 2.0734E-04 8.5251E-05 8.2270E-05 9.2738E-05 7.8633E-05 4.6946E-05 6.3337E-05 4.0000E+02 8.3571E-05 5.6574E-05 2.3073E-05 2.2171E-05 2.4959E-05 2.1156E-05 1.2651E-05 1.7037E-05 6.0000E+02 4.0789E-05 2.7588E-05 1.1137E-05 1.0640E-05 1.1948E-05 1.0115E-05 6.0633E-06 8.1500E-06 8.0000E+02 2.5258E-05 1.7066E-05 6.8147E-06 6.4686E-06 7.2407E-06 6.1210E-06 3.6791E-06 4.9358E-06 1.2000E+03 1.3451E-05 9.0731E-06 3.5615E-06 3.3449E-06 3.7221E-06 3.1352E-06 1.8930E-06 2.5343E-06 1.6000E+03 8.6388E-06 5.8208E-06 2.2640E-06 2.1138E-06 2.3435E-06 1.9684E-06 1.1913E-06 1.5945E-06 2.4000E+03 4.6396E-06 3.1215E-06 1.1983E-06 1.1093E-06 1.2234E-06 1.0236E-06 6.2155E-07 8.3152E-07 8.2000E+03 2.9919E-06 2.0108E-06 7.6467E-07 7.0347E-07 7.7290E-07 6.4492E-07 3.9254E-07 5.2493E-07 4.0000E+03 2.1327E-06 1.4322E-06 5.4057E-07 4.9486E-07 5.4206E-07 4.5136E-07 2.7525E-07 3.6794E-07 4.8000E+03 1.6197E-06 1.0869E-06 4.0772E-07 3.7169E-07 4.0613E-07 3.3761E-07 2.0620E-07 2.7555E-07 5.6000E+03 1.2851E-06 8.6188E-07 3.2156E-07 2.9210E-07 3.1848E-07 2.6437E-07 1.6168E-07 2.1599E-07 6.4000E+03 1.0527E-06 7.0569E-07 2.6204E-07 2.3728E-07 2.5821E-07 2.1409E-07 1.3108E-07 1.7506E-07 7.2000E+03 8.8372E-07 5.9213E-07 2.1893E-07 1.9768E-07 2.1476E-07 1.7787E-07 1.0901E-07 1.4555E-07 8.0000E+03 7.5629E-07 5.0653E-07 1.8655E-07 1.6801E-07 1.8224E-07 1.5079E-07 9.2500E-08 1.2348E-07 8.8000E+03 6.5740E-07 4.4014E-07 1.6152E-07 1.4511E-07 1.5717E-07 1.2994E-07 7.9777E-08 1.0647E-07 9.6000E+03 5.7885E-07 3.8741E-07 1.4169E-07 1.2702E-07 1.3739E-07 1.1350E-07 6.9734E-08 9.3045E-08 1.0400E+04 5.1522E-07 3.4472E-07 1.2568E-07 1.1243E-07 1.2146E-07 1.0027E-07 6.1647E-08 8.2237E-08 1.1200E+04 4.6283E-07 3.0957E-07 1.1253E-07 1.0046E-07 1.0841E-07 8.9434E-08 5.5024E-08 7.3386E-08 1.2000E+04 4.1908E-07 2.8023E-07 1.0158E-07 9.0514E-08 9.7566E-08 8.0438E-08 4.9520E-08 6.6032E-08 1.2800E+04 3.8210E-07 2.5543E-07 9.2338E-08 8.2134E-08 8.8441E-08 7.2874E-08 4.4889E-08 5.9846E-08 1.4400E+04 3.2324E-07 2.1598E-07 7.7684E-08 6.8866E-08 7.4011E-08 6.0920E-08 3.7565E-08 5.0064E-08 1.5200E+04 2.9954E-07 2.0009E-07 7.1801E-08 6.3549E-08 6.8235E-08 5.6138E-08 3.4634E-08 4.6149E-08 1.6000E+04 2.7878E-07 1.8618E-07 6.6655E-08 5.8904E-08 6.3192E-08 5.1966E-08 3.2075E-08 4.2732E-08 1.6800E+04 2.6046E-07 1.7391E-07 6.2124E-08 5.4818E-08 5.8759E-08 4.8300E-08 2.9825E-08 3.9728E-08 1.7600E+04 2.4421E-07 1.6302E-07 5.8110E-08 5.1201E-08 5.4838E-08 4.5058E-08 2.7836E-08 3.7071E-08 1.8400E+04 2.2970E-07 1.5331E-07 5.4533E-08 4.7982E-08 5.1350E-08 4.2176E-08 2.6066E-08 3.4709E-08 1.9200E+04 2.1669E-07 1.4460E-07 5.1331E-08 4.5102E-08 4.8231E-08 3.9599E-08 2.4483E-08 3.2596E-08 2.0000E+04 2.0498E-07 1.3675E-07 4.8449E-08 4.2514E-08 4.5429E-08 3.7285E-08 2.3061E-08 3.0698E-08 2.0800E+04 1.9437E-07 1.2966E-07 4.5846E-08 4.0176E-08 4.2901E-08 3.5198E-08 2.1779E-08 2.8986E-08 2.1600E+04 1.8474E-07 1.2321E-07 4.3484E-08 3.8058E-08 4.0611E-08 3.3308E-08 2.0616E-08 2.7435E-08 2.2400E+04 1.7596E-07 1.1734E-07 4.1334E-08 3.6131E-08 3.8528E-08 3.1589E-08 1.9560E-08 2.6024E-08 2.3200E+04 1.6793E-07 1.1196E-07 3.9369E-08 3.4371E-08 3.6627E-08 3.0022E-08 1.8595E-08 2.4737E-08 2.4000E+04 1.6057E-07 1.0703E-07 3.7569E-08 3.2760E-08 3.4888E-08 2.8587E-08 1.7713E-08 2.3560E-08 5.0000E+04 6.6152E-08 4.3921E-08 1.4708E-08 1.2415E-08 1.3008E-08 1.0593E-08 6.6148E-09 8.7552E-09 1.0000E+05 3.6797E-08 2.4312E-08 7.6013E-09 6.1002E-09 6.2529E-09 5.0719E-09 3.1966E-09 4.1852E-09 2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-11 Design Basis LOCA X/Q Values (sec/m3) Exclusion Area Boundary Low Population Zone 610 meters 3.6 miles 0.5% 50% 0.5% 50% 0-2 hours 8.9 x 10-4 6.3 x 10-4 9.5 x 10-5 7.9 x 10-5 0-8 hours - - 4.2 x 10-5 3.6 x 10-5 0-24 hours - - 2.7 x 10-5 2.4 x 10-5 0-31 days - - 6.8 x 10-6 6.6 x 10-6 Note: Appendix 2A and Table 2.2-11 values were used for analyses performed prior to 1996. The values in Tables 2.2-11a and 2.2-11b will be used for radiological consequence analyses performed subsequent to 1996. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-11a 0.5% Accident Analysis 0- to 2-Hour X/Q Values at the Exclusion Area Boundary (1/1/86 - 12/31/95) Downwind Downwind Sector X/Q Sector Distance (m) (sec/m3 ) N 610 5.41E-4 NNE 610 3.31E-4 NE 610 2.11E-4 ENE 610 1.84E-4 E 610 1.85E-4 ESE 610 2.01E-4 SE 610 1.86E-4 SSE 610 1.92E-4 S 610 2.08E-4 SSW 610 2.36E-4 SW 610 3.17E-4 WSW 610 3.93E-4 W 610 5.67E-4 WNW 610 8.00E-4 NW 610 1.04E-3 NNW 610 7.35E-4 Maximum Value (NW) 1.04E-3 5% Site Value 6.09E-4 Notes:
- 1. The data above were generated in 1996. Appendix 2A and Table 2.2-11 values were used for analyses performed prior to 1996.
- 2. Ref: ERS-SFL-96-021 r0, 1996 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.2-11b 0.5% Accident Analysis X/Q Values for Various Time Periods at the Low Population Zone Boundary (1/1/86 - 12/31/95) Downwind Distance sec/m3 Sector (m) 0-2 Hrs 0-8 Hrs 8-24 Hrs 1-4 days 4-30 days N 5794 5.22E-5 2.42E-5 1.64E-5 7.12E-6 2.14E-6 NNE 5794 2.79E-5 1.33E-5 9.16E-6 4.09E-6 1.29E-6 NE 5794 1.66E-5 8.16E-6 5.72E-6 2.65E-6 8.76E-7 ENE 5794 1.40E-5 7.50E-6 5.49E-6 2.80E-6 1.06E-6 E 5794 1.32E-5 6.52E-6 4.59E-6 2.14E-6 7.17E-7 ESE 5794 1.28E-5 6.16E-6 4.27E-6 1.93E-6 6.19E-7 SE 5794 1.45E-5 6.95E-6 4.81E-6 2.17E-6 6.92E-7 SSE 5794 1.47E-5 6.80E-6 4.62E-6 2.00E-6 5.99E-7 S 5794 1.64E-5 7.51E-6 5.09E-6 2.18E-6 6.48E-7 SSW 5794 1.88E-5 8.68E-6 5.90E-6 2.55E-6 7.65E-7 SW 5794 2.80E-5 1.30E-5 8.83E-6 3.83E-6 1.15E-6 WSW 5794 4.22E-5 1.99E-5 1.37E-5 6.08E-6 1.89E-6 W 5794 6.41E-5 3.00E-5 2.06E-5 9.03E-6 2.77E-6 WNW 5794 9.06E-5 4.58E-5 3.26E-5 1.56E-5 5.38E-6 NW 5794 1.18E-4 6.04E-5 4.33E-5 2.10E-5 7.44E-6 NNW 5794 8.32E-5 3.94E-5 2.71E-5 1.21E-5 3.78E-6 Max. Value (NW) 1.18E-4 6.04E-5 4.33E-5 2.10E-5 7.44E-6 5% Site Value 6.68E-5 3.77E-5 2.83E-5 1.52E-5 6.23E-6 Notes:
- 1. The data above were generated in 1996. Appendix 2A and Table 2.2-11 values were used for analyses performed prior to 1996.
- 2. Ref: ERS-SFL-96-021 r0, 1996 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2.2-12A BVPS-1 ON-SITE ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION FACTORS (SEC/M 3) - ARCON96 Methodology Release Receptor 0-2 hr 2-8 hr 8-24 hr 1-4 d 4-30 d U1 Containment Edge BVPS-1 CR Intake 7.48E-04 5.77E-04 2.53E-04 2.00E-04 1.78E-04 U1 Containment Top BVPS-1 CR Intake 8.16E-04 5.78E-04 2.27E-04 1.71E-04 1.47E-04 U1 Ventilation Vent BVPS-1 CR Intake 4.75E-03 3.66E-03 1.43E-03 1.02E-03 8.84E-04 U1 RWST Vent BVPS-1 CR Intake 7.34E-04 6.17E-04 2.54E-04 1.96E-04 1.57E-04 U1 MS Relief Valves BVPS-1 CR Intake 1.24E-03 9.94E-04 4.08E-04 3.03E-04 2.51E-04 U1 MSL (break)/AEJ BVPS-1 CR Intake 1.05E-02 7.72E-03 3.01E-03 2.14E-03 2.00E-03 U1 Gaseous Waste BVPS-1 CR Intake 1.40E-03 8.78E-04 3.16E-04 2.93E-04 2.62E-04 Storage Vault U1 Containment BVPS-1 CR Intake 6.25E-04 4.23E-04 1.76E-04 1.27E-04 1.11E-04 Equipment Hatch U1 Cooling Tower BVPS-1 CR Intake 1.19E-04 8.79E-05 3.41E-05 2.76E-05 2.09E-05 U1 Containment Edge BVPS-2 CR Intake 4.88E-04 4.07E-04 1.79E-04 1.41E-04 1.22E-04 U1 Containment Top BVPS-2 CR Intake 5.93E-04 4.63E-04 1.84E-04 1.34E-04 1.16E-04 U1 Ventilation Vent BVPS-2 CR Intake 2.00E-03 1.62E-03 6.76E-04 5.05E-04 4.06E-04 U1 RWST Vent BVPS-2 CR Intake 4.76E-04 4.10E-04 1.70E-04 1.33E-04 1.07E-04 U1 MS Relief Valves BVPS-2 CR Intake 7.46E-04 6.31E-04 2.62E-04 1.98E-04 1.62E-04 U1 MSL (break)/AEJ BVPS-2 CR Intake 4.24E-03 3.87E-03 1.69E-03 1.18E-03 1.06E-03 U1 Gaseous Waste BVPS-2 CR Intake 1.42E-03 8.19E-04 3.38E-04 2.78E-04 2.49E-04 Storage Vault U1 Containment BVPS-2 CR Intake 4.48E-04 3.33E-04 1.36E-04 1.02E-04 8.70E-05 Equipment Hatch U1 Cooling Tower BVPS-2 CR Intake 1.33E-04 9.49E-05 3.61E-05 2.87E-05 2.25E-05 U1 Containment Edge BVPS-2 Aux. 3.34E-04 2.85E-04 1.23E-04 9.62E-05 8.37E-05 Bldg. NW Corner U1 Containment Top BVPS-2 Aux. 4.37E-04 3.41E-04 1.39E-04 1.02E-04 8.79E-05 Bldg. NW Corner U1 RWST Vent BVPS-2 Aux. 3.23E-04 2.83E-04 1.18E-04 9.32E-05 7.52E-05 Bldg. NW Corner U1 Cooling Tower BVPS-2 Aux. 1.57E-04 1.12E-04 4.13E-05 3.35E-05 2.60E-05 Bldg. NW Corner U1 Containment Edge BVPS-1 Service 1.90E-03 1.57E-03 4.54E-04 5.08E-04 4.55E-04 Bldg. U1 Containment Top BVPS-1 Service 1.64E-03 8.59E-04 3.35E-04 2.71E-04 2.29E-04 Bldg. U1 RWST Vent BVPS-1 Service 2.37E-03 1.88E-03 7.58E-04 5.71E-04 4.48E-04 Bldg. 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2.2-12A (CONT'D) BVPS-1 ON-SITE ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION FACTORS (SEC/M 3) - ARCON96 Methodology Release Receptor 0-2 hr 2-8 hr 8-24 hr 1-4 d 4-30 d U1 Cooling Tower BVPS-1 Service 1.09E-04 8.10E-05 3.28E-05 2.65E-05 1.92E-05 Bldg. U1 Containment Edge ERF Intake 4.53E-05 2.97E-05 1.41E-05 1.23E-05 1.09E-05 U1 Containment Top ERF Intake 4.57E-05 3.74E-05 1.50E-05 1.44E-05 1.23E-05 U1 RWST Vent ERF Intake 4.53E-05 2.87E-05 1.39E-05 1.21E-05 1.05E-05 U1 Cooling Tower ERF Intake 5.75E-05 4.97E-05 2.31E-05 1.80E-05 1.66E-05 U1 Containment Edge ERF Edge Closest 4.70E-05 3.16E-05 1.54E-05 1.32E-05 1.14E-05 to Cont. U1 Containment Top ERF Edge Closest 5.00E-05 3.94E-05 1.62E-05 1.52E-05 1.30E-05 to Cont. U1 RWST Vent ERF Edge Closest 4.54E-05 3.14E-05 1.50E-05 1.29E-05 1.13E-05 to Cont. U1 Cooling Tower ERF Edge Closest 7.67E-05 6.28E-05 3.10E-05 2.36E-05 2.17E-05 to Cont. Notes:
- 1. Table 2.2-12A provides the main control room X/Q information for the Waste Gas System Rupture and the Fuel Handling Accident
- 2. Table 2.2-12B provides the main control room X/Q information for all of the release-receptor combinations associated with BVPS-2 accidents. The BVPS-2 accident X/Q values are taken into consideration when the dose consequences of the event are established based on an analysis that is bounding for both units.
- 3. Occupancy factors are not addressed in these values.
- 4. The Control Room In-leakage X/Q values can be represented by the Control Room air intake X/Q values. The higher values from among the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Control Room Intake X/Qs are conservatively used for this purpose.
2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 23 TABLE 2.2-12B BVPS-2 ON-SITE ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION FACTORS (SEC/M 3) - ARCON96 Methodology Release Receptor 0-2 hr 2-8 hr 8-24 hr 1-4 d 4-30 d U1 Containment Edge BVPS-1 CR Intake 3.19E-04 2.38E-04 1.06E-04 8.08E-05 6.19E-05 U 2 Containment Top BVPS-1 CR Intake 3.83E-04 3.10E-04 1.34E-04 9.83E-05 6.65E-05 U 2 Ventilation Vent BVPS-1 CR Intake 5.32E-04 3.89E-04 1.75E-04 1.30E-04 9.02E-05 U 2 RWST Vent BVPS-1 CR Intake 1.70E-04 1.30E-04 5.56E-05 4.40E-05 3.31E-05 U 2 MS Relief Valves BVPS-1 CR Intake 3.33E-04 2.38E-04 1.09E-04 7.88E-05 5.66E-05 U 2 MSL (break)/AEJ BVPS-1 CR Intake 6.21E-04 4.87E-04 2.30E-04 1.65E-04 1.10E-04 U 2 Gaseous Waste BVPS-1 CR Intake 7.71E-04 4.90E-04 2.26E-04 1.76E-04 1.31E-04 Storage Vault U 2 Containment BVPS-1 CR Intake 2.47E-04 1.69E-04 7.94E-05 6.05E-05 4.56E-05 Equipment Hatch U 2 Contain. Edge BVPS-2 CR Intake 4.82E-04 3.59E-04 1.55E-04 1.21E-04 9.18E-05 U 2 Containment Top BVPS-2 CR Intake 5.56E-04 4.45E-04 1.91E-04 1.39E-04 9.35E-05 U 2 Ventilation Vent BVPS-2 CR Intake 9.39E-04 6.69E-04 3.08E-04 2.23E-04 1.54E-04 U 2 RWST Vent BVPS-2 CR Intake 2.18E-04 1.58E-04 7.31E-05 5.53E-05 4.12E-05 U 2 MS Relief Valves BVPS-2 CR Intake 5.01E-04 3.58E-04 1.61E-04 1.19E-04 8.32E-05 U 2 MSL (break)/AEJ BVPS-2 CR Intake 1.03E-03 7.84E-04 3.57E-04 2.64E-04 1.86E-04 U 2 Gaseous Waste BVPS-2 CR Intake 1.55E-03 9.04E-04 4.08E-04 3.30E-04 2.45E-04 Storage Vault U 2 Containment BVPS-2 CR Intake 3.45E-04 2.23E-04 1.06E-04 8.29E-05 6.14E-05 Equipment Hatch U 2 Contain. Edge BVPS-2 Aux. Bldg. 9.12E-04 7.13E-04 3.05E-04 2.35E-04 1.79E-04 NW Corner U 2 Containment Top BVPS-2 Aux. Bldg. 1.14E-03 8.87E-04 3.83E-04 2.74E-04 1.83E-04 NW Corner U 2 RWST Vent BVPS-2 Aux. Bldg. 3.19E-04 2.25E-04 1.06E-04 7.95E-05 5.84E-05 NW Corner U 2 Contain. Edge BVPS-1 Service 1.96E-04 1.54E-04 6.37E-05 5.05E-05 3.89E-05 Bldg. U 2 Containment Top BVPS-1 Service 2.46E-04 2.07E-04 8.84E-05 6.56E-05 4.49E-05 Bldg. U 2 RWST Vent BVPS-1 Service 1.24E-04 9.81E-05 4.10E-05 3.24E-05 2.51E-05 Bldg. 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 23 TABLE 2.2-12B (CONT'D) BVPS-2 ON-SITE ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION FACTORS (SEC/M 3) - ARCON96 Methodology Release Receptor 0-2 hr 2-8 hr 8-24 hr 1-4 d 4-30 d U 2 Contain. Edge ERF Intake 6.02E-05 4.67E-05 2.22E-05 1.78E-05 1.59E-05 U 2 Containment Top ERF Intake 6.16E-05 5.36E-05 2.42E-05 2.08E-05 1.81E-05 U 2 RWST Vent ERF Intake 7.28E-05 6.58E-05 3.01E-05 2.31E-05 2.08E-05 U 2 Contain. Edge ERF Edge Closest 6.72E-05 5.69E-05 2.65E-05 2.13E-05 1.89E-05 to Containment U 2 Containment Top ERF Edge Closest 7.22E-05 6.43E-05 2.96E-05 2.48E-05 2.15E-05 to Containment U 2 RWST Vent ERF Edge Closest 9.42E-05 8.37E-05 3.81E-05 2.97E-05 2.58E-05 to Containment Notes:
- 1. The X/Q values presented above are for all of the release-receptor combinations associated with BVPS-2 accidents. These X/Q values are taken into consideration when the dose consequences of the event are established based on an analysis that is bounding for both units.
- 2. Occupancy factors are not addressed in these values.
- 3. The Control Room In-leakage X/Q values can be represented by the Control Room air intake X/Q values. The higher values from among the Unit 1 and Unit 2 Control Room Intake X/Qs are conservatively used for this purpose.
2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-1 DRAINAGE AREA VALUES(1) Area Area Area Unit In Unit In In Drainage Square Drainage Square Square Area Miles Area Miles Dam Miles 1 290 35 119 Berlin 249 2 332 36 180 Chautauqua 194 3 136 37 74 Conemaugh 1,351 4 321 38 458 Crooked Creek 277 5 205 39 382 East Branch 72.4 6 222 40 121 Kinzua 2,180 7 576 41 94 Kirwin 80.5 8 230 42 295 Loyalhanna 290 9 166 43 389 Mahoning 340 10 303 44 145 Meander 84 11 350 45 267 Milton 27 12 234 46 257 Mosquito 97.4 13 501 47 504 Shenango 589 14 144 48 242 Tionesta 478 15 738 49 120 Tygart 1,184 16 329 50 203 Youghogheny 434 17 199 51 239 18 443 52 304 19 137 53 398 20 184 54 356 21 498 55 118 22 384 56 178 23 121 57 505 24 125 58 149 25 129 59 409 26 116 60 124 27 330 61 667 28 214 29 504 30 254 31 200 32 241 33 227 34 354 (1) Refer to Figure 2.3-4 for map of unit drainage areas. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS REC 1, LN 80 00 50 100 160 240 300 390 480 600 730 870 1090 1300 1510 1650 1770 REC 2, LN 80 1840 1900 1940 1980 2010 2030 2060 2070 2080 2090 2100 2110 2120 2130 2140 2150 REC 3, LN 80 2150 2160 2160 2170 2170 2170 2175 2175 2180 2180 2185 2185 2185 2185 2180 2180 REC 4, LN 80 AREA 2175 2170 2165 2160 2150 2140 2130 2120 2110 2095 2080 2065 2050 2030 2010 1990 REC 5, LN 80 1 1970 1945 1920 1895 1870 1845 1820 1795 1770 1745 1720 1690 1660 1625 1590 1555 REC 6, LN 80 HOURLY UNIT 1520 1485 1450 1420 1390 1360 1330 1295 1260 1230 1200 1170 1140 1110 1080 1050 HYDROGRAPH REC 7, LN 80 VALUES 1020 990 960 930 900 870 840 815 790 765 740 715 690 665 640 615 REC 8, LN 80 590 565 540 520 500 475 450 430 410 390 370 355 340 320 300 285 REC 9, LN 80 270 255 240 225 210 195 180 165 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 REC 10, LN 80 70 60 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 11, LN 80 6 REC 12, LN 80 k = 6.0 x = 0.0 MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS (K IS IN HRS) REACH: AREA 1 TO STA. AA PLUS NUMBER OF ITERATIONS PER REACH REC 13, LN 80 140 2 2 00 20 50 110 140 240 330 610 1100 1720 2430 3080 3480 3630 3680 3690 REC 14, LN 80 3700 3690 3680 3670 3660 3650 3630 3610 3580 3550 3510 3480 3440 3390 3340 3290 REC 15, LN 80 3240 3170 3110 3040 2970 2890 2820 2750 2680 2600 2530 2460 2390 2310 2240 2180 REC 16, LN 80 AREA 2120 2060 2000 1950 1900 1860 1820 1785 1750 1720 1690 1665 1640 1615 1590 1570 REC 17, LN 80 2 1550 1530 1510 1485 1460 1440 1420 1405 1390 1375 1360 1345 1330 1320 1310 1200 REC 18, LN 80 1290 1285 1280 1270 1260 1245 1230 1215 1200 1185 1170 1145 1120 1095 1070 1040 REC 19, LN 80 1010 980 950 915 880 845 810 775 740 710 680 650 620 590 560 525 REC 20, LN 80 500 475 450 425 400 375 350 325 300 280 260 240 220 200 180 160 REC 21, LN 80 140 125 110 95 80 70 60 45 30 20 10 00 REC 22, LN 80 RUSSELL REC 23, LN 80 2.0 0.1 REACH: STA. AA TO STA. AB REC 24, LN 80 95 2 2 REC 25, LN 80 00 40 90 190 320 530 1180 2170 3650 4620 5280 5610 5730 5730 5360 5270 REC 26, LN 80 AREA 4550 2960 2490 2040 1750 1520 1380 1220 1110 1040 970 905 840 810 780 750 REC 27, LN 80 3 720 700 680 660 640 625 610 595 580 560 540 525 510 500 490 475 REC 28, LN 80 1 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 460 440 420 410 400 390 380 365 350 335 320 305 290 280 270 260 REC 29, LN 80 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 105 REC 30, LN 80 100 95 90 85 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 15 10 05 00 REC 31, LN 80 WARREN, PA. REC 32, LN 80 6.0 0.2 - REACH: STA. AB TO STA. AC REC 33, LN 80 152 REC 34, LN 80 00 240 480 1020 2520 4040 4760 5400 5820 6090 6110 5820 5500 5210 5000 4810 REC 35, LN 80 4640 4480 4290 4030 3760 3440 3140 2990 2810 2690 2580 2460 2380 2350 2360 2370 REC 36, LN 80 2390 2410 2430 2450 2460 2470 2470 2460 2440 2410 2380 2330 2280 2220 2160 2100 REC 37, LN 80 2040 1980 1920 1860 1800 1745 1690 1635 1580 1530 1480 1430 1380 1335 1290 1240 REC 38, LN 80 AREA 1190 1145 1100 1055 1010 965 920 890 860 825 790 755 720 695 670 640 REC 39, LN 80 4 610 590 570 545 520 500 480 460 440 420 400 385 370 355 340 325 REC 40, LN 80 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 205 200 190 180 170 REC 41, LN 80 160 150 140 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 90 90 85 80 REC 42, LN 80 75 70 65 60 60 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 30 30 25 20 REC 43, LN 80 20 20 15 10 10 10 05 00 REC 44, LN 80 6.0 0.4 - REACH: AREA 4 TO STA. AC REC 45, LN 80 94 3 2 REC 46, LN 80 00 20 120 320 740 1670 3150 5500 6750 7950 8850 9650 9810 9810 9500 7900 REC 47, LN 80 AREA 6350 4600 3700 3130 2750 2410 2080 1830 1620 1500 1350 1240 1110 990 910 820 REC 48, LN 80 5 730 670 610 560 530 490 460 420 400 390 380 360 340 320 310 300 RED 49, LN 80 300 295 290 280 270 260 250 235 220 215 210 205 200 195 190 185 REC 50, LN 80 180 165 150 140 130 120 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 REC 51, LN 80 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 05 00 REC 52, LN 80 WEST HICKORY REC 53, LN 80 8.0 0.2 - REACH: STA AC TO STA. AF REC 54, LN 80 97 REC 55, LN 80 00 360 710 1070 1490 1890 2160 2330 2500 2620 2720 2810 2880 2940 3000 3050 REC 56, LN 80 2 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 3110 3170 3220 3300 3370 3420 3490 3520 3570 3580 3570 3510 3430 3310 3220 3100 REC 57, LN 80 2990 2830 2700 2570 2460 2330 2220 2090 1980 1880 1780 1680 1580 1500 1420 1340 REC 58, LN 80 1260 1190 1120 1060 1000 950 900 850 800 760 720 680 640 605 570 540 REC 59, LN 80 AREA 510 485 460 430 400 380 360 340 320 305 290 275 260 240 220 205 REC 60, LN 80 6 190 175 160 145 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 55 40 30 10 05 REC 61, LN 80 00 REC 62, LN 80 5.0 0.1 NO. OF ITERATIONS REC 63, LN 80 5.8 0.0 2 REC 64, LN 80 5.5 0.0 2 REACHES: AREA 6 TO STA. AD REC 65, LN 80 5.0 0.2 REC 66, LN 80 3.0 0.4 REC 67, LN 80 164 2 2 REC 68, LN 80 00 20 60 100 120 190 280 400 700 1290 1920 2440 3050 3750 4450 5070 REC 69, LN 80 5460 5860 6160 6310 6390 6400 6350 6210 6080 5930 5840 5780 5710 5700 5690 5680 REC 70, LN 80 AREA 5690 5670 5640 5610 5590 5520 5490 5390 5290 5210 5120 5020 4920 4830 4720 4610 REC 71, LN 80 7 4510 4410 4320 4210 4110 4020 3940 3860 3790 3710 3640 3600 3530 3490 3420 3390 REC 72, LN 80 3340 3300 3250 3200 3180 3120 3100 3060 3020 2990 2910 2880 2800 2710 2640 2590 REC 73, LN 80 2500 2410 2320 2270 2190 2100 2010 1930 1850 1780 1690 1600 1510 1450 1380 1200 REC 74, LN 80 1230 1170 1100 1040 1000 930 900 840 800 770 730 700 650 610 590 560 REC 75, LN 80 530 500 490 450 420 400 390 360 330 310 300 290 280 260 250 230 REC 76, LN 80 210 205 200 195 190 180 160 150 145 140 130 120 110 105 100 95 REC 77, LN 80 95 90 85 80 75 70 60 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 REC 78, LN 80 05 05 05 00 REC 79, LN 80 MEADVILLE NO. OF ITERATIONS REC 80, LN 80 7.0 0.0 2 REC 81, LN 80 6.0 0.1 REACHES: STA. AD TO STA. AE REC 82, LN 80 123 2 REC 83, LN 80 00 05 10 20 30 40 70 130 230 480 820 1360 1900 2620 3210 3830 REC 84, LN 80 3 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 4280 4710 4900 5080 5170 5220 5230 5210 5160 5020 4900 4730 4580 4360 4180 3890 REC 85, LN 80 3620 3230 2840 2550 2220 2010 1850 1700 1570 1440 1370 1290 1210 1150 1090 1045 REC 86, LN 80 AREA 1000 955 910 880 850 820 790 765 740 715 690 665 640 615 590 570 REC 87, LN 80 8 550 535 520 500 480 455 430 415 400 385 370 355 340 330 320 310 REC 88, LN 80 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 REC 89, LN 80 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 REC 90, LN 80 60 50 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 91, LN 80 4.0 0.2 - REACH: STA. AE TO STA. AF REC 92, LN 80 121 REC 93, LN 80 00 90 240 550 1380 2270 2880 3460 3770 4180 4710 5370 5380 4940 4560 4070 REC 94, LN 80 3460 2910 2410 2140 1960 1770 1650 1560 1480 1400 1320 1255 1190 1115 1060 1015 REC 95, LN 80 AREA 970 930 890 855 820 790 760 730 700 680 660 640 620 600 580 565 REC 96, LN 80 9 550 535 520 510 500 490 480 465 450 435 420 405 390 380 370 360 REC 97, LN 80 350 340 330 320 310 305 300 295 290 285 280 270 260 250 240 230 REC 98, LN 80 220 215 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 170 160 150 140 135 130 125 REC 99, LN 80 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 REC 100, LN 80 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 101, LN 80 4.0 0.4 - REACH: AREA 9 TO STA. AF REC 102, LN 80 161 REC 103, LN 80 00 430 910 1570 2270 3120 3890 4290 4520 4870 5350 6350 6940 7390 7450 7240 REC 104, LN 80 6600 6050 5610 5150 4660 4330 4260 4190 4130 4050 3970 3830 3700 3520 3350 3160 REC 105, LN 80 2970 2770 2600 2415 2230 2070 1910 1770 1630 1515 1400 1300 1200 1115 1030 915 REC 106, LN 80 800 755 710 675 640 615 590 570 550 530 510 495 480 465 450 435 REC 107, LN 80 AREA 420 405 390 380 370 360 350 335 320 310 300 295 290 280 270 260 REC 108, LN 80 10 250 240 230 220 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 160 150 145 REC 109, LN 80 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 90 90 90 90 85 REC 110, LN 80 80 80 80 80 80 75 70 70 70 70 70 65 60 60 60 60 REC 111, LN 80 60 55 50 50 50 50 50 45 40 40 40 40 40 35 30 30 REC 112, LN 80 4 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 30 30 30 25 20 20 20 20 20 15 10 10 10 10 10 05 REC 113, LN 80 00 REC 114, LN 80 1.0 0.2 - REACH: AREA 10 TO STA. AF REC 115, LN 80 193 5 2 REC 116, LN 80 00 10 70 180 290 530 900 1470 2220 3340 5950 8720 9060 9090 9020 8880 REC 117, LN 80 8600 8280 7950 7530 7200 6810 6390 6000 5590 5280 4840 4460 4130 3810 3500 3220 REC 118, LN 80 2960 2670 2450 2270 2110 1960 1810 1680 1570 1440 1370 1290 1210 1150 1090 1050 REC 119, LN 80 1010 970 930 900 870 840 810 780 750 725 700 680 660 640 620 605 REC 120, LN 80 AREA 590 575 560 545 530 515 500 490 480 475 470 465 460 455 450 445 REC 121, LN 80 11 440 435 430 425 420 415 410 405 400 395 390 385 380 375 370 365 REC 112, LN 80 360 355 350 345 340 334 330 325 320 315 310 310 310 305 300 300 REC 123, LN 80 300 295 290 285 280 275 270 265 260 255 250 245 240 235 230 225 REC 124, LN 80 220 215 210 205 200 200 200 195 190 190 190 185 180 180 180 175 REC 125, LN 80 170 165 160 155 150 145 140 135 130 125 120 120 120 115 110 110 REC 126, LN 80 110 105 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 95 90 90 90 85 80 80 REC 127, LN 80 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 REC 128, LN 80 00 REC 129, LN 80 FRANKLIN REC 130, LN 80 6.0 0.4 - REACH: STA. AF TO STA. AI REC 131, LN 80 133 REC 132, LN 80 00 380 710 1270 1650 2260 2930 3830 4600 5290 6020 6430 6470 6210 5570 4940 REC 133, LN 80 4480 4060 3790 3480 3250 3020 2870 2690 2560 2410 2290 2180 2080 1995 1910 1840 REC 134, LN 80 1770 1705 1640 1595 1550 1495 1440 1395 1350 1305 1260 1220 1180 1140 1100 1060 REC 135, LN 80 AREA 1020 975 970 935 900 870 840 815 790 765 740 715 690 665 640 615 REC 136, LN 80 12 590 570 550 530 510 495 480 465 450 435 420 410 400 390 380 370 REC 137, LN 80 360 350 340 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 REC 138, LN 80 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 160 150 140 130 125 120 115 110 105 REC 139, LN 80 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 REC 140, LN 80 5 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 20 15 10 05 00 REC 141, LN 80 0.4 NO. OF ITERATIONS REC 142, LN 80 4.0 2 REACH: AREA 12 TO STA. AG 170 2 REC 143, LN 80 00 90 150 260 360 540 770 1250 2130 3170 4130 5260 6200 6960 7490 7950 REC 144, LN 80 8310 8620 8800 8890 8870 8700 8430 7960 7600 7210 6910 6520 6160 5710 5430 5100 REC 145,LN 80 4860 4520 4310 4040 3840 3620 3460 3250 3110 2940 2820 2690 2600 2490 2400 2300 REC 146, LN 80 2220 2160 2110 2040 2000 1960 1940 1900 1860 1810 1800 1760 1730 1700 1670 1630 REC 147, LN 80 1600 1580 1540 1520 1500 1480 1440 1420 1400 1380 1360 1330 1310 1290 1280 1260 REC 148, LN 80 AREA 1240 1220 1200 1190 1180 1160 1140 1130 1110 1100 1090 1050 1030 1010 990 980 REC 149, LN 80 13 950 940 930 900 890 880 860 840 830 800 790 780 770 750 730 710 REC 150, LN 80 700 690 680 670 650 630 610 600 590 580 560 540 525 510 505 500 REC 151, LN 80 485 470 455 440 425 410 405 400 390 380 360 340 330 320 310 300 REC 152, LN 80 290 280 270 260 245 230 215 200 195 190 175 160 145 130 120 110 REC 153, LN 80 100 95 80 70 55 40 30 20 10 00 REC 154, LN 80 4.0 0.4 - REACH: STA. AG TO STA. AH REC 155, LN 80 137 2 REC 156, LN 80 00 20 90 180 290 410 620 880 1240 1850 3040 5260 5990 5730 5270 4560 REC 157, LN 80 4000 3430 2990 2680 2420 2210 2010 1840 1700 1560 1450 1330 1260 1175 1090 1010 REC 158, LN 80 930 870 810 755 700 660 620 590 560 535 510 490 470 450 430 415 REC 159, LN 80 AREA 400 390 380 365 350 340 330 320 310 305 300 295 290 280 270 260 REC 160, LN 80 14 250 245 240 235 230 225 220 215 210 205 200 200 200 195 190 190 REC 161, LN 80 190 185 180 180 180 175 170 165 160 155 150 145 140 135 130 125 REC 162, LN 80 120 120 120 115 110 110 110 110 110 105 100 100 100 100 100 100 REC 163, LN 80 100 100 100 100 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 REC 164, LN 80 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 165, LN 80 5.0 0.4 REC 166, LN 80 186 3 2 - REACH: STA. AH TO STA. AI REC 167, LN 80 00 230 590 1100 1690 2540 4030 6240 9480 14500 17660 20090 20320 20270 19630 17720 REC 168, LN 80 6 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 16100 14890 13590 12400 11310 0330 9390 8430 7630 6970 6520 6110 5720 5390 5100 4850 REC 169, LN 80 4650 4460 4270 4095 3920 3790 3660 3535 3410 3305 3200 3095 3010 2920 2830 2750 REC 170, LN 80 2670 2590 2510 2445 2380 2310 2240 2185 2130 2075 2020 1970 1920 1870 1820 1775 REC 171, LN 80 AREA 1730 1685 1640 1605 1570 1535 1500 1470 1440 1410 1380 1350 1320 1295 1270 1245 REC 172, LN 80 15 1220 1200 1180 1160 1140 1120 1100 1085 1070 1055 1040 1025 1010 1005 980 960 REC 173, LN 80 940 925 910 895 880 865 850 835 820 805 790 775 760 745 730 715 REC 174, LN 80 700 685 670 655 640 620 610 600 590 580 570 560 550 540 530 520 REC 175, LN 80 510 500 485 470 455 440 430 420 410 400 390 380 370 360 350 340 REC 176, LN 80 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 215 210 205 200 REC 177, LN 80 195 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 REC 178, LN 80 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 179, LN 80 PARKER REC 180, LN 80 4.2 0.4 - REACH: STA. AI TO STA. AK REC 181, LN 80 159 REC 182, LN 80 00 180 370 750 1350 2250 3050 4050 4800 5750 6330 6640 6670 6540 6290 5870 REC 183, LN 80 5340 4750 4290 3960 3730 3580 3420 3300 3200 3110 3010 2910 2820 2750 2690 2610 REC 184, LN 80 AREA 2540 2480 2400 2350 2300 2250 2190 2140 2090 2030 1990 1940 1900 1850 1800 1780 REC 185, LN 80 16 1720 1690 1650 1610 1580 1540 1500 1480 1430 1400 1380 1340 1300 1280 1240 1210 REC 186, LN 80 1190 1160 1120 1100 1090 1060 1020 1000 990 970 940 910 900 880 840 820 REC 187, LN 80 800 790 780 760 740 710 700 680 670 650 630 610 600 590 570 550 REC 188, LN 80 520 510 500 490 480 470 460 430 410 400 390 380 370 360 350 340 REC 189, LN 80 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 215 210 205 200 195 REC 190, LN 80 190 185 180 170 160 155 150 145 140 130 120 115 110 105 100 95 REC 191, LN 80 90 85 80 70 60 50 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 192, LN 80 8.0 0.0 REACH: AREA 16 TO STA. AJ REC 193, LN 80 121 2 REC 194, LN 80 00 40 110 200 310 480 690 1080 1490 2090 2750 3940 5060 5760 5860 5600 REC 195, LN 80 5220 4720 4320 3990 3700 3400 3190 2980 2780 2610 2460 2310 2180 2030 1920 1815 REC 196, LN 80 7 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 1710 1615 1520 1450 1380 1310 1240 1185 1130 1095 1060 1025 990 955 920 895 REC 197, LN 80 870 840 810 790 770 745 720 700 680 660 640 620 600 585 570 555 REC 198, LN 80 540 520 500 490 480 465 450 435 420 405 390 380 370 360 350 335 REC 199, LN 80 AREA 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 200 195 190 185 REC 200, LN 80 17 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 95 90 85 80 70 60 50 REC 201, LN 80 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 202, LN 80 5.0 0.3 REACH: STA. AJ TO AK REC 203, LN 80 175 3 2 REC 204, LN 80 00 1000 1840 2890 3990 5260 6680 8400 9840 11040 12150 12790 12860 12770 11640 9780 REC 205, LN 80 8260 7010 6185 5430 4900 4500 4170 3910 3650 3430 3260 3080 2940 2790 2690 2560 REC 206, LN 80 2450 2340 2235 2140 2040 1975 1910 1830 1755 1700 1640 1590 1540 1495 1450 1410 REC 207, LN 80 AREA 1370 1340 1310 1275 1245 1210 1180 1160 1130 1110 1080 1060 1030 1010 990 970 REC 208, LN 80 18 950 930 910 890 870 850 840 820 810 790 775 760 745 735 720 710 REC 209, LN 80 700 690 680 670 660 650 640 630 620 615 610 605 600 595 590 585 REC 210, LN 80 580 575 570 560 550 540 530 525 520 515 510 505 500 490 480 470 REC 211, LN 80 460 450 440 430 420 410 400 390 380 375 370 365 360 355 350 340 REC 212, LN 80 330 320 310 305 300 295 290 285 280 270 260 255 250 240 230 220 REC 213, LN 80 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 115 110 105 REC 214, LN 80 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 60 50 40 30 25 20 10 0 REC 215, LN 80 LOCK 7,ALLY. REC 216, LN 80 3.3 0.2 REACH: STA. AK TO AL REC 217, LN 80 101 REC 218, LN 80 00 220 430 710 1010 1360 1730 2150 2670 3340 4380 4490 4470 4310 4090 3850 REC 219, LN 80 3590 3320 3080 2810 2560 2290 2050 1790 1590 1410 1290 1190 1090 1025 960 895 REC 220, LN 80 AREA 830 770 710 665 620 585 550 515 480 450 420 395 370 350 330 315 REC 221, LN 80 19 300 290 280 275 270 265 260 250 240 230 220 215 210 205 200 195 REC 222, LN 80 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 105 100 100 100 95 90 90 REC 223, LN 80 90 85 80 80 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 REC 224, LN 80 8 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 20 15 10 05 00 REC 225, LN 80 0.8 0.2 REACH: AREA 19 TO STA. AL REC 226, LN 80 127 REC 227, LN 80 00 220 420 760 1240 1970 2720 3780 5380 5860 6170 6180 5990 5590 5270 4630 REC 228, LN 80 4050 3580 3210 2880 2570 2330 2100 1910 1750 1600 1490 1385 1280 1195 1110 1055 REC 229, LN 80 AREA 1000 960 920 885 850 815 780 745 710 690 670 640 610 585 560 535 REC 230, LN 80 20 510 490 470 450 430 410 390 375 360 345 330 315 300 290 280 270 REC 231, LN 80 260 250 240 230 220 215 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 165 REC 232, LN 80 160 155 150 145 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 100 100 100 REC 233, LN 80 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 70 70 65 REC 234, LN 80 60 55 50 50 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 235, LN 80 5.3 0.2 REACH: AREA 20 TO STA. AL REC 236, LN 80 155 4 REC 237, LN 80 00 120 350 630 1050 1680 2520 3810 5500 6380 7020 7400 7430 7210 6760 6040 REC 238, LN 80 5330 4570 3910 3270 2850 2400 2020 1710 1500 1320 1210 1110 1020 960 900 845 REC 239, LN 80 AREA 790 740 690 650 610 580 550 525 500 480 460 454 430 415 400 390 REC 240, LN 80 21 380 370 360 350 340 330 320 315 310 305 300 295 290 290 290 285 REC 241, LN 80 280 280 280 275 270 270 270 265 260 260 260 255 250 250 250 245 REC 242, LN 80 240 240 240 235 230 230 230 225 220 220 220 215 210 210 210 205 REC 243, LN 80 200 200 200 195 190 190 190 185 180 180 180 175 170 165 160 155 REC 244, LN 80 150 145 140 135 130 130 130 125 120 120 120 115 110 110 110 105 REC 245, LN 80 100 100 100 95 90 90 90 85 80 80 80 75 70 65 60 55 REC 246, LN 80 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 247, LN 80 LOCK 4,ALLY. REC 248, LN 80 6.8 0.1 REACH: STA. AL TO STA. OA REC 249, LN 80 94 REC 250, LN 80 00 140 260 450 610 910 1201 1880 2500 3080 3490 3870 4300 4740 5100 5570 REC 251, LN 80 5950 6380 6610 6830 7000 7370 7400 7520 7560 7550 7520 7430 7300 7150 6850 6630 REC 252, LN 80 9 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 6350 6140 5830 5580 5340 5060 4770 4520 4220 3990 3670 3380 3090 2740 2520 2290 REC 253, LN 80 2130 1980 1800 1670 1530 1420 1310 1210 1120 1050 960 880 790 710 620 590 REC 254, LN 80 AREA 510 480 410 375 340 310 280 250 220 200 180 160 140 130 120 115 REC 255, LN 80 22 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 70 60 45 30 10 05 00 REC 256, LN 80 CLARKSBURG REC 257, LN 80 5.0 0.4 REACH: AREA 22 TO STA. MA REC 258, LN 80 81 REC 259, LN 80 00 80 130 230 320 470 610 830 1050 1390 1610 1840 2060 2270 2490 2590 REC 260, LN 80 AREA 2670 2710 2710 2700 2640 2600 2520 2440 2350 2260 2150 2030 1920 1820 1730 1620 REC 261, LN 80 23 1560 1480 1390 1310 1220 1140 1070 1000 950 880 810 760 710 660 610 570 REC 262, LN 80 520 490 450 420 390 360 330 315 300 280 260 235 210 205 200 175 REC 263, LN 80 150 135 120 110 100 90 80 65 50 40 30 25 20 15 10 05 REC 264, LN 80 00 REC 265, LN 80 4.5 0.4. REACH: AREA 23 TO STA. MA REC 266, LN 80 62 REC 267, LN 80 00 140 290 480 680 1020 1380 1780 2130 2420 2700 2980 3260 3350 3500 3640 REC 268, LN 80 3780 3900 3930 3900 3780 3600 3460 3270 3040 2800 2600 2360 2160 1900 1680 1430 REC 269, LN 80 AREA 1280 1040 910 750 630 560 510 450 410 360 340 310 290 260 230 210 REC 270, LN 80 24 190 175 160 130 110 100 90 80 60 40 20 10 05 00 REC 271, LN 80 1.5 0.4 REACH: AREA 24 TO STA. MA REC 272, LN 80 85 4 2 REC 273, LN 80 00 50 120 300 900 1720 3000 4000 4450 4850 5100 5140 5000 4760 4440 4000 REC 274, LN 80 3690 3230 2940 2540 2240 1930 1690 1430 1260 1030 970 760 660 590 520 480 REC 275, LN 80 AREA 420 400 390 360 350 335 320 315 310 305 300 295 290 275 260 250 REC 276, LN 80 25 240 235 230 220 210 205 200 195 190 180 170 165 160 150 140 135 REC 277, LN 80 130 120 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 60 50 20 30 25 REC 278, LN 80 20 15 10 05 00 REC 279, LN 80 ENTERPRISE REC 280, LN 80 10 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 2.8 0.4 REC 281, LN 80 85 1 REACH: STA. MA. TO STA. MB REC 282, LN 80 00 10 30 90 200 670 1870 2430 2850 3080 3250 3370 3490 3590 3660 3670 REC 283, LN 80 3660 3620 3550 3420 3230 2970 2630 2180 1740 1330 1060 910 800 710 630 560 REC 284, LN 80 AREA 510 470 440 410 380 360 340 320 300 285 270 255 240 230 220 210 REC 285, LN 80 26 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 135 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 95 REC 286, LN 80 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 45 40 40 35 30 25 REC 287, LN 80 20 15 10 05 00 REC 288, LN 80 109 3 2 REC 289, LN 80 00 160 320 540 830 1240 1880 3630 6140 8530 8980 9030 8950 8690 8400 7910 REC 290, LN 80 7450 6820 6170 5680 5350 5080 4920 4780 4600 4410 4250 4030 3830 3620 3460 3280 REC 291, LN 80 3110 2970 2830 2690 2560 2435 2310 2205 2100 2005 1910 1815 1720 1640 1560 1475 REC 292, LN 80 AREA 1390 1310 1230 1160 1090 1035 980 930 880 835 790 750 710 675 640 615 REC 293, LN 80 27 590 565 540 520 500 485 470 455 440 425 410 395 380 365 350 335 REC 294, LN 80 320 310 300 290 280 265 250 235 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 REC 295, LN 80 140 130 120 105 90 75 60 50 40 30 20 10 00 REC 296, LN 80 LOCK 15,MON. REC 297, LN 80 6.4 0.2 REC 298, LN 80 148 REACH: STA. MB TO STA. MD REC 299, LN 80 00 280 530 850 1210 1730 2320 3500 4240 4740 4790 4800 4790 4700 4690 4340 REC 300, LN 80 4030 3760 3540 3320 3130 2960 2800 2640 2510 2370 2240 2110 2000 1890 1780 1670 REC 301, LN 80 1580 1500 1420 1340 1270 1210 1160 1105 1050 1015 980 940 900 870 840 815 REC 302, LN 80 790 765 740 720 700 680 660 640 605 590 575 560 550 540 530 520 REC 303, LN 80 AREA 505 490 475 460 445 430 420 410 400 390 380 370 360 350 340 330 REC 304, LN 80 28 320 310 305 300 290 280 270 260 255 250 245 240 230 220 215 210 REC 305, LN 80 205 200 195 190 185 180 175 170 165 160 155 150 145 140 135 130 REC 306, LN 80 125 120 115 110 105 100 100 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 REC 307, LN 80 60 60 55 50 45 40 40 40 35 30 25 20 20 20 15 10 REC 308, LN 80 11 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 10 10 05 00 REC 309, LN 80 2.0 0.4 REACH: AREA 28 TO STA. MK REC 310, LN 80 109 2 REC 311, LN 80 00 240 500 880 1340 2270 4650 8730 10700 11530 11570 11480 11090 10600 10140 9650 REC 312, LN 80 9240 8800 8380 7990 7600 7185 6770 6385 6000 5660 5320 5050 4780 4570 4360 4165 REC 313, LN 80 AREA 3970 3815 3660 3545 3430 3345 3260 3190 3120 3060 3000 2940 2880 2820 2760 2700 REC 314, LN 80 29 2640 2580 2520 2460 2400 2345 2290 2235 2180 2125 2070 2015 1960 1910 1860 1810 REC 315, LN 80 1750 1700 1650 1600 1550 1500 1450 1400 1350 1305 1260 1215 1170 1120 1070 1025 REC 316, LN 80 980 935 890 845 800 760 720 675 630 585 540 505 470 430 390 355 REC 317, LN 80 320 285 250 220 190 160 130 110 90 65 40 20 00 REC 318, LN 80 PARSONS REC 319, LN 80 8.0 0.3 REACH: STA. MK TO STA. MC REC 320, LN 80 61 2 REC 321, LN 80 00 110 230 420 600 840 1140 1700 3950 6630 8470 10180 11820 12180 12100 11640 REC 322, LN 80 10710 9290 8000 6830 5960 5160 4440 3700 3150 2640 2240 1870 1590 1310 1160 1020 REC 323, LN 80 AREA 930 860 790 730 670 615 560 515 470 430 390 355 320 295 270 245 REC 324, LN 80 30 220 195 170 145 120 105 90 75 60 45 30 15 00 REC 325, LN 80 ROWLESBURG REC 326, LN 80 5.0 0.4 REACH: STA. MC TO STA. MD REC 327, LN 80 95 REC 328, LN 80 00 40 110 370 800 1430 2240 3510 4690 5360 5810 6000 5970 5820 5680 5460 REC 329, LN 80 5250 4990 4730 4430 4140 3820 3550 3230 2930 2620 2360 2120 1950 1800 1670 1540 REC 330, LN 80 AREA 1440 1320 1270 1195 1120 1060 1000 950 900 850 800 760 720 685 650 620 REC 331, LN 80 31 590 560 530 505 480 460 440 420 400 380 360 340 320 305 290 275 REC 332, LN 80 260 245 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 105 REC 333, LN 80 100 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 334, LN 80 2.6 0.4 REACH: AREA 31 TO STA. MD REC 335, LN 80 59 3 REC 336, LN 80 12 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 00 100 200 330 510 780 1270 2630 4480 7850 12250 12890 12490 11620 10780 9630 REC 337, LN 80 AREA 8780 7940 7160 6400 5690 4920 4210 3590 3000 2460 2000 1550 1200 970 770 610 REC 338, LN 80 32 500 420 360 315 270 240 210 195 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 115 REC 339, LN 80 110 100 90 80 70 55 40 30 20 10 00 REC 340, LN 80 LAKE LYNN REC 341, LN 80 2.0 0.2 REACH: STA. MD TO STA. ME REC 342, LN 80 89 REC 343, LN 80 00 90 200 390 640 1140 1670 2230 2690 3290 3680 4100 4420 4820 5080 5390 REC 344, LN 80 5590 5810 5960 6110 6210 6300 6300 6170 6010 5740 5460 5030 4580 3940 3360 2620 REC 345, LN 80 AREA 2060 1730 1510 1320 1180 1050 950 850 790 710 680 620 600 530 500 480 REC 346, LN 80 33 450 410 390 360 340 310 300 280 270 240 220 210 200 190 180 170 REC 347, LN 80 160 145 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 80 70 60 50 45 REC 348, LN 80 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 349, LN 80 1.5 0.2 REACH: AREA 33 TO STA. ME REC 350, LN 80 81 4 2 REC 351, LN 80 00 950 1900 3010 4150 5300 6570 7810 8930 10300 11200 12120 12900 12900 12340 11340 REC 352, LN 80 AREA 10250 9300 8360 7170 6250 5180 4560 4130 3700 3370 3100 2790 2570 2410 2230 2100 REC 353, LN 80 34 2000 1910 1820 1750 1680 1600 1510 1430 1380 1300 1250 1200 1140 1100 1050 1000 REC 354, LN 80 980 940 900 865 830 805 780 740 700 675 650 620 590 550 510 480 REC 355, LN 80 450 425 400 370 340 315 290 245 210 190 170 135 100 70 40 10 REC 356, LN 80 00 REC 357, LN 80 LOCK 7,MON. NO. OF ITERATIONS REC 358, LN 80 4.4 0.2 2 REACH: STA. ME TO STA. MF REC 359, LN 80 62 REC 360, LN 80 00 110 340 780 1170 1770 2280 2720 3060 3370 3700 3980 4090 4130 4100 3950 REC 361, LN 80 AREA 3710 3430 3160 2860 2550 2240 1970 1760 1530 1320 1180 1050 950 870 790 730 REC 362, LN 80 35 670 625 580 545 510 475 440 415 390 365 340 315 290 265 240 220 REC 363, LN 80 200 185 170 150 130 110 90 75 60 45 30 20 10 00 REC 364, LN 80 13 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 5.0 0.4 REACH: AREA 35 TO STA. MF REC 365, LN 80 84 REC 366, LN 80 00 50 120 750 1450 2250 3200 4200 5500 5825 5990 5960 5890 5780 5680 5550 REC 367, LN 80 AREA 5380 5210 5000 4740 4360 3800 3400 2840 2050 1580 1400 1250 1100 1010 925 850 REC 368, LN 80 36 780 725 670 625 580 550 520 500 475 450 430 410 390 370 350 330 REC 369, LN 80 320 300 280 270 255 240 225 210 200 180 175 165 150 140 130 120 REC 370, LN 80 110 100 90 80 75 70 65 60 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 REC 371, LN 80 10 05 05 00 REC 372, LN 80 4.9 0.4 REACH: AREA 36 TO STA. MF REC 373, LN 80 82 REC 374, LN 80 00 90 270 540 810 1130 1450 1850 2240 2370 2390 2380 2340 2290 2240 2170 REC 375, LN 80 2070 1930 1800 1640 1460 1260 1070 880 750 640 580 530 480 450 420 395 REC 376, LN 80 370 350 330 315 300 285 270 260 250 240 230 210 200 190 180 170 REC 377, LN 80 AREA 160 150 145 140 130 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 REC 378, LN 80 37 65 60 55 50 50 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 20 20 15 10 REC 379, LN 80 05 00 REC 380, LN 80 2.8 0.4 REACH: AREA 37 TO STA. MF REC 381, LN 80 83 5 2 REC 382, LN 80 00 370 750 1160 1590 2100 2700 3330 3990 5070 6530 8640 10750 12410 13130 13380 REC 383, LN 80 13350 13190 12660 11620 9970 9290 8700 8100 7490 7020 6510 6090 5680 5320 4940 REC 384, LN 80 10790 AREA 4660 4350 4060 3810 3590 3330 3140 2935 2730 2555 2380 2240 2100 1975 1850 1750 REC 385, LN 80 38 1650 1555 1460 1385 1310 1220 1130 1065 990 920 850 775 700 640 580 525 REC 386, LN 80 470 430 390 355 320 280 240 215 190 165 140 115 90 70 50 35 REC 387, LN 80 20 10 00 REC 388, LN 80 LOCK 4.MON. REC 389, LN 80 6.0 0.1 REACH: STA. MF TO STA. MJ REC 390, LN 80 93 REC 391, LN 80 00 130 670 2630 4600 7250 10060 12870 14000 14310 14280 13890 13310 12660 11970 11100 REC 392, LN 80 14 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 10240 9120 8070 7250 6240 5310 4720 4140 3500 3080 2760 2450 2200 1970 1790 1660 REC 393, LN 80 1520 1400 1310 1210 1130 1070 1010 960 910 865 820 775 730 695 660 625 REC 394, LN 80 AREA 590 560 530 505 480 455 430 410 390 370 350 330 310 295 280 265 REC 395, LN 80 39 250 235 220 205 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 105 100 95 REC 396, LN 80 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 397, LN 80 4.0 0.4 REACH: AREA 39 TO STA. MG REC 398, LN 80 71 1 REC 399, LN 80 00 180 410 740 1030 1390 1780 2280 2810 3280 3590 3720 3660 3380 3110 2840 REC 400, LN 80 2540 2360 2250 2150 2060 1980 1910 1840 1750 1670 1590 1500 1420 1320 1240 1150 REC 401, LN 80 AREA 1060 970 900 840 780 725 670 625 580 540 500 470 440 415 390 365 REC 402, LN 80 40 340 320 300 285 270 250 230 210 190 175 160 145 130 115 100 85 REC 403, LN 80 70 60 50 40 30 15 00 REC 404, LN 80 36 3 2 REC 405, LN 80 00 70 170 400 880 1600 2380 3340 4070 5170 5960 5980 5160 4160 3460 2910 REC 406, LN 80 AREA 2490 2100 1800 1510 1270 1060 850 690 540 410 320 260 200 150 110 80 REC 407, LN 80 41 50 30 10 00 REC 408, LN 80 CONFLUENCE REC 409, LN 80 3.0 0.2 REACH: STA. MG TO STA. MH REC 410, LN 80 78 2 2 REC 411, LN 80 00 410 640 1190 1780 2600 3370 4790 8150 15700 16600 16200 12500 9600 7850 6300 REC 412, LN 80 AREA 5650 5020 4700 4310 4000 3730 3490 3310 3130 2940 2810 2610 2480 2320 2210 2080 REC 413, LN 80 42 1980 1850 1740 1650 1550 1500 1400 1340 1290 1210 1140 1090 1010 960 900 850 REC 414, LN 80 790 740 700 680 620 590 540 500 480 430 400 390 340 300 280 240 REC 415, LN 80 200 190 180 150 120 100 90 70 50 40 20 10 05 00 REC 416, LN 00 CONNELLSVILLE REC 417, LN 80 7.7 0.3 REACH: STA. MH TO STA. MI REC 418, LN 80 84 2 2 REC 419, LN 80 AREA 00 160 400 750 1040 1590 2140 3080 4210 5580 7830 10590 12430 13440 13600 13330 REC 420, LN 80 43 15 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 12610 11450 10170 9100 8080 7270 6580 6010 5450 5110 4730 4340 4020 3750 3440 3210 REC 421, LN 80 2980 2810 2600 2460 2320 2190 2060 1970 1880 1810 1740 1670 1600 1535 1470 1410 REC 422, LN 80 1350 1290 1230 1170 1110 1055 1000 955 910 865 820 770 720 670 620 575 REC 423, LN 80 530 495 460 430 400 375 330 300 270 245 220 190 160 135 110 85 REC 424, LN 80 60 35 10 00 REC 425, LN 80 SUTHERSVILLE REC 426, LN 80 4.0 0.1 REACH: STA. MI TO STA. MJ REC 427, LN 80 105 1 REC 428, LN 80 00 330 840 1450 2100 3000 3870 4620 5020 5230 5280 5180 4830 4370 3950 3520 REC 429, LN 80 3030 2640 2320 2060 1810 1610 1450 1310 1220 1130 1070 1000 950 900 850 815 REC 430, LN 80 AREA 780 740 700 670 640 615 590 565 540 520 500 485 470 455 440 425 REC 431, LN 80 44 410 395 380 365 350 335 320 310 300 290 280 265 250 240 230 220 REC 432, LN 80 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 170 160 150 140 135 130 120 110 105 REC 433, LN 80 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 REC 434, LN 80 20 20 20 15 10 10 10 05 00 REC 435, LN 80 83 4 2 REC 436, LN 80 00 530 1280 2250 3320 4570 5970 8030 10510 12600 13920 15190 16000 16100 15720 14810 REC 437, LN 80 13790 12260 11050 9880 8810 7840 6900 6030 5320 4520 3940 3450 2970 2660 2340 2060 REC 438, LN 80 AREA 1820 1630 1440 1305 1170 1060 950 870 790 725 660 600 540 495 450 420 REC 439, LN 80 45 390 355 320 295 270 250 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 REC 440, LN 80 130 120 110 105 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 35 30 25 20 15 REC 441, LN 80 10 05 00 REC 442, LN 80 LOCK 2, MON. REC 443, LN 80 4.0 0.1 REACH: STA. MJ TO STA. OA REC 444, LN 80 97 REC 445, LN 80 00 390 800 1390 2170 2950 3630 4460 5080 5720 6370 7090 7620 7690 7600 7410 REC 446, LN 80 7130 6850 6500 6110 5700 5250 4820 4450 4040 3670 3300 2990 2650 2330 2040 1780 REC 447, LN 80 AREA 1530 1380 1220 1110 1010 955 900 855 810 780 750 720 690 660 630 600 REC 448, LN 80 46 16 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 570 550 530 510 490 470 450 430 410 395 380 365 350 335 320 305 REC 449, LN 80 290 280 270 260 250 240 230 220 210 205 200 195 190 185 180 175 REC 450, LN 80 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 15 REC 451, LN 80 00 REC 452, LN 80 2.6 0.1 REACH: AREA 46 TO STA. OA REC 453, LN 80 61 4 2 REC 454, LN 80 00 290 690 1360 2120 3450 5230 8720 11530 14930 18270 21410 24380 26330 26320 22720 REC 455, LN 80 AREA 19650 15900 12170 9620 8340 7400 6590 5930 5360 4880 4420 4040 3620 3250 2940 2660 REC 456, LN 80 47 2380 2130 1880 1710 1540 1380 1220 1075 930 815 700 610 520 455 390 350 REC 457, LN 80 310 270 230 200 170 140 110 90 70 50 30 15 00 REC 458, LN 80 DASHIELDS REC 459, LN 80 3.7 0.1 REACH: STA. OA TO STA. OB REC 460, LN 80 118 2 REC 461, LN 80 00 30 60 100 140 260 350 490 620 790 930 1100 1320 1540 1720 1910 REC 462, LN 80 AREA 2100 2350 2510 2750 2940 3140 3290 3470 3540 3620 3700 3740 3790 3800 3810 3830 REC 463, LN 80 48 3830 3820 3810 3790 3740 3680 3600 3500 3380 3290 3150 3060 2960 2840 2720 2610 REC 464, LN 80 2480 2390 2250 2140 2010 1900 1770 1660 1540 1420 1320 1220 1140 1050 960 890 REC 465, LN 80 810 750 700 650 600 560 510 500 480 450 410 400 380 340 320 310 REC 466, LN 80 300 290 260 240 230 210 200 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 125 REC 467, LN 80 120 110 105 100 100 95 90 80 70 65 60 50 40 35 30 25 REC 468, LN 80 20 15 10 05 05 00 REC 469, LN 80 WARREN,OHIO REC 470, LN 80 6.0 0.2 No. OF ITERATIONS REC 471, LN 80 2 REACH: AREA 48 TO STA.BA 97 2 2 REC 472, LN 80 00 180 350 850 1730 3050 3840 4150 4310 4390 4350 4090 3740 3350 2970 2600 REC 473, LN 80 2280 2020 1820 1550 1330 1200 1100 1010 950 900 860 810 790 750 710 690 REC 474, LN 80 AREA 640 620 600 590 560 510 500 480 440 420 400 390 370 340 310 300 REC 475, LN 80 49 290 275 260 240 220 210 200 190 180 165 150 135 120 115 110 100 REC 476, LN 80 17 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 50 50 50 50 45 40 REC 477, LN 80 35 30 25 20 20 20 15 15 15 10 10 10 05 05 05 05 REC 478, LN 80 00 REC 479, LN 80 YOUNGSTOWN REC 480, LN 80 4.0 0.2 NO. OF ITERATIONS REC 481, LN 80 2 REACH: STA. BA TO STA. BB 120 1 REC 482, LN 80 00 160 340 530 720 950 1200 1500 1740 2120 2300 2460 2560 2630 2710 2780 REC 483, LN 80 2790 2810 2820 2830 2830 2810 2810 2790 2740 2700 2680 2610 2560 2500 2460 2400 REC 484, LN 80 AREA 2340 2290 2230 2170 2110 2060 2000 1910 1860 1800 1750 1700 1640 1590 1520 1480 REC 485, LN 80 50 1410 1380 1320 1290 1220 1190 1140 1100 1050 1010 990 940 900 860 820 800 REC 486, LN 80 760 720 700 660 630 600 580 560 530 500 490 480 460 430 410 400 REC 487, LN 80 390 370 350 330 320 310 300 290 270 250 240 230 220 210 200 190 REC 488, LN 80 180 160 140 130 120 110 100 95 90 85 80 70 60 50 40 35 REC 489, LN 80 30 25 20 15 10 10 05 00 REC 490, LN 80 113 2 2 REC 491, LN 80 00 260 520 880 1150 1520 1890 2300 2730 3290 3860 4510 5000 5440 5550 5590 REC 492, LN 80 5580 5380 4900 4590 4360 4100 3810 3560 3320 2680 2480 2320 2160 2020 1890 1790 REC 493, LN 80 AREA 1690 1600 1520 1450 1380 1350 1280 1180 1090 1050 1010 970 930 900 870 835 REC 494, LN 80 51 800 765 730 705 680 655 630 605 580 555 530 510 490 470 450 430 REC 495, LN 80 410 395 380 365 350 335 320 305 290 280 270 260 250 235 220 210 REC 496, LN 80 200 195 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 95 REC 497, LN 80 90 85 80 75 70 60 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 REC 498, LN 80 00 REC 499, LN 80 NEW CASTLE REC 500, LN 80 3.0 0.2 REACH: AREAS 50 AND 51 TO STA. BB REC 501, LN 80 127 3 REC 502, LN 80 00 90 180 300 470 760 1300 2020 2930 4550 5840 6680 7230 7570 7560 7380 REC 503, LN 80 AREA 7140 6760 6330 5810 5380 4920 4590 4310 4070 3840 3680 3520 3370 3240 3110 2990 REC 504, LN 80 52 18 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 2890 2780 2670 2560 2450 2375 2280 2185 2090 2005 1920 1845 1770 1700 1630 1570 REC 505, LN 80 1510 1450 1390 1335 1280 1230 1180 1130 1080 1035 990 950 910 870 830 795 REC 506, LN 80 760 730 700 670 640 615 590 570 550 530 510 495 480 465 450 435 REC 507, LN 80 420 405 390 375 360 345 330 320 310 300 290 280 270 260 250 240 REC 508, LN 80 230 220 210 205 200 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 115 110 105 REC 509, LN 80 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 05 00 REC 510, LN 80 3.0 0.2 REACH: STA. BB TO STA. BC REC 511, LN 80 144 REC 512, LN 80 00 100 200 380 670 1300 2400 3650 3980 4130 4280 4390 4560 4910 5180 5280 REC 513, LN 80 5270 5130 4940 4780 4610 4480 4390 4390 4410 4490 4600 4790 4810 4790 4730 4640 REC 514, LN 80 AREA 4550 4450 4360 4230 4140 4050 3940 3820 3730 3600 3480 3330 3210 3100 2850 2690 REC 515, LN 80 53 2600 2500 2400 2300 2210 2120 2030 1940 1860 1770 1700 1610 1530 1490 1430 1400 REC 516, LN 80 1350 1300 1280 1230 1210 1190 1170 1150 1110 1100 1080 1040 1010 1000 980 960 REC 517, LN 80 930 910 900 870 850 810 800 780 760 730 710 700 690 660 650 620 REC 518, LN 80 610 600 590 570 560 540 520 500 500 480 470 430 420 410 400 390 REC 519, LN 80 370 350 320 300 290 280 260 250 240 230 210 200 190 170 150 140 REC 520, LN 80 130 110 100 100 95 90 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 10 05 00 REC 521, LN 80 3.0 0.4 REACH: AREA 53 TO STA. BC REC 522, LN 80 126 REC 523, LN 80 00 00 100 200 360 520 800 1150 1550 2000 2410 2820 3290 3680 4070 4380 REC 524, LN 80 4690 5000 5300 5520 5710 5830 5930 5990 6000 5980 5900 5800 5680 5550 5410 5270 REC 525, LN 80 AREA 5140 5000 4830 4680 4500 4310 4120 3940 3790 3620 3450 3300 3120 2970 2790 2680 REC 526, LN 80 54 2520 2410 2300 2200 2090 2000 1900 1810 1710 1620 1560 1500 1410 1360 1280 1200 REC 527, LN 80 1150 1100 1020 980 910 880 810 780 730 700 660 620 590 560 520 500 REC 528, LN 80 480 440 410 400 380 340 310 300 290 280 270 240 210 200 200 190 REC 529, LN 80 180 150 140 120 110 105 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 REC 530, LN 80 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 05 05 00 REC 531, LN 80 4.0 0.4 REACH: AREA 54 TO STA. BC REC 532, LN 80 19 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS REC 533, LN 80 00 220 430 770 1150 1610 2200 3270 4200 5060 5760 6120 5780 5450 5070 4480 REC 534, LN 80 3910 3100 2640 2220 1900 1600 1390 1190 1010 870 720 620 520 460 400 350 REC 535, LN 80 AREA 300 255 210 180 150 120 90 65 40 20 00 REC 536, LN 80 55 BEAVER FALLS REC 537, LN 80 2.1 0.1 REACH: STA. BC TO STA. OB REC 538, LN 80 71 REC 539, LN 80 00 220 490 810 1210 1670 2150 2680 3140 3650 4200 4770 5310 5870 6190 6320 REC 540, LN 80 6260 6000 5700 5420 5060 4650 4280 3770 3300 2850 2440 2170 1820 1570 1370 1210 REC 541, LN 80 AREA 1070 940 830 740 660 600 540 505 470 430 390 355 320 290 260 235 REC 542, LN 80 56 210 195 180 160 140 125 110 100 90 80 70 60 50 45 40 35 REC 543, LN 80 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 544, LN 80 0.5 0.1 3 REACH: AREA 56 TO STA. OB REC 545, LN 80 4.5 0.0 REC 546, LN 80 135 REC 547, LN 80 00 30 80 170 210 620 970 1440 1930 2530 3220 4250 5730 7000 8260 9580 REC 548, LN 80 10170 10380 10000 9380 8920 8530 8130 7770 7540 7450 7510 7980 8380 8350 7990 7570 REC 549, LN 80 7220 6830 6500 6270 5850 5490 5160 4820 4510 4220 3960 3710 3490 3290 3090 2910 REC 550, LN 80 AREA 2760 2600 2450 2310 2180 2040 1960 1870 1790 1710 1650 1590 1540 1490 1440 1400 REC 551, LN 80 57 1360 1320 1280 1240 1200 1160 1120 1085 1050 1020 990 960 930 900 870 845 REC 552, LN 80 820 795 770 745 720 695 670 645 620 600 580 560 540 520 500 485 REC 553, LN 80 470 455 440 425 410 395 380 365 350 335 320 310 300 290 280 270 REC 554, LN 80 260 245 230 220 210 190 180 170 160 150 140 130 120 110 100 90 REC 555, LN 80 80 65 50 35 20 10 00 REC 556, LN 80 3.8 0.0 REACH: AREA 57 TO STA. OB REC 557, LN 80 105 REC 558, LN 80 00 40 90 140 200 260 320 390 490 690 1120 1670 2130 2500 2770 2990 REC 559, LN 80 AREA 3210 3400 3430 3380 3320 3320 3350 3410 3540 3760 3880 3810 3440 2920 2460 2060 REC 560, LN 80 58 20 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 1700 1420 1280 1190 1100 1035 970 910 850 800 750 715 680 640 600 570 REC 561, LN 80 540 515 490 470 450 435 420 405 390 375 360 345 330 315 300 290 REC 562, LN 80 280 270 260 245 230 220 210 200 190 180 170 165 160 150 140 130 REC 563, LN 80 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 60 55 50 45 REC 564, LN 80 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 565, LN 80 0.5 0.0 REACH: AREA 58 TO STA. OB REC 566, LN 80 62 4 2 REC 567, LN 80 00 910 1720 2870 4050 5500 7090 9000 11100 15200 19140 22980 23150 21000 14100 11050 REC 568, LN 80 9250 7830 7090 6200 5690 5020 4640 4230 3810 3430 3210 2980 2720 2510 2380 2180 REC 569, LN 80 AREA 2010 1830 1750 1610 1520 1410 1350 1220 1190 1100 1020 970 900 820 790 710 REC 570, LN 80 59 670 610 580 470 420 400 380 330 300 260 220 200 180 150 110 100 REC 571, LN 80 80 60 40 30 25 20 10 00 REC 572, LN 80 NEW CUMBERLAND REC 573, LN 80 6.6 0.0 REACH: STA. OB TO STA. OC REC 574, LN 80 93 REC 575, LN 80 00 10 50 90 160 220 290 370 470 590 740 890 1140 1470 1750 2190 REC 576, LN 80 2660 3260 3840 4270 4510 4600 4420 4110 3650 3220 2870 2510 2220 1990 1780 1580 REC 577, LN 80 AREA 1410 1270 1120 1010 900 810 720 655 590 545 500 465 430 410 390 370 REC 578, LN 80 60 350 330 310 285 270 255 240 225 210 200 190 185 180 170 160 155 REC 579, LN 80 150 140 130 125 120 115 110 105 100 95 90 85 80 75 70 65 REC 580, LN 80 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 05 00 REC 581, LN 80 2.4 0.1 REACH: AREA 60 TO STA. OC REC 582, LN 80 109 3 2 REC 583, LN 80 00 102 300 520 750 1050 1550 2020 2700 3480 4200 5250 6280 7700 9370 11600 REC 584, LN 80 AREA 13900 17200 20750 23080 24190 24400 24000 21650 19490 17200 15470 13220 11900 10500 9500 8420 REC 585, LN 80 61 7510 6720 6080 5420 4800 4310 3950 3600 3280 3000 2780 2580 2400 2210 2090 1960 REC 586, LN 80 1840 1750 1660 1580 1500 1420 1370 1290 1230 1190 1130 1070 1030 1000 980 920 REC 587, LN 80 870 830 800 790 770 730 700 670 640 610 600 580 550 510 480 450 REC 588, LN 80 21 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-2 (CONTD) HOURLY UNIT HYDROGRAHIC VALUES AND MUSKINGUM ROUTING COEFFICIENTS 430 410 400 390 360 335 310 290 270 245 220 210 200 190 180 160 REC 589, LN 80 140 125 110 100 90 75 60 45 30 25 20 10 00 REC 590, LN 80 WHEELING REC 591, LN 80 22 of 22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-3 DISTANCES FROM SHIPPINGPORT TO DAM SITES Distance from Shippingport Dam in miles Union City 231 Chautauqua 258.8 Kinzua 233 Tionesta 188.5 East Branch 225.3 Mahoning 112.4 Crooked Creek 82.4 Conemaugh 99.6 Loyalhanna 96.8 Youghiogheny 125.6 Tygart 186.3 Shenango 87.0 Meander Creek 65.3 Mosquito Creek 75.8 Milton 94.4 Kirwin 97.5 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-4 FLOOD FORECAST FOR DASHIELDS BEGINNING ON 10/15/1954 Increase in Day Time Predicted Flow CFS 15 6 47. 12 1,463. 18 22,381. 24 111,396. 16 6 212,113. 12 275,696. 18 317,480. 24 321,660. 17 6 294,720. 12 248,305. 18 198,122. 24 154,732. 18 6 122,149. 12 98,827. 18 81,785. 24 68,974. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-5 DAMS ABOVE BVPS SITE - PERTINENT DATA Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 1 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-5 (CONT'D) DAMS ABOVE BVPS SITE - PERTINENT DATA Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 2 of 2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-6 ANALYSIS OF LIQUEFACTION POTENTIAL KINZUA DAM ABUTMENT SECTION Aavg S, Psf 0.65 Elevation Mass Above, Psf (Peak) = 0.65.M.Aavg , Psf S/ Factor of Safety At Center - DBE Plus 25-Yr Flood 1210 22,700 0.15 g 2,200 22,700 0.097 0.21 2.2 1200 24,090 0.15 g 2,350 23,450 0.10 0.21 2.1 1180 26,870 0.14 g 2,440 24,950 0.098 0.21 2.1 1160 29,650 0.13 g 2,520 27,450 0.092 0.21 2.3 1140 32,430 0.12 g 2,530 28,950 0.088 0.21 2.4 1120 35,210 0.11 g 2,520 30,450 0.083 0.21 2.6 At Toe - DBE Plus 25-Yr Flood 1210 4,170 0.11 g 300 4,170 0.072 0.21 2.9 1200 5,560 0.11 g 395 4,920 0.081 0.21 2.6 1180 8,340 0.10 g 540 6,420 0.084 0.21 2.5 1160 11,120 0.09 g 650 7,920 0.082 0.21 2.6 1140 13,900 0.08 g 720 9,420 0.077 0.21 2.7 1120 16,680 0.07 g 760 10,920 0.070 0.21 3.0 At Center - Historic Earthquake Plus Standard Project Flood 1240 18,700 0.04 g 490 18,700 0.026 0.21 8.0 1220 21,580 0.04 g 565 20,200 0.028 0.21 7.5 1200 24,360 0.04 g 630 21,700 0.029 0.21 7.2 1180 27,140 0.035 g 620 23,200 0.027 0.21 7.8 1160 29,920 0.032 g 620 24,700 0.025 0.21 8.4 1140 32,700 0.03 g 640 26,200 0.024 0.21 8.7 1120 35,480 0.0275 g 630 27,700 0.023 0.21 9.1 NOTE: / from triaxial tests by Seed on Sacramento River sand, as shown on Figure 2.6-9, for relative density of 60%. Number of cycles of loading - 10 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.3-7 RATIOS BETWEEN THE HEIGHTS, LENGTHS AND STEEPNESS OF WAVES AND IN CURRENTS OF DIFFERENT RELATIVE VELOCITIES (Based on a theoretical study made at the Scripps Institution of Oceanography) Ratio Between Current Velocity and Wave Velocity in Still Water Ratio Between Wave Characteristics in Current and in Still Water Contrary Currents Following Currents U/C -0.25 -0.20 -0.15 -0.10 -0.05 +0.05 +0.10 +0.15 +0.20 +0.25 Height 2.35 1.75 1.39 1.21 1.08 0.93 0.87 0.82 0.79 0.76 Length .43 .52 .67 .79 .90 1.08 1.19 1.26 1.36 1.43 Steepness 5.49 3.40 2.07 1.53 1.21 .86 .73 .65 .58 .53 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.6-1 NUMBER OF CYCLES IN WHICH ACCELERATION EQUALS OR EXCEEDS ONE-HALF THE PEAK ACCELERATION FOR DIRECTION RECORDED Number of Cycles of Earthquake Record Significant Motion Taft '52 S69E 9 Taft '52 N21E 9 El Centro '40 NS 10 El Centro '40 EW 12 Golden Gate '57 NE 3 Golden Gate S80E 5 Olympia '49 S86W 7 Helena '35 NS 5 Helena '35 EW 5 Eureka N79E 4 Eureka NllW 7 Parkfield Site 2 2 Parkfield Site 5 - N5W 1 Parkfield Site 5 - N85E 1 Hollister 3 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.6-2 RELATIVE DENSITIES AND RELATED SOIL PROPERTIES FOR SOILS UNDERLYING BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION SITE VIBRATORY COMPACTION TESTS AT 1 PSI FOR 8 MIN Natural Natural Dry Grain Size Analysis, Wet Minimum Maximum Density, Density, Relative Location Test Depth, Elevation, % Passing Density (PCF) Density, PCF PCF Density, North East No. Ft Ft Description of Soils No. 200 Mesh D60/D10 (In-Place) PCF VIB Field*1 (In-Place) % *4 Coordinates Coordinates 1 25.0 710.0 Medium brown 1 50.0 129.0 112.0 136.8 139.3 120.6 87 3710 7500 coarse sand slightly silty, some gravel 2 35.0 700.0 Fine to medium 1 42.5 139.8 117.4 134.3 141.4 131.3 92 3799 7550 brown sand, some coarse sand and gravel, trace of clay and silt 3 40.0 695.0 Same as Test 2 with 2 44.0 141.3 115.0 134.9 141.4 132.9 94 3751 7600 large pieces of broken gravel 4 *2 45.0 690.0 Same as Test 1 2 89.0 131.7 120.0 128.4 141.4 123.7 87.5 3730 7575 5 47.5 687.5 Same as Test 2 1 47.5 138.5 115.4 134.5 141.4 129.6 91 3730 7588 6 49.8 685.2 Same as Test 1 50.0 136.6 116.8 133.9 143.7 130.0 92 3691 7550 7 52.5 682.5 Fine to medium 1 29.0 143.9 116.4 134.7 143.7 136.5 95 3782 7550 gravel and sand slightly silty, some large gravel Maximum densities were obtained both by laboratory (ASTM D2049-64T), and field compaction using a vibratory compactor.
*1 Field in-place density tests were performed in area soils during the reactor containment excavation.
*2 Test No. 4 was performed using the Bureau of Reclamation Procedure for determining minimum and maximum densities
*3 Field compaction tests were not available for this material (soil was excavated and wasted)
*4 Relative density was calculated using measured natural (in-place) and field compacted densities 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.6-3 RESULTS OF STABILITY ANALYSES FOR NATURAL AND DESIGN CONDITIONS As-built Conditions with Rapid Drawdown As-built Conditions As-built Conditions Level with As-built Conditions with Rapid Drawdown with Rapid Drawdown DBE = 0.125 As-built Conditions with Project from Project from Project Flood Morgenstern Stability Analyses Plan: As-built Conditions with DBE = 0.125 Flood El. 707 Flood Level Level with DBE = 0.125 Analysis
*F **B F B F B F B F B Section as shown on figure Section E 8100 2.136 2.702 1.741 1.777 1.273 1.204 0.974 0.982 0.975 TO N 4825 E 8550 Section N 7550 2.73 2.61 2.36 2.29 1.781 1.701 1.771 1.70 1.431 1.492 1.310 (Proposed fill river side of turbine building)
Note: Many circles where analyzed; tabulated values indicate lowest factor of safety obtained for particular section under listed condition. For combined static and earthquake loading indicated factor of safety is instantaneous single peak value. Value of less than 1.0 indicates some distortion might occur at section considered.
*F - Indicates Fellenius Method of Analyses
- B - Indicates Bishops Simplified Method of Analyses (Side forces used in calculations) 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.7-1 ADDITIVE BUILDING LOADING Nominal El. Of Approximate Addi-Base of El. Of Approximate Removed tional Founda- Original Structure Soil Bldg. tion Ground Dead Wt Load Load Structure (ft) (ft) (ksf) (ksf) (ksf) Containment Structure 681 735 7.3 6.5 0.8 Fuel Building 720 735 4.0 1.8 2.2 Auxiliary Building 714 735 4.0 2.5 1.5 Turbine Building 683 715 4.0 4.2 -0.2 Service Building Switchgear Room 711 732 4.0 2.5 1.5 High Part of Building 730 730 1.0 - 1.0 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.8-1 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY STATION(3) SAMPLING DESCRIPTION SAMPLING FREQUENCY Sample Pre-Operational Type of Sample Point Sampling Point Description Program Analysis Remarks Surface Water 49(4) Upstream Side Montgomery Dam Monthly com- Gross beta Gamma Spectrum 2 Station discharge posite of weekly (suspended when gross beta 3 Shippingport station discharge samples and dissolved) >10pCi/1,periodic 4 Midland water plant (raw water) tritium gross alpha 5 East Liverpool water plant (raw water) Drinking Water 4 Midland water plant (treated Weekly com- Gross beta Gamma Spectrum water) posite of daily (suspended when gross beta 5 East Liverpool water plant samples and dissolved) >10pCi/1,periodic (treated water) tritium gross alpha Fish (any avail- 2 In or near station discharge Quarterly Gross beta able species Potassium-40 gamma spectrum Sr-90 (bone) Bottom Sediments 49(4) Upstream Side Montgomery Dam Quarterly Gross beta near mile 31 Potassium-40 2 In or near station discharge gamma 50 Upstream Side New Cumberland spectrum Dam near mile 54 4 Midland Water intake near mile 36 1 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.8-1 (CONTD) PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY STATION(3)(CONTD) SAMPLING DESCRIPTION SAMPLING FREQUENCY Sample Pre-Operational Type of Sample Point Sampling Point Description Program Analysis Remarks Well Water 6,7 2 wells near Shippingport Quarterly Gross beta Gamma Spectrum discharge (suspended when gross beta 8 Spring southwest of site and dissolved) >10pCi/1,periodic 9 On-site well tritium gross alpha 10,11 2 wells in Shippingport, Pa 12 Spring in Shippingport, Pa 13 Wells at Meyers Dairy Farm 14 Hookstown, Pa 15 Georgetown, Pa Soil 16,17 2 east of site Quarterly Gross beta 18,19 2 west of site Potassium-40 20,21 2 north of site gamma spectrum 22,23 2 south of site Sr-89 Sr-90 Wildlife 24 On-site Quarterly I-131 in thyroid (rabbit) gamma spectrum on flesh Sr-89,90 in bone Milk 25 Searight Dairy Monthly(2) I-131 I-131 only on 26 Hobbs Dairy (weekly at weekly samples 27 Brunton Dairy sample pt. Cs-137 28 Sherman Dairy 13) Sr-90 2 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.8-1 (CONTD) PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY STATION(3)(CONTD) SAMPLING DESCRIPTION SAMPLING FREQUENCY Sample Pre-Operational Type of Sample Point Sampling Point Description Program Analysis Remarks Milk (Contd) 29 Nichols Dairy Sr-89 13 Meyers Dairy Ba-140 La-140 Elemental Ca Air Particulates 30 On-site east(1) Weekly Gross Beta Periodic gross 31 On-site west(1) I-131 on alpha, gamma 32 Midland, Pa charcoal spectrum if gross 51 Aliquippa, Pa only beta >10pCi/m3 46 Industry, Pa Composited for 28 Sherman Dairy each station 13 Meyers Dairy monthly for gamma 29 Nichols Dairy (Beaver) spectrum analysis 47 East Liverpool, Ohio 48(4) Weirton, West Virginia Gamma Dosimeters 33-44 Site periphery Monthly Beta and (3 sets each location) 10 Shippingport, Pa Quarterly gamma dose 45 Mount Pleasant Church Annual 30 On-site east 31 On-site west 32 Midland, Pa 14 Hookstown, Pa 15 Georgetown, Pa 51 Aliquippa, Pa 46 Industry, Pa 3 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.8-1 (CONTD) PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY STATION(3)(CONTD) SAMPLING DESCRIPTION SAMPLING FREQUENCY Sample Pre-Operational Type of Sample Point Sampling Point Description Program Analysis Remarks Gamma Dosimeters 28 Sherman Dairy (3 sets each 13 Meyers Dairy location) (Contd) 29 Nichols Dairy (Beaver) 47 East Liverpool, Ohio 48(4) Weirton, West Virginia Vegetation and 25 Searight Dairy Quarterly Beta, Sr-89 Vegetation Food Crops 26 Hobbs Dairy Sr-90 during growing 27 Brunton Dairy gamma season, silage 28 Sherman Dairy spectrum and supplemental 29 Nichols Dairy feed 13 Meyers Dairy
-- Fruit and vegetables Fruit at Sr-89, Sr-90 (within 5 miles of plant harvest, gamma if available) vegetables spectrum during growing season 4 of 5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2.8-1 (CONTD) PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM FOR THE BEAVER VALLEY STATION(3)(CONTD) (1) On site stations to be relocated elsewhere on site due to interference with future construction. (2) The weekly sampling will be instituted at all dairies if I-131 is detected in any milk sample orif I-131 is detected in the weekly airborne particulate samples. Sampling will continue at the weekly level until I-131 levels drop below minimum detectable concentrations associated with this program. (3) Revised environmental monitoring program, Beaver Valley Power Station, Unit 1, Final Environmental Statement, App. B. (4) Control point location. 5 of 5
Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 F1GU£ 2.1-12 PIPB.JNE LOCATION BEAVER VAUEY POWER STATION lNT NO. 1 lPOA TED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 FIGURE 2-3-19 KINZUA DAM - TYPICAL CROSS SECTION BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATlON UN(T NO. 1 UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
e = J o o 6 e o l:ilt 1.
- tt
.^3 F Fot lsl;
,'4 77 o' go b
?-
3 t-I m r i t
- u. o o- o o
m (D { rrl f' rn r q m
-1 --l o o z 7 3-@
\fn ir
)rn i<
i;!o
;6 fr ur z
-l o lo I
.fn r
;--e d I (fl n rq
-l F -fo) r EH P =I { v ln clf o-{C) o TE 1
,t.
m 3 ff;, ,2r ?f t=# s. o
--@ z 3P
=P-25 a x s o
!'l
! ? r 3 b-t*
fi9 irr
- B;E DI:"'
irylp F lr lr lr it t; 7> O l$ii* ll ld ld ;d iu ir P4 Z. lq i6 u) lii l"'1. r'r i i5:r;.i6'Ii6:id. I iF ru I a I l j az - ulc 16 a= n 3
!c)
= m IU CO
o+ oi z - s o D. s no mo o =o oo o I u z @ ir sL-o @o G
- 5. mn
{ {* I -c o mz iIH trz m aJ;
-t 5a$
urI ttl t E+ I 3 s
, i o
? tl i$
?
i I
> g .t o o n
r c l*. r$ It$
- o. lri lil t: 3q<
to "or t> o1 itrr ,?-s E qo (,}
,2 lt .- ftl 0.1 $ rir) ry>
t- r' r>.1 an ln 106\ E' a BT rrl q co o rP* uZ !
-t : 1o lF4 rr6
- t -
$ l*l ld3 2u) :{r lo- ids 7 E'r !t
{3 i>
.'m t to rE , 3el IE ofP lar.lo 3[ ---@
I F 5. z i tt
) ig c N I Pg d N 931 P
?7 :as -t { ,
7 s_
?q g n Ed t JR q t fi 2
F tll Fr-{
!36 Itrl[ ifi PFf
'.'-.7 dilm b+rrl lE l" l-l q Rq coL. uxES AIE
@LUNEs I'6 o ffl 0
,a o I
u ls r Iz
?; {
1;i ffi,,, z t'z A- c f. IFr$
- 6p qE z
o gfi lfi
-l I
-l I'
D
.3 t
L-3E 'q {
! a 5H n>2 <az f,o 8 i E P j7 l*q >m r f
{m i- {-r rt -q a\ tott m! -; Xfl F>
- o. l'o < z m 0o N - t f a' t'-L Q mm ; l 1'l D Z- 7 -n rn %N o
?F , n1 ! " q 8I -T Dnl 0o 6E- o7 Bx rrF -l o l r l m D - -
o H ;
, 8 4*
li -{m stE tA -6t D J i- EE i l ool n i iz 9'1
- 32. f--8 HJq.
il-
'9 !a za l r 'P _ iiE dit 3efr L-$
acl -
= ti n Z-l rq oz
, ?,,-
f 1P
* $i:
I o"l i-r z f n F m N) l-n
Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 FIGURE 2-7-9 STATION ARRANGERENT - EL. 713'-6* BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNIT NO. UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
.t { 7 g g f; fi H - I t F fiIt E+ it a I a it d 3 r e a E 10
- FO
-*ii$ I rrc + t F T
$? !
CIF z ct dl "frH J DsE uo F i EE
-l z o
It T
'rl I lrr
?
b lo' i o N
=
I 3 FI
'rt '. D tl 'frr ti, tlr
- /r
, q ft F q
art E tt u I q l\I E eG ;;iiFElf;uii ltl=c$
;l l;l[ElHullti r
fl E t 6 - qE\ {r g: {, fi c
=z z
{
\
\
\
I I qFtrc F
.o F
t f) o o tr z c'
=iif;E-H d rn 4
f = l!. I 5t;' lfi o? I
.fr E^ tt+.t t-+6+t
-. t,l.r lq ggHH .i t rrt *; r"! +t! {t!'
ii Hi E" -l'r t t= t((L f +F+$ at FfrEg D l.e--{+It 1W fns ?
!E r
s-l1
$F
;Et FEETT EH :ES + A d - I I - Y J I R I lq lfil,:Jll..}-rlt +Jl-Ell
*lg D tlll;!si((d r:,:-{r- -,-
ffietrifu trrr" I c Hpililffirull i' i.C.-rr I I rO o flns tr- :e. lli!.5irFal--E;l h
.ltlF I t' 3 6v q ftrrt**r
$ iffimt ;U rtl r d ?
n:=fliFqffiiiiffii lg #.$ry= l c 3 E N) c- g- @ It A
.p l8 m
s o N 0 m [ fr ',$til!
-{
f M ' )----,7 -l;-
/t;L l6-i 1, I aOl OI
-+@ CI g
lffi-;ffi-r N Q-i a{
-l
/ LJlrl 1l sl m l r3; gel -r-,/ri; ii II a t--
ra=:* ;li1 il { I or t I
- 3o
- lF:
" ; ; 3 l i;I riil Eil l()-
fr F9 =ii+ liil $iiE l". S$'-<l
,.i:-o q 3;;: lj,F.ii lf; I
;E:i :i;i ,li'r I
'4;*
*;22ri,l---,5 ii l;;l ii rs iiil li tu I l@
r m r {
@t' u
ff) t o-FI (o{ r o (ro {o (ra <l 88 gu. ('l s 9P
}P q iF (t zt r 3?
orl'J'.
=z 8 (,1 r8 n-Yq o a o I
\o
{. A 8
> -.1 FL to P! : 1-z
^, i! f-o I q66 N =
z i .z I I (Lo j o.+l i rJ p= gr 7 I so. lD Ito b6 u lu m @ 99 =
.2 o o E o
.Lll TF fr8 fil F
{ r( oro 6l N N { :S m at o { t _
?9 01.
P$ 6: 6 gF m { mr ! FI c o l, 3 2 o t r C z o N) o m
-l a o o (rl r I a9 C' m u <r( c c) 1-r-1rr Em tu cl 21 o I C t o('l
-4' (rl ro (rl
@ s I
(n
'/pzetqo .tr rF L I
J;1E}.
+lrrb IEIEIEI FI !ql:
3 i-
' ' J t [l
- 7. a I i
@ I(t llug -
lb; ll-m v, f r E7761.33 m -ltA8-o dor (n I or (,r N _ f;* nE
,.. gr I ?.
rt o z
.m z u
.r =
c@ (,-un c Tm o-= v Gi) = E> CD! $ m { D< -..1.Z= 2-o 2
-tm-*
m:D Dr'l 2oT o oz. ^. !iF T]D 9^z
! EEfiE =f C)A r *T>
l -t 3 I [6]= g o e z ll= tn zI= - l..o' yx TlF '(, r P P m nl- a O o a ! 4
- o_
"> -+;
-u o= 5 E r"- nr o= r Ho) { O a F o9 <:j (t 3
n --:-l-f ,z! g-[i, I r- -..i * 'ln fi 62.,j ac nZ ;U m --1 {o T I oc) m oz. tI{
- DO s
t : N) im $**r*-
-I N.Z n m :i:
I h;l r t?vl lt l l l! Oul m l-Oi l-61 t9 Hm Flal q { io II 6 h O iz r IJI tl n O I fEI H lo.ql r5 r O F 83 zql lu o n l= It 2. t
,t deH lo o ix tss
;n fio q.
is iH a tb o ia E A I i B* :
.o l-- o
{ N ciI () gr ta 4= E h F 60 ll tv >3 i: >P> 7 h q o> izfl I s du @E I I, -l I' i T 6 -5 Htfr 'as ii> @. ! ,io Orh ;NC F n I I
-l I dt; 5 a.)
n
? 6 , t'{
I Flg t n r'
?
h d!o ld. vt rE!
&-l =mlz I F'
{
- 9. ir i.lr i I
I
-l I
.{ ttr o
ir , c
;r I
C t m F7q:?ggo Jo m l! 3 F ! ,I I Frlz m r
.{15
- F trz u I I F r
o lj {3
*+ 8: re o.
c 9k rr L M I 6.9
- -D +i q T.
fr?
\'.D { T r$
ffi (-- (/! - n- 7 t
-o c
f p; B f? t Nd r 5F ?E frP ii s9 : {,) _. .__ r=
-F--8a_oqao-. -- 9. d^ o. l = a-c m)>
- 7 . qr m rF
{ 0 6= 0m
>c m o=
{ 8 e=
-l
- -9 2
{o n
':7,t fl
$ = n c, oc
@ :1m t'
-{ -,"g 2 Po a u n r}ilT z ll I itl ol n T-1 l 3 z
= o o (t) r z rtl E' 780r n o
ffi z rn z il
= -=
'.,r 6 o z
'(rrrtf!
arlr loil) TtiStFf;$r OotoOl,
*eAOseeSH l9
! TT t'o tefif,{i66e-F r
aiEgsetffigaf,l -f t-o 88.3.Ea-qo**c'; tl
\E r
,l F E {
EET z SEF x o
--o t-2.6c i o og-illll rrl
= @ o \
4
-('r o -----Et H9 oT 3
= ID -.\
a ! = < { d { jr o u o z ! s --\ a 6o s3 C' o 0o 6! ii+9Yf,8 rl _{l m 22 i {-ln d6gRESS I
++
IfI o {C' N 0 I o ao9 oc rF
- nn 8&Eo'"oB o r?H3 p1 oo6l (r -.@
u t c zao (rl I (n z
- t
-1 o
- l-I ! m I
- f. m
'r=
{ 9c
-b d o c s f t t 9 0 Ft=
tDrotolo io F f,
-+g { iD (({ ITis""F+ F+
h I 8888 9 csiiiss$e
- t i l 6 6onntoo$-qu i-H\h-l ffir!
p ro h qH'EE g: -;d
;J il qH E Flt !t I
I or ; F f; F P 9 F'v I'rI- Ir E ts I z l\) u E oP ) r j. E r !, Nt Bs S=il N
- I af o
o ! l O l hm d f ; !- ib- { I rr ln L' F
, h,N c AN eg 2- 2 4 r{
6 o
-++'ii
; ro r( D- r C eS' 100 i q l r l
{ oo E 3 a =m i5 f t3 s z l\ro
-z trt I:l r l crc
!n
.nz A :' :- =a fim = : ;; ae 5 s$ 3?- 1* I rd o! 4i t He rrl f\) m
3 g I a e a N to ffiWl !F ig o g, g o z E a
&t ffiffi1 D a
N I g lo F o e ffif+ffi d8 o 3 3T 4q lv.l+{nF{E}st-lglBI;{ l lEFlEFlflflffilrlFl l..,inH$ ffi'Ib,m ll' ffiLri nFll -1. I t enl cc 6 g I T r l- Itl WT
- d f
O p
***iffiJl n I o
t ats'='\ frFEF F I
.B .6
- tp rH tiHn i,il-ill 1ll' O.1 F gF fi$ oE o o *:.
E$ o I 2 o.dt u o'
.i, nr r l{
Ld-Htry's dgil
;?
2F Sso,.ar,o oo EE 6 6 r
- g{ ! (t a-I a {
- i. A.o @ u o !
r H.\ fs cg l6
! I
== = -e=i
;0 3B
{ ri
'o g$H:$$s i ze.=2, fir
,it r
]}$fifffir 2 a9g3 l' n F;; {s t ril o lD rt ll I
is
${s Tg Pl l F*E Efi r ttt--r t--EF iPn 2:
i' !.
^"'fx
;!;;r;::fl ilF853,
*r!!!!,,
6 tna-atE E.?
._=*
IEESPE! 3g lr e9EgEhIF A*]frr8: fis gf, iniilri i ttBfiI*:i Fo r9.g:itI3 E Lr!.1-ll a f u-ht<r ! !! SdEl tn (t G = ! B - - - F , : > J - ! ' t efl (( lDo IF I h ; D oo { <1 I f 3F1{EF i EslE;i o to nl sE. n EElllBS 3 IE "cEi
-s5a6 fi HETHgil . a*aFs F
- .U.':'l y. s e r;fi3 li t*
;EEl $: N;Eh :
tiili lrlP;r-s* o o
- EEnb j:
li Erq t t7 _ rF: ;;;: FA = { T i
^6.r i F I ; ri 6r t' UC o N>
t, >1 ri +p=l I tl rt o o q>oz Ao 2 I tsx -9il sss8 ii Et r t r il* g i xts :.$ *. coliil
- ! =
Fb
-s D9= F 6
ulq P n m
#.It =
B6 N) m
Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 FIGURE 2.7-17 PENETRATION SEALS ELEV. 7l3'-6' BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION UNIT NO.I UPDATED FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT
Removed in Accordance with RIS 2015-17 FIGURE 2.7-18 PENETRATION SEALS ELEV. 735' -6"
3 m o 6l lo \l': I f s
- Jl
' l i ii F ilil t
nlJ (! o_ { 5 o z
?N, x
I t) o o o ttd f,--i?',er q* E s r*Tli
.- t"lE iF 3H Fe
*sl n
- J LO 9T O0
-t) r z-rn -ta it<
t- Iti ?o x lD vrzo r : r
-.1 o T?i a,
* {A 1\)
tu_ s6; {+q
?
a Eti D u
, .a Ol
,L g9 utn 90 b$
'"! rl \
5; oo r!s s St ) f H 3 t[ fia I 6l I t: lEl 6 { F l^i a .s l\4 lal ! E; z g \? o l=12 I EJ v+ 'a A s J^;. ra d.
\ '"r 5
0 o A i 2 9 6* = z I n
- R ui or u
z t
!f,rl I {JI r I ztir 4)
\
\
fffi
*g
- 1U
;E c- I@
rm wc-)fi ccf= cf D =zy! r1 n ra I tnD e l- Yr z o{ f;$ o-BEH 6-* 7 Ntr u(D ri,
.rrp oP\
Zl F Pnb rr ';' tsxF il= ln Dg 4 v-1 Is
-< cf az tJl g nZ n m-l m 1l oz no N) m
I g a a o o { s o L I
)
Fi {: i; R ii o r { a q f,ru t' tN {
- i o' o t
F FI r d { n il
$ffi I f,ct E
?
s{l ir- 'o + q r z rfl r N n) I o} I H" al
$.i r
-r L
5r I P-i:g t F; q o o q
+ $I F
r+-T" r H d_ l: i;
+T l !l
;Ut q j i-,Filii L-$ $?
t" t' Fii::;fi (t d+' fgLJ EF .il-' ii
.r
\ .,tE ffi
-o. t ll F+qel I (rr J i i,E z
I Itll r9S n_ r iiish 4 ir x t 8s? IIIEE FE l a a !
+ ++ l 't
; ii; +++ I 3t
*orr-ljl u-mr l* +rf, H+- d.E
-{C' a I F6: +'d t a NH t- 6 t o,'
N. o. o o ur t Fr -+ g rlr q Iq z I
- t n
r r o ' g q { 2 a f I o
++ t g i r*
c !r:;
++ q
++ e fi B6EI q . i'
)
fi-$-ii {*r I ilii E g p
+
+
+ u lliii +
+ l rt t t i
{t t t!! f{g a l
+ !' 4 4t t n t l :!; I l t
-t
-ti Jlil t t i i -l ri it
'+ a o o t a
- a I O Q oo t t a t a o o 3 o o n i ! ..t ! t -
illit iii ! JLii: ! iiJ"3ia at JJ 3r I r8i rFr : o
-r1 c @ DC-) ttl' ?s r-+ **
l.-*
--t lg:l I l.'-+ +
5aFeH ?illil I t'l li-+ + F'l:---- l'?-+ +
-P\ ,l =r 'lfr E=X bgF t*f, ^E*.o=
ri
,l a + --; t- 'il io
- t
-? R . !-_++ + 3 : a ir ,ftl Odr . C _
'Egg g r l ' EH r; FT a
; 6l t!+i.{:.1
;5 s.-iiol 6 I! lt t t+++
o t9 o t+?'ai si si b6 E a ; 6 I +-f++ :o
$*FH-l' aa dEsiF qi d.E tt! +.r-++ 6a BF I
l{ lt i+r+ s9 Fc" tuz 6; lh t+++ Ffrtd'.-
-- 0i a ++++
f9 I { ++++ I I I i*; a Ll n -r-y' FJl ,5i ta
;ER B i:
{u ur6 Z n3= i h l.a o i-' r 'o' r{ cq n s-. '9 a m EF s I\) m
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 APPENDIX 2A THE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM Prepared for DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Prepared by ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS DIVISION NUS CORPORATION ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 2A-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Appendix 2A includes the first annual and second annual reports of the meteorological program at the Beaver Valley Power Station which began in September of 1969. The first annual report, Appendix 2A.1, summarizes the meteorological data collected over a year period from September 5, 1969 to September 9, 1970, while the second annual report, Appendix 2A.2, summarizes the meteorological data collected over a year period from September 5, 1970 to September 5, 1971. Both sets of data were analyzed to develop parameters appropriate to dispersion estimates for the design basis accident and for evaluation of the average dispersion conditions which would govern normal gaseous releases from the Beaver Valley Power Station. The design basis accident meteorological conditions obtained by analysis of the first year of data were Pasquill Type "F" and 0.9 m/sec wind speed while the design basis accident meteorological conditions obtained by analysis of the second year data were Pasquill Type "F" and 0.84 m/sec wind speed. The First and Second Annual Meteorological Reports were retyped/reformatted as part of the update of the FSAR. Appendix 2A.3 contains the current report for the Meteorological Program. 2A-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 APPENDIX 2A.1 FIRST ANNUAL REPORT THE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM AT THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION September 5, 1969 - September 5, 1970 Report Date: September, 1971 Prepared for DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Prepared by ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS DIVISION NUS CORPORATION ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 2A.1-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
2A.1-5 II. SITE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM 2A.1-5 III. DATA REDUCTION 2A.1-6 IV. SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS 2A.1-7 A. Wind Roses and Speeds 2A.1-7 B. Atmospheric Stability 2A.1-7 C. Lapse Rate Stability Classification 2A.1-9 V. DETERMINATION OF DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS 2A.1-9 VI. ANNUAL AVERAGE RELEASE METEOROLOGY 2A.1-10 REFERENCES 2A.1-12 APPENDIX - STABILITY AND WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION SUMMARIES 2A.1-21 2A.1-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2A.1-1
SUMMARY
OF DATA COLLECTION September 5, 1969 - September 5, 1970 2A.1-13 2A.1-2 AVERAGE WIND SPEED
SUMMARY
2A.1-14 2A.1-3 STABILITY CATEGORIES 2A.1-15 2A.1-4 STABILITY DISTRIBUTION BASED ON WIND VARIANCE 2A.1-16 2A.1-5 OCEAN BREEZE AND DRY GULCH STABILITY CLASSIFICATION 2A.1-17 2A.1-6 NATIONAL REACTOR TESTING STATION STABILITY CLASSIFICATION 2A.1-18 2A.1-7 CLASSIFICATION OF PASQUILL STABILITY CLASS BASED ON LAPSE RATE 2A.1-19 2A.1-8 JOINT FREQUENCY DATA September 5, 1969 - September 5, 1970 2A.1-20 2A.1-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 2A.1-1 SITE PLAN 2A.1-2 GROSS WIND ROSE - SEASON 1 - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.1-3 GROSS WIND ROSE - SEASON 2 - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.1-4 GROSS WIND ROSE - SEASON 3 - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.1-5 GROSS WIND ROSE - SEASON 4 - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.1-6 GROSS WIND ROSE - ANNUAL AVERAGE - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.1-7 GROSS WIND ROSE - ANNUAL AVERAGE - 150 FOOT LEVEL 2A.1-8 WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION 2A.1-9 ESTIMATION OF FROM WIND DIRECTION RANGE 2A.1-10 ANNUAL AVERAGE /Qs 2A.1-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 I. INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
This report summarizes meteorological data collected at the Beaver Valley site over a year period extending from September 5, 1969 through September 5, 1970. The data were analyzed to develop parameters appropriate to dispersion estimates for the design basis accident and for evaluation of the average dispersion conditions which would govern normal gaseous releases from the Beaver Valley Power Station. II. SITE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM On April 19, 1969, the following equipment was installed on the Beaver Valley meteorological tower: Bendix-Friez aerovanes with six-bladed propellers at the 50-and 150-foot levels and Bendix-Friez recorders Packard-Bell wind sensors (Model WS-101), at the 50-foot level and Esterline Angus recorders NUS Wind Variance Computer. Due to a delay in vendor deliver, the Bristol temperature system, consisting of resistance temperature bulbs with Packard-Bell aspirated shields at the 50- and 150-foot levels, and multi-point Bristol recorder, was not installed until September 5, 1969. At this time, the Foxboro dew cell was also installed. All meteorological sensors were placed on booms on a tower located approximately 250 meters from the center of the reactor building for the Beaver Valley Station. This location assured good exposure for the wind sensors. Figure 2A.1-1 shows the approximate location of the meteorological tower relative to the containment building, though most of the indicated trees have since been cleared. The particular Bendix-Friez wind system chosen is rugged, yet has the lowest threshold, approximately two miles-per-hour, of any such equipment. The supplementary Packard-Bell wind system with a threshold of 0.7 miles-per-hour was particularly intended to help analyze wind and temperature statistics under low wind speed conditions. Due to the delay in installation of temperature sensors, data and analyses are being reported for the time period September 5, 1969 through September 5, 1970. The recovery rate of the site data for these 52 weeks is presented in Table 2A.1-1, and is considered satisfactory for an accurate representation of the site conditions. 2A.1-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Instrument performance was generally satisfactory during the one-year period from September 5, 1969 to September 5, 1970. The only significant instrument problem was the incorrect factory calibration of the Packard-Bell wind speed system. As a result, the Packard-Bell instruments yielded anomalously low wind speeds, when compared with the Bendix-Friez instruments known to be in correct calibration. During the winter, a few days of Packard-Bell data were lost when the sensors "froze". Most of the data loss from the Packard-Bell instruments resulted from short-term "painting" of the wind recorded. Unfortunately, this occurrence is inherent in the Packard-Bell and other sensors which have a significant "dead-band". Operation of the Bendix-Friez instruments was quite good. The only malfunction occurred with the 150-foot recorder, which encountered difficulty with the pen-switching mechanism for a one-week period. Otherwise, the loss of Bendix data occurred solely from short-term inking problems and in transmittal to NUS Corporation from the site. No malfunctions with the Bristol temperature system were observed; the only data loss resulted from occasional inking difficulties. The Foxboro dew cell was installed to gather data in support of the cooling towers; reduction of the dew cell data has not been completed at this time. III. DATA REDUCTION Data records from the wind sensors and the temperature and dew cell recorders were forwarded to NUS for reduction and analysis. Wind data were obtained both from the strip charts and the Variance Computer; however, because of greater data availability from the former, as well as possible questions as to interpretation of the latter, primary reliance has been placed in the report upon the strip chart data. Wind records were examined and hourly data extracted representing wind speed and direction averages and wind direction range. Range was determined from the two second-most extreme gusts. These data were taken for the two levels of Bendix-Friez sensors and the Packard-Bell equipment at the 50-foot level. Temperature measurements for the 50- and the 150-foot levels were recorded hourly, as were dew point data for the 50-foot level. The data were entered on punched cards and processed to yield the data summaries presented and discussed in a later section. 2A.1-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 IV. SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS A. Wind Roses and Speeds Based on Bendix-Friez data from the 50-foot level, Figures 2A.1-2, 2A.1-3, 2A.1-4, 2A.1-5, and 2A.1-6 show the distribution of wind directions for four seasons and the annual distribution. It is noted that in spring the winds from the northwest quadrant prevail. In summer, the wind directions from south-southeast to south-southwest predominate, along with a secondary maximum of winds from northwest. A season of transition, autumn, shows relatively high frequencies of winds from the west, west-northwest, and northwest, with a secondary maximum of winds from the south. This pattern of prevailing winds probably reflects both the large-scale wind flow from the meteorological pressure systems and the local channeling effect of the valley. During the winter, winds from the northwest quadrant are dominant; the effect of the valley in channeling is evident in the high frequencies of winds from the north-northwest and northwest. As a result of the seasonal patterns, the annual wind roses exhibit a high frequency of winds from the northwest quadrant and from southerly directions. A similar distribution of wind directions, shown in Figure 2A.1-7, is found with the 150-foot wind sensors. Table 2A.1-2 shows the seasonal and annual distribution of wind speeds for both the 50-foot and 150-foot levels, based on the Bendix-Friez data. Speeds are determined over 15-minute averaging periods. It is noted that the season of highest wind speed is winter; whereas, the lowest wind speeds occur in summer. The average annual value of 5.5 miles-per-hour at the 50-foot level is higher than the 3-mile-per-hour value found by the Weather Bureau during the two-year site meteorological program conducted in Shippingport from 1955 through 1957. The annual figure of 2.5 percent "calm" found by the Beaver Valley meteorological program compares with 8.5 percent found by the Weather Bureau from 1955 to 1957. About two-thirds of the calms noted by the applicant occurred during the night; thus, if daytime calms are excluded, the overall frequency of calms is only 1.6 percent of all observations. The overall occurrence of calms as measured by the Packard-Bell instrument is only 0.4 percent. It is expected that the frequency of calms would be less as measured by the Packard-Bell than with the Bendix instrument because of the lower threshold and greater sensitivity of the Packard-Bell instrument. For these reasons, it was suspected that the Packard-Bell wind instruments yielded an annual average wind speed of 4.5 miles-per-hour, a value lower than the 5.6 miles-per-hour average found with the Bendix-Friez. During a preventive maintenance and instrument calibration trip, it was found that the Packard-Bell wind sensors and translator has been incorrectly calibrated at the factory, which led to these lower wind speeds. At that time, the Packard-Bell equipment was properly calibrated. The Bendix-Friez instrumentation remained in correct calibration during the complete period. Figure 2A.1-8 shows the wind speed distribution at the Beaver Valley site, based on the Bendix instrument. The median wind speed is noted to be 4.7 miles-per-hour; thus, when the median is compared to the mean wind speed, it is obvious that the distribution of the wind speeds is somewhat skewed toward the lower values. B. Atmospheric Stability In the context of this report, atmospheric stability refers to the degree of turbulence present in the atmosphere. An "unstable" atmosphere is turbulent and results in good diffusion of waste gases injected into the atmosphere, whereas, a "stable" atmosphere is relatively nonturbulent and results in poor diffusion. "Neutral" stability refers to an intermediate condition. 2A.1-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Two basic methods of inferring atmospheric dispersion capability are generally available; the first is based on wind fluctuations; the second on temperature lapse rate. The first method uses a sensitive wind vane, preferably one which is free to move in both vertical and horizontal directions (a "bivane") to measure fluctuations in wind direction in both planes, thus providing a measure of and , the standard deviations of horizontal and vertical wind direction fluctuations, respectively. However, bivanes are not sufficiently rugged to provide the reliable data recovery over long time periods necessary for long-term diffusion climatology programs. Several systems have been developed which determine the horizontal variance (2) from standard (horizontal only) wind direction sensors, and which can be related to atmospheric stability. The second method is the classical categorization of atmospheric stability based on vertical temperature structure, from which inferences of vertical diffusivity can be made. This method, of course, does not indicate diffusivity directly, nor does it account for differences in turbulence that may be introduced by surface roughness features. In view of the availability of both horizontal wind fluctuations, vertical temperature difference data, and the significance of dispersion conditions in the design basis accident considerations, both measures of atmospheric stability were combined to provide the best estimates of horizontal and vertical plume dispersion. Using the 50-foot level Bendix-Friez data, horizontal stability based on seven classes of was determined, according to the classification scheme in Table 2A.1-3, from the range in horizontal wind direction over a 15-minute time period, based on methods presented by Slade(1) using the "second gust" range described earlier. This procedure is illustrated (in Figure 2A.1-9) for some typical atmospheric conditions (arrows indicate the range of wind direction). If winds are "calm" or "non-steady", then the occurrence is classified as Pasquill B stability during the day, and Pasquill E at night, as suggested by Slade(2). Values of from the Bendix-Friez instrumentation can be questioned as to whether they are representative of the real wind fluctuations. This was tested by comparing values determined by the Bendix-Friez sensor with those from the more sensitive Packard-Bell sensor at the same level. Table 2A.1-4 shows that when using a sampling time of 15 minutes, the distributions of horizontal stability classes estimated from both Bendix-Friez and Packard-Bell data at the 50-foot level agree very closely for all stability categories. Therefore, the horizontal variance data based on Bendix-Friez wind observations are felt to be representative of actual atmospheric conditions. To determine the joint frequency distribution of vertical temperature difference and horizontal variance, all individual 15-minute time periods for which wind speed, , and temperature difference data were available were processed by the NUS computer code, AMET, which computes the joint frequency of and temperature classes for given wind speed groups and for all wind speeds. Six wind speed groups were enumerated: Class 1 includes all wind speeds greater than or equal to 0.5 miles-per-hour and less than 1.5 miles-per-hour; Classes 2, 3, 4, and 5 are defined analogously for 2, 3, 4, and 5-miles-per-hour mean values; Class 6 includes all wind speeds greater than 5.5 miles-per-hour. Calms are not treated in the AMET code, but, as mentioned previously, occurred only in 2.5 percent of the observations by the Bendix-Friez sensor and 0.4 percent by the Packard-Bell unit. Computer summary pages of this joint frequency distribution listing are attached as an appendix to this report. 2A.1-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 C. Lapse Rate Stability Classification In order to determine the dispersion parameters for the two-hour design basis accident, meteorological conditions are chosen for which calculated doses would not be exceeded more than 5 percent of the time. In order to select these based jointly on and lapse rate, vertical dispersion parameters are needed based on temperature difference corresponding to those established using the horizontal variance classification presented above. Seventeen vertical temperature difference classes were arbitrarily defined for the purpose of categorizing these observations. In order to classify vertical dispersion parameters based on the lapse rate, a number of references in the literature were examined, including the stability classification defined for Cape Kennedy and Vandenberg Air Force Base and presented in Table 2A.1-5(3). The most complete vertical stability classification system found in the literature is that used at the National Reactor Testing Station(4) as presented in Table 2A.1-6. It was noted that none of these classification systems define a G stability, however. Therefore, in the lapse rate stability classification system chosen, the "G" interval has been defined in accordance with the range of a "large inversion", as presented by Holland in Meteorology and Atomic Energy(5). The ranges used are presented in Table 2A.1-7. V. DETERMINATION OF DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS Using the seven horizontal stability classes (A-G) and seven vertical stability classes (A-G) and the corresponding y and z values, as presented in Meteorology and Atomic Energy(6), a computer code was used to determine the combinations of vertical and horizontal stability classes and wind speeds which result in a calculated /Q value larger than any designated value at the site boundary distance of 610 meters. These 23 possible conditions are shown in Table 2A.1-8 ranked in order from the highest to the lowest values of /Q. These calculations of /Q do not include a building wake effect, since the objective was to find the meteorological conditions of stability and wind speed upon which the building wake correction is normally imposed for the design basis accident. Due to the somewhat lower wind speeds, the 50-foot wind data are more conservative than those measured at the 150-foot level and the former were, therefore, used with the temperature difference measurements. A conservative analysis also includes the total calms, both daytime and nighttime, as found by the less responsive Bendix-Friez speed sensors to meet the 5 percent criterion. On this basis, the total occurrence of calms is 2.5 percent. If the joint frequency data in Table 2A.1-8 are examined, for a /Q value equalled or exceeded 2.5 percent of the time (5 percent less 2.5 percent calm), a value of 1.5 x 10-3 sec/m3 is obtained. Thus, F and 0.9 m per sec are the appropriate design basis accident meteorological conditions for the period of the accident on this conservative basis. 2A.1-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 VI. ANNUAL AVERAGE RELEASE METEOROLOGY The annual average /Q for an elevated release is calculated according to the following equation: Where:
= distance (m) l/ui = average reciprocal wind speed for sector of interest, sec per m3 Z = vertical diffusion parameter for stability class i (m) i Fi = fraction of time stability class i occurs H = height of stack (m) z = vertical height above valley floor(m) fi = fraction of time wind direction is in sector of interest for stability class i In calculating /Q, z has been estimated from Pasquill stability curves(7); (Fi) (fi) is based on i
the categorization of temperature difference previously discussed and found in Table 2A.1-7. (The value of z for G stability is defined as the z for Class F, divided by (2.5)1/2. For an elevated release of normal process gases, the highest ground level annual average /Q occurs at a distance of 2500 feet from the reactor centerline, at an elevation of 47 meters above the valley floor. This /Q is equal to 1.0 x 10-5 sec per m3. At the nearest site boundaries, each of which is 610 meters from the reactor containment, the annual average ground level /Qs for an elevated release are as follows: Northeast boundary 1.3 x 10-7 sec/m3 East-northeast boundary 1.1 x 10-7 sec/m3 East-southeast boundary 2.0 x 10-7 sec/m3 WINDVANE computer outputs giving the raw data from which these calculations are made are given in the appendix to this report. 2A.1-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 It should be noted that the /Qs at the nearest site boundaries are all less than the /Q at the 2500-foot point. Figure 2A.1-10 contains isopleths of the ground level annual average /Q for an elevated release. 2A.1-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 References
- 1. Slade, D. H., Meteorology and Atomic Energy, United States Atomic Energy Commission, Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information, Springfield, Virginia, 1968, p. 47.
- 2. Slade. D. H., "Dispersion Estimates from Pollutant Releases of a Few Seconds to 8 Hours in Duration", U.S. Weather Bureau, Washington, DC, 1965, p. 15.
- 3. Haugen, D. A. and J. J. Fuquay, The Ocean Breeze and Dry Gulch Diffusion Programs, Vol. I, USAEC Report HW-78435 (Report AFCRL-63-791 (I)), Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories and Hanford Atomic Products Operation, 1963.
- 4. Start, George E. and Markee, Earl H., "Relative Dose Factors from Long-Period Point Source Emissions of Atmospheric Pollutants", Proceedings USAEC Meteorological Information Meeting, 1967, p. 63.
- 5. United States Department of Commerce Weather Bureau, Meteorology and Atomic Energy, 1955, p. 54.
- 6. Slade, D. H., Meteorology and Atomic Energy, pp. 408-409.
- 7. Ibid., p. 409.
2A.1-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLES FOR APPENDIX 2A.1 TABLE 2A.1-1
SUMMARY
OF DATA COLLECTION September 5, 1969 September 5, 1970 Recovery Rate Instrument Level (%) BendixFriez 50 feet 85 BendixFriez 150 feet 80 PackardBell 50 feet 75 Bristol Temperature 50 feet 98 Bristol Temperature 150 feet 98 2A.1-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2A.1-2 AVERAGE WIND SPEED
SUMMARY
(mph) Bendix 50 foot Bendix 150 foot Spring 5.7 6.4 Summer 4.2 4.1* Fall 5.4 6.4 Winter 7.2 7.9 Annual Average 5.6
- It is doubtful that the average wind speed at 150 foot is actually lower than that for the 50 foot level during summer; rather it is believed that, within the accuracy of the calculations, there is no significant difference between the two levels.
2A.1-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2A.1-3 STABILITY CATEGORIES Range of Stability Type Standard Deviation Turbulence Type A = Extremely Unstable 22.5 High Atmospheric Turbulence B = Unstable 22.5 > 17.5 High Atmospheric Turbulence C = Slightly Unstable 17.5 > 12.5 High Atmospheric Turbulence D = Neutral 12.5 > 7.5 Moderate Atmos-pheric Turbulence E = Slightly Stable 7.5 > 3.8 Low Atmospheric Turbulence F = Stable 3.8 > 1.3 Low Atmospheric Turbulence G = Extremely Stable < 1.3 Low Atmospheric Turbulence 2A.1-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2A.1-4 STABILITY DISTRIBUTION BASED ON WIND VARIANCE Class Level Instrument (ft) A B C D E F G
% Of Total Observations BendixFriez 50 13.2 14.5 28.3 30.2 11.7 1.9 0.2 150 9.3 12.5 25.2 36.8 14.0 2.0 0.1 PackardBell 50 12.6 14.6 27.5 34.5 9.8 0.9 0.0 2A.1-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2A.1-5 OCEAN BREEZE AND DRY GULCH STABILITY CLASSIFICATION WT = temperature at 54 ft. minus temperature at 6 ft. Range of Vertical Category Temperature Difference (F) Very Unstable WT F -3.0 F Moderately Unstable -3.0 F WT F 0.0 F Moderately Stable 0 F WT F 3.0 F Very Stable WT J 3.0 F 2A.1-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2A.1-6 NATIONAL REACTOR TESTING STATION STABILITY CLASSIFICATION Range of Vertical Category Temperature Gradient (F/100 Ft) A -1.1 or less B -0.5 to -1.0 C -0.1 to -0.4 D 0.0 to 0.4 E 0.5 to 1.0 F 1.1 or greater 2A.1-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2A.1-7 CLASSIFICATION OF PASQUILL STABILITY CLASS BASED ON LAPSE RATE Range of Vertical Category Temperature Gradient (F/1000 ft.) A Very Unstable WT F -16 B Moderately Unstable -16 F WT F -13 C Slightly Unstable -13 F WT F -7 D Neutral -7 F WT F -1 E Slightly Stable -1 F WT F 11 F Moderately Stable 11 F WT F 20 G Very Stable WT J 20 2A.1-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 TABLE 2A.1-8 JOINT FREQUENCY DATA Sept. 5, 1969 - Sept. 5, 1970 50 Ft. Level Wind Data 50 & 150 Ft. Level Temp. Site Boundary: 610 Meters Effective F Cum. Wind Speed Ordered Condition /Q & Wind Speed Frequency Frequency (m/sec) Horiz. Vert. (sec/m3) (m/sec) % % 0.45 G G 7.5 x 10-3 0.18 .01 .01 0.45 F G .08 .09 0.45 G F .02 .11 0.90 G G .05 .16 0.45 E G .18 .34 0.45 F F .08 .42 0.45 G E .05 .47 0.45 D G 2.5 x 10-3 0.52 .25 .72 1.35 G G 0.00 .72 0.90 F G .18 .90 0.90 G F .03 .93 0.45 G D .00 .93 0.45 E F .18 1.11 1.80 G G .00 1.11 0.45 F E .24 1.35 0.90 E G .67 2.02 0.45 C G .11 2.13 0.45 D F .20 2.33 1.35 F G .07 2.40 1.35 G F .00 2.40 2.25 G G .00 2.40 0.90 F F .21 2.61 0.90 G E 1.5 x 10-3 0.90 .00 2.61 1.3 x 10-2 1.00 2A.1-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 APPENDIX - STABILITY AND WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION SUMMARIES 2A.1-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 SEASON INDEX=1 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. HOURLY TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 1848 Hour In Percent of Total OBS In Percent of Hourly OBS Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 .22 2.76 .60 .70 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.06 64.56 13.92 16.46 2 .05 0.00 0.00 .11 2.81 .54 .76 1.27 0.00 0.00 2.53 65.82 12.66 17.72 3 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 3.14 .27 .81 0.00 0.00 1.27 0.00 73.42 6.33 18.99 4 .05 0.00 .05 0.00 2.81 .49 .92 1.25 0.00 1.25 0.00 65.00 11.25 21.25 5 .05 0.00 .11 .16 2.76 .60 .60 1.27 0.00 2.53 3.80 64.56 13.92 13.92 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16 2.92 .43 .76 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.80 68.35 10.13 17.72 7 .11 .05 0.00 .11 3.03 .49 .38 2.60 1.30 0.00 2.60 72.73 11.69 9.09 8 .11 0.00 .05 .38 3.08 .22 .32 2.60 0.00 1.30 9.09 74.03 5.19 7.79 9 .05 .22 0.00 .54 2.92 .05 .22 1.35 5.41 0.00 13.51 72.97 1.35 5.41 10 .05 .05 .05 .54 3.03 .05 .11 1.39 1.39 1.39 13.89 77.78 1.39 2.78 11 0.00 .05 0.00 .65 3.08 .05 .11 0.00 1.37 0.00 16.44 78.08 1.37 2.74 12 .05 0.00 .16 .49 3.35 0.00 0.00 1.33 0.00 4.00 12.00 82.65 0.00 0.00 13 0.00 .05 .22 .65 3.19 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.32 5.26 15.79 77.63 0.00 0.00 14 0.00 0.00 .27 .76 3.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.49 18.18 75.32 0.00 0.00 15 .05 .05 .38 .81 2.87 0.00 0.00 1.30 1.30 9.09 19.48 68.83 0.00 0.00 16 0.00 .16 .27 .65 3.08 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.90 6.49 15.58 74.03 0.00 0.00 17 0.00 0.00 .16 .87 3.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.90 20.78 75.32 0.00 0.00 18 0.00 0.00 .22 .54 3.35 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.19 12.99 80.52 1.30 0.00 19 0.00 0.00 0.00 .49 3.57 0.00 .11 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.69 85.71 0.00 2.60 20 0.00 0.00 .11 .27 3.30 .27 .27 0.00 0.00 2.56 6.41 78.21 6.41 6.41 21 0.00 0.00 .05 .16 2.87 .43 .70 0.00 0.00 1.28 3.85 67.95 10.26 16.67 22 .05 0.00 0.00 .16 2.60 .43 .87 1.32 0.00 0.00 3.95 63.16 10.53 21.05 23 .05 0.00 .05 .05 2.81 .27 .92 1.30 0.00 1.30 1.30 67.53 6.49 22.08 24 0.00 0.00 .05 .05 2.81 .43 .87 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 66.67 10.26 20.51 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS.) Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
.70 .65 2.27 8.82 72.46 5.68 9.42 AVERAGE WIND SPEED FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN MPH)
Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Speed 4.8 4.8 7.3 6.9 6.3 2.6 2.8 WIND ROSE FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN PERCENT OF EACH INDEX TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 23.08 15.38 7.69 7.69 0.00 7.69 7.69 7.69 0.00 7.69 15.38 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.33 16.67 0.00 41.67 3 2.38 0.00 2.38 4.76 7.14 2.38 7.14 11.90 11.90 4.76 4.76 9.52 4.76 19.05 7.14 0.00 0.00 4 5.52 2.45 5.52 3.68 4.29 5.52 4.91 3.68 1.84 1.23 2.45 5.52 13.50 21.47 7.98 10.43 0.00 5 2.99 3.96 2.91 6.87 7.77 7.77 3.73 3.96 2.69 2.69 3.21 5.83 14.56 14.56 5.45 8.36 2.69 6 .95 0.00 0.00 .95 5.71 13.33 11.43 14.29 18.10 14.29 5.71 7.62 2.86 2.86 0.00 1.90 0.00 7 1.15 0.00 .57 1.15 6.90 8.62 5.17 16.67 20.69 18.39 5.75 5.75 4.02 2.30 .57 2.30 0.00 2A.1-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 SEASON INDEX=1 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 1848 GROSS WIND ROSE (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL (OBS) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 2.87 3.08 2.92 5.68 7.20 7.79 4.55 5.95 5.41 4.76 3.52 5.95 12.50 13.31 4.98 7.31 2.22 Speed 5.2 5.3 5.4 5.2 5.3 4.6 3.3 3.2 3.0 2.9 3.8 5.0 8.5 9.2 8.6 6.8 0.0 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH WIND DIRECTION (IN PERCENT OF DIRECTION TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 5.56 1.90 .75 .69 0.00 .91 1.00 1.14 0.00 .91 .87 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 1.85 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.38 .91 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .41 2.17 0.00 12.20 3 1.89 0.00 1.85 1.90 2.26 .69 3.57 4.55 5.00 2.27 3.08 3.64 .87 3.25 3.26 0.00 0.00 4 16.98 7.02 16.67 5.71 5.26 6.25 9.52 5.45 3.00 2.27 6.15 8.18 9.52 14.23 14.13 12.59 0.00 5 75.47 92.98 72.22 87.62 78.20 72.22 59.52 48.18 36.00 40.91 66.15 70.91 84.42 79.27 79.35 82.96 87.80 6 1.89 0.00 0.00 .95 4.51 9.72 14.29 13.64 19.00 17.05 9.23 7.27 1.30 1.22 0.00 1.48 0.00 7 3.77 0.00 1.85 1.90 9.02 10.42 10.71 26.36 36.00 36.36 15.38 9.09 3.03 1.63 1.09 2.96 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS. Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 .16 .11 .05 .05 0.00 .05 .05 .05 0.00 .05 .11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .11 0.00 .27 3 .05 0.00 .05 .11 .16 .05 .16 .27 .27 .11 .11 .22 .11 .43 .16 0.00 0.00 4 .49 .22 .49 .32 .38 .49 .43 .32 .16 .11 .22 .49 1.19 1.89 .70 .92 0.00 5 2.16 2.87 2.11 4.98 5.63 5.63 2.71 2.87 1.95 1.95 2.33 4.22 10.55 10.55 3.95 6.06 1.95 6 .05 0.00 0.00 .05 .32 .76 .65 .81 1.03 .81 .32 .43 .16 .16 0.00 .11 0.00 7 .11 0.00 .05 .11 .65 .81 .49 1.57 1.95 1.73 .54 .54 .38 .22 .05 .22 0.00 AVERAGE WIND SPEED (INVERSE WEIGHTED) BY INDEX AND DIRECTION (IN MPH) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 0.00 0.00 3.16 4.50 5.00 3.00 0.00 4.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 4.00 11.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.83 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.00 9.10 0.00 3 13.00 0.00 9.00 5.00 5.11 10.00 6.90 4.99 3.87 1.33 6.46 4.57 14.48 8.19 7.46 0.00 4 4.81 4.28 4.97 4.75 5.21 2.99 3.60 5.01 2.67 1.67 3.31 6.44 5.52 7.66 6.17 6.05 5 3.41 3.83 3.94 4.09 4.22 3.34 2.06 2.33 2.34 2.25 3.01 3.64 6.63 6.89 6.16 5.05 6 1.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.57 2.55 2.18 1.88 1.93 1.91 2.88 2.46 3.00 1.00 0.00 1.75 7 6.00 0.00 5.00 1.33 1.90 3.35 1.86 2.00 2.37 2.23 1.18 1.58 2.67 1.60 2.00 1.89 (AVERAGE INVERSE SPEED) 1 0.00 0.00 .32 .22 .20 .33 0.00 .25 1.00 1.00 0.00 .25 .09 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 .17 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 .20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 .11 0.00 3 .08 0.00 .11 .20 .20 .10 .14 .20 .26 .75 .15 .22 .07 .12 .13 0.00 4 .21 .23 .20 .21 .19 .33 .28 .20 .38 .60 .30 .16 .18 .13 .16 .17 5 .29 .26 .25 .24 .24 .30 .49 .43 .43 .44 .33 .27 .15 .15 .16 .20 6 1.00 0.00 0.00 .50 .39 .39 .46 .53 .52 .52 .35 .41 .33 1.00 0.00 .57 7 .17 0.00 .20 .75 .53 .30 .54 .50 .42 .45 .85 .63 .37 .63 .50 .53 2A.1-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 SEASON INDEX=2 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. HOURLY TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 1515 Hour In Percent of Total OBS In Percent of Hourly OBS Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 .07 0.00 0.00 .13 1.52 .92 1.58 1.56 0.00 0.00 3.13 35.94 21.88 37.50 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .13 1.98 1.12 .99 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 46.88 26.56 23.44 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 1.91 1.19 1.06 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.56 45.31 28.13 25.00 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.91 1.52 .79 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 45.31 35.94 18.75 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.05 1.58 .59 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 48.44 37.50 14.06 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 2.31 1.06 .79 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.56 54.69 25.00 18.75 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 .20 2.51 .92 .59 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.69 59.38 21.88 14.06 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .53 3.17 .40 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.70 76.19 9.52 1.59 9 0.00 .86 .40 1.25 1.58 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.97 9.68 30.65 38.71 0.00 0.00 10 .07 .33 .73 1.65 1.25 0.00 0.00 1.64 8.20 18.03 40.98 31.15 0.00 0.00 11 0.00 .07 .66 2.18 1.12 .07 0.00 0.00 1.61 16.13 53.23 27.42 1.61 0.00 12 0.00 .20 1.19 1.91 .53 .07 .07 0.00 5.00 30.00 48.32 13.33 1.67 1.67 13 .07 .07 .92 2.05 .92 0.00 0.00 1.64 1.64 22.95 50.82 22.95 0.00 0.00 14 .07 .33 1.32 2.05 .26 0.00 0.00 1.64 8.20 32.79 50.82 6.56 0.00 0.00 15 .07 .20 1.25 1.91 .53 0.00 .07 1.64 4.92 31.15 47.54 13.11 0.00 1.64 16 0.00 .07 1.39 1.98 .79 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.56 32.81 46.88 18.75 0.00 0.00 17 0.00 .07 1.06 2.38 .73 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.56 25.00 56.25 17.19 0.00 0.00 18 0.00 .07 .46 2.38 1.25 .07 0.00 0.00 1.56 10.94 56.25 29.69 1.56 0.00 19 0.00 0.00 .07 1.91 2.24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.56 45.31 53.13 0.00 0.00 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 .59 3.04 .26 .33 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.06 71.88 6.25 7.81 21 0.00 0.00 0.00 .26 1.85 .66 1.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.25 43.75 15.63 34.38 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 .13 1.91 .73 1.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 45.31 17.19 34.38 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.65 1.12 1.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 39.06 26.56 34.38 24 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 1.72 1.06 1.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.56 40.63 25.00 32.81 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS.) Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
.33 2.24 9.44 23.83 38.75 12.74 12.67 AVERAGE WIND SPEED FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN MPH)
Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Speed 4.4 2.3 5.8 5.3 3.7 3.1 3.1 WIND ROSE FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN PERCENT OF EACH INDEX TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 0.00 20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 20.00 0.00 20.00 0.00 2 0.00 2.94 11.76 11.76 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.94 0.00 0.00 2.94 5.88 2.94 5.88 2.94 50.00 3 7.69 7.69 13.29 6.29 4.90 5.59 1.40 3.50 2.80 2.80 2.80 2.80 6.29 16.78 12.59 2.80 0.00 4 6.37 7.20 3.60 4.71 4.71 5.54 3.05 3.05 2.77 5.26 3.32 7.20 8.31 19.67 6.37 8.86 0.00 5 3.58 1.87 1.19 3.07 3.75 8.35 10.56 13.97 9.20 5.28 5.45 4.60 8.01 8.35 3.41 3.75 5.62 6 .52 0.00 0.00 .52 .52 3.63 8.29 24.87 34.20 18.13 5.18 2.59 .52 .52 .52 0.00 0.00 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.13 3.65 3.13 15.63 50.52 19.27 2.60 1.04 0.00 0.00 .52 .52 0.00 2A.1-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 SEASON INDEX=2 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 1515 GROSS WIND ROSE (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL (OBS) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 3.70 3.23 2.84 3.23 3.50 6.01 6.47 11.62 15.38 8.32 4.16 4.29 5.94 9.70 4.29 4.03 3.30 Speed 5.3 5.0 4.5 3.5 3.4 4.0 3.6 3.1 3.1 2.8 3.0 4.2 5.8 7.0 6.4 5.0 0.0 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH WIND DIRECTION (IN PERCENT OF DIRECTION TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.02 0.00 .43 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.11 .68 0.00 1.64 0.00 2 0.00 2.04 9.30 8.16 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .43 0.00 0.00 1.54 2.22 .68 3.08 1.64 34.00 3 19.64 22.45 44.19 18.37 13.21 8.79 2.04 2.84 1.72 3.17 6.35 6.15 10.00 16.33 27.69 6.56 0.00 4 41.07 53.06 30.23 34.69 32.08 21.98 11.22 6.25 4.29 15.08 19.05 40.00 33.33 48.30 35.38 52.46 0.00 5 37.50 22.45 16.28 36.73 41.51 53.85 63.27 46.59 23.18 24.60 50.79 41.54 52.22 33.33 30.77 36.07 66.00 6 1.79 0.00 0.00 2.04 1.89 7.69 16.33 27.27 28.33 27.78 15.87 7.69 1.11 .68 1.54 0.00 0.00 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.32 7.69 6.12 17.05 41.63 29.37 7.94 3.08 0.00 0.00 1.54 1.64 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS. Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 0.00 .07 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 .07 0.00 .07 0.00 2 0.00 .07 .26 .26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 0.00 0.00 .07 .13 .07 .13 .07 1.12 3 .73 .73 1.25 .59 .46 .53 .13 .33 .26 .26 .26 .26 .59 1.58 1.19 .26 0.00 4 1.52 1.72 .86 1.12 1.12 1.32 .73 .73 .66 1.25 .79 1.72 1.98 4.69 1.52 2.11 0.00 5 1.39 .73 .46 1.19 1.45 3.23 4.09 5.41 3.56 2.05 2.11 1.78 3.10 3.23 1.32 1.45 2.18 6 .07 0.00 0.00 .07 .07 .46 1.06 3.17 4.36 2.31 .66 .33 .07 .07 .07 0.00 0.00 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .40 .46 .40 1.98 6.40 2.44 .33 .13 0.00 0.00 .07 .07 0.00 AVERAGE WIND SPEED (INVERSE WEIGHTED) BY INDEX AND DIRECTION (IN MPH) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.00 4.00 0.00 1.00 2 0.00 10.00 4.10 5.51 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 1.33 4.00 4.20 2.00 3 5.12 4.26 4.51 3.80 4.02 5.24 3.43 4.48 4.44 4.00 3.69 5.05 7.32 5.56 4.33 3.12 4 4.15 4.21 3.48 2.37 2.67 3.57 5.14 3.24 2.86 2.70 2.75 3.30 5.47 5.81 5.12 3.99 5 4.20 3.39 2.01 2.17 2.11 2.62 2.42 2.37 2.54 1.92 2.52 3.49 3.83 4.97 3.18 3.06 6 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 3.02 2.58 2.75 2.71 2.19 1.86 2.73 3.00 7.00 15.00 0.00 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.86 3.50 1.85 2.74 2.58 2.23 2.86 1.71 0.00 0.00 5.00 7.00 (AVERAGE INVERSE SPEED) 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 .50 0.00 0.00 0.00 .33 .25 0.00 1.00 2 0.00 .10 .24 .18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .20 0.00 0.00 .50 .75 .25 .24 .50 3 .20 .23 .22 .26 .25 .19 .29 .22 .22 .25 .27 .20 .14 .18 .23 .32 4 .24 .24 .29 .42 .37 .28 .19 .31 .35 .37 .36 .30 .18 .17 .20 .25 5 .24 .29 .50 .46 .47 .38 .41 .42 .39 .52 .40 .29 .26 .20 .31 .33 6 .50 0.00 0.00 .50 .50 .33 .39 .36 .37 .46 .54 .37 .33 .14 .07 0.00 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .35 .29 .54 .36 .39 .45 .35 .58 0.00 0.00 .20 .14 2A.1-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 SEASON INDEX=3 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. HOURLY TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 1952 Hour In Percent of Total OBS In Percent of Hourly OBS Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 2.61 1.08 .41 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.44 62.20 25.61 9.76 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 2.77 .67 .77 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 65.06 15.66 18.07 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 2.77 .87 .51 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.41 65.06 20.48 12.05 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 2.56 1.08 .51 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.41 60.24 25.30 12.05 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 2.72 .77 .67 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.22 64.63 18.29 15.85 6 0.00 0.00 .10 .10 2.92 .61 .46 0.00 0.00 2.44 2.44 69.51 14.63 10.98 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.97 .82 .36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 71.60 19.75 8.64 8 0.00 0.00 .05 .31 2.87 .67 .26 0.00 0.00 1.23 7.41 69.14 16.05 6.17 9 0.00 .41 0.00 .20 3.38 .05 .10 0.00 9.88 0.00 4.94 81.48 1.23 2.47 10 .05 .20 .10 .77 2.77 .05 .05 1.28 5.13 2.56 19.23 69.23 1.28 1.28 11 0.00 .31 .20 .77 2.72 0.00 .10 0.00 7.50 5.00 18.75 66.25 0.00 2.50 12 .05 .10 .10 .87 2.72 0.00 .05 1.32 2.63 2.63 22.37 69.74 0.00 1.32 13 .05 .05 .20 .92 2.77 0.00 0.00 1.28 1.28 5.13 23.08 69.23 0.00 0.00 14 0.00 0.00 .10 1.69 2.36 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.47 40.74 56.79 0.00 0.00 15 0.00 0.00 .36 1.13 2.56 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.64 27.16 61.73 2.47 0.00 16 .05 .10 .05 1.18 2.77 0.00 0.00 1.23 2.47 1.23 28.40 66.67 0.00 0.00 17 0.00 .26 .10 .92 2.77 .10 0.00 0.00 6.17 2.47 22.22 66.67 2.47 0.00 18 0.00 0.00 .10 .61 2.92 .15 .20 0.00 0.00 2.56 15.38 73.08 3.85 5.13 19 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 2.77 .41 1.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.20 65.06 9.64 24.10 20 0.00 0.00 .05 .10 2.46 .56 1.02 0.00 0.00 1.22 2.44 58.54 13.41 24.39 21 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 2.61 .51 1.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.19 60.71 11.90 26.19 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 .20 2.15 .87 1.02 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.82 50.60 20.48 24.10 23 0.00 .05 0.00 .05 2.51 .61 1.08 0.00 1.19 0.00 1.19 58.32 14.29 25.00 24 0.00 0.00 0.00 .15 2.56 .72 .87 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.57 59.52 16.66 20.24 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS.) Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
.20 1.49 1.54 10.50 64.96 10.71 10.60 AVERAGE WIND SPEED FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN MPH)
Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Speed 9.8 .3 6.0 7.6 5.8 3.6 3.3 WIND ROSE FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN PERCENT OF EACH INDEX TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 25.00 0.00 25.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.45 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 89.66 3 6.67 13.33 3.33 6.67 6.67 6.67 23.33 0.00 3.33 0.00 3.33 3.33 6.67 3.33 10.00 3.33 0.00 4 2.44 2.93 4.39 2.44 6.83 7.80 2.93 3.41 1.95 2.44 3.90 8.78 16.59 17.56 10.24 5.37 0.00 5 1.58 1.42 1.34 2.76 4.73 5.99 7.57 9.15 3.94 3.23 5.13 14.27 13.49 8.75 4.81 7.18 4.65 6 .96 0.00 .48 3.35 6.70 12.44 16.75 22.97 15.31 6.70 2.39 5.26 2.87 .96 1.44 1.44 0.00 7 .48 .48 1.45 3.38 6.28 6.76 14.98 24.15 22.71 13.53 1.93 .97 1.45 .48 .48 .48 0.00 2A.1-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 SEASON INDEX=3 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 1952 GROSS WIND ROSE (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL (OBS) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1.54 1.49 1.59 2.92 5.28 6.86 9.02 11.32 6.86 4.51 4.35 10.96 11.07 7.79 4.61 5.48 4.35 Speed 5.1 4.7 4.8 3.8 4.2 4.6 3.7 3.6 3.1 2.9 3.9 6.6 9.0 10.4 8.8 6.4 0.0 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH WIND DIRECTION (IN PERCENT OF DIRECTION TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.18 .47 0.00 .66 1.11 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.75 0.00 0.00 .57 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 30.59 3 6.67 13.79 3.23 3.51 1.94 1.49 3.98 0.00 .75 0.00 1.18 .47 .93 .66 3.33 .93 0.00 4 16.67 20.69 29.03 8.77 13.59 11.94 3.41 3.17 2.99 5.68 9.41 8.41 15.74 23.68 23.33 10.28 0.00 5 66.67 62.07 54.84 61.40 58.25 56.72 54.55 52.49 37.31 46.59 76.47 84.58 79.17 73.03 67.78 85.05 69.41 6 6.67 0.00 3.23 12.28 13.59 19.40 19.89 21.72 23.88 15.91 5.88 5.14 2.78 1.32 3.33 2.80 0.00 7 3.33 3.45 9.68 12.28 12.62 10.45 17.61 22.62 35.07 31.82 4.71 .93 1.39 .66 1.11 .93 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS. Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .05 0.00 .05 .05 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.33 3 .10 .20 .05 .10 .10 .10 .36 0.00 .05 0.00 .05 .05 .10 .05 .15 .05 0.00 4 .26 .31 .46 .26 .72 .82 .31 .36 .20 .26 .41 .92 1.74 1.84 1.08 .56 0.00 5 1.02 .92 .87 1.79 3.07 3.89 4.92 5.94 2.56 2.10 3.33 9.27 8.76 5.69 3.13 4.66 3.02 6 .10 0.00 .05 .36 .72 1.33 1.79 2.46 1.64 .72 .26 .56 .31 .10 .15 .15 0.00 7 .05 .05 .15 .36 .67 .72 1.59 2.56 2.41 1.43 .20 .10 .15 .05 .05 .05 0.00 AVERAGE WIND SPEED (INVERSE WEIGHTED) BY INDEX AND DIRECTION (IN MPH) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 12.00 0.00 6.00 16.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 3.00 5.33 6.00 3.43 5.09 1.71 4.89 0.00 7.00 0.00 2.00 4.00 7.06 14.00 8.18 7.00 4 3.28 5.14 4.42 4.47 4.95 4.11 5.88 2.88 5.27 2.94 4.29 5.07 7.25 9.45 7.57 4.99 5 2.97 3.26 3.31 2.86 3.14 3.52 2.53 2.64 2.22 2.29 2.80 4.71 6.37 7.41 6.73 4.74 6 3.11 0.00 4.00 3.44 2.85 2.76 3.26 2.92 2.13 1.89 2.26 3.76 4.62 9.26 10.00 3.18 7 8.00 5.00 3.60 3.11 3.25 2.49 2.94 3.23 2.33 2.17 1.85 5.45 5.53 7.00 8.00 2.00 (AVERAGE INVERSE SPEED) 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .20 .08 0.00 .17 .06 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 0.00 0.00 .50 0.00 0.00 0.00 .50 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .33 .19 .17 .29 .20 .58 .20 0.00 .14 0.00 .50 .25 .14 .07 .12 .14 4 .31 .19 .23 .22 .20 .24 .17 .35 .19 .34 .23 .20 .14 .11 .13 .20 5 .34 .31 .30 .35 .32 .28 .39 .38 .45 .44 .36 .21 .16 .13 .15 .21 6 .32 0.00 .25 .29 .35 .36 .31 .34 .47 .53 .44 .27 .22 .11 .10 .31 7 .13 .20 .28 .32 .31 .40 .34 .31 .43 .46 .54 .18 .18 .14 .13 .50 2A.1-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 SEASON INDEX=4 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. HOURLY TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 1908 Hour In Percent of Total OBS In Percent of Hourly OBS Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 3.35 .52 .31 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 79.01 12.35 7.41 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.62 .37 .26 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 85.19 8.64 6.17 3 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 3.41 .26 .47 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.25 81.25 6.25 11.25 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 3.30 .42 .37 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.50 78.75 10.00 8.75 5 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16 3.67 .10 .26 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.75 87.50 2.50 6.25 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 3.25 .58 .21 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.53 78.48 13.92 5.06 7 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 3.51 .21 .21 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.60 87.01 5.19 5.19 8 0.00 0.00 .05 .16 3.51 .10 .10 0.00 0.00 1.33 4.00 89.33 2.67 2.67 9 0.00 .10 0.00 .16 3.56 .05 .10 0.00 2.63 0.00 3.95 89.47 1.32 2.63 10 .05 0.00 .05 .31 3.35 0.00 .10 1.35 0.00 1.35 8.11 86.49 0.00 2.70 11 .05 0.00 .05 .52 3.35 0.00 0.00 1.32 0.00 1.32 13.16 84.21 0.00 0.00 12 0.00 .05 0.00 .84 3.14 .10 0.00 0.00 1.27 0.00 20.25 75.95 2.53 0.00 13 .05 0.00 0.00 .47 3.56 0.00 .05 1.27 0.00 0.00 11.39 86.08 0.00 1.27 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .89 3.30 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 21.25 78.75 0.00 0.00 15 0.00 .05 .05 .58 3.56 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 1.23 13.58 83.95 0.00 0.00 16 0.00 .05 0.00 .42 3.77 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 0.00 9.88 88.89 0.00 0.00 17 0.00 .05 .05 .21 3.88 .05 0.00 0.00 1.23 1.23 4.94 91.36 1.23 0.00 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 3.62 .31 .26 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 85.19 7.41 6.17 19 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 3.25 .42 .47 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.47 76.54 9.88 11.11 20 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16 3.30 .37 .42 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 77.78 8.64 9.88 21 .05 0.00 0.00 .05 3.56 .26 .31 1.23 0.00 0.00 1.23 83.95 6.17 7.41 22 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 3.41 .52 .26 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.23 80.25 12.35 6.17 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.46 .52 .31 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 80.49 12.20 7.32 24 0.00 0.00 0.00 .10 3.35 .52 .26 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.47 79.01 12.35 6.17 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS.) Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
.21 .31 .26 5.66 83.07 5.71 4.77 AVERAGE WIND SPEED FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN MPH)
Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Speed 4.5 2.0 9.0 10.3 7.4 3.5 3.6 WIND ROSE FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN PERCENT OF EACH INDEX TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 25.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 83.33 3 20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 0.00 20.00 20.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 20.00 0.00 0.00 4 .93 .93 4.63 3.70 1.85 3.70 .93 0.00 0.00 .93 2.78 6.48 21.30 30.56 18.52 2.78 0.00 5 1.39 .57 1.58 3.47 6.69 4.29 3.72 3.72 3.22 3.09 4.10 11.29 24.73 17.85 5.05 5.11 .13 6 0.00 0.00 .92 1.83 8.26 17.43 15.60 28.44 12.84 5.50 .92 3.67 1.83 1.83 .92 0.00 0.00 7 1.10 0.00 0.00 7.69 12.09 12.09 16.48 15.38 18.68 3.30 2.20 3.30 5.49 2.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.1-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 SEASON INDEX=4 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 1908 GROSS WIND ROSE (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL (OBS) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1.31 .52 1.68 3.56 6.71 5.35 4.87 5.56 4.30 3.14 3.77 10.12 22.22 16.77 5.35 4.40 .37 Speed 6.1 5.0 3.8 4.1 5.2 4.2 3.3 3.2 3.4 3.6 4.4 6.0 9.2 11.4 10.9 8.0 0.0 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH WIND DIRECTION (IN PERCENT OF DIRECTION TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 3.13 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.08 .94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 0.00 0.00 0.00 71.43 3 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .94 0.00 1.67 1.39 0.00 0.00 0.00 .98 0.00 0.00 4 4.00 10.00 15.63 5.88 1.56 3.92 1.08 0.00 0.00 1.67 4.17 3.63 5.42 10.31 19.61 3.57 0.00 5 88.00 90.00 78.13 80.88 82.81 66.67 63.44 55.66 62.20 81.67 90.28 92.75 92.45 88.44 78.43 96.43 28.57 6 0.00 0.00 3.13 2.94 7.03 18.63 18.28 29.25 17.07 10.00 1.39 2.07 .47 .62 .98 0.00 0.00 7 4.00 0.00 0.00 10.29 8.59 10.78 16.13 13.21 20.73 5.00 2.78 1.55 1.18 .62 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS. Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .26 3 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 .05 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 4 .05 .05 .26 .21 .10 .21 .05 0.00 0.00 .05 .16 .37 1.21 1.73 1.05 .16 0.00 5 1.15 .47 1.31 2.88 5.56 3.56 3.09 3.09 2.67 2.57 3.41 9.38 20.55 14.83 4.19 4.25 .10 6 0.00 0.00 .05 .10 .47 1.00 .89 1.62 .73 .31 .05 .21 .10 .10 .05 0.00 0.00 7 .05 0.00 0.00 .37 .58 .58 .79 .73 .89 .16 .10 .16 .26 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 AVERAGE WIND SPEED (INVERSE WEIGHTED) BY INDEX AND DIRECTION (IN MPH) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.00 3.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 12.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.00 0.00 7.00 8.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 14.00 0.00 4 1.00 6.00 3.75 3.12 6.00 7.16 3.00 0.00 0.00 7.00 5.68 5.51 10.16 11.64 9.48 7.58 5 3.14 4.54 2.67 3.48 3.24 2.78 2.74 2.83 2.69 2.55 3.59 4.33 7.27 8.83 8.33 5.20 6 0.00 0.00 1.00 2.40 2.93 2.86 2.03 2.34 2.48 2.79 3.00 4.75 7.50 10.00 13.00 0.00 7 2.00 0.00 0.00 2.56 4.13 2.66 2.28 2.60 2.91 1.89 3.75 2.57 3.70 1.85 0.00 0.00 (AVERAGE INVERSE SPEED) 1 0.00 0.00 .25 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 .33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .20 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 .08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .25 0.00 .14 .13 0.00 0.00 0.00 .07 0.00 4 1.00 .17 .27 .32 .17 .14 .33 0.00 0.00 .14 .18 .18 .10 .09 .11 .13 5 .32 .22 .37 .29 .31 .36 .36 .35 .37 .39 .28 .23 .14 .11 .12 .19 6 0.00 0.00 1.00 .42 .34 .35 .49 .43 .40 .36 .33 .21 .13 .10 .08 0.00 7 .50 0.00 0.00 .39 .24 .38 .44 .38 .34 .53 .27 .39 .27 .54 0.00 0.00 2A.1-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 ANNUAL AVERAGE 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. HOURLY TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 7223 Hour In Percent of Total OBS In Percent of Hourly OBS Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 .01 0.00 0.00 .12 2.62 .78 .71 .33 0.00 0.00 2.94 61.76 18.30 16.66 2 .01 0.00 0.00 .07 2.84 .65 .68 .33 0.00 0.00 1.63 66.78 15.31 15.96 3 0.00 0.00 .01 .06 2.85 .62 .69 0.00 0.00 .33 1.31 67.32 14.71 16.34 4 .01 0.00 .01 .06 2.69 .84 .64 .33 0.00 .33 1.30 63.19 19.87 14.98 5 .01 0.00 .03 .10 2.84 .72 .53 .33 0.00 .66 2.30 67.21 17.05 12.46 6 0.00 0.00 .03 .11 2.88 .65 .54 0.00 0.00 .66 2.63 68.42 15.46 12.83 7 .03 .01 0.00 .10 3.03 .60 .37 .67 .33 0.00 2.34 73.24 14.38 9.03 8 .03 0.00 .04 .33 3.16 .35 .19 .68 0.00 1.01 8.11 77.03 8.45 4.73 9 .01 .37 .08 .50 2.94 .04 .11 .34 9.22 2.05 12.29 72.35 1.02 2.73 10 .06 .14 .21 .78 2.67 .03 .07 1.40 3.51 5.26 19.65 67.72 .70 1.75 11 .01 .11 .21 .97 2.64 .03 .06 .34 2.75 5.15 24.05 65.64 .69 1.37 12 .03 .08 .32 .98 2.53 .04 .03 .69 2.07 7.93 24.48 63.10 1.03 .69 13 .04 .04 .30 .97 2.70 0.00 .01 1.02 1.02 7.48 23.81 66.33 0.00 .34 14 .01 .07 .37 1.32 2.37 0.00 0.00 .33 1.67 9.03 31.77 57.19 0.00 0.00 15 .03 .07 .47 1.07 2.48 .03 .01 .67 1.67 11.33 25.66 59.66 .67 .33 16 .01 .10 .37 1.01 2.70 0.00 0.00 .33 2.31 8.91 24.09 64.36 0.00 0.00 17 0.00 .10 .30 1.02 2.73 .04 0.00 0.00 2.31 7.26 24.42 65.02 .99 0.00 18 0.00 .01 .18 .82 2.87 .15 .12 0.00 .33 4.33 19.66 69.00 3.67 3.00 19 0.00 0.00 .01 .57 2.99 .22 .43 0.00 0.00 .33 13.44 70.82 5.25 10.16 20 0.00 0.00 .04 .26 3.02 .37 .53 0.00 0.00 .98 6.23 71.48 8.85 12.46 21 .01 0.00 .01 .12 2.77 .46 .87 .33 0.00 .33 2.93 65.15 10.75 20.52 22 .01 0.00 0.00 .14 2.55 .64 .87 .33 0.00 0.00 3.29 60.53 15.13 20.72 23 .01 .01 .01 .03 2.66 .61 .91 .33 .33 .33 .65 62.54 14.33 21.50 24 0.00 0.00 .01 .10 2.66 .66 .82 0.00 0.00 .33 2.28 62.54 15.64 19.22 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS.) Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
.36 1.12 3.05 11.59 66.16 8.53 9.19 AVERAGE WIND SPEED FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN MPH)
Index 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Speed 5.5 1.9 6.2 6.8 6.2 3.3 3.2 WIND ROSE FOR EACH TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX (IN PERCENT OF EACH INDEX TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 15.38 7.69 3.85 3.85 7.69 7.69 7.69 3.85 3.85 7.69 15.38 7.69 3.85 3.85 0.00 2 0.00 1.23 6.17 6.17 0.00 0.00 3.70 1.23 1.23 0.00 1.23 1.23 3.70 2.47 4.94 1.23 65.43 3 6.82 6.82 9.55 5.91 5.45 5.00 5.45 5.00 4.55 3.18 3.64 4.09 5.91 15.00 11.36 2.27 0.00 4 4.54 4.42 4.30 3.82 4.78 5.85 3.11 2.87 2.03 3.23 3.23 7.17 13.02 20.91 9.20 7.53 0.00 5 2.16 1.90 1.84 4.18 6.11 6.21 5.59 6.49 4.00 3.29 4.29 9.73 16.84 13.35 4.90 6.40 2.72 6 .65 0.00 .32 1.79 4.87 10.71 12.99 23.05 21.27 11.36 3.57 4.55 1.95 1.30 .81 .81 0.00 7 .60 .15 .60 2.41 6.33 7.08 9.19 18.52 29.67 15.06 3.16 2.56 2.26 1.05 .45 .90 0.00 2A.1-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 ANNUAL AVERAGE 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. TOTAL NO. OF OBS = 7223 GROSS WIND ROSE (IN PERCENT OF TOTAL (OBS) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 2.27 2.01 2.22 3.86 5.77 6.52 6.24 8.49 7.60 5.01 3.95 8.06 13.30 11.98 4.83 5.36 2.53 Speed 5.4 5.1 4.7 4.3 4.8 4.4 3.5 3.3 3.1 3.0 3.8 5.8 8.7 9.9 8.9 6.7 0.0 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION FOR EACH WIND DIRECTION (IN PERCENT OF DIRECTION TOTAL) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 2.50 .72 .24 .21 .44 .33 .36 .28 .35 .34 .42 .23 .29 .26 0.00 2 0.00 .69 3.13 1.79 0.00 0.00 .67 .16 .18 0.00 .35 .17 .31 .23 1.15 .26 28.96 3 9.15 10.34 13.12 4.66 2.88 2.34 2.66 1.79 1.82 1.93 2.81 1.55 1.35 3.82 7.16 1.29 0.00 4 23.17 25.52 22.50 11.47 9.59 10.40 5.76 3.92 3.10 7.46 9.47 10.31 11.34 20.23 22.06 16.28 0.00 5 62.80 62.76 55.00 71.68 70.02 63.06 59.20 50.57 34.79 43.37 71.93 79.90 83.77 73.76 67.05 79.06 71.04 6 2.44 0.00 1.25 3.94 7.19 14.01 17.74 23.16 23.86 19.34 7.72 4.81 1.25 .92 1.43 1.29 0.00 7 2.44 .69 2.50 5.73 10.07 9.98 13.53 20.07 35.88 27.62 7.37 2.92 1.56 .81 .86 1.55 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY INDEX DISTRIBUTION IN PERCENT OF TOTAL OBS. Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N Calm 1 0.00 0.00 .06 .03 .01 .01 .03 .03 .03 .01 .01 .03 .06 .03 .01 .01 0.00 2 0.00 .01 .07 .07 0.00 0.00 .04 .01 .01 0.00 .01 .01 .04 .03 .06 .01 .73 3 .21 .21 .29 .18 .17 .15 .17 .15 .14 .10 .11 .12 .18 .46 .35 .07 0.00 4 .53 .51 .50 .44 .55 .68 .36 .33 .24 .37 .37 .83 1.51 2.42 1.07 .87 0.00 5 1.43 1.26 1.22 2.77 4.04 4.11 3.70 4.29 2.64 2.17 2.84 6.44 11.14 8.83 3.24 4.24 1.80 6 .06 0.00 .03 .15 .42 .91 1.11 1.97 1.81 .97 .30 .39 .17 .11 .07 .07 0.00 7 .06 .01 .06 .22 .58 .65 .84 1.70 2.73 1.38 .29 .24 .21 .10 .04 .08 0.00 AVERAGE WIND SPEED (INVERSE WEIGHTED) BY INDEX AND DIRECTION (IN MPH) Index NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 0.00 0.00 3.33 4.50 5.00 3.00 8.00 3.43 1.33 1.00 5.00 6.00 5.59 4.80 16.00 1.00 2 0.00 10.00 4.38 5.60 0.00 0.00 3.56 5.00 5.00 0.00 2.00 2.00 1.89 6.22 5.75 2.00 3 5.04 4.50 4.68 3.88 4.41 3.94 4.90 4.64 4.28 2.65 3.96 4.69 7.88 6.15 5.01 3.51 4 3.82 4.38 4.04 2.95 3.68 3.75 4.55 3.42 3.16 2.68 3.39 4.26 6.64 7.47 6.71 4.69 5 3.38 3.70 3.16 3.40 3.36 3.10 2.44 2.54 2.44 2.26 3.00 4.27 6.57 7.49 6.36 4.77 6 1.87 0.00 1.60 2.84 2.77 2.76 2.60 2.57 2.39 2.10 2.20 3.16 4.14 2.25 11.27 2.40 7 4.17 5.00 3.87 2.47 2.79 2.89 2.42 2.66 2.50 2.20 1.62 1.88 3.32 1.88 3.64 2.18 (AVERAGE INVERSE SPEED) 1 0.00 0.00 .30 .22 .20 .33 .12 .29 .75 1.00 .20 .17 .18 .21 .06 1.00 2 0.00 .10 .23 .18 0.00 0.00 .28 .20 .20 0.00 .50 .50 .53 .16 .17 .50 3 .20 .22 .21 .26 .23 .25 .20 .22 .23 .38 .25 .21 .13 .16 .20 .29 4 .26 .23 .25 .34 .27 .27 .22 .29 .32 .37 .30 .23 .15 .13 .15 .21 5 .30 .27 .32 .29 .30 .32 .41 .39 .41 .44 .33 .23 .15 .13 .16 .21 6 .54 0.00 .63 .35 .36 .36 .39 .39 .42 .48 .45 .32 .24 .44 .09 .42 7 .24 .29 .26 .41 .36 .35 .41 .38 .40 .45 .62 .53 .30 .53 .27 .46 2A.1-31
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 ANNUAL AVERAGE 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. CHI/Q FOR RELEASE HEIGHT OF 4.7000E+01 METERS (IN SEC PER CU METER) DIST, M NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S 2.0000E+02 4.2793E-09 6.0607E-09 6.0743E-08 3.0882E-08 1.0551E-08 1.5073E-08 2.2502E-08 2.5287E-08 4.0000E+02 5.8457E-08 6.3189E-08 1.2081E-07 9.0736E-08 6.0165E-08 6.6807E-08 6.6273E-08 5.9663E-08 6.0000E+02 1.0968E-07 1.0436E-07 1.4372E-07 1.4875E-07 1.4408E-07 1.6246E-07 1.3591E-07 1.4336E-07 8.0000E+02 1.5374E-07 1.3687E-07 1.6823E-07 2.2400E-07 2.6337E-07 2.9622E-07 2.7423E-07 3.0335E-07 1.2000E+03 1.8422E-07 1.5645E-07 1.8150E-07 2.9293E-07 3.8486E-07 4.3294E-07 4.3565E-07 4.9215E-07 1.6000E+03 1.7542E-07 1.4612E-07 1.6749E-07 2.8920E-07 3.9410E-07 4.4658E-07 4.6362E-07 5.3189E-07 2.4000E+03 1.3765E-07 1.1212E-07 1.2832E-07 2.3425E-07 3.3041E-07 3.8166E-07 4.0841E-07 4.8230E-07 3.2000E+03 1.0591E-07 8.4984E-08 9.7661E-08 1.8287E-07 2.6302E-07 3.0914E-07 3.3620E-07 4.0644E-07 4.0000E+03 8.3330E-08 6.6099E-08 7.6324E-08 1.4521E-07 2.1179E-07 2.5237E-07 2.7750E-07 3.4183E-07 4.8000E+03 6.7294E-08 5.2885E-08 6.1352E-08 1.1813E-07 1.7424E-07 2.0984E-07 2.3274E-07 2.9118E-07 5.6000E+03 5.5626E-08 4.3374E-08 5.0542E-08 9.8305E-08 1.4640E-07 1.7775E-07 1.9860E-07 2.5182E-07 6.4000E+03 4.6897E-08 3.6322E-08 4.2502E-08 8.3414E-08 1.2529E-07 1.5307E-07 1.7214E-07 2.2085E-07 7.2000E+03 4.0198E-08 3.0950E-08 3.6358E-08 7.1950E-08 1.0891E-07 1.3371E-07 1.5125E-07 1.9607E-07 8.0000E+03 3.4939E-08 2.6760E-08 3.1552E-08 6.2922E-08 9.5917E-08 1.1821E-07 1.3443E-07 1.7590E-07 8.8000E+03 3.0729E-08 2.3424E-08 2.7715E-08 5.5672E-08 8.5415E-08 1.0558E-07 1.2066E-07 1.5921E-07 9.6000E+03 2.7302E-08 2.0722E-08 2.4599E-08 4.9748E-08 7.6781E-08 9.5129E-08 1.0922E-07 1.4519E-07 1.0400E+04 2.4469E-08 1.8500E-08 2.2028E-08 4.4835E-08 6.9578E-08 8.6366E-08 9.9572E-08 1.3327E-07 1.1200E+04 2.2098E-08 1.6647E-08 1.9879E-08 4.0707E-08 6.3491E-08 7.8929E-08 9.1349E-08 1.2302E-07 1.2000E+04 2.0091E-08 1.5085E-08 1.8063E-08 3.7197E-08 5.8289E-08 7.2550E-08 8.4266E-08 1.1412E-07 1.2800E+04 1.8374E-08 1.3754E-08 1.6511E-08 3.4184E-08 5.3799E-08 6.7028E-08 7.8109E-08 1.0632E-07 1.4400E+04 1.5604E-08 1.1617E-08 1.4010E-08 2.9292E-08 4.6461E-08 5.7969E-08 6.7952E-08 9.3331E-08 1.5200E+04 1.4475E-08 1.0750E-08 1.2992E-08 2.7286E-08 4.3431E-08 5.4217E-08 6.3722E-08 8.7867E-08 1.6000E+04 1.3479E-08 9.9875E-09 1.2095E-08 2.5511E-08 4.0736E-08 5.0875E-08 5.9943E-08 8.2956E-08 1.6800E+04 1.2596E-08 9.3130E-09 1.1300E-08 2.3929E-08 3.8327E-08 4.7884E-08 5.6548E-08 7.8521E-08 1.7600E+04 1.1808E-08 8.7129E-09 1.0591E-08 2.2513E-08 3.6163E-08 4.5192E-08 5.3485E-08 7.4498E-08 1.8400E+04 1.1102E-08 8.1763E-09 9.9558E-09 2.1239E-08 3.4208E-08 4.2759E-08 5.0708E-08 7.0835E-08 1.9200E+04 1.0467E-08 7.6943E-09 9.3841E-09 2.0088E-08 3.2436E-08 4.0551E-08 4.8181E-08 6.7485E-08 2.0000E+04 9.8918E-09 7.2594E-09 8.8673E-09 1.9044E-08 3.0822E-08 3.8540E-08 4.5873E-08 6.4413E-08 2.0800E+04 9.3701E-09 6.8655E-09 8.3984E-09 1.8093E-08 2.9348E-08 3.6701E-08 4.3757E-08 6.1587E-08 2.1600E+04 8.8948E-09 6.5074E-09 7.9714E-09 1.7223E-08 2.7997E-08 3.5015E-08 4.1813E-08 5.8978E-08 2.2400E+04 8.4605E-09 6.1807E-09 7.5813E-09 1.6426E-08 2.6754E-08 3.3463E-08 4.0020E-08 5.6564E-08 2.3200E+04 8.0622E-09 5.8817E-09 7.2237E-09 1.5693E-08 2.5609E-08 3.2032E-08 3.8362E-08 5.4325E-08 2.4000E+04 7.6961E-09 5.6073E-09 6.8949E-09 1.5018E-08 2.4549E-08 3.0708E-08 3.6826E-08 5.2243E-08 5.0000E+04 2.9337E-09 2.0910E-09 2.6241E-09 5.9722E-09 1.0044E-08 1.2558E-08 1.5382E-08 2.2399E-08 1.0000E+05 1.3610E-09 9.6914E-10 1.2134E-09 2.7577E-09 4.6229E-09 5.8092E-09 7.0962E-09 1.0243E-08 2A.1-32
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 ANNUAL AVERAGE 13 MO. DATA 1 DUQUESNE - BEAVER VALLEY - (9/5/69 - 9/5/70) REL. HT 150 FT. CHI/Q FOR RELEASE HEIGHT OF 4.7000E+01 METERS (IN SEC PER CU METER) DIST, M SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 2.0000E+02 5.5631E-08 3.6960E-08 1.5877E-08 2.0158E-08 4.6173E-08 2.5611E-08 1.8083E-08 4.1553E-08 4.0000E+02 7.0732E-08 7.0347E-08 5.5429E-08 6.6166E-08 9.4125E-08 1.2751E-07 1.0491E-07 6.8222E-08 6.0000E+02 1.1481E-07 1.3367E-07 1.1485E-07 1.6964E-07 2.0138E-07 2.5035E-07 1.5705E-07 1.3843E-07 8.0000E+02 2.1204E-07 2.2716E-07 2.0577E-07 3.2198E-07 3.6891E-07 3.7406E-07 2.0121E-07 2.3066E-07 1.2000E+03 3.3066E-07 3.2518E-07 3.0038E-07 4.7718E-07 5.3890E-07 4.7159E-07 2.2887E-07 3.1501E-07 1.6000E+03 3.5978E-07 3.3847E-07 3.0836E-07 4.8888E-07 5.4822E-07 4.5682E-07 2.1409E-07 3.1345E-07 2.4000E+03 3.3618E-07 2.9850E-07 2.5985E-07 4.0767E-07 4.5163E-07 3.6248E-07 1.6493E-07 2.5386E-07 3.2000E+03 2.9153E-07 2.4923E-07 2.0771E-07 3.2239E-07 3.5347E-07 2.7965E-07 1.2540E-07 1.9740E-07 4.0000E+03 2.5165E-07 2.0918E-07 1.6781E-07 2.5788E-07 2.8025E-07 2.2014E-07 9.7786E-08 1.5601E-07 4.8000E+03 2.1978E-07 1.7858E-07 1.3845E-07 2.1076E-07 2.2725E-07 1.7777E-07 7.8409E-08 1.2629E-07 5.6000E+03 1.9472E-07 1.5518E-07 1.1661E-07 1.7590E-07 1.8833E-07 1.4693E-07 6.4437E-08 1.0455E-07 6.4000E+03 1.7479E-07 1.3697E-07 1.0002E-07 1.4953E-07 1.5907E-07 1.2388E-07 5.4061E-08 8.8242E-08 7.2000E+03 1.5864E-07 1.2248E-07 8.7106E-08 1.2912E-07 1.3654E-07 1.0619E-07 4.6146E-08 7.5712E-08 8.0000E+03 1.4528E-07 1.1070E-07 7.6849E-08 1.1298E-07 1.1882E-07 9.2318E-08 3.9965E-08 6.5867E-08 8.8000E+03 1.3402E-07 1.0095E-07 6.8541E-08 9.9988E-08 1.0461E-07 8.1217E-08 3.5039E-08 5.7982E-08 9.6000E+03 1.2438E-07 9.2733E-08 6.1700E-08 8.9348E-08 9.3032E-08 7.2182E-08 3.1043E-08 5.1559E-08 1.0400E+04 1.1602E-07 8.5713E-08 5.5984E-08 8.0509E-08 8.3456E-08 6.4718E-08 2.7753E-08 4.6249E-08 1.1200E+04 1.0868E-07 7.9643E-08 5.1146E-08 7.3074E-08 7.5433E-08 5.8472E-08 2.5007E-08 4.1801E-08 1.2000E+04 1.0219E-07 7.4338E-08 4.7006E-08 6.6749E-08 6.8637E-08 5.3183E-08 2.2689E-08 3.8035E-08 1.2800E+04 9.6385E-08 6.9661E-08 4.3429E-08 6.1315E-08 6.2821E-08 4.8660E-08 2.0712E-08 3.4812E-08 1.4400E+04 8.6457E-08 6.1789E-08 3.7570E-08 5.2492E-08 5.3429E-08 4.1361E-08 1.7533E-08 2.9608E-08 1.5200E+04 8.2174E-08 5.8445E-08 3.5147E-08 4.8874E-08 4.9598E-08 3.8385E-08 1.6241E-08 2.7486E-08 1.6000E+04 7.8265E-08 5.5420E-08 3.2990E-08 4.5671E-08 4.6218E-08 3.5761E-08 1.5104E-08 2.5613E-08 1.6800E+04 7.4683E-08 5.2671E-08 3.1060E-08 4.2820E-08 4.3219E-08 3.3432E-08 1.4096E-08 2.3951E-08 1.7600E+04 7.1389E-08 5.0163E-08 2.9324E-08 4.0267E-08 4.0542E-08 3.1354E-08 1.3200E-08 2.2468E-08 1.8400E+04 6.8351E-08 4.7866E-08 2.7755E-08 3.7972E-08 3.8141E-08 2.9492E-08 1.2397E-08 2.1138E-08 1.9200E+04 6.5540E-08 4.5754E-08 2.6331E-08 3.5898E-08 3.5979E-08 2.7814E-08 1.1676E-08 1.9940E-08 2.0000E+04 6.2932E-08 4.3807E-08 2.5033E-08 3.4017E-08 3.4023E-08 2.6297E-08 1.1024E-08 1.8856E-08 2.0800E+04 6.0507E-08 4.2007E-08 2.3847E-08 3.2305E-08 3.2247E-08 2.4919E-08 1.0434E-08 1.7872E-08 2.1600E+04 5.8247E-08 4.0338E-08 2.2760E-08 3.0741E-08 3.0629E-08 2.3664E-08 9.8961E-09 1.6975E-08 2.2400E+04 5.6136E-08 3.8786E-08 2.1759E-08 2.9307E-08 2.9149E-08 2.2516E-08 9.4055E-09 1.6154E-08 2.3200E+04 5.4160E-08 3.7341E-08 2.0835E-08 2.7989E-08 2.7792E-08 2.1464E-08 8.9562E-09 1.5402E-08 2.4000E+04 5.2307E-08 3.5991E-08 1.9980E-08 2.6775E-08 2.6543E-08 2.0496E-08 8.5435E-09 1.4710E-08 5.0000E+04 2.3832E-08 1.5941E-08 8.2209E-09 1.0597E-08 1.0244E-08 7.8656E-09 3.2203E-09 5.6684E-09 1.0000E+05 1.0607E-08 7.1459E-09 3.7809E-09 4.9392E-09 4.8080E-09 3.6504E-09 1.4924E-09 2.6437E-09 2A.1-33
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 APPENDIX 2A.2 SECOND ANNUAL REPORT THE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM AT THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION September 5, 1970 - September 5, 1971 Report Date: April, 1972 Prepared for DUQUESNE LIGHT COMPANY Prepared by ENVIRONMENTAL SAFEGUARDS DIVISION NUS CORPORATION ROCKVILLE, MARYLAND 2A.2-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE I. INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
2A.2-5 II. SITE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM 2A.2-5 III. DATA REDUCTION 2A.2-6 IV. SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS 2A.2-6 A. Wind Roses and Speeds 2A.2-6 B. Dew Point Data 2A.2-8 C. Atmospheric Stability 2A.2-8 D. Lapse Rate Stability Classification 2A-2.9 V. DETERMINATION OF DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT AND EXTENDED RELEASE METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS 2A.2-9 A. Design Basis Accident Meteorology for Unit 1 2A-2.10 B. Design Basis Accident Meteorology for Unit 2 2A.2-12 VI. ANNUAL AVERAGE RELEASE METEOROLOGY 2A.2-12 REFERENCES 2A.2-14 APPENDIX - WINDVANE COMPUTER OUTPUTS 2A.2-26 2A.2-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF TABLES Table Page 2A.2-1
SUMMARY
OF DATA COLLECTION September 5, 1970 - September 5, 1971 2A.2-15 2A.2-2 AVERAGE WIND SPEED
SUMMARY
2A.2-16 2A.2-3 GREATER PITTSBURGH AIRPORT WIND SPEEDS 2A.2-17 2A.2-4 WIND SPEEDS VERSUS DIRECTION 2A.2-18 2A.2-5 QUANTITATIVE COMPARATIVE EFFECT OF SITE BUILDING UPON REDUCING WIND SPEEDS AT TWO LEVELS 2A-2.19 2A.2-6 STABILITY CATEGORIES 2A.2-20 2A.2-7 OCEAN BREEZE AND DRY GULCH STABILITY CLASSIFICATION 2A-2.21 2A.2-8 NATIONAL REACTOR TESTING STATION STABILITY CLASSIFICATION 2A.2-22 2A.2-9 CLASSIFICATION OF PASQUILL STABILITY CLASS BASED ON LAPSE TIME 2A.2-23 2A.2-10 JOINT FREQUENCY DATA 2A.2-24 2A.2-11 DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT AND EXTENDED RELEASE METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS 2A.2-25 2A.2-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 LIST OF FIGURES Figure Title 2A.2-1 SITE PLAN 2A.2-2 GROSS WIND ROSE - SEASON 1 - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.2-3 GROSS WIND ROSE - SEASON 2 - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.2-4 GROSS WIND ROSE - SEASON 3 - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.2-5 GROSS WIND ROSE - SEASON 4 - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.2-6 GROSS WIND ROSE - ANNUAL AVERAGE - 50 FOOT LEVEL 2A.2-7 GROSS WIND ROSE - ANNUAL AVERAGE - 150 FOOT LEVEL 2A.2-8 WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION 2A.1-9 PERSISTENCE WIND ROSE 2A.2-10 WIND DIRECTIONAL PERSISTENCE PROBABILITY 2A.2-11 ESTIMATION OF S FROM WIND DIRECTION RANGE 2A.2-12 BEAVER VALLEY ACCIDENT AND EXTENDED RELEASE DILUTION FACTORS 2A.2-13 ANNUAL AVERAGE /Qs 2A.2-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 I. INTRODUCTION AND
SUMMARY
This second annual report summarizes meteorological data collected at the Beaver Valley site over a year period extending from September 5, 1970 through September 5, 1971. The data was analyzed to develop parameters appropriate to dispersion estimates for the design basis accident, and for evaluation of the average dispersion conditions which would govern normal gaseous releases from the Beaver Valley Power Station. II. SITE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM On April 19, 1969, the following equipment was installed on the Beaver Valley meteorological tower: Bendix-Friez aerovanes with six-bladed propellers at the 50 and 150 foot levels and Bendix-Friez recorders Packard-Bell wind sensors (Models WS-101), at the 50 foot level and Esterline Angus recorders NUS Wind Variance Computer Due to a delay in vendor delivery, the Bristol temperature system, consisting of resistance temperature bulbs with Packard-Bell aspirated shields at the 50 and 150 foot levels, and multi-point Bristol recorder, was not installed until September 5, 1969. At this time, the Foxboro dew cell was also installed. All meteorological sensors were placed on booms on a tower located approximately 250 meters from the center of the Unit 1 containment structure. Although this location originally assured good exposure for the wind sensors the erection of offices, buildings and warehouses in the vicinity of the tower may have affected the wind speed data during the period September 5, 1970 through the present. An analysis of this question is presented in the section, "Site Meteorological Data Analysis". Figure 2A.1-1 shows the approximate location of the meteorological tower relative to the containment structure, though most of the indicated trees have since been cleared as construction has proceeded. The particular Bendix-Friez wind system chosen is rugged, yet has the lowest threshold, approximately 2 mph, of any such equipment. The supplementary Packard-Bell wind system with a threshold of 0.7 mph was particularly intended to help analyze wind and temperature statistics under low wind speed conditions. The recovery rate of the site data for these 52 weeks is presented in Table 2A.2-1, and is considered satisfactory for an accurate representation of the site conditions. Instrument performance was generally satisfactory during the one year period from September 5, 1970 to September 5, 1971. The primary instrument problems were with wind speed and direction transmitter of the Packard-Bell wind speed system whose respective failures resulted in a considerable amount of down time while replacement components were ordered. Other data loss from the Packard-Bell instrument resulted from the short-term "painting" of the wind recorder. Unfortunately, this characteristic is inherent in the Packard-Bell and other sensors which have a significant "dead band." 2A.2-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Operation of the Bendix-Friez instruments was quite good. The only malfunction occurred with the 150 foot recorder. Otherwise, the loss of Bendix data occurred solely from short-term inking problems, and in transmittal to NUS Corporation from the site. No malfunctions with the Bristol temperature system were observed; the only data loss resulted from occasional inking difficulties. The Foxboro dew cell was installed to gather data in support of the cooling towers; reduction of the dew cell data has shown that good dew-point data is available from April 2, 1970 through the remainder of this report period. Prior to April 1970 it appears that the dust from the construction site and corrosion interfered with the proper operation of the lithium chloride solution; the problem was solved by having a local representative of NUS Corporation clean the sensor on a weekly basis. III. DATA REDUCTION Data records from the wind sensors and the temperature and dew cell recorders were forwarded to NUS for reduction and analysis. Wind data were obtained both from the strip charts and the Variance Computer; however, in order to be consistent with analyses presented in the first annual report,(1) the results presented in this report are based upon the strip chart data. Wind records were examined and hourly data extracted representing wind speed and direction averages and wind direction range. Range was determined from the two second-most extreme gusts. This data was taken for the two levels of Bendix-Friez sensors and the Packard-Bell equipment at the 50 foot level. Temperature measurements for the 50 and 150 foot levels were recorded hourly, as were dew point data for the 50 foot level. The data was entered on punched cards and processed to yield the data summaries presented and discussed in the following sections. IV. SITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA ANALYSIS A. Wind Roses and Speeds Based on Bendix-Friex data from the 50 foot level, Figures 2A.2-2, 2A.2-3, 2A.2-4, 2A.2-5, and 2A.2-6. show the distribution of wind directions for the four seasons (Season 1: March through May, Season 2: June through August, Season 3: September through November, and Season 4: December through February) and the annual distribution. It is noted that in spring the winds from the northwest quadrant prevail. In summer, the wind directions from south-southeast to south-southwest predominate, along with a secondary maximum of winds from west-northwest. A season of transition, autumn, shows relatively high frequencies of winds from the south to southeast with a secondary maximum of winds from northwest. This pattern of prevailing winds probably reflects both the large scale wind flow from meteorological pressure systems. During the winter, winds from the northwest quadrant are dominant; the effect of the valley in channeling is evident in the high frequencies of winds from the north-northwest and northwest. As a result of the seasonal patterns, the annual wind roses exhibit a high frequency of winds from the northwest quadrant and from southerly directions. The distribution of wind directions at the 150 foot level, shown in Figure 2A.2-7, is somewhat more uniform, though still with prevailing winds from the northwest quadrant. 2A.2-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table 2A.2-2 shows the seasonal and annual average wind speeds for the 50 foot level based on both the Bendix-Friez and Packard-Bell data and the 150 foot level based on the Bendix data; these values are compared with those found previously. Speeds are determined over 15 minute averaging periods. It is noted that the season of highest wind speed is winter; whereas, the lowest wind speeds occur in summer. The average annual value of 4.7 mph at the 50 foot level is higher than the 3 mph value found by the Weather Bureau during the two-year site meteorological program conducted in Shippingport from 1955-1957 but lower than the annual average wind speed 5.5 mph found by the Bendix instruments during the previous year. The annual figure of 2.4 percent "calm" found by the Beaver Valley meteorological program compares with 8.5 percent found by the Weather Bureau from 1955-1957 and 2.5 percent noted during first year of the Beaver Valley meteorological program. Again, about two-thirds of the calms noted by the applicant occurred during the night; thus, if daytime calms are excluded, the overall frequency of calms is only 1.5 percent of all observations. The overall occurrence of calms as measured by the Packard-Bell instrument is only 2.5 percent. It is expected that the frequency of calms would be less as measured by the Packard-Bell than with the Bendix instrument because of the lower threshold and greater sensitivity of the Packard-Bell instrument. The somewhat lower average wind speed found at both the 50 and 150 foot levels during the period 1970-1971 compared to the period 1969-1970 was noted and investigated. Inasmuch as there was considerable construction activity upon the site, including 15-20 feet high urrounding the meteorological tower, it was decided to investigate whether or not this reduction in wind speed was likely to be attributable to the construction. The wind directions which were thought to be potentially affected by the presence of these temporary structures in the vicinity of the meteorological tower were from the north-northwest, northeast, southeast, south, southwest, west-southwest, west, west-northwest, northwest and north-northwest. Before performing a detailed analysis, however, it was decided to ascertain whether the wind speed reduction could be attributed to natural yearly variations of the synoptic meteorology. Thus in Table 2A.2-3 the average monthly wind speeds at Greater Pittsburgh Airport are presented from September 1969 through August 1971. It can be concluded that seasonally, as well as monthly, the gradient wind speeds were not lower during the period September 1970-August 1971 compared to September 1969-August 1970, with the exception of the summer season. However, this season will not be included in subsequent analysis inasmuch as substantial building construction around the meteorological tower during the summer of 1970 and the objective is to compare the seasonal winds before and after this period. Thus in comparing the gradient wind speeds during fall 1969 and fall 1970, and winter 1970 and winter 1971 and spring 1970 and 1971, there was no naturally occurring wind speed reduction during these periods at Greater Pittsburgh Airport. Thus it would appear that site construction of buildings and alteration of air flows has resulted in somewhat lower site wind speeds. Such an effect would be expected to be more prominent with respect to the 50 foot wind measurements than with respect to the 150 foot wind measurements. This appears to be the case in examining the gross seasonal average wind speeds but is further examined qualitatively at both levels by comparing the number of the ten wind directions (defined above) which have seasonally reduced wind speeds during the period September 1970-August 1971 compared to the period September 1969-August 1970. The seasonal wind speeds for each wind direction for both the 50 and 150 foot levels are presented in Table 2A.2-4 for these time periods. From this data the number of wind directions having higher, lower or similar wind speeds in the year following the building erection is compiled in Table 2A.2-5 for both the 50 and 150 foot levels. It is apparent that the effect is more pronounced at the lower level. 2A.2-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Figure 2A.2-8 shows the wind speed distribution at the Beaver Valley site based on the Bendix instrument at the 50 foot level. The median wind speeds are noted to be 3.7 and 4.7 mph, respectively; thus when the medians are compared to the mean wind speeds, it is obvious that the distribution of wind speeds is somewhat skewed towards the lower values. The longest observed wind directional persistence was for 24 hours from the north under slightly stable conditions. A persistence wind rose is presented in Figure 2A.2-9; a persistence probability plot is presented in Figure 2A.2-10. B. Dew Point Data As mentioned previously, essentially 100 percent dew point data recovery has been obtained since April 1, 1969, through the date of issue of this report, (April 1972). Thus approximately one year of site dew point is available for subsequent cooling tower effects analyses. Throughout the period a considerable amount of quality control was applied to the field data collection; the NUS representative who cleaned the dew cell data on a weekly basis also measured the ambient dew point temperature by using a sling psychrometer and the appropriate psychometric charts; the Foxboro dew cell values on the chart were almost always within 1.0 of the measured psychometric values. A comparison of dew point data taken at Greater Pittsburgh Airport with that taken at the Beaver Valley site shows that the dew points recorded on site are generally about 4 higher than those at the airport. C. Atmospheric Stability In the context of this report, atmospheric stability refers to the degree of turbulence present in the atmosphere. An "unstable" atmosphere is turbulent and results in good diffusion of waste gases injected into the atmosphere, whereas a "stable" atmosphere is relatively non-turbulent and results in poor diffusion. "Neutral" stability refers to an intermediate condition. Two basic methods of inferring atmospheric dispersion capability are generally available; the first is based on wind fluctuations; the second on temperature lapse rate. The first method uses a sensitive wind vane, preferably one which is free to move in both vertical and horizontal directions (a "bivane") to measure fluctuations in the wind direction in both planes, thus providing a measure of S and S, the standard deviations of horizontal and vertical wind direction fluctuations, respectively. However, bivanes are not sufficiently rugged to provide the reliable data recovery over long time periods necessary for long-term diffusion climatology programs. Several systems have been developed which determine the horizontal variance (S)2 from standard (horizontal only) wind direction sensors, and which can be related to atmospheric stability. The second method is the classical categorization of atmospheric stability based on vertical temperature structure, from which inferences of vertical diffusivity can be made. This method of course does not indicate diffusivity directly, nor does it account for differences in turbulence that may be introduced by surface roughness features. In view of the availability of both horizontal wind fluctuations, and vertical temperature difference data, and the significance of dispersion conditions in the design basis accident considerations, both measures of atmospheric stability were combined to provide the best estimates of horizontal and vertical plume dispersion. 2A.2-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Using the 50 foot level Bendix-Friez data, horizontal stability based on seven classes of S was determined, according to the classification scheme in Table 2A.2-6, from the range in horizontal wind direction over a 15 minute time period, based on methods presented by Slade(2) using the "second gust" range described earlier. This procedure is illustrated in Figure 2A.2-11 for some typical atmospheric conditions (arrows indicate the range of wind direction). If winds are "calm" or "non-steady" then the occurrence is classified as Pasquill B stability during the day and Pasquill E at night, as suggested by Slade.(3) To determine the joint frequency distribution of vertical temperature difference and horizontal variance all individual 15 minute time periods for which wind speed, S, and temperature difference data were available were processed by the NUS computer code AMET which computes the joint frequency of S and temperature classes for given wind speed groups and for all wind speeds. Nine wind speed groups were defined as listed and tabulated in the Appendix. Calms are not treated in the AMET code but as mentioned previously, occurred in 2.4 percent of the observations by the Bendix-Friez sensor and 0.25 percent by the Packard-Bell unit. D. Lapse Rate Stability Classification In order to determine the dispersion parameters for the 2-hour design basis accident, meteorological conditions are chosen for which calculated doses would not be exceeded more than 5 percent of the time. In order to select these based jointly on S and lapse rate, vertical dispersion parameters are needed based on temperature difference corresponding to those established using the horizontal variance classification presented above. Seventeen vertical temperature difference classes were arbitrarily defined for the purpose of categorizing these observations. In order to classify vertical dispersion parameters based on the lapse rate, a number of references in the literature were examined including the stability classification defined for Cape Kennedy and Vandenberg Air Force Base and presented in Table 2A.2-7(4). The most complete vertical stability classification system found in the literature is that used at the National Reactor Testing Station(5) as presented in Table 2A.2-8. It was noted that none of these classification systems define a G stability, however. Therefore, in the lapse rate stability classification system chosen, the "G" interval has been defined in accordance with the range of a "large inversion," as presented by Holland in Meteorology and Atomic Energy.(6) The ranges used are presented in Table 2A.2-9. V. DETERMINATION OF DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT AND EXTENDED RELEASE METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS Using the seven horizontal stability classes (A-G) and seven vertical stability classes (A-G) and the corresponding Sy and Sz values as presented in Meteorology and Atomic Energy(7), a computer code was used to determine the combinations of vertical and horizontal stability classes and wind speeds which result in a calculated /Q value such that its frequency when added to the frequency of calms (2.4 percent) would not occur more than 5 percent of the time at the site boundary. These calculations of /Q do not include a building wake effect since the objective was to find the meteorological conditions of stability and wind speed upon which the building wake correction is normally imposed, for the design basis accident. Thus the following equation is used for determination of the ordered values of /Q and the equivalent stability and wind speed conditions: 2A.2-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34
/Q = l/(3.14*SY*SZ*u) (1)
A. Design Basis Accident Meteorology for Unit 1 For unit number one, for the 0-2 hour period following the accident the design basis accident meteorology has been computed for a ground level release at the containment to a receptor at the nearest site boundary, 610 meters. A very conservative analysis includes the total calms, both daytime and nighttime, as found by the less responsive Bendix-Friez speed sensors to meet the 5 percent criterion. On this basis, the total occurrence of calms is 2.4 percent. Thus 5 percent less the 2.4 percent calms yields 2.6 percent, the percentage of time during which the design basis meteorological conditions may be exceeded. Thus from Table 2A.2-10, Joint Frequency Data, it is noted that 2.11 x 10-3 sec/m3 is the /Q exceeded 2.6 percent of the time; thus the equivalent design basis meteorological conditions corresponding to this value at 610 meters are Pasquill stability class "F" and wind speed 0.64 m/sec. A somewhat less conservative analysis would include only the 1.5 percent nighttime calms measured by the Bendix instrument; on this basis the /Q exceeded 3.5 percent of the time is 1.83 x 10-3 sec/m3; the design basis meteorological conditions are F and 0.73 m/sec. Finally, a more realistic analysis would include only the calms found by the more responsive Packard-Bell wind sensors. Whether or not all such calms (20 percent) or only the nighttime calms (.08 percent) are included, the resultant found from Table 2A.2-10 is 1.62 x 10-3 sec/m3; the equivalent design basis meteorological conditions are stability class F and 0.84 m/sec. These latter values are included in Table 2A.2-11, Design Basis Accident and Extended Release Meteorological Conditions, as being the recommended choice for the 0-2 hour period with an invariant wind. Now using the meteorological conditions of F and wind speed 0.84 m/sec the design basis accident meteorology /Q at the nearest site boundary, 610 m for the 0-2 hour period is computed from the following equation (including a building wake factor) to be equal to 7.8 x 10-4 sec/m3:
/Q = 1/((3.14*Sy*Sz + C*A)*u) (2) where:
= concentration (units/m3)
Q = source release rate (units/sec) Sy = horizontal diffusion parameter (m) Sz = vertical diffusion parameter (m) u = mean wind speed (m/sec) A = cross-sectional area of containment (1600m2) C = building shape factor = 0.5 (dimensionless) 2A.2-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 For the period 2-24 hr following the start of a release, it is assumed that the wind direction varies over one sector under F stability and 0.84 m/sec wind speed. Inasmuch as the longest observed onsite persistence under stable conditions (F stability) was one occurrence for 24 hours, this assumption is conservative. For the remaining time periods, it is noted that the assumed extended meteorological conditions are the same as presented in the Unit 1 FSAR based upon the 1969-1970 meteorological data. Thus, for the period from 24 - 96 hours, it is assumed that the mean wind direction is varying within the one sector of interest 50 percent of the time. During this time, the stability is assumed to be D with a 2.0 m/sec wind speed and F and a 0.9 m/sec wind speed. For the period from 4 to 30 days, meteorological conditions typical of the worst season have been chosen. These conditions, and those for the other time periods, are also presented in Table 2A.2-11. In addition to these assumed ground level design basis meteorological conditions, it is necessary to postulate for Unit 1 the design basis accident meteorology for the situation of an elevated release (47 m) from the top of the containment building to a receptor located upon a 47 m hill 760 m to the southeast of the containment. As discussed previously, it is necessary to find the /Q exceeded only five percent of the time. The diffusion equation for the situation in which the receptor is on the plume centerline at the same elevation as the release is as follows:
/Q = [1/(2*3.14*Sy*Sz*u)]*(1+exp(-0.5*
Z H **2)) (3) Sz where all terms are as previously defined and Z = height above ground of the receptor = H = 47 m. As the equation stands, it is rather difficult to develop a simple calculational technique to determine the /Q which is exceeded only 5 percent of the time, and the corresponding equivalent design basis meteorological conditions. However, by inspection it will be noted that equation (1) is a good approximation to equation (3). That is, in very unstable conditions, equation (3) becomes equal to equation (1) and under very stable conditions equation (3) overestimates equation (1) by a factor of 2. Therefore, in order to simplify the calculational technique, equation (1) was used to determine the design basis meteorological conditions, exactly as before. Thus again for a very conservative analysis including total calms, both daytime and nighttime measured by the less responsive instrument, the design basis meteorological conditions are F stability and 0.64 m/sec. Similarly, for a somewhat less conservative analysis including only the nighttime calms measured by the Bendix instrument, the design basis meteorological conditions are F and 0.73 m/sec. Finally for a more realistic analysis including only the calms found by the more responsive Packard-Bell instrument, the design basis meteorological conditions are stability F and 0.84 m/sec. 2A.2-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Using the design basis meteorological conditions stability class F and wind speed equal to 0.84 m/sec, the /Q for the elevated release to the elevated receptor is approximated by equation (1) without credit for a building wake effect and is equal to 1.1 x 10-3 sec/m3 at a distance of 760 m southeast of the reactor containment for the 0 - 2 hour period. The design basis accident meteorology for the other time periods is the same as before. B. Design Basis Accident Meteorology for Unit 2 As was the case for Unit 1, it is necessary to present design basis accident meteorology for Unit 2 by postulating both a ground level release to a ground level receptor at the nearest site boundary 456 m northeast of the site boundary and an elevated release from the top of the containment (47 m) to a receptor at an elevation of 47 m on a hill located 610 m southeast of the Unit 2 containment. Such an analysis is exactly the same as for Unit 1; thus, the design basis meteorological conditions are stability class F and wind speed 0.84 m/sec. Therefore, upon using equation (2) to calculate the design basis /Q for the 0 - 2 hour period following the accident for a ground level release to a ground level receptor at the nearest site boundary 456 m from the containment, the /Q is equal to 9.4 x 10-4 sec/m3. Using stability class F and 0.84 m/sec, the /Q from an elevated release of 47 m to an elevated receptor of 47 m located 610 m southeast of the containment is approximated by equation (1) and is equal to 1.6 x 10-3 sec/m3. The accident meteorology for both release cases for other time periods is the same as presented for Unit 1. The results of the calculations for the four time periods comprising the 30-day model are shown in Figure 2A.2-12 with curves of /Q versus distance. VI. ANNUAL AVERAGE RELEASE METEOROLOGY The annual average /Q for an elevated release is calculated according to the following equation: /Q = (((2/3.14)**0.5)*8/(3.14*D))*[SUM, i, 1, 7 ((Fi*fi*Ui)/ (Szi)*(EXP((-(Z-h)**2)/(2*Szi**2))
+EXP((-(Z+h)**2)/(2*Szi**2)))]
where:
= distance (m)
Ui = average reciprocal wind speed for sector of interest, sec per m3 Szi = vertical diffusion parameter for stability class i (m) Fi = fraction of time stability class i occurs h= height of stack (m) Z= vertical height above valley floor (m) fi = fraction of time wind direction is in sector of interest for stability class i In the calculation of /Q, Szi has been estimated from Pasquill stability curves(17); Fi*fi is based on the categorization of temperature difference previously discussed and found in Table 2A.2-9. (The value of Sz for G stability is defined as the Sz for class F, divided by SQRT (2.5)). 2A.2-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 The release of normal process gas is from a vent 522 ft (158 m) above the valley floor. Although it is possible that the process gas exit velocity and the buoyant cooling tower plume would cause the process gas plume to become more elevated than the release height, for a conservative estimate of the highest annual average /Q, no plume rise is assumed. Thus for a release height of 158 m, the highest annual average /Q is 1.42 x 10-6 sec/m3 for a receptor located 2,000 m southeast of the containment structure at an elevation 158 m above the valley floor. In addition, a /Q of approximately the same magnitude (1.3 x 10-6 sec/m3) was calculated for a receptor located 1,300 m southeast of the containment structure at an elevation of 158 m. Figure 2A.2-13 contains isopleths of ground level annual average /Q for release from the 158 m vent. WINDVANE computer outputs giving the raw data from which the above calculations are made are provided in the Appendix. 2A.2-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 References
- 1. Muschett, F. Douglas, "Annual Report - The Meteorological Program at the Beaver Valley Nuclear Power Station Site, September 5, 1969 - September 5, 1970", Prepared for Duquesne Light Company, NUS-737, December, 1970.
- 2. Slade, D. H., Meteorology and Atomic Energy, United States Atomic Energy Commission, Clearinghouse for Federal Scientific and Technical Information, Springfield, Virginia, 1968, p. 47.
- 3. Slade, D. H., "Dispersion Estimates From Pollutant Releases of a Few Seconds to 8 Hours in Duration", U.S. Weather Bureau, Washington, D. C., 1965, p. 15.
- 4. Haugen, D. A. and J. J. Fuquay, The Ocean Breeze and Dry Gulch Diffusion Programs, Vol. I. USAEC Report HW-78435 (Report AFCRL-63-791 (I)), Air Force Cambridge Research Laboratories and Hanford Atomic Products Operation, 1963.
- 5. Start, George E. and Markee, Earl H., "Relative Dose Factors from Long-Period Point Source Emissions of Atmospheric Pollutants", Proceedings USAEC Meteorological Information Meeting, 1967, p. 63.
- 6. United States Department of Commerce Weather Bureau, Meteorology and Atomic Energy, 1955, p. 54.
- 7. Slade, D. H., ed Meteorology and Atomic Energy, pp. 408-409.
- 8. Ibid., p. 409.
- 9. NUS Corporation, "Plume Dispersion Study and Evaluation of Ambient Air Quality Impact of the Cheswick Power Station", NUS-872 (In Preparation).
2A.2-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLES FOR APPENDIX 2A.2 TABLE 2A.2-1
SUMMARY
OF DATA COLLECTION September 5, 1970 - September 5, 1971 Recovery Rate Instrument Level (percent) Bendix-Friez 50 ft 94 Bendix-Friez 150 ft 83 Packard-Bell 50 ft 67 Bristol Temperature 50 ft 96 Bristol Temperature 150 ft 99 2A.2-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-2 AVERAGE WIND SPEED
SUMMARY
(mph) Bendix 50-foot Bendix 150-foot Packard-Bell 50-foot 1969-1970 1970-1971 1969-1970 1970-1971 1970-1971 Spring 5.7 5.1 6.4 7.4 4.0 Summer 4.2 3.3 4.1* 2.8 2.4 Fall 5.4 4.3 6.4 5.1 4.8 Winter 7.2 6.0 7.9 7.4 6.0 Annual Average 5.6 4.7 6.2 5.7 4.3
*It is doubtful that the average wind speed at 150 feet is actually lower than that for the 50-foot level during summer 1970; rather it is believed that, within the accuracy of the calculations, there is no significant difference between the two levels.
2A.2-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-3 GREATER PITTSBURGH AIRPORT WIND SPEEDS (mph) 1969 1970 1971 September 7.4 8.2 October 9.3 8.3 November 10.5 10.3 December 10.9 11.0 January 10.8 11.9 February 11.5 12.1 March 10.4 12.4 April 10.9 11.2 May 9.3 9.1 June 8.3 7.0 July 7.6 7.0 August 7.2 6.7 2A.2-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-4 WIND SPEEDS VERSUS DIRECTION 50-Foot Level (2111) (1949) (2149) (1898) (1795) (1934) (Number of Spring Spring Winter Winter Fall Fall Observations) 1971 1970 1970-71 1969-70 1970 1969 Wind Direction NNE 4.6 5.5 3.6 6.6 4.5 5.0 NE 3.6 5.2 3.3 5.0 3.0 4.8 E 3.7 5.2 3.2 4.1 2.9 3.8 SE 2.8 4.6 3.2 4.5 3.6 4.6 S 2.3 3.2 2.4 3.3 2.9 3.7 SW 2.2 2.9 2.8 3.7 2.9 3.0 WSW 2.9 3.8 2.5 4.4 3.2 4.1 W 4.9 5.1 4.5 6.2 4.3 6.6 WNW 6.9 8.5 7.5 9.2 6.2 9.0 NW 8.4 9.0 9.6 11.4 8.4 10.5 NNW 8.8 8.4 10.3 11.0 7.8 8.6 N 6.6 6.8 6.6 8.0 6.1 6.5 150-Foot Level (1763) (1810) (2061) (1843) (1386) (1813) (Number of Spring Spring Winter Winter Fall Fall Observations) 1971 1970 1970-71 1969-70 1970 1969 Wind Direction NNE 7.0 5.7 2.8 4.2 7.3 5.5 NE 4.8 5.7 4.4 4.8 5.1 5.0 E 5.0 4.5 4.6 4.6 3.9 4.7 SE 3.9 4.6 3.4 3.7 3.2 4.8 S 3.0 5.0 3.4 5.2 4.6 4.7 SW 5.1 6.4 4.1 6.7 4.1 7.2 WSW 4.8 8.2 4.2 9.3 4.6 8.9 W 5.8 9.8 5.7 11.7 4.2 10.2 WNW 9.6 8.0 9.3 11.8 8.1 9.4 NW 10.3 7.2 12.7 10.9 8.1 8.4 NNW 11.5 7.0 10.7 8.5 7.9 6.2 N 9.2 5.0 6.1 5.4 7.1 6.0 2A.2-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-5 QUANTITATIVE COMPARATIVE EFFECT OF SITE BUILDING UPON REDUCING WIND SPEEDS AT THE TWO LEVELS No. Higher* in No. Lower in No. Equal in Following Year Following Year Following Year 50 0 9 1 Fall 150 2 6 2 50 0 10 0 Winter 150 3 6 1 50 1 8 1 Spring 150 5 5 0
- Number of wind directions with higher winds for given season after building erection compared to before.
Number of wind directions with lower average speeds for given season after building erection compared to before. Number of wind directions with equal average wind speeds for given season after building erection compared to before. 2A.2-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-6 STABILITY CATEGORIES Range of Standard Stability Type Deviation Turbulence Type A = Extremely Unstable 22.5 High Atmospheric Turbulence B = Unstable 22.5 17.5 High Atmospheric Turbulence C = Slightly Unstable 17.5 12.5 High Atmospheric Turbulence D = Neutral 12.5 7.5 Moderate Atmospheric Turbulence E = Slightly Stable 7.5 3.8 Low Atmospheric Turbulence F = Stable 3.8 1.3 Low Atmospheric Turbulence G = Extremely Stable 1.3 Low Atmospheric Turbulence 2A.2-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-7 OCEAN BREEZE AND DRY GULCH STABILITY CLASSIFICATION(4) T = temperature at 54 ft minus temperature at 6 ft Category Range of Vertical Temperature Difference (-F) Very Unstable T -3.0 F Moderately Unstable -3.0 < T 0.0 F Moderately Stable 0 < T 3.0 F Very Stable T > 3.0 F 2A.2-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-8 NATIONAL REACTOR TESTING STATION STABILITY CLASSIFICATION Range of Vertical Temperature Category Gradient (F/100 Ft) A -1.1 or less B -0.5 to -1.0 C -0.1 to -0.4 D 0.0 to 0.4 E 0.5 to 1.0 F 1.1 or greater 2A.2-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-9 CLASSIFICATION OF PASQUILL STABILITY CLASS BASED ON LAPSE RATE Range of Vertical Temperature Category Gradient (F/1000 ft) A - Very Unstable T -16 B - Moderately Unstable -16 T < -13 C - Slightly Unstable -13 T < -7 D - Neutral - 7 T < -1 E - Slightly Stable - 1 T < 11 F - Moderately Stable 11 T < 20 G - Very Stable T 20 2A.2-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-10 JOINT FREQUENCY DATA Ordered Wind Horiz. Vert. Stability Unit 1 Condition Speed Stability /Q Freq. Cumulative 1 1.0 G G .05 .05 2 1.0 F G .21 .26 3 1.0 G F .08 .34 4 2.0 G G 0 .34 5 1.0 E G .73 1.07 6 1.0 F F .17 1.24 7 1.0 G E .04 1.28 8 1.0 D G .69 1.97 9 3.0 G G 0 1.97 10 2.0 F G .59 2.56 11 2.0 G F .02 2.58 12 1.0 G D 0 2.58
*2.11 x 10-3 13 1.0 E F .27 2.85 14 4.0 G G 0 2.85 15 1.0 F E .35 3.20
**1.83 x 103 16 2.0 E G 1.13 4.33 17 1.0 C G .29 4.62
***1.62 x 103 18 1.0 D F 19 3.0 F G 20 3.0 G F 21 4.0 G G 22 2.0 F F 23 2.0 G E
*using all Bendix calms; effective F and 0.64
**using only Bendix nighttime calms; effective F and 0.73
- using all PBell calms; effective and 0.84 2A.2-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE 2A.2-11 DESIGN BASIS ACCIDENT AND EXTENDED RELEASE METEOROLOGICAL CONDITIONS Pasquill Mean Wind Speed Period Class (m/sec) Fi*fi Wind Direction 0 - 24 hours F 0.9 1.0 Invariant 2 - 24 hours F 0.9 1.0 Sector Average 24 - 96 hours D 2.0 0.25 Sector Average F 0.9 0.25 Sector Average 4 days D 1.5 0.020 Sector Average 30 days E 1.0 0.020 Sector Average F 0.9 0.020 Sector Average G 1.4 0.025 Sector Average 2A.2-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 APPENDIX - WINDVANE COMPUTER OUTPUTS 2A.2-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 24 HOUR
SUMMARY
OF WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION DUQUESNE, BEAVER VALLEY, 50 FT. BENDIX, 9/5/70-9/5/71 TOTAL NUMBER OF READINGS 8.183E + 03 TOTAL NUMBER OF READINGS WITHOUT CALMS 7.989E + 03 WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION, PERCENT CALM 1 TO 2 3 TO 4 5 TO 6 7 TO 8 9 TO 11 12 TO 14 15 TO 18 19 TO 23 GT 23 2.37 33.07 25.65 14.73 9.96 8.05 4.02 1.58 .40 .17 SUMMED OVER ALL DIRECTIONS WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .18 .09 .66 2.45 17.70 6.40 6.40 3 TO 4 .11 .13 1.06 3.48 14.27 2.85 4.37 5 TO 6 .11 .16 1.13 3.15 9.60 .45 .48 7 TO 8 .01 .03 .61 3.05 6.22 .11 .16 9 TO 11 .03 .04 .36 2.34 5.28 .09 .11 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .14 1.40 2.53 .04 .01 15 TO 18 0.00 .01 .06 .51 1.03 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16 .25 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 .01 .05 .11 0.00 0.00 SUMMED OVER ALL TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITIES WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .65 .63 .90 1.30 2.17 3.23 3.54 5.65 5.18 3.62 1.85 1.48 .96 .81 .75 1.15 3 TO 4 .61 .56 .68 1.15 2.04 2.14 1.50 2.74 3.33 1.46 1.33 2.05 2.58 1.78 1.05 1.26 5 TO 6 .45 .39 .50 .69 1.28 .99 .31 .51 .23 .46 .49 1.41 2.99 2.17 .69 1.53 7 TO 8 .36 .15 .16 .18 .41 .43 .26 .09 .09 .19 .14 .53 2.45 2.47 .89 1.41 9 TO 11 .18 .04 .01 .03 .08 .10 .18 .05 0.00 .04 .01 .30 1.56 3.19 1.45 1.04 12 TO 14 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .55 1.68 1.26 .44 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .21 .79 .53 .05 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .19 .11 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .13 .01 0.00 2A.2-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 DUQUESNE, BEAVER VALLEY, 50 FT. BENDIX, 9/5/70-9/5/71 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS A WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .01 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 .04 .03 .01 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .03 .01 .03 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .03 0.00 7 TO 8 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS B WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .01 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 .04 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 5 TO 6 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .05 .01 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 9 TO 11 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS C WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .04 .05 .06 .05 .01 .01 .08 .04 .06 .05 .03 .04 .01 .05 .03 .06 3 TO 4 .05 .05 .03 .04 .05 .01 .05 .05 .04 .04 .04 .06 .11 .19 .15 .11 5 TO 6 .05 .06 .04 .08 .06 .03 .03 .01 0.00 .09 .04 .05 .21 .23 .09 .08 7 TO 8 .05 .01 .04 .03 .04 .04 .01 0.00 0.00 .04 .03 0.00 .09 .15 .05 .05 9 TO 11 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .15 .04 .06 12 TO 14 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .04 .03 .03 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .01 .03 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS D WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .15 .21 .18 .23 .16 .15 .09 .30 .16 .16 .09 .11 .05 .15 .11 .15 3 TO 4 .10 .11 .23 .15 .16 .11 .11 .19 .05 .25 .20 .19 .59 .48 .34 .23 5 TO 6 .13 .11 .19 .19 .09 .06 .03 .14 .06 .15 .14 .31 .55 .54 .21 .26 7 TO 8 .15 .09 .05 .08 .13 .09 .08 .01 .01 .05 .05 .08 .80 .79 .25 .36 9 TO 11 .06 .01 .01 .01 .03 .01 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .08 .36 .95 .45 .33 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .16 .54 .49 .15 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .30 .14 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .08 .06 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .01 .01 0.00 2A.2-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 DUQUESNE, BEAVER VALLEY, 50 FT. BENDIX, 9/5/70-9/5/71 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS E WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .43 .30 .55 .88 1.51 2.04 2.05 2.38 1.68 1.18 1.14 1.01 .70 .53 .51 .81 3 TO 4 .40 .39 .35 .85 1.36 1.49 .75 .89 .50 .58 .95 1.59 1.80 1.05 .45 .86 5 TO 6 .19 .15 .24 .33 1.04 .83 .24 .26 .05 .21 .26 .93 2.07 1.33 .33 1.16 7 TO 8 .15 .05 .08 .08 .25 .30 .16 .06 .04 .08 .06 .43 1.54 1.46 .55 .94 9 TO 11 .08 0.00 0.00 .01 .04 .06 .13 .03 0.00 .04 0.00 .20 1.14 2.05 .90 .61 12 TO 14 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .33 1.09 .75 .26 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .11 .46 .36 .05 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .09 .11 .05 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS F WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .01 .04 .06 .04 .23 .66 .79 1.59 1.30 .81 .35 .23 .14 .01 .05 .09 3 TO 4 .01 .01 .01 .08 .21 .31 .38 .66 .64 .14 .08 .11 .06 .04 .08 .04 5 TO 6 .03 .01 .03 .05 .01 .05 .01 .04 .01 0.00 .03 .08 .05 .01 .03 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .03 .03 .05 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 .03 .01 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS G WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .01 .03 .03 .10 .25 .31 .54 1.31 1.92 1.39 .24 .09 .05 .06 .05 .03 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 .04 .03 .25 .21 .21 .94 2.07 .45 .03 .06 0.00 .01 .03 .03 5 TO 6 .05 .03 0.00 .05 .06 .03 0.00 .05 .06 .01 .03 .03 .08 .01 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 .04 .03 0.00 .01 .03 .03 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .03 .03 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 DUQUESNE, BEAVER VALLEY, 50 FT. BENDIX, 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION NNE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 0.00 .01 .04 .15 .43 .01 .01 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 .05 .10 .40 .01 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .05 .13 .19 .03 .05 7 TO 8 .01 0.00 .05 .15 .15 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 .01 .03 .06 .08 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .05 .21 .30 .04 .03 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .05 .11 .39 .01 0.00 5 TO 6 .03 0.00 .06 .11 .15 .01 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .01 .09 .05 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .03 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION ENE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .03 0.00 .06 .18 .55 .06 .03 3 TO 4 .01 .01 .03 .23 .35 .01 .04 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .04 .19 .24 .03 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .04 .05 .08 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION E WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .01 0.00 .05 .23 .88 .04 .10 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .04 .15 .85 .08 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .08 .19 .33 .05 .05 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .03 .08 .08 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 DUQUESNE, BEAVER VALLEY, 50 FT. BENDIX, 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION ESE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .01 .16 1.51 .23 .25 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .05 .16 1.36 .21 .25 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .06 .09 1.04 .01 .06 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .04 .13 .25 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 .01 0.00 0.00 .03 .04 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .03 .03 .01 .15 2.04 .66 .31 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .01 .11 1.49 .31 .21 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 .83 .05 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .04 .09 .30 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 .06 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SSE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .08 .09 2.05 .79 .54 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .05 .11 .75 .38 .21 5 TO 6 .01 0.00 .03 .03 .24 .01 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .01 .08 .16 0.00 .01 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .13 .01 .01 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .01 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION S WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .03 0.00 .04 .30 2.38 1.59 1.31 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .05 .19 .89 .65 .94 5 TO 6 .01 0.00 .01 .14 .26 .04 .05 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .06 0.00 .01 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .03 0.00 .01 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-31
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 DUQUESNE, BEAVER VALLEY, 50 FT. BENDIX, 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION SSW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .04 .03 .06 .16 1.68 1.30 1.92 3 TO 4 .03 .01 .04 .05 .50 .64 2.07 5 TO 6 .03 .01 0.00 .06 .05 .01 .06 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .04 0.00 .04 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .03 0.00 .05 .16 1.18 .81 1.39 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .04 .25 .58 .14 .45 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .09 .15 .21 0.00 .01 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .04 .05 .08 0.00 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION WSW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .01 0.00 .03 .09 1.14 .35 .24 3 TO 4 .03 .01 .04 .20 .95 .08 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .04 .14 .26 .03 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .03 .05 .06 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION W WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .04 .11 1.01 .23 .09 3 TO 4 0.00 .04 .06 .19 1.59 .11 .06 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 .05 .31 .93 .08 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .43 .01 .01 9 TO 11 .01 0.00 0.00 .08 .20 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-32
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 DUQUESNE, BEAVER VALLEY, 50 FT. BENDIX, 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION WNW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 0.00 .01 .01 .05 .70 .14 .05 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .11 .59 1.80 .06 0.00 5 TO 6 .01 .03 .21 .55 2.07 .05 .08 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .09 .80 1.54 0.00 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .04 .36 1.14 .01 .01 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .04 .16 .33 .01 .01 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .03 .08 .11 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .09 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 .01 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 .01 0.00 .05 .15 .53 .01 .06 3 TO 4 0.00 .01 .19 .48 1.05 .04 .01 5 TO 6 0.00 .05 .23 .54 1.33 .01 .01 7 TO 8 0.00 .01 .15 .79 1.46 .03 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 .01 .15 .95 2.05 0.00 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .04 .54 1.09 .01 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 .01 .01 .30 .46 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .11 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .11 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NNW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .11 .51 .05 .05 3 TO 4 0.00 .01 .15 .34 .45 .08 .03 5 TO 6 .03 .01 .09 .21 .33 .03 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .05 .25 .55 .03 .01 9 TO 11 0.00 .01 .04 .45 .90 .03 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .03 .49 .75 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .03 .14 .36 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .05 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION N WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1 TO 2 0.00 .01 .06 .15 .81 .09 .03 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .11 .23 .86 .04 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .08 .26 1.16 .03 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 .01 .05 .36 .94 .05 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .06 .33 .61 .01 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .03 .15 .26 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DAYTIME (9AM-8PM)
SUMMARY
OF WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TOTAL NUMBER OF READINGS 3.522E+43 TOTAL NUMBER OF READINGS WITHOUT CALMS 3.475E+03 2A.2-33
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION, PERCENT CALM 1 TO 2 3 TO 4 5 TO 6 7 TO 8 9 TO 11 12 TO 14 15 TO 18 19 TO 23 GT 23 1.33 13.86 18.09 18.03 15.02 16.64 8.18 5.54 2.92 .40 SUMMED OVER ALL DIRECTIONS WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM 0.00 0.00 .06 .09 .65 .20 .34 1 TO 2 .09 .09 .62 2.53 7.75 1.28 1.50 3 TO 4 .20 .26 1.11 3.78 11.16 .85 .74 5 TO 6 .17 .23 1.39 5.34 9.97 .48 .45 7 TO 8 .14 .14 1.76 5.14 7.50 .11 .23 9 TO 11 .09 .09 1.76 5.74 8.80 .14 .03 12 TO 14 .03 .09 .34 3.21 4.40 .09 .03 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .45 2.70 2.36 .03 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 .03 .26 1.16 1.48 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .20 .20 0.00 0.00 SUMMED OVER ALL TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITIES WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .68 .40 .74 1.45 .94 .94 .85 .88 .74 .77 .82 1.48 .82 .65 .88 .82 3 TO 4 .57 .45 .62 1.73 1.65 .82 .80 1.02 .80 1.11 1.05 2.27 2.04 1.62 .80 .74 5 TO 6 .68 .97 .91 1.45 1.48 .45 .34 .40 .54 .94 1.50 1.70 2.95 2.07 .85 .80 7 TO 8 .77 .54 .31 .91 .65 .43 .11 .37 .31 .48 .74 2.27 2.73 2.30 .82 1.28 9 TO 11 .74 .43 .43 .51 .60 .40 .11 .28 .51 .45 .71 1.50 3.29 3.61 1.53 1.53 12 TO 14 .54 0.00 .17 0.00 .06 .03 .09 .17 .06 .06 .03 .26 2.02 2.19 1.56 .97 15 TO 18 .20 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .14 1.33 1.79 1.16 .77 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .68 1.28 .77 .17 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .17 .17 0.00 2A.2-34
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS A WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 .03 0.00 5 TO 6 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS B WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 3 TO 4 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .03 .03 0.00 .06 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 .03 .06 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .09 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .03 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS C WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .11 .06 .06 .09 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .09 0.00 0.00 .06 .11 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 .09 .09 .11 .06 .03 .03 .09 .03 0.00 .09 .11 .20 .09 .09 5 TO 6 .03 .09 .06 .14 .09 .03 .03 .03 .03 .09 .06 .06 .34 .09 .17 .09 7 TO 8 .09 .09 .06 .11 .06 .14 .03 .03 .03 .06 .11 .09 .28 .37 .11 .11 9 TO 11 .09 .17 .03 .11 0.00 .06 0.00 .03 .03 .09 .11 .06 .37 .28 .11 .23 12 TO 14 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .03 .20 0.00 15 TO 18 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .09 .09 .11 .09 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 .14 .03 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS D WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .23 .11 .20 .28 .20 .11 .06 .17 .14 .09 .11 .11 .09 .23 .20 .20 3 TO 4 .20 .20 .11 .28 .26 .20 .09 .11 .20 .17 .17 .20 .40 .62 .37 .20 5 TO 6 .14 .43 .34 .20 .28 .09 .09 .20 .11 .20 .45 .34 .94 .97 .34 .23 7 TO 8 .23 .26 .06 .17 .20 .09 .06 .11 .14 .20 .26 .62 1.05 .97 .34 .40 9 TO 11 .17 .14 .17 .14 .14 .06 0.00 .09 .28 .09 .34 .34 1.22 1.42 .77 .37 12 TO 14 .34 0.00 .09 0.00 .06 0.00 .03 .03 .03 0.00 .03 .06 .68 .82 .57 .48 15 TO 18 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .71 .94 .57 .34 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .31 .43 .34 .06 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .03 .11 0.00 2A.2-35
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS E WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .31 .20 .37 .82 .60 .43 .43 .40 .45 .51 .48 .82 .57 .34 .57 .45 3 TO 4 .31 .17 .40 1.16 1.05 .45 .43 .74 .40 .77 .82 1.79 1.28 .74 .28 .37 5 TO 6 .48 .43 .45 .94 1.05 .28 .14 .14 .31 .51 .85 1.22 1.48 .94 .28 .45 7 TO 8 .45 .14 .20 .54 .40 .17 .03 .20 .11 .11 .34 1.53 1.39 .82 .28 .77 9 TO 11 .48 .11 .23 .20 .43 .28 .09 .17 .17 .26 .26 1.08 1.68 1.85 .62 .91 12 TO 14 .14 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 .14 .03 .03 0.00 .17 1.28 1.28 .74 .45 15 TO 18 .09 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .09 .54 .77 .45 .34 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .31 .80 .28 .09 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 .06 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS F WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .03 .03 .09 .14 .06 .17 .11 .14 .06 .03 .11 .17 .06 .03 .03 .03 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 0.00 .14 .14 .09 .11 .03 .03 .06 0.00 .09 .09 .03 .03 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .03 .03 .06 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 .14 .03 0.00 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS G WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 .06 .17 .23 .17 .09 .14 .11 .28 .09 .03 .03 .03 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 .06 0.00 .11 .09 .09 .09 .06 .06 .09 0.00 0.00 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .09 .06 .09 .03 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .09 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-36
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION NNE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .11 .23 .31 .03 0.00 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 .03 .20 .31 0.00 0.00 5 TO 6 .03 0.00 .03 .14 .48 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .09 .23 .45 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .09 .17 .48 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .06 .34 .14 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .06 .06 .09 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .06 .11 .20 .03 0.00 3 TO 4 .03 .03 0.00 .20 .17 .03 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 .09 .43 .43 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 .06 0.00 .09 .26 .14 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .17 .14 .11 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION ENE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .06 .20 .37 .09 .03 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .09 .11 .40 0.00 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 .06 .34 .45 0.00 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .06 .06 .20 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .03 .17 .23 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 .03 0.00 0.00 .09 .06 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION E WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 .06 0.00 .09 .28 .82 .14 .06 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .09 .28 1.16 .14 .06 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .14 .20 .94 .11 .06 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .11 .17 .54 .03 .06 9 TO 11 0.00 .03 .11 .14 .20 .03 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-37
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION ESE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .20 .60 .06 .06 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 .11 .26 1.05 .14 .06 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 .09 .28 1.05 .03 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .06 .20 .40 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 .03 0.00 0.00 .14 .43 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 .03 0.00 .03 .11 .43 .17 .17 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 .06 .20 .45 .09 0.00 5 TO 6 .03 0.00 .03 .09 .28 .03 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .14 .09 .17 0.00 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .06 .06 .28 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SSE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 .03 0.00 .06 .43 .11 .23 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 .03 .09 .43 .11 .11 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .03 .09 .14 .06 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 .03 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .09 .03 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION S WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 .40 .14 .17 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 .03 .11 .74 .03 .09 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .03 .20 .14 0.00 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .03 .11 .20 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .03 .09 .17 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .14 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-38
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION SSW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 .45 .06 .09 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .09 .20 .40 .03 .09 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .03 .11 .31 0.00 .09 7 TO 8 .03 0.00 .03 .14 .11 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 .03 0.00 .03 .28 .17 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .09 .51 .03 .14 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .03 .17 .77 .06 .09 5 TO 6 .06 0.00 .09 .20 .51 .03 .06 7 TO 8 0.00 .03 .06 .20 .11 0.00 .09 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .09 .09 .26 0.00 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION WSW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .48 .11 .11 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .17 .82 0.00 .06 5 TO 6 .03 .03 .06 .45 .85 0.00 .09 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .11 .26 .34 0.00 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .11 .34 .26 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION W WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .09 .11 .82 .17 .28 3 TO 4 0.00 .06 .09 .20 1.79 .09 .06 5 TO 6 .03 0.00 .06 .34 1.22 .03 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .09 .62 1.53 0.00 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 .03 .06 .34 1.08 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .17 .03 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .09 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION WNW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 .03 0.00 .09 .57 .06 .09 3 TO 4 .06 .03 .11 .40 1.28 .09 .09 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 .34 .94 1.48 .14 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .28 1.05 1.39 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .37 1.22 1.68 .03 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .06 .68 1.28 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .09 .71 .54 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 .03 .03 .31 .31 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NW 2A.2-39
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 .03 0.00 .23 .34 .03 .03 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 .20 .62 .74 .03 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 .09 .97 .94 .03 .03 7 TO 8 .03 .09 .37 .97 .82 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 .03 .28 1.42 1.85 .03 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 .03 .03 .82 1.28 .03 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .09 .94 .77 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 .06 .43 .80 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .14 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NNW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .06 .20 .57 .03 .03 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 .09 .37 .28 .03 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 .06 .17 .34 .28 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 .03 .03 .11 .34 .28 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 .03 0.00 .11 .77 .62 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 .03 .20 .57 .74 .03 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .11 .57 .45 .03 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 .14 .34 .28 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .06 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION N WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .11 .20 .45 .03 .03 3 TO 4 0.00 .06 .09 .20 .37 0.00 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .09 .23 .45 .03 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .11 .40 .77 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .23 .37 .91 .03 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 .03 0.00 .48 .45 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .09 .34 .34 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 .09 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-40
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 TABLE RESPONSE 2.5-1 (CONTD) NIGHTTIME (9PM-8AM)
SUMMARY
OF WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TOTAL NUMBER OF READINGS 3.693E + 03 TOTAL NUMBER OF READINGS WITHOUT CALMS 3.538E + 03 WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION, PERCENT CALM 1 TO 2 3 TO 4 5 TO 6 7 TO 8 9 TO 11 12 TO 14 15 TO 18 19 TO 23 GT 23 4.20 33.12 23.50 14.05 9.31 6.99 4.20 3.11 1.27 .24 SUMMED OVER ALL DIRECTIONS WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM .03 .03 0.00 .03 .92 .97 2.22 1 TO 2 .08 0.00 .11 .27 12.78 8.56 11.32 3 TO 4 .03 .03 0.00 .27 13.30 5.36 4.52 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 10.59 1.81 1.41 7 TO 8 .05 .03 0.00 .22 8.04 .57 .41 9 TO 11 .03 0.00 0.00 .49 6.26 .14 .08 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .51 3.68 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .41 2.71 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .32 .95 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .16 0.00 0.00 SUMMED OVER ALL TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITIES WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .54 .32 .65 1.68 2.36 3.47 4.20 3.09 1.98 1.90 1.62 4.14 2.17 2.52 1.19 1.30 3 TO 4 .43 .41 .54 2.30 3.44 2.65 2.06 2.25 1.03 .84 1.11 2.17 1.92 .97 .65 .73 5 TO 6 .43 .22 .30 2.52 1.68 .65 .43 .43 .41 .65 .76 1.84 1.79 .51 .43 1.00 7 TO 8 .46 .11 .05 .89 .92 .14 .27 .11 .05 .24 .46 1.25 2.19 .81 .41 .95 9 TO 11 .11 .03 0.00 .16 .14 .05 .08 .05 .08 .08 .08 .76 2.36 1.30 .57 1.14 12 TO 14 .08 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .11 1.76 1.52 .41 .24 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 1.14 1.44 .35 .16 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .19 .84 .22 .03 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 .08 .03 2A.2-41
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT. WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS A WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS B WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS C WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .03 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS D WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .08 0.00 .03 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 .03 .03 .03 .03 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .03 0.00 .05 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .03 .03 .08 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .11 .19 .08 .03 12 TO 14 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .19 .24 .03 .03 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .24 .05 .03 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .16 .08 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 .03 2A.2-42
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT. WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS E WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .32 .22 .30 1.03 1.33 1.98 1.52 1.00 .43 .65 .60 1.49 .60 .35 .43 .54 3 TO 4 .35 .32 .49 1.79 2.06 1.52 .81 .41 .46 .32 .62 1.30 1.38 .41 .46 .60 5 TO 6 .41 .16 .30 1.81 1.00 .49 .35 .11 .22 .51 .60 1.41 1.60 .41 .32 .89 7 TO 8 .46 .08 .05 .54 .76 .11 .24 .11 .03 .22 .38 1.03 2.06 .79 .38 .81 9 TO 11 .08 .03 0.00 .11 .14 .05 .08 .05 .08 .08 .08 .57 2.25 1.11 .49 1.06 12 TO 14 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .11 1.57 1.27 .38 .22 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 1.06 1.19 .30 .14 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .68 .14 .03 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .08 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS F WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .14 .05 .14 .38 .43 .97 1.41 1.06 .46 .41 .35 .87 .68 .73 .22 .27 3 TO 4 .05 .03 .03 .24 1.06 .70 .51 .73 .30 .24 .22 .49 .30 .30 .08 .08 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 0.00 .38 .54 .05 .03 .11 .05 .08 .08 .24 .03 .08 .03 .08 7 TO 8 0.00 .03 0.00 .16 .08 .03 .03 0.00 .03 0.00 .05 .08 .03 0.00 0.00 .05 9 TO 11 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS G WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .08 .05 .22 .24 .49 .49 1.22 1.00 1.00 .84 .68 1.71 .89 1.44 .54 .43 3 TO 4 0.00 .05 0.00 .24 .30 .41 .73 1.06 .27 .24 .27 .38 .16 .27 .11 .03 5 TO 6 .03 .03 0.00 .27 .08 .11 .05 .22 .14 .05 .08 .14 .14 .03 .03 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .19 .08 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .05 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-43
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT. WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION NNE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .32 .14 .08 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .35 .05 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .41 0.00 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .46 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .03 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .05 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .22 .05 .05 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .32 .03 .05 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16 .03 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION ENE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .30 .14 .22 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .49 .03 0.00 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .30 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION E WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 1.03 .38 .24 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 1.79 .24 .24 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 1.81 .38 .27 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .54 .16 .19 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .11 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-44
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION ESE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .08 1.33 .43 .49 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 2.06 1.06 .30 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 1.00 .54 .08 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .76 .08 .08 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 1.98 .97 .49 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 1.52 .70 .41 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .49 .05 .11 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SSE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 1.52 1.41 1.22 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .81 .51 .73 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .35 .03 .05 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION S WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.06 1.00 3 TO 4 .03 0.00 0.00 .03 .41 .73 1.06 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .11 .22 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-45
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION SSW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .05 .43 .46 1.00 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .46 .30 .27 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .22 .05 .14 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .65 .41 .84 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .32 .24 .24 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .51 .08 .05 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .22 0.00 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION WSW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .60 .35 .68 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .62 .22 .27 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .60 .08 .08 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .38 .05 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION W WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 .05 0.00 0.00 .03 1.49 .87 1.71 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.30 .49 .38 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 1.41 .24 .14 7 TO 8 .05 .03 0.00 0.00 1.03 .08 .05 9 TO 11 .03 0.00 0.00 .03 .57 .08 .05 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION WNW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .60 .68 .89 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 0.00 .05 1.38 .30 .16 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 1.60 .03 .14 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 2.06 .03 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 2.25 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .19 1.57 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 1.06 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .11 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NW 2A.2-46
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .35 .73 1.44 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .41 .30 .27 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .41 .08 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .79 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .19 1.11 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 1.27 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .24 1.19 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .16 .68 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .08 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NNW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .43 .22 .54 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .46 .08 .11 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .32 .03 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .38 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .49 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .38 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .30 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .14 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION N WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .05 .54 .27 .43 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .60 .08 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .89 .08 .03 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .81 .05 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 1.06 .03 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .22 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .14 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 24 HOUR
SUMMARY
OF WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TOTAL NUMBER OF READINGS 7.215E + 03 TOTAL NUMBER OF READINGS WITHOUT CALMS 7.013E + 03 WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION, PERCENT CALM 1 TO 2 3 TO 4 5 TO 6 7 TO 8 9 TO 11 12 TO 14 15 TO 18 19 TO 23 GT 23 2.80 23.71 20.86 15.99 12.10 11.70 6.14 4.30 2.08 .32 SUMMED OVER ALL DIRECTIONS WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G CALM .01 .01 .03 .06 .79 .60 1.30 1 TO 2 .08 .04 .36 1.37 10.33 5.00 6.53 3 TO 4 .11 .14 .54 1.98 12.25 3.16 2.67 5 TO 6 .08 .11 .68 2.73 10.28 1.16 .94 7 TO 8 .10 .08 .86 2.62 7.78 .35 .32 9 TO 11 .06 .04 .86 3.05 7.50 .14 .06 12 TO 14 .01 .04 .17 1.83 4.03 .04 .01 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .22 1.52 2.54 .01 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 .01 .12 .73 1.21 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .14 .18 0.00 0.00 2A.2-47
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 SUMMED OVER ALL TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITIES WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .61 .36 .69 1.57 1.66 2.23 2.56 2.01 1.37 1.34 1.23 2.84 1.51 1.61 1.04 1.07 3 TO 4 .50 .43 .58 2.02 2.56 1.76 1.44 1.65 .91 .97 1.08 2.22 1.98 1.29 .72 .73 5 TO 6 .55 .58 .60 2.00 1.58 .55 .39 .42 .47 .79 1.12 1.77 2.36 1.28 .64 .90 7 TO 8 .61 .32 .18 .90 .79 .28 .19 .24 .18 .36 .60 1.75 2.45 1.54 .61 1.11 9 TO 11 .42 .22 .21 .33 .36 .22 .10 .17 .29 .26 .39 1.12 2.81 2.43 1.04 1.33 12 TO 14 .30 0.00 .08 0.00 .06 .01 .04 .08 .03 .03 .03 .18 1.88 1.84 .97 .60 15 TO 18 .10 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .07 1.23 1.61 .75 .46 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .43 1.05 .49 .10 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .15 .12 .01 2A.2-48
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS A WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 TO 4 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .01 0.00 5 TO 6 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS B WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 3 TO 4 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .01 0.00 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 .01 .03 0.00 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 .04 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 .01 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS C WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .06 .03 .03 .04 .03 .03 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .04 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .04 .04 .06 .03 .01 .01 .04 .01 0.00 .04 .06 .10 .04 .04 5 TO 6 .01 .04 .03 .07 .04 .01 .01 .01 .01 .04 .03 .03 .17 .04 .08 .04 7 TO 8 .04 .04 .03 .06 .03 .07 .01 .01 .01 .03 .06 .04 .14 .18 .06 .06 9 TO 11 .04 .08 .01 .06 0.00 .03 0.00 .01 .01 .04 .06 .03 .18 .14 .06 .11 12 TO 14 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .01 .10 0.00 15 TO 18 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .04 .04 .06 .04 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .03 .07 .01 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS D WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .11 .06 .10 .15 .14 .06 .04 .08 .10 .04 .06 .07 .04 .11 .10 .12 3 TO 4 .11 .10 .07 .15 .14 .11 .04 .07 .10 .10 .08 .10 .22 .30 .18 .11 5 TO 6 .07 .21 .17 .12 .17 .04 .04 .10 .06 .10 .22 .19 .47 .47 .19 .11 7 TO 8 .11 .12 .03 .08 .10 .04 .03 .06 .07 .10 .12 .30 .55 .49 .18 .24 9 TO 11 .08 .07 .08 .10 .07 .03 0.00 .04 .14 .04 .17 .18 .65 .79 .42 .19 12 TO 14 .18 0.00 .04 0.00 .03 0.00 .01 .01 .01 0.00 .01 .03 .43 .53 .29 .25 15 TO 18 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .39 .58 .30 .18 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .19 .29 .21 .03 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .04 .06 .01 2A.2-49
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT. WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS E WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .32 .21 .33 .93 .97 1.22 .98 .71 .44 .58 .54 1.16 .58 .35 .50 .50 3 TO 4 .33 .25 .44 1.48 1.57 1.00 .62 .57 .43 .54 .72 1.54 1.33 .57 .37 .49 5 TO 6 .44 .29 .37 1.39 1.03 .39 .25 .12 .26 .51 .72 1.32 1.54 .67 .30 .68 7 TO 8 .46 .11 .12 .54 .58 .14 .14 .15 .07 .17 .36 1.28 1.73 .80 .33 .79 9 TO 11 .28 .07 .11 .15 .28 .17 .08 .11 .12 .17 .17 .82 1.97 1.47 .55 .98 12 TO 14 .10 0.00 .03 0.00 .03 .01 .03 .07 .01 .01 .01 .14 1.43 1.28 .55 .33 15 TO 18 .04 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .04 .80 .98 .37 .24 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .21 .73 .21 .06 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .11 .07 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS F WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .08 .04 .11 .26 .25 .58 .78 .61 .26 .22 .24 .53 .37 .39 .12 .15 3 TO 4 .03 .03 .01 .19 .61 .40 .32 .39 .17 .15 .11 .29 .19 .17 .06 .04 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 0.00 .25 .29 .04 .04 .06 .03 .06 .04 .14 .08 .06 .01 .06 7 TO 8 0.00 .01 0.00 .10 .04 .01 .01 .01 .01 0.00 .03 .04 .01 .01 .01 .03 9 TO 11 .01 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .01 .01 0.00 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS G WIND SPEED VERSUS DIRECTION (IN PERCENT) NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW N 1 TO 2 .04 .03 .12 .15 .28 .33 .73 .60 .55 .50 .40 1.01 .50 .75 .29 .24 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 .01 .15 .18 .21 .43 .58 .18 .17 .17 .22 .12 .14 .06 .03 5 TO 6 .01 .01 .01 .17 .04 .06 .04 .12 .11 .06 .08 .08 .08 .03 .01 .01 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 0.00 .12 .04 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .03 .04 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-50
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT. WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION NNE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .06 .11 .32 .08 .04 3 TO 4 0.00 .01 .01 .11 .33 .03 0.00 5 TO 6 .01 0.00 .01 .07 .44 0.00 .01 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .04 .11 .46 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .04 .08 .28 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .03 .18 .10 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .04 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .06 .21 .04 .03 3 TO 4 .01 .01 0.00 .10 .25 .03 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .04 .21 .29 .01 .01 7 TO 8 .03 0.00 .04 .12 .11 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .08 .07 .07 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION ENE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .10 .33 .11 .12 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .04 .07 .44 .01 .01 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .03 .17 .37 0.00 .01 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .12 0.00 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .01 .08 .11 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 .01 0.00 0.00 .04 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION E WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 .03 0.00 .04 .15 .93 .26 .15 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .04 .15 1.48 .19 .15 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .07 .12 1.39 .25 .17 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .06 .08 .54 .10 .12 9 TO 11 0.00 .01 .06 .10 .15 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-51
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION ESE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .14 .97 .25 .28 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .06 .14 1.57 .61 .18 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .04 .17 1.03 .29 .04 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .03 .10 .58 .04 .04 9 TO 11 .01 0.00 0.00 .07 .28 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 .01 0.00 .03 .06 1.22 .58 .33 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .03 .11 1.00 .40 .21 5 TO 6 .01 0.00 .01 .04 .39 .04 .06 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .07 .04 .14 .01 .01 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .03 .03 .17 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SSE WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 .01 .01 .04 .98 .78 .73 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .01 .04 .62 .32 .43 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .01 .04 .25 .04 .04 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .01 .03 .14 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .03 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION S WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 .01 0.00 0.00 .08 .71 .61 .60 3 TO 4 .01 .01 .01 .07 .57 .39 .58 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .01 .10 .12 .06 .12 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .01 .06 .15 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .01 .04 .11 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .07 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-52
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION SSW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .01 .10 .44 .26 .55 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .04 .10 .43 .17 .18 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .01 .06 .26 .03 .11 7 TO 8 .01 0.00 .01 .07 .07 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 .01 0.00 .01 .14 .12 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION SW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .58 .22 .50 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 .01 .10 .54 .15 .17 5 TO 6 .03 0.00 .04 .10 .51 .06 .06 7 TO 8 0.00 .01 .03 .10 .17 0.00 .06 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .04 .04 .17 0.00 .01 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION WSW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .54 .24 .40 3 TO 4 0.00 0.00 0.00 .08 .72 .11 .17 5 TO 6 .01 .01 .03 .22 .72 .04 .08 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .06 .12 .36 .03 .03 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .06 .17 .17 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 .01 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION W WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 .03 0.00 .04 .07 1.16 .53 1.01 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 .04 .10 1.54 .29 .22 5 TO 6 .01 0.00 .03 .19 1.32 .14 .08 7 TO 8 .03 .01 .04 .30 1.28 .04 .04 9 TO 11 .01 .01 .03 .18 .82 .04 .03 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .14 .01 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 .04 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-53
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 BEAVER VALLEY 150 FT WIND DATA - DELTA T - 9/5/70-9/5/71 DIRECTION WNW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 .01 0.00 .04 .58 .37 .50 3 TO 4 .03 .03 .06 .22 1.33 .19 .12 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .17 .47 1.54 .08 .08 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .14 .55 1.73 .01 .01 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .18 .65 1.97 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 0.00 .03 .43 1.43 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .04 .39 .80 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 .01 .01 .19 .21 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .03 0.00 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 .01 0.00 .11 .35 .39 .75 3 TO 4 0.00 .01 .10 .30 .57 .17 .14 5 TO 6 0.00 .01 .04 .47 .67 .06 .03 7 TO 8 .01 .04 .18 .49 .80 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 .01 .14 .79 1.47 .01 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 .01 .01 .53 1.28 .01 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .04 .58 .98 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 .03 .29 .73 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .04 .11 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION NNW WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .03 .10 .50 .12 .29 3 TO 4 .01 0.00 .04 .18 .37 .06 .06 5 TO 6 0.00 .03 .08 .19 .30 .01 .01 7 TO 8 .01 .01 .06 .18 .33 .01 0.00 9 TO 11 .01 0.00 .06 .42 .55 0.00 0.00 12 TO 14 0.00 .01 .10 .29 .55 .01 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .06 .30 .37 .01 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 .07 .21 .21 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .06 .07 0.00 0.00 DIRECTION N WIND SPEED DISTRIBUTION VERSUS TEMP. LAPSE RATE STABILITY CLASS (IN PERCENT) A B C D E F G 1 TO 2 0.00 0.00 .06 .12 .50 .15 .24 3 TO 4 0.00 .03 .04 .11 .49 .04 .03 5 TO 6 0.00 0.00 .04 .11 .68 .06 .01 7 TO 8 0.00 0.00 .06 .24 .79 .03 0.00 9 TO 11 0.00 0.00 .11 .19 .98 .03 .01 12 TO 14 0.00 .01 0.00 .25 .33 0.00 0.00 15 TO 18 0.00 0.00 .04 .18 .24 0.00 0.00 19 TO 23 0.00 0.00 .01 .03 .06 0.00 0.00 GT 23 0.00 0.00 0.00 .01 0.00 0.00 0.00 2A.2-54
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 APPENDIX 2A.3 1980 REPORT - THE METEOROLOGICAL PROGRAM AT THE BEAVER VALLEY POWER STATION Appendix 2A.3 is a copy of the Annual Report for the Beaver Valley Meteorological Program for January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980. This report has been retyped and reformatted as part of the Updated FSAR. 2A.3i
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 2A.3ii
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 Table of Contents Page I. Introduction 2A.3-1 II. System Description 2A.3-2 III. Meteorological Data Reduction 2A.3-6 IV. Meteorological Data Recovery 2A.3-7 V. Representativeness of Onsite Meteorological Data 2A.3-8 References 2A.3-12 Appendix A - Monthly and Annual Joint Frequency Distribution of T(150ft-35ft) and 35-ft wind data (January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980) Appendix B - Monthly and Annual Joint Frequency Distribution of T(150ft-35ft) and 35-ft wind data (January 1, 1976 - December 31, 1980) Appendix C - Monthly and Annual Joint Frequency Distribution of T(500ft-35ft) and 500-ft wind data (January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980) Appendix D - Monthly and Annual Joint Frequency Distribution of T(500ft-35ft) and 500-ft wind data (January 1, 1976 - December 31, 1980) 2A.3iii
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 List of Tables Table Number Title 2A.3-1 Meteorological System Equipment Specifications for Beaver Valley 2A.3-2 Monthly and Annual Meteorological Data Recovery for Beaver Valley 2A.3-3 Monthly and Annual Joint Recovery of T and Winds 2A.3-4 Monthly and Annual Average Wind Speeds (mph) for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (NWS) for 1980 and 1976 to 1980 2A.3-5 Annual Average Wind Speeds (mph) for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (NWS) for 1976 to 1980 2A.3-6 Monthly and Annual Stability Class Distributions for Beaver Valley Based on T(150ft-35ft) for 1980 2A.3-7 Monthly and Annual Stability Class Distributions for Beaver Valley Based on T(500ft-35ft) for 1980 2A.3-8 Monthly and Annual Stability Class Distributions for Beaver Valley Based on T(150ft-35ft) for 1976 to 1980 2A.3-9 Monthly and Annual Stability Class Distributions for Beaver Balley Based on T(500ft-35ft) for 1976 to 1980 2A.3-10 Comparison of Annual Stability Class Distributions for Beaver Valley for 1976 to 1980 2A.3-11 Comparison of Annual Stability Class Distributions for Pittsburgh for 1976 to 1980 2A.3-12 Comparison of Monthly Mean, Average Daily Maximum and Average Daily Minimum Temperature Data for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980) 2A.3-13 Comparison of Monthly mean Average Daily Maximum and Average Daily Minimum Temperature Data for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (January 1, 1976 - December 31, 1980) 2A.3-14 Annual Diurnal Temperature and Atmospheric Water Vapor Data for Beaver Valley for 1980 2A.3-15 Annual Diurnal Temperature and Atmospheric Water Vapor Data for Beaver Valley for 1976 to 1980 2A.3-16 Comparison of Monthly and Annual Averages of Dew Point and Relative Humidity Data for Veaver Valley and Pittsburgh 2A.3-17 Monthly and Annual Precipitation Data for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh 2A.3iv
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 34 List of Figures Figure Number Title 2A.3-1 Location of 500 ft Meteorological Tower 2A.3-2 Beaver Valley 35-ft Monthly wind Roses for January, February, March, and April (1980 and 1976-1980) 2A.3-3 Beaver Valley 35-ft Monthly Wind Roses for May, June, July, and August (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-4 Beaver Valley 35-ft Mothly Wind Roses for September, October, November, and December (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-5 Beaver Valley 150-ft Monthly Wind Roses for January, February, March, and April (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-6 Beaver Valley 150-ft Monthly Wind Roses for May, June, July, and August (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-7 Beaver Valley 150-ft Monthly Wind Roses for September, October, November, and December (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-8 Beaver Valley 500-ft Montly Wind Roses for January, February, March, and April (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-9 Beaver Valley 500-ft Monthly Wind Roses for May, June, July, and August (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-10 Beaver Valley 500-ft Monthly Wind Roses for September, October, November, and December (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-11 Beaver Valley 35-ft, 150-ft, and 500-ft Annual Wind Roses (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-12 Pittsburgh Monthly Wind Roses for January, February, March, and April (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-13 Pittsburgh Monthly Wind Roses for May, June, July, and August (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-14 Pittsburgh MOnthly Wind Roses for September, October, November, and December (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-15 Pittsburgh Annual Wlind Roses (1980 and 1976 - 1980) 2A.3-16 Monthly Average Wind Speeds for 1980 2A.3-17 Monthly Average Wind Speeeds 1976 to 1980 2A.3-18 Annual Average Wind Speeds for BVPS, 1976 to 1980 2A.3-19 35-ft Wind Direction Persistence for BVPS 2A.3-20 150-ft Wind Direction Persistence for BVPS 2A.3-21 500-ft Wind Direction Persistence for BVPS 2A.3-22 Annual Stability Class Distributions for BVPS 2A.3-23 Annual Stability Class Distributions for BVPS 2A.3-24 Annual Stability Class Distributions for Pittsburgh 2A.3-25 Monthly Average Temperatures for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh 2A.3-26 Monthly Average Precipitation Data, Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh 2A.3v
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 I. INTRODUCTION Meteorological data collected on a 500-ft tower at the Beaver Valley Power Station for the period January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980 have been reviewed for validity and analyzed. Onsite meteorological data were reviewed to determine the degree of agreement with previous data collected onsite for the period January 1, 1976 - December 1979(1,2,3) and with concurrent National Weather Service (NWS) data for Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.(4,5) Onsite data were also compared to climatological normals based on NWS data for Greater Pittsburgh International Airport to help determine the climatic representativeness of the data. The current meteorological program complies with Regulatory Guide 1.23 of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), Onsite Meteorological Programs.(6) 2A.3-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 II. SYSTEM DESCRIPTION The present onsite meteorological program began effectively on January 1, 1976. The 500-ft guyed meteorological tower is located approximately 3600 ft northeast of Beaver Valley Unit 1, as shown in Figure 2A.3-1. The base of the tower is at approximately 730 ft MSL. The meteorological data monitoring system consists of three levels of instrumentation on the 500-ft guyed tower. Wind speed and direction measurements are made at elevations of 35-, 150-, and 500-ft. Ambient temperature and dew point measurements are made at the 35-ft level. Temperature differential measurements are made between 35-ft and 150-ft (T(150ft-35ft)) and 35-ft and 500-ft (T(500ft-35ft)). Precipitation data are obtained from a ground-level rain gauge located near the base of the tower. The 500-ft guyed tower is situated on a relatively flat plot of land in the Ohio River Valley and is enclosed by a fence. The area immediately surrounding the tower is currently being used as a laydown area for construction equipment and parts. The ground surface in the immediate area is composed of slag and dirt. The data recording and signal conditioning equipment were maintained in three separate locations until May 1980. The signal conditioning equipment is located in an environmentally-controlled trailer located near the base of the meteorological tower, within the enclosed fenced area. Strip chart recorders and TermiNet are located in the Beaver Valley Unit 1 control room. On August 15, 1979, a set of strip chart recorders was installed in the meteorological shelter located near the base of the tower. The PDP8 digital computer originally located in the Duquesne Light Company (DLC) offices in downtown Pittsburgh was moved to the meteorological equipment trailer at the monitoring site in May 1980. Analog data are telemetered directly to the Unit 1 control room charts. Before May 1, 1980, digital data were transmitted via microwave telemetry to the computer in Pittsburgh where averages were processed at 15-minute intervals. After May 1980, the computer was hard-wired to the meteorological sensors. 2A.3-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 The 15-minute averages are telemetered to the Beaver Valley Plant site, where they are outputted on the TermiNet in the control room, and are transmitted via dialable telecommunications to NUS, Rockville, Maryland, to be examined daily for any anomalous conditions or instrumentation problems. The analog data are examined on a weekly basis for any anomalous conditions that might appear in the data. Onsite meteorological instrumentation on the 500-ft guyed tower at the Beaver Valley Site includes: A. Wind Instrumentation Climet wind direction and speed sensors at the 35-ft, 150-ft and 500-ft levels. B. Temperature Instrumentation
- 1. Rosemont RTB's at the 35-ft, 150-ft and 500-ft levels.
- 2. Endevco signal conditioners.
- 3. Geotech aspirated solar radiation shields to house the RTB's at the 35-ft, 150-ft and 500-ft levels.
C. Dew Point Instrumentation One Cambridge System dew point measuring unit at the 35-ft level. D. Precipitation Instrumentation One Belfort tipping bucket rain gauge at the surface near the tower. 2A.3-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 E. Recorders
- 1. Three Leeds and Northrup analog strip chart recorders, located in the Beaver Valley Unit 1 control room, that record wind direction and wind speed at each level.
- 2. One multipoint Leeds and Northrup recorder located in the Beaver Valley Unit 1 control room that records temperature at 35-ft, temperature differential between the 150-ft and 35-ft level (T(150ft-35ft)), and between the 500-ft and 35-ft levels (T(500ft-35ft)), precipitation data, and dew point data.
- 3. Three Esterline-Angus analog strip chart recorders located in the meteorological shelter that record wind direction and wind speed at each level.
- 4. One multipoint Esterline-Angus recorder located in the meteorological shelter that records temperature at 35-ft, temperature differential between the 150-ft and 35-ft levels (T(150ft-35ft)), and between the 500-ft and 35-ft levels (T(500ft-35ft)),
precipitation data, and dew point data. F. Computer
- 1. One Digital Equipment Corporation PDP8/E 12 bit mini-computer.
- 2. One Climet Digital Clock.
The specifications for the above equipment are summarized in Table 2A.3-1. The shelter housing the signal conditioning equipment is located approximately 10 ft east of the base of the tower. The dimensions of the shelter are approximately 8 ft wide, 16 ft long, and 9 ft high. It is not expected that the trailer shelter will affect meteorological measurements. 2A.3-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 An automated tipping bucket rain gauge is located approximately 20 ft west of the tower and approximately 30 ft west of the shelter. It is not anticipated that the tower or the shelter will affect precipitation measurements. The meteorological instrumentation at Beaver Valley is calibrated quarterly. System surveillance includes daily checks of the system by onsite personnel, computer calibration on a real-time basis, and computer annunciation of any malfunctions every 15 minutes. As soon as a malfunction is detected, field maintenance personnel are dispatched to correct the problem. 2A.3-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 III. METEOROLOGICAL DATA REDUCTION The meteorological data acquisition system consists of a computerized data processing system which collects and reduces data on a real-time basis. The average wind direction, wind speed, T, ambient temperature, dew point, and total precipitation are determined for four 15-minute periods each hour. The sampling rate for each parameter for each level is approximately four times per second. Standard statistical equations are used to compute the 15-minute average values from the instantaneous samples. The standard deviation of the wind direction is calculated every 15 minutes with 10-second smoothing of the instantaneous wind direction. Prior to the computer relocation in May 1980, all digital data were transmitted daily via a dialable telecommunications link to NUS as 15-minute averages where they were reviewed for validity, and where hourly averages centered on the hour were computed. For the remainder of the year digital data in the form of 15-minute averages from the teletype printer output were transmitted weekly to NUS where 15-minute values ending on the hour were manually key punched for use in preparing data summaries. The meteorological data acquisition system also includes an analog system as a backup to the digital system. On August 15, 1979, the Esterline-Angus recorders located in the meteorological shelter replaced the Leeds and Northrup recorders as the analog backup system. Data from the analog system are utilized to supplement digital data for the key parameters, 35- and 500-ft winds, T(150ft-35ft) and T(500ft-35ft), to maintain recovery rates greater than the 90 percent required by Regulatory Guide 1.23. Data recovery rates of 80 percent are maintained for the non-key parameters, ambient temperature, dew point, and 150-ft winds. Because the representativeness of precipitation data can be greatly affected by minor data losses, such as telemetry drifts and trips (see References 2 and 3), analog precipitation data were used to supplement the digital data during the 1980 data period. When necessary to supplement digital data, the strip chart data are manually reduced to obtain hourly averages centered on the hour for wind speed and direction, and temperature differential (T) data. The standard deviation of the wind direction fluctuations () is determined from analog data based on the procedure of Reference 6 and classified according to Reference 5. Atmospheric stability, based on the temperature differential, is classified according to Reference 5. 2A.3-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 IV. METEOROLOGICAL DATA RECOVERY Monthly and annual meteorological data recovery rates for 35-, 150-, and 500-ft wind, T(150ft-35ft)), T(500ft-35ft), 35-ft ambient temperature, 35-ft dew point temperature, and precipitation are provided in Table 2A.3-2 for the period January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980. Table 2A.3-3 provides the monthly and annual data recovery rates for the joint 35-ft wind and T(150ft-35ft) and joint 500-ft wind and T(500ft-35ft). The data recovery as provided in Table 2A.3-3 is based on the combined digital and analog data which were used to compile the joint frequency distribution tables for input to the Beaver Valley NRC Regulatory Guide 1.21 analysis. With few exceptions, the monthly recovery rate of the safety-related parameters, 35- and 500-ft winds, T(150ft-35ft) and T(500ft-35ft), exceeded the minimum 90% required by Regulatory Guide 1.23. Losses of digital data before May 1980 were due mainly to noise or drift in the telemetry links resulting in invalid digital data. Other significant losses of digital data occurred in May due to computer downtime associated with relocation of the computer to the meteorological trailer, and in October due to a failure of the air conditioner unit in the trailer. Losses of analog data from the Esterline-Angus recorders were due mainly to chart jamming and to malfunctions of the printhead on the multi-point recorder. Low recovery of 35-ft wind data in April 1980 was due to a malfunction of the bearings on the wind speed sensor. Low recoveries of 35-ft wind data and T (500ft-35ft) data in October 1980 were due to loss of digital data during the air conditioner failure mentioned above and chart jamming on the 35-ft wind and multipoint recorders. Loss of analog T(500ft-35ft) data also occurred due to darkening of the thermal sensitive chart paper on the multi-point recorder because of the high temperatures in the shelter during the air conditioner outage. Low recovery of precipitation data in February 1980 was due primarily to computer downtime resulting in the loss of about five days of digital data, and a malfunction of the multipoint recorder printhead. Low recovery of precipitation data in October 1980 was due primarily to computer downtime associated with the air conditioner outage and to darkening of the multipoint chart paper during the air conditioner outage mentioned above. Data recoveries in Tables 2A.3-2 and 2A.3-3 represent combined digital data and Esterline-Angus analog data used to prepare the summaries in this report. Analog data from the Leeds & Northrup recorders were also used to supplement the data during the computer relocation in May and the air conditioner outage in October. 2A.3-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 V. REPRESENTATIVENESS OF ONSITE METEOROLOGICAL DATA A. Wind Direction and Wind Speed Monthly and annual wind roses for the 35-, 150-, and 500-ft levels, for the period January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980 and January 1, 1976 - December 31, 1980, are presented in Figures 2A.3-2, 2A.3-3, 2A.3-4, 2A.3-5, 2A.3-6, 2A.3-7, 2A.3-8, 2A.3-9, 2A.3-10, and 2A.3-11. The annual wind roses for 1980 exhibit similar wind frequency distributions to the wind roses for the five year composite data period. Additional 35-ft and 500-ft wind data for 1980 and 1976-1980 are provided in Appendices A and B in the form of joint frequency distribution (JFD) tables of 35-ft wind speed and wind direction by T(150ft-35ft) stability class, and in Appendices C and D in the form of JFDs of 500-ft wind speed and wind direction by T(500ft-35ft) stability class. Winds at the 35-ft level for 1980 are primarily from the west-southwest and southwest and from the east-southeast and southeast. The easterly wind directions are associated with low mean wind speeds and are the result of the nighttime drainage flow down the valley sides. Winds at the 150-ft level exhibit peak frequencies for winds from the west and from the northeast. The northeasterly winds are associated with the turning down-river of the cold-air drainage flow from the valley sides. The 500-ft onsite wind data indicate that the winds are primarily from the west through southwest directions and are not influenced by the valley circulation. Figures 2A.3-12, 2A.3-13, 2A.3-14, and 2A.3-15 present monthly and annual wind roses of NWS data for Pittsburgh for the periods of January 1, 1980-December 31, 1980, and January 1, 1976-December 31, l980. The distributions for the two periods are similar. Further comparisons of these periods with the onsite distribution at the 500-ft level shows that they are similar, indicating that the onsite data is representative of regional conditions. The differences between Pittsburgh wind data and the 35-ft and 150-ft Beaver Valley wind data are attributable to the differences in topography between the two sites, specifically the valley circulation described by the onsite data above. 2A.3-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Monthly mean wind speeds for onsite data for the period January 1, 1980-December 31, 1980 are presented in Table 2A.3-4 along with five-year composite values and concurrent NWS data for Pittsburgh. The 1980 data are also presented in Figure 2A.3-16 and the 1976-1980 data are presented in Figure 2A.3-17. The mean annual wind speeds for 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979 and 1980 for onsite and Pittsburgh data are presented in Table 2A.3-5 and in Figure 2A.3-18. Onsite wind speed data at the 500-ft level, which is effectively removed from the valley circulation, averages about 1 mph higher than the wind speed at Pittsburgh. Variations between onsite data and Pittsburgh data are primarily due to the differences in exposure of the wind instruments. The mean annual wind speed for the 1980 data period was 4.0 mph at the 35-ft level, 6.3 mph at the 150-ft level, and 9.5 mph at the 500-ft level. These data agree well with the onsite data for the five-year composite period, 1976-1980, with reported annual average wind speeds of 4.1 mph at the 35-ft level, 6.6 mph at the 150-ft level, and 10.0 mph at the 500-ft level. The frequency of calms for the 1980 data period was 1.6 percent at the 35-ft level, 0.6 percent at the 150-ft level, and 0.3 percent at the 500-ft level. The frequency of calms recorded at Pittsburgh was higher than Beaver Valley, 7.8 percent for 1980, due to the higher threshold of the wind speed instrumentation employed at NWS airport stations (1.1 mph). Both onsite and Pittsburgh frequencies of calms for 1980 were slightly higher than the 1976-1980 composite values. Monthly and annual frequencies of calms are provided with the wind roses in Figures 2A.3-2, 2A.3-3, 2A.3-4, 2A.3-5, 2A.3-6, 2A.3-7, 2A.3-8, 2A.3-9, 2A.3-10, 2A.3-11, 2A.3-12, 2A.3-13, 2A.3-14, and 2A.3-15. Wind direction persistence is defined as the number of hours of continuous airflow within a 22 1/2 degree sector. For computation purposes, calms are considered a direction category. Wind direction persistence probabilities for Beaver Valley 35-ft, 150-ft and 500-ft data are presented in Figures 2A.3-19, 2A.3-20 and 2A.3-21, respectively, for 1980 and 1976-1980 data periods. For all three levels, the 1980 data show about a 10-hour shorter duration of wind direction persistence at the 0.01 percent level than the 1976-1980 data period. The maximum persistence periods for 1980 were 17 hours for a WSW wind at the 35-ft level, 20 hours for a WSW wind at the 150-ft level, and 23 hours for a SW wind at the 500-ft level. 2A.3-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 B. Atmospheric Stability Monthly and annual frequency distributions of onsite T(150ft-35ft) and T(500 ft-35ft) stability classes for Beaver Valley are presented in Tables 2A.3-6 and 2A.3-7 for the period January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980 and Tables 2A.3-8 and 2A.3-9 for the five-year composite period. Annual frequency distributions of T(150ft-35ft) and T(500ft-35ft) stability classes for 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979 and 1980, are presented in Table 2A.3-10. Interannual comparisons of stability class distributions are also presented in Figure 2A.3-22 for T(150ft-35ft) and Figure 2A.3-23 for T(500ft-35ft). The annual stability distributions for 1980 agree well with earlier data periods for both levels of T. Additional data on atmospheric stability for 1980 and for 1976-1980 are provided in Appendices A and B in the form of joint frequency distribution (JFD) tables of 35-ft wind speed and wind direction by T(150ft-35ft) stability class, and in Appendices C and D in the form of JFDs of 500-ft wind speed and wind direction by T(500ft-35ft) stability class. Table 2A.3-11 presents annual stability class frequency distributions for Pittsburgh (NWS) for 1976, 1977, 1978, 1979, 1980 and for the period January 1976 to December 1980. The Pittsburgh stability distributions are also presented in Figure 2A.3-24. Stability classes for the Pittsburgh data were determined by the Pasquill-Turner method(8) which uses wind speed, cloud cover and radiation intensity data to classify atmospheric stability. The distribution for 1980 shows good agreement with data for previous years. Differences between these distributions and the onsite distributions presented in Tables 2A.3-6, 2A.3-7, 2A.3-8 and 2A.3-9 and Figures 2A.3-22 and 2A.3-23 are attributed to the different methods used to determine atmospheric stability. C. Ambient Temperature Monthly and annual mean, average daily maximum and average daily minimum ambient temperature data for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (NWS) for 1980 are presented in Table 2A.3-12. Also included in Table 2A.3-12 are the climatological normal (1941-1970) temperature data for Pittsburgh. Table 2A.3-13 presents monthly and annual temperature data for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh for the five-year composite period 1976-1980. The monthly mean temperature data are also presented in Figure 2A.3-25. Monthly temperature data for Beaver Valley agrees well with concurrent data for Pittsburgh. The 1980 data also show good agreement with the five-year composite data. The annual average temperature at Beaver Valley for 1980 was 49.4F. The highest temperature recorded onsite during 1980 was 94.4F and the lowest recorded was -0.8F. 2A.3-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 Diurnal temperature data for Beaver Valley are provided in Table 2A.3-14 for the 1980 period and in Table 2A.3-15 for the five-year composite period 1976-1980. D. Dew Point and Relative Humidity Monthly and annual averages of dew point and relative humidity for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (NWS) for 1980 and 1976-1980 are presented in Table 2A.3-16. Agreement between onsite and offsite atmospheric water vapor data is good. Dew point and relative humidity are generally somewhat higher onsite than at Pittsburgh. This is probably due to the effect of the valley location on the onsite data. Agreement between the data periods is good. Diurnal water vapor data for Beaver Valley are provided in Table 2A.3-14 for the 1980 period and in Table 2A.3-15 for the five-year composite period 1976-1980. E. Precipitation Table 2A.3-17 presents monthly and annual totals and maximum 24-hour precipitation for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (NWS). The monthly totals for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh for 1980 are also presented in Figure 2A.3-26 together with the normal values for Pittsburgh. Total precipitation recorded during the period January 1, 1980-December 31, 1980 was 30.06 inches at Beaver Valley and 39.46 inches at Pittsburgh. This compares with a normal total for Pittsburgh of 36.23 inches based on the 1941 to 1970 period of record. The maximum 24-hour precipitation during 1980 was 1.47 inches at Beaver Valley and 2.27 inches at Pittsburgh. Beaver Valley precipitation totals are less than Pittsburgh for every month except February, August and September. This is attributed primarily to data loss on the Beaver Valley system for reasons discussed in Section IV. A comparison of major precipitation events reported in the Pittsburgh LCDs (Reference 4) with precipitation values recorded onsite shows that major discrepancies are largely associated with periods of missing onsite data. Lower onsite precipitation totals during winter months may also be due to the heater in the tipping-bucket rain gauge causing evaporation of some of the frozen precipitation captured in the gauge before it falls through the funnel and activates the measuring device. For these reasons, the onsite data are not considered representative of total annual precipitation occurring at the site. However, data for individual precipitation events, where available, are representative of the site for those events. 2A.3-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 19 REFERENCES
- 1. Annual Meteorological Report for the Beaver Valley Meteorological Program for January 1, 1977-December 31, 1977, NUS-3174, NUS Corporation, Rockville, Maryland (June 1978).
- 2. Annual Meteorological Report for the Beaver Valley Meteorological Program for January 1, 1978-December 31, 1978, NUS-3394, NUS Corporation, Rockville, Maryland (June 1979).
- 3. Annual Meteorological Report for the Beaver Valley Meteorological Program for January 1, 1979 -
December 31, 1979, NUS-3563, NUS Corporation, Rockville, Maryland (February 1981).
- 4. Local Climatological Data, 1980, Greater Pittsburgh International Airport. NOAA, EDS, National Climatic Center, Asheville, North Carolina.
- 5. Surface Observations for Greater Pittsburgh International Airport, January 1976 to December 1980, National Weather Service TDF-14. NOAA, EDS, National Climatic Center, Asheville, North Carolina.
- 6. NRC Regulatory Guide 1.23, Onsite Meteorological Programs, Nuclear Regulatory Commission (Issued February 17, 1972).
- 7. Slade, David H.J. Dispersion Estimates from Pollutant Releases of a Few Seconds to 8 Hours in Duration, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, D.C. (August 1965).
- 8. Turner, D.B. A Diffusion Model for an Urban Area, J. Of Appl. Met., 3, pp. 83-91 (February 1964).
2A.3-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLES FOR APPENDIX 2A.3 TABLE 2A.3-1 METEOROLOGICAL SYSTEM EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS FOR BEAVER VALLEY (January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980) Instrument Manufacturer Model Level Specifications Wind Speed-Direction Climet Wind Direction WD- 35 ft Threshold 0.75 mph (WS/WD) 012-10 150 ft Accuracy +3 for direction Wind Speed 500 ft Threshold 0.6 mph WS-011-1 Accuracy +1% of the wind speed reading or 0.2 mph, whichever is greater. Translator 025-2 Temperature Endevco 4470.114 Univer- T35ft T accuracy + 1F sal Sig. Cond T150-35ft T accuracy + .18F 4473.2 RTB T500-35ft (T=-20F to 100F, Conditioner T150 = -4.0 to +8.0F) GEOTECH M327 Aspirators T500 = -6.0 to +12.0F) Rosemont 104MB12ADCA four wire RTB Precipitation Belfort 5-405 Rain Gauge Ground Accuracy + 2% for 1 in/hr Dew Point Cambridge Dew Point 35 ft Accuracy +0.5F Measuring Set 110S-M Multipoint Recorder Leeds and Speedomax W Accuracy +0.3% of full scale (T35ft, T150-35ft, Northrup T500-35ft) Precip., Dew Point Esterline-Angus Speed Servo II Accuracy +0.35% of full scale Strip Recorders Leeds and Speedomax W/L Accuracy +0.3% of full scale (3 ea.) (ws/wd) Northrup wd = 0 to 540 ws = 0 to 50 mph Esterline-Angus Speed Servo II Accuracy +0.35% of full scale wd = 0 to 540 ws = 0 to 50 mph Mini-Computer Digital Equipment PDP8/E ADO1 Accuracy of converter is 0.1% Corporation Analog to Digital full scale Converter Digital Clock Climet Model 0180 Line frequency 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-2 Monthly and Annual Meteorological Data Recovery for Beaver Valley (January 1, 1980-December 31, 1980) (%) 35-ft 150-ft 500-ft 35-ft Ambient 35-ft Dew Winds Winds Winds T(150ft-35ft) T(500ft-35ft) Temperature Point Precipitation January 97 94 94 91 95 94 97 97 February 98 81 94 97 98 81 82 78 March 99 96 99 95 95 94 94 97 April 85 97 98 96 94 92 90 97 May 99 99 99 92 92 92 88 87 June 97 94 96 93 93 93 93 93 July 94 93 94 94 92 94 94 95 August 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 97 September 93 89 93 93 93 89 83 87 October 88 99 99 92 88 81 94 63 November 96 92 96 94 93 96 95 97 December 99 94 94 91 94 93 92 94 Annual 95 94 96 94 94 91 92 90 Note: Data recovery for wind is based on the joint availability of valid wind speed and wind direction data. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-3 Monthly and Annual Joint Recovery (%) of T and Winds (January 1, 1980-December 31, 1980) Joint Joint T (150ft-35ft) and 35-ft T (500ft-35ft) and 500-ft Wind Wind January 91 91 February 96 94 March 95 95 April 82 94 May 92 91 June 93 93 July 94 91 August 97 97 September 93 93 October 82 88 November 93 93 December 91 94 Annual 92 93 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-4 Monthly and Annual Average Wind Speed (mph) For Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (NWS) Beaver Valley Pittsburgh 35-ft 150-ft 500-ft 1980 1976-1980 1980 1976-1980 1980 1976-1980 1980 1976-1980 January 4.5 5.3 7.2 8.4 10.3 11.5 8.8 10.8 February 4.6 4.7 7.1 7.7 10.2 11.0 8.6 10.0 March 4.7 4.9 7.9 8.2 11.5 11.8 9.9 10.6 April 4.2 4.5 6.7 7.2 10.1 10.5 8.6 9.7 May 3.8 3.6 5.7 5.8 8.6 9.1 8.0 8.3 June 3.6 3.6 5.9 5.6 8.7 8.8 8.6 8.0 July 2.9 3.3 4.4 5.2 7.2 7.8 7.6 7.3 August 2.9 3.0 4.5 4.8 7.3 7.7 6.3 6.4 September 3.1 3.0 4.8 5.1 7.8 8.2 6.0 6.5 October 4.4 3.9 7.2 6.5 10.9 10.4 8.1 8.7 November 4.6 4.5 7.3 7.1 11.2 10.9 8.8 9.2 December 4.2 5.0 6.6 7.7 9.9 11.8 9.0 10.4 Annual 4.0 4.1 6.3 6.6 9.5 10.0 8.2 8.8 Note: Pittsburgh 1980 and 1976-1980 data are based on hourly observations from TDF-14 data tapes.(4) 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-5 Annual Average Wind Speeds (mph) for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh for 1976 to 1980 Beaver Valley Pittsburgh 35-ft 150-ft 500-ft 1976 4.2 6.9 10.3 9.5 1977 4.4 7.2 10.8 9.1 1978 4.0 6.4 9.6 8.7 1979 4.0 6.4 9.7 8.5 1980 4.0 6.3 9.5 8.2 1976-1980 4.1 6.6 10.0 8.8 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-6 Monthly and Annual Stability Class Distributions For Beaver Valley Based on T(150ft-35ft) (January 1, 1980-December 31, 1980) (%) Stability Class A B C D E F G January 2.94 1.62 2.79 62.94 18.82 7.94 2.94 February 4.77 4.32 5.07 61.70 9.69 5.81 8.64 March 13.46 3.26 4.96 39.24 19.12 7.37 12.61 April 17.52 3.23 2.55 29.59 16.33 11.22 19.56 May 27.31 3.08 3.96 18.36 17.91 8.37 21.00 June 29.10 3.88 3.28 19.70 14.93 16.72 12.39 July 23.35 3.30 3.87 22.21 19.91 18.62 8.74 August 21.28 4.31 3.89 19.33 30.46 18.92 1.81 September 21.73 3.27 3.13 20.09 16.82 21.28 13.69 October 14.64 2.63 4.44 33.06 14.64 14.14 16.45 November 9.99 3.58 4.62 39.64 15.95 11.33 14.90 December 5.64 2.97 4.30 50.15 18.84 8.61 9.50 Annual 16.01 3.30 3.92 34.64 17.91 12.55 11.67 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-7 Monthly and Annual Stability Class Distributions For Beaver Valley Based on T(500ft-35ft) (January 1, 1980-December 31, 1980) (%) Stability Class A B C D E F G January 0.00 0.00 0.00 77.56 19.17 3.27 0.00 February 0.00 0.00 0.77 77.64 12.86 6.89 1.84 March 0.14 1.14 2.28 66.15 18.35 9.53 2.42 April 0.00 0.44 2.81 56.95 21.30 14.35 4.14 May 0.74 3.54 4.28 43.36 24.63 19.32 4.13 June 1.05 4.20 9.15 41.08 24.44 18.44 1.65 July 0.15 1.32 7.94 43.24 29.71 17.50 0.15 August 0.00 0.70 3.06 48.40 38.80 9.04 0.00 September 0.30 1.19 5.95 43.75 30.51 18.15 0.15 October 0.61 2.15 3.23 54.38 24.88 12.29 2.46 November 0.00 0.00 0.30 66.22 19.22 12.91 1.35 December 0.00 0.00 0.86 66.62 22.21 10.17 0.14 Annual 0.25 1.22 3.38 57.07 23.93 12.64 1.52 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-8 Monthly and Annual Stability Class Distributions For Beaver Valley Based on T(150ft-35ft) (January 1, 1976-December 31, 1980) (%) Stability Class A B C D E F G January 3.09 1.66 2.71 58.02 21.23 7.04 6.25 February 6.39 2.76 3.65 46.22 19.03 8.42 13.53 March 14.64 2.37 3.73 36.90 21.14 8.55 12.68 April 20.88 2.96 3.32 27.90 17.01 10.09 17.84 May 23.90 2.95 3.94 23.60 17.35 11.46 16.81 June 29.29 3.21 3.85 19.54 16.21 14.39 13.51 July 27.28 2.43 2.61 19.21 19.60 17.84 11.03 August 23.96 2.78 2.43 17.86 24.99 19.24 8.73 September 21.34 2.32 2.79 18.67 21.78 18.17 14.93 October 9.62 2.84 3.72 32.31 21.95 12.55 17.02 November 5.08 2.01 3.26 44.08 22.30 10.25 13.02 December 3.20 1.83 2.49 50.88 22.70 9.04 9.85 Annual 15.90 2.51 3.20 32.65 20.46 12.34 12.92 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-9 Monthly and Annual Stability Class Distributions For Beaver Valley Based on T(500ft-35ft) (January 1, 1976-December 31, 1980) (%) Stability Class A B C D E F G January 0.00 0.00 0.00 78.96 15.83 4.56 0.62 February 0.13 0.03 0.63 67.93 20.25 10.06 0.97 March 0.09 0.84 2.49 63.62 19.42 10.58 2.97 April 0.00 1.30 4.77 54.56 20.64 15.62 3.10 May 0.81 2.55 5.63 46.93 22.67 17.34 4.07 June 1.69 3.87 7.61 40.24 26.24 19.24 1.12 July 1.57 3.33 5.70 42.99 30.26 15.78 0.37 August 1.22 2.47 3.86 44.07 34.67 13.69 0.03 September 1.05 2.15 4.09 42.58 31.76 18.08 0.30 October 0.12 0.53 1.44 54.06 26.97 15.19 1.68 November 0.00 0.00 0.29 66.40 20.19 11.40 1.72 December 0.00 0.00 0.29 68.17 21.92 8.57 1.05 Annual 0.57 1.45 3.13 55.44 24.42 13.48 1.51 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-10 Comparison of Annual Stability Class Distributions for Beaver Valley for 1976 to 1980 (%) A B C D E F G T(150ft-35ft) 1976 20.42 2.35 2.92 27.53 21.03 12.35 13.50 1977 16.49 2.85 3.39 30.73 20.35 11.68 14.52 1978 16.33 2.13 2.71 33.56 20.76 12.82 11.70 1979 11.31 2.44 3.39 36.01 21.76 12.08 13.01 1980 16.01 3.30 3.92 34.64 17.91 12.55 11.67 1976-1980 15.90 2.51 3.20 32.65 20.46 12.34 12.92 T(500ft-35ft) 1976 0.61 1.80 5.91 52.04 24.37 13.00 2.25 1977 0.38 1.20 3.76 53.32 25.07 16.01 0.26 1978 1.35 2.15 3.44 54.37 24.51 12.59 1.60 1979 0.10 0.53 1.39 59.18 24.32 12.92 1.57 1980 0.25 1.22 3.38 57.07 23.93 12.64 1.52 1976-1980 0.57 1.45 3.13 55.44 24.42 13.48 1.51 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-11 Comparison of Annual Stability Class Distributions for Beaver Valley for 1976 to 1980(5,8) (%) A B C D E F G 1976 0.42 3.79 9.02 62.53 9.13 9.87 5.24 1977 0.66 4.81 9.94 59.95 8.94 9.38 6.31 1978 0.43 4.35 10.16 60.45 8.04 9.50 7.08 1979 0.54 4.42 10.29 59.36 9.75 9.71 5.94 1980 0.43 4.75 10.90 57.32 9.78 10.55 6.27 1976-1980 0.49 4.47 10.01 60.01 9.19 9.75 6.09 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-12 Comparison of Monthly Mean, Average Daily Maximum and Average Daily Minimum Temperature Data for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (January 1, 1980-December 31, 1980) (F) Monthly Mean Average Daily Maximum Average Daily Minimum Beaver Beaver Beaver Valley Pittsburgh Normal* Valley Pittsburgh Normal* Valley Pittsburgh Normal* January 28.3 27.3 28.1 33.9 33.1 35.3 21.7 20.6 20.8 February 25.0 24.1 29.3 31.5 31.3 37.3 19.1 17.1 21.3 March 35.9 35.6 38.1 44.7 44.1 47.2 27.0 26.9 29.0 April 48.0 48.5 50.2 58.5 57.7 60.9 36.9 38.4 39.4 May 59.7 60.8 59.8 71.3 70.3 70.8 48.0 49.8 48.7 June 64.9 66.7 68.6 76.6 77.5 79.5 52.5 54.9 57.7 July 72.0 74.5 71.9 82.9 85.2 82.5 61.7 64.7 61.3 August 72.5 73.5 70.2 81.9 83.2 80.9 65.4 65.8 59.4 September 64.9 67.0 63.8 76.0 78.0 74.9 54.8 56.2 52.7 October 49.4 49.2 53.2 57.5 58.2 63.9 39.5 40.4 42.4 November 39.8 38.7 41.3 47.4 45.6 49.3 31.6 31.1 33.3 December 29.3 29.2 30.5 37.1 35.7 37.3 21.7 21.5 23.6 Annual 49.4 49.7 50.4 58.6 58.4 60.0 40.3 40.7 40.8
- Based on NWS data for Pittsburgh for the period 1941-1970.
Note: Pittsburgh 1980 data are based on hourly observations from TDF-14 data tapes.(5) 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-13 Comparison of Monthly Mean, Average Daily Maximum and Average Daily Minimum Temperature Data for Beaver Valley and Pittsburgh (January 1, 1976-December 31, 1980) (F) Average Daily Average Daily Monthly Mean Maximum Minimum Beaver Beaver Beaver Valley Pittsburgh Valley Pittsburgh Valley Pittsburgh January 21.7 21.4 28.4 27.9 14.8 13.7 February 26.2 25.2 33.9 33.5 17.8 17.1 March 40.4 40.7 50.2 50.4 30.4 30.8 April 48.9 50.0 60.0 60.5 37.4 38.9 May 58.9 60.0 70.2 70.5 47.1 48.4 June 66.2 67.4 77.3 78.0 54.8 56.1 July 70.7 71.3 80.7 81.3 61.0 61.5 August 69.7 69.4 79.3 78.8 60.8 60.5 September 63.3 64.0 74.1 74.3 53.9 54.1 October 49.0 49.1 58.2 58.1 40.1 40.2 November 41.0 40.8 49.4 48.7 33.0 32.3 December 30.5 30.5 38.1 37.8 22.8 22.1 Annual 49.0 49.2 58.5 58.4 39.6 39.7 Note: Pittsburgh data are based on hourly observations from TDF-14 data tapes.(5) 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-14 ANNUAL DIURNAL TEMPERATURE AND ATMOSPHERIC WATER VAPOR DATA FOR BEAVER VALLEY (January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980) 35.0 FEET LEVEL TEMPERATURE DEW POINT RELATIVE HUM ABSOLUTE HUM WET BULB NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER HOUR OBS (DEG F) OBS (DEG F) OBS (%) OBS (GM/M3) OBS (DEG F) 1 342 44.7 348 41.0 340 87.1 340 8.4 340 43.3 2 341 44.2 346 40.6 340 87.5 340 8.3 340 42.8 3 340 43.7 344 40.2 338 87.7 338 8.2 338 42.4 4 339 43.4 344 40.1 338 88.2 338 8.1 338 42.2 5 339 43.2 311 40.5 305 88.3 305 8.3 305 42.6 6 340 43.1 340 39.6 333 88.4 333 8.0 333 41.8 7 339 44.0 307 39.4 302 86.4 302 8.1 302 41.9 8 336 45.6 341 40.6 333 83.5 333 8.3 333 43.4 9 331 48.1 337 40.8 329 76.9 329 8.3 329 44.6 10 321 51.0 324 40.8 310 69.3 310 8.3 310 46.4 11 322 53.2 338 40.3 320 64.6 320 8.1 320 47.0 12 323 54.9 339 40.1 322 61.1 322 8.1 322 47.8 13 320 56.2 336 40.0 317 58.4 317 8.1 317 48.4 14 323 57.3 336 39.9 320 56.6 320 8.0 320 48.9 15 325 57.7 336 40.0 322 55.8 322 8.0 322 49.1 16 331 57.6 339 40.3 328 56.8 328 8.1 328 49.2 17 334 56.4 310 41.4 300 60.0 300 8.5 300 49.2 18 338 54.9 344 41.5 334 64.1 334 8.6 334 48.4 19 339 52.3 308 41.0 302 69.7 302 8.6 302 46.7 20 340 50.0 347 42.3 339 76.6 339 8.9 339 46.6 21 340 48.4 346 42.1 338 80.4 338 8.8 338 45.8 22 340 47.0 336 42.0 330 83.0 330 8.7 330 45.1 23 340 46.2 345 41.4 338 84.3 338 8.6 338 44.3 24 343 45.2 347 41.2 341 86.2 341 8.5 341 43.7 Hourly Mean 49.4 40.7 75.2 8.3 45.5 Avg Daily Max 58.6 46.8 95.0 10.0 50.7 Avg Daily Min 40.3 35.4 51.2 6.9 39.3 Absolute Max 94.4 77.3 100.0 22.8 80.7 Absolute Min -3.8 -7.9 19.0 0.9 -1.2 Total OBS 8026 8049 7819 7819 7819 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-15 ANNUAL DIURNAL TEMPERATURE AND ATMOSPHERIC WATER VAPOR DATA FOR BEAVER VALLEY (January 1, 1976 - December 31, 1980) 35.0 FEET LEVEL TEMPERATURE DEW POINT RELATIVE HUM ABSOLUTE HUM WET BULB NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER NUMBER HOUR OBS (DEG F) OBS (DEG F) OBS (%) OBS (GM/M3) OBS (DEG F) 1 1704 44.4 1709 40.4 1666 84.8 1666 8.1 1666 42.9 2 1698 43.9 1710 40.1 1669 85.5 1669 8.0 1669 42.5 3 1698 43.5 1693 40.0 1652 86.1 1652 8.0 1652 42.3 4 1709 43.0 1664 40.3 1626 86.8 1626 8.0 1626 42.4 5 1697 42.8 1658 39.8 1621 86.8 1621 7.9 1621 42.0 6 1692 42.9 1695 39.5 1656 86.9 1656 7.9 1656 41.7 7 1683 43.7 1675 39.7 1629 85.1 1629 7.9 1629 42.0 8 1683 45.4 1694 40.2 1646 81.3 1646 8.1 1646 43.2 9 1650 48.0 1687 40.3 1625 74.4 1625 8.0 1625 44.5 10 1607 50.7 1643 40.1 1570 67.7 1570 7.9 1570 45.7 11 1571 52.8 1643 39.8 1532 62.5 1532 7.8 1532 46.5 12 1568 54.4 1671 39.8 1537 59.1 1537 7.7 1537 47.2 13 1549 55.9 1655 39.6 1515 56.7 1515 7.7 1515 47.9 14 1604 56.7 1666 39.7 1572 55.4 1572 7.7 1572 48.4 15 1622 56.9 1652 39.6 1576 54.8 1576 7.7 1576 48.4 16 1635 56.6 1631 40.4 1555 55.6 1555 7.9 1555 49.0 17 1660 55.8 1642 40.6 1580 57.9 1580 8.0 1580 48.6 18 1667 54.1 1692 40.9 1628 62.5 1628 8.1 1628 47.8 19 1665 51.7 1669 41.4 1599 68.6 1599 8.3 1599 46.7 20 1677 49.4 1699 41.7 1636 74.9 1636 8.5 1636 46.0 21 1681 47.8 1715 41.4 1654 78.3 1654 8.4 1654 45.1 22 1694 46.6 1705 41.2 1656 80.7 1656 8.3 1656 44.4 23 1699 45.7 1704 40.7 1657 82.1 1657 8.2 1657 43.7 24 1700 45.0 1713 40.5 1667 83.6 1667 8.1 1667 43.2 Hourly Mean 49.0 40.3 73.6 8.0 45.0 Avg Daily Max 58.5 45.9 93.1 9.6 50.3 Avg Daily Min 39.6 34.6 50.3 6.6 38.6 Absolute Max 94.4 78.5 100.0 23.8 80.7 Absolute Min -15.0 -22.0 19.0 0.4 -15.6 Total OBS 39819 40285 38724 38724 38724 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-16 COMPARISON OF MONTHLY AND ANNUAL AVERAGES OF DEW POINT AND RELATIVE HUMIDITY DATA FOR BEAVER VALLEY AND PITTSBURGH Mean Dew Point (F) Mean Relative Humidity (%) Beaver Beaver Beaver Beaver Valley Pittsburgh Valley Pittsburgh Valley Pittsburgh Valley Pittsburgh 1980 1980 1976-1980 1976-1980 1980 1980 1976-1980 1976-1980 January 19.5 14.2 14.4 12.8 71.5 58.7 72.8 69.9 February 15.1 10.8 16.4 14.7 67.7 58.1 67.2 62.7 March 25.9 25.0 27.8 26.7 69.7 67.8 64.1 60.5 April 37.2 35.1 36.0 34.5 69.7 63.6 65.7 59.2 May 48.7 47.0 47.8 45.5 73.1 64.5 71.8 62.4 June 55.0 52.8 56.7 53.4 74.7 64.3 74.9 63.5 July 64.8 63.0 63.1 60.4 81.0 70.2 79.5 70.6 August 67.8 66.0 63.7 61.1 86.5 79.2 83.0 76.3 September 58.3 55.9 56.4 54.6 80.8 69.8 80.3 73.7 October 40.8 37.3 41.0 39.4 75.7 65.7 76.6 71.5 November 30.5 27.7 32.3 30.6 73.2 67.1 73.7 69.1 December 22.9 20.7 22.1 20.3 77.3 71.7 71.8 67.1 Annual 40.7 38.1 40.3 38.0 75.2 66.8 73.6 67.2 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 TABLE 2A.3-17 MONTHLY AND ANNUAL PRECIPITATION DATA FOR BEAVER VALLEY AND PITTSBURGH (INCHES) Beaver Valley 1980 Pittsburgh 1980 Pittsburgh Long Term Total Greatest Precipitation Total Greatest Precipitation Normal Maximum Minimum Precipitation In 24 hours Precipitation In 24 hours Total(a) Monthly(b) Monthly(b) January 0.82 0.60 1.56 0.52 2.79 6.25 1.06 February 1.70 1.00 1.32 0.58 2.35 5.98 0.51 March 2.90 1.02 5.65 1.17 3.60 6.10 1.14 April 1.07 0.46 2.94 0.97 3.40 7.61 0.48 May 3.53 1.17 4.32 2.05 3.63 6.36 1.21 June 4.15 1.16 4.34 1.03 3.48 5.08 0.90 July 3.82 0.96 6.76 2.27 3.84 7.43 1.82 August 8.02 1.47 5.10 1.43 3.15 7.56 0.78 September 1.36 0.50 1.29 0.32 2.52 5.42 0.74 October 1.01 0.47 2.42 1.36 2.52 8.20 0.16 November 1.27 0.38 2.38 0.88 2.47 4.70 0.90 December 0.41 0.12 1.38 0.36 2.48 5.24 0.40 Annual 30.06 1.47 39.46 2.27 36.23 8.20 0.16 (a) Based on NWS data for Pittsburgh for the period of 1941-1970. (b) Based on NWS data for Pittsburgh for the period of 1953-1980. 1 of 1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 APPENDIX A Monthly and Annual Joint Frequency Distribution of T(150ft-35ft) and 35-ft Wind Data (January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980) 2A.3Ai
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 0 0 8 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 3 0 11 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 20 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 7 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 1 1 0 11 2A.3A-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 2 3 2 0 14 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3 5 2 0 19 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 7 9 25 18 12 8 3 1 2 4 1 4 6 9 12 3 124 3.50 - 7.49 6 3 4 0 1 1 0 2 2 19 34 39 36 30 35 9 221 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 31 19 9 0 1 73 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 1 0 0 0 10 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 13 12 29 18 13 9 3 3 4 24 47 83 62 48 47 13 428 2A.3A-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 3 8 19 7 8 3 12 4 7 5 3 4 1 3 2 2 91 3.50 - 7.49 0 5 4 0 0 0 0 1 8 8 2 0 0 0 1 1 30 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 13 23 7 8 3 12 5 15 15 7 4 3 3 3 3 128 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 2 3 6 7 5 15 7 2 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 51 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 3 3 6 7 5 15 7 3 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 54 2A.3A-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 2 0 3 1 2 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 3 0 3 1 2 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 11 19 50 31 31 17 32 17 12 11 5 8 8 12 14 5 283 3.50 - 7.49 6 10 9 1 3 2 0 3 14 28 37 45 43 38 39 10 288 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 14 35 28 13 3 1 97 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2 0 0 0 11 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 17 29 59 32 34 19 32 20 26 42 56 97 81 63 56 16 680 2A.3A-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 680 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 64 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.4% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.7 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 2.94 1.62 2.79 62.94 18.82 7.94 2.94 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 6 3 0 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 1 1 0 0 C 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3 5 2 0 0 D 13 12 29 18 13 9 3 3 4 24 47 83 62 48 47 13 0 E 3 13 23 7 8 3 12 5 15 15 7 4 3 3 3 3 1 F 1 3 3 6 7 5 15 7 3 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 G 0 1 3 0 3 1 2 5 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 17 29 59 32 34 19 32 20 26 42 56 97 81 63 56 16 1 2A.3A-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 5 1 1 4 20 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 2 1 12 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 14 1 3 5 32 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 5 3 0 21 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 6 7 3 0 29 2A.3A-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 0 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3.50 - 7.49 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 4 5 2 23 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 1 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 4 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 5 1 4 6 2 34 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 6 7 20 23 7 3 1 0 3 1 1 5 14 15 14 12 132 3.50 - 7.49 13 1 1 5 0 0 0 0 3 9 32 36 41 35 32 13 221 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12 18 6 9 2 3 57 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 21 8 21 28 7 3 1 0 6 15 45 62 62 59 48 28 414 2A.3A-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 4 5 9 2 3 2 4 2 4 1 2 1 2 1 1 43 3.50 - 7.49 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 7 1 0 1 0 0 20 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 5 6 9 2 3 2 4 3 11 9 3 2 3 1 1 65 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 0 2 6 3 8 4 4 2 0 0 2 0 0 0 33 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 6 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 1 0 2 6 3 8 4 8 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 39 2A.3A-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 8 22 14 5 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 50 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 8 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 8 22 14 12 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 58 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 7 15 27 37 15 17 33 23 14 7 3 7 17 17 15 13 267 3.50 - 7.49 21 4 3 8 2 0 0 0 15 17 45 46 52 46 41 19 319 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 16 20 18 11 5 4 81 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 30 19 30 45 17 17 33 23 29 29 64 76 88 74 61 36 671 2A.3A-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 696 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 671 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 25 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 96.4% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.6 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 4.77 4.32 5.07 61.70 9.69 5.81 8.64 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 14 1 3 5 0 B 2 1 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 6 7 3 0 0 C 2 4 0 4 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 5 1 4 6 2 0 D 21 8 21 28 7 3 1 0 6 15 45 62 62 59 48 28 0 E 1 5 6 9 2 3 2 4 3 11 9 3 2 3 1 1 0 F 1 1 0 2 6 3 8 4 8 2 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 8 22 14 12 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 30 19 30 45 17 17 33 23 29 29 64 76 88 74 61 36 0 2A.3A-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3.50 - 7.49 7 4 5 6 2 6 3 3 3 2 0 3 7 0 0 1 52 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 8 11 11 2 0 36 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 4 5 6 2 8 4 4 3 4 2 12 20 11 2 1 95 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 2 3 1 1 1 0 15 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 3 2 2 3 0 23 2A.3A-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 0 10 3.50 - 7.49 1 1 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 2 2 2 0 0 0 0 13 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 2 4 0 0 11 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 4 4 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 5 5 3 5 1 0 35 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 9 12 5 8 4 2 3 1 0 0 1 2 1 3 3 7 61 3.50 - 7.49 20 1 0 8 10 3 2 3 2 9 11 9 9 18 26 7 138 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 13 21 14 18 0 72 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 29 13 5 16 14 5 5 4 2 11 17 25 32 38 47 14 277 2A.3A-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 3 10 18 25 9 6 6 4 2 0 1 2 5 2 0 4 97 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 1 9 4 0 0 0 2 6 4 6 0 2 0 0 34 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 10 19 34 13 6 6 4 4 7 5 8 6 4 0 4 135 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 2 8 6 4 12 8 3 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 48 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 2 8 6 4 12 8 3 3 1 0 0 0 1 1 52 2A.3A-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 5 3 12 14 33 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 86 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 5 3 12 14 33 17 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 89 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 13 26 32 45 31 28 55 30 5 1 5 4 7 6 6 14 308 3.50 - 7.49 28 9 10 23 18 9 5 8 12 21 19 23 17 21 27 8 258 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 8 24 36 30 22 0 126 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 3 3 0 0 11 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 41 35 42 68 49 37 60 38 18 27 35 53 63 60 55 22 706 2A.3A-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 706 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 38 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 94.9% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.7 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 13.46 3.26 4.96 39.24 19.12 7.37 12.61 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 7 4 5 6 2 8 4 4 3 4 2 12 20 11 2 1 0 B 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 0 5 3 2 2 3 0 0 C 2 4 4 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 5 5 3 5 1 0 0 D 29 13 5 16 14 5 5 4 2 11 17 25 32 38 47 14 0 E 3 10 19 34 13 6 6 4 4 7 5 8 6 4 0 4 2 F 0 2 2 8 6 4 12 8 3 3 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 G 0 0 5 3 12 14 33 17 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 Total 41 35 42 68 49 37 60 38 18 27 35 53 63 60 55 22 3 2A.3A-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 9 3.50 - 7.49 9 7 1 0 2 1 4 1 0 4 4 12 12 6 1 1 65 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 6 6 8 2 1 29 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 11 8 2 1 2 1 4 1 0 5 9 18 19 15 5 2 103 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 2 1 0 8 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 0 0 0 6 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 4 5 1 2 1 0 19 2A.3A-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 2 0 6 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 1 6 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 3 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 3 4 0 2 1 15 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 6 4 5 1 0 2 0 0 3 4 3 7 4 7 1 48 3.50 - 7.49 7 2 0 0 3 3 1 1 1 8 12 17 4 2 7 2 70 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 21 25 2 1 1 0 52 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 8 8 4 5 4 3 3 1 1 13 37 49 13 7 15 3 174 2A.3A-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 3 2 13 3 8 7 2 5 7 0 5 3 3 2 3 3 69 3.50 - 7.49 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 0 1 4 6 2 1 1 0 1 25 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 3 15 5 9 8 3 5 8 4 11 7 4 3 3 4 96 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 0 1 5 4 6 15 16 6 6 0 2 0 0 0 0 63 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 0 1 5 4 6 15 16 7 6 1 3 0 0 0 0 66 2A.3A-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 1 2 10 14 42 36 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 112 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 1 2 10 14 42 36 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 115 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 8 12 21 17 24 27 61 57 18 9 12 9 12 7 14 4 312 3.50 - 7.49 17 11 3 2 6 5 6 3 6 16 24 36 19 11 9 5 179 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 28 36 10 9 3 1 92 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 25 23 24 19 30 32 67 60 24 30 64 85 41 27 26 10 588 2A.3A-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 588 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 132 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 81.7% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.2 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 17.52 3.23 2.55 29.59 16.33 11.22 19.56 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 11 8 2 1 2 1 4 1 0 5 9 18 19 15 5 2 0 B 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 4 5 1 2 1 0 0 C 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 3 4 0 2 1 0 D 8 8 4 5 4 3 3 1 1 13 37 49 13 7 15 3 0 E 4 3 15 5 9 8 3 5 8 4 11 7 4 3 3 4 0 F 2 0 1 5 4 6 15 16 7 6 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 2 1 2 10 14 42 36 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total 25 23 24 19 30 32 67 60 24 30 64 85 41 27 26 10 1 2A.3A-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 7 3.50 - 7.49 25 13 6 1 1 0 0 0 2 6 12 13 26 20 11 14 150 7.50 - 12.49 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 6 3 3 1 28 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 30 15 6 1 1 0 0 0 2 6 18 20 33 23 15 16 186 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 1 0 6 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 3 3 0 12 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 4 1 4 4 0 21 2A.3A-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 1 9 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 1 0 2 14 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 2 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 8 1 0 3 27 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 7 5 5 3 2 1 0 2 5 4 4 10 9 2 2 0 61 3.50 - 7.49 3 2 0 4 2 1 1 0 1 2 9 8 1 3 5 4 46 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 10 2 0 0 0 18 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 10 7 5 7 4 2 1 2 6 6 19 28 12 5 7 4 125 2A.3A-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 6 5 4 4 2 5 6 7 17 6 10 2 2 3 2 5 86 3.50 - 7.49 4 2 0 2 0 0 1 0 5 5 9 3 3 0 0 1 35 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 10 7 4 6 2 5 7 7 22 11 19 5 5 3 2 6 122 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 1 8 18 9 10 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 51 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 0 0 1 8 18 9 11 4 1 1 1 0 1 0 57 2A.3A-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 1 4 4 13 48 51 14 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 137 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 1 4 4 13 48 53 16 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 143 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 15 14 10 13 9 27 72 69 46 11 20 15 16 6 7 7 357 3.50 - 7.49 34 19 6 7 6 1 2 2 11 17 32 29 34 27 19 21 267 7.50 - 12.49 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 19 10 3 3 1 52 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 52 34 16 20 15 28 74 71 57 28 65 64 60 36 29 29 681 2A.3A-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 681 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 63 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.5% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.7 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 27.31 3.08 3.96 18.36 17.91 8.37 21.00 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 30 15 6 1 1 0 0 0 2 6 18 20 33 23 15 16 0 B 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 4 1 4 4 0 0 C 1 2 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 8 1 0 3 0 D 10 7 5 7 4 2 1 2 6 6 19 28 12 5 7 4 0 E 10 7 4 6 2 5 7 7 22 11 19 5 5 3 2 6 1 F 1 0 0 0 1 8 18 9 11 4 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 G 0 2 1 4 4 13 48 53 16 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 Total 52 34 16 20 15 28 74 71 57 28 65 64 60 36 29 29 3 2A.3A-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 2 1 0 0 1 2 4 5 3 0 1 4 5 3 3 36 3.50 - 7.49 6 3 0 1 2 1 2 1 8 12 11 15 15 14 19 22 132 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 5 4 7 1 0 27 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 8 5 1 1 2 2 4 5 13 20 16 21 23 26 23 25 195 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 1 6 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 1 1 3 1 16 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 9 2 1 4 2 26 2A.3A-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 1 0 0 1 1 9 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 1 1 10 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 9 4 0 0 2 2 22 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 8 7 2 2 0 0 1 2 1 3 4 6 1 1 5 6 49 3.50 - 7.49 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 11 11 5 3 7 10 59 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 8 1 3 0 0 20 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 11 7 2 2 0 0 1 2 1 13 22 26 7 7 12 16 132 2A.3A-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 4 1 3 4 9 2 4 7 14 8 3 2 1 2 6 8 78 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 5 4 1 3 0 0 20 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 1 3 4 9 2 4 7 14 14 8 6 2 5 6 8 100 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 11 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 1 4 4 14 26 26 11 2 1 0 0 0 0 2 93 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 1 4 4 14 26 26 12 9 1 0 0 0 0 2 112 2A.3A-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 6 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 1 0 1 5 51 12 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 77 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 1 0 1 5 51 12 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 83 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 22 0.75 - 3.49 16 12 9 11 14 22 85 51 37 17 9 10 6 8 15 20 342 3.50 - 7.49 12 3 0 1 2 1 2 1 9 36 34 36 22 21 30 34 244 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 17 19 6 10 2 1 61 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 28 15 9 12 16 23 87 52 46 59 60 66 34 39 47 55 670 2A.3A-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 670 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 50 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.1% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.6 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 29.10 3.88 3.28 19.70 14.93 16.72 12.39 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 8 5 1 1 2 2 4 5 13 20 16 21 23 26 23 25 0 B 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 9 2 1 4 2 0 C 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 9 4 0 0 2 2 0 D 11 7 2 2 0 0 1 2 1 13 22 26 7 7 12 16 3 E 5 1 3 4 9 2 4 7 14 14 8 6 2 5 6 8 2 F 0 2 1 4 4 14 26 26 12 9 1 0 0 0 0 2 11 G 1 0 1 0 1 5 51 12 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Total 28 15 9 12 16 23 87 52 46 59 60 66 34 39 47 55 22 2A.3A-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 7 3 2 0 4 3 4 3 3 1 0 3 0 5 2 3 43 3.50 - 7.49 10 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 4 10 16 28 19 7 3 6 108 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 5 1 0 0 0 11 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 17 4 3 0 5 4 5 3 8 13 18 37 20 12 5 9 163 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 0 11 3.50 - 7.49 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 4 0 0 0 3 12 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 1 6 0 1 0 3 23 2A.3A-31
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 10 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 4 0 1 0 4 15 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 7 0 1 1 4 27 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 7 9 5 8 9 1 6 1 11 8 2 0 8 5 8 7 95 3.50 - 7.49 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 5 12 17 4 3 4 2 53 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 10 9 6 8 9 2 6 2 11 14 16 18 13 8 12 9 155 2A.3A-32
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 3 1 3 6 5 11 20 22 22 9 2 1 5 2 0 8 120 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 6 0 1 1 0 1 16 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 2 3 6 5 11 20 22 24 14 8 1 6 3 0 9 139 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 5 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 6 3 10 21 45 23 8 3 0 0 1 0 0 1 122 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 6 3 10 21 45 23 9 5 0 0 1 0 0 1 130 2A.3A-33
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 2 3 7 37 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 59 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 2 3 7 37 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 11 0.75 - 3.49 19 15 19 22 35 43 113 56 47 22 5 7 14 13 11 19 460 3.50 - 7.49 18 2 2 0 1 2 1 1 10 22 36 53 24 12 7 16 207 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 4 8 2 0 0 0 19 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 37 17 21 22 36 45 114 57 58 48 45 69 40 25 18 35 698 2A.3A-34
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 698 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 46 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.8% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 2.9 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 23.35 3.30 3.87 22.21 19.91 18.62 8.74 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 17 4 3 0 5 4 5 3 8 13 18 37 20 12 5 9 0 B 4 1 0 1 2 0 1 0 2 1 1 6 0 1 0 3 0 C 2 1 3 2 2 0 0 0 2 0 2 7 0 1 1 4 0 D 10 9 6 8 9 2 6 2 11 14 16 18 13 8 12 9 2 E 3 2 3 6 5 11 20 22 24 14 8 1 6 3 0 9 2 F 1 0 6 3 10 21 45 23 9 5 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 G 0 0 0 2 3 7 37 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Total 37 17 21 22 36 45 114 57 58 48 45 69 40 25 18 35 11 2A.3A-35
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 5 1 1 1 0 5 1 4 3 2 1 4 0 2 0 6 36 3.50 - 7.49 6 2 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 7 26 33 13 1 5 2 97 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 8 1 0 0 0 20 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 11 3 1 2 0 5 2 4 3 9 38 45 14 3 5 8 153 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 11 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 7 2 0 1 0 18 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 4 6 8 2 2 1 1 31 2A.3A-36
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 2 1 0 2 1 0 2 0 12 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 6 1 2 0 0 13 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 3 2 3 9 2 2 2 0 28 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 6 5 17 4 5 1 3 3 2 3 7 6 7 4 1 6 80 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 15 22 3 1 1 2 52 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 8 5 17 4 5 1 3 3 3 8 26 28 10 5 2 8 139 2A.3A-37
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 26 0.75 - 3.49 2 11 12 14 17 21 14 23 17 15 3 1 6 4 6 8 174 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 7 1 0 0 0 0 17 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 12 12 14 17 21 14 23 18 22 10 3 6 5 6 8 219 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 29 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 7 13 11 50 13 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 107 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 7 13 11 50 13 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 136 2A.3A-38
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 60 0.75 - 3.49 15 18 32 28 36 40 75 48 32 25 13 13 14 12 9 21 431 3.50 - 7.49 9 3 0 1 0 0 1 0 3 24 53 69 19 4 7 4 197 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 11 1 1 0 0 31 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 24 21 32 29 36 40 76 48 35 49 84 93 34 17 16 25 719 2A.3A-39
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 719 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 25 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 96.6% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 2.9 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 21.28 4.31 3.89 19.33 30.46 18.92 1.81 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WS W WN NW NNW CALM W W A 11 3 1 2 0 5 2 4 3 9 38 45 14 3 5 8 0 B 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 4 6 8 2 2 1 1 0 C 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 3 2 3 9 2 2 2 0 0 D 8 5 17 4 5 1 3 3 3 8 26 28 10 5 2 8 3 E 2 12 12 14 17 21 14 23 18 22 10 3 6 5 6 8 26 F 0 0 1 7 13 11 50 13 7 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 29 G 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Total 24 21 32 29 36 40 76 48 35 49 84 93 34 17 16 25 60 2A.3A-40
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 8 0 0 1 0 2 1 2 5 3 2 1 2 4 1 4 36 3.50 - 7.49 16 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 11 12 19 6 10 6 7 94 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 3 2 3 0 0 16 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 25 2 0 1 0 2 1 4 8 14 21 23 10 17 7 11 146 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 3 0 1 8 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 4 2 1 1 0 11 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 6 2 4 1 1 22 2A.3A-41
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 2 1 1 8 3.50 - 7.49 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 2 1 0 0 1 11 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 4 1 2 1 2 21 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 9 4 5 1 0 2 2 4 5 3 4 3 2 1 7 8 60 3.50 - 7.49 7 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 22 4 7 5 5 3 64 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 1 0 1 0 10 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 16 6 6 1 0 2 2 4 6 10 28 13 10 6 13 11 135 2A.3A-42
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 6 3 7 9 5 15 9 7 8 7 2 0 0 1 2 2 83 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 6 6 1 0 0 0 27 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 4 8 9 5 15 9 7 8 19 8 6 1 1 2 2 113 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 2 4 13 23 57 23 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 136 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 2 4 13 23 57 23 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 143 2A.3A-43
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 2 1 3 20 36 20 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 87 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 2 1 3 20 36 20 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 92 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 11 0.75 - 3.49 25 11 17 16 21 62 105 56 33 15 11 4 4 11 11 16 418 3.50 - 7.49 24 7 2 0 0 0 0 2 8 33 45 35 17 16 12 11 212 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 13 3 3 1 0 31 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 50 18 19 16 21 62 105 58 41 48 66 52 24 30 24 27 672 2A.3A-44
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 672 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 48 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.3% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.1 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 21.73 3.27 3.13 20.09 16.82 21.28 13.69 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WS W WN NW NNW CALM W W A 25 2 0 1 0 2 1 4 8 14 21 23 10 17 7 11 0 B 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 6 2 4 1 1 0 C 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 4 1 2 1 2 0 D 16 6 6 1 0 2 2 4 6 10 28 13 10 6 13 11 1 E 6 4 8 9 5 15 9 7 8 19 8 6 1 1 2 2 3 F 0 2 2 4 13 23 57 23 12 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 G 0 1 2 1 3 20 36 20 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 Total 50 18 19 16 21 62 105 58 41 48 66 52 24 30 24 27 11 2A.3A-45
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 5 3.50 - 7.49 7 4 4 2 3 2 2 1 0 7 5 5 4 0 2 4 52 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 11 11 3 0 0 31 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 4 5 2 3 2 2 3 0 8 11 16 16 3 2 5 89 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 1 1 0 0 9 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 2 6 2 1 0 0 16 2A.3A-46
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3.50 - 7.49 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 4 4 0 1 0 17 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 0 0 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 2 5 8 0 1 1 27 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 3 1 5 5 4 3 1 0 3 3 4 0 3 2 2 0 39 3.50 - 7.49 4 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 17 20 20 4 8 6 86 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 35 25 0 2 0 66 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 0 8 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 1 5 6 5 5 1 0 5 4 25 60 51 6 12 6 201 2A.3A-47
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 5 2 4 3 8 6 7 6 9 6 2 0 0 1 1 1 61 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 1 0 2 0 1 0 2 4 12 4 0 0 0 0 26 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 2 5 3 10 6 8 6 11 11 15 4 0 1 1 1 89 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 1 0 6 5 14 18 23 5 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 76 3.50 - 7.49 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 2 0 6 5 14 18 23 11 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 86 2A.3A-48
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 1 6 35 35 9 9 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 99 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 1 6 35 35 9 10 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 100 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 10 6 10 16 23 59 62 40 27 12 8 0 4 4 3 3 287 3.50 - 7.49 16 5 5 3 6 4 3 1 11 19 37 36 29 5 11 10 201 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11 50 41 3 2 0 109 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 0 0 0 9 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 26 11 15 19 29 63 65 41 38 33 56 91 78 12 16 13 608 2A.3A-49
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 608 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 136 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 81.7% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.5 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 14.64 2.63 4.44 33.06 14.64 14.14 16.45 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WS W WN NW NNW CALM W W A 7 4 5 2 3 2 2 3 0 8 11 16 16 3 2 5 0 B 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 2 6 2 1 0 0 0 C 3 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 2 5 8 0 1 1 0 D 7 1 5 6 5 5 1 0 5 4 25 60 51 6 12 6 2 E 5 2 5 3 10 6 8 6 11 11 15 4 0 1 1 1 0 F 3 2 0 6 5 14 18 23 11 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 1 6 35 35 9 10 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 Total 26 11 15 19 29 63 65 41 38 33 56 91 78 12 16 13 2 2A.3A-50
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 0 7 3.50 - 7.49 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3 5 7 4 9 2 44 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 1 6 0 1 16 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 8 11 8 11 10 3 67 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 3 0 1 3 0 11 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 6 2 2 1 0 13 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 9 2 3 4 0 24 2A.3A-51
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 4 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 2 3 3 1 15 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 2 3 0 12 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 7 4 5 6 1 31 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 6 14 10 5 0 0 1 1 3 1 1 0 2 7 7 10 68 3.50 - 7.49 14 7 1 5 0 0 0 0 2 6 7 14 7 19 51 12 145 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 22 4 3 12 0 52 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 20 21 11 10 0 0 1 1 5 9 17 37 13 29 70 22 266 2A.3A-52
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 2 5 9 2 6 4 2 4 1 3 1 1 2 3 0 1 46 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 8 0 0 0 0 1 4 9 14 2 0 1 0 40 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 5 5 0 1 0 18 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 6 9 10 6 4 2 4 2 8 16 20 9 3 2 1 107 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 6 7 8 12 15 7 2 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 64 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 11 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 6 7 8 12 15 7 7 9 3 0 1 0 0 0 76 2A.3A-53
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 0 4 6 15 36 21 3 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 89 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 10 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 0 5 6 15 36 21 6 6 1 0 0 2 0 0 100 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 5 0.75 - 3.49 9 22 25 18 20 31 54 33 9 12 5 3 6 12 8 11 278 3.50 - 7.49 21 10 1 14 0 0 0 0 12 25 26 39 18 28 67 15 276 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 21 41 13 13 17 1 111 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 30 32 26 32 20 31 54 33 21 42 52 84 37 53 92 27 671 2A.3A-54
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 671 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 49 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.2% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.5 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 9.99 3.58 4.62 39.64 15.95 11.33 14.90 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WS W WN NW NNW CALM W W A 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 8 11 8 11 10 3 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 9 2 3 4 0 0 C 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 7 4 5 6 1 0 D 20 21 11 10 0 0 1 1 5 9 17 37 13 29 70 22 0 E 2 6 9 10 6 4 2 4 2 8 16 20 9 3 2 1 3 F 0 0 6 7 8 12 15 7 7 9 3 0 1 0 0 0 1 G 0 1 0 5 6 15 36 21 6 6 1 0 0 2 0 0 1 Total 30 32 26 32 20 31 54 33 21 42 52 84 37 53 92 27 5 2A.3A-55
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 11 4 6 3 31 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 1 0 2 12 5 7 3 38 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 7 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 1 1 1 11 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 2 3 2 20 2A.3A-56
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 3 12 3.50 - 7.49 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 4 1 12 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 2 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 0 7 6 29 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 11 12 37 15 1 1 3 2 4 8 4 2 1 1 4 5 111 3.50 - 7.49 20 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 15 18 18 16 11 19 13 136 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 21 12 19 9 4 2 78 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 1 0 10 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 31 14 37 15 1 1 3 2 8 34 43 35 42 21 28 20 338 2A.3A-57
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 5 0.75 - 3.49 5 5 11 8 17 6 2 5 4 4 5 3 3 1 3 1 83 3.50 - 7.49 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 9 7 3 0 0 0 3 29 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 0 0 0 0 10 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 6 11 8 17 6 2 5 8 13 20 8 3 1 3 4 127 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 0 3 1 3 5 6 6 7 3 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 37 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 3 1 3 5 6 6 8 15 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 58 2A.3A-58
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 5 3 5 11 20 9 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 60 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 5 3 5 11 20 9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 64 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 13 0.75 - 3.49 17 21 58 31 31 24 33 23 16 13 12 6 5 3 9 11 313 3.50 - 7.49 25 6 0 1 2 1 0 1 23 29 26 26 32 16 30 21 239 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 29 15 21 10 8 5 99 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 6 0 1 0 10 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 42 27 58 32 33 25 33 24 39 53 67 50 64 29 48 37 674 2A.3A-59
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 674 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 70 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 90.6% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.3 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 5.64 2.97 4.30 50.15 18.84 8.61 9.50 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WS W WN NW NNW CALM W W A 2 0 0 0 3 1 2 0 0 1 0 2 12 5 7 3 0 B 0 0 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 2 3 2 0 C 2 4 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 3 0 7 6 0 D 31 14 37 15 1 1 3 2 8 34 43 35 42 21 28 20 3 E 7 6 11 8 17 6 2 5 8 13 20 8 3 1 3 4 5 F 0 3 1 3 5 6 6 8 15 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 4 G 0 0 5 3 5 11 20 9 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 Total 42 27 58 32 33 25 33 24 39 53 67 50 64 29 48 37 13 2A.3A-60
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 26 9 6 3 6 13 11 16 16 10 7 10 8 18 10 18 187 3.50 - 7.49 97 38 17 13 14 12 13 8 21 65 91 136 128 71 63 66 853 7.50 - 12.49 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 44 59 59 44 14 4 241 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 127 48 23 16 20 25 24 24 38 86 143 207 198 133 87 88 1287 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 4 4 6 5 5 1 3 0 4 0 11 4 0 8 3 3 61 3.50 - 7.49 8 4 3 2 1 1 0 0 4 11 17 42 18 17 18 5 151 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 8 21 9 5 4 1 51 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 12 8 9 7 6 2 3 0 8 14 37 68 27 30 25 9 265 2A.3A-61
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 5 13 10 11 3 0 1 3 3 2 4 6 8 3 8 6 86 3.50 - 7.49 13 8 2 1 7 0 0 2 4 10 20 35 17 14 16 13 162 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 14 20 12 8 7 3 66 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 18 21 12 12 10 0 1 5 8 13 39 61 37 25 31 22 315 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WNW NW NN TOTA W W L CALM 14 0.75 - 3.49 80 91 140 97 45 22 26 17 39 41 37 41 61 54 72 65 928 3.50 - 7.49 102 20 8 23 17 11 4 7 19 95 200 215 153 134 200 83 1291 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 25 104 181 101 48 40 6 507 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 27 12 3 1 0 44 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 184 111 148 120 62 33 30 24 58 161 342 464 327 239 313 154 2784 2A.3A-62
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 45 0.75 - 3.49 42 57 108 94 96 89 86 98 110 67 38 21 29 26 26 44 1031 3.50 - 7.49 9 14 10 21 7 1 3 1 27 76 80 44 9 8 2 7 319 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 18 10 8 1 1 0 44 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 51 71 118 115 103 90 89 99 137 149 136 75 47 35 29 51 1440 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 56 0.75 - 3.49 7 12 23 55 82 127 285 166 71 28 9 4 6 0 2 4 881 3.50 - 7.49 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 34 26 4 1 1 0 0 0 72 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 9 15 23 55 82 127 285 167 105 54 13 5 7 0 2 4 1009 2A.3A-63
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 17 0.75 - 3.49 1 5 17 20 53 145 368 203 53 7 2 0 1 2 1 4 882 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 3 25 4 2 0 0 1 0 0 39 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 7 18 21 53 145 368 206 78 11 4 0 1 3 1 4 938 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 132 0.75 - 3.49 165 191 310 285 290 397 780 503 296 155 108 86 113 111 122 144 4056 3.50 - 7.49 231 89 41 61 46 25 20 22 134 287 414 473 326 245 299 174 2887 7.50 - 12.49 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 46 188 291 189 106 66 14 909 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 30 16 3 1 0 54 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 402 281 351 346 336 422 800 525 432 488 714 880 644 465 488 332 8038 2A.3A-64
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 8784 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 8038 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 746 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.5% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.0 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 16.01 3.30 3.92 34.64 17.91 12.55 11.67 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WS W WN NW NNW CALM W W A 127 48 23 16 20 25 24 24 38 86 143 207 198 133 87 88 0 B 12 8 9 7 6 2 3 0 8 14 37 68 27 30 25 9 0 C 18 21 12 12 10 0 1 5 8 13 39 61 37 25 31 22 0 D 184 111 148 120 62 33 30 24 58 161 342 464 327 239 313 154 14 E 51 71 118 115 103 90 89 99 137 149 136 75 47 35 29 51 45 F 9 15 23 55 82 127 285 167 105 54 13 5 7 0 2 4 56 G 1 7 18 21 53 145 368 206 78 11 4 0 1 3 1 4 17 Total 402 281 351 346 336 422 800 525 432 488 714 880 644 465 488 332 132 2A.3A-65
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 APPENDIX B Monthly and Annual Joint Frequency Distribution of T(150ft-35ft) and 35-ft Wind Data (January 1, 1976 - December 31, 1980) 2A.3Bi
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 0 3 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 15 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 2 6 1 0 2 1 0 3 4 8 7 5 2 0 43 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 16 4 3 0 33 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 5 4 7 2 2 4 2 1 3 7 18 26 9 5 0 97 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 1 4 2 2 2 1 16 7.50 - 12.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 9 7 4 1 1 0 25 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 5 0 1 0 9 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 11 13 12 3 4 1 52 2A.3B-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 2 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 8 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 1 4 3 0 0 0 1 1 2 6 9 3 5 1 36 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7 10 10 4 1 0 33 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 1 0 0 0 7 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 3 5 4 0 1 1 1 2 11 22 20 7 6 1 85 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 32 46 77 59 47 19 8 13 18 19 12 13 16 23 23 20 445 3.50 - 7.49 23 11 32 22 2 2 0 3 23 49 135 206 115 59 77 33 792 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 3 2 1 0 0 0 2 11 92 254 109 31 13 1 519 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 39 4 1 0 0 55 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 8
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 56 57 112 83 50 21 8 16 43 79 255 515 244 114 113 54 1820 2A.3B-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 11 0.75 - 3.49 20 31 56 39 40 23 28 22 22 22 9 9 3 11 6 10 351 3.50 - 7.49 4 12 21 21 1 0 0 3 26 44 49 15 7 5 4 3 215 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 5 3 0 0 0 0 1 6 28 29 5 0 0 0 77 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 6 1 0 0 0 11 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 24 43 82 63 41 23 28 25 49 73 90 59 16 16 10 13 666 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 6 0.75 - 3.49 3 9 18 20 38 17 30 25 11 4 2 2 3 0 0 3 185 3.50 - 7.49 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 9 3 1 0 0 0 0 27 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 11 18 20 38 17 30 25 20 13 6 5 3 0 0 3 221 2A.3B-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 6 0.75 - 3.49 1 2 5 9 20 19 57 51 10 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 176 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 11 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 3 6 10 20 19 57 51 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 196 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 27 0.75 - 3.49 56 91 160 129 147 80 126 113 63 47 23 26 25 34 29 33 1182 3.50 - 7.49 30 29 57 54 7 3 2 7 70 108 194 240 140 74 90 38 1143 7.50 - 12.49 0 1 8 5 1 0 0 0 4 19 140 308 144 40 18 1 689 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18 55 12 1 1 0 87 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 9
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 86 121 225 188 155 83 128 120 137 175 380 632 321 149 138 72 3137 2A.3B-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3137 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 583 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 84.3% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 5.2 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 3.09 1.66 2.71 58.02 21.23 7.04 6.25 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 5 4 7 2 2 4 2 1 3 7 18 26 9 5 0 2 B 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3 11 13 12 3 4 1 0 C 0 0 3 5 4 0 1 1 1 2 11 22 20 7 6 1 1 D 55 57 112 83 50 21 8 16 43 79 255 515 244 114 113 54 1 E 24 43 82 63 41 23 28 25 49 73 90 59 16 16 10 13 11 F 6 11 18 20 38 17 30 25 20 13 6 5 3 0 0 3 6 G 1 3 6 10 20 19 57 51 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 Total 86 121 225 188 155 83 128 120 137 175 380 632 321 149 138 72 27 2A.3B-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 6 2 0 1 2 0 0 1 2 0 2 1 1 0 20 3.50 - 7.49 8 3 5 12 4 0 2 0 5 5 7 23 29 18 12 4 137 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 22 6 4 1 40 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 9 4 11 14 4 1 4 0 5 6 12 28 55 26 17 5 201 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 7 3.50 - 7.49 3 0 4 3 2 1 1 0 0 1 3 14 6 9 6 1 54 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 5 11 5 1 0 26 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 2 7 3 2 1 1 0 0 3 6 19 17 14 7 2 87 2A.3B-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 to 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 1 4 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 2 15 3.50 - 7.49 6 3 2 6 0 0 0 1 1 2 3 11 17 9 9 3 73 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 3 9 2 1 1 27 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 5 3 10 0 0 2 2 1 3 14 16 26 11 10 6 115 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 29 25 44 54 18 5 8 6 5 7 14 19 25 33 22 25 339 3.50 - 7.49 53 25 22 34 2 0 2 2 7 37 84 115 122 115 131 51 802 7.50 - 12.49 3 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 77 98 54 22 12 7 297 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 10 1 0 0 0 17 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 85 51 68 88 20 5 10 8 12 65 181 242 202 170 165 83 1455 2A.3B-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFO-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 12 21 32 38 26 21 16 9 15 10 16 9 10 8 12 14 269 3.50 - 7.49 6 9 15 10 1 0 0 1 9 36 68 42 11 12 14 11 245 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 10 44 17 4 1 2 0 81 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 18 30 48 49 28 21 16 10 24 56 129 69 25 21 28 25 599 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 5 6 16 26 23 18 34 30 16 6 2 2 4 0 0 1 189 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 26 11 18 3 1 0 2 0 65 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 7 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 6 17 27 23 18 35 31 42 18 25 5 5 0 2 1 265 2A.3B-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 14 0.75 - 3.49 3 8 14 14 37 36 112 89 26 11 3 2 0 1 2 2 360 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 2 2 1 1 0 4 22 10 2 3 0 0 0 0 49 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 10 16 16 38 37 112 93 48 22 7 5 0 1 2 2 426 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 20 0.75 - 3.49 50 65 116 138 104 81 174 135 62 35 39 34 41 43 37 45 1199 3.50 - 7.49 77 42 51 68 10 2 5 9 70 102 185 211 185 163 174 70 1425 7.50 - 12.49 3 1 3 1 1 0 1 0 0 36 143 127 100 36 20 9 481 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 12 3 1 0 0 23 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 130 109 170 207 115 83 180 144 132 173 374 384 330 243 231 124 3148 2A.3B-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3408 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3148 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 260 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 92.4% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.6 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 6.39 2.76 3.65 46.22 19.03 8.42 13.53 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 9 4 11 14 4 1 4 0 5 6 12 28 55 26 17 5 0 B 3 2 7 3 2 1 1 0 0 3 6 19 17 14 7 2 0 C 6 5 3 10 0 0 2 2 1 3 14 16 26 11 10 6 0 D 85 51 68 88 20 5 10 8 12 65 181 242 202 170 165 83 0 E 18 30 48 49 28 21 16 10 24 56 129 69 25 21 28 25 2 F 6 6 17 27 23 18 35 31 42 18 25 5 5 0 2 1 4 G 3 10 16 16 38 37 112 93 48 22 7 5 0 1 2 2 14 Total 130 108 170 207 115 83 180 144 132 173 374 384 330 243 231 124 20 2A.3B-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 5 0 1 1 4 2 2 1 0 2 2 0 0 3 2 25 3.50 - 7.49 33 19 16 11 10 19 21 15 9 13 18 28 37 19 7 9 284 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 6 14 26 36 44 27 13 2 172 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7 2 2 0 0 0 14 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 33 24 16 12 11 23 24 20 16 30 53 68 83 46 23 13 495 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 9 3.50 - 7.49 3 3 3 1 0 0 2 2 4 1 8 5 4 3 3 1 43 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 5 8 6 3 2 0 27 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 3 4 3 0 0 3 3 4 3 15 14 10 7 6 2 80 2A.3B-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 2 3 3 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 3 1 1 2 0 18 3.50 - 7.49 3 5 3 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 7 6 2 3 5 2 52 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 10 10 13 8 0 1 51 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 8 6 3 2 3 3 3 4 9 21 19 17 12 7 3 126 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 21 22 33 36 15 9 9 5 5 5 7 6 10 16 10 24 233 3.50 - 7.49 54 15 26 43 19 6 6 4 10 37 64 61 82 59 90 41 617 7.50 - 12.49 2 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 11 25 82 67 80 32 37 5 343 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 14 20 2 8 1 0 51 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 77 38 59 79 34 15 16 9 26 73 167 154 174 115 138 70 1248 2A.3B-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFO-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 8 0.75 - 3.49 17 24 60 66 42 17 17 13 26 6 7 11 16 10 14 10 356 3.50 - 7.49 6 6 21 46 20 2 5 6 24 43 41 29 13 9 15 7 293 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 9 23 7 8 2 0 0 53 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 5 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 23 30 81 112 62 20 22 19 53 58 76 47 37 21 29 17 715 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 8 0.75 - 3.49 3 8 8 29 34 42 54 23 21 5 6 2 0 0 2 2 239 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 3 2 0 0 1 2 11 10 8 1 0 0 0 0 40 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 10 11 31 34 42 55 25 32 15 15 3 1 0 2 2 289 2A.3B-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 19 0.75 - 3.49 3 6 19 33 48 84 111 54 16 4 5 0 4 0 3 2 392 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 1 9 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 18 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 6 19 37 48 84 111 55 25 6 7 0 4 0 3 2 429 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 40 0.75 - 3.49 46 68 124 167 140 157 194 98 69 20 29 25 31 28 35 41 1272 3.50 - 7.49 99 50 72 110 51 29 37 32 70 108 148 130 138 93 120 60 1347 7.50 - 12.49 2 1 0 0 0 1 3 4 21 57 147 128 152 72 52 8 648 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 30 22 5 8 1 0 75 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 147 119 196 277 191 187 234 134 160 194 354 305 326 201 208 109 3382 2A.3B-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3382 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 338 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 90.9% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.9 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 14.64 2.37 3.73 36.90 21.14 8.55 12.68 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 33 24 16 12 11 23 24 20 16 30 53 68 83 46 23 13 0 B 3 3 4 3 0 0 3 3 4 3 15 14 10 7 6 2 0 C 5 8 6 3 2 3 3 3 4 9 21 19 17 12 7 3 1 D 77 39 59 79 34 15 16 9 26 73 167 154 174 115 138 70 4 E 23 30 81 112 62 20 22 19 53 58 76 47 37 21 29 17 8 F 3 10 11 31 34 42 55 25 32 15 15 3 1 0 2 2 8 G 3 5 19 37 48 84 111 55 25 6 7 0 4 0 3 2 19 Total 147 119 146 277 191 187 234 134 160 194 354 305 326 201 208 109 40 2A.3B-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 4 3 2 2 0 0 0 1 1 1 2 2 5 4 3 4 34 3.50 - 7.49 50 34 15 12 13 2 7 3 7 11 38 59 66 42 34 47 440 7.50 - 12.49 17 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 45 28 27 23 15 19 183 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 10 10 2 0 0 27 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 71 40 18 14 13 2 7 4 8 17 90 99 109 71 52 70 685 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 3 2 1 2 1 0 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 1 17 3.50 - 7.49 6 3 3 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 4 6 4 6 7 9 54 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7 4 4 1 2 0 22 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 3 6 4 1 2 2 0 1 8 15 12 8 9 9 10 97 2A.3B-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 1 3 3 0 18 3.50 - 7.49 12 1 1 3 2 1 0 1 2 2 3 5 9 7 17 8 74 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 3 4 1 0 3 15 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 14 2 4 4 2 1 0 1 2 5 7 10 15 11 20 11 109 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 13 17 22 17 13 3 9 3 10 11 9 15 16 11 27 10 206 3.50 - 7.49 52 14 11 29 30 7 8 3 4 26 57 45 24 53 84 43 490 7.50 - 12.49 3 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 7 61 50 25 25 13 3 190 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 18 3 0 0 0 25 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 68 31 33 47 45 10 17 6 14 44 132 128 69 89 124 56 915 2A.3B-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 15 21 46 31 37 25 17 21 16 16 12 8 12 17 11 15 320 3.50 - 7.49 15 10 11 17 7 6 4 2 19 22 22 11 5 12 9 8 180 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 15 13 5 3 2 0 48 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 3 1 0 0 8 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 30 31 57 48 44 31 21 23 37 47 51 33 25 33 22 23 558 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 5 0.75 - 3.49 7 2 13 37 40 43 48 46 25 18 6 4 1 1 2 4 297 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 9 2 2 0 1 0 0 27 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 3 14 37 40 43 48 46 36 28 9 6 1 2 2 4 331 2A.3B-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 40 0.75 - 3.49 2 5 7 17 45 81 204 139 23 5 1 1 1 0 0 1 532 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 8 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 5 7 18 45 81 204 141 31 7 1 1 1 0 0 1 585 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 49 0.75 - 3.49 43 49 96 107 136 154 279 210 76 53 34 33 36 37 46 35 1424 3.50 - 7.49 135 63 42 64 52 16 20 11 51 75 126 128 108 121 151 115 1278 7.50 - 12.49 21 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 2 27 130 98 65 53 32 25 460 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14 30 17 4 0 0 66 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 3
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 199 115 139 172 190 170 299 221 129 156 305 289 228 215 229 175 3280 2A.3B-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3600 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3280 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 320 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.1% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.4 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 20.88 2.96 3.32 27.90 17.01 10.09 17.84 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 71 40 19 14 13 2 7 4 8 17 90 99 109 71 52 70 0 B 7 3 6 4 1 2 2 0 1 8 15 12 8 9 9 10 0 C 14 2 4 4 2 1 0 1 2 5 7 10 15 11 20 11 0 D 68 31 33 47 45 10 17 6 14 44 132 128 69 89 124 56 2 E 30 31 57 48 44 31 21 23 37 47 51 33 25 33 22 23 2 F 7 3 14 37 40 43 48 46 36 28 9 6 1 2 2 4 5 G 2 5 7 18 45 81 204 141 31 7 1 1 1 0 0 1 40 Total 199 115 139 172 190 170 299 221 129 156 305 289 228 215 229 175 49 2A.3B-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 6 8 3 4 5 5 6 4 10 2 6 2 8 7 8 5 89 3.50 - 7.49 83 26 26 16 12 6 5 10 27 33 60 49 73 45 33 45 549 7.50 - 12.49 12 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 4 12 37 21 22 9 19 11 150 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 101 35 29 20 19 11 11 14 41 47 105 75 104 61 60 61 795 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 3 2 2 0 0 1 1 1 2 0 4 1 0 2 3 1 23 3.50 - 7.49 4 3 1 1 2 0 0 0 0 3 15 4 7 6 3 9 58 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 3 1 3 0 1 16 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 5 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 27 9 8 11 6 11 98 2A.3B-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 5 3 5 3 1 2 0 1 0 0 2 3 4 4 2 37 3.50 - 7.49 11 0 1 1 4 0 0 0 2 6 7 13 10 7 5 8 75 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 2 7 1 0 1 18 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 13 5 4 6 7 1 2 0 3 7 14 17 20 12 9 11 131 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 28 25 50 33 17 15 11 10 17 19 25 21 26 15 18 16 346 3.50 - 7.49 31 10 1 22 10 4 3 3 12 38 75 53 21 31 33 39 386 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 17 16 7 0 3 2 50 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 59 35 51 55 27 19 14 13 30 61 118 91 54 46 54 57 785 2A.3B-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 8 0.75 - 3.49 20 29 59 45 57 34 27 29 42 30 17 7 14 9 14 13 446 3.50 - 7.49 8 4 2 9 2 1 2 0 12 31 27 10 5 0 2 4 119 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 28 33 61 54 59 35 29 29 54 61 46 19 19 9 16 17 577 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 13 0.75 - 3.49 4 7 10 23 53 73 75 44 31 8 3 2 1 0 4 2 340 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 6 9 5 1 1 0 0 0 28 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 7 11 24 54 75 75 44 37 17 8 3 2 0 4 2 381 2A.3B-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 8 0.75 - 3.49 5 5 7 14 38 137 214 89 21 3 5 0 0 1 1 1 541 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 6 7 14 38 137 214 91 27 4 5 0 0 1 1 1 559 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 31 0.75 - 3.49 68 81 134 124 173 266 336 177 124 62 60 35 52 38 52 40 1822 3.50 - 7.49 138 44 32 50 31 13 10 15 65 121 189 130 117 89 76 105 1225 7.50 - 12.49 12 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 5 17 70 44 37 13 22 15 238 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 1 0 0 0 10 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 218 126 166 174 206 279 346 192 194 200 323 214 207 140 150 160 3326 2A.3B-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3326 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 394 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 89.4% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.5 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 23.90 2.95 3.94 23.60 17.35 11.46 16.81 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 101 35 29 20 19 11 11 14 41 47 105 75 104 61 60 61 1 B 7 5 3 1 2 1 1 1 2 3 27 9 8 11 6 11 0 C 13 5 4 6 7 1 2 0 3 7 14 17 20 12 9 11 0 D 59 36 51 55 27 19 14 13 30 61 118 91 54 46 54 57 1 E 28 33 61 54 59 35 29 29 54 61 46 19 19 9 16 17 8 F 5 7 11 24 54 75 75 44 37 17 8 3 2 0 4 2 13 G 5 5 7 14 38 137 214 91 27 4 5 0 0 1 1 1 8 Total 218 126 166 174 206 279 346 192 194 200 323 214 207 140 150 160 31 2A.3B-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 8 11 15 6 8 6 13 9 17 9 6 5 10 8 11 11 153 3.50 - 7.49 52 17 19 13 8 2 5 15 52 53 89 72 62 48 49 75 631 7.50 - 12.49 1 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 63 26 26 14 11 8 173 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 1 0 0 0 10 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 61 32 35 19 16 8 18 24 69 81 160 110 99 70 71 94 967 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 2 3 2 0 0 1 3 1 3 6 5 1 1 3 33 3.50 - 7.49 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 18 15 3 5 8 3 61 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 2 0 0 0 11 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 2 2 3 2 0 0 1 4 6 24 25 10 6 9 6 106 2A.3B-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 4 1 4 3 1 0 2 0 3 1 0 3 0 3 2 4 31 3.50 - 7.49 13 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 3 9 24 9 2 1 7 6 77 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 7 0 0 1 1 19 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 17 2 5 3 1 0 2 1 6 10 34 19 2 4 10 11 127 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 5 0.75 - 3.49 39 27 20 19 10 11 11 13 23 23 13 17 7 12 22 26 293 3.50 - 7.49 25 3 2 0 1 0 1 3 22 46 56 31 22 23 30 28 293 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 21 19 5 3 0 0 53 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 65 30 22 19 11 11 12 16 45 73 90 68 34 38 52 54 645 2A.3B-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 5 0.75 - 3.49 20 21 27 36 51 38 31 28 50 38 14 5 9 4 12 18 402 3.50 - 7.49 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 14 44 28 10 4 10 4 3 122 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 0 0 2 6 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 24 21 28 36 51 38 31 28 64 82 45 15 14 14 16 23 535 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 26 0.75 - 3.49 1 10 11 26 52 93 109 73 40 6 2 2 1 1 1 4 432 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 10 11 26 52 93 109 73 48 15 2 2 1 1 1 4 475 2A.3B-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 12 0.75 - 3.49 3 2 7 9 18 100 199 62 22 5 0 2 1 1 0 1 432 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 2 7 9 18 100 199 63 23 5 0 2 1 1 0 1 446 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 49 0.75 - 3.49 75 74 86 102 142 248 365 186 158 83 38 40 33 30 49 67 1776 3.50 - 7.49 98 21 23 13 9 2 6 20 101 165 215 137 93 87 98 115 1203 7.50 - 12.49 3 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 24 100 56 34 17 12 11 262 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 1 0 0 0 11 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 176 99 110 115 151 250 371 206 259 272 355 241 161 134 159 193 3301 2A.3B-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3600 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3301 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 299 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.7% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.6 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 29.29 3.21 3.85 19.54 16.21 14.39 13.51 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 61 32 35 19 16 8 18 24 69 81 160 110 99 70 71 94 0 B 5 2 2 3 2 0 0 1 4 6 24 25 10 6 9 6 1 C 17 2 5 3 1 0 2 1 6 10 34 19 2 4 10 11 0 D 65 30 22 19 11 11 12 16 45 73 90 68 34 38 52 54 5 E 24 21 28 36 51 38 31 28 64 82 45 15 14 14 16 23 5 F 1 10 11 26 52 93 109 73 48 15 2 2 1 1 1 4 26 G 3 2 7 9 18 100 199 63 23 5 0 2 1 1 0 1 12 Total 176 99 110 115 151 250 371 206 259 272 355 241 161 134 159 193 49 2A.3B-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 25 13 15 11 12 9 12 14 16 5 7 8 13 16 10 10 196 3.50 - 7.49 86 18 7 3 8 1 3 5 35 70 109 84 70 35 35 51 620 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 18 47 28 12 2 1 1 111 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 112 31 22 14 20 10 15 19 52 93 163 122 96 53 46 62 930 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 6 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 3 1 2 0 2 26 3.50 - 7.49 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 14 8 9 4 1 4 8 54 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 3 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 11 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 2 14 10 12 6 3 5 10 83 2A.3B-31
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 4 1 4 3 3 0 0 0 1 2 1 3 1 0 2 1 26 3.50 - 7.49 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 7 9 7 1 4 10 55 7.50 - 12.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 0 0 0 8 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 15 3 4 3 3 0 0 0 4 4 10 17 8 1 6 11 89 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 33 30 30 32 17 5 12 14 21 20 13 14 16 16 18 28 319 3.50 - 7.49 20 5 1 0 0 2 0 1 6 54 71 61 18 11 17 14 281 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1` 32 17 3 0 0 0 53 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 53 35 31 32 17 7 12 15 27 75 116 92 37 27 35 42 655 2A.3B-32
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 12 0.75 - 3.49 23 17 32 52 50 46 53 72 81 35 24 14 15 8 5 19 546 3.50 - 7.49 4 1 2 0 0 1 0 2 23 24 29 6 10 1 1 2 106 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 27 18 34 52 50 47 53 74 104 60 56 20 25 9 6 21 668 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 9 0.75 - 3.49 4 9 10 22 61 127 191 91 40 18 1 2 1 0 0 2 579 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 6 3 0 0 1 0 0 20 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 9 10 22 61 127 191 92 49 24 4 2 1 1 0 2 608 2A.3B-33
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 7 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 1 4 21 76 175 56 26 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 366 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 1 1 4 21 76 175 57 28 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 376 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 30 0.75 - 3.49 96 73 94 126 166 263 444 248 186 83 47 44 47 42 36 63 2058 3.50 - 7.49 126 25 10 3 8 4 3 10 79 170 227 169 109 50 61 85 1139 7.50 - 12.49 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 20 85 50 16 2 2 1 179 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 223 99 104 129 174 267 447 258 266 273 359 265 173 94 99 149 3409 2A.3B-34
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3409 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 311 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.6% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.3 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 27.28 2.43 2.61 19.21 19.60 17.84 11.03 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 112 31 22 14 20 10 16 19 52 93 163 122 96 53 46 62 0 B 11 2 2 2 2 0 1 1 2 14 10 12 6 3 5 10 0 C 15 3 4 3 3 0 0 0 4 4 10 17 8 1 6 11 0 D 53 35 31 32 17 7 12 15 27 75 116 92 37 27 35 42 2 E 27 18 34 52 58 47 53 74 104 68 56 20 25 9 6 21 12 F 4 9 10 22 61 127 191 82 49 24 4 2 1 1 0 2 9 G 1 1 1 4 21 76 175 57 28 3 0 0 0 0 1 1 7 Total 223 99 104 129 174 267 447 258 266 273 359 265 173 94 99 149 30 2A.3B-35
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 21 6 15 11 12 11 5 11 14 6 7 10 11 8 13 19 180 3.50 - 7.49 58 31 10 12 7 2 1 1 12 47 119 114 62 15 23 29 5 43 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 51 42 9 2 0 0 113 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 79 37 25 23 19 13 6 12 26 62 177 166 82 25 36 48 837 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 4 2 3 1 1 3 3 0 1 1 2 1 0 2 0 3 27 3.50 - 7.49 6 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 13 15 6 0 3 5 60 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 2 0 0 0 0 10 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 10 4 3 1 1 3 3 0 1 11 23 18 6 2 3 8 97 2A.3B-36
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 3 4 2 2 4 0 0 4 2 1 2 3 4 1 3 2 37 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 12 7 6 3 1 3 42 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 6 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 4 2 2 4 0 0 4 5 6 18 12 10 4 4 5 85 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 8 0.75 - 3.49 32 31 45 25 20 10 11 11 19 16 20 15 21 18 8 22 324 3.50 - 7.49 19 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 37 74 58 27 12 9 14 262 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 21 6 0 0 0 0 30 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 51 32 45 25 20 10 11 12 29 56 115 79 48 30 17 36 624 2A.3B-37
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 43 0.75 - 3.49 19 42 57 35 71 76 69 78 82 48 20 7 16 8 16 17 661 3.50 - 7.49 8 4 1 0 0 0 0 1 23 63 35 10 5 1 4 6 161 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 1 0 1 0 1 8 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 27 46 58 35 71 76 69 79 105 112 59 18 21 10 20 24 873 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 65 0.75 - 3.49 4 3 4 25 72 155 201 63 43 10 3 0 0 0 1 4 588 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11 4 1 0 0 1 0 0 19 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 3 4 25 72 155 201 65 54 14 4 0 0 1 1 4 672 2A.3B-38
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 28 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 2 2 14 69 121 47 15 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 273 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 2 2 14 69 121 47 18 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 305 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 145 0.75 - 3.49 83 88 128 101 194 324 410 214 176 83 55 36 52 37 42 67 2090 3.50 - 7.49 93 38 11 12 7 2 1 5 62 167 254 204 106 32 40 57 1091 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 88 53 9 3 0 1 167 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 176 126 139 113 201 326 411 219 238 263 397 293 167 72 82 125 3493 2A.3B-39
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3493 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 227 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.9% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.0 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 23.96 2.78 2.43 17.86 24.99 19.24 8.73 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 79 37 25 23 19 13 6 12 26 62 177 166 82 25 36 48 1 B 10 4 3 1 1 3 3 0 1 11 23 18 6 2 3 8 0 C 5 4 2 2 4 0 0 4 5 6 18 12 10 4 4 5 0 D 51 32 45 25 20 10 11 12 29 56 115 79 48 30 17 36 8 E 27 46 58 35 71 76 69 79 105 112 59 18 21 10 20 24 43 F 4 3 4 25 72 155 201 65 54 14 4 0 0 1 1 4 65 G 0 0 2 2 14 69 121 47 18 2 1 0 0 0 1 0 28 Total 176 126 139 113 201 326 411 219 238 263 397 293 167 72 82 125 145 2A.3B-40
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 21 9 10 4 9 10 7 8 8 8 9 8 12 8 4 13 148 3.50 - 7.49 73 18 6 6 8 7 4 6 31 37 67 100 37 30 20 42 492 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 26 30 16 6 0 1 85 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 96 27 16 10 17 17 11 14 40 48 103 138 65 44 24 56 726 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 4 2 2 1 0 0 0 1 3 3 0 2 3 1 1 25 3.50 - 7.49 6 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 7 3 9 5 2 2 2 40 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 5 0 0 0 0 14 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 8 5 2 2 1 1 0 1 2 10 15 14 7 5 3 3 79 2A.3B-41
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 5 3 3 1 1 1 0 0 3 0 4 2 2 3 3 1 32 3.50 - 7.49 7 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 9 10 7 3 3 5 54 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 5 1 0 0 0 9 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 12 7 4 1 2 1 0 0 3 4 16 17 10 6 6 6 95 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 43 32 38 24 10 9 13 12 23 18 14 11 15 27 15 18 322 3.50 - 7.49 28 11 2 0 0 1 0 0 7 14 73 53 29 10 21 27 276 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 13 13 2 0 2 0 34 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 71 43 40 24 10 10 13 12 30 36 100 77 46 37 38 45 635 2A.3B-42
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 27 0.75 - 3.49 31 25 65 63 45 59 45 55 54 35 30 10 16 9 15 14 571 3.50 - 7.49 5 3 2 0 2 1 0 1 11 40 33 20 7 3 7 3 138 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 0 0 6 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 36 28 67 63 47 60 45 56 65 76 65 31 24 12 22 17 741 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 27 0.75 - 3.49 6 8 15 25 79 134 149 83 46 15 3 1 0 0 0 2 566 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 7 7 0 0 0 0 0 25 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 9 15 25 79 134 149 85 54 22 10 1 0 0 0 2 618 2A.3B-43
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 23 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 4 12 33 139 192 63 27 3 0 0 1 0 0 0 476 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 9 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 1 4 12 33 139 193 65 30 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 508 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 80 0.75 - 3.49 109 82 137 131 178 352 406 221 162 82 63 32 48 50 38 49 2140 3.50 - 7.49 119 38 11 6 11 10 5 12 61 111 193 192 85 48 53 79 1034 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 8 53 54 20 6 2 1 147 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 230 120 148 137 189 362 411 233 224 201 310 278 153 104 93 129 3402 2A.3B-44
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3680 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3402 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 198 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 94.5% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.0 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 21.34 2.32 2.79 18.67 21.78 18.17 14.93 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 96 27 16 10 17 17 11 14 40 48 103 138 65 44 24 56 0 B 8 5 2 2 1 1 0 1 2 10 15 14 7 5 3 3 0 C 12 7 4 1 2 1 0 0 3 4 16 17 10 6 6 6 0 D 71 43 40 24 10 10 13 12 30 36 100 77 46 37 38 45 3 E 36 28 67 63 47 60 45 56 65 76 65 31 24 12 22 17 27 F 6 9 15 25 79 134 149 85 54 22 10 1 0 0 0 2 27 G 1 1 4 12 33 139 193 65 30 5 1 0 1 0 0 0 23 Total 230 120 148 137 189 362 411 233 224 201 310 278 153 104 93 129 80 2A.3B-45
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 2 4 6 4 2 2 3 2 0 3 2 2 2 2 3 40 3.50 - 7.49 20 9 8 6 14 9 8 3 12 16 13 26 13 15 7 11 190 7.50 - 12.49 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12 30 20 7 0 0 74 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 24 11 12 12 18 11 10 6 14 18 28 61 36 24 9 14 308 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 0 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 12 3.50 - 7.49 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 2 17 5 10 2 1 47 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 8 12 6 2 0 0 32 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 7 11 29 11 13 4 1 91 2A.3B-46
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 3 0 3 1 0 0 0 1 2 1 1 0 1 0 3 18 3.50 - 7.49 6 0 3 0 1 1 1 0 1 10 4 18 8 5 5 3 66 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 11 10 7 1 1 0 32 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 8 3 3 3 2 1 1 0 2 15 18 29 15 7 6 6 119 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 12 0.75 - 3.49 24 32 26 24 21 11 10 6 14 16 11 7 17 13 17 13 262 3.50 - 7.49 53 10 2 1 3 3 2 4 18 31 70 91 75 58 60 42 523 7.50 - 12.49 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 10 53 104 47 6 3 1 229 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3 0 0 0 9 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 81 42 28 25 24 14 12 10 33 57 135 207 142 77 80 56 1035 2A.3B-47
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 16 0.75 - 3.49 21 22 51 34 54 41 41 30 57 33 16 4 12 11 9 13 449 3.50 - 7.49 3 6 4 1 9 2 2 1 28 50 42 20 14 15 6 5 208 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 15 6 2 1 2 0 30 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 24 28 55 35 63 43 43 31 85 87 73 30 28 27 17 18 703 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 17 0.75 - 3.49 8 7 10 23 61 69 73 49 35 11 6 2 0 0 0 3 357 3.50 - 7.49 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 13 5 2 1 0 0 0 0 28 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 10 8 10 23 61 69 73 53 48 16 8 3 0 0 0 3 402 2A.3B-48
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 9 0.75 - 3.49 0 3 7 28 53 152 182 65 24 3 1 2 1 1 0 1 523 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 9 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 13 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 3 7 28 53 152 183 67 33 3 2 2 1 1 0 1 545 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 54 0.75 - 3.49 57 69 98 120 195 276 309 154 134 65 39 18 32 29 30 36 1661 3.50 - 7.49 86 27 18 8 27 15 14 14 84 115 134 173 115 103 80 62 1075 7.50 - 12.49 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 22 99 162 82 17 6 1 397 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 8 4 0 0 0 16 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 150 96 116 128 222 291 323 168 219 203 275 361 233 149 116 99 3203 2A.3B-49
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3203 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 517 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 86.1% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 3.9 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 9.62 2.84 3.72 32.31 21.95 12.55 17.02 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 24 11 12 12 18 11 10 6 14 18 28 61 36 24 9 14 0 B 3 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 4 7 11 29 11 13 4 1 0 C 8 3 3 3 2 1 1 0 2 15 18 29 15 7 6 6 0 D 81 42 28 25 24 14 12 10 33 57 135 207 142 77 80 56 12 E 24 28 55 35 63 43 43 31 85 87 73 30 28 27 17 18 16 F 10 8 10 23 61 69 73 53 48 16 8 3 0 0 0 3 17 G 0 3 7 28 53 152 183 67 33 3 2 2 1 1 0 1 9 Total 150 95 116 128 222 291 323 168 219 203 275 361 233 149 116 99 54 2A.3B-50
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 0 2 1 0 11 3.50 - 7.49 7 3 6 11 9 2 5 9 4 7 4 13 17 9 13 2 121 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 11 7 9 1 1 35 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 4 7 11 9 2 5 9 9 8 9 25 24 20 15 3 167 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 1 1 2 5 10 3 4 6 0 38 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 9 6 3 1 0 25 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 0 2 3 1 0 1 1 4 10 19 9 7 7 0 66 2A.3B-51
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 0 0 0 12 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 1 0 4 1 1 0 3 3 10 9 11 6 6 1 58 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12 9 8 3 3 0 37 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 1 1 2 5 1 1 0 3 5 23 20 22 9 9 1 107 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 25 49 64 63 31 15 12 12 12 11 11 11 13 19 18 25 391 3.50 - 7.49 22 15 12 31 17 2 3 3 13 52 67 94 98 82 113 26 650 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 28 78 141 97 18 16 1 384 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 14 3 0 0 0 22 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 47 64 76 94 48 17 15 15 30 92 160 260 211 119 147 52 1449 2A.3B-52
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 11 0.75 - 3.49 9 28 49 72 45 28 28 25 28 26 9 7 9 9 8 8 388 3.50 - 7.49 1 4 8 33 4 6 9 3 24 55 64 29 9 4 7 2 262 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 14 29 19 7 0 1 0 70 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 10 32 57 105 49 34 37 28 52 95 102 57 25 13 16 10 733 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 8 0.75 - 3.49 3 1 17 20 27 55 68 42 24 9 5 2 2 1 0 0 276 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 0 2 0 1 0 27 11 7 1 1 0 0 1 52 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 2 17 20 29 55 69 42 51 20 13 3 3 1 0 1 337 2A.3B-53
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 1 4 5 17 31 71 166 74 16 6 0 0 0 3 0 0 394 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 17 5 1 0 1 1 0 0 30 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 6 5 18 31 72 166 75 33 11 1 0 1 4 0 0 428 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 25 0.75 - 3.49 40 84 136 175 136 169 274 153 82 53 29 23 27 34 27 33 1475 3.50 - 7.49 32 27 27 77 38 13 19 17 89 135 158 156 140 106 145 32 1211 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 46 127 189 125 33 22 2 552 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 16 3 0 0 0 24 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 73 111 163 252 174 182 293 170 179 235 318 384 295 173 194 67 3287 2A.3B-54
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3600 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3287 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 313 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.3% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.4 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 5.08 2.01 3.26 44.08 22.30 10.25 13.02 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 7 4 7 11 9 2 5 9 9 8 9 25 24 20 15 3 0 B 0 2 0 2 3 1 0 1 1 4 10 19 9 7 7 0 0 C 4 1 1 2 5 1 1 0 3 5 23 20 22 9 9 1 0 D 47 64 76 94 48 17 15 15 30 92 160 260 211 119 147 52 2 E 10 32 57 105 49 34 37 28 52 95 102 57 25 13 16 10 11 F 3 2 17 20 29 55 69 42 51 20 13 3 3 1 0 1 8 G 1 6 6 18 31 72 166 75 33 11 1 0 1 4 0 0 4 Total 72 111 163 252 174 182 293 170 179 235 318 384 295 173 194 67 25 2A.3B-55
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 1 3 0 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 3.50 - 7.49 5 4 0 4 3 1 0 0 2 4 3 4 17 6 6 5 64 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 9 11 8 3 0 34 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 4 1 5 6 1 2 0 3 4 6 14 28 14 9 5 107 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 0 2 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 1 15 3.50 - 7.49 1 1 0 1 1 0 1 1 2 2 0 5 8 2 4 2 31 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 1 2 3 1 1 13 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 1 2 3 5 0 1 1 2 6 2 6 12 6 7 4 61 2A.3B-56
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 1 3 1 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 1 4 17 3.50 - 7.49 2 4 2 0 0 1 0 1 2 3 3 3 4 3 4 4 36 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3 11 4 4 3 28 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 5 5 1 1 1 0 2 2 5 6 6 17 8 9 11 83 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 26 33 71 54 15 6 11 10 19 17 12 13 9 13 14 13 336 3.50 - 7.49 45 17 6 3 9 2 2 5 26 79 133 148 90 66 70 31 732 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 39 114 169 155 47 32 4 562 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 28 28 3 1 0 64 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 71 50 77 57 24 8 13 15 47 136 262 359 283 129 117 48 1699 2A.3B-57
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 6 0.75 - 3.49 16 24 71 50 42 23 14 23 33 22 16 8 6 6 12 4 370 3.50 - 7.49 5 10 6 14 7 2 1 4 34 86 77 24 15 7 10 5 307 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 37 16 5 1 2 0 68 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 0 0 0 7 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 21 34 77 64 49 25 15 27 69 113 130 53 28 14 24 9 758 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 8 0.75 - 3.49 3 10 16 26 42 41 55 30 16 6 3 2 1 0 1 1 253 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 20 10 3 2 0 0 0 0 39 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 10 17 26 42 41 55 31 36 16 6 6 1 0 1 1 302 2A.3B-58
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 3 5 17 22 49 69 78 38 20 2 4 0 0 0 1 3 311 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 5 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 15 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 5 17 25 49 69 78 38 25 9 4 0 0 0 1 3 329 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 20 0.75 - 3.49 52 73 181 156 156 139 160 102 89 49 36 23 17 20 31 26 1310 3.50 - 7.49 60 36 15 25 20 6 4 12 91 191 219 186 134 84 94 47 1224 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 48 158 200 184 63 42 8 707 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 34 33 4 1 0 76 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 2
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 112 109 196 181 176 145 164 114 184 289 416 444 369 171 168 81 3339 2A.3B-59
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3339 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 381 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 89.8% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 5.1 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 3.20 1.83 2.49 50.88 22.70 9.04 9.85 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 5 4 1 5 6 1 2 0 3 4 6 14 28 14 9 5 0 B 3 1 2 3 5 0 1 1 2 6 2 6 12 6 7 4 0 C 4 5 5 1 1 1 0 2 2 5 6 6 17 8 9 11 0 D 71 50 77 57 24 8 13 15 47 136 262 359 283 129 117 48 3 E 21 34 77 64 49 25 15 27 69 113 130 53 28 14 24 9 6 F 5 10 17 26 42 41 55 31 36 16 6 6 1 0 1 1 8 G 3 5 17 25 49 69 78 38 25 9 4 0 0 0 1 3 3 Total 112 109 196 181 176 145 164 114 184 289 416 444 369 171 168 81 20 2A.3B-60
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 87 62 74 49 55 50 53 53 73 33 46 40 65 56 56 67 919 3.50 - 7.49 475 184 120 112 97 51 63 68 196 299 531 580 490 287 241 320 4114 7.50 - 12.49 36 8 2 0 2 0 1 3 15 82 319 272 232 117 70 44 1203 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 17 32 19 3 0 0 74 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 598 254 196 161 154 101 117 124 284 417 913 924 807 463 367 431 6315 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 19 14 20 17 13 7 7 5 11 6 20 13 9 14 10 14 199 3.50 - 7.49 40 17 12 9 7 4 5 5 13 52 80 113 57 50 50 42 556 7.50 - 12.49 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 20 65 60 43 21 9 2 224 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 7 1 1 0 17 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 60 32 32 26 20 11 13 10 25 78 169 190 116 86 70 58 997 2A.3B-61
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 27 25 28 26 16 3 8 7 11 9 13 25 16 16 20 19 269 3.50 - 7.49 75 19 16 17 17 6 4 6 24 49 91 106 92 51 71 54 698 7.50 - 12.49 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 16 79 69 70 24 11 10 283 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 9 4 4 1 0 0 19 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 103 45 44 43 33 9 12 14 36 75 192 204 182 92 102 83 1271 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 43 0.75 - 3.49 345 369 520 440 234 118 125 115 186 182 161 162 191 216 212 240 3816 3.50 - 7.49 425 137 117 185 83 29 27 32 158 500 959 1016 723 579 735 389 6104 7.50 - 12.49 13 2 5 3 3 0 1 0 22 157 661 954 584 184 131 24 2744 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 44 136 44 12 2 0 246 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 2 0 0 0 12
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 783 508 642 628 330 147 153 147 366 847 1831 2272 1544 991 1080 653 12965 2A.3B-62
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 151 0.75 - 3.49 223 305 605 561 560 431 386 405 506 321 190 99 138 110 134 155 5129 3.50 - 7.49 69 69 94 151 53 21 23 24 247 538 515 226 105 79 83 59 2356 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 6 4 1 1 0 0 8 59 205 111 38 9 9 3 454 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 15 6 1 0 0 35 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 292 374 705 716 614 453 409 429 761 920 922 451 287 199 226 217 8126 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 196 0.75 - 3.49 51 80 148 302 582 867 1087 599 348 116 42 23 14 3 11 28 4301 3.50 - 7.49 9 8 7 4 3 2 2 13 159 100 59 12 3 3 2 1 387 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 9 3 1 0 0 0 16 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 60 88 155 306 585 869 1096 612 507 218 110 39 18 6 13 29 4901 2A.3B-63
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 173 0.75 - 3.49 23 42 95 181 407 1033 1811 827 246 48 20 7 8 7 9 12 4776 3.50 - 7.49 0 6 3 12 1 2 2 16 96 30 7 3 1 1 0 0 180 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 3 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 23 48 98 193 408 1035 1813 843 342 79 29 10 9 8 9 12 5132 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 35.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 570 0.75 - 3.49 775 697 1490 1576 1867 2509 3477 2011 1381 715 492 369 441 422 452 535 19409 3.50 - 7.49 1043 440 369 490 271 115 126 164 893 1568 2242 2056 1471 1050 1182 865 14395 7.50 - 12.49 51 12 13 7 6 1 4 4 47 337 1340 1469 968 355 230 83 4927 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13 86 192 80 18 3 0 392 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 6 4 3 0 0 0 14 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1919 1349 1872 2073 2144 2625 3607 2179 2321 2634 4166 4090 2963 1845 1867 1483 39707 2A.3B-64
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-35 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 35.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 43848 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 39707 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 4141 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 90.6% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 4.1 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 15.90 2.51 3.20 32.65 20.46 12.34 12.92 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 598 254 196 161 154 101 117 124 284 417 913 924 807 463 367 431 4 B 60 32 32 26 20 11 13 10 25 78 169 190 116 86 70 58 1 C 103 45 44 43 33 9 12 14 36 75 192 204 182 92 102 83 2 D 783 509 642 628 330 147 153 147 366 847 1831 2272 1544 991 1080 653 43 E 292 374 705 716 614 453 409 429 761 920 922 451 287 199 226 217 151 F 60 83 155 306 585 869 1090 612 507 218 110 39 18 6 13 29 196 G 23 48 88 193 408 1035 1813 843 342 79 29 10 9 8 9 12 173 Total 1919 1349 1872 2073 2144 2625 3607 2179 2321 2634 4166 4090 2963 1845 1867 1483 570 2A.3B-65
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 APPENDIX C Monthly and Annual Joint Frequency Distribution of T(500ft-35ft) and 500-ft Wind Data (January 1, 1980 - December 31, 1980) 2A.3Ci
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2A.3C-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 5 2 1 4 1 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 2 2 1 3 26 3.50 - 7.49 3 3 7 13 8 13 1 1 4 0 7 11 8 4 11 8 102 7.50 - 12.49 19 7 8 17 0 7 5 11 3 10 15 28 39 23 26 12 230 12.50 - 18.49 1 0 3 0 0 0 3 0 4 2 7 24 30 18 9 0 101 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 4 8 18 11 0 0 45
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 10 4 0 0 0 17 TOTAL 28 12 19 34 9 20 10 13 12 20 33 82 101 58 47 23 522 2A.3C-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 10 3.50 - 7.49 3 0 2 1 7 8 7 0 2 1 2 1 4 5 1 0 44 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 1 5 5 3 18 2 1 0 3 9 6 3 1 1 58 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 4 0 2 1 1 0 0 0 12 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 5
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 0 3 7 12 12 25 9 9 3 7 12 11 9 3 3 129 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 3 2 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 10 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 0 3 3 0 0 4 5 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 22 2A.3C-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 6 2 1 5 1 0 1 2 3 2 0 2 2 3 2 5 37 3.50 - 7.49 7 3 12 16 15 21 9 2 7 1 9 12 12 9 12 8 155 7.50 - 12.49 20 7 9 23 5 10 25 17 4 10 18 38 45 26 28 13 298 12.50 - 18.49 1 0 3 0 0 1 4 3 8 3 9 25 31 18 9 0 115 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 5 4 8 18 11 0 0 50
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 10 4 0 0 0 17 TOTAL 34 12 25 44 21 32 39 27 23 24 40 95 112 67 51 26 673 2A.3C-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 673 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 71 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 90.5% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 10.5 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.00 0.00 0.00 77.56 19.17 3.27 0.00 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 28 12 19 34 9 20 10 13 12 20 33 82 101 58 47 23 1 E 4 0 3 7 12 12 25 9 9 3 7 12 11 9 3 3 0 F 2 0 3 3 0 0 4 5 2 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 34 12 25 44 21 32 39 27 23 24 40 95 112 67 51 26 1 2A.3C-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2A.3C-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 5 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 2 0 2 2 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 10 3.50 - 7.49 9 4 12 16 17 1 1 2 1 0 8 7 7 3 7 10 105 7.50 - 12.49 8 0 3 16 9 3 0 0 4 6 28 25 29 44 30 18 223 12.50 - 18.49 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 2 25 15 44 31 15 8 146 18.50 - 23.99 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 1 9 0 0 20
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 TOTAL 22 6 15 36 29 4 2 3 6 8 64 54 82 88 52 36 507 2A.3C-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 5 5 0 0 2 0 1 2 2 3 5 3 0 1 31 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 1 1 0 3 1 2 0 5 4 7 10 3 5 0 42 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 1 0 1 0 8 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 7 6 0 3 3 2 1 8 8 15 16 6 6 1 84 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 3 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 1 2 1 3 0 0 0 0 10 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 2 5 0 6 2 7 2 0 1 0 0 25 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1 0 0 0 0 7 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 0 7 4 16 7 0 1 0 0 45 2A.3C-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 11 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 2 1 2 2 0 1 1 0 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 16 3.50 - 7.49 9 6 17 21 17 1 6 2 3 5 11 13 12 6 7 11 147 7.50 - 12.49 8 0 4 17 10 8 9 2 17 14 39 34 40 48 35 18 303 12.50 - 18.49 2 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 2 33 20 47 32 16 8 164 18.50 - 23.99 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 6 1 9 0 0 20
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 3 TOTAL 22 8 22 42 30 9 16 5 21 22 88 76 101 96 58 37 653 2A.3C-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 696 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 653 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 43 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.8% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 10.2 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.00 0.00 0.77 77.64 12.86 6.89 1.84 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 D 22 6 15 36 29 4 2 3 6 8 64 54 82 88 52 36 0 E 0 2 7 6 0 3 3 2 1 8 8 15 16 6 6 1 0 F 0 0 0 0 0 2 8 0 7 4 16 7 0 1 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 7 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 22 8 22 42 30 9 16 5 21 22 88 76 101 96 58 37 0 2A.3C-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 1 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 2A.3C-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7.50 - 12.49 4 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 9 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 0 1 1 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 2 16 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 1 2 0 0 9 3.50 - 7.49 11 8 11 6 6 6 8 4 2 1 5 4 3 3 5 7 90 7.50 - 12.49 21 6 1 5 15 5 7 10 7 11 9 5 10 10 15 7 144 12.50 - 18.49 0 2 0 6 8 15 8 4 7 2 16 17 22 24 18 0 149 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 20 14 3 0 44
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 20 0 0 29 TOTAL 33 16 13 17 31 27 23 19 18 15 32 28 65 73 41 14 465 2A.3C-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 6 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 1 3 5 10 6 7 5 1 2 3 3 0 2 1 51 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 5 3 2 5 9 10 3 1 6 3 1 0 1 49 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 4 4 0 1 2 1 0 0 0 18 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 5
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 2 2 9 9 13 19 22 19 5 5 12 7 1 2 2 129 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 1 6 3 4 1 1 5 1 6 5 0 0 0 0 33 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 1 6 0 4 1 1 3 1 6 0 1 1 0 0 25 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 2 12 3 8 2 5 9 5 13 5 1 1 0 0 67 2A.3C-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 4 2 0 1 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 17 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 2 1 2 1 0 1 2 0 3 1 1 2 0 0 18 3.50 - 7.49 11 10 13 19 16 25 16 12 12 3 13 12 6 3 7 8 186 7.50 - 12.49 25 6 4 16 21 13 13 21 24 18 16 11 15 12 15 10 240 12.50 - 18.49 0 2 0 8 8 15 14 12 11 7 17 19 23 26 18 0 180 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 2 1 2 1 2 20 14 3 0 50
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 20 0 0 29 TOTAL 37 19 19 44 48 55 46 48 50 30 50 45 74 77 43 18 703 2A.3C-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 703 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 41 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 94.5% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 11.4 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.14 1.14 2.28 66.15 18.35 9.53 2.42 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 1 1 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 4 0 1 1 0 3 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 D 33 16 13 17 31 27 23 19 18 15 32 28 65 73 41 14 0 E 0 2 2 9 9 13 19 22 19 5 5 12 7 1 2 2 0 F 0 1 2 12 3 8 2 5 9 5 13 5 1 1 0 0 0 G 0 0 0 4 2 0 1 2 4 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 37 19 19 44 48 55 46 48 50 30 50 45 74 77 43 18 0 2A.3C-15
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2A.3C-16
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 2 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 1 0 5
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 7 3 0 19 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 0 3 0 1 1 0 2 2 3 1 3 1 1 1 4 25 3.50 - 7.49 6 4 9 5 1 6 3 0 0 4 4 13 6 5 2 3 71 7.50 - 12.49 7 7 2 2 1 1 1 4 2 9 23 16 4 5 12 11 107 12.50 - 18.49 3 0 0 3 6 0 2 1 4 19 15 25 15 16 11 2 122 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 2 6 6 1 1 4 9 12 9 4 1 0 55
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 5 TOTAL 18 11 14 10 11 14 14 8 9 39 52 71 35 32 27 20 385 2A.3C-17
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 150.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 2 1 3 1 4 0 0 0 4 2 1 1 2 0 22 3.50 - 7.49 5 1 2 2 6 4 4 4 2 4 7 3 4 1 2 2 53 7.50 - 12.49 1 4 2 3 0 1 5 0 5 2 5 5 6 2 1 3 45 12.50 - 18.49 1 0 0 2 0 2 5 3 5 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 23 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 8 5 6 8 9 8 18 7 12 7 16 12 13 5 5 5 144 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 2 0 4 2 1 2 0 1 2 19 3.50 - 7.49 4 1 4 7 4 5 0 2 1 4 5 5 5 3 2 3 55 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 2 5 2 0 0 1 15 12.50 - 18.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 0 8 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 7 2 5 9 4 5 4 6 3 10 9 12 9 3 3 6 97 2A.3C-18
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 6 1 0 2 0 0 12 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 2 2 0 0 0 0 9 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 2 1 10 3 0 2 0 0 28 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 4 1 6 2 4 2 5 4 2 7 9 6 4 2 4 6 68 3.50 - 7.49 15 6 15 14 11 15 7 6 5 13 23 22 17 11 6 8 194 7.50 - 12.49 13 11 6 6 2 2 10 8 7 11 32 28 13 7 13 15 184 12.50 - 18.49 5 0 0 5 6 2 11 7 11 21 15 29 17 20 13 2 164 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 2 6 6 1 1 5 9 12 9 8 2 0 61
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 0 0 5 TOTAL 37 18 27 27 25 27 41 26 26 57 88 99 60 49 38 31 676 2A.3C-19
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 APRIL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 676 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 44 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.9% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 10.1 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.00 0.44 2.81 56.95 21.30 14.35 4.14 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 3 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 7 3 0 0 D 18 11 14 10 11 14 14 8 9 39 52 71 35 32 27 20 0 E 8 5 6 8 9 8 18 7 12 7 16 12 13 5 5 5 0 F 7 2 5 9 4 5 4 6 3 10 9 12 9 3 3 6 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 2 1 10 3 0 2 0 0 0 Total 37 18 27 27 25 27 41 26 26 57 88 99 60 49 38 31 0 2A.3C-20
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 12.50 - 18.49 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7.50 - 12.49 4 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 2 2 17 12.50 - 18.49 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 9 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 2 2 24 2A.3C-21
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 9 7.50 - 12.49 3 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 5 3 3 1 18 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 0 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 7 4 0 2 29 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 4 5 0 1 19 3.50 - 7.49 5 1 3 10 3 3 0 4 4 6 9 11 9 4 14 10 96 7.50 - 12.49 9 1 0 4 1 3 6 2 6 5 5 4 14 16 7 7 90 12.50 - 18.49 2 0 0 0 0 6 3 0 0 7 25 7 9 9 3 2 73 18.50 - 23.99 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 3 1 6 1 0 0 16
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 19 3 4 15 5 12 10 6 10 20 43 26 42 35 24 20 294 2A.3C-22
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 4 1 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 4 3 2 0 22 3.50 - 7.49 4 5 6 6 4 4 1 0 5 1 5 13 11 8 5 3 81 7.50 - 12.49 3 2 0 3 3 2 1 2 2 1 1 6 6 0 4 4 40 12.50 - 18.49 3 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 4 8 2 1 0 0 0 21 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 14 9 6 12 8 7 4 2 9 6 15 24 22 11 11 7 167 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 13 3.50 - 7.49 5 2 3 3 6 0 0 0 3 4 4 6 14 12 11 3 76 7.50 - 12.49 0 1 2 2 3 1 0 4 2 1 5 3 5 4 4 1 38 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 4 7 8 9 1 1 5 6 5 10 11 21 17 16 4 131 2A.3C-23
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 4 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 5 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 3 6 4 0 0 0 17 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 5 1 0 4 7 5 1 1 1 28 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 5 3 3 7 2 0 1 0 1 1 3 7 10 9 4 2 58 3.50 - 7.49 17 8 13 20 14 8 2 4 13 11 19 32 35 26 30 17 269 7.50 - 12.49 19 4 7 10 7 6 7 13 10 8 15 22 35 23 20 16 222 12.50 - 18.49 11 3 1 1 0 7 4 1 0 11 34 10 12 9 3 2 109 18.50 - 23.99 3 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 2 1 3 1 6 1 0 0 20
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 55 18 24 38 23 21 16 19 26 32 74 72 98 68 57 37 678 2A.3C-24
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 MAY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 678 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 66 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.1% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 8.5 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.74 3.54 4.28 43.36 24.63 19.32 4.13 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 B 9 1 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 2 2 0 C 5 0 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 7 4 3 2 0 D 19 3 4 15 5 12 10 6 10 20 43 26 42 35 24 20 0 E 14 9 6 12 8 7 4 2 9 6 15 24 22 11 11 7 0 F 6 4 7 8 9 1 1 5 6 5 10 11 21 17 16 4 0 G 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 5 1 0 4 7 5 1 1 1 0 Total 55 18 24 38 23 21 16 19 26 32 74 72 98 68 57 37 0 2A.3C-25
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 7 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 9 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 2 3 2 1 13 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 3
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 0 2 2 1 2 3 1 0 1 3 7 2 3 28 2A.3C-26
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 2 3 0 2 2 2 4 4 1 23 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 1 1 4 3 4 3 23 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 3 0 7 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 3 0 0 8
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 3 6 2 4 4 10 11 11 4 61 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 2 2 2 2 4 0 0 16 3.50 - 7.49 4 0 0 0 0 1 2 6 7 6 4 11 6 2 4 9 62 7.50 - 12.49 9 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 6 14 10 10 4 7 9 11 82 12.50 - 18.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 13 21 19 8 10 13 7 95 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 1 4 3 4 1 0 17
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 TOTAL 15 0 1 1 2 1 3 8 15 38 39 46 23 28 27 27 274 2A.3C-27
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 2 1 0 1 4 4 4 0 1 2 6 2 2 2 1 1 33 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 3 1 1 2 7 1 3 2 6 6 10 2 2 4 51 7.50 - 12.49 5 0 1 0 2 1 1 0 1 3 11 7 6 2 2 0 42 12.50 - 18.49 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 8 5 7 2 1 7 0 35 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 10 3 4 2 7 7 12 2 5 15 29 22 20 7 12 5 163 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 5 0.75 - 3.49 3 1 1 2 7 2 2 4 1 1 7 4 7 1 3 2 48 3.50 - 7.49 1 3 3 5 7 5 3 6 2 1 3 3 7 1 1 1 52 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 1 1 8 1 0 0 16 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 4 4 7 14 7 8 10 3 3 12 8 23 3 4 3 123 2A.3C-28
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 11 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 6 0.75 - 3.49 5 2 3 4 14 6 6 5 3 5 15 8 11 7 4 3 101 3.50 - 7.49 5 4 6 7 9 9 17 19 18 9 15 23 26 9 11 16 203 7.50 - 12.49 17 0 1 0 4 4 6 3 12 20 24 19 24 16 17 15 182 12.50 - 18.49 5 1 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 22 28 26 12 14 23 8 144 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 2 5 6 10 1 0 29
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 2 TOTAL 32 7 10 11 27 19 31 29 35 60 85 81 79 57 56 42 667 2A.3C-29
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JUNE STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 667 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 53 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 92.6% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 8.7 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 1.05 4.20 9.15 41.08 24.44 18.44 1.65 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 B 0 0 1 0 2 2 1 2 3 1 0 1 3 7 2 3 0 C 2 0 0 1 0 0 3 3 6 2 4 4 10 11 11 4 0 D 15 0 1 1 2 1 3 8 15 38 39 46 23 28 27 27 0 E 10 3 4 2 7 7 12 2 5 15 29 22 20 7 12 5 1 F 5 4 4 7 14 7 8 10 3 3 12 8 23 3 4 3 5 G 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 32 7 10 11 27 19 31 29 35 60 85 81 79 57 56 42 6 2A.3C-30
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 7.50 - 12.49 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 9 2A.3C-31
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3.50 - 7.49 4 1 0 2 0 1 4 1 2 3 3 4 2 1 1 3 32 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 2 4 3 1 0 0 17 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 6 1 0 2 1 1 4 2 3 9 6 8 5 2 1 3 54 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 2 4 1 0 2 1 2 2 1 3 2 5 2 1 2 31 3.50 - 7.49 8 2 3 2 3 2 4 4 6 5 14 15 7 9 3 9 96 7.50 - 12.49 9 0 0 1 1 1 4 7 4 15 27 19 10 9 6 9 122 12.50 - 18.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 1 16 5 3 1 2 1 37 18.50 - 23.99 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 8
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 19 5 7 4 4 5 13 14 17 23 60 41 27 22 12 21 294 2A.3C-32
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 3 1 2 2 1 2 2 3 5 1 3 2 14 8 1 2 52 3.50 - 7.49 2 1 7 4 4 4 2 3 5 7 7 8 12 5 0 1 72 7.50 - 12.49 3 0 1 0 0 0 3 2 2 12 11 6 4 4 1 0 49 12.50 - 18.49 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 2 8 7 1 0 0 1 2 25 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL 9 2 10 7 6 7 7 9 15 28 29 17 30 17 3 5 202 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 3 1 0 4 7 2 0 2 4 2 6 5 9 2 4 2 53 3.50 - 7.49 5 1 0 1 2 1 0 2 2 5 2 6 2 9 2 3 43 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 6 2 1 0 0 1 1 17 12.50 - 18.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 10 2 0 5 9 4 1 4 10 14 11 12 11 11 7 6 119 2A.3C-33
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 7 4 6 7 9 6 3 7 12 4 12 9 28 12 6 6 138 3.50 - 7.49 20 5 10 9 9 8 10 11 16 20 26 33 23 25 6 17 248 7.50 - 12.49 18 1 1 1 1 3 8 10 9 37 42 30 17 14 8 11 211 12.50 - 18.49 3 0 0 1 1 0 3 2 6 12 25 6 3 1 3 3 69 18.50 - 23.99 0 1 0 0 0 1 1 0 3 1 0 0 2 1 0 0 10
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 TOTAL 48 11 17 18 20 18 25 30 46 74 106 78 73 53 23 37 680 2A.3C-34
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 JULY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 680 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 64 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 91.4% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 7.2 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.15 1.32 7.94 43.24 29.71 17.50 0.15 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 4 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 C 6 1 0 2 1 1 4 2 3 9 6 8 5 2 1 3 0 D 19 5 7 4 4 5 13 14 17 23 60 41 27 22 12 21 0 E 9 2 10 7 6 7 7 9 15 28 29 17 30 17 3 5 1 F 10 2 0 5 9 4 1 4 10 14 11 12 11 11 7 6 2 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 Total 48 11 17 18 20 18 25 30 46 74 106 78 73 53 23 37 3 2A.3C-35
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2A.3C-36
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 2 1 1 0 0 11 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 3 1 0 0 0 0 8 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 1 0 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 4 3 1 1 0 0 22 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 3 2 0 1 6 4 3 3 4 3 1 2 2 2 2 3 41 3.50 - 7.49 3 3 0 2 5 7 3 6 8 7 16 27 4 3 3 6 103 7.50 - 12.49 7 1 0 0 3 3 2 1 1 14 45 29 8 9 3 7 133 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 29 9 12 1 0 1 64 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 7
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 13 6 0 3 14 14 8 10 15 39 93 67 26 15 8 17 348 2A.3C-37
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 5 3 3 6 8 6 3 5 4 6 7 6 3 5 5 2 77 3.50 - 7.49 5 2 8 6 2 11 3 3 9 11 21 15 6 4 0 3 109 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 2 1 3 0 1 4 20 16 6 8 1 4 4 72 12.50 - 18.49 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 5 5 0 1 0 0 3 17 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 2
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 14 5 11 14 11 21 6 9 17 43 50 27 18 10 9 12 279 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 2 5 2 1 0 1 0 1 2 3 6 5 2 1 1 0 32 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 1 6 7 5 1 0 1 0 24 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 5 4 1 0 1 0 2 7 12 13 10 3 1 2 0 65 2A.3C-38
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 11 10 5 8 14 12 6 9 10 12 14 13 7 8 8 5 152 3.50 - 7.49 8 7 12 10 7 18 8 11 20 24 44 49 12 8 4 9 251 7.50 - 12.49 9 1 0 2 5 7 4 2 8 37 64 36 16 10 7 11 219 12.50 - 18.49 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 17 35 9 13 1 0 4 84 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 3 0 0 0 0 0 9
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 30 18 17 20 26 38 18 22 41 95 160 107 48 27 19 29 719 2A.3C-39
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 AUGUST STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 719 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 25 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 96.6% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 7.3 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.00 0.70 3.06 48.40 38.80 9.04 0.00 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 1 1 0 2 1 1 3 1 2 1 4 3 1 1 0 0 0 D 13 6 0 3 14 14 8 10 15 39 93 67 26 15 8 17 0 E 14 5 11 14 11 21 6 9 17 43 50 27 18 10 9 12 2 F 2 5 4 1 0 1 0 2 7 12 13 10 3 1 2 0 2 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 30 18 17 20 26 38 18 22 41 95 160 107 48 27 19 29 4 2A.3C-40
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3.50 - 7.49 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 4 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 8 2A.3C-41
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 1 1 3 5 2 1 1 0 20 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 4 1 1 1 3 13 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 4 0 0 5 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 2 1 5 9 3 7 2 3 40 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 3 3 1 1 3 2 1 0 1 0 3 3 6 1 2 3 33 3.50 - 7.49 8 2 1 0 5 3 5 1 6 3 10 10 4 3 3 4 68 7.50 - 12.49 18 0 2 0 0 1 2 3 8 17 16 9 6 4 12 11 109 12.50 - 18.49 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 16 22 8 11 7 4 2 76 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 7
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 TOTAL 30 7 4 1 8 6 8 4 20 36 52 32 28 16 21 21 294 2A.3C-42
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 3 0.75 - 3.49 1 2 2 3 6 2 3 2 1 1 2 2 11 3 2 1 44 3.50 - 7.49 2 4 3 10 1 6 3 1 4 7 10 11 7 7 4 2 82 7.50 - 12.49 5 1 0 0 0 0 1 4 4 6 15 3 1 0 1 4 45 12.50 - 18.49 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 4 11 6 2 0 0 0 2 31 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 11 7 5 13 7 9 7 9 13 25 33 18 19 10 7 9 205 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 3 1 3 2 4 3 1 2 1 1 3 4 5 3 7 0 43 3.50 - 7.49 1 2 5 5 1 8 3 2 0 2 8 6 5 1 0 0 49 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 2 1 0 0 1 1 4 5 6 0 0 0 0 4 24 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 3 10 8 5 11 5 5 5 10 17 10 10 4 7 4 122 2A.3C-43
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 7 0.75 - 3.49 8 6 6 6 13 8 5 4 3 2 8 9 22 8 11 5 124 3.50 - 7.49 12 9 9 15 7 18 13 8 12 13 31 33 18 12 8 6 224 7.50 - 12.49 25 1 4 1 0 1 4 9 17 28 38 16 8 6 14 23 195 12.50 - 18.49 4 2 0 0 0 1 0 2 7 29 29 10 11 11 4 4 114 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 2 1 0 0 1 7
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 TOTAL 49 18 19 22 20 28 22 23 41 72 107 70 60 38 37 39 672 2A.3C-44
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 SEPTEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 672 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 48 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.3% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 7.8 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.30 1.19 5.95 43.75 30.51 18.15 0.15 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 0 1 0 2 0 C 2 0 0 0 0 1 2 3 2 1 5 9 3 7 2 3 0 D 30 7 4 1 8 6 8 4 20 36 52 32 28 16 21 21 0 E 11 7 5 13 7 9 7 9 13 25 33 18 19 10 7 9 3 F 4 3 10 8 5 11 5 5 5 10 17 10 10 4 7 4 4 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 49 18 19 22 20 28 22 23 41 72 107 70 60 38 37 39 7 2A.3C-45
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 3 7.50 - 12.49 2 1 1 1 0 0 1 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 14 2A.3C-46
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 3 3 0 0 0 13 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 6 3 3 0 0 1 21 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 0 0 1 2 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 9 3.50 - 7.49 2 1 1 5 6 0 5 3 6 3 6 2 5 2 0 5 52 7.50 - 12.49 3 1 0 4 5 1 3 2 5 9 26 23 9 7 4 12 114 12.50 - 18.49 2 2 0 2 0 2 2 0 0 4 11 31 42 16 3 0 117 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 2 2 0 1 3 1 13 14 10 0 0 46
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 10 0 0 0 16 TOTAL 8 4 1 11 12 7 12 7 12 21 45 74 80 35 7 18 354 2A.3C-47
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 1 0 1 7 3.50 - 7.49 1 2 4 3 0 1 0 1 1 1 11 6 14 1 2 0 48 7.50 - 12.49 3 1 0 3 10 1 3 1 4 4 11 12 10 0 3 3 69 12.50 - 18.49 1 1 1 1 3 1 0 1 3 2 12 4 1 1 0 0 32 18.50 - 23.99 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 6
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 5 5 5 7 13 3 3 3 9 7 39 23 28 3 5 4 162 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 3 1 2 1 0 0 11 3.50 - 7.49 3 1 4 7 0 0 0 0 4 3 11 1 1 2 2 1 40 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 2 2 1 0 0 0 5 2 2 1 3 0 1 0 19 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 10 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 1 6 9 1 0 0 2 12 10 19 3 6 3 3 1 80 2A.3C-48
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 4 3 0 0 0 0 0 9 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 16 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 0 0 0 1 2 0 4 0 2 6 2 5 2 0 2 28 3.50 - 7.49 8 4 10 15 6 1 5 4 13 11 31 9 21 5 4 7 154 7.50 - 12.49 11 3 3 12 16 2 7 3 18 21 42 39 25 7 8 15 232 12.50 - 18.49 3 3 2 3 3 6 2 1 6 11 30 35 43 17 3 0 168 18.50 - 23.99 0 1 0 0 0 3 2 0 2 3 5 13 14 10 0 0 53
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 5 10 0 0 0 16 TOTAL 24 11 15 30 26 14 16 12 39 49 114 103 118 41 15 24 651 2A.3C-49
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 OCTOBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 651 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 93 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 87.5% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 11.2 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.61 2.15 3.23 54.38 24.88 12.29 2.46 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 1 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 4 1 1 1 0 1 1 0 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 C 2 0 1 1 0 2 0 0 0 2 6 3 3 0 0 1 0 D 8 4 1 11 12 7 12 7 12 21 45 74 80 35 7 18 0 E 5 5 5 7 13 3 3 3 9 7 39 23 28 3 5 4 0 F 4 1 6 9 1 0 0 2 12 10 19 3 6 3 3 1 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 24 11 15 30 26 14 16 12 39 49 114 103 118 41 15 24 0 2A.3C-50
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2A.3C-51
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 2 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 5 3.50 - 7.49 9 4 5 5 4 2 1 1 1 4 6 5 6 1 4 7 65 7.50 - 12.49 24 5 5 4 8 1 0 0 6 6 10 2 11 19 39 23 163 12.50 - 18.49 2 2 0 0 6 3 0 0 0 13 36 18 25 28 30 5 168 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 11 11 5 1 0 37
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 3 TOTAL 35 12 10 9 19 7 1 1 7 25 59 37 56 53 74 36 441 2A.3C-52
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 1 2 1 1 0 12 3.50 - 7.49 0 2 1 2 1 1 3 5 5 2 3 7 8 2 1 0 43 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 1 10 1 1 1 2 3 2 1 5 14 1 0 0 43 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 5 1 6 3 6 1 0 0 24 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 1 0 0 0 5
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 TOTAL 1 3 2 13 4 3 5 9 13 6 14 16 32 5 2 0 128 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 6 3.50 - 7.49 0 1 1 0 0 2 7 5 9 1 11 4 2 0 0 0 43 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 3 1 1 7 7 2 2 4 1 1 0 0 0 29 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 2 0 1 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 2
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 1 3 1 4 15 15 12 5 19 5 4 0 1 0 86 2A.3C-53
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 9 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 0 1 2 2 2 5 0 0 1 1 3 1 2 1 23 3.50 - 7.49 9 7 7 7 5 5 11 12 15 7 20 16 16 3 5 7 152 7.50 - 12.49 25 5 6 17 10 3 8 10 11 11 15 8 27 20 39 24 239 12.50 - 18.49 2 2 0 0 7 4 0 0 6 20 46 21 32 29 30 5 204 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 12 11 12 5 1 0 44
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 4 TOTAL 36 16 13 25 24 14 21 27 32 41 94 58 93 58 77 37 666 2A.3C-54
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 NOVEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 666 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 54 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 92.5% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 11.1 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.00 0.00 0.30 66.22 19.22 12.91 1.35 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 D 35 12 10 9 19 7 1 1 7 25 59 37 56 53 74 36 0 E 1 3 2 13 4 3 5 9 13 6 14 16 32 5 2 0 0 F 0 1 1 3 1 4 15 15 12 5 19 5 4 0 1 0 0 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 5 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 36 16 13 25 24 14 21 27 32 41 94 58 93 58 77 37 0 2A.3C-55
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2A.3C-56
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 4 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 6 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 4 5 2 2 6 0 3 1 0 1 0 0 0 1 0 26 3.50 - 7.49 6 1 3 19 16 11 5 1 5 3 6 11 6 1 3 11 108 7.50 - 12.49 20 2 1 6 8 6 0 2 4 5 14 16 22 12 17 20 155 12.50 - 18.49 9 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 17 24 12 26 14 12 8 125 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 10 3 10 8 1 1 35
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 3 0 0 16 TOTAL 36 8 9 27 26 23 5 6 12 27 55 43 76 38 34 40 465 2A.3C-57
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 4 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 3 0 2 1 2 2 2 2 0 0 1 4 2 0 23 3.50 - 7.49 1 2 2 3 9 9 3 5 7 4 2 1 1 0 2 1 52 7.50 - 12.49 2 0 0 2 1 1 2 1 7 8 15 6 14 0 0 0 59 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 7 3 1 4 0 0 0 17 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 3 5 5 12 11 7 8 18 21 20 8 20 4 4 1 155 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 0 1 3 0 2 1 1 0 2 1 0 0 0 1 13 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 4 6 11 3 2 5 2 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 37 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 5 2 2 0 0 0 0 0 14 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 1 4 8 15 4 6 7 10 7 6 1 0 0 0 1 71 2A.3C-58
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 5 0.75 - 3.49 2 6 8 3 7 7 4 6 4 2 3 1 1 4 3 1 62 3.50 - 7.49 7 3 9 28 39 23 10 11 14 11 9 12 7 1 5 12 201 7.50 - 12.49 22 2 1 9 10 8 3 4 16 15 31 22 37 12 17 20 229 12.50 - 18.49 9 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 7 25 29 13 31 14 12 8 150 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 10 3 10 8 1 1 35
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12 3 0 0 16 TOTAL 40 12 18 40 56 38 18 21 41 55 82 52 98 42 38 42 698 2A.3C-59
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 DECEMBER STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 744 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 698 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 46 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 93.8% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 9.9 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.00 0.00 0.86 66.62 22.21 10.17 0.14 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 0 0 D 36 8 9 27 26 23 5 6 12 27 55 43 76 38 34 40 0 E 4 3 5 5 12 11 7 8 18 21 20 8 20 4 4 1 4 F 0 1 4 8 15 4 6 7 10 7 6 1 0 0 0 1 1 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 40 12 18 40 56 38 18 21 41 55 82 52 98 42 38 42 5 2A.3C-60
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 2 1 1 1 1 2 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 12.50 - 18.49 2 1 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 8 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 4 2 2 1 1 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 20 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 3.50 - 7.49 5 2 2 1 1 3 2 2 4 0 0 2 2 0 0 2 28 7.50 - 12.49 10 1 7 2 3 5 1 2 1 5 0 3 3 4 4 5 56 12.50 - 18.49 4 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 1 9 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 4
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 19 4 10 4 4 9 3 4 5 5 1 5 5 8 4 9 99 2A.3C-61
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 2 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 6 3.50 - 7.49 6 2 2 5 4 5 11 7 1 4 11 14 9 8 6 6 108 7.50 - 12.49 17 0 2 1 3 0 3 3 8 7 11 13 21 8 8 10 111 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 4 4 7 1 6 11 5 0 37 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 3 7 1 0 13
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 25 2 4 7 8 8 14 10 13 16 29 29 39 35 20 16 275 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 18 17 17 13 20 18 7 15 12 12 15 17 24 19 8 18 250 3.50 - 7.49 74 33 55 83 74 55 38 33 50 42 95 127 71 40 59 89 1018 7.50 - 12.49 154 30 22 59 52 32 30 43 56 121 228 186 166 165 180 148 1672 12.50 - 18.49 25 9 3 13 21 26 22 6 26 107 247 190 247 175 120 36 1273 18.50 - 23.99 5 1 0 0 3 9 10 2 9 25 41 61 95 67 7 2 337 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 1 20 38 27 0 0 92 TOTAL 276 90 97 168 170 140 109 99 153 311 627 601 641 493 374 293 4643 2A.3C-62
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 11 0.75 - 3.49 18 10 14 19 27 17 19 16 14 14 26 21 41 29 17 9 311 3.50 - 7.49 23 24 44 46 40 60 41 30 49 43 78 77 85 38 21 18 717 7.50 - 12.49 25 8 7 34 26 18 41 26 43 66 94 78 88 17 22 20 613 12.50 - 18.49 14 3 1 4 5 8 12 15 29 46 57 29 20 4 9 7 263 18.50 - 23.99 0 1 0 0 0 1 3 4 5 5 9 1 1 0 0 0 30
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 2 TOTAL 80 46 66 103 98 104 116 91 140 174 265 206 236 88 69 54 1947 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 14 0.75 - 3.49 14 12 8 13 21 9 8 17 12 12 33 23 29 9 18 7 245 3.50 - 7.49 20 11 30 42 34 28 20 25 31 33 58 44 37 28 19 11 471 7.50 - 12.49 4 1 7 17 6 10 23 19 33 24 37 15 20 7 7 7 237 12.50 - 18.49 2 0 1 1 0 0 3 4 10 17 15 3 2 0 0 0 58 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 3
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 40 24 46 73 61 47 54 66 86 86 145 85 88 44 44 25 1028 2A.3C-63
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 1 1 2 0 0 0 1 0 3 0 0 0 1 1 10 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 4 2 1 2 5 6 6 9 2 1 4 0 0 42 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 9 15 7 6 8 4 0 0 0 54 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 4 1 6 3 0 0 0 0 0 17 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 5 4 1 11 18 23 19 21 10 5 4 1 1 124 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 26 0.75 - 3.49 52 39 41 46 71 46 34 48 40 38 77 61 94 58 44 36 825 3.50 - 7.49 128 72 133 181 155 152 114 102 148 128 251 266 205 118 105 126 2384 7.50 - 12.49 212 41 46 114 91 67 104 102 153 230 376 303 302 201 221 191 2754 12.50 - 18.49 47 14 6 20 26 37 41 30 66 180 330 223 275 192 134 44 1665 18.50 - 23.99 5 2 0 0 3 11 14 7 14 31 52 63 99 77 8 2 388
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 4 2 20 39 27 0 0 94 TOTAL 444 168 226 361 346 313 309 289 421 611 1088 936 1014 673 512 399 8136 2A.3C-64
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/80 - 12/31/80 ANNUAL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 8784 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 8136 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 648 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 92.6% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 9.5 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.25 1.22 3.38 57.07 23.93 12.64 1.52 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 4 2 2 1 1 4 2 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 B 19 4 10 4 4 9 3 4 5 5 1 5 5 8 4 9 0 C 25 2 4 7 8 8 14 10 13 16 29 29 39 35 20 16 0 D 276 90 97 168 170 140 109 99 153 311 627 601 641 493 374 293 1 E 80 46 66 103 98 104 116 91 140 174 265 206 236 88 69 54 11 F 40 24 46 73 61 47 54 66 86 86 145 85 88 44 44 25 14 G 0 0 1 5 4 1 11 18 23 19 21 10 5 4 1 1 0 Total 444 168 226 361 346 313 309 289 421 611 1088 936 1014 673 512 399 26 2A.3C-65
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 APPENDIX D Monthly and Annual Joint Frequency Distribution of T(500ft-35ft) and 500-ft Wind Data (January 1, 1976 - December 31, 1980) 2A.3Di
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2A.3D-1
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 11 5 7 7 6 7 7 8 4 4 3 3 2 2 5 3 84 3.50 - 7.49 12 12 15 48 35 41 26 17 28 12 41 25 19 12 24 22 389 7.50 - 12.49 36 18 44 45 15 24 9 19 14 20 76 159 100 64 61 34 738 12.50 - 18.49 3 0 24 11 12 3 3 1 22 12 122 194 204 59 34 5 709 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 2 4 0 0 0 0 1 5 34 83 92 27 1 0 249 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 28 50 27 5 0 0 114 TOTAL 62 35 92 115 68 75 45 45 69 57 304 514 444 169 125 64 2285 2A.3D-2
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 5 2 3 4 3 2 3 6 5 3 3 1 3 4 3 4 54 3.50 - 7.49 11 0 6 12 16 12 19 6 24 12 19 12 7 7 1 3 167 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 3 18 12 9 28 15 10 8 22 21 13 5 1 2 167 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 1 3 5 1 6 8 6 12 5 5 0 1 0 53 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 3 1 2 1 2 2 0 0 0 15
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 TOTAL 16 2 12 35 38 29 52 36 48 31 57 41 30 16 6 9 458 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 1 1 4 1 2 3 0 3 2 4 1 3 0 1 1 27 3.50 - 7.49 2 1 3 5 2 2 4 9 6 4 8 9 6 1 0 0 62 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 0 4 0 0 3 5 6 3 0 4 9 1 1 0 37 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 0 1 1 0 0 0 6 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 3 2 4 13 3 4 11 15 15 11 12 15 19 2 2 1 132 2A.3D-3
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 2 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 6 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 6 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 12 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 6 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 18 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 16 8 11 15 12 11 14 15 12 10 10 6 8 6 9 8 171 3.50 - 7.49 25 13 24 65 54 55 50 34 64 30 69 46 32 20 25 25 631 7.50 - 12.49 37 18 47 67 27 33 40 39 30 31 98 184 122 70 63 36 942 12.50 - 18.49 3 0 24 12 15 8 5 8 30 20 134 200 210 59 35 5 768 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 2 4 3 1 0 3 2 7 35 85 94 27 1 0 264 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 4 28 50 27 5 0 0 116 TOTAL 81 39 108 163 112 108 110 99 138 102 374 571 493 187 133 74 2894 2A.3D-4
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 JANUARY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 2894 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 826 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 77.8% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 11.5 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.00 0.00 0.03 78.96 15.83 4.56 0.62 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 D 62 35 92 115 68 75 45 45 69 57 304 514 444 169 125 64 2 E 16 2 12 35 38 29 52 36 48 31 57 41 30 16 6 9 0 F 3 2 4 13 3 4 11 15 15 11 12 15 19 2 2 1 0 G 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 3 6 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 Total 81 39 108 163 112 108 110 99 138 102 374 571 493 187 133 74 2 2A.3D-5
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 2A.3D-6
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 2 0 0 9 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 1 0 5 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 1 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 1 0 19 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 6 6 3 4 6 6 2 3 4 2 2 3 6 3 2 10 68 3.50 - 7.49 27 9 34 37 33 11 7 12 8 8 41 32 20 11 36 37 363 7.50 - 12.49 61 13 21 25 19 14 1 3 14 21 76 86 122 118 122 62 778 12.50 - 18.49 12 3 16 11 2 0 1 2 2 27 111 81 162 101 36 15 582 18.50 - 23.99 2 0 7 1 0 0 1 0 0 11 48 40 50 27 1 0 188 > 23.99 0 0 5 1 0 1 1 0 0 1 4 12 29 7 0 0 61 TOTAL 108 31 86 79 60 32 13 20 28 70 282 254 389 267 197 124 2040 2A.3D-7
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 3 5 8 0 5 3 2 1 2 4 2 5 4 3 2 5 54 3.50 - 7.49 13 12 13 14 15 11 10 3 3 6 6 13 18 12 3 17 169 7.50 - 12.49 13 1 2 5 18 13 9 12 18 16 13 30 41 12 14 6 223 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 1 1 1 1 5 0 6 19 31 25 17 6 4 0 117 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 2 20 8 7 0 0 0 40
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 4 TOTAL 29 18 24 20 39 29 29 16 29 47 72 82 89 33 23 28 608 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 4 3 4 4 6 3 1 5 3 3 9 9 4 3 1 2 64 3.50 - 7.49 7 2 5 6 11 10 6 9 10 5 6 6 6 3 3 4 99 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 1 1 1 9 8 3 14 23 15 6 4 1 1 0 87 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 1 17 17 5 1 0 1 0 46 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 1 2 0 0 0 0 0 5 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 11 5 10 11 18 25 18 17 28 49 49 26 15 7 6 6 302 2A.3D-8
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 4 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 0 7 7 1 0 0 0 0 0 20 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 3 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 7 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 29 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SS SW WSW W WN NW NN TOTA W W W L CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 13 14 15 8 17 13 5 9 9 9 13 17 14 9 5 17 187 3.50 - 7.49 47 23 53 58 60 33 23 24 21 23 53 51 44 26 42 58 639 7.50 - 12.49 74 14 29 32 41 36 23 18 53 67 105 122 170 133 137 68 1122 12.50 - 18.49 12 3 17 12 3 4 7 2 9 65 160 111 183 108 42 15 753 18.50 - 23.99 2 0 7 1 0 1 5 2 0 14 70 48 57 27 1 0 235 > 23.99 0 0 5 1 0 1 2 0 0 1 4 13 31 7 0 0 65 TOTAL 148 54 126 112 121 88 65 55 92 179 405 362 499 310 227 158 3003 2A.3D-9
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 FEBRUARY STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3408 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3003 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 405 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 88.1% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 10.9 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.13 0.03 0.63 67.93 20.25 10.06 0.97 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW CALM A 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 B 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 C 0 0 1 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 3 1 0 0 D 108 31 86 79 60 32 13 20 28 70 282 254 389 267 197 124 0 E 29 18 24 20 39 29 29 16 29 47 72 82 89 33 23 28 1 F 11 5 10 11 18 25 18 17 28 49 49 26 15 7 6 6 1 G 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 2 7 13 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 Total 148 54 126 112 121 88 65 55 92 179 405 362 499 310 227 158 2 2A.3D-10
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS A STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 STABILITY CLASS B STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 2 1 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 1 0 2 4 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 11 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 1 1 0 1 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 7 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 TOTAL 3 1 3 1 2 8 6 0 0 0 0 0 3 0 0 1 28 2A.3D-11
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS C STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3.50 - 7.49 5 1 0 0 1 9 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 21 7.50 - 12.49 5 1 1 0 0 3 2 0 0 1 0 0 5 3 2 5 28 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 2 1 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 2 5 4 2 0 20 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 2 2 0 10
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 4 TOTAL 10 2 3 1 1 12 8 1 0 1 0 3 19 10 6 6 83 STABILITY CLASS D STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 3 2 6 6 6 2 1 1 6 3 5 3 3 8 4 3 62 3.50 - 7.49 34 17 23 21 32 23 24 10 10 5 13 19 18 11 22 28 310 7.50 - 12.49 55 15 14 45 58 15 30 21 22 35 62 48 64 69 68 37 658 12.50 - 18.49 2 7 8 17 14 31 34 12 19 49 84 126 150 100 53 11 717 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 1 5 12 6 13 15 26 38 94 32 9 1 252 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 7 10 19 47 30 6 0 123 TOTAL 94 41 51 89 111 76 103 50 72 114 200 253 376 250 162 80 2123 2A.3D-12
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS E STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 1 1 5 4 7 5 3 3 3 6 5 5 8 3 3 0 62 3.50 - 7.49 1 16 12 8 13 21 14 11 14 5 11 8 14 6 14 6 174 7.50 - 12.49 1 0 6 16 17 17 18 19 22 17 11 22 20 15 7 4 212 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 2 1 1 15 21 15 23 25 24 16 8 4 1 0 156 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 3 11 2 5 5 12 2 1 0 0 0 41
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 0 0 0 1 0 3 TOTAL 3 17 25 29 38 61 67 50 67 60 63 53 51 28 26 10 648 STABILITY CLASS F STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 1 0.75 - 3.49 2 2 4 3 2 3 5 3 3 4 4 0 2 0 3 3 43 3.50 - 7.49 5 6 13 12 7 25 16 8 10 4 17 9 4 3 5 2 146 7.50 - 12.49 2 2 8 17 7 15 4 4 14 14 10 0 4 6 3 2 112 12.50 - 18.49 0 0 0 0 0 4 3 5 10 21 2 0 0 0 0 0 45 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 1 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 9 10 25 32 16 48 33 20 37 43 33 9 10 9 11 7 353 2A.3D-13
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY CLASS G STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 0 0.75 - 3.49 0 2 3 5 1 2 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 0 19 3.50 - 7.49 1 2 5 6 6 1 0 0 3 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 27 7.50 - 12.49 0 0 0 1 3 1 0 1 10 7 3 2 0 0 0 1 29 12.50 - 18.49 1 0 0 0 2 3 0 1 2 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 21 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 3
> 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 2 4 8 12 12 7 1 3 15 22 6 2 0 2 1 2 99 STABILITY CLASS ALL STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH JOINT FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF WIND SPEED AND DIRECTION IN HOURS AT 500.00 FEET SPEED (MPH) N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW SW WSW W WNW NW NNW TOTAL CALM 2 0.75 - 3.49 6 7 18 18 15 12 9 8 12 14 15 8 13 13 11 6 186 3.50 - 7.49 48 43 54 47 59 82 58 29 37 15 42 36 37 20 41 38 686 7.50 - 12.49 64 18 30 79 88 56 56 45 68 74 86 72 93 93 80 50 1052 12.50 - 18.49 3 7 13 20 17 54 65 34 54 107 110 144 164 108 56 11 967 18.50 - 23.99 0 0 0 0 1 9 29 8 18 21 39 41 101 34 11 1 313 > 23.99 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 9 10 19 51 31 7 0 131 TOTAL 121 75 115 164 181 213 219 124 191 240 302 320 459 299 206 106 3337 2A.3D-14
BVPS UFSAR UNIT 1 Rev. 22 PROGRAM: JFD REVISION: 4P BEAVER VALLEY JFD-500 FOOT LEVEL FOR CY1976 TO 1980 SITE IDENTIFIER: LBV2 DATA PERIOD EXAMINED: 1/1/76 - 12/31/80 MARCH STABILITY BASED ON: DELTA T BETWEEN 500.0 AND 35.0 FEET WIND MEASURED AT: 500.0 FEET WIND THRESHOLD AT: 0.75 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS: 3720 TOTAL NUMBER OF VALID OBSERVATIONS: 3337 TOTAL NUMBER OF MISSING OBSERVATIONS: 383 PERCENT DATA RECOVERY FOR THIS PERIOD: 89.7% MEAN WIND SPEED FOR THIS PERIOD: 11.7 MPH TOTAL NUMBER OF OBSERVATIONS WITH BACKUP DATA: 0 PERCENTAGE OCCURRENCE OF STABILITY CLASSES A B C D E F G 0.09 0.84 2.49 63.62 19.42 10.58 2.97 DISTRIBUTION OF WIND DIRECTION VS STABILITY N NNE NE ENE E ESE SE SSE S SSW}}