Regulatory Guide 3.40: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(Created page by program invented by StriderTol)
(StriderTol Bot change)
 
(7 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
{{Adams
| number = ML13350A250
| number = ML003739400
| issue date = 11/30/1976
| issue date = 12/31/1977
| title = Design Basis Floods for Fuel Reprocessing Plants and for Plutonium Processing and Fuel Fabrication Plants
| title = Rev. 1, Design Basis Floods for Fuel Reprocessing Plants and for Plutonium Processing and Fuel Fabrication Plants
| author name =  
| author name =  
| author affiliation = NRC/RES
| author affiliation = NRC/RES
Line 10: Line 10:
| license number =  
| license number =  
| contact person =  
| contact person =  
| document report number = RG-3.040
| document report number = RG-3.40 Rev 1
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| document type = Regulatory Guide
| page count = 5
| page count = 6
}}
}}
{{#Wiki_filter:.I U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY  
{{#Wiki_filter:Revision 1 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION                                                                               December 1977 REGULATORY GUIDE
COMMISSION  
                                    OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT
November 1976 REGULATORY  
                                                                    REGULATORY GUIDE 3.40
GUIDE OFFICE OF STANDARDS  
                        DESIGN BASIS FLOODS FOR FUEL REPROCESSING PLANTS AND FOR
DEVELOPMENT
                                  PLUTONIUM PROCESSING AND FUEL FABRICATION PLANTS
REGULATORY  
GUIDE 3.40 DESIGN BASIS FLOODS FOR FUEL REPROCESSING  
PLANTS AND FOR PLUTONIUM  
PROCESSING  
AND FUEL FABRICATION  
PLANTS  


==A. INTRODUCTION==
==A. INTRODUCTION==
safety-related functions.
signed to withstand the effects of floods or discuss the design requirements for flood protection.


It do s.:i'ot identify struc-tures. systems, and should be Paragraph (a)(1) of §50.34, "Contents of applica- designed to withstand the dffects of floods or discuss tions: Technical information," of 10 CFR Part 50, the design requirementslfor flood protection."Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," requires, among other things, that each application for a construction permit for a production or utiliza- The methodsý'described in this guide result from tion facility, including fuel reprocessing plants, in- review and action'on a number of specific cases, and clude a description and safety assessment of the site as such, relflectthe latesi general approaches to the on which the facility is to be located, with ap- problem-NkC
Paragraph (a)(1) of §50.34, "Contents of Applica                                          ANSI N170-1976, "Standards for Determining                                    *
has approved.
  tions: Technical Information," of 10 CFR Part 50,                                         Design Basis Flooding at Power Reactor Sites,"'
  "Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities,"                                     presents standards to establish design basis flooding requires, among other things, that each application                                       for safety-related features at power reactor sites.


If an applicant desires propriate attention to features affecting facility to emniynCwinr.rmation that may be developed in desig
for a construction permit for a production or utiliza                                    ANSI N170-1976 also contains, among other things, tion facility, including fuel reprocessing plants,. in                                    methodology for estimating probable maximum surges clude a description and safety assessment of the site                                    and seiches at estuaries and coastal areas on oceans on which the facility is to be located, with appro                                        and large lakes. Appendix B to Regulatory Guide priate attention to features affecting facility design.                                    1.59, "Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Paragraph 70.22 (f) of 10 CFR Part 70, "Special Nu                                        Plants," gives timesaving alternative methods of es clear Material," requires that each application for a                                    timating the probable maximum flood along streams.


====n. Paragraph ====
license to possess and use special nuclear material in                                   Appendix C to Regulatory Guide 1.59 gives a a plutonium processing and fuel fabrication plant. con                                    simplified method of estimating probable maximum tain, among other things, a description and safety as                                    surges on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. It is the'con sessment of the design bases of the principal struc                                      sensus of the NRC staff that ANSI N170-1976 and ture, systems, and components of the plant, including                                     Appendices B and C to Regulatory Guide 1.59 are provisions for protection against natural phenomena.                                      also applicable to nuclear facilities, and therefore Paragraph 70.23 (b) of 10 CFR Part 70 provides that                                        they are referenced in this guide.
70.22(0 of 10 CFR Part 70,
use an alternative method. NRC will"Special Nuclear Material," requires that each ap- .. i the'lroposal and approve its use, if found ac-plication for a license to possess and use special-'-i P1 c I..nuclear material in a plutonium processing and fuel -.. .".'>.fabrication plant contain, among other th The flood analysis described in this guide need not descrpton and safety assessment of.the design basei."..descipton nd sfet asessmnt ~ r~ be considered by applicants in their submittals for of the principal structure, systems, and "omi...e t ;: oe on er ty apants m m nrs nm as of~t~heprincipalstrc.t com special nuclear material lic,;nses or construction per-of the plant, including provisions  
-
mit applications for nuclear facilities located at sites against natural phenomena.


of 10. ....... .CFR.Part 70 provesa. the ) C , :o" p-- above the design basis flood level where it is obvious Pro c on ion of the ,,-#il that safety-related structures, systems. and compo-prove construction of the principay,*ttuctures, nents are not affected by flooding.systems, and components of a plutonium processing and fuel fabrication p. Owhen it has determined, among other things, at t .dsign bases of the prin-
the Commission will approve construction of the                                               The methods described in this guide result from re principal structures, systems, and components of a                                         view of and action on specific cases, and as such, plutonium processing and fuel fabrication plant when                                      reflect the latest general approaches to the problem it has determined, among other things, that the design                                    that are acceptable to the NRC staff. If an applicant bases of the principal structures, systems, and com                                      desires to employ new information that may be de ponents provide reasonable assurance of protection                                        veloped or to use an alternative method, the NRC
against natural phenomena and the consequences of                                        staff will review the proposal and approve its use, if potential accidents.                                                                    found acceptable.


==B. DISCUSSION==
This guide describes methods of determining the                                           The flood analysis described in this guide need not design basis floods that fuel reprocessing plants and                                   be considered by applicants in their submittals in plutonium processing and fuel fabrication plants t                                      connection with applications for special nuclear ma should be designed to withstand without loss of                                         terial licenses, operating licenses, or construction safety-related functions. It does not identify struc                                    permits for nuclear facilities located at sites above the tures, systems, and components that should be de                                        design basis flood level where it can be demonstrated
cipal structures, s 'sten an omponents provide reasonable as lof-otection against natural Nuclear facilities should be designed to prevent a phenomena a the nsequences of potential acci- release of radioactivity resulting from the effects of dents. the most severe flood conditions that can reasonably be predicted to occur at a site as a result of severe This e describes methods of determining the hydromecteorological conditions, seismic activity, or design ba oods that fuel reprocessing plants and both.plutonium rocessing and fuel fabrication plants should be designed to withstand without loss of The Corps of Engineers for many years has studied The term "nuclear facility" will be used in this guide to refer to fuel reprocessing plants and to plutonium processing and fuel fabrication plants.conditions and circumstances relating to floods and flood control. As a result of these studies, it has developed a definition for a Probable Maximum USNRC REGULATORY
                                                                                              *Lines indicate substantive changes from the previous issue.
GUIDES Comments should be sent to the Secetarv ol the C.m;-,,t',son,.
U S No, leA'Regulatory Commision.


Washlngton.
'The term "nuclear facility" will be used in this guide to
                                                                                              'Copies of ANSI N170-1976 may be purchased from the refer to fuel reprocessing plants and to plutonium processing and                        American Nuclear Society, 555 N. Kensington Avenue, La fuel fabrication plants.                                                                Grange Park, IL 60525.


D C 4%65, Attint,, Oo.t.ketanli unid Regulatory Guides are ,ssued to describe and make available to the public Senrice Section methods acceptable to the NRC sIal of fmplementing specific patts of tte Commissions regulations, to delineate techniques used by the stWt in ev.ltu The guides are issued in the following ten broad divistons aling specific problems or postulated accidents or to provide guidaince to appih cant%. RegulatorV
USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES                                          Comments Should be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, US. Nuclear Regu Regulatory Guides are issued to describe and make available to the public methods     latory Commission, Washington. D.C.       20555. Attention    Docketing and Service Branch.
Guides ate not substitutes fot regulations.


and compl;ince I. Power Reactors 6 PtilIctl%with them is not required Methods and solutions ditlerent front those set out in 2 Research and Test Reactort 7 Ttnsirtpotatinti the guides will be acceptable if they provtde a basis lo, the findings tequisite to 3 Fuels And Materials Facitities a Uccupationtrl Health the issuence or continuance of a petmit of license by the Commission
acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts of the Commission's regulations. to delineate techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems The guides are issued in the following ten broad divisions or postulated accidents, or to provide guidance to applicants. Regulatory Guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with them is not required.        1.  Power Reactors                          6. Products Methods and solutions different from those set out in the guides will be accept.      2Research and Test Reactors              7. Transportation able if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance 3Fuels and Materials Facilities          8. Occupational Health of a permit or license by the Comminsion.                                              4.   Environmental and Siting               
4 Environmentatl And Siting 9 Anwtititl Reniny.Comments and suggestions for improvements in these guides ate encouraged
5 Materials and Plant Protection tO Generteal at all times, usd guides will be revised. as app to accommodate aom ments and to reflect new information ot experience.


However. comments on Copies of published guides may be obtained hv wtiltepi request indicaltin the this guide, it received within about two months atter its issuance.
===9. Antitrust Review===
                                                                                        5.  Materials and Plant Protection          10. General Comments and suggestions for improvements in these guides are encouraged at all        Requests for single copies of issued guides (which may be reoroduced) or for plac.


will be par. divisions desired to the U S Nuclear Commission.
times, and guides will be revised, as appropriate, to accommodate comments and        ment on an automatic distribution list for single copies of future guides in spicilif to reflect new information or experience. This guide was revised as a result of        divisions should be made in writing to the US Nuclear Regul~atory Commissioii substantive comments received from the public and additional staff review.              Washington, D.C      20555, Attentioin    Director, Division of Document Coitrol


Washington
that safety-related structures, systems, and compo                      mically induced floods reasonably possible should be nents are not affected by flooding.                                    considered for each site. Along streams and estuaries, seismically induced floods may be produced by dam
0 C ticulatry useful in evaluating the need for an early tevision.


2055. Attention Cirectot.
==B. DISCUSSION==
failures or landslides. Along lakeshores, coastlines, and estuaries, seismically induced or tsunami-type Nuclear facilities should be designed to prevent a                  flooding should be considered. Consideration of release of radioactivity resulting from the effects of                  seismically induced floods should include the same the most severe flood conditions that can reasonably                    range of seismic events as is postulated for the design be predicted to occur at a site as a result of severe                  of the nuclear facility. For instance, the analysis of hydrometeorological conditions, seismic activity, or                  floods caused by dam failures, landslides, or tsunami both.                                                                  requires consideration of seismic events equivalent in The Corps of Engineers for many years has studied                  severity to the Safe Shutdown Earthquake 4 occurring conditions and circumstances relating to floods and                    at the location that would produce the worst such flood control. As a result of these studies, it has de                  flood at the nuclear facility site.


Ottice of Standardt Developtmrent Flood (PMF)' and attendant analyt'.d techniques for estimating, with an acceptable degree of conser-vatism, flood levels on streams resulting from hydrometeorological conditions.
veloped a definition for a Probable Maximum Flood                          In the case of seismically induced floods along riv (PMF) 3 and attendant analytical techniques for es                      ers, lakes, and estuaries that may be produced by timating, with an acceptable degree of conservatism,                    events less severe than a Safe Shutdown Earthquake, flood levels on streams resulting from hy                              consideration should be given to the coincident oc drometeorological conditions. An acceptable degree                      currence of floods due to severe hydrometeorological of conservatism, for estimating seismically induced                    conditions. This combination of events, however, flood levels and for evaluating the effects of the in                  should be considered only where the effects on the itiating event, is provided in Appendix A, "Seismic                    nuclear facility are worse than and the probability of and Geologic Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power                          such combined events may be greater than an indi Plants," to 10 CFR Part 100, "Reactor Site                              vidual occurrence of the most severe event of either Criteria.'"                                                            type. ANSI N170-1976 contains combinations of The conditions resulting from the worst site-related                such events acceptable to the NRC staff. For the spe flood probable at the nuclear facility (e.g., PMF,                      cific case of seismically induced floods due to dam seismically induced flood, seiche, surge, severe local                  failures, an evaluation should be made of flood precipitation) with attendant wind-generated wave ac                    waves that may be caused (1) by domino-type dam tivity constitute the design basis flood conditions that                failures triggered by a seismically induced failure of safety-related structures, systems, and components,                    a critically located dam and (2) by multiple dam fail whose failure during such conditions would constitute                  ures in a region where dams may be located close a threat to the public health and safety, should be de                  enough together that a single seismic event can cause signed to withstand and remain functional.                              multiple failures.


An acceptable degree of conservatism, for estimating seismically in-duced flood levels and for evaluating the effects of the i initiating event, is provided in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100.The conditions resulting from the worst site-related flood probable at the nuclear facility (e.g., PMF, seismically induced flood, seiche, surge, severe local precipitation)
For sites along streams, the PMF generally pro                          Each of the severe flood types discussed above vides the design basis flood. For sites along lakes or                 should represent the upper limit of all potential seashores, a flood condition of comparable severity                     phenomenologically caused flood combinations con could be produced by the most severe combination of                     sidered reasonably possible. Analytical techniques hydrometeorological parameters reasonably possi                        are available and should generally be used for predic ble, such as may be produced by a Probable                              tion at individual sites. Those techniques applicable Maximum Hurricane (Refs. 1, 2) or by a Probable                        to PMF and seismically induced flood estimates on Maximum Seiche. On estuaries, a Probable                                streams are presented in ANSI N170-1976 and Ap Maximum River Flood, a Probable Maximum Surge,                          pendix B to Regulatory Guide 1.59. For sites on a Probable Maximum Seiche, or a reasonable combi                        coasts, estuaries, and large lakes, techniques are pre nation of less severe phenomenologically caused                        sented in ANSI N170-1976 and in Appendix C to flooding events should be considered in arriving at                    Regulatory Guide 1.59.
with attendant wind-generated wave activity constitute the design basis flood conditions that safety-related structures, systems, and compo-nents, whose failure during such conditions would constitute a threat to the public health and safety.should be designed to withstand and remain func-tional.For sites along streams, the PMF generally provides the design basis flood. For sites along lakes or seashores, a flood condition of comparable severity could be produced by the most severe com-bination of hydrometeorological parameters reasonably possible.


such as may be produced by a Probable Maximum Hurricane (Refs. 1, 2) or by a Probable Maximum Seiche. On estuaries, a Probable*Maximum River Flood. a Probable Maximum Surge, a Probable Maximum Seiche, or a reasonable com-bination of less severe phenomenologically caused flooding events should be considered in arriving at design basis flood conditions comparable in fre-quency of occurrence with PMF on streams.In addition to floods produced by severe hydrometcorological conditions, the most severe seismically induced floods reasonably possible should be considered for each site. Along streams and es-tuaries, seismically induced floods may be produced by dam failures or landslides.
design basis flood conditions comparable in fre                             Analyses of only the most severe flood conditions quency of occurrence with a PMF on streams.                             may not indicate potential threats to safety-related In addition to floods produced by severe hy                        systems that might result from combinations of flood drometeorological conditions, the most severe seis                      conditions thought to be less severe. Therefore, rea sonable combinations of less-severe flood conditions
    3 The Corps of Engineers' Probable Maximum Flood definition should also be considered to the extent needed for a appears inr many publications of that agency such as Engineering        consistent level of conservatism. Such combinations Circular EC 1110-2-27, Change 1, "Engineering and Design                should be evaluated in cases where the probability of Policies and Procedures Pertaining to Determination of Spillway        their existing at the same time and having significant Capacities and Freeboard Allowances for Dams," February 19,            consequences is at least comparable to that associated
1968. The Probable Maximum Flood is also directly analogous to the Corps of Engineers' "Spillway Design Flood" as used for        with the most severe hydrometeorological or seismi dams whose failures would result in a significant loss of life and property. A similar definition for Probable Maximum Flood is              'Determined as outlined for nuclear power plants in Appendix given in ANSI N170-1976.                                              A to 10 CFR Part 100.


Along lakeshores, coastlines, and estuaries, seismically induced or tsunami-type flooding should be considered.
3.40-2


Con-sideration of seismically induced floods should in-clude the same range of seismic events as is postulated for the design of the nuclear facility.
cally induced flood. For example, a failure of rela                  wind-generated wave activity constitute the design tively high levees adjacent to a nuclear facility could              basis flood conditions that structures, systems, and occur during floods less severe than the worst site                  components important to safety must be designed to related flood but would produce conditions more se                    withstand without impairing their capability to per vere than those that would result during a greater                    form safety functions.


For instance, the analysis of floods caused by dam failuies, landslides, or tsunami requires consideration of seismic events equivalent in severity to the Safe Shutdown Earthquake'
flood (where a levee failure elsewhere would produce                       a. The standards for determining design basis less severe conditions at the nuclear facility site).                 flooding at power reactor sites contained in ANSI
occurring at the location that would produce the worst such flood at the nuclear facility site.ýCorps of IEngincers'
        Wind-generated wave activity may produce severe                  N170-1976 are considered by the NRC staff to be flood-induced static and dynamic conditions either                  generally acceptable for nuclear facilities, subject to independent of or coincident with severe hy                          the following:
Probable Maximum Flood definition ap-pears in many publications of that agency such as Engineering Circular EC 1110-2-27.
  drometeorological or seismic flood-producing                                    (1) Footnote 1 and the list of safety-related mechanisms. For example, along a lake, reservoir,                    structures, systems, and components in Section 3.1.3 river, or seashore, reasonably severe wave action                    of ANSI N170-1976 are not applicable to nuclear should be considered coincident with the probable                    facilities. A list of pertinent elevations of safety maximum water level conditions. 5 The coincidence                    related structures should be provided for comparison of wave activity with probable maximum water level                    with design basis flood levels. It should be referenced conditions should take into account the fact that suf                to maps and drawings of such facilities.


Change I. "Engineering and Design-Policies and Procedures Pertaining to Determination of Spillway Capacities zind Freeboard Allowances for Dams." February 19.1968. The Probable Naximum Flood is also directly analogous to the Corps of Engineers "Spillway Design Flood" as used for dams %hose failures would result in a significant loss of life and property.In the case of seismically induced floods along rivers, lakes, and estuaries which may be produced by events less severe than a Safe Shutdown Earthquake, consideration should be given to the coincident oc-currence of floods due to severe hydrometeorological conditions.
ficient time can elapse between the occurrence of the                          (2) Footnote 2 in Section 4.3.1 of ANSI N170
  assumed meteorological mechanism and the                              1976 is not applicable to nuclear facilities. The words maximum water level to allow subsequent                              "safe shutdown" in Section 4.3.1 of ANSI N170
  meteorological activity to produce substantial wind                  1976 should be interpreted to mean "safe curtailment generated waves coincident with the high water level.                of operations."
  In addition, the most severe wave activity at the'site                          (3) Sections 5.5.4.2.3 and 5.5.5 of ANSI
  that can be generated by distant hydrometeorological                  N170-1976 contain references to methods for evaluat activity should be considered. For instance, coastal                ing the erosion failure of earthfill or rockfill dams locations may be subjected to severe wave action                      and determining the resulting outflow hydrographs.


But this should be considered only where the effects on the nuclear facility are worse, and the probability of such combined events may be greater, than an individual occurrence of the most severe event of either type. For example, a seismically in-duced flood produced by an earthquake equivalent in severity to an Operating Basis Earthquake'
caused by a distant storm that, although not as severe               The staff has found that some of these methods may as a local storm (e.g., a Probable Maximum Hur                        not be conservative because they predict slower rates ricane), may produce more severe wave action be                       of erosion than those that have historically occurred.
coinci-dent with a runoff-type flood of Standard Project Flood' severity may be considered to have approx-imately the same severity as the seismically induced flood from an earthquake of Safe Shutdown severity coincident with about a 25-year flood. For the specific case of seismically induced floods due to dam failures, an evaluation should be made (a) of flood waves that may be caused by domino-type dam failures triggered by a seismically induced failure of a critically located dam and (b) of flood waves that may be caused by multiple dam failures in a region where dams may be located close enough together that a single seismic event can cause multiple failures.Each of the severe flood types discussed above should represent the upper limit of all potential phenomenologically caused flood combinations con-sidered reasonably possible.


Analytical techniques are available and should generally be used for predic-tion at individual sites. Those techniques applicable to PMF and seismically induced flood estimates on streams are presented in Appendices A and B to Regulatory Guide 1.59, "Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Plants." Similar appendices for coastal, estuary, and Great Lakes sites, reflecting comparable levels of risk, will be issued as they become available.
cause of a very long wave-generating fetch. The most                  Modifications to the models may be made to increase severe wave activity at the site that may be generated                their conservatism. Such modifications will be re by conditions at a distance from the site should be                  viewed by the NRC staff on a case-by-case basis.


Appendix C to Regulatory Guide 1.59 contains an acceptable method of estimating hurricane-induced surge levels on the open coasts of the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Ocean.Analyses of only the most severe flood conditions may not indicate potential threats to safety-related systems that might result from combinations of flood conditions thought to be less severe. Therefore.
considered in such cases. In addition, assurance                                (4) Instead of Section 7.4.5.1 of ANSI
  should be provided that safety systems are designed                  N170-1976, the following should be used:
  to withstand the static and dynamic effects resulting
                                                                              "7.4.5.1 Structure Being Considered. In gen from frequent flood levels (i.e., the maximum operat eral, the structures that need to be considered for ing level in reservoirs and the 10-year flood level in the wave activities are protective dikes, waterfront streams) coincident with the waves that would be produced by the Probable Maximum Gradient Wind"                          banks and shores, auxiliary and control buildings, for the site (based on a study of historical regional                    and other safety-related facilities, and non-safety related facilities whose failure could adversely af meteorology).                                                             fect safety-related facilities."
                                                                                (5) The terms "safe shutdown earthquake


reasonable combinations of less-severe flood condi-tions should also be considered to the extent needed Determined in a manner analogous to tV-'t outlined in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100.'The Standard Project Flood (SPF) is the flood resulting from the most severe flood-producing rainfall depth-area-duration relationship and isohyctal pattern of any storm that is considered reasonahly characteristic of the region in which the watershed is located. If snowmelt may be substantial, appropriate amounts are included with the Standard Project Storm rainfall.
==C. REGULATORY POSITION==
(SSE)" and "operating basis earthquake (OBE)" are used in Section 9.2.1.2 of ANSI N170-197


Where floods are predominantly caused by snowmelt.
===6. For the===
      1. The conditions resulting from the worst site purposes of this guide, the safe shutdown earthquake related flood probable at a nuclear facility (e.g.,
                                                                      (SSE) and the operating basis earthquake (OBE)
PMF, seismically induced flood, hurricane, seiche, should be determined as outlined for nuclear power surge, heavy local precipitation) with attendant plants in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100.


the SPF is based on critical combinations or snow. temperature.
'Probable Maximum Water Level is defined by the Corps of                    (6) Instead of Section 10.1 of ANSI N170
Engineers as "the maximum still water level (i.e., exclusive of      1976, the following should be used:
local coincident wave runup) which can be produced.by the most              "10.1 General. Guidance is available if canals, severe combination of hydrometeorological and/or seismic                  reservoirs, and related structures are used."
parameters reasonably possible for a particular location. Such phenomena are hurricanes, moving squall lines, other cyclonic                  (7) Instead of Section 10.3 of ANSI N170
meteorological events, tsunami, etc., which, when combined            1976, the following should be used:
with the physical response of a body of water and severe am bient hydrological conditions, would produce a still water level
                                                                            "10.3 Reservoirs. Guidance is available if a re that has virtually no risk of being exceeded."                            servoir is used."
    'Probable Maximum Gradient Wind is defined as a gradient                b. The PMF on streams, as defined in ANSI
wind of designated duration, which there is virtually no risk of      N170-1976 and based on the analytical techniques exceeding.


and water losses. See"'Standard Project Flood Determinations." EM 1110-2-1411.
summarized in ANSI N170-1976 and Appendix B to
                                                                3.40-3


Corps of Engineers.
Regulatory Guide 1.59, provides an acceptable level                    components as specified in regulatory position 1 of conservatism for estimating flood levels caused by                  above, it is permissible to curtail operation of the severe hydrometeorological conditions.                                facility and initiate suitable protective measures pro c. Along lakeshores, coastlines, and estuaries,                vided that:
estimates of flood levels resulting from severe                              a. Sufficient warning time is shown to be avail surges, seiches, and wave action caused by hy                          able to curtail operations and implement adequate drometeorological activity should be based on criteria                emergency procedures;
comparable in conservatism to those used for PMFs.                          b. Those structures, systems, and components Criteria and analytical techniques providing this level                necessary for confinement of radioactivity during the of conservatism for the analysis of these events are                  emergency are designed with hardened protective fea summarized in ANSI N170-1976. Appendix C to                            tures to remain functional while withstanding the en Regulatory Guide 1.59 presents an acceptable method                    tire range of flood conditions up to and including the for estimating the stillwater level of the Probable                    worst site-related flood probable (e.g., PMF, seismi Maximum Surge (PMS) from hurricanes at open                            cally induced flood, hurricane, surge, seiche, heavy coast sites on the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico.                  local precipitation), with coincident wind-generated d. Flood conditions that could be caused by dam                wave action as discussed in regulatory position 1 failures from earthquakes should also be considered                    above.


Department of the Army (revised March 1965).3.40-2 for a consistent level of conservatism.
in establishing the design basis flood. Analytical                        3. During the economic life of a nuclear facility, techniques for evaluating the hydrologic effects of                    unanticipated changes to the site environs that may seismically induced dam failures discussed herein are                  adversely affect the flood-producing characteristics presented in ANSI N170-1976. Techniques for                           of the environs are possible. Examples include con evaluating the effects of tsunami will be presented in                struction of a dam upstream or downstream of the nu a future appendix to Regulatory Guide 1.59.                            clear facility, or comparably, construction of a high e. Where upsteam dams or other features that                    way or railroad bridge and embankment that obstructs provide flood protection are present, in addition to                  the floodflow of a river, and construction of a harbor the analyses of the most severe floods that may be                    or deepening of an existing harbor near a coastal or induced by either hydrometeorological or seismic                      lake site nuclear facility.


Such combina-tions should be evaluated in cases where the probability of their existing at the same time and hav-ing significant consequences is at least comparable to that associated with the most severe hydrometeorological or seismically induced flood.For example, a failure of relatively high levees adja-cent to a nuclear facility could occur during floods less severe than the worst site-related flood, but would produce conditions more severe than those that would result during a greater flood (where a levee failure elsewhere would produce less severe con-ditions at the nuclear facility site).Wind-generated wave activity may produce severe flood-induced static and dynamic conditions either independent of or coincident with severe hydrometeorological or seismic flood-producing mechanisms.
mechanisms, reasonable combinations of less-severe                        Significantly adverse changes in the runoff or other flood conditions and seismic events should also be                     flood-producing characteristics of the site environs, considered to the extent needed for a consistent level                as they affect the design basis flood, should be iden of conservatism. The effect of such combinations on                    tified and used as the basis to develop or modify the flood conditions at the nuclear facility site should              emergency operating procedures, if necessary, to be evaluated in cases where the probability of such                    mitigate the effects of the increased flood.


For example, along a lake. reservoir.
combinations occurring at the same time and having                        4. Proper utilization of the data and procedures in significant consequences is at least comparable to the                Appendices B and C to Regulatory Guide 1.59 will probability associated with the most severe hy                        result in PMF peak discharges and PMS peak stillwa drometeorological or seismically induced flood. For                   ter levels that will in many cases be approved by the relatively large streams, examples of acceptable                      NRC staff with no further verification. The staff will combinations of runoff floods and seismic events that                  continue to accept for review detailed PMF and PMS
could affect the flood conditions at the nuclear facil                analyses that result in less conservative estimates ity are contained in ANSI N170-1976. Less-severe                      than those obtained by use of Appendices B and C to flood conditions, associated with the above seismic                    Regulatory Guide 1.59. In addition, previously re events, may be acceptable for small streams that                      viewed and approved detailed PMF and PMS
exhibit relatively short periods of flooding.                          analyses will continue to be acceptable even though f. The effects of coincident wind-generated                    the data and procedures in Appendices B and C to wave activity to the water levels associated with the                  Regulatory Guide 1.59 result in more conservative worst site-related flood possible (as determined from                  estimates.


river, or seashore, reasonably severe wave action should be considered coincident with the probable maximum water level conditions.'
paragraphs a, b, c, d, or e above) should be added to generally define the upper limit of flood potential.
The coincidence of wave activity with probable maximum water level conditions should take into account the fact that suf-ficient time can elapse between the occurrence of the assumed meteorological mechanism and the max-imum water level to allow subsequent meteorological activity to produce substantial wind-generated waves coincident with the high water level. In addition, the most severe wave activity at the site that can be generated by distant hydrometeorological activity should be considered.


For instance, coastal locations may be subjected to severe wave action caused by a distant storm that, although not as severe as a local storm (e.g., a Probable Maximum Hurricane).
Acceptable procedures are contained in ANSI N 170                                     
may produce more severe wave action because of a very long wave-generating fetch. The most severe wave ac-tivity at.the site that may be generated by conditions at a distance from the site should be considered in such cases. In addition, assurance should be provided that safety systems are designed to withstand the static and dynamic effects resulting from frequent flood levels (i.e., the maximum operating level in reservoirs and the 10-year flood level in streams)coincident with the waves that would be produced by the Probable Maximum Gradient Wind' for the site (based on a study of historical regional meteorology).
Probable Maximum Water Level is defined by the Corps of Engineers as "ithe maximum still water level (i.e.. exclusive of local coincident wave runup) which can be produced by the most severe combination of hydrometeorological and/or seismic parameters rcasonably possible for a particular location.


Such phenomena are hurricanes, moving squall lines, other cyclonic meteorological events, tsunami. etc.. which, when combined with the physical response of a body of water and severe ambient hydrological conditions, would produce a still water level that has virtually no risk of being exceeded.** (See Appendix A to Regulatory Guide 1.59).Probable Maximum Gradient Wind is defined as a gradient wind of designated duration, of which ihere is virtually no riskof being exceeded.C. REGULATORY
==D. IMPLEMENTATION==
POSITION 1. The conditions resulting from the worst site-related flood probable at a nuclear facility (e.g..PMF. seismically induced flood, hurricane.
1976.
 
seiche.surge, heavy local precipitation)
with attendant wind-generated wave activity constitute the design basis flood conditions that structures, systems, and compo-nents important to safety must be designed to with-stand without impairing their capability to perform safety functions.
 
a. On streams, the PMF, as defined by the Corps of Engineers and based on the analytical techniques summarized in Appendices A and B of Regulatory Guide 1.59. provides an acceptable level of conservatism for estimating flood levels caused by severe hydrometeorological conditions.
 
b. Along lakeshores.
 
coastlines, and estuaries.
 
estimates of flood levels resulting from severe surges.seiches. and wave action caused ,v hydrometeorological activity should be based on criteria comparable in conservatism to those used for PMFs. Criteria and analytical techniques providing this level of conservatism for the analysis of these events will be summarized in subsequent appendices to Regulatory Guide 1.59. Appendix C of Regulatory Guide 1.59 presents an acceptable method for es-timating the stillwater level of the Probable Max-imum Surge (PMS) from hurricanes at open-coast sites on the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico.c. Flood conditions that could. be caused by dam failures from earthquakes should also be con-sidered in establishing the design basis flood. A simplified analytical technique for evaluating the hydrologic effects of seismically induced dam failures discussed herein is presented in Appendix A of Regulatory Guide 1.59. Techniques for evaluating the effects of tsunami will also be presented in a future appendix to Regulatory Guide 1.59.d. Where upstream dams or other features that provide flood protection are present, in addition to the analyses of the most severe floods that may be in-duced by either hydrometeorological or seismic mechanisms, reasonable combinations of less severe flood conditions and seismic events should also be considered to the extent needed for a consistent level of conservatism.
 
The effect of such combinations on the flood conditions at the nuclear facility site should be evaluated in cases where the probability of such combinations occurring at the same time and having significant consequences is at least comparable to the probability associated with the most severe hydrometeorological or seismically induced flood.On relatively large streams, examples of acceptable combinations of runoff floods and seismic events that could affect the flood conditions at the nuclear facility include the Safe Shutdown Earthquake (see 3.40-3 footnote 3) with the 25-year flood and the Operating Basis Earthquake (see footnote 3) with the Standard Project Flood. Less severe flood conditions, as-sociated with the above seismic events, may be accep-table for small streams that exhibit relatively short periods of flooding.
 
The above combinations of in-dependent events are specified here only with respect to the determination of the design basis flood level.e. The effects of coincident wind-generated wave activity to the water levels associated with the worst site-related flood possible (as determined from paragraphs a, b, c, or d above) should be added to generally define the upper limit of flood potential.


An acceptable analytical basis for wind-generated wave activity coincident with probable maximum water levels is the assumption of a 40-mph overland wind from the most critical wind-wave-producing direc-tion. However, if historical windstorm data substan-tiate that the 40-mph event, including wind direction and speed, is more extreme than has occurred regionally, historical data may be used. If the mechanism producing the maximum water level, such as a hurricane, would itself produce higher waves, these higher waves should be used as the design basis.2. As an alternative to designing hardened protec-tion' for all safety-related structures, systems, and components as specified in Regulatory Position I above, it is permissible to curtail operation of the facility and initiate suitable protective measures provided that: a. Sufficient warning time is shown to be available to curtail operations and implement ade-quate emergency procedures:
2. As an alternative to designing hardened protec                     The purpose of this section is to provide informa tion for all safety-related structures, systems, and                   tion to applicants regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide.
b. Those structures, systems, and components necessary for confinement of radioactivity during the emergency are designed with hardened protective features to remain functional while withstanding the entire range of flood conditions up to and including the worst site-related flood probable (e.g., PMF, seismically induced flood, hurricane, surge, seiche, heavy local precipitation), with coincident wind-generated wave action as discussed in Regulatory Position I above.3. During the economic life of a nuclear facility, unanticipated changes to the site environs which may affect the flood-producing characteristics of the en-virons are possible.


Examples include construction of a dam upstream or downstream of the nuclear facility, or comparably, construction of a highway or railroad bridge and embankment that obstructs the Hardened protection means structural provisions incorporated in the nuclear facility design that will protect safety-related struc-tures, systems, and components from the static and dynamic ef-fects of floods, In addition, each component of the protection must be passive and in place, as it is to be used for flood protec-tion. during normal facility operation.
This guide reflects current NRC staff practice.


floodflow of a river, and construction of a harbor or deepening of an existing harbor near a coastal or lake site nuclear facility.Significant changes inthe runoff or other flood-producing characteristics of the site environs, as they affect the design basis flood, should be identified and used as the basis to develop or modify emergency operating procedures, if necessary, to mitigate the ef-fects of the increased flood. The following should be reported!a. The type of investigation undertaken to iden-tify changed or changing conditions in the site en-virons, b. The changed or changing conditions noted during the investigation, c. The hydrologic engineering bases for es-timating the effects of the changed conditions on the design basis flood, and d. Structures, systems, or components impor-tant to safety affected by the changed conditions in the design basis flood should be identified along with modifications to the nuclear facility necessary to af-ford protection during the increased flood condi-tions. If emergency operating procedures must be used to mitigate the effects of these new flood condi-tions, the emergency procedures developed or modifications to existing procedures should be provided.4. Proper utilization of the data and procedures in Appendices B and C of Regulatory Guide 1.59 will result in PMF peak discharges and PMS peak still-water levels that will in many cases be approved by the NRC staff with no further verification.
'Hardened protection means structural provisions incorpo            Therefore, except in those cases in which the appli rated in the nuclear facility design that will protect safety          cant proposes an acceptable alternative method for related structures, systems, and components from the static and dynamic effects of floods. In addition, each component of the         complying with specified portions of the Commis protection must be passive and in place, as it is to be used for      sion's regulations, the methods described herein are flood protection, during normal facility operation.                   being and will continue to be used in the evaluation
                                                                3.40-4


The staff will continue to accept for review detailed PMF and PMS analyses that result in less conservative es-timates than those obtained by use of Appendices B and C of Regulatory Guide 1.59. In addition, previously reviewed and approved detailed PMF and PMS analyses will continue to be acceptable even though the data and procedures in Appendices B and C of Regulatory Guide 1.59 result in more conser-vative estimates.
of submittals for operating license or construction                            REFERENCES
 
permit applications for fuel reprocessing plants and for license applications submitted pursuant to 10 CFR        1. U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center, Part 70 authorizing possession and use of special nu          "Shore Protection Manual," Second Edition, 1975.
==D. IMPLEMENTATION==
The purpose of this section is to provide informa-tion to applicants regarding the NRC staffs plans for using this regulatory guide.Except in those cases in which the applicant proposes to use an acceptable alternative method for Reporting should be by special report to the appropriate NRC Regional Office and to the Director of the OiTice of Inspection and Enforcement.


Requirement for such reports should be in.cluded in the Technical Specifications or in applicable sections of the license application unless it can be demonstrated that such reports will not be necessary during the life of the nuclear facility.0 3.40-4 complying with specific portions of the Commis-sion's regulations.
clear material at plutonium processing and fuel fabri        2. U.S. Weather Bureau (now U.S. Weather Service, cation plants until this guide is revised as a result of    NOAA), "Meteorological Characteristics of the suggestions from the public or additional staff re          Probable Maximum Hurricane, Atlantic and Gulf view.                                                        Coasts of the United States," Hurricane Research Interim Report, HUR 7-97 and HUR 7-97A, 1968.


the methods described herein will be used in the evaluation of submittals for special nuclear material license or construction permit ap-plications docketed after July 15, 1977. If an appli-cant wishes to use this regulatory guide in developing submittals for an application docketed prior to July 15, 1977, the pertinent portions of the application will be evaluated on the basis of this guid
3.40-5


====e. REFERENCES====
UNITED STATES
1. U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center,"Shore Protection Manual," 1973.2. U.S. Weather Bureau (now U.S. Weather Servicc, NOAA), "Meteorological Characteristics of the Probable Maximum Hurricane, Atlantic and Gulf Coasts of the United Stateb." Hurricane Research Interim Report, HUR 7-97 and HUR 7-97A, 1968.3.40-5}}
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION    POSTAGE AND FEES PAID
    WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555    U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY
                                        COMMISSION
      OFFICIAL BUSINESS
  PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300}}


{{RG-Nav}}
{{RG-Nav}}

Latest revision as of 11:39, 28 March 2020

Rev. 1, Design Basis Floods for Fuel Reprocessing Plants and for Plutonium Processing and Fuel Fabrication Plants
ML003739400
Person / Time
Issue date: 12/31/1977
From:
Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research
To:
References
RG-3.40 Rev 1
Download: ML003739400 (6)


Revision 1 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION December 1977 REGULATORY GUIDE

OFFICE OF STANDARDS DEVELOPMENT

REGULATORY GUIDE 3.40

DESIGN BASIS FLOODS FOR FUEL REPROCESSING PLANTS AND FOR

PLUTONIUM PROCESSING AND FUEL FABRICATION PLANTS

A. INTRODUCTION

signed to withstand the effects of floods or discuss the design requirements for flood protection.

Paragraph (a)(1) of §50.34, "Contents of Applica ANSI N170-1976, "Standards for Determining *

tions: Technical Information," of 10 CFR Part 50, Design Basis Flooding at Power Reactor Sites,"'

"Licensing of Production and Utilization Facilities," presents standards to establish design basis flooding requires, among other things, that each application for safety-related features at power reactor sites.

for a construction permit for a production or utiliza ANSI N170-1976 also contains, among other things, tion facility, including fuel reprocessing plants,. in methodology for estimating probable maximum surges clude a description and safety assessment of the site and seiches at estuaries and coastal areas on oceans on which the facility is to be located, with appro and large lakes. Appendix B to Regulatory Guide priate attention to features affecting facility design. 1.59, "Design Basis Floods for Nuclear Power Paragraph 70.22 (f) of 10 CFR Part 70, "Special Nu Plants," gives timesaving alternative methods of es clear Material," requires that each application for a timating the probable maximum flood along streams.

license to possess and use special nuclear material in Appendix C to Regulatory Guide 1.59 gives a a plutonium processing and fuel fabrication plant. con simplified method of estimating probable maximum tain, among other things, a description and safety as surges on the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. It is the'con sessment of the design bases of the principal struc sensus of the NRC staff that ANSI N170-1976 and ture, systems, and components of the plant, including Appendices B and C to Regulatory Guide 1.59 are provisions for protection against natural phenomena. also applicable to nuclear facilities, and therefore Paragraph 70.23 (b) of 10 CFR Part 70 provides that they are referenced in this guide.

the Commission will approve construction of the The methods described in this guide result from re principal structures, systems, and components of a view of and action on specific cases, and as such, plutonium processing and fuel fabrication plant when reflect the latest general approaches to the problem it has determined, among other things, that the design that are acceptable to the NRC staff. If an applicant bases of the principal structures, systems, and com desires to employ new information that may be de ponents provide reasonable assurance of protection veloped or to use an alternative method, the NRC

against natural phenomena and the consequences of staff will review the proposal and approve its use, if potential accidents. found acceptable.

This guide describes methods of determining the The flood analysis described in this guide need not design basis floods that fuel reprocessing plants and be considered by applicants in their submittals in plutonium processing and fuel fabrication plants t connection with applications for special nuclear ma should be designed to withstand without loss of terial licenses, operating licenses, or construction safety-related functions. It does not identify struc permits for nuclear facilities located at sites above the tures, systems, and components that should be de design basis flood level where it can be demonstrated

  • Lines indicate substantive changes from the previous issue.

'The term "nuclear facility" will be used in this guide to

'Copies of ANSI N170-1976 may be purchased from the refer to fuel reprocessing plants and to plutonium processing and American Nuclear Society, 555 N. Kensington Avenue, La fuel fabrication plants. Grange Park, IL 60525.

USNRC REGULATORY GUIDES Comments Should be sent to the Secretary of the Commission, US. Nuclear Regu Regulatory Guides are issued to describe and make available to the public methods latory Commission, Washington. D.C. 20555. Attention Docketing and Service Branch.

acceptable to the NRC staff of implementing specific parts of the Commission's regulations. to delineate techniques used by the staff in evaluating specific problems The guides are issued in the following ten broad divisions or postulated accidents, or to provide guidance to applicants. Regulatory Guides are not substitutes for regulations, and compliance with them is not required. 1. Power Reactors 6. Products Methods and solutions different from those set out in the guides will be accept. 2. Research and Test Reactors 7. Transportation able if they provide a basis for the findings requisite to the issuance or continuance 3. Fuels and Materials Facilities 8. Occupational Health of a permit or license by the Comminsion. 4. Environmental and Siting

9. Antitrust Review

5. Materials and Plant Protection 10. General Comments and suggestions for improvements in these guides are encouraged at all Requests for single copies of issued guides (which may be reoroduced) or for plac.

times, and guides will be revised, as appropriate, to accommodate comments and ment on an automatic distribution list for single copies of future guides in spicilif to reflect new information or experience. This guide was revised as a result of divisions should be made in writing to the US Nuclear Regul~atory Commissioii substantive comments received from the public and additional staff review. Washington, D.C 20555, Attentioin Director, Division of Document Coitrol

that safety-related structures, systems, and compo mically induced floods reasonably possible should be nents are not affected by flooding. considered for each site. Along streams and estuaries, seismically induced floods may be produced by dam

B. DISCUSSION

failures or landslides. Along lakeshores, coastlines, and estuaries, seismically induced or tsunami-type Nuclear facilities should be designed to prevent a flooding should be considered. Consideration of release of radioactivity resulting from the effects of seismically induced floods should include the same the most severe flood conditions that can reasonably range of seismic events as is postulated for the design be predicted to occur at a site as a result of severe of the nuclear facility. For instance, the analysis of hydrometeorological conditions, seismic activity, or floods caused by dam failures, landslides, or tsunami both. requires consideration of seismic events equivalent in The Corps of Engineers for many years has studied severity to the Safe Shutdown Earthquake 4 occurring conditions and circumstances relating to floods and at the location that would produce the worst such flood control. As a result of these studies, it has de flood at the nuclear facility site.

veloped a definition for a Probable Maximum Flood In the case of seismically induced floods along riv (PMF) 3 and attendant analytical techniques for es ers, lakes, and estuaries that may be produced by timating, with an acceptable degree of conservatism, events less severe than a Safe Shutdown Earthquake, flood levels on streams resulting from hy consideration should be given to the coincident oc drometeorological conditions. An acceptable degree currence of floods due to severe hydrometeorological of conservatism, for estimating seismically induced conditions. This combination of events, however, flood levels and for evaluating the effects of the in should be considered only where the effects on the itiating event, is provided in Appendix A, "Seismic nuclear facility are worse than and the probability of and Geologic Siting Criteria for Nuclear Power such combined events may be greater than an indi Plants," to 10 CFR Part 100, "Reactor Site vidual occurrence of the most severe event of either Criteria.'" type. ANSI N170-1976 contains combinations of The conditions resulting from the worst site-related such events acceptable to the NRC staff. For the spe flood probable at the nuclear facility (e.g., PMF, cific case of seismically induced floods due to dam seismically induced flood, seiche, surge, severe local failures, an evaluation should be made of flood precipitation) with attendant wind-generated wave ac waves that may be caused (1) by domino-type dam tivity constitute the design basis flood conditions that failures triggered by a seismically induced failure of safety-related structures, systems, and components, a critically located dam and (2) by multiple dam fail whose failure during such conditions would constitute ures in a region where dams may be located close a threat to the public health and safety, should be de enough together that a single seismic event can cause signed to withstand and remain functional. multiple failures.

For sites along streams, the PMF generally pro Each of the severe flood types discussed above vides the design basis flood. For sites along lakes or should represent the upper limit of all potential seashores, a flood condition of comparable severity phenomenologically caused flood combinations con could be produced by the most severe combination of sidered reasonably possible. Analytical techniques hydrometeorological parameters reasonably possi are available and should generally be used for predic ble, such as may be produced by a Probable tion at individual sites. Those techniques applicable Maximum Hurricane (Refs. 1, 2) or by a Probable to PMF and seismically induced flood estimates on Maximum Seiche. On estuaries, a Probable streams are presented in ANSI N170-1976 and Ap Maximum River Flood, a Probable Maximum Surge, pendix B to Regulatory Guide 1.59. For sites on a Probable Maximum Seiche, or a reasonable combi coasts, estuaries, and large lakes, techniques are pre nation of less severe phenomenologically caused sented in ANSI N170-1976 and in Appendix C to flooding events should be considered in arriving at Regulatory Guide 1.59.

design basis flood conditions comparable in fre Analyses of only the most severe flood conditions quency of occurrence with a PMF on streams. may not indicate potential threats to safety-related In addition to floods produced by severe hy systems that might result from combinations of flood drometeorological conditions, the most severe seis conditions thought to be less severe. Therefore, rea sonable combinations of less-severe flood conditions

3 The Corps of Engineers' Probable Maximum Flood definition should also be considered to the extent needed for a appears inr many publications of that agency such as Engineering consistent level of conservatism. Such combinations Circular EC 1110-2-27, Change 1, "Engineering and Design should be evaluated in cases where the probability of Policies and Procedures Pertaining to Determination of Spillway their existing at the same time and having significant Capacities and Freeboard Allowances for Dams," February 19, consequences is at least comparable to that associated

1968. The Probable Maximum Flood is also directly analogous to the Corps of Engineers' "Spillway Design Flood" as used for with the most severe hydrometeorological or seismi dams whose failures would result in a significant loss of life and property. A similar definition for Probable Maximum Flood is 'Determined as outlined for nuclear power plants in Appendix given in ANSI N170-1976. A to 10 CFR Part 100.

3.40-2

cally induced flood. For example, a failure of rela wind-generated wave activity constitute the design tively high levees adjacent to a nuclear facility could basis flood conditions that structures, systems, and occur during floods less severe than the worst site components important to safety must be designed to related flood but would produce conditions more se withstand without impairing their capability to per vere than those that would result during a greater form safety functions.

flood (where a levee failure elsewhere would produce a. The standards for determining design basis less severe conditions at the nuclear facility site). flooding at power reactor sites contained in ANSI

Wind-generated wave activity may produce severe N170-1976 are considered by the NRC staff to be flood-induced static and dynamic conditions either generally acceptable for nuclear facilities, subject to independent of or coincident with severe hy the following:

drometeorological or seismic flood-producing (1) Footnote 1 and the list of safety-related mechanisms. For example, along a lake, reservoir, structures, systems, and components in Section 3.1.3 river, or seashore, reasonably severe wave action of ANSI N170-1976 are not applicable to nuclear should be considered coincident with the probable facilities. A list of pertinent elevations of safety maximum water level conditions. 5 The coincidence related structures should be provided for comparison of wave activity with probable maximum water level with design basis flood levels. It should be referenced conditions should take into account the fact that suf to maps and drawings of such facilities.

ficient time can elapse between the occurrence of the (2) Footnote 2 in Section 4.3.1 of ANSI N170

assumed meteorological mechanism and the 1976 is not applicable to nuclear facilities. The words maximum water level to allow subsequent "safe shutdown" in Section 4.3.1 of ANSI N170

meteorological activity to produce substantial wind 1976 should be interpreted to mean "safe curtailment generated waves coincident with the high water level. of operations."

In addition, the most severe wave activity at the'site (3) Sections 5.5.4.2.3 and 5.5.5 of ANSI

that can be generated by distant hydrometeorological N170-1976 contain references to methods for evaluat activity should be considered. For instance, coastal ing the erosion failure of earthfill or rockfill dams locations may be subjected to severe wave action and determining the resulting outflow hydrographs.

caused by a distant storm that, although not as severe The staff has found that some of these methods may as a local storm (e.g., a Probable Maximum Hur not be conservative because they predict slower rates ricane), may produce more severe wave action be of erosion than those that have historically occurred.

cause of a very long wave-generating fetch. The most Modifications to the models may be made to increase severe wave activity at the site that may be generated their conservatism. Such modifications will be re by conditions at a distance from the site should be viewed by the NRC staff on a case-by-case basis.

considered in such cases. In addition, assurance (4) Instead of Section 7.4.5.1 of ANSI

should be provided that safety systems are designed N170-1976, the following should be used:

to withstand the static and dynamic effects resulting

"7.4.5.1 Structure Being Considered. In gen from frequent flood levels (i.e., the maximum operat eral, the structures that need to be considered for ing level in reservoirs and the 10-year flood level in the wave activities are protective dikes, waterfront streams) coincident with the waves that would be produced by the Probable Maximum Gradient Wind" banks and shores, auxiliary and control buildings, for the site (based on a study of historical regional and other safety-related facilities, and non-safety related facilities whose failure could adversely af meteorology). fect safety-related facilities."

(5) The terms "safe shutdown earthquake

C. REGULATORY POSITION

(SSE)" and "operating basis earthquake (OBE)" are used in Section 9.2.1.2 of ANSI N170-197

6. For the

1. The conditions resulting from the worst site purposes of this guide, the safe shutdown earthquake related flood probable at a nuclear facility (e.g.,

(SSE) and the operating basis earthquake (OBE)

PMF, seismically induced flood, hurricane, seiche, should be determined as outlined for nuclear power surge, heavy local precipitation) with attendant plants in Appendix A to 10 CFR Part 100.

'Probable Maximum Water Level is defined by the Corps of (6) Instead of Section 10.1 of ANSI N170

Engineers as "the maximum still water level (i.e., exclusive of 1976, the following should be used:

local coincident wave runup) which can be produced.by the most "10.1 General. Guidance is available if canals, severe combination of hydrometeorological and/or seismic reservoirs, and related structures are used."

parameters reasonably possible for a particular location. Such phenomena are hurricanes, moving squall lines, other cyclonic (7) Instead of Section 10.3 of ANSI N170

meteorological events, tsunami, etc., which, when combined 1976, the following should be used:

with the physical response of a body of water and severe am bient hydrological conditions, would produce a still water level

"10.3 Reservoirs. Guidance is available if a re that has virtually no risk of being exceeded." servoir is used."

'Probable Maximum Gradient Wind is defined as a gradient b. The PMF on streams, as defined in ANSI

wind of designated duration, which there is virtually no risk of N170-1976 and based on the analytical techniques exceeding.

summarized in ANSI N170-1976 and Appendix B to

3.40-3

Regulatory Guide 1.59, provides an acceptable level components as specified in regulatory position 1 of conservatism for estimating flood levels caused by above, it is permissible to curtail operation of the severe hydrometeorological conditions. facility and initiate suitable protective measures pro c. Along lakeshores, coastlines, and estuaries, vided that:

estimates of flood levels resulting from severe a. Sufficient warning time is shown to be avail surges, seiches, and wave action caused by hy able to curtail operations and implement adequate drometeorological activity should be based on criteria emergency procedures;

comparable in conservatism to those used for PMFs. b. Those structures, systems, and components Criteria and analytical techniques providing this level necessary for confinement of radioactivity during the of conservatism for the analysis of these events are emergency are designed with hardened protective fea summarized in ANSI N170-1976. Appendix C to tures to remain functional while withstanding the en Regulatory Guide 1.59 presents an acceptable method tire range of flood conditions up to and including the for estimating the stillwater level of the Probable worst site-related flood probable (e.g., PMF, seismi Maximum Surge (PMS) from hurricanes at open cally induced flood, hurricane, surge, seiche, heavy coast sites on the Atlantic Ocean and Gulf of Mexico. local precipitation), with coincident wind-generated d. Flood conditions that could be caused by dam wave action as discussed in regulatory position 1 failures from earthquakes should also be considered above.

in establishing the design basis flood. Analytical 3. During the economic life of a nuclear facility, techniques for evaluating the hydrologic effects of unanticipated changes to the site environs that may seismically induced dam failures discussed herein are adversely affect the flood-producing characteristics presented in ANSI N170-1976. Techniques for of the environs are possible. Examples include con evaluating the effects of tsunami will be presented in struction of a dam upstream or downstream of the nu a future appendix to Regulatory Guide 1.59. clear facility, or comparably, construction of a high e. Where upsteam dams or other features that way or railroad bridge and embankment that obstructs provide flood protection are present, in addition to the floodflow of a river, and construction of a harbor the analyses of the most severe floods that may be or deepening of an existing harbor near a coastal or induced by either hydrometeorological or seismic lake site nuclear facility.

mechanisms, reasonable combinations of less-severe Significantly adverse changes in the runoff or other flood conditions and seismic events should also be flood-producing characteristics of the site environs, considered to the extent needed for a consistent level as they affect the design basis flood, should be iden of conservatism. The effect of such combinations on tified and used as the basis to develop or modify the flood conditions at the nuclear facility site should emergency operating procedures, if necessary, to be evaluated in cases where the probability of such mitigate the effects of the increased flood.

combinations occurring at the same time and having 4. Proper utilization of the data and procedures in significant consequences is at least comparable to the Appendices B and C to Regulatory Guide 1.59 will probability associated with the most severe hy result in PMF peak discharges and PMS peak stillwa drometeorological or seismically induced flood. For ter levels that will in many cases be approved by the relatively large streams, examples of acceptable NRC staff with no further verification. The staff will combinations of runoff floods and seismic events that continue to accept for review detailed PMF and PMS

could affect the flood conditions at the nuclear facil analyses that result in less conservative estimates ity are contained in ANSI N170-1976. Less-severe than those obtained by use of Appendices B and C to flood conditions, associated with the above seismic Regulatory Guide 1.59. In addition, previously re events, may be acceptable for small streams that viewed and approved detailed PMF and PMS

exhibit relatively short periods of flooding. analyses will continue to be acceptable even though f. The effects of coincident wind-generated the data and procedures in Appendices B and C to wave activity to the water levels associated with the Regulatory Guide 1.59 result in more conservative worst site-related flood possible (as determined from estimates.

paragraphs a, b, c, d, or e above) should be added to generally define the upper limit of flood potential.

Acceptable procedures are contained in ANSI N 170

D. IMPLEMENTATION

1976.

2. As an alternative to designing hardened protec The purpose of this section is to provide informa tion for all safety-related structures, systems, and tion to applicants regarding the NRC staff's plans for using this regulatory guide.

This guide reflects current NRC staff practice.

'Hardened protection means structural provisions incorpo Therefore, except in those cases in which the appli rated in the nuclear facility design that will protect safety cant proposes an acceptable alternative method for related structures, systems, and components from the static and dynamic effects of floods. In addition, each component of the complying with specified portions of the Commis protection must be passive and in place, as it is to be used for sion's regulations, the methods described herein are flood protection, during normal facility operation. being and will continue to be used in the evaluation

3.40-4

of submittals for operating license or construction REFERENCES

permit applications for fuel reprocessing plants and for license applications submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 1. U.S. Army Coastal Engineering Research Center, Part 70 authorizing possession and use of special nu "Shore Protection Manual," Second Edition, 1975.

clear material at plutonium processing and fuel fabri 2. U.S. Weather Bureau (now U.S. Weather Service, cation plants until this guide is revised as a result of NOAA), "Meteorological Characteristics of the suggestions from the public or additional staff re Probable Maximum Hurricane, Atlantic and Gulf view. Coasts of the United States," Hurricane Research Interim Report, HUR 7-97 and HUR 7-97A, 1968.

3.40-5

UNITED STATES

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION POSTAGE AND FEES PAID

WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300