ML13260A253

Wolf Creek, Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuant to 10 CFR 50.54(f) Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident - 1.5 Year Response for

ML13260A253
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	09/12/2013
From:	Broschak J P Wolf Creek
To:	Document Control Desk, Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
ET 13-0029
Download: ML13260A253 (7)

Text

AW4 LF CREEK'NUCLEAR OPERATING CORPORATION September 12, 2013John P. BroschakVice President Engineering ET 13-0029U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission ATTN: Document Control DeskWashington, DC 20555

Reference:

1) Letter dated March 12, 2012, from E. J. Leeds and M. R. Johnson,USNRC, to M. W. Sunseri, WCNOC, "Request for Information Pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations 50.54(f)Regarding Recommendations 2.1, 2.3, and 9.3, of the Near-Term Task Force (NTTF) Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichiAccident"

2) Letter dated February 15, 2013, from D. L. Skeen, USNRC, to J. E.Pollock, NEI, "Endorsement of EPRI Final Draft Report 1025287,"Seismic Evaluation Guidance""

3) Electric Power Research Institute Report 1025287, "SeismicEvaluation Guidance:

Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution of Fukushima Near-Term Task ForceRecommendation 2.1: Seismic"4) Letter dated April 9, 2013, from A. R. Pietrangelo, NEI, to D. L. Skeen,USNRC, "Proposed Path Forward for NTTF Recommendation 2.1:Seismic Reevaluations"

5) Letter dated May 7, 2013, from E. J. Leeds, USNRC, to J. E. Pollock,NEI, "EPRI Final Draft Report XXXXXX, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance:

Augmented Approach for the Resolution of Near-Term TaskForce Recommendation 2.1: Seismic,"

as an Acceptable Alternative tothe March 12, 2012, Information Request for Seismic Reevaluations"

Subject:

Docket No. 50-482: Response to NRC Request for Information Pursuantto 10 CFR 50.54(f)

Regarding the Seismic Aspects of Recommendation 2.1 of the Near-Term Task Force Review of Insights from the Fukushima Dai-ichi Accident

-1.5 Year Response for CEUS SitesGentlemen:

On March 12, 2012, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) issued Reference 1 to allpower reactor licensees and holders of construction permits in active or deferred status.P.O. Box 411 / Burlington, KS 66839 / Phone: (620) 364-8831An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F/HC/VET ET 13-0029Page 2 of 3Enclosure 1 of Reference 1 requested each addressee in the Central and Eastern UnitedStates (CEUS) to submit a written response consistent with the requested seismic hazardevaluation information (items 1 through 7) within 1.5 years. On February 15, 2013, NRC issuedReference 2, endorsing the Reference 3 industry guidance for responding to Reference 1.Section 4 of Reference 3 identifies the detailed information to be included in the seismic hazardevaluation submittals.

On April 9, 2013, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted Reference 4 to NRC, requesting NRC agreement to delay submittal of some of the CEUS seismic hazard evaluation information so that an update to the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2004, 2006) ground motionattenuation model could be completed and used to develop that information.

NEI proposed thatdescriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles (items 3aand 3b in Section 4 of Reference

3) be submitted to NRC by September 12, 2013, with theremaining seismic hazard and screening information submitted to NRC by March 31, 2014. InReference 5, NRC agreed with this recommendation.

The attachment contains the requested descriptions of subsurface materials and properties andbase case velocity profiles for WCNOC. The information provided in the attachment to thisletter is considered an interim product of seismic hazard development efforts being performed for the industry by EPRI. The complete and final seismic hazard reports for WCNOC will beprovided to the NRC in our seismic hazard submittals by March 31, 2014 in accordance withReference 5.This letter contains no commitments.

If you have any questions concerning this matter, pleasecontact me at (620) 364-4085, or Mr. Michael J. Westman at (620) 364-4009.

Sincerely, John P. BroschakJPB/rltAttachment cc: C. F. Lyon (NRC), w/aN. F. O'Keefe (NRC), w/aS. A. Reynolds (NRC), w/aSenior Resident Inspector (NRC), w/a ET 13-0029Page 3 of 3STATE OF KANSASCOUNTY OF COFFEY))ssJohn P. Broschak, of lawful age, being first duly sworn upon oath says that he is Vice President Engineering of Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corporation; that he has read the foregoing document and knows the contents thereof; that he has executed the same for and on behalf ofsaid Corporation with full power and authority to do so; and that the facts therein stated are trueand correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.ByJo .BroschakVi resident Engineering SUBSCRIBED and sworn to before me this 12- day of 1, 2013.Notary Public4? Th~2/~44~;~ RHONDA L. TIEMEYERo-FICIALS MY COWSSION EXPIRESI ...SEA :.."Expiration Date (_OA / ./?A),f /"

Attachment to ET 13-0029Page 1 of 4Near Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic -1.5 Year Response of Central andEastern United States (CEUS) PlantsOn April 9, 2013, Nuclear Energy Institute (NEI) submitted Reference 1 to NRC, requesting NRC agreement to delay submittal of some of the CEUS seismic hazard evaluation information so that an update to the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI) (2004, 2006) ground motionattenuation model could be completed and used to develop that information.

NEI proposed thatdescriptions of subsurface materials and properties and base case velocity profiles (items 3aand 3b in Section 4 of Reference

2) be submitted to NRC by September 12, 2013, with theremaining seismic hazard and screening information submitted to NRC by March 31, 2014. InReference 3, NRC agreed with this recommendation.

Wolf Creek Generating Station (WCGS) Subsurface Materials and Properties and BaseCase Velocity ProfilesThe basic information used to create the site geologic profile at WCGS was the Updated SafetyAnalysis Report (USAR) material for the site. The Safe Shutdown Earthquake (SSE) ControlPoint was assumed to be at the top of the highest soft rock layer, and the profile was modeledup to this layer, without including overlying

topsoil, sand, silt, and clay. For dynamic properties of soft rock layers, modulus and damping curves were represented with 2 models. The firstmodel used rock curves taken from Reference 4, the second model assumed linear behavior.

These dynamic property models were weighted equally.The 3 base-case shear-wave velocity profiles used to model amplification at WCGS are shownin Figure 1. Profiles 1, 2, and 3 are weighted 0.4, 0.3, and 0.3, respectively.

Thicknesses, depths, and shear-wave velocities (Vs) corresponding to each profile are shown in Table 1.Shear-Wave Velocities (Vs) for WCGSVs (ft/sec)0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 6000 7000 8000 9000 10000500 __ _10001500 --Profile 1F. 2000 -Profile 2--Profile 325003500 _4000 -4500Figure 1Shear Wave Velocities (Vs) Profile for WCGS Attachment to ET 13-0029Page 2 of 4Table 1Layer Thicknesses, Depths, and Velocities (Vs) for 3 ProfilesProfile I ____Profile 2 _____Profile 3Thickness depth Vs Thickness depth Vs Thickness depth Vs0 1450 0 924 ____ 0 227610.0 10.0 1450 10.0 10.0 924 10.0 10.0 227610.0 20.0 1450 10.0 20.0 924 10.0 20.0 227610.0 30.0 4512 10.0 30.0 2888 10.0 30.0 708410.0 40.0 4517 10.0 40.0 2891 10.0 40.0 709210.0 50.0 4522 10.0 50.0 2894 10.0 50.0 710010.0 60.0 4527 10.0 60.0 2897 10.0 60.0 710810.0 70.0 4532 10.0 70.0 2901 10.0 70.0 711610.0 80.1 4537 10.0 80.1 2904 10.0 80.1 712310.0 90.1 4542 10.0 90.1 2907 10.0 90.1 713110.0 100.1 4547 10.0 100.1 2910 10.0 100.1 713910.0 110.1 4552 10.0 110.1 2913 10.0 110.1 714710.0 120.1 4557 10.0 120.1 2917 10.0 120.1 715510.0 130.1 4562 10.0 130.1 2920 10.0 130.1 716310.0 140.1 4567 10.0 140.1 2923 10.0 140.1 717110.0 150.1 4572 10.0 150.1 2926 10.0 150.1 717810.0 160.1 4577 10.0 160.1 2929 10.0 160.1 718610.0 170.1 4582 10.0 170.1 2933 10.0 170.1 719410.0 180.1 4587 10.0 180.1 2936 10.0 180.1 720210.0 190.1 4592 10.0 190.1 2939 10.0 190.1 721010.0 200.1 4597 10.0 200.1 2942 10.0 200.1 721810.0 210.1 4602 10.0 210.1 2945 10.0 210.1 722610.0 220.1 4607 10.0 220.1 2949 10.0 220.1 723310.0 230.2 4612 10.0 230.2 2952 10.0 230.2 724110.0 240.2 4617 10.0 240.2 2955 10.0 240.2 724910.0 250.2 4622 10.0 250.2 2958 10.0 250.2 725710.0 260.2 4627 10.0 260.2 2961 10.0 260.2 726510.0 270.2 4632 10.0 270.2 2965 10.0 270.2 727310.0 280.2 4637 10.0 280.2 2968 10.0 280.2 728010.0 290.2 4642 10.0 290.2 2971 10.0 290.2 728810.0 300.2 4647 10.0 300.2 2974 10.0 300.2 729610.0 310.2 4652 10.0 310.2 2977 10.0 310.2 730410.0 320.2 4657 10.0 320.2 2981 10.0 320.2 731210.0 330.2 4662 10.0 330.2 2984 10.0 330.2 732010.0 340.2 4667 10.0 340.2 2987 10.0 340.2 732810.0 350.2 4672 10.0 350.2 2990 10.0 350.2 733510.0 360.2 4677 10.0 360.2 2993 10.0 360.2 7343 Attachment to ET 13-0029Page 3 of 4Profile I ____Profile 2 Profile 3Thickness depth Vs Thickness depth Vs Thickness depth Vs10t0 370.2 4682s 10.0 370.2 2997s 10.0 370. 735110.0 380.2 4687 10.0 380.2 3000 10.0 380.2 735910.0 390.3 4692 10.0 390.3 3003 10.0 390.3 736710.0 400.3 4697 10.0 400.3 3006 10.0 400.3 737510.0 410.3 4702 10.0 410.3 3009 10.0 410.3 738310.0 420.3 4707 10.0 420.3 3013 10.0 420.3 739010.0 430.3 4712 10.0 430.3 3016 10.0 430.3 739810.0 440.3 4717 10.0 440.3 3019 10.0 440.3 740610.0 450.3 4722 10.0 450.3 3022 10.0 450.3 741410.0 460.3 4727 10.0 460.3 3025 10.0 460.3 742210.0 470.3 4732 10.0 470.3 3029 10.0 470.3 743010.0 480.3 4737 10.0 480.3 3032 10.0 480.3 743810.0 490.3 4742 10.0 490.3 3035 10.0 490.3 74459.6 500.0 4779 9.6 500.0 3058 9.6 500.0 7502100.1 600.0 4835 100.1 600.0 3095 100.1 600.0 7592100.1 700.1 4893 100.1 700.1 3131 100.1 700.1 7681100.1 800.2 4950 100.1 800.2 3168 100.1 800.2 7771100.1 900.2 5007 100.1 900.2 3204 100.1 900.2 7861100.1 1000.3 5064 100.1 1000.3 3241 100.1 1000.3 7951100.1 1100.4 5121 100.1 1100.4 3278 100.1 1100.4 8040100.1 1200.4 5179 100.1 1200.4 3314 100.1 1200.4 8130100.1 1300.5 5236 100.1 1300.5 3351 100.1 1300.5 8220100.1 1400.6 5293 100.1 1400.6 3387 100.1 1400.6 8310100.1 1500.6 5350 100.1 1500.6 3424 100.1 1500.6 8400100.1 1600.7 5407 100.1 1600.7 3461 100.1 1600.7 8489100.1 1700.8 5464 100.1 1700.8 3497 100.1 1700.8 8579100.1 1800.8 5522 100.1 1800.8 3534 100.1 1800.8 8669100.1 1900.9 5579 100.1 1900.9 3570 100.1 1900.9 8759100.1 2000.9 5636 100.1 2000.9 3607 100.1 2000.9 8848100.1 2101.0 5693 100.1 2101.0 3644 100.1 2101.0 8938100.1 2201.1 5750 100.1 2201.1 3680 100.1 2201.1 9028100.1 2301.1 5807 100.1 2301.1 3717 100.1 2301.1 9118100.1 2401.2 5865 100.1 2401.2 3753 100.1 2401.2 9208100.1 2501.3 5922 100.1 2501.3 3790 100.1 2501.3 9285100.1 2601.3 5979 100.1 2601.3 3827 100.1 2601.3 9285100.1 2701.4 6036 100.1 2701.4 3863 100.1 2701.4 9285100.1 2801.5 6093 100.1 2801.5 3900 100.1 2801.5 9285100.1 2901.5 6151 100.1 2901.5 3936 100.1 2901.5 9285100.1 3001.6 6208 100.1 3001.6 3973 100.1 3001.6 9285100.1 3101.7 6265 100.1 3101.7 4010 100.1 3101.7 9285 Attachment to ET 13-0029Page 4 of 4Profile I Profile 2 Profile 3Thickness depth Vs Thickness depth Vs Thickness depth Vs1001(ft)

(f3s) (ft) (ft) (f30. (ft) 10.1 3(f0s)100.1 3201.7 6322 100.1 3201.7 4046 100.1 3201.7 9285100.1 3301.8 6379 100.1 3301.8 4083 100.1 3301.8 9285100.1 3401.9 6436 100.1 3401.9 4119 100.1 3401.9 9285100.1 3501.9 6494 100.1 3501.9 4156 100.1 3501.9 9285100.1 3602.0 6551 100.1 3602.0 4193 100.1 3602.0 9285100.1 3702.1 6608 100.1 3702.1 4229 100.1 3702.1 9285100.1 3802.1 6665 100.1 3802.1 4266 100.1 3802.1 9285100.1 3902.2 6719 100.1 3902.2 4300 100.1 3902.2 9285100.1 4002.3 6791 100.1 4002.3 4346 100.1 4002.3 92853280.8 7283.1 9285 3280.8 7283.1 9285 3280.8 7283.1 9285

References:

1. Letter from A. R. Pietrangelo, NEI, to D. L. Skeen, USNRC, "Proposed Path Forward forNTTF Recommendation 2.1: Seismic Reevaluations" April 9, 2013. ADAMS Accession No. ML13107B386.

2. Electric Power Research Institute Report 1025287, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance:

Screening, Prioritization and Implementation Details (SPID) for the Resolution ofFukushima Near-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic."

ADAMS Accession No. ML12333A170.

3. Letter from E. J. Leeds, USNRC, to J. E. Pollock, NEI, "EPRI Final Draft ReportXXXXXX, "Seismic Evaluation Guidance:

Augmented Approach for the Resolution ofNear-Term Task Force Recommendation 2.1: Seismic,"

as an Acceptable Alternative tothe March 12, 2012, Information Request for Seismic Reevaluations,"

May 7, 2013.ADAMS Accession No. ML13106A331.

4. Electric Power Research Institute Report, TR-102293, Vol. 1 -5, "Guidelines forDetermining Design Basis Ground Motions,"

1993.