kansas i!as and electric company

-

*.

KANSAS i!AS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY

GLENN L mOESTEm, , n w. - ~. a..

Novenber 18, 1981

Mr. Harold R. Denton, Director . ''yOffice of Nuclear Reactor Regulation fh I '"' /U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cc= mission py';V

- ,s

f. .

'Washing ton , D.C. 20555

}dN0y'>',203[A~-|IY Lou, L ) ?b

-i,

MKMINRC 81-133 *

Re: Docket No. STN 50-482 c,A M//Wrco[f\' A [8Ref: Letter dated 10/26/81 from BJYoungblood,

NRC, to GLKoester, KG&E \ '- , <N

Subj : Hydrologic Engineering ,

Dear Mr. Denton:

The Referenced letter requested additional information in thearea of hydrologic engineering. Transmitted herewith are responsesto questions in the Referenced letter. This information will b2fornally incorporated into the Wolf Creek Generating Station, UnitNo. 1, Final Safety Analysis Report in Revision 7. This informationis hereby incorporated into the Wolf Creek Generating Station, UnitNo. 1, Operating License Application.

Yours very truly,

'f.'f 'f '

,

GLK:bbAttach

cc: Dr. Gordon Edison (2)Division of Project 'Mnagem?ntOffice of Nuclear Reactor FagulationU.S. Nuclear Regulatory CommissionWashington, D.C. 20535

Mr. Thomas VandelResident NRC Inspector hIP.O. Box 311Burlington, Kansas 66839

8111230545 811118PDR ADOCK 05000482A PDR

201 N Market -W!cMa, Kansas -Mad Address- PO~ Bon 208 ! WcMa. Kansas 67201 - Teiephone: Area Code (316) 261-6451

8

.

OATl! Ol' ATT110!ATICN,

STATE OF KANSAS )

) SS:COUNTY OF SEDGWlCK )

I, Glenn L. Koester, of lawful age, being duly sworn upon oath, do depose,state and af fim that I am Vice Fresident - Nuclear of Kancas Gas andElectric Company, Wichita, Kaasas, that I have signed the foregoing letterof transmittal, know the contents thereof, and that all statements centainedtherein are true.

KANSAS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPA*JY

ATidST: - , : PBy

'' ,,f8W)m n,Olenn L. Koeste'r

D Vice President - NuclearW.B. Walker, Secre tary

STATE OF KANSAS )

) SS:

COUNTY OF SEDGWICK )

BE IT FE!'EMBERED that on this 18th day of November, 1981 be foreme, Evelyn L. Fry, a Notary, personally appeared Glenn L. Koester, VicePresident - Nuclear of Kansas Gas and Electric Company, Wicaita, Kansas,who is personally known to ne and who executed the foregoinc instrument,and he duly acknowledged the execution of the same for and cn behalf ofand as the act and deed of said corporation.

IN WITNESS WilEFT.Ol', I have hereunt o set my hand and af fixed my seal the41.11 t' a n d ye.1 r .il)< >ve wri t i e'n .

*,,o* *..

A < %... . . . . :. a -$ .' i e' ''.. f

[ 8 [dvelyn >[ Fry, Nota ///"

;*

: Osw : V*

- . >- u g u,G :*m

.

O, My C'cT'* mission expires on August 15, 1984./'

- -

- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

i' '

SMUPPS-WC* s"\

it

240.0WC llYDROLOGIC & GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING BRANCH

Q240.1WC In Section 2.4.10 you state that the ESWS screen

(2.4.10) house was designed to withstand a high waterelevation of 1100.2 feet, which corresponds tothe maximum wave runup elevation from a wave ,

height of 5.0 feet, with a period of 3.3 seconds. *

Using the PMF water surface elevation of 1095feet, tae combined wind set-up and runup musthave been 5.2 feet. The staff's independentanalysis at the ESWS screenhouse shows the maxi-mum runup including set-up is 6.60 feet result-ing in a high water elevation of 1101.60 feet. -

Our analysis is based on the following assump-tions: 1) an effective fetch of 2.1 miles,2) average fetch depth of 34 feet, 3) over landwindspeed of 40 mph adjusted for over-water (50mph), and 4) average depth along the south sideof the structure of 17.8 feet. Either j usti fyyour wave runup calculations or use the staff'sestimates and discuss the effects of the result-ing higher wave runup elevation on the ESWSscreen house.

R240.1WC The ESWS Pumphouse was designed for a wave runupelevation greater than the NRC staff's value.The FSAR will be revised accordingly in Section2.4.10.

Rev. 7240-1 12/81

. . .

*.

SNUPPS-WC

Q240.2WC Table 2.4-25. The natural evaporation used to(2.4.11.3) evaluate cooling lake drawdown are data for Fall

Reservoir. Provide geographical coordinates ofFall Reservoir location. Since evaporation is amicro-climatically dependent phenomenon, providesufficient justification (i.e., similarity of .

*meteorological variables - wind speed, vaporpressure, etc.) for using Fall Reservoir naturalevaporation in the analysis of cooling lakeevaporation.

R240.2WC The Fall Reservoir referred to in Table 2.4-25should be Fall River Reservoir. The Fall River *

Reservoir dam is located approximately 40 milessouth and 20 miles west of the Wolf Creek Cool-ing Lake. Fall River Reservoir evaporation datawere chosen for the Wolf Creek evaluation be-cause of Fall River's close proximity (< 50miles) to Wolf Creek and because the Fall Riverweather station was the only station in south-eastern Kansas which had Weather Bureau typeClass 'A' evaporation instrumentation in opera-tion (1952-1957) during the drought of record inKansas,

i

i1

||

Rev. 7.

240-2 12/81

|

.

*SNUPPS-WC

0240.3WC Table 2,4-27. Provide a detailed description of

(2.4.11.3) your procedure for calculating forced evapora-tion from the cooling lake as presented in Table2.4-26. Accompany the description with an exam-ple calculation including all data required toperform the example calculation. ,

..

R240.3WC The evaporation data presented in Table 2.4-26was calculated by Sargent & Lundy's LAKET com-puter model in 1979.

The LAKET program is proprietary. The LAKETprogram abstract is provided in WCGS-ER(OLS) .

response to Question 240.6 (ER). The LAKETuser's manual is avail able in Sargent & Lundy'sof fice for NRC 's inspection.

Since the original Tables 2.4-24 through 2.4-26and Figure 2.4-47 were recorded in the FSAR newLAKET runs have been ' executed to include the 16year period 1949-1964. These tables and figurehave been revised to include the more recentoutput,

f Rev. 7l 240-3 12/81|

[_ , -

*

.

SNUPPS-WC

2.4.11.3 Historical Low Water

2.4.11.3.1 Historical Drought

Since Wolf Creek is ungauged, its low-flow history is notavailable. However, according to the Kansas Water Resources ,

Board (1960, p. 169), the lowest mean discharge for 7 con- r

sectutive days for the creek that is expected to recur oncein 2 years would be 0 cubic feet per second. Stream flowin Wolf Creek was extrapolated from gauging records obtainedat Council Grove, Americus, Strawn, Burlington and Iola, onthe Neosho River, and at Madison on the Verdigris River.This takes into consideration the proper adjustments for the -

respective drainage areas. Low flows calculated for WolfCreek during the 1952-1957 historic drought period are givenin Table 2.4-22.

Based on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers data (U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers, 1958), a low-flow frequency analysis was madefor the Neosho River at the John Redmond dam site by usingthe log-Gumbel distribution procedure. Figure 2.4-46 showsthe resulting low-flow frequency curves for durations of 1,2, 3, and 5 years. The 1952-1957 drought, as seen from Figure2.4-46, has a recurrence interval of 50 years. Average riverinflow to the John Redmond Reservoir for this 5-year droughtof 50-year recurrence interval is 147.5 cubic feet per second.

2.4.11.3.2 Water Level Determination

Lake drawdown analysis was perforined to include the 1952-1957historic drought under projected operation of a 1150-megawattgenerating station. Hydrologic data used in the drawdownstudies and shown in Tables 2.4-24, 2.4-25, and 2.4-26 includerainfall, natural evaporation, and forced evaporation due toplant heat rejected to the lake, respectively. A conserva-tively estimated seepage loss of 3.5 cubic feet per secondwas used.

The period used for the drawdown analysis was 1949-1964, whichincluded the historical drought period of 1952-1957. At thebeginning of the analysis period, that is, at the beginningof 1951, the assumed starting lake water level was 1087.0feet, which is the normal operating level of the cooling lake.The spillway crest elevation is at 1088.0 feet. No makeupwater from John Redmond Reservoir is pumped when the coolinglake pool elevation is at or above the normal operating levelof 1087.0 feet. The required makeup varies from 0 to 120cubic feet per second (with an annual average rate of 41 cubicfeet per second), depending on the pool elevation in JohnRedmond Reservoir. Figure 2.4-47 shows fluctuations in the

Rev. 72.4-43 12/81

.

.

'

SNUPPS-NC

water surface elevation of the Wolf Creek cooling lake forthe period 1949-1964.

The computed minimum water level in the cooling lake is 1085.5feet based on the simulated operation of one unit at 100 per-cent average load factor and 100 percent capacity factor.

'

At this elevation, there would be 4900 acres of surface area +and 104,197 acre-feet of storage remaining. The minimum de-sign operating level for the circulating water screen house,circulating water pumps, and cervice water pumps for normaloperation is 1075 feet. This level is based on the estimatedlow-water condition during the 1952-1957 historic droughtfor the operation of two 1150-megawatt units on the cooling .

lake. At elevation 1075 feet, approximately 3255 acres ofsurface area and 61,350 acre-feet of storage remain in thecooling lake.

2.4.11.4 Future Control

The cooling lake is designed to supply adequate water to theplant under a drought condition that is at least as severeas the 1952-1957 historic drought, which has a recurrencecf about 50 years. Future upstream uses of Wolf Creek waterwill not lower minimum flows. Furthermore, any future useof the water upstream of the site has to consider the waterrights that have been obtained for the plant.

2.4.11.5 Plant Requirements

The cooling lake described in Section 2.4.8.2 provides thecooling water requirements for the WCGS Unit No. 1 and fora future unit of similar size. The lake supplies coolingwater to the circulating water system, the service water sys-tem, and the essential service water system,- as describedin Subsections 10.4.5 and 9.2.1. The ultimate heat sink,which is the source of cooling water for ti.e essential servicewater system, is created within the lake by a submerged seismicCategory I dam, with a crest elevation of 1070 feet, whichspans one of the fingers of the lake. A summary of the coolingwater requirements for various operating moles is providedbelow for one unit.

Rev. 72.4-44 12/81

_,w u . _.m, -. - ..-- 4 - , = . . . . - w;_, + .au 4 -_4_. ., ma_. .we.. _ _,,.4 . a -.a_. a 4, _ma,aw -- .*_.._w. an.a 4w__4 a

e

f %

1

:

.

>

4

.

- ,b

a

11

% f

$%I'PPS mf, :g-

1t!

s -S W * C e 8e

# == 2 e.. -. . e-. ~. c.e. c w

E... ,

. . *. g < e. e >-e em e .o.e

ee

r e-. e%N%gK**

IC ,ee me 2 9 r + +

$. e.*

e g

) -- *&. =e. e. .e

s.r*e~. e.

- c.e e. .e e e e -e.g e

.

9t.

** e, , , ,

g' - -seu om.*

>-- ~ - ,

aa3

-cee

gme .~

,-se == 4

+ cy e

.a C-

me. e,"e .- - e,

e 5r - ,9A

.

I,

'. - .sa 5+ e- ,n ~,e. .e eef*e -.- Je @e

< *.a. c, e

-

, :

.N.eGED

.O W

$-

Q Q $.e b E'.$g

d

a. an e .o s

., . - - ,. ., - ze.

i . ., ,ce , . ~. . <. . ~- - . . oj j e

..e epe e,

4-

eve e.m: 4-

4,

=

$ .$g

.

7me I

8ad 3,- O'r

"? 4g .

( < d.e'G

e=.e4 r. -u.

Om4'

ge-

$ Q e. QYem

e'B *%**

&e=. >

, S== es 4 ee

$.

O

>

|

],fh

e$e

==*'S.

a*eee

-, e e~ ~C eo?

e es e o ef # y eq _

'

$9.'

eO ==e

Se & h ke Y $me 4e gW

| .W'

*- eei

* %

. 2m e c *

e.e

9

E'==Me.

L y

*.d =e

; e 9m 9 r e

-

. e = . =. - g. o.=

e:I O 4e O

.eM

e' *='k [' @

sey = ee me %

(-

8 ga

gt =". - C+ m6e't

se-e

9= **ase=s

d.&C

y 94== g 8'm

#**e#

-

@ .* e r(

(* g e $ ee

etO

*

*@44

.* e e -.eme av s*. ce

4w

#

6$ 4 &

m"*

e e a

ea. 9,9e= r t

4==

s.em

e- <. ===. = h Nce$. -e. . .=. ,

, ,<

&r a r

. Le-

e <<.'

&,ame * =

e- e es e#

kg

eHI m, H, * .- e > 99

- ,a 9_ .

- y ; ** n e q w.

-s. -e,

e ,e - e ,+

&s-v

mme ce

en ae

e,. gee, e ce

um

edf

4elese-

**e

r@- e g

QN.e==e**J. .e *ee e,

=*

$eP4 ''e- *4 E #

a rC

+ ,=( 4,

.- *> =. es e-

mP-

a,e

ee .*-D

**<

'

se e $

e-eOe

*eg N

s *m 9 a* g

*i e,.

ne V *4-

ceae -e

c, e.p

u-2

p - +, - = ce

9

ee, e

9 c e==

s-es me r= 4

I

i

Oe

O

C #-0

A e =- . -I

'| e. e qo -e >o e.e a.,+m*

er eg &

e . a

pe f f oo

g* m*;

J-

g Q e e-.4

es4Fs e,

-

es#

O++ m0

1

.*e ,. g a

4,1 e e e 4 4

-g la c <o e.a ae

ee--9 e9 %,u

<-e *4 -e oe**#w

2r- e e e

. e e-r .-e *e,Mi

.

a, -

a1

hI =

r

i. 9 e, e e. cO-

.e- - * *W*a

e

} - e e- - -t4

Pe p9+ ema

e--'"e

c-,

| g sp

C=re m+ e

o- ,te

d3t p g

- - -

b_,]

-

( s6

=.-

1 , . *8 Y b

. , er 4 s^ 4 4*

.

4' g e senv

.=

& E -D

e( 9e

g n**

a T as ee D

6 eas

sg c 6 or > vG

24 $- 3

ms e ~ - e +

5o

Eme s 2 s e 5 s *e, m s < s

4

!4

.A

.Ia

1.i

i

h

-

'

'!1

J rf!

e

<

. -_. _ _ . - - __. _- . . . _ . - . _ _ _ .. _ -. . . . .-.-

- - - - _ a _ . - - - - - - . - ~ _ ~ .w_. - . . - _ - . .

.

e

l

.

TAMLE 2.4-24

9 9frMLY 4VERAGE NATURAL r'I A POR 4f 104 19 c f s , 1941 + 1964*

MLYd 1948 1990 1111 1U.2 1,9,11 19.14 lE 1916 1157 1958 19_19 1912 1111 1*i] 11 0 111_4_

J emanc y 9.23 12.32 11.42 6.6% 7.2% 12.44 9.34 10.59 IJ.e4 9.21 9.71 9.3. 12.9% 11.49 1% 29 11.69

Februar y 4.20 9.60 6.49 8.48 14.14 13.44 4.00 7.43 S.02 11.03 7.41 11.41 6.30 7.76 11.06 13.17

March 0.61 20.23 15.42 12.42 17.11 12.76 13.46 24.16 14.89 * 46 18.41 7.29 14.00 11.05 11.53 22.03.

Aptk1 21.05 29.86 17.09 15.2% 31.90 20.70 21.67 34.03 10.72 19.01 2%.89 25.71 23.81 22.74 34 3e 27.85

May 21.44 J%.19 27.40 35.70 21.6% 27.09 30,31 33.68 24.93 21.27 26.0% 31,22 12.39 56.*2 31.09 42.61 y4

June 31.95 39.79 29.70 $4,86 70.66 41.66 32.64 44.46 11.46 48.0 1 39.89' 57.88 34.91 3% 43 44.60 35.77 1m

1 0

July 45.18 11.16 27.57 58.42 48.20 74.1% 49.42 59.99 49.9% 3%.99 38.6% 40.46 46.92 90.67 60.62 59.34 ,%1

Aaqast 44.22 34.54 46.4% 14.38 64.10 65.63 56.42 7%.44 60,25 49.14 e 4.14 *4.43 44.44 61.32 $S.12 57.92

September' 43.24 27.84 40.05 44.6% 66.36 69.40 41.20 71.06 36.12 44.45 31.90 $5.20 42.89 36.47 46.73 45.9'

october 27.06 13.7% 31.88 43.24 37.97 )$.27 39.54 38.20 30.4e 35.00 30.17 35.7e 32.52 29.26 46.5% 35.60

Novembes 26.20 29.21 16.32 23.15 23.36 21.06 26.87 27.04 16.79 27.26 21.14 26.59 19.77 19,49 27.45 25.11

December 16.29 9.04 11.46 10.72 17.04 14.45 9.90 9.36 13.03 10.10 9.92 14.21 12.22 13.59 10.69 11.24

d55dife's' f5175[ete.f~fiUm meteorologLeal data by LAKrf progree.

,_.. ,-

12/8 1

,

! *,

f e

.

- . ____ --- __. . . . _ _ -._ ___._ _____ . ._, -m...m__.._____.__.,_..m__

iI

.

t

>

* >

l

i

I !

: hI

l .

I h

tant.E 2.4-26

11J e M 949 - 1944'fMLM5H.Y ave *R ACE MRCED FV APOR Af f 04 DUE TO PL APFP MFAf RF.f ECTION

"M U11 11M lin lin liu lib 111.5 19'' 1957 11M lili 1119 1111 1911 1143 1111 [

Janoas y 3.09 13.77 14.85 12.68 13.01 11.58 13.55 12.71 12.57 14.02 12.09 12.94 13.25 e.92 11.29 10.53

Febreary 10.41 14.04 9.19 16.06 16.57 16.03 1 3. 19 12.47 12,91 12.21 12.41 14.38 11.99 15.25 8.46 16.55i

March 17.60 14.48 16.35 17.06 16.09 16.95 17.02 14.76 17.46 15.36 18.25 11.60 17.7% 15.64 18.17 16.97 ,

f I

| April 19.09 20.43 19.42 10.95 20.03 19.56 21.19 20.09 17.80 20.61 20.09 23.02 19.32 20.01 22.82 19.90d b

|May 24.02 21.45 22.97 25.72 23.03 23.41 23.56 23.30 23.62 23.01 23.90 22.03 22.61 24.40 22.57 23.88 .e'

E'!

I June 24.00 25.65 21.33 25.73 25.92 24.93 21,87 24.6% 25.23 25.93 25.04 25.19 24.47 23.02 24.91 24.12 gisa

J uly 25.07 23.4? 24.06 25.31 24.76 25.86 26.21 24.95 25.95 24.57 24.36 24.56 25.16 25.55 25.46 24.90

Aup st 25.14 25.00 26.50 25.05 25.20 24.49 25.92 24.79 24.95 25.44 25.54 25.33 24.16 24.91 24.41 24.541

September 23.12 23.79 23.95 23.53 23.33 24.46 21.63 22.73 23.01 23.96 23.97 23.71 24.07 22.49 23.85 23.42

' Octo ec 21.73 21.75 20.75 21.67 21.09 21.41 21.64 21.27 20.73 20.13 19.51 21,26 20.11 21.64 21.75 19.46 [1

Noveebec 17.32 16.60 15.18 17.05 17.61 17.47 16.11 17.54 17.04 17.95 16.24 17.06 16.61 15.73 17.51 19.46 r

December 14.91 13.17 14.11 14.01 14.98 14.89 12.44 13.22 14.79 12.69 14.21 14.18 13.92 1s.34 12.30 12.39

I.

IRe v . 7

1* Tdn Et (L150 w eb at 1004 average load tactor. 12/8L

!

I, I

1 h

I4

1: '

4

25

)1

I N l.

+ ,

i

1

.,- .- -- . . - _. - . . . , , - - - , __,- - - . - -.. - , -_

, _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ______________ _ _______ __________-_ _____

!

\l

u,

i .

LI

H.

I-

! 1090 -

A _ . _ _ -

mLt.

E2 1080 -

r -

w<>$ww

N 1070 -a

OEaOOO

1000 -

|JAN JAN JAN JAN JAN JAN JAN JAN JAN JAN JAN1949 1950 1951 1952 1G53 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959

NOTE: ONE UNIT AT 100% AVERAGE ANNUAL LO AD F AC'

jil

.

__ _ _ ._

!' '

c

- ~

JAN JAN JAN JAN JAN

1960 1961 1962 1963 1964

" " ' ' 7 I 7 '" I)R.

WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATIONUNIT NO. I

FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

FIGURE 2.4-47ISIMULATED COOLItJG IAKE '

DRAWDOWr3 ANALYSIS 1949 - 1964(ONE UNIT OPERATION) <

- _ - _ _ - _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

-_

.

SNUPFS-WC-

Q240.4WC During the August 13, 1981 site visit, you indi-(2.4.11.6) cated that concrete pads were placed on the

bottom of the ultimate heat sink and essentialservice water intake canal, and that sedimenta-tion rates would be monitored by divers. Please

discuss details of sampling methods, locations'

and frequency. Also, provide details of dredg- ,-

ing procedures to restore capacity if and whenit is reduced below the required capacity.

R240.4WC Twenty sounding stations (concrete sediment

pads) have been located on the bottom of theultimate heat sink and essential service water .

intake canal (see FS AR Addendum Fig. 2.4-49 forlocations of the pade). Sedimentation will bechecked at these pads by visual inspection. Thevisual inspection will be accomplished by diversusing rulers. When the water level is greaterthan 1975 foot elevation, the visual inspectionwill be done yearly. A visual inspection will

be done whenever the lake is drawn down below1975 foot 1cvel. During filling, spot insI:e c-

tions will be done. Capacity loss due to sedi-mentation is not expected to exceed eight per-cent over a period of 40 years (FSAR AddendumSection 2.4.11.6). Therefore, dredging proced-ures will not be written until inspections indi-cate that dredging is required,

i

Rev. 7

240-4 12/81

- _ - _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ . _ _ _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ _ _

.

' SNUPPS-WC,

Q240.5WC It is stated in Section 9.2.5.3 that the UHS dam(9.2.5.3) embankment structure will withstand overflow

conditions that would result if the main coolinglake were to be drawn down below the UHS damcrest elevation. Please provide the maximum

,expected overflow velocities at the UHS dam

^

during a postulated loss of the mai.m ecoling r'

lake dam event and a discussion of the analysisincluding all pertinent assumptions. Provideevidence that the unprotected soil abutments ofthe UHS dam will not be eroded during the postu- ,

lated event to the extent that there will be aloss of essential service water from behind the .

UHS dam.

Two cases were investigated to have an effect onthe UHS for a postulated failure of the coolinglake main dam. Case I postulated the simultan-eous failure of the cooling lake Main Dam andthe Baffle Like 'A' in front of the UHS. InCase II it was assumed that Baffle Dike 'A'

fails subsequent to the main dam failure.

R240.5WC FLOWAVE, a computer program developed by theTennessee Valley Authority (TVA) and modifiedby S&L, was used for unsteady flood routing.This unsteady flow model is discussed in Subsec-tion 2.4.4.2.2. The theoretical discharge anddepth at the cross section of the Main Dam werecomputed as outlined by Stoker (Ref. 1) andused in Case I. The discharge computed was forthe instantaneous complete failure of the cool-ing lake Main Dam and hence conservative. InCase II, a similar approach was used for theinstantaneous failure of the Baffle Dike 'A'

in front of the UHS. The flood wave was routedthrough the cooling lake in both cases. Figures240.5-1 and 240.5-2 show the transient averagevelocities through the cross section at the UHSDam location for Cases I and II, respectivety.From these figures, the maximum average velocityfor Cases I and II are 7.6 and 9.5 feet persecond, respectively.

During the unlikely postulated total loss of themain cooling lake dam and baffle dike 'A', theslopes and crest of the UHS dam will be subject-ed to a flow of water over the crest. Adequateerosion protection has been provided for the up-stream and downstream slopes as well as for thecrest of the dam. The techniques for the designof rock sections for overtopping were presentedby Olivier (Ref. 2); a series of laboratorytests were made with various sizes of stones to

Rev. 7240-5 12/81

. . _ . . - -_ . _ _

.

'

SNCPPS-WC

R240.5WC (Continued)

develop parameters for different flow rates.The test results were applied to the design ofthe UHS dam slope protection. Following thecriteria that the filter and riprap materials ,

satisfy the quality requirements of concrete -

aggregates as given in ASTM C-33 and in accord-ance with the guidelines established in theCorps of Engineers publication entitled "Sta-bility of Riprap and Discharge Characteristics,Overflow Embankments, Arkansas River, Arkansas"(Ref. 3), the riprap will be a well-graded mate- -

rial with the following gradations:

Maximum Size Weight: 3200 pounds85% Size Weight: 1500 to 2200 pounds50% Size Weight: 190 to 400 pounds15% Size Weight: 25 to 50 poundsMinimum Size Weight: -5 pounds

The basic criteria or conditions for the UHSdam are quite similar to those experienced andinvestigated in the Corps of Engineers publica-tion (Ref. 3). The side slopes used in theirstudy, 4 horizontal to i vertical, are the sameas those for the UHS dam. The duration of theovertopping is approximately equal in both cases,The gradation for the riprap for the UHS dam wasmade to compare to the A-gradation used by theCorps. The UHS dam ripra,i is twice as thick asthat used oy the Corps (4 feet as opposed to 2feet), and is complimented by two 18-inch fil-ters consisting of a fine filter and a coarsefilter. The maximum average water velocity ex-pected over the UHS dam is less than 10 fps,while the Corps had experienced velocities ashigh as 13 fps.

By examining various flow conditions over theUHS dam which take the tailwater elevation down-stream and the headwater elevation upstream 250feet from the crest of the dam (in contrastto the 100-foot distance used by the Corps), theriprap was Cound to be in the stable region fornonaccess-type embankments with a gradation ofA-1 as shown in Army Corps of Engineers Plate48 (Ref. 3). This A-1 gradation performedsimilarly to the A-gradation, as described inthe Corps of Engineers publication (Ref. 3).

The riprap material is 4 feet thick, measuredperpendicular to the slopes of the embankment.The filter material (coarse and fine beddings)

Rev. 7240-6 12/81

.

*

.

SNUPFS-WC

Q240.5WC (Continued)

to be placed under the riprap was designedaccording to the criteria established in sub-section 2.5.6.4.1.4.2. Based on these criteria,the following gradation sizes were required for .

*.the filter material:

Coarse Filter Fine FilterSieve % Passing Sieve % Passing4 inch 100 3/4 inch 1003 inch 85-100 1/2 inch 90-1001 inch 55-85 3/8 inch 70-100 *

3/4 inch 30-65 No. 10 20-653/8 inch 10-30 No. 30 8-35No. 4 0-15 No. 50 3-15No. 10 0-3 No. 200 0-5

Each of the coarse and fine bedding layers is18 inches thick, measured perpendicular to the*

side slopes. Details of the riprap and filterare shown on Figures 2.5-116 and 2.5-117.

The design water level of the UHS and crest ofthe cohesive embankment of the UHS Dam is atelevation 1070 and the elevation of the top ofriprap is at elevation 1077. As shown in Fig-ure 2.5-116, the riprap extends into the abut-ment to the point where natural grade is atelevation 1077. Therefore, any flow below ele-vation 1077 will be through areas protected byfilter bedding and riprap.

The abutments are protected with adequate riprapand filter as described above and hence willnot be eroded during the postulated overflowconditions.

REFERENCES

1. Stoker, J.J., 1957, Water Waves: Inter-science Publishers, New York, p. 333-513.

2. Olivier, H., "Through and overflow RockfillDams - New Design Techniques," Proceedingsof the Institute of Civil Engineers, PaperNo. 7012, Vol. 36, March 1967.

3. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, " Stabilityof Riprap and Discharge Characteristics,Overflow Embankments, Arkansas River,Arkansas," Publication No. 2-650, June 1964.

Rev. 7240-7 12/81

.

.

I |'

-. ____ ' { . . 7 {. D..

i i

_

_. .I _

'

| ; !I T

._. .. _ .

_. . {_; , . -. . . . . . . _ g

I :

| ( N| | :

~

' N.

I |' '

. o. .

---4 -. N; .

i| i G

| mi

f. . l _ - .. . D

i g'

! wgr L i | i i

-oi

soI i ! aw

_. ! i !'

,

: v gxi 231 '

,

)~ ^

!-

w]ESm

! 8g;

--

5_

-_ -. __ .. . _ _ _ w h-

,

. _ . _ . _ . _ e

Ii

__ _ _ _ _'__ 4 4

!

! ! N3

OO m m > e D # n N - O

'03S/ld 'All0013A 39VM3AV Rev. 7 12/81WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION

UNIT NO. IFINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

FIGURE 240.5-1

TRANSIENT VELOCITY AT WOLF CREEKUHS LOCATION - CASE I

. _ _ _ _

~

.

b

. . _ .O

( eT N

l ,

,Y # '.

~

NN

ON '

eGI

59 O

\( W @-W\ D

2 zy/ s a

N( - wrT 2%

O N- u.

S' e

,

.-

' q,

! fN' s

l w

O| O O m N D D # m N - O

'03Wl:1 'All0013A 30VB3At Rev. 7 12/81

\/0LF CREEK GENERATING STATION| UNIT NO. I

FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT

FIGURE 240.5-2

TRAtlSIEilT VELOCITY AT WOLF CREEKUHS LOCATI0tl - CASE II

__

'

SNUPPS-WC

0240.6WC Please provide a description of the trash col-(9.2) lection and removal procedures from the service

water and essential service trash racks.

R240.6WC Trash is removed from the essential servicewater and circulating water influent by travel-

'

ing water screens operated as per system oper- .-

ating procedures. The circulating water screenscan be rotated and backwashed, manually or auto-matically, due to differential pressure _acrossthe screens. The essential service waterscreens can also be rotated and backwashed man-ually or automatically. In automatic, the .

es sent ial service water screens will be cleanedwhenever the essential service water pumps arerunning. Any debris on the screens is washedback into the Wolf Creek Cooling Lake.

;-

Rev. 7240-8 12/81

Question 240.7: What is the criteria used to determinewhich wells will be sealed and what is thestatus of well sealing?

Response ,

The criterion used was in accordance with Sargent & Lundy's

Specifications A-3854, (section 304.1). This specification is

reproduced here as Attachment 240.7-1. -

The status of well sealing is presented in Tables 240.7-1

and 240.7-2.

.

' ATTACHME:;T 240.7-1

SARGENT & LUNDY-

A-3854CNGINCCRSA=d. 3, 01-30-81**'"^"

.

t .

'..

i

.

!

.

304. PLUCCI;;G OF EXISTI';G PIE 20 METERS A';D EXISTI;;G 'n' ELLS

304.1 Ceneral: All existing piezoneters and existing wells located with thearea to be inundated by the cooling lake shall be scaled prior to fil-ling of .he lake. This includes all piezoneters and wells within thedrainage boundaries of the lake below cicvation 1997.5 ft. (SSUPPS) And.3or 1097.5 ft. (USGS) with the exception of piezoccters at Boring B-6,B-14, B-17, B-20, P-14, LK-6A, and LK-10 which wil1 be maintained

| to mcnitor groundwater levcis during plant ope' rations.:

!

!

!!

!

|l

|l

[

l

)

|r

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

c

.

TABLE 240.7-1 Sheet 1 of 4

WELLS IN COOLING LAKE AREA TIIAT REQUIRE SEALING

Approximate SurfaceName Of Owner Elevation

Well Location (a) Or Tenant (feet, mean sea level) Date Scaled

A-4 Phillips Not Available (b)

A-17 (cistern) Abbey 1100 11/19/80

Abbey 1100 (c),

A-18 Anderson 1100 08/01/80

A-23 Williams 1090 08/01/80

C-1 IIouser 1097 (b)

(pond) llouser 1097 (b)

aWell locations refer to the property locations used for the 1973 wellinventory as shown on Figure 2.4-52 and as listed in Table 2.4-29 (FSAR).

b ells A-4 and C-1 are currently being used by occupied dwellings.W

cWell A-17 was lost during clearing and excavation to bury remains ofstructures in area.

dwells D-35 and D-59 were climinated during removal of material fromBorrow Area 11 and Borrow Area I.

eWells D-37 and D-61 have been eliminated during excavation of foundationfor Ba f fle Dike A and Main Dam.

fWell D-58 is in waste area and cannot be located.

-,

e

- ._

.

TABLE 240.7-1 (continued) Sheet 2 of 4


Well Location (a) Or Tenant (feet, mean sea ~ level) Date Sealed

C-5 (cistern) Woods 1085 07/28/80

Woods 1085 07/28/80

Woods 1085 --

C-7 Skillman 1075 07/29/80

C-17 (cis' tern) Hunter 1084 --

Hunter 1084 11/14/77

C-18 Robinett 1080 07/28/80

(cistern) Robinett 1080 --

D-ll Johnson 1088 07/30/80

Johnson 1000 07/30/80

D-12 Kellerman 1049 07/25/80

Kellerman 1048 07/24/80

(cistern) Kellerman 1048 --

'

D-25 Hess 1095 07/24/80

Hess 1095 07/24/80

..,

__-. . _ - _ _ _ _ . _.

,

.

.



Well Location (a) Or Tenant (feet, mean sea level) Date Scaled

D-29 Ilildebrand 1071 07/25/80

(cistern) Ilildebrand 1071 08/15/80

D-32 fiamman 1063 03/16/79

liamman 1063 03/16/79

D-33 Snider 1062 03/16/79'

Snider 1060 11/14/77

D-34 Sa l,i ra 1040 03/16/79

D-35 Wynn IJot Available (d)

D-36 Riffenbark 3030 03/18/78

Ri f fenbark 1030 03/18/78

D-37 Danford 1035 (e)

(cistern) Danford 1035 07/25/80

D-38 Iseman 1063 08/15/30

D-39 liess 1062 03/15/79

lie s s 1057 03/15/79

D-56 Ilutson 1088 03/15/79

. .

,

!

.

.



Well Location (a) Or Tenant (feet, mean sea level) Date Sealer!D-57 Vincent 1054 03/15/79

D-58 Bull 1032 (f)

D-59 Morris 1019 (d)

D-61 Levering 1028 07/25/80

Levering 1018 (e)

Levering 1033 (e)

D-63 Delong 1055 06/05/78

*e

*

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _

1-

.

TABLE 240.7-2 Sheet 1 of 6<

ADDITIONAL WELLS IN COOLING LAKE AREAFOUND AND SEALED DURING CONSTRUCTION

Location Approximate SurfaceApproximate Coordinates Elevation

Number North East (feet, mean sea' level) Date Sealed

A-19-A 108,000 91,300 >1087 (a)!

A-19-B 108,000 91,200 >1087 (a)

D-34-A 88,650 101,?00 <1092 09/20/78

D-38-B 90,500 104,700 1063 (b)

D-58-B 85,350 102,900 1032 (c)

X-A6 107,000 88,500 <1092 07/29/80

X-A18-3 109 ' O 91,400 1098 08/01/80

X-A18-4 109,:00 91,450 1094 08/01/80

X-A18-5 109,700 91,400 1099 08/01/80

X-A23-1 107,650 98,650 <1092 08/01/80

aWells are curran'ly being used by occupied dwelling.

bWell was flooded by water storage pond at wash plant.cWells are in waste areas and cannot be located.

dwell was eliminated during removal of material from Borrow Area A.

eWells have been eliminated during excavation of foundation for Ba f fle Dike A.

f ells were eliminated during removal of material from Borrow Area D.W

|.

,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - . . _ _ _ _ ---__ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . .______________ __ -_______.

._

.



Number North East (fect, mean sea level) Date-Sealed

X-A23-2 107,600 98,750 <1092 08/01/80

X-Cl 100,950 96,400 <1092 11/29/78

X-C2 100,890 96,300 <1092 11/29/78

X-C5-A-1 103,600 97,200 <1092 07/28/80

X-C5-ll 103,600 97,200 <1092 07/28/80

X-CS-ll-1 98,5CO 91,900 <1092 07/28/80

X-C6 100,500 94,500 <1092 07/30/80

X-C7 103,000 96,300 <1092 07/31/80

X-C7-A 105,200 91,100 <1092 07/28/80

x-C8 103,800 93,600 <1092 (d)

X-C8-12 106,800 89,000 <1092 07/29/80

X-C8-13 106,800 88,700 <1092 07/29/80

X-C8-14 106,100 91,000 <1092 07/29/80

X-C8-15 106,150 91,200 <1092 07/29/80

X-C8-15-3 106,000 89,200 <1092 09/23/80

X-C8-16 106,150 90,200 (1092 07/29/80

,.

.

I



Number North East (feet, mean sea level) Date Scaled

X-C8-17 106,180 91,210 <1092 11/19/80

X-C9 105,500 90,500 <1092 07/29/80

X-C10 102,700 96,250 <1092 09/23/80

X-C16 102,700 94,600 <1092 07/31/80

X-C17 102,100 96,000 <1092 07/31/80

X-C17-6 96,000 95,000 <1092 07/28/80

X-C18-1 96,200 96,000 <1092 07/25/80

X-C19-A 98,720 96,150 <1092 07/28/80

X-C19-B 98,720 96,150 <1032 07/28/80

X-C19-C 98,760 96,450 <1092 07/28/80

X-D1 95,365 101,740 <1092 (e)

X-D2 95,265 101,740 <1092 (e)

X-D3 95,700 101,600 <1092 05/16/80

X-D4 94,720 101,780 <1092 03/18/78

X-D8 104,100 96,600 <1092 07/30/80

X-D10 86,100 100,800 <1092 07/25/80.

O

i

.

6 de 0 0 9 0 0 0 8 0 J 0 0 8 0

f l 8 8 7 8 8 7 7 8 C 8 8 7 8 ,

-o a / / / / / / / / / / / / /0 4 1 9 1 0 )e 0 1 6 0 0 0 1 1 )

4 S 2 0 1 3 3 8 2 2 c 3 1 0 1 2 2 f- / / / / / / / / ( / / / / / / (

t e 1 8 3 7 7 1 9 9 7 0 8 1 9 5e t 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0e ah DS

.

)

e lc ea vf er lunSoa

ieet s 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2

) t a 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9d avn 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0e mea 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

u il e < < < < < < < < < < < < < < < <n xEmi ot r ,

n p to p ec A e( f

(

2-7

s0 e4 t 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 02 a t 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 5 0 0 0 0 6 5 5 0

n s 0 6 9 6 2 0 1 9 0 6 5 0 9 2 7 9E i a , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

L d E 9 8 7 6 8 8 0 9 1 6 6 9 8 0 2 8B nr 0 9 9 9 9 9 0 9 0 9 9 9 9 0 0 9A oo 1 1 1 1 1

T iotCaceotLa 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

m h 0 5 0 5 0 0 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5i t 1 3 1 3 4 0 0 5 9 1 9 3 5 9 8 8x r , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

o o 7 7 5 3 9 0 1 0 5 4 3 7 7 0 4 5r N 8 0 8 0 9 0 9 9 9 0 0 0 0 9 9 9p 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

pA

r 0e 1 2 9 1

b - - - -

m 0 0 l l 2 3 4 7 8 9 0 1 1 2 3 4u 1 1 l l 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2N D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X

._____ _ _________ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

i



Number North East (feet, hiean sea level) ~Date Sealed

X-D25 95,950 98,700 <1092 (f)

X-D25-c 92,300 107,900 <1092 11/20/P'X-D26 96,000 98,300 <1092 v;/nt/

X-D27 87,100 107,500 <1092 07/25/80X-D27-1 87,200 107,300 <1092 09/17/80X-D28 92,200 107,100 <1092 07/24/80X-D29 92,400 107,200 <1092- 07/25/80X-D30 95,800 104,000 <1092 05/20/80X-D31 99,400 97,900 <1092 07/30/80X-D32 101,800 98,800 <1092 07/31/80X-D33 96,300 97,200 <1092 07/25/80X-D33-5 89,500 99,500 <1092 03/16/79X-D35 94,600 96,000 <1092 07/28/80X-D39-1 85,500 104,400 1060 (c)X-D41-6 91,000 107,800 <1092 07/23/80X-D41-7 91,000 107,800 <1092 07/23/80

,.

_.

.

.



Number North East (feet, mean sea level) Date Sealed

X-D41-15 90,750 108,100 <1092 07/23/80

X-D41-16 90,550 107,500 <1092 07/23/80

X-D42 96,200 105,000 <1092 11/19/80

X-D43 94,300 104,300 <1092 11/19/80

X-D56 85,500 105,800 <1092 09/17/80

X-D57 107,830 102,750 >1115 03/31/81

,.

.

*

.

Question 240.8: Please provide a revised Figure 2.4-52showing the cooling lake at its normaloperating level and the WCGS propertyboundary superimposed on the well inventorywithin five miles of the plant.

'i ..

Response

The requested information has been added to the well inventory

map (Figure 2.4-52) and is provided as Figure 240.8-1.,

.

--

_

-

_

- _

I-

0|

d; . !, . . . . . . > +.

mia i !

U !.

d['A| {;,1 |B i

.,, . . . . . ..

',

k,, jg' '

{.i, ,. . . = * a

s e .. E L 5"

--

/ |[ . . .

%, .> . .. . .. . . .. .. ..

f EE 53 [ |. '.a= = 3 ....

-

Mg; 27 E %3 V/ / .". . **

k]., n yl,,.

.L Jw n - - ~. ~ ~

. _ :g=w + ,: . _1 :-p --- .;j -- . M . .,

sge w 2.... ., .m,

mv - . .= = = 2 ==:- ., ., u,s ,.

es.

H .. , i

.-..

Er3EE3:Eci 'EEEE ig==m -:w - :== [m. m - . .. , . ..

, | ., , 1, , ,~~ = = y= :=E. R. .3..c. E .- EE.EE ) } ..-

,.

' * 5- -- - - - --, , ,. j,g=Y;gJtas q=u=- ~ *i 0 . ..' v., i . . .h j| $ ** "

\,3

2. == : = . E# , .: ",*|g,, &,; { '"."?,;'

ggj3z y . ". C .-.,

(. . . . . .

=~3=~~32 E'. i{ t *.

|,__r--_ y m er

.,, .

m,:.; . . r_ ._

_ __.s., . .

.;p,g.;,,;yy4,5,m :. -

.: -

aw .. ,~. ,, .. ..

y_ -g o- ..,.n,...;.,.,,| ....

.f, = . . . , , _

,g.g-

.. ,[s..,::.. :.,33

, i' ,. u .{. s r |*w . a.

.... -: , a . ,. . o.-v. , . . . -

1 1 ..

. . .=. m.a.. ., -

v- .- . w ,.u. 6.. u .2 .;-Yf ea .a.o'. . e. .pw . ,, a n q,i p- = .- a a,

443 I a,

<Si rr. . s,

|. ., .. -. , . . . . .. .. . .

,

.-- ---------- ..- L- ' --- L -''^'

A AREA LOCATION |*'

. r. m . .. .. i n .. ..ma r, tecarie. j . . . . . '

.

.x.. , c . ..... . w e. , ,4, p. r.. m ...a iu

e r.. ~ . ..a i n m--.Q rwoo ec rncn. m g#; . .o ... m ...u in . .. .

r v.. ,n . .er ur at

esaso i a

LEGEND: . .

SITE BOUNDARY-

COOLING LAFE AT NORMALOPERATING LEVEL (1087 FEET)

AREA OUTSICE SITE eCUNCARY p, y , 7 17/g1CWNED BY AFFLtCANTS

WOLF CREEK GENER ATING STATIONUNIT NO.1

FINAL SAFETY AN ALYSIS REPORT

FIGURE 240.8-1" " " "''

WELL INVENTORY WITHIN'I'$$ %EI1"$ $tTsEs'i$$ 5 MILES REL ATIVE TO COOLING-v etnamin. L AKE AND PROPERTY BOUND ARYr ecuns 2.i-3, 2.u s2. 2.s-2 asm.

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ____ _ _

, -

.

*

SNUPPS-WC-

Q240.9WC Section 2.4.2.3.1 of the SNUPPS FSAR states that-(2.4.2.3) any rainfall in excess of design intensity (7.4

inches) will overflow the roof curb and thebuilding walls to the site drainage system.Describe. ir. more detail the roofs of safetyrelated structures regarding their ability to

*

pond _ water. State the maximum heights of any :r

curbs or parapets on the roofs and the dimen-sions and locations of scuppers or other open-ings that will limit the depth of water duringthe PMP event.

R240.9WC- All safety-related buildings with flat roofs, .

where ponding could occur, are designed with atwo inch pitch towards the roof drains. Agravel stop fastened to a 2x6 was used aroundthe perimeter of the roofs. No parapets orcurbs exist at these roofs. Therefore, themaximum possible ponding depth is approximatelyfour inches.

Q240.10WC State whether any permanent underdrains orground water devatering systems are installed,being constructed er planned at the plant site.If so, provide the information called for inBranch Technical Position HMB/GSB, " Safety-Related Permanent Dewatering Systems."

R240.10WC As discussed in Section 2.4.13.5 and Section3.4, the normal water table at the plant site is5 feet below grade and all the safety-relatedstructures are designed for full hydrostaticloading to El. 1099.5 ft. MSL (Standard Plant

,

Elevation 1999.5 ft.) which is the plant grade.

| No permanent underdrains or ground water de-watering systems are installed or planned at

: the site.!

,

!

1

I,

i

!

! Rev. 7240-9 12/81,

'

t

kansas i!as and electric company

Documents