INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN 40 C.F.R. PART PLANT YATES ASH POND 2 (AP-2) GEORGIA POWER COMPANY

Similar documents
HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING CCR SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT PLANT GASTON ASH POND 40 CFR (c)(1)(i) (xii)

STRUCTURAL STABILITY ASSESSMENT

Coal Combustion Residuals Unit Inflow Design Flood Control System Plan

Section 4: Model Development and Application

Stage Discharge Tabulation for Only Orifice Flow

ARTICLE 5 (PART 2) DETENTION VOLUME EXAMPLE PROBLEMS

Advanced /Surface Hydrology Dr. Jagadish Torlapati Fall 2017 MODULE 2 - ROUTING METHODS

Standards for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control in New Jersey May 2012

Rucker Pond. Background

Submitted to: St. Johns River Power Park New Berlin Road Jacksonville, FL 32226

INTRODUCTION TO HYDROLOGIC MODELING USING HEC-HMS

INITIAL INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN EXISTING CCR IMPOUNDMENTS CCR Rule Section

STREUVER FIDELCO CAPPELLI, LLC YONKERS DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT For: PALISADES POINT

Continuing Education Course #101 Drainage Design with WinTR-55

9. Flood Routing. chapter Two

APPENDIX B HYDROLOGY

The effectiveness of the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) and Huff rainfall distribution methods for use in detention basin design

Bushkill Creek 3 rd Street Dam Removal Analysis

APPENDIX G APPENDIX G SEDIMENT CONTAINMENT SYSTEM DESIGN RATIONALE

EROSION CONTROL NARRATIVE

Sediment Trap. A temporary runoff containment area, which promotes sedimentation prior to discharge of the runoff through a stabilized spillway.

Chapter 10 - Sacramento Method Examples

CCR Rule Annual Inspection Report (cont.) 2

HISTORY OF CONSTRUCTION FOR EXISTING CCR SURFACE IMPOUNDMENT PLANT GADSDEN ASH POND 40 CFR (c)(1)(i)-(xii)

INTRODUCTION TO HEC-HMS

THE NEED FOR AN ADDITIONAL SPILLWAY AT THE SANFORD DAM BOILING SPRING LAKES, NC. Presentation for The Brunswick County Commissioners April 20, 2015

Big Rivers Electric Corporation Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals (CCR) from Electric Utilities Final Rule CCR Impoundment Liner Assessment Report

Hydrology and Hydraulics Design Report. Background Summary

WATER MANAGEMENT REPORT FOR PAGE ESTATES

Study 16.5 Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)

City of Columbia BMP Manual. Detailed Unified Sizing Criteria Example Wet Pond Design

Stormwater Guidelines and Case Studies. CAHILL ASSOCIATES Environmental Consultants West Chester, PA (610)

Study 16.5 Probable Maximum Flood (PMF)

ENGINEER S CERTIFICATION OF FAULT AREA DEMONSTRATION (40 CFR )

STORMWATER DESIGN CALCULATIONS

WQ Outlet Design Single Orifice Orifice diameter = 24. Perforated riser/orifice Plate Outlet area per perforation row = 4

Appendix E Guidance for Shallow Flooding Analyses and Mapping

9. PROBABLE MAXIMUM PRECIPITATION AND PROBABLE MAXIMUM FLOOD

******************* Project Description ******************* File Name... NAAF Stormwater Improvement Project 11_21_2014.SPF

Project Description. Project Options. End Analysis On... Apr 26, :00:00. Rainfall Details

Stone Outlet Sediment Trap

Emergency Action Plan (EAP) Tata Pond Dam

WEST CATARACT CREEK DAM FINAL DESIGN REPORT

LOCATED IN INDIAN RIVER COUNTY PREPARED FOR S.J.R.W.M.D. AND F.W.C.D. DECEMBER, 2003 Updated 2007 Updated May 2014 PREPARED BY

Chapter 5 CALIBRATION AND VERIFICATION

Homework 10. Logan Dry Canyon Detention Basin Design Case Study Date: 4/14/14 Due: 4/25/14

DRAINAGE REPORT FOR THORNTON SELF STORAGE THORNTON, COLORADO

Phillips Ditch Drainage Study

FORECAST-BASED OPERATIONS AT FOLSOM DAM AND LAKE

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT REPORT

Section 3.0 Existing Systems Hydrology and Hydraulics

September 6, City of Thornton 9500 Civic Center Drive Thornton, CO (303) RE: Maverik Thornton, CO - Drainage Report

Monte Carlo Simulations for Probabilistic Flood Hazard Assessment

Stormwater Capacity Analysis for Westover Branch Watershed

Technical Memorandum No

BRANDON LAKES AVENUE PRE AND POST CONDITIONS DRAINAGE REPORT

UPPER COSUMNES RIVER FLOOD MAPPING

APPENDIX B WORKSHEETS & EXHIBITS

TPDES: Soil, Erosion and Sedimentation Methods

UNIVERSITY OF BOLTON. ENGINEERING, SPORTS and SCIENCES BSC CIVIL ENGINEERING SEMESTER 1 EXAMINATION 2014/2015 WATER ENGINEERING MODULE NO: BLT3023

WELCOME Lake Wabukayne OPEN HOUSE

Appendix 15 Computational Methodology

Mr. Michael Malone CPS Energy 145 Navarro Street San Antonio, Texas Project No

D. MATHEMATICAL MODEL AND SIMULATION

ISSN Vol.03,Issue.10 May-2014, Pages:

Pompton Lakes Dam Downstream Effects of the Floodgate Facility. Joseph Ruggeri Brian Cahill Michael Mak Andy Bonner

Watershed Processes and Modeling

NRC Workshop Probabilistic Flood Hazard Assessment (PFHA) Jan 29-31, Mel Schaefer Ph.D. P.E. MGS Engineering Consultants, Inc.

Pressure Head: Pressure head is the height of a column of water that would exert a unit pressure equal to the pressure of the water.

Limited Visual Dam Safety Inspections OA Oahu Reservoir No Oahu, Hawaii

Determination of Urban Runoff Using ILLUDAS and GIS

PONDNET.WK1 - Flow and Phosphorus Routing in Pond Networks

CITY OF CAPE CORAL STORMWATER MASTER PLAN PHASE II - PART 1 BASINS 4, 10, & 14 SUB-BASIN DRAINAGE IMPROVEMENTS HYDRAULIC ANALYSIS SUMMARY

Sediment Trap. At multiple locations within the project site where sediment control is needed.

Objectives: After completing this assignment, you should be able to:

design, construction, operation, and maintenance of the BAP is consistent with recognized and generally accepted good engineering standards.

Design Storms for Hydrologic Analysis

ENGINEERING HYDROLOGY

Analysis of Hydraulic Impacts on the Schuylkill River

APPENDIX B DESIGN CRITERIA FOR TEMPORARY WATER QUALITY BMPS USED DURING CONSTRUCTION

Pennypack Creek Watershed Act 167 Study

PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION ENGINEERING DISTRICT 3-0

Sediment Control Practices. John Mathews Ohio Dept. of Natural Resources, Division of Soil and Water Resources

STABILIZATION OF THE H&CT RAILWAY STONE DAM WALTER E. SKIPWITH, PE, JOYCE CRUM, AIA AND JOHN BAUMGARTNER, PE. Introduction.

J.H. Campbell Generating Facility Pond A - Location Restriction Certification Report

Roger Andy Gaines, Research Civil Engineer, PhD, P.E.

Stormwater Drainage Design Report. Reeve & Associates, Inc. Maverik, Inc. 88th Avenue and Pecos Street. Thornton, CO

Watershed concepts for community environmental planning

Tom Ballestero University of New Hampshire. 1 May 2013

EROSION CONTROL NARRATIVE

GRAPEVINE LAKE MODELING & WATERSHED CHARACTERISTICS

12 SWAT USER S MANUAL, VERSION 98.1

Detailed Storm Rainfall Analysis for Hurricane Ivan Flooding in Georgia Using the Storm Precipitation Analysis System (SPAS) and NEXRAD Weather Radar

Stream Geomorphology. Leslie A. Morrissey UVM July 25, 2012

LEVEE DESIGN FOR FLOOD PROTECTION ON ALLUVIAL FANS

Basic Hydraulics June 2007

A HYDROLOGIC STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF URBAN DEVELOPMENT ON STORM RUNOFF: A CASE STUDY IN QUEENS, NY ABSTRACT

Attachment B to Technical Memorandum No.2. Operations Plan of Ross Valley Detention Basins

A GIS-based Approach to Watershed Analysis in Texas Author: Allison Guettner

STORMWATER REPORT FRITO LAY SUBDIVISION NO. 3

Transcription:

INFLOW DESIGN FLOOD CONTROL SYSTEM PLAN 40 C.F.R. PART 257.82 PLANT YATES ASH POND 2 (AP-2) GEORGIA POWER COMPANY EPA s Disposal of Coal Combustion Residuals from Electric Utilities Final Rule (40 C.F.R. Part 257 and Part 261), 257.82, requires the owner or operator of an existing or new CCR surface impoundment or any lateral expansion of a CCR surface impoundment to design, construct, operate and maintain an inflow design flood control system capable of adequately managing flow during and following the peak discharge of the specified inflow design flood. The owner or operator must prepare an inflow design flood system written plan documenting how the inflow design flood control system has been designed and constructed to meet the requirements of 40 C.F.R. 257.82. The existing CCR surface impoundment known as AP- 2 is located at Georgia Power Company s Plant Yates. The facility consists of a 63-acre storage area. The inflow design flood consists of the rainfall that falls within the limits of the surface impoundment, runoff from approximately 622 acres of adjoining watershed, and a nominal amount (relative to rainfall) of process flows. Additionally, run-off from Ash Ponds B, B, and 3 are ultimately routed into AP-2. The drainage area for these basins totals an additional 723 acres (total drainage area of 1,408 acres). The pond discharges through an overflow discharge structure located near the northeast corner of the impoundment and includes a channel that leads to a concrete holding tank where pond discharge is pumped through a discharge pipe to the river. There is no active discharge pipe passing through or under the embankment. Additionally, there is an auxiliary spillway constructed primarily of a concrete-filled Fabriform erosion protection blanket. The spillway entrance is comprised of rip-rap and a concrete control structure and the outfall is constructed with stair-stepping gabion baskets with concrete on the top surface. The outlet bottom is comprised of bedrock, with gabion basket-armored side slopes. The inflow design flood has been calculated using the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) method, also known as the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) method, using the 1000-yr storm event required for a significant hazard potential surface impoundment. Runoff curve number data was determined using Table 2-2A from the Urban Hydrology for Small Watersheds (TR-55). Appendix A and B from the TR-55 were used to determine the rainfall distribution methodology. Precipitation values

1.0 Purpose of Calculation The purpose of this report is to demonstrate the hydraulic capacity of the subject CCR impoundment in order to prepare an inflow design flood control plan as required by the United States Environmental Protection Agency s (EPA) final rule for Disposal of CCR from Electric Utilities (EPA 40 CFR 257). 2.0 Summary of Conclusions A hydrologic and hydraulic model was developed for the Plant Yates Ash Pond 2 to determine the hydraulic capacity of the impoundment. The design storm for the Plant Yates Ash Pond 2 is a 1000-year rainfall event. Southern Company has selected a storm duration of 24-hours for all inflow design flood control plans. The results of routing a 1000-year, 24-hour rainfall event through the impoundment are presented in Table 1 below: Plant Yates Ash Pond 2 Table 1 - Flood Routing Results for Plant Yates Ash Pond 2 Peak Water Normal Top of Emergency Surface Pool El Embankment Spillway Elevation Freeboard* (ft) El (ft) Crest El (ft) (ft (ft) Peak Inflow (cfs) Peak Outflow (cfs) 723.2 729.3 725.4 729.7-0.4 3,990 1,892 *Freeboard is measured from the top of embankment to the peak water surface elevation. Negative freeboard indicates that the dam overtops during the subject storm event. 3.0 Methodology 3.1 HYDROLOGIC ANALYSES The Plant Yates Ash Pond 2 is classified as a significant hazard structure, and is the most downstream of the CCR ash ponds at the Plant Yates site. The Plant Yates Ash Pond 2 is required to safely store and/or pass the runoff resulting from the 24-hour, 1,000 year storm event. A summary of the design storm parameters and rainfall distribution methodology for the calculations is summarized below in Table 2. Hazard Classification Table 2 - Plant Yates Ash Pond 2 Storm Distribution Return Storm Rainfall Frequency Duration Total Rainfall (years) (hours) (Inches) Source NOAA Atlas 14 Significant 1000 24 11.0 Storm Distribution SCS Type II The drainage area of Ash Pond 2 includes the basins contributing runoff to Ash Pond B, Ash Pond B and Ash Pond 3. The Ash Pond 2 sub-basin was analyzed independently of the other structures, and the discharges from the other Ash Ponds resulting from the

1,000-year storm event were added to the inflow hydrograph of the Ash Pond 2 subbasin. Stormwater discharges from Ash Pond 2 are conveyed directly into the Chattahoochee River. Runoff characteristics were developed based on the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) methodologies as outlined in TR-55. An overall SCS curve number for the drainage area was developed based on the National Engineering Handbook, Part 630, Chapter 9 which provides a breakdown of curve numbers for each soil type and land use combination. The NRCS web-soil survey of the watershed was utilized to estimate the run-off potential of the basin. A table of the pertinent basin characteristics of Ash Pond 2 is provided in Table 3. Table 3 Ash Pond 2 Drainage Basin Characteristics Drainage Basin Area, mi 2 1.07* Hydrologic Curve Number, CN 75 Hydrologic Methodology SCS Time of Concentration (minutes) 54 Lag Time (minutes) 32 *Ash Pond 2 Sub-Basin Only. Total drainage area is 2.2 square miles when areas from Ash Pond B, Ash Pond B, and Ash Pond 3 are included. Runoff values were determined by importing the characteristics developed above into a hydrologic model with the US Army Corps of Engineers HEC-HMS program. 3.2 HYDRAULIC ANALYSES Storage values for the Ash Pond were determined by developing a stage-storage relationship utilizing contour data. The current spillway system for Plant Yates Ash Pond 2 consists of a concrete lined earthen channel primary spillway. The spillway has a control section on the order of 50 feet wide at approximate elevation 725.4 feet. Flows through the spillway are discharged directly to the Chattahoochee River. A table of the pertinent hydraulic characteristics of Ash Pond 2 is provided in Table 4. Primary Spillway Table 4 Ash Pond 2 Hydraulic Characteristics US Material / Size Invert, tt Concrete Lined Channel, 50 ft wide DS Invert, ft Length, ft 725.4 - - Based on the spillway attributes listed above, a rating curve was developed and inserted into HEC-HMS to determine the pond performance during the design storm. Results are shown in Table 1.

4.0 SUPPORTING INFORMATION 4.1 CURVE NUMBER

4.2 STAGE-STORAGE TABLE

4.3 RATING CURVE Elev. Head 1 Weir 1 Orifice Full Flow Pipe P/S Total E/S Top of Dam Discharge Total Discharge 723.18 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.0 0 724.00 0.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.0 0 725.40 2.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 0.0 0 726.00 2.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 65 0.0 65 726.50 3.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 162 0.0 162 727.00 3.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 283 0.0 283 727.50 4.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 426 0.0 426 728.00 4.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 587 0.0 587 728.50 5.32 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 764 0.0 764 729.00 5.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 956 0.0 956 729.30 6.12 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1078 0.0 1078

730.00 6.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1381 983.9 2365 731.00 7.82 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1855 3723.8 5579

4.4 DRAINAGE BASIN