ML18017A053

Rev 0 to EC-ENVR-1026, SSES Maximum Offsite Dose Rate from ISFSI & Other Fuel Cycle Sources.

ML18017A053
Person / Time
Site:	Susquehanna
Issue date:	10/02/1996
From:	Barclay R, Ely R, Kalter C PENNSYLVANIA POWER & LIGHT CO.
To:
Shared Package
ML17158C159	List: ML17158C158 ML17158C160 ML18017A053 ML18017A291
References
EC-ENVR-1026, EC-ENVR-1026-R, EC-ENVR-1026-R00, NUDOCS 9705200153
Download: ML18017A053 (89)

Text

NUCLEAR ENGINEERING ¹ gg CALCULATIONI STUDY COVER SHEET and NUCLEAR RECORDS TRANSMITTALSHEET Fiie

1. Page Total R2>>1 1 of41 1

'2. TYPE: CALC )'3. NUMBER: EC-ENVR-1026 >4. REVISION: 0

5. TRANSMITTAL¹. >6. UNIT: 3 ">7. QUALITYCLASS: R '>8. DISCIPLINE: R

>9. DESCRIPTION:

SSES Maximum Offsite Dose Rate from ISFSI & Other Fuel C cle Sources SUPERSEDED BY: EC-

10. Alternate Number. 11. Cycle:

12: Computer Code or Model used: See Section 4.1 Fiche Q Disks H Am'I

13. Application: SSES ISFSI

'>14 Affected Systems: 089

• 'fN/A then line 15 is mandatory.

• >15. NON-SYSTEM DESIGNATOR: ENVR

16. Affected Documents:

17.

References:

See Section 6.0

18. Equipment I Component ¹:

19. DBD Number.

e

>20. PREPARED BY >21. REVIEWED BY Print Name R. F. El Jr. Print Name R. K. Barcla Si nature Si nature 'eFC~j ~e c.

>22. APPROVED BY I DAT 23. ACCEPTED BY PP&L I DATE Print Name C. J. Kalter Print Name P

Si nature I'd Z. Si nature BECOMPLE D Y,Nucl.EAR RECORDS RECEIvFD NR-DCS SIGNATURE/0 ADD A NEW COVER PAGE FOR EAGHREVISION FORM NEPM-QA4221-1, Revhlon1 NC-v 'ei

PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET Rept PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1 026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI & Other'uel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Description Page

~

1.0 OBJECTIVE

2.0 CONCLUSION

S AND RECOMMENDATIONS 3.0 ASSUMPTIONS/INPUTS 4.0 METHOD 17 4;1 COMPUTER PROGRAMS USED 17

. 4.2 LOCATION OF DOSE POINTS 17 4.3 SPENT FUEL 18 4.3.1 Transport of NUHOMS Transfer Cask 18 4.3.2 ISFSI 19 44 TURBINE BUILDING SOURCES 19 4.4.1 Dose Point 1 19 4.4.2 Dose Point 2 21 4.4.3 Dose Point 3 22 444 Dose Point 4 24 4.5 CONDENSATE STORAGE TANKS (CST) 28 4.6 LLRWHF 30 4.7 TEMPORARY LAUNDRYFACILITY 31 4.8 DAW VOLUME REDUCTION SYSTEM 32 5.0 RESULTS 39

6.0 REFERENCES

39

PPSL CALCULATIONSHEET

- Rept PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 iate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of List of Tables 3-1 Total Dose Rate (n+ y) from NUHOMSO~ Transfer Cask During Transport as a Function of Distance 11 3-2 Total Dose Rate (n+ y) from ISFSI as a Function of Distance 3-3 Dose Rates at the 500 kV Switchyard from the Turbine Building, CSTs, and LLRWHF 12 N-16 Source Activities in Turbine/Main Steam Components 14 3-5 Condensate Storage Tank Isotopic Inventory 15 LLRWHF Dose Rates at Security Fence South of the Facility 16 4-1 Distances from Sources to Dose Points 34 4-2 Dose Rates at the Specified Dose Points 35 List of Figures 4-1 Dose Point Locations 36 4-2 Total Dose Rate (n+ y) from NUHOMS Transfer Cask During Transport as a Function of Distance 37 4-3 Total Dose Rate (n+ y) from ISFSI as a Function of Distance 38 List of Attachments 1- Letter from J. L. Simpson, GE Nuclear Energy, to J. C. Pacer, PP8L, "Review of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Assessment of Impact of Hydrogen Water Chemistry on Radiation Field Buildup", 11/7/95 (Ref. 6.3) (5 pages).

2- Turbine Building IVIICROSKYSHINEAND MICROSHIELD Models, Figures 1 through 6 of EC-HPHY-0518 (Ref. 6.1) (7 pages).

3- Memo from Robert K. Barclay to Kevin J. Kelenski, "Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Assumptions Regarding Movement of Spent Fuel to ISFSI," PLI-82098, 0/11/96 (Ref. 6.9) (3 pages).

4- Letter from, to Kevin Kelenski, PP8 L, "Total Dose Rate Contributed by Cask During Transfer to the Susquehanna ISFSI Site", 8/16/95 (Ref. 6.11) (1 page).

I PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET

'lept. PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of 5- Letter from Norman Eng, VECTRA Technologies, to Kevin Kelenski, PP8L, "Total Dose Rate Contributed by NUHOMS Transfer Cask During Transfer to the Susquehanna ISFSI Site," Vectra Letter Number 16-77-96-052 dated 5/21/96 (Ref.

6.12) (4 pages).

6- MICROSKYSHINE Results (15 pages) 7- MICROSHIELD Results (19 pages) 8- Attachment 1 to Safety Evaluation NL-89-002 (Ref. 6.17) (4 pages).

)

~ M

PPRL CALCULATIONSHEET

'lept. PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026

>ate 10/2/96 IVlax Offsite Dose Rate 0 'ev.

Designed By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other. Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of 1.0 OBJECTIVE The purpose of this calculation is to determine the maximum dose rate (mrem/hr) in unrestricted areas from transport to and storage of spent nuclear fuel at the proposed location of the SSES Independent Spent Fuel Storage Installation (ISFSI) to assure compliance with 10CFR f20.1301 (Ref. 6.2). Dose rates calculated herein include contributions from ISFSI storage and transport on-site, shine from the turbine building under full power hydrogen water chemistry (HWC) conditions, shine from the condensate storage tanks (CSTs), and Low Level Radwaste Handling Facility (LLRWHF) storage and transportation on-site. Also addressed, are the impact of the Temporary Laundry Facility and the DAW Reduction System Facility.

This calculation is prepared in support of the licensing effort for the proposed ISFSI.

2.0 CONCLUSION

S AND RECOMMENDATIONS Based on results herein, the maximum dose rate in an unrestricted area from SSES fuel cycle components, including storage and transport of spent fuel to the ISFSI, is 1.2 mrem/hr; this occurs at the fence to the south of the plant, the area of closest approach of the NUHOMS transport trailer to an unrestricted area. This dose rate is less than the 10CFR f20.1301 maximum allowed dose rate in an unrestricted area of 2.0-mrem/hr. Almost all of this dose rate is attributed to transport of a loaded NUHOMS transfer cask to the ISFSI; all other sources, including consideration of HWC, contribute less than 1% of the dose rate. It should be noted that the dose rate from the transfer cask is based on an assumed 10 year cooling time; reducing the cooling time for spent fuel to be transported to less, than 10 years would increase the maximum calculated dose rate in an unrestricted area, The maximum dose rate in an unrestricted area from transport of a loaded NUHOMS transfer cask to the ISFSI is 1.2 mrem/hr; this occurs along the south fence. The maximum dose rate in an unrestricted area from storage of the casks at the ISFSI is 0.02 mrem/hr, this occurs at the construction fence due west of the ISFSI.

The maximum dose rate in an unrestricted area from the Turbine Building including the effects of hydrogen water chemistry is 0.08 mR/hr.

3.0 ASSUMPTIONS/INPUTS The following assumptions and input are used. There are no assumptions requiring later confirmation.

PP&L CALCULATIONSHEET

')ept. PRDJKCT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By ~

Cycle Sources Sh. No. of 3.1 References 6.4.c, d, and e show a construction fence between the security fence and Township Road T438. Credit is taken for this fence in determining the location of unrestricted areas.

3.2 The transport path from the Fuel Handling Building to the ISFSI is assumed to be the south road around the perimeter of the protected area (Ref. 6.9). Access to the ISFSI is via the gate at the southeast corner of the ISFSI. Transfer to the railroad track west of the ISFSI (i.e. ultimate disposition of the spent fuel)is not considered.

3.3 Total dose. rate (neutron plus gamma) from a NUHOMS transfer cask containing fuel with a 10 year cooling time as a function of distance is provided in Table 3-1 (Refs'. 6.11 and 6.12). This cooling time is consistent with the assumption that the minimum cooling time of fuel to be moved to the ISFSI is 10 years (Section 3.21). This is the dose rate from a closed transfer cask during transport. It does not address local streaming effects when the cask top cover plate, ram access penetration shield plugs, and HSM shield door are removed. 'ccess 3.4 Total dose rate (neutron and gamma) from high-level waste storage in the ISFSI as a function of distance is provided in Table 3-2 (Ref. 6.10). The fully occupied 2010 Scenario loaded with base case fuel (10 year old spent fuel) and with theoretical limiting (design basis) case (5 year old fuel) are evaluated.

3.5 Transport of one transfer cask to the ISFSI at a time is considered. Simultaneous transport of low level radwaste to the LLRWHF or a second transfer cask is not considered /Ref. 6.9).

3.6 Dose rates from major Turbine Building components, the Condensate Storage Tanks, and the LLRWHF were calculated in Ref. 6.1 at a point 960'outh and 640'est of the Turbine Building, nominally the middle of the north fence around the 500 kV Switchyard (depicted as point A on Fig. 4-1). The results tabulated in Section 6.1 of this reference are summarized in Table 3-3 herein. Key assumptions from Ref. 6.1 are included below; discussion and justification of all assumptions is provided in the reference calculation.

3.7 Implementation of Hydrogen Water Chemistry (HWC) at a moderate injection rate is assumed. Based on discussion in Ref. 6.3, the N-16 source activities for the turbine/main steam components provided in Ref. 6.1 (i.e. no hydrogen water chemistry (NWC)) are increased by a factor of five (5.0). It is noted that the Ref. 6.1 source term of 50 pCi/gm was conservatively assumed to be 100% N-16 instead of 80% N-16 and 20% C-15. Implementation. of HWC is not expected to affect C-15; thus, this

'l PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET

'7ept. PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 rate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI & Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of assumption is still conservative. The NWC source activities developed in Ref. 6.1 and the corresponding HWC source activities are shown in Table 3-4.

3.8 Per Ref. 6.9, calculations for dose rate contributions from turbine component are to be based on 3441 MWt. Ref. 6.1, Section 4.4, states the effects of power uprate were included in the development of the source terms; this corresponds to a power level of 3441 MWt (Ref. 6.18).

3.9 The effect of local shielding, such as the concrete panels over the moisture separators, is considered herein. Shielding effects of intermediate equipment and structures are not considered except as discussed in Section 4.

3.10 The Turbine Bay Operating Floor geometry is shown in Ref. 6.1, Figure 1. This figure shows the overall layout and distances to the outside corners of the building. Location of individual components and shield walls is shown in Ref. 6.1, Figures 2 through 6.

The Unit 2 area is a mirror image of Unit 1; it is not separately shown. Distance to the .

dose points from each unit are separately considered.

Figures 1 through 6 of Ref. 6.1 will be used in Section 4 to develop the source to dose point distances in Section 4. These figures are provided in Attachment 2 for convenience.

3.11 Turbine component an'd steam source modeling is obtained from Ref. 6.1. This calculation considers the exposure rate contribution from the moisture separators, 42" cross-around piping from the moisture separators to the CIVs, CIVs, CIV~LP turbine piping, HP and LP turbines, and the HP turbine inlet piping. Unit 1 and Unit 2 turbine component sources are assumed to be identical, except for location.

Source models of the Turbine Building components were developed in Section 5.2 of Ref. 6.1. Those parameters that are used in Section 4 are presented in the following sections. Source densities and strengths are given in Table 3-4.

3.11.1 Moisture Separators (Ref. 6.1, Section 5.2.1)

The Moisture Separator is modeled as a horizontal cylinder located as shown in Ref.

6.1, Figure 3. The labyrinth walls are ignored.

MICROSHIELD (Ref. 6.1, Section 5.2.1 8 Fig. 3) geometry- Source at Side (shield wall along column G for dose points west of the Turbine Building)-

PPSL CALCULATIONSHEET

')ept PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1 026

>ate 10/$ 96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of L = source length = 67.29' 2051 cm T1 = radius = 163 cm T2 = iron shell = 3.18 cm T3 = (MS Ci to shield wall) - (MS radius) = 7.5'163 cm = 67 cm air T4 = concrete shield = 3' 91 cm 3.11.2 Cross-around piping (CAP) (Ref. 6.1, Section 5.2.2, Fig. 4)

Instead of modeling each cross-around pipe segment separately as a cylinder, the piping for each MS is modeled as an equivalent point source, located as shown in Ref.

6.1, Figure 4. A review of the piping drawings indicates all four Moisture Separators have similar piping arrangements; the detailed model is based on the west Unit 2 Moisture Separator (2B2T1 04B).

MICROSHIELD-CAP (Ref. 6.1, Section 5.4.1.2, Fig. 4) geometry 1- "Point Source- slab shields" T1 = 14.75' 450 cm (air space between source point and shield wall at column G)

T2 = 0.375" = 0.953 cm, steel pipe wall T3 = 3' 91 cm, concrete shield wall 3.11.3 CIV Piping Model (Ref. 6.1, Section 5,2.4 and Fig. 4)

Piping from the CIVs to the LP Turbines is depicted in Ref. 6.1, Figure 4. The N-16 inventory of the elbow as well as the horizontal pipe run is assumed to be in a horizontal cylinder of length equal to that of the horizontal run with its end at the outside edge of the partial shield wall Neither the shielding nor the scattering provided by the turbines

~

is considered in the skyshine calculations.

MICROSKYSHINE Parameters- CIV Piping L=10'=3m Radius = W = 0.52 m T1 = cover slab- none = 0 T2 = second shield = pipe wall = 0.375" = 0.01 m iron Y=7.8m Elevation of top of shield wall =

756.5'.12 Shield material densities used are those from the MICROSKYSHINE and MICROSHIELD codes:

Iron: 7.86 2.35 g/cm' g/cm'oncrete:

"pL~

ate 10/2/96 PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET PROJECT: SSES Max Offsite Dose Rate Calc, No. EC-ENVR-1026 Rev. 0 esigned By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. -

~ of 3.13 In Ref. 6.1, use of the center CIVs/piping (¹ 2 and ¹5) to model a set of three CIVs and piping associated with one moisture separator is justified. The CIV piping source presented in Table 3-4 is for one component, thus, the results of the CIV piping calculations are multiplied by three to encompass three components. It is noted that the point source model for the cross-around piping represents the total CAP source for one moisture separator.

3.14 Buildup factors are based on air (Ref. 6.1).

3.15 The dose rate 1200'rom the Condensate Storage Tank (CST) (i.e. 500 kV Switchyard)

(Ref. 6,1, Section 5.6):

IVIICROSKYSHINE 3.1EW mR/hr MICROSHIELD 4.2E-5 mR/hr 3,16 LLRWHF dose rates (storage only; does not include movement or inspection activities):

500 kV Switchyard- 2.1E-4 mR/hr (Ref. 6.1, Section 5.5.5) distance- 288.2 m = 945'Ref. 6.1, Section 5.5.2).

Security fence (*) due south of the LLRWHF- Table 3-6 (Ref. 6.13, Table 12-3)

• (Dose point B depicted on Fig. 4-1, not the Construction Fence discussed in Section 3.1) 3,17 The skyshine contribution from the Temporary Laundry Facility to the EOF/Towers Club is 7.071E-5 mR/hr, this was based on an inventory of 1.2 Ci (Ref. 6.15).

The maximum exposure rate estimated for a receiver at the one foot perimeter of the laundry facility is 7.94 mR/hr (Ref. 6.15).

3.18 The skyshine contribution from the Turbine Building to the EOF/Towers Club is 2.24E-4 mR/hr (Table 4-1b of Ref. 6.16).

3.19 The DAW.Reduction System facility parameters (Ref. 6.17) maximum inventory = 30 mCi, with a realistic estimate at one-tenth that amount (3 mCi total) maximum inventqry based on 150 bags each containing 200 pCi of Co0 with contact dose rate of 2 mR/hr bag dimensions = 38.1 cm radius x 76.2 cm high

0

/

PPBL CAI CULATION SHEET

'lept. PROJECT: SSES Gale, No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By Checked By from ISFSI & Other'uel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of 3.20 The dose rate equivalent (mrem/hr) was shown to be approximately the same as the dose rate (mR/hr) for the Turbine Building sources, CSTs, and LLRWHF in Section 6.4 of Ref. 6.1. Do'se rates provided by Vectra are mrem/hr; no conversion is required.

3.21 The minimum cooling time of the fuel to be moved to the ISFSI is 10 years (Ref. 6.9).

3.22 Condensate Storage Tank MICROSKYSHINE Model (Ref. 6.1, Section 5.6):

geometry- vertical cylinder source in a silo Y = Depth of source in silo = 0.01 m.

R1 = Distance between source and shield wall = 20.0 m'1

= Thickness of concrete slab cover = 0.0 m.

T2 = Thickness of second shield = 0.0 m L = = Length of source = 9.75 m.

W = Radius of source = 20' 6.1 m.

top of CST = 670' 32' inventory for shielding purposes per FSAR Table 12.2-29 (Ref. 6.19). Six 702'sotopic isotopes (Rb-91, Sr-94, Y-94, Y-95, Cs-140, and Cs-141) included in Ref. 6.19 are not included in the MICROSKYSHINE library. The half-lives of these isotopes range from 25 seconds to 19 minutes (Ref. 6.20). Further consideration of these isotopes is not necessary. Values are tabulated in Table 3-5.

Source material- water, density 1 gm/cc.

3.23 Refueling Water Storage Tank Parameters (Ref. 6.21):

diameter = 50' height

=48'.24 The dose points are assumed to be 6'bove grade.

PP &L CALCULATIONSHEET Rept PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1 026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~1 of Table 3-1 Total Dose Rate (n+ y) from NUHOMS Transfer Cask During Transport as a Function of Distance (1)

Distance from Cask Dose Rate (n+ y) mrem/hr meters feet 16.4 9.23 10 32.8 2.49 15 49.2 1.10 20 65.6 0.61 25 82.0 0.40 30 98.4 0.33 300 3.6E-3 450 6.1E-4 Notes:

1. Refs. 6.11 and 6.12.

Table 3-2 Total Dose Rate (n+ y) from ISFSI as a Function of Distance (1)

Distance Theoretical Base Case Limiting Case (mrem/yr)

(feet) mrem/hr 450 Townshi Rd. T438 3.42E-2 2.03E-2 1050 Townshi Rd. T419 3:77E-3 2.24E-3 1400 Towers Club 1.20E-'3 7.16E-4 1450 500 kV Switch ard 1.01E-3 6.03E-4 1600 NIMS Center 6.57E-4 3.92EQ 2763 Res. Sector 16 2.78E-5 1.67E-G Notes:

1. Ref. 6.10, Table 13.

PPBL CALCULATIONSHEET pt rate IIILIICb 10/2/96 PROJECT: SSES'ale.

Max Offsite Dose Rate No. EC-ENVR-1026 Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of Table 3-3 (page 1 of 2)

Dose Rates at the 500 kV Switchyard from the Turbine Building, CSTs, and LLRWHF (1) skyshine direct mR/hr mR/hr Moisture Se arators Unit 1 East 1.0E-5 NA Unit 1 West 1.2E-5 1.4E-5 Unit 2 East 2.2E-5 NA Unit 2 West 2.5E-5 1.9E-5 Cross-around Pi in CAP Unit 1 East 5.4E-6 NA Unit 1 West 5.8E-6 NA Unit 2 East 1.1E-5 NA Unit 2 West 1.3E-5 1.2E-6 CIVs Unit 1 East 3.2E-5 NA Unit 1 West 1.0E-5 NA Unit 2 East 5.8E-5 NA Unit 2 West 1.6E-5 NA CIVPi in Unit 1 East 1.4E-4 NA Unit 1 West 5.2E-5 NA Unit 2 East 2.2E-4 NA Unit 2 West 6.4E-5 NA HPT Unit 1 9.4E-7 NA Unit 2 , 2.7E-6 5.7E-7 LPT Unit 1 5.6EW 4.4E-7 Unit 2 7.7E-6 NA Note:

1. Section 6.1, Ref. 6.1.

PP&L CALCULATIONSHEET

'lept I ~16/ 96 esigned By PROJECT: SSES Max Offsite Dose Rate Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1 026 Rev. 0 from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of Table 3-3 (page 2 of 2)

Dose Rates at the 500 kV Switchyard from the Turbine Building, CSTs, and LLRWHF (1) skyshine direct mR/hr mR/hr HPT Inlet Pi in - Horizontal Unit 1 East 2.8E-5 NA.

Unit 1 West 2.1E-G NA.

Unit 2 East 6.0E-5 NA Unit 2 West 4.5E-5 HPT Inlet Pi in - Horizontal Unit 1 East 1.6E-5 NA Unit 1 West 8.1E-6 NA Unit 2 East 3.5E-G NA Unit 2 West 1.8E-5 NA Subtotal Turbine Buildin 9.4E-4 3.5E-5 CST 3.1E-6 4.2E-5 LLRWHF sk shine+ direct. 2.1E-4 Total 1.2E-3 7.7E-G Total sk shine+ direct 1.3E-3 Note:

1. Section 6.1, Ref. 6.1.

PP8 L CALCULATIGNSHEET

" pl PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 iate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of Table 3-4 N-16 Source Activities in Turbine/Main Steam Components Source Density N-1 6 Activity N-1 6 Activity Turbine/Main Steam Component (1) (NWC) (2) (HWC) (3) m/cc Ci Ci Moisture Se arator 0.44 51 255.0 Cross-around Pi in 37.0 5 CIV i in 0.0064 5.0 6 Notes:

1. Ref. 6.1, Section 5.2.

2. Normal Water Chemistry (NWC) inventory per Ref. 6.1.

3. Hydrogen Water Chemistry (HWC) a factor of five higher than NWC (Section 3.7).

4 Not applicable; point source.

5. Total activity for all cross-around piping for one Moisture Separator.

6. Activityfor piping associated with one CIV; the dose rates determined using this activity must be multiplied by a factor of three to encompass three piping runs associated with one moisture separator(Section 3.13).

PPSL CALCULATIONSHEET "lept. PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of Table 3-5 Condensate Storage Tank Isotopic Inventory (1)

Nuclide Activity Nuclide Activity Ci Ci Ba-137m 1.36e-04 2 Ba-1 39 2.56e-02 Ba-140 1.12e-03 Ba-141 4.72e-03 Ba-142 1.78e-03 Br-83 1.72e-02 Br-84 1 10e-02

~ Br-85 5.05e-04 Co-58 5.67e-04 Co-60 5.68e-05 Cr-51 5.66e-05 Cs-134 9.08e-05 Cs-1 36 6.20e-05 Cs-138 2.87e-02 Cs-1 39 2.91e-02 I-131 2.92e-02 l-132 1.36e-01 I-133 1.84e-01 I-1 34 1.45e-01 I-135 2.19e-01 La-140 6.12e-05 La-141 1.89e-03 La-142 1.23e-03 IVIn-56 2.97e-03 Mo-99 2.41e-03 Na-24 1.97e-04 Ni-65 1.77e-05 N -239 2.62e-02 Rb-88 2.13e-03 Rb-89 1.42e-02 Rb-90 2.03e-02 Sr-89 3.78e-04 Sr-90 2.61e-05 Sr-91 9.45e-03 Sr-92 8.54e-03 Sr-93 7.89e-04 Tc-99m 2.35e-02 Tc-101 1.32e-03 Te-132 5.40e-03 W-1 87 3.11e-04 Y-91 1.46e-05 Y-91m 5.11e-03 Y-92 3.44e-03 Y-93 1.71e-04 Notes:

1. Isotopic inventory for shielding purposes per Section 3.22.

2. Cs-137 has been listed as Ba-137m, because MICROSHIELD and MICROSKYSHINE attribute the 0.664 Mev gamma to the latter isotope.

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET

" pl PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1 026 sate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of Table 3-6 LLRWHF Dose Rates at Security Fence South of the Facility (1)

Exposure Source Exposure Rate mR/hr CD/SS Stora e: Direct 9.74E-4 CD/SS Stora e: Sk shine 3.39E-4 DAW Stora e: Direct 9.32E-5 DAWStora e: Sk shine 1.29E-4 LSM Stora e Outer Row: Direct 1.19E-2 LSM Stora e Inner Row: Direct 9.22E-5 LSMStora e: Sk shine 3.36E-3 Total 2 0.017 Notes:

1. Ref. 6.13, Table 12-3.

2. Total is sum of the individual sources; this was not provided in the reference.

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET P~. PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of 4.0 METHOD 4.1 COMPUTER PROGRAMS USED 4.1.1 MICROSKYSHINE, Version 1.16, Grove Engineering, Inc. Rockville, MD, 20850, 1988 (Ref. 6.5 and 6.6).,

4.1.2 MICROSHIELD, Version 3.12, Grove Engineering, Inc. Rockville, MD, 20850, 1988 (Ref. 6.7 and 6.8).

4.2 LOCATION OF DOSE POINTS Figure 4-1 shows the location of the dose points that are analyzed in this calculation.

This figure is a partial view of Ref. 6.4.a; the ISFSI has been added based on its size and location shown on IDCN 7 to this drawing. Distances from the sources to the dose points are provided in Table 4-1; the'se were obtained from scaling from these drawings.

Point 1 is located adjacent to the security fence south of the plant; it was chosen, because it is the shortest distance between the transport path and an unrestricted area.

The east-west location of this point is not critical, because it is minimally affected by the Turbine Building and Condensate Storage Tanks to the northeast and by the ISFSI and LLRWHF to the northwest. As shown in subsequent sections, the major dose component at this location is from the transfer cask itself. This dose point is conservatively shifted east-west to maximize each component of the dose rate in the following sections..

Point 2 is located south of the LLRWHF where the construction fence ends adjacent to the security fence; it was chosen, because it is close to the path of transit (i.e. the south road) and is close to both the LLRWHF and the ISFSI.

Point 3 is at the construction fence west of the ISFSI; it was chosen for its proximity to the ISFSI. It is noted that the construction fence is 104'est of the security fence (scaled from Ref. 6.4.c).

Point 4 is adjacent to the security fence north of the plant; it was chosen for its proximity to the Turbine Building. Although the ISFSI and transport of spent fuel is expected to have minimal impact at this location, it is expected to be the highest dose point from the Turbine Building,

0 PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET pl JlaaZaJI PROJECT: SSES Calc. No.

ate 10/2/96 'ax Offsite Dose Rate EC-ENVR-1026 Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of The grade elevation at the dose points is determined from Ref. 6.4.g and 6.4.h. Per Section 3.24, the dose points are assumed to be 6'bove grade.

Grade Elevation Dose point 1- 700'06'-

730'36'-

725'31'-

710'16'.3 SPENT FUEL Dose rates from transport of spent fuel in a NUHOMS transfer cask to the ISFSI and from storage of spent fuel at the ISFSI are based on calculations performed by Vectra in support of the project (References 6.10, 6.11, and 6.12). These sources are considered first, because, as discussed in following s'ections, they are the major contributors to the dose rate at the selected dose points. Other contributions to the dose rate are considered only as they impact the total dose rate. It should be noted that, although transport is the highest contributor to the dose rate at the fence, it is not significant to the annual dose to Members of the Public, because the transit time and number of transfers per year are small; evaluation of annual dose is beyond the scope of this calculation (see Ref. 6.16 for annual dose calculation).

4.3.1 Transport of NUHOMS Transfer Cask The distance from the transport path to the dose points is determined as follows:

Dose point:

1-48'rom outer security fence to edge of road (scaled from Ref. 6.4.f).

2-84'rom outer security fence to edge of road (scaled from Ref. 6.4.e).

3- The distance from the west fence of the ISFSI to the construction fence ranges from 342'o 348'scaled from Ref. 6.4.c). This is a minimum distanceactual movement of the transfer cask within the ISFSI and local streaming effects when the cask top cover plate, ram access penetration shield plugs, and HSM shield access door are removed are not addressed (Sections 3.2 and 3.3).

4-676'rom the center of the Reactor Building to the fence (scaled from Ref. 6.4.g).

This represents the nominal minimum distance the transport vehicle, as it exits the Reactor Building, would approach this dose point.

The total dose rate'from the transfer cask during transport to the ISFSI as a function of distance is provided in Table 3-1; this has been plotted for use in determining the dose

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET

" Pt PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 te 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate .Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of rate at other distances in Fig. 4-2. The maximum dose rate from transport of a transfer cask at each of the dose points is provided in Table 4-2.

4.3.2 ISFSI The distance from the center of the ISFSI to the dose points is determined as follows:

Dose point:

1-1450'conservatively use 500 kV Switchyard dose point identified in Table 3-2);

this is the nearest point along the south fence to the ISFSI.

2- 1190'scaled from Fig. 4-1) ~

3- The minimum distance from the center of the ISFSI to the construction fence is 450'scaled from Ref. 6.4.c).

4-1563'scaled from Fig. 4-1).

The total dose rate from the ISFSI for both the theoretical limiting and the base case loading as a function of distance is provided in Table 3-2; this has been plotted for use in determining the dose rate at other distances in Fig. 4-3. The dose rate from the ISFSI at each of the dose points is obtained from Fig. 4-3 and is provided in Table 4-2.

As noted in Section 3.4, the minimum cooling of the fuel to be stored at the ISFSI is 10 years, corresponding to the base case loading. Use of the theoretical limiting loading at the ISFSI affects the total dose rate only at dose point 3.

The total dose rate at each of the dose points from transport of a transfer cask and from the ISFSI is also provided'in Table 4-2.

4.4 TURBINE BUILDINGSOURCES 4,4.1 Dose Point1 This dose point is adjacent to the 500 kV Switchyard. A dose rate of 9.8E-4 mR/hr from the Turbine Building (Table 3-3) has previously been determined for a point 960'outh and 640'est of the Turbine Building, nominally the middle of the north fence around the switchyard, considering both skyshine and direct radiation (point A on Fig, 4-1).

This point is farther from the Turbine Building than Dose Point 1. One Turbine Building source is evaluated at dose point 1 to demonstrate that the difference in location and consideration of HWC is not significant to the total dose rate at point 1, because the Turbine Building dose rate is insignificant (<0.1%) compared to the dose rate from transport of the transfer cask past this point (1.2 mrem/hr per Table 4-2).

wl ate

~10/2/96 esigned By Checked By PPSL CALCULATIONSHEET PROJECT: SSES Max Offsite Dose Rate from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Gale. No.

Sh. No.

f EC-ENVR-1026 Rev. 0 of The largest dose contributor from the Turbine Building to point A is the Unit 2 East CIV piping (2.2E-4 mR/hr per Table 3-3; this is approximately 22% of the total dose rate from the Turbine Building, 9.8E-4 mR/hr per Table 3-3). This would be the largest contributor at dose point 1, because of the similarity in distance and direction from the Turbine Building to the two dose points. The skyshine component of the dose rate from this piping is calculated to demonstrate that the different location is not significant to the calculated dose rate at point 1. The factor of five increase due to the effects of HWC itself is not significant, because the dose rate is insignificant compared to the transfer cask dose rate.

MICROSKYSHINE Parameters- CIV Piping o 4 model per Section 3.11.3 frame ef reference: ~

~

~

4

+X: from east to west

+Z: from south to north shield wall is along column Gd (distances are obtained from Table 4-1 and attachment 2 figures):

X = 300' 3'9" + 27' 1'2" = 332'.1 01 m Z = 830' 9" + 72' 36' 54' 993' 303 m (based on CIV-5)

H = 756.5' 706' 50.5' 15.4 m R1 =R2=9m The dose rate at dose point 1 from the CIV-5 piping run is 1.0E-3 mR/hr (MICROSKYSHINE run 2CIVEPT1.SKY in Attachment 6); multiplying by a factor of three as described in Section 3.13 gives a total dose rate of 3.0E-3 mR/hr from the Unit 2 East CIV piping. This value is less than a factor of 15 greater than that of dose point A (2.2EQ mR/hr). Note, the increase is a factor of five for HWC consideration and less than a factor of three for location, The dose rate at point 1'from the Turbine Building can be estimated by multiplying the total dose rate at point A from the Turbine Building (9.8E-4 mR/hr) by a factor of 15; giving 0.01 mR/hr. This is <1% of the transfer cask/ISFSI dose rate at point 1; therefore, additional analysis of the Turbine Building contribution to the dose rate at point 1 need not be performed.

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET lept. PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. 'C-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of A second MICROSKYSHINE run was made to determine the effect of increasing the integration parameters from 5/5/5/1,6 to 20/20/20/32. The difference in results is not significant (1.015E-3 and 1.017E-3 mR/hr in runs 2CIVEPT1.SKY and 2CIVEP1I.SKY, respectively in Attachment 6). Thus, since the result is not significant for this case; the smaller parameters are used here and for calculations for other dose points.

4.4.2 Dose Point 2 Dose point 2 is in the same general direction from the Turbine Building as the 500 kV Switchyard (point A on Fig. 4-1) and EOF analyzed in Ref. 6.1. It is anticipated that the skyshine component of the dose rate at point 2 is bounded by that at point A, because of the greater distance. The Unit 2 Cooling Tower is in the direct path between the Turbine Buildings and dose point 2; it provides a partial shield for the skyshine component from the Turbine Building sources, further decreasing the dose rate at point 2 compared with point A.

The largest dose contributor from the Turbine Building to point A is the Unit 2 East CIV piping (2.2E-4 mR/hr per Table 3-3); this would be the largest contributor at dose point 2, also. The skyshine component of the dose rate from this source is calculated to demonstrate that the dose rate at point 2 is bounded by that of point A. The effect of the Cooling Tower is not considered.

MICROSKYSHINE Parameters- CIV Piping model per Section 3.11.3 frame of reference:

+X: from east to west

+Z: from south to north shield wall is along column Gd (distances are obtained from Table 4-1 and attachment 2 figures):

X = 1140' 3'9" + 27' 1'2" = 1172' 357 m Z = 610' 9" + 72' 36' 54' 773' 235 m H = 756.5' 736' 20.5' 6.25 m R1 = R2=9m The dose rate at dose point 2 from one Unit 2 CIV piping run is 1.SEE mR/hr (MICROSKYSHINE run 2CIVEPT2.SKY in Attachment 6); multiplying by a factor of three as described in Section 3.13 gives a total dose rate of 5.4E-4 mR/hr from the Unit 2

PP&L CALCULATIONSHEET pl PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other-Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of East CIV piping. The dose rate at point 2 from the CIV piping is slightly higher than that determined in Ref. 6.1 for the 500 kV Switchyard when the effects of Hydrogen Water Chemistry are considered (Table 3-3) and, as expected, is less than that at the 500 kV Switchyard with a consistent HWC basis.

Shielding by the Cooling Towers was not considered in determining the direct dose rate contribution from the Turbine Building at the Switchyard in Ref. 6.1; in addition the albedo effect was shown to be negligible. Table 3-3 shows that the direct dose at point A (3.5E-5 mR/hr) is <4% of the skyshine dose (9.4E-4 mR/hr). Fig. 4-1 shows that dose point 2 is shielded by the Unit 2 Cooling Tower from the Turbine Building and is farther away from the Turbine Building than dose point A. Thus, the direct dose rate is expected to be significantly less at point 2 than at point A. Thus, it is not necessary to calculate a direct dose rate at point 2.

The total dose rate at point 2 from the Turbine Building can be estimated by multiplying the total dose rate at the 500 kV Switchyard, 9.8E-4 mR/hr, by a'factor of (5.4E-4/2.2E-4); this gives a total dose rate at dose point 2 from the Turbine Building of 2.4E-3 mR/hr (the direct dose rate at point A is included for conservatism even though, as described above, the direct dose at point 2 is expected to be significantly less than at point A). This dose rate is <1% of the dose rate from transport of the transfer cask past this point (0.4 mrem/hr per Table 4-2). Therefore, additional analysis of the Turbine Building contribution to the dose rate at point 2 need not be performed.

4.4.3 Dose Point 3 Although Ref. 6.1 does not address a dose point due west of the plant, i.e. in the general direction of dose point 3, the magnitude of the dose rates computed for the 500 kV Switchyard are sufficiently small compared to the dose rate at point 3 from the ISFSI and transfer cask (0.024 mrem/hr per Table 4-2) that detailed analysis is not required for point 3. It is expected that the dose rate at the Switchyard bounds that at point 3, because point 3 is farther from the Turbine Building; the change in direction is expected to have little impact..

Based on a review of the dose rates shown in Table 3-3, the CIV piping, as modeled, is generally expected to be the major dose contributor. The Unit 1 East CIV piping would be the largest skyshine dose contributor from the Turbine Building at point 3, because Unit 1 is nearer the Unit 2 and the east piping has a larger forward scattering angle than the west piping, The effect of the Cooling Towers is not considered, MICROSKYSHINE Parameters- CIV Piping model per Section 3.11.3

PP&L CALCULATIONSHEET Pl PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of frame of reference:

+X: from east to west

+Z: from south to north shield wall is along column..Gd (distances are obtained from Table 4-1 and attachment 2 figures):

X = 1725'+ 3'9" + 27'+ 1'2" = 1757' 536 m Z = 0 m (conservatively assume dose point 3 is directly opposite the source)

H = 756.5' 731' 25.5' 7.8 m R1 =R2=9m

\

The dose rate at dose point 3 from one Unit 1 CIV piping run is 4.9E-5 mR/hr (MICROSKYSHINE run 1CIVEPT3.SKY in Attachment 6); multiplying by a factor of three as described in Section 3.13 gives a total dose rate of 1.5E-4 mR/hr from the Unit 1 East CIV piping, compared with 2.2E-4 mR/hr at point A. Thus, even considering the effect of HWC, the Turbine Building skyshine component of the dose rate at point 3 from the CIV piping is bounded by that determined in Ref. 6.1 for the 500 kV Switchyard (9.4E-4 mR/hr. point A). This is 4% of the transfer cask/ISFSI dose rate at point 3.

Thus, 9.4E-4 mR/hr will be used as the skyshine component of the dose rate at point 3 from the Turbine Building instead of calculating the dose rate from each Turbine Building source.

The only sources that are expected to contribute a direct dose component at dose point 3 are the Unit 2 west Moisture Separator and cross around piping; the Unit 1 sources being shielded by the Unit 1 Cooling Tower and the other sources by other components.

MICROSHIELD is used to determine the magnitude ef the direct dose contribution from the moisture separator. MICROSHIELD geometry 9, "Cylinder Source from Side-Combination Shields" (SAS) requires the dose point to be adjacent to the source.

Although dose point 3 is not adjacent to the Unit 2 Moisture Separator, this geometry is used to bound the dose rate at point 3 by assuming the dose point is adjacent to the north end of the Moisture Separator.

MICROSHIELD Parameters-Moisture Separator model per Section 3.11.1

PPSL CALCULATIONSHEET pl PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of shield wall is along column G (distances are obtained from Table 4-1 and attachment 2 figures):

X = 1725' 3'9" + 1' 7.5' 1737' 53000 cm Y = L/2 = 2051/2 = 1025 cm (conservatively assume dose point 3 is directly opposite the source)

The dose rate at dose point 3 from the Unit 2 west Moisture Separator is 4.8E-4 mR/hr (MICROSHIELD run 2MSWP3.MSH in Attachment 6); this is 2% of the transfer cask/

ISFSI dose rate.

MICROSHIELD Parameters- CAP model per Section 3.11.2 shield wall is along column G (distances are obtained from Table 4-1 and attachment 2 figures):

X = 1725'+ 3'9" + 1'+ 14.75' 1744' 53200 cm Y = 749'-(725'+ 6') = 18' 550 cm ~ ~

The direct dose rate at dose point 3 from the Unit 2 cross around piping is 4.2EQ mR/hr .

(MICROSHIELD run 2CAPP3.MSH in Attachment 7.

The total dose rate at point 3 from the Turbine Building is the sum of the following:

total skyshine dose rate = 9.4E-4 mR/hr Unit 2 Moisture Separator. = 4.8E-4 Unit 2 cross around piping = 4.2E-4 total = 1.8E-3 4.4.4 Dose Point 4 Dose point 4 was chosen for its proximity to the Turbine Building, It is nominally diagonal to the Turbine Building with respect to the 500 kV Switchyard, i.e. dose point A. The east CIV piping provides 38% of the dose rate at point A (1.4E-4 and 2.2E-4 compared to 9.4EP mR/hr from Table 3.-3). The west CIV piping would be the major contributor to dose point 4, because of the symmetry in the sources and the relative location of dose points A and 4.

MICROSKYSHINE Parameters- CIV Piping model per Section 3.11.3 frame of reference:

PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET W I. JlaaZaJI PROJECT: SSES Cate. No. EC-ENVR-1026 a ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of

+X: from west to east

+Z: from south to north shield wall is along column J (distances are obtained from Table 4-1 and attachment 2 figures):

Unit 1 west CIV piping (CIV-5):

X = 102'+ 9" + 62'3" + 32' 199' 61 m Z = 361'+ 9" + 72'+ 36'+ 54' 524' 160 m H = 756.5' 716' 40.5' 12.3 m R1 = R2=9m The dose rate from the Unit 1 west CIV piping is 3.5E-3 mR/hr (MICROSKYSHINE run 1CIVWP4.SKY in Attachment 6); multiplying by a factor of three as described in Section 3.13 gives a total dose rate of 0.011 mR/hr from the Unit 1 west CIV piping. This is a factor of 48 greater than that calculated at dose point A for the Unit 2 east CIV piping (2.2E~ mR/hr).

Unit 2 west CIV piping (CIV-5):

X=61m Z = 361' 9" + 72' 36' 108' 198' 54' 830' 253 m The dose rate from the Unit 2 west GIV piping is 1.9E-3 mR/hr (MICROSKYSHINE run 2CIVWP4.SKY in Attachment 6); multiplying by a factor of three as described in Section, 3.13 gives a total dose rate of 5.7E-3 mR/hr. This is a factor of 41 greater than that calculated at dose point A for the Unit 1 east CIV piping (1.4EQ mR/hr).

Based on the above results showing increases of 48 and 41 for the two major contributors, the dose rate at point 4 is expected to be less than a factor of fifty (50) greater than that calculated in Ref. 6.1 at point A; this is a factor of 5 for HWC and a factor of 10 for location: Multiplying the Turbine Building skyshine dose rate at point A (9.4E-4 mR/hr) by a factor of 50 gives 0.05 mR/hr. This is less than 3% of the dose rate limit of 2 mR/hr; thus, further analysis of Turbine Building skyshine is not required for this dose point.

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET P! PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of A review of Table 3-3 shows that the direct radiation component of the Turbine Building dose rate at the 500 kV Switchyard is small compared to the skyshine component.

Simplified models were used to bound the contribution from the cross-around piping and the moisture separators at this location. Per Table 3-3, the turbines provide a small contribution with respect to the moisture separators and cross-around piping to the direct radiation; thus, they are not considered herein.

MICROSHIELD Parameters- Unit 1 CAP model per Section 3.11.2 frame of reference:

+X: from south to north

+Y: from west to east ~

~

(the vertical offset is ignored) shield wall is north moisture separator wall between columns 18 and 19 (distances are obtained from Table 4-1 and attachment 2 figures):

X = -7.2'+ 54'+ 36'+ 72'+ 9" + 361' 517'15744 cm Y,.~ = 14.75'+ 3'3'+ 62'3" 9" + 102' 183' 5578 cm (note, Attachment 2 figures do not show detail with respect to location of the CAP relative to column K; the values used are typical of the west CAP).

Y,= 10.4' 10" + 21' 21' 32'+ 62'3" + 9" + 102' 250' 7627 cm T1 = 0.953 cm iron T2 = 37.3' 1137 cm T3 = 3' 91 cm The dose rates from the Unit 1 east and west CAP are 8.5E-3 and 5.8E-3 mR/hr, respectively (MICROSHIELD runs 1CAPEP4.MSH and 1CAPWP4.MSH in Attachment 7)

MICROSHIELD geometry 9, "Cylinder Source from Side- Combination Shields" (SAS) requires the dose'point to be adjacent to the side of the source while geometry 10, "Cylindrical Source from End- Slab Shields" (SAE) requires the dose point to be along the axis of the source. Neither is directly applicable to dose point 4 with respect to the moisture separators. SAE is used, since the dose rate along the MS axis is conservative with respect to the actual location of the dose point; SAS is not considered, because of the significant slant path in the east shield wall and floor. The dose rate along the axis of the source bounds that at displacements from the axis and

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET pl PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 date 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI & Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of will, thus, be determined. This model is conservative, because it ignores the additional distance and shielding afforded by the slant path.

MICROSHIELD Parameters- Unit 1 Moisture Separator model per Section 3.11.1 frame of reference:

+X: from south to north shield wall north of the moisture separator between columns 18 and 19 X = 67.29' 18' 3' 6.5' 36' 72' 9" + 361' 565' 17207 cm T1 = source length = 67.29' 2051 cm T2 = iron shell = 3.18 cm T3 = air space between end of MS and shield wall =18' 549 cm (Att. 2, Fig. 3)

T4 = concrete shield = 3' 91 cm (Att. 2, Fig. 3)

The dose rate from one moisture separator is 4.5E-3 mR/hr, (MICROSHIELD run 1MSP4.MSH in Attachment 7). This is conservatively multiplied by 2 to account for both Unit 1 moisture separators. Attributing the same dose rate to the west moisture separator is conservative, because of the shielding afforded by the turbines. Further detail is not required at this time, because this is a small portion of the skyshine dose rate at point 4.

The total dose rate at point 4 from the Turbine Building is the sum of the following:

total skyshine dose rate = 0.05 mR/hr Unit 1 cross around piping = 0.014 Unit 1 Moisture Separators = 9.0E-3 total = 0.07 mR/hr

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET pl PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of 4.5 CONDENSATE STORAGE TANKS (CST)

A dose rate of 3.1E-6 mR/hr was previously determined from the skyshine component of the dose rate at the 500 kV Switchyard (point A) from the Unit 2 CST, a distance of 1200'Section 3.15). Table 4-1 shows that dose points 2 and 3 are farther than 1200'o the CST; thus, this dose rate bounds the dose rate at these dose points. This dose rate is insignificant compared to the dose rate from transport of the transfer cask past point 1 (1.2 mrem/hr per Table 4-2). As shown in Section 4.4.1, the skyshine dose rate at point 1 is expected to be a factor of three higher than point A (i.e. 9.3EW mR/hr); this difference has no impact on the total dose rate at dose point 1. The direct dose rate at point A was previously determined to be 4.2E-5 mR/hr (Section 3.15); correcting this for the closer distance at point1 also has no impact on the total dose rate at point 1. There is no direct dose contribution from the CSTs to dose points 2 and 3, because of shielding from the Turbine Buildings and Cooling Towers. Therefore,'additional analysis of the CST contribution to the dose rate at dose points 1, 2, and 3 neednot be performed.

The distance from the Unit 1 CST to dose point 4 is 430', even though it is not expected to be a significant contributor, the dose rate from the CST will be determined, because the distance is much less than 1200'.

MICROSKYSHINE Parameters- CST model per Section 3.22 X=430'=131 m The simplified model, of the CST established in Ref. 6.1 cannot be used here, because an unshielded line-of-sight exists to'the dose point. This model does not explicitly model shielding beside the CSTs. As shown on Fig. 4-1, the RWST is between the CST

'nd dose point 4. A review of the tank dimensions shown in Sections 3.22 and 3.23 show the RWST is larger than the CST, thus, the RWST serves as a shield to limit the..

forward s'cattering angle from the CST and direct radiation. A shield wall will be placed at the center of the RWST (R1, the distance between the source and shield wall, equals the distance between the centerlines of the two tanks) to take credit for the widest profile of the RWST. The minimum height of the shield wall to eliminate the line-of-sight will be used instead of the actual height of the RWST to maximize the calculated dose rate.

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET

'I pt. PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 iate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of Dose Point 4- Ei.

716'hield H

Wall Y~

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Top of CST- El. 702' Not to scale R1 = 24'+ 29' 53' 16 m (Ref. 6.4.i)

Y/ (R1 + W) = Y1/ (X + W) (similar triangles)

Y1 = 71 6' 702' 14' 4.3 m Y = 4.3 *(16+ 6.1) /(131+ 6.1) = 0.7 m H = 0.7 - 4.3 = -3.6 m (negative H is above top of shield wall)

The RWST is 50'-32' 5.5m taller than the CST. This is larger than the value of Y determined above; thus, use of 0.7 m is conservative.

Z = horizontal offset of dose point from line normal to the shield wall. This is conservatively assumed to be zero to minimize the distance from the source to the dose point.

The dose rate from the Unit 1 CST is 1.1E-G mR/hr (MICROSKYSHINE run 1CSTP4.SKY in Attachment 6); this is insignificant with respect to the Turbine Building dose rate.

Dose point 4 is shielded from direct radiation from the Unit 1 CST by the north wall of the CST/RWST area (Ref. 6.4,i) and from the RWST (as described. above); and from the Unit 2 CST by the Reactor Buildings.

Further analysis of the CSTs for dose point 4 is not required at this time.

PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET pl JIRL1Kb PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 IYlax Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of I

4.6 LLRWHF Dose rates of 2.1E-4 mR/hr and 0.017 mR/hr have previously been determined for the 500 kV Switchyard and points along the security fence due south of the LLRWHF, respectively (Section 3.16 and Table 3-6). These values bound the dose rate at dose points 1 and 2 from the LLRWHF, because the present dose points are located farther from the LLRWHF than those previously analyzed. These dose rates are not significant compared to those determined from the transfer cask and ISFSI, 1.2 and 0.4 mR/hr, respectively (Table 4-2).

Dose point 3 is located north of the LLRWHF. Although the reference calculations do not explicitly address dose rates in this direction, the dose rates determined south of the facility bound those expected north of the facility, because of the greater distance from the stored waste to the outside walls, an internal 18" thick concrete wall between the storage area and the truck bay on the north end of the facility, and the symmetry of the assumed loading of waste in the facility (Ref. 6.14, Sections 4.2.5 and 4.2.8). Dose point 3 is 550'rom the northeast corner of the LLRWHF. The dose point at the security fence south of the facility is 135'rom the wall. Thus, the dose rate at the south security fence bounds that at dose point 3. Although the bounding LLRWHF dose rate of 0.017 mR/hr is significant with respect to the other dose rates determined for point 3, the total is well below the acceptance criterion of 2 mrem/hr; thus, additional analysis is not required at this time.

As shown on Table 4-1, dose point 4 is approximately 1730'rom the LLRWHF; this is greater than the distance from the LLRWHF to the 500 kV Switchyard (945'er Section 3.16).'hus, the dose rate calculated for the 500 kV Switchyard (2.1E-4 mR/hr) bounds that at dose point 4.

0

-PPSL CALCULATIONSHEET PL PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of

~ r 4.7 TEMPORARY LAUNDRYFACILITY Skyshine dose rates at the EOF/Towers Club from the Temporary Laundry Facility and Turbine Building are provided in Sections 3.17 and 3.18; the contribution from the Turbine Building clearly bounds that of the Temporary Laundry Facility at this location.

It is expected that the contribution from the Turbine Building would bound that of the-Temporary Laundry Facility at the dose points considered herein, because the distance from the sources to the dose points is comparable. As discussed in Section 4.4, the contribution from the Turbine Building is not significant at any of these dose points; thus, additional skyshine analysis of the Temporary Laundry Facility is not required.

The Temporary Laundry Facility is located southwest of the Unit 2 Turbine Building, Dose points 2, 3, and 4 are shielded by the Unit 2 cooling tower and the Turbine Buildings; the only dose point that is not shielded from direct radiation from the facility is dose point 1. As noted in Section 3.17, the maximum exposure rate for a receiver at the-one foot perimeter of the laundry facility has been estimated to be 7.94 mR/hr (Ref.

6.15); this would decrease by several orders of magnitude over the nominal the facility and dose point 1. Ref. 6.15 stated that this value exceeds that at 800'etween which the area outside the facility would be posted as a RADIATIONAREA; the actual inventory would be limited and shielding would be provided to meet Radiation Protection requirements. Therefore, additional analysis of the dose rate contribution from

, Temporary Laundry Facility at this dose point is not required at this time.

':3

PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET lept. PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1 026 J ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0

> Designed By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. of 4.8 DAW VOLUME REDUCTION SYSTEM The DAW Volume Reduction Trailer is located adjacent to the Radwaste Building. The inventory is limited to 30 mCi by the safety evaluation prepared to support its operation (Section 3.19). This is less than 4% of the inventory in the Temporary Laundry Facility (Section 3.17). Thus, the dose rate at dose points 1, 2, and 3 are bounded by the laundry facility. It was shown in Section 4.7 that the dose rate at these points from the laundry facility is negligible. Therefore, further analysis of the DAW facility at these points is not required.

The distance between the DAW facility and dose point 4 is over 200'scaled from Fig.

4-1). The inventory limit of 30 mCi is based on 150 bags each containing 200 pCi of Co%0 with contact dose rate of 2 mR/hr (Section 3.19). A dose rate of 2.143 mR/hr was calculated using the current version of MICROSHIELD (run DAW1.MSH in Attachment 7); this compares favorably with the value of 2.099 mR/hr calculated in the safety evaluation (Attachment 8). The safety evaluation modeled one bag as a cylindrical source 76.2 crn high with a radius of 38.1 cm (Section 3.19). Instead of modeling 150 cylindrical sources, a slab source is used. The slab is modeled as a cube with the same volume as the cylinder:

volume of cylinder = n(38.1) ~ 76.2 = 347,500 cm'ide of cube = (347,500)"'m = 70.3 cm A dose rate of 2.5 mR/hr was calculated using this model (run DAW2.MSH in Attachment 7);" The contact dose rate on the slab is larger than that of the cylinder, therefore, this model is conservative. Two geometries of 150 bags are considered, a 10x1 Gx1 array which maximizes the face toward the dose point and a Gx5x6 array to make the source more compact.

10x1 Gx1 array W = source width = 15

• 70.3 cm = 1054.5 cm L = source length = 10 70.3 cm = 703 cm T1 = source thickness = 70.3 cm X = distance from back face of source to dose point

= 200' 30.48 cm/ft + 70.3 cm = 6166 cm = 5170 cm

PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET 0 pt. PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026

,ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 esigned By from ISFSI 8 Other fuel Checked By Cycle Sources , Sh. No. of 5x5x6 array W = source length = 6

• 70.3 cm = 421.8 cm L = source width = 5

• 70.3 cm = 351.5 cm T1 = source thickness = 5

• 70.3 cm = 351.5 cm X = distance from back face of source to dose point

= 200'0.48 cm/ft+ 351.5 cm = 6448 cm = 6450 cm The dose rate 200 feet from the slab for these two geometries is .011 and .010 mR/hr (runs DAW3.MSH and DAW4.MSH in Attachment 7). Although a much smaller inventory is expected in the facility, a dose rate of 0.01 mR/hr is used at dose point 4 from this source (Section 3.19).

PP8L CAI CULATION SHEET Pt PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 M~ Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By Checked By from ISFSI & Other Fuel

,Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of Table 4-1 Distances from Sources to Dose Points Source Point Dose Direct Distance East-West North-South Point feet Distance feet Distance feet ISFSI (1) 1450 2 N/A N/A 1190 N/A N/A 450 N/A

'/A 1563 N/A N/A U1 CST 1410 N/A N/A 1710 N/A N/A 1900 N/A N/A 430 N/A N/A U2 CST 1090 N/A N/A 1550 N/A N/A 2000 N/A N/A U1/U2 TB N/A 300 830 Outer Wall N/A 1140 610 N/A 1725 580 3 N/A 102 361 LLRWHF 1280 1020 780 Outer Wall 570 190 550 II 3 550 4 410 360 1732 4 N/A N/A Notes:

Measured from the center of the ISFSI.

2. This represents the minimum distance from the ISFSI to the south fence; the distance from the ISFSI to the location of dose point 1 shown on Fig. 4-1 is 1700'.

3. Measured from the southwest corner of the Turbine Building.

4 Measured from the northeast corner of the LLRWHF.

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET

'< PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose'ate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of Table 4-2 Dose Rates at the Specified Dose Points (1)

Source Dose Point 1 Dose Point 2 Dose Point 3 Dose Point 4 mrem/hr mrem/hr mrem/hr mrem/hr Trans ort of Transfer Cask 1.2 0.4 3.6E-3 2 1.E-4 ISFSI base case 6.0E-4 2.E-3 2.03E-2 5.E-4 theoretical limitin case 1.0E-3 4.E-3 3.42E-2 9.E-4 Subtotal 1.2 0.4 0.024/0.038 3 6.EQ/1.E>>3 3 Turbine Buildin 0.01 2.4E-3 1.8E-3 0.07 CSTs 5.1E-5 3.1E4 3.1EW 1.1E LLRWHF 2.1E-4 0.017 0.017 2.1E-4 Tem ora Laund Facilit DAW Facilit 0.01 Subtotal 0.01 0.020 0.019 0.08 Total 1.2 0.42 0.043/.057 3 0.08 Notes:

1. In some cases, the values shown were not calculated for the specified dose point but shown to bound the dose rate expected at that location; in other cases scaling factors were developed to determine the v'alues shown (see Sections 4.4 through 4.7). Careful review of all of the results is required before they may be applied to other uses.

2. The dose rate for Dose Point 3 is conservatively based on a distance of 300'rom Table 3-1 instead of interpolation of the data.

3. Base case/ theoretical limiting case dose rates, respectively, from ISFSI.

4. Dose rates were not determined for the Temporary Laundry Facility. It was shown in Section 4.7 that these dose rates are negligible.

5. As discussed in Section 4.7, the inventory will be limited and shielding provided to meet Radiation Protection requirements.

6. Dose rates were not determined for the DAW Facility. It was shown in Section 4.8 that these dose rates are negligible.

PP8 L CALCULATIONSHEET

'lept. PROJECT: SSEII Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By ~

from ISFSI & Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of Figure 4-1 Dose Point Locations

)

M, o

(h8nes ~~ $ 4Rf" J

~~

I pZPINHS FcHct 8C

(

/ 4

~AC IAd+thdoldNl Sport Fuel Sots e lfNNSh 0

.)( ~ '

~

2

+ BM I

RQSLC'f I weHs ALl'TY t

uuvuCN~ C Note, points 1 through 4 represent location of dose points calculated herein, Points A and B represent location of dose points calculated in Ref. 6.1; they are shown here for reference,

PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET

>ept. PROJECT: SSES Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of Figure 4-2 Total Dose Rate (n+ y) from NUHOMS Transfer Cask During Transport as a Function of Distance (1) 10 E

Ql E

1 0

D 0.1 3

40 50 60 100 Distance(feet)

Notes:

1. Data from Table 3-1.

PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET ept PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. C-ENVR-1 026

~

~10/ M" ~

Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh, No. of Figure 4-3 Total Dose Rate (n+ y) from ISFSI as a Function of Distance (1) 4l 0.1

~ Limiting Case 6fBase Case E

0.01 0.001 A

0.0001 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 Distance (feet)

Notes:

1. Data from Table 3-2.

PP&L CALCULATIONSHEET lept. PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026

~1a Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By.

Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel

,Cycle Sources Sh. No, ~ of 5.0 RESULTS A summary of the contributions to the total dose rate at each of the specified dose points determined in Section 4 is provided in Table 4-2. The maximum dose rate in an unrestricted area is 1.2 mrem/hr along the south security fence, the point of closest approach of the transport trailer during transport to the ISFSI Almost all of this dose

~

rate is attributed to transport of spent fuel in the transfer cask to the ISFSI; all other sources, including consideration of HWC, contribute less than 1/o of this dose rate, The maximum dose rate in an unrestricted area from transport of a loaded NUHOMS transfer cask to the ISFSI is 1.2 mrem/hr; this occurs along the south fence. The maximum dose rate in an unrestricted area from storage of the casks at the ISFSI is.

0.02 mrem/hr; this occurs at the construction fence due west of the ISFSI.

The maximum dose rate in an unrestricted area from the Turbine Building including the effects of hydrogen water chemistry is 0.08 mR/hr.

6.0 REFERENCES

6.1 PP&L Calculation EC-HPHY-0518, "Dose Rates to Various Locations within the SSES Controlled Area: Fixed Plant Sources," Rev. 0, Issued 9/29/93.

II 6.2 10CFR $ 20.1301, Dose limits for individual members of the public.

6.3 Letter from J. L. Simpson, GE Nuclear Energy, to J. C, Pacer, PP8L, "Review of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Assessment of Impact of Hydrogen Water, Chemistry on Radiation Field Buildup,'1/7/95 (Attachment 1).

6.4 PP&L Dr'awings a, E-105151, Rev. 17, "Plant Location Site Plan'C-1) (including IDCNs 7 and 8).

b. E-105943-1, Rev. 14, "Finish Grades 8 Area Paving North Laydown Area'C-1401)

(including IDCN 4 and PCNs 96-0279 and 96-0390),

c. E-105943-1, Rev. 14, IDCN 5.

d. E-105943-3, Rev. 7, "Finish Grade & Area Paving West of Tower 2'C-1403)

(including IDCN 4).

e. E-105943-4, Rev. 2, "Finish Grade & Area Paving South West of Tower 2" (C-1404)

(inclu'ding IDCN 1).

f. E-105943-5, Rev. 6, "Finish Grades 8 Area Paving South of Tower 2" (C-1405).

J t ~10/ Qs PR: PP&L CALCULATIONSHEET OJECT SSES Max Offsite Dose Rate

't Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI & Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of

g. E-105004-0, Rev. 10, "General Arrangement Fence and Patrol Road'A-5).

h. E-105811, Rev. 10, "Finish Grades & Area Paving West Parking Area" (C-1030)

(including IDCN 4),

E-105789, Rev. 8, ""Refueling and Unit C1 Condensate Tanks- Plan'C-1008).

6.5 PP&L User's Manual Documentation UM-CDA-004 for MICROSKYSHINE Version 1.16, approved 9/30/91.

6.6 PP&L PCC-CDA-004 Production Computer Code 004 for MICROSKYSHINE Version 1.16, approved 9/30/91.

6.7 PP&L User's Manual Documentation UM-CDA-002 for MICROSHIELD Version 3.12, approved 8/30/91.

6.8 PP&L PCC-CDA-002 Production Computer Code for MICROSHIELD Version 3.12, approved 8/30/91.

6.9 Memo from Robert K. Barclay to Kevin J. Kelenski, "Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Assumptions Regarding Movement of Spent Fuel to ISFSI," PLI-82098, 6/11/96 (Attachment 3),

6.10 PP&L Calculation EC-ENVR-1024, "Susquehanna NUHOMS Site Dose Calculation'"

Rev. 0, accepted 11/1/95.

Letter from Norman Eng, VECTRA Technologies, to Kevin Kelenski, PP&L, "Total Dose Rate Contributed by Cask During Transfer to the Susquehanna ISFSI Site," 8/16/95 (Attachment 4).

6.12 Letter from Norman Eng, VECTRA Technologies, to Kevin Kelenski, PP&L, "Total Dose Rate Contributed by NUHOMS Transfer Cask During Transfer to the Susquehanna ISFSI Site, Vectra Letter Number 16-77-96-052 dated 5/21/96 (Attachment 5).

6.13 PP&L Calculation EC-RADN-0524, "LLRWHF-Calculation of Direct and Skyshine Dose Rates," Rev. 0, approved 12/27/94.

6.14 PP&L Calculation EC-RADNZ523, "Annual Dose and Exposure Rates to Walls for Operations at LLRWHF,'ev. 0, approved 12/27/94.

6.15 PP &L Calculation EC-RADN-1 022, "Laundry Facility C. R. 96-01 56 Dose Calculations,'ev. 0, approved 4/3/96.

'l Gate 10/2/96 PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET PROJECT: SSES Max Offsite Dose Rate

. Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 Rev. 0 Designed By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources. Sh. No. ~ of 6.16 PP8L Calculation EC-ENVR-1025, "ISFSI Fuel Cycle 40CFR190 Offsite Dose Calculations,'ev. 0, approved 10/2/96.

6.17 PP8L Safety Evaluation NL-89-002, "Dry Active Waste Volume Reduction System Safety Analysis," prepared by R. A. Stigers, PORC approved 2/17/89, meeting 89-027.

6.18 SSES Licensing Topical Report for Power Uprate With Increased Core Flow, NE-092-001a, Rev. 0, 6/92 6.19 SSES FSAR Table 12,2-29, "Condensate Storage Tank Source Terms."

6.20 Lederer, C. M. and Shirley, V. S., et al., "Table of Isotopes," Seventh Edition, 1978.:

6.21 Design Description Manual, chapter 40b, Design Description for Condensate and Refueling Water Storage System."

g 4'

PP&L CALCULATIONSHEET ept. PROJECT: SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 J ate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSI & Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~4 of

g. E-105004-0, Rev. 10, "General Arrangement Fence and Patrol Road" (A-5).

h. E-105811, Rev. 10, "Finish Grades & Area Paving West Parking Area" (C-1030)

(including IDCN 4).

E-1 05789, Rev, 8, ""Refueling and Unit ¹1 Condensate Tanks- Plan" (C-1 008).

6.5 PP&L User's Manual Documentation UM-CDA-004 for MICROSKYSHINE Version 1.16, approved 9/30/91 ~

6.6 PP&L PCC-CDA-004 Production Computer Code 004 for MICROSKYSHINE Version 1.16, approved 9/30/91.

6.7 PP&L User's Manual Documentation UM-CDA-002 for MICROSHIELD Version 3.12, approved 8/30/91.

6.8 PP&L PCC-CDA-002 Production Computer Code for MICROSHIELD Version 3.12, approved 8/30/91.

6.9 Memo from Robert K. Barclay to Kevin J. Kelenski, "Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Assumptions Regarding Movement of Spent Fuel to ISFSI," PLI-82098, 6/11/96 (Attachment 3).

.'.10 PP&L Calculation EC-ENVR-1024, "Susquehanna NUHOMS Site Dose Calculation'"

Rev. 0, accepted 11/1/95.

6.11 Letter from Norman Eng, VECTRA Technologies, to Kevin Kelenski, PP&L, "Total Dose Rate Contributed by Cask During Transfer to the Susquehanna ISFSI Site," 8/16/95 (Attachment 4).

6.12 Letter from Norman Eng, VECTRA Technologies, to Kevin Kelenski, PP&L, "Total Dose Rate Contributed by NUHOMS Transfer Cask During Transfer to the Susquehanna ISFSI Site," Vectra Letter Number 16-77-96-052 dated 5/21/96 (Attachment 5).

6.13 PP&L Calculation EC-RADN-0524, "LLRWHF- Calculation of Direct and Skyshine Dose Rates," Rev. 0, approved 12/27/94.

6.14 PP&L Calculation EC-RADN-0523, "Annual Dose and Exposure Rates to Walls for Operations at LLRWHF," Rev. 0, approved 12/27/94.

6.15 PP&L Calculation EC-RADN-1022, "Laundry Facility C. R. 96-0156 Dose Calculations," Rev. 0, approved 4/3/96.

PPB L CALCULATIONSHEET pL PROJECT: SSES'. Calc. No. EC-ENVR-1026 Bate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By Checked By from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Sh. No. ~ of 6.16 PP8L Calculation EC-ENVR-1025, "ISFSI Fuel Cycle 40CFR190 Offsite Dose Calculations," Rev. 0, approved 10/2/96.

6.17 PP8L Safety Evaluation NL-89-002, "Dry Active Waste Volume Reduction System Safety Analysis," prepared by R. A. Stigers, PORC approved 2/17/89, meeting 89-027.

6.18 SSES Licensing Topical Report for Power Uprate With Increased Core Flow, NE-092-001a, Rev. 0, 6/92 6.19 SSES FSAR Table 12.2-29, "Condensate Storage Tank Source Terms."-

6.20 Lederer, C. M. and Shirley, V. S., et al., "Table of Isotopes," Seventh Edition, 1978.

6.21 Design Description Manual, chapter 40b, "Design Description for Condensate and Refueling Water Storage System."

DO NOT WRITE ANYTHINGABOVE THIS LINE CALCULATIONSEPARATOR DOCUMENT NO. SC'-&&Vie /d~

(20 characters)

SFGTlON (1 0 characters)

DO NOT DUPLICATF SEE NUCLEARRECORDS FOR ADDITIONALFORMS.

pl ate

~ 10/2/96 esigned By Checked By PP8L CALCULATIONSHEET PROJECT SSES Max Offsite Dose Rate from ISFSI 8 Other Fuel Cycle Sources Attachment 1 Gale. No.

Sh. No.

EC-ENVR-1026 Rev. 0

~ of Attachment 1 Letter from J. L. Simpson, GE Nuclear Energy, to J. C. Pacer, PP8L, "Review of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Assessment of Impact of Hydrogen Water Chemistry on Radiation Field Buildup", 11/7/95 (Ref, 6.3)

GE Nuclear Energy General Eleetno Campany l 75 Conner Avenue, San Jose. CA 95125 Mr. John C. Pacer November 7, 1995 Pennsylvania Power and Light Co.

2 N 9th Street A2-3 Allentown PA 18101

SUBJECT:

Review of the Susquehanna Steam Electric Station Assessment of Impact nf Hydrogen Water Chemistry on Radiation Field Buildup'ear Mr. Pacer:

BillMarble and I both reviewed the two documents supplied by the Pennsylvania Power and Light Co.. These documents were 1, SUSQUENHANNA STEAM ELECTRIC STATION, ASSESSMENT OF IMPACT OF HYDROGEN WATER CHEMISTRY ON RADIATIONFIELD BUILDUP, JOHN C. PACER, OPERATION TECHNOLOGY, JUNE 1995 and 2, HWC Evaluation for SSES, Radiation Effects, D. J.,Morgan, 9/22/95.

I called in early October, I believe October 13th, and had the opportunity to discuss with you our review. This letter report details our review of the referenced documents.

GE Nuclear Energy recommends to the BWR fleet the implementation of Hydrogen Water Chemistry (HWC) at the moderate injection rate. The moderate injection rate is defined as that amount of hydrogen to achieve a final feedwater concentration between 1.0 and 1.6 ppm. At this hydrogen concentration, in-'plant tests have shown that the Electrochemical Corrosion Potential (ECP) is reduced to < 0.23 V (SHE) in the bottom plenum, core plate and below. In high power. density plants the recirculation piping system environment will also achieve this chemistry condition. An ECP of <0.23 V (SHE) is recognized as a chemistry condition that wiH immune metal components &om Intergrannular Stress Corrosion Cracking (IGSCC) initiation and ifcracks are present the crack growth rate will be reduced to approximately 5 mil/yr.

Two subsequent side effects of implementation of moderate HWC are 1, increased Main Steam Line Radiation (MSLR) levels to approximately 5 times normal and 2, increase in shutdown dose rates in the dry well. The increase in MSLR levels may impact on environmental dose rates although this is very plant specific. This was address in your CALL IKh EC-ENVR- I 02.4 am e).: 0 PAGE NO.: I-z QF

evaluation and considered manageable. The,dry well dose rates are e6ected by the transport of radionuclides Rom the fuel surfaces to the pipe walls resulting Rom the change in vessel chemistry to a more reducing condition.

A review of the GE Chemistry Data Base shows the following for the Susquehanna Plants:

Feedwa erIr n ncentra i n Unit ¹1 10 ppb Unit ¹2 - 6 ppb, last cycle through March - 2 ppb ReactorWaerl i nc nt ai n h lan Fe 4 times fleet average Mn-54, - 4 times fleet average (both Fe-59 and Mn-54 were lower in Unit ¹2 when the source term was reduced)

Co-60i' 1/5 ofthe fleet average (this is consistent with other high iron plants, most likely a result of the Fe, Co spinel formed on the fuel. Co-60 could increase with a long term decrease in feedwater iron)

Co-60 ]+/ - normal to low compared to the fleet average "GE Nuclear Energy is for the most part in agreement with the summary evaluation of the effects that the Susquehanna Plant wiH experience with the implementation of HWC with minor exceptions.

l. Upon initiation ofHWC under the current chemistry conditions we feel that the dty well (piping) dose rates wiH increase closer to the factor of seven rather than the lower factor of three suggested in the report. The high crud loading resulting &om the high iron input will drive the dose rates and hot spots. The increase willbe driven by the transport of insoluble crud, the size of the crud particles wiH be small, possibly in the coHoidal range. These small particles can easily incorporate into the oxide Glm. Brunswick, with a history'f high iron input, had a similar occurrence because of the high crud inventory in the vessel. At Brunswick, during a mid cycle outage, crud was visually detected in the bottom of the annulus. It was planned to vacuum this observed crud during the next full refueling outage, during the subsequent outage this crud in the bottom annulus was not found.

Fast SFooOo 2FooOo + l/2 Oo Slow

'I

2. Long term mitigation techniques for shutdown dose rate control should include both feedwater iron reduction and introduction of depleted zinc oxide (DZO).

-was injected into the plants prior to HWC implementation one would If natural zinc expect an approximate 5% reduction in the overall dry well dose rates, the downside is the higher Zn-65 concentration. The plants could benefit by injecting DZO, however, with the high feedwater iron concentrations this is most likely not cost effective. Ifthe feedwater iron GE would recommend that zinc injection be initiated six months before HWC to is'educed, incorporate zinc into the crud. Cobalt is held much more tenaciously in the fuel crud with

, the presence of zinc.

1

3. With the implementation of moderate HWC a decontamination should be planned for after the first fuel cycle. This decontamination should be planned with'r without the implementation of DZO injection. There is a 50/50 chance that a second decontamination will be required, a contingency plari for a second decontamination after the second fuel cycle should be considered. Decontamination should not be required during future fuel outages.

4. The feedwater iron reduction is a necessity. Ifthe feedwater iron is reduced to 1-2 ppb, a test program to demonstrate the effectiveness of DZO could be run. Our data base indicated that the cobalt concentrations in the reactor water should drop 2-3 times with in a three month period after the addition of DZO. There are currently eighteen BWR's on zinc injection with twelve on DZO. Of the six plants currently on zinc but not DZO, four are strongly considering DZO. Several other plants are in the evaluation stage of zinc injection.

5. Decontamination's willbe required after HWC implementation, The experience at Brunswick with Citrox was not acceptable, very low DF's were obtained. Subsequently, Vectra (currently PN Services - Westinghouse) performed a series of decon tests with artifacts from both Brunswick ¹I and ¹2, these tests indicate that Citrox or Citrox-AP-Citrox is not as effective as other decontamination solutions. This should be discussed

, with the decon vendor. The Brunswick films were successfully decontaminated using a Lomi-AP-Lomi process. Fitzpatrick films were also successfully removed with the Lomi-AP-Lomi with a DF of approximately 12. The films &om both plants had even better DF's using Lomi-NP-Lomi. Hatch Unit ¹1 is planning to decontaminated several piping systems during their Spring 96 outage using Lomi-NP-Lomi. PN Services have recommended to Hatch the use of the Lomi-NP-Lomi based on the experience at the Brunswick Plant..

6. 'Hydrogen cycling has been shown to have a pronounced e6ect of the dry well dose rates. Laboratory studies as weH as, plant experiences have shown that resulting dose rates can be 25-40 % higher with sequent cycling compared to steady state HWC.

CaC. aO REV. NO.: g

.".C..-n . /<<,

PAGE NO.. I- y

7. MSLR levels willincrease approximately Gve time normal with the implementation of moderate HWC. These increases have or w'ill have varying degrees of impact on plants.

At several plants,'.e. Quad Cities, Dresden, Hatch, the impact has been minimal and have not required any plant modiGcations. Other plants have managed the impacts with administrative control, i.e. Monticello while other domestic plants have installed minimal shielding at speci6c locations on the turbine deck. Those plants that have are sensitive to the increases or plants are located very close to general population and have small owner controller acreage, i.e. Vermont Yankee, certain European Plants. In your evaluation the environmental dose rate increases were addressed and it was concluded that the increases were manageable.

Other than the above, we agree with the evaluation and conclusions that were stated in the reports. Any further questions feel &ee to call me at (408) 925-1106.

Sincerely, ames, im n Principle Chemist GE Nuclear Energy cc: BillMarble Marcus Urioste Tom Hurst

~. N).:of6&

CALL NO loxs A/e 4 VAGENO.~ i s;. s

-1 DO NOT WRITE ANYTHINGABOVE THIS LINE CALCULATIONSEPARATOR DOCUMENT NO. dC 8~V/P- /~4M (20 characters)

SECTION (10 characters) c4Cl

.AKr *-

AI DO NOT DUPLICATE SEE NUCLEARRECORDS FOR ADDFQONAEFORMS.

r~ W Vi. ~

~,,:

I

PPB L CALCULATIONSHEET

'.ept. PROJECT SSES Gale. No. EC-ENVR-1026 Jate 10/2/96 Max Offsite Dose Rate Rev. 0 Designed By from ISFSl 8 Other Fuel Checked By Cycle Sources Sh. No. of Attachment 2 Attachment 2 Turbine Building MICROSKYSHINE AND MICROSHIELD Models Figures 1 through 6 of EC-HPHY-0518

ffjLFena 2~ 110~ Calc. Ho.i OT-93-RKB-023 0IS, Al7$401.

Dept.

Date Te E'nv.Sv

-19 93 PNISYLPRIIS PNIR C t.CULATIO I LISRI SIIIIPSN S EEF IR II .~15 Design by PROSPECT MSE RATES TO VAR Sht.~5 oS-~

Apped by rN SES Reviewed ONT 0 RE Ã P U CE 0 ->

OI O e

~S O

TII IO ~ ~ ~

~

0 O

5 CO N ~ N ~ 0 V

~ Q 5

S o II W E7

~

e II Rs ESS II I Ol CO II C r o II RN It RN EO

~ RS STs II ~

ei Q ~

~ ~ II N II O II I I

os II R V

! C O

0 O

07 U

CI I

C I

E C

ce CO o oCL

~ II II II CO ~ II o ~

2 II

'll STR II v4 CL II C Ilr C 0 II I 0+ES EO Z 0 o-.j R CS 5)i Q~.k,4 N ~ LN ~

'+5 ++ ++ +E-~+~NS~.'+

0

PPQ. Fone 2454 ILLL~

CaC. 4978401 Gale. NO. 2 OT-93-RN-023 Dept.

Date Designe by

'.Sv Tec tlNIIYLVIIIIAtllllBI PROJECT CALCU OOS A I LIDI CIINPINI TO VAR iR 8 Sht. 56 D Applwve4 b LOCATIO T I T E SS S Reviewed AR

~

0

~

~+

MS lO

~ ~

4 iR ~

DI til ~ O OID ~ ~ D ~ D LCl 4 I ~D 0 CLL CO CL

,A %D ~ L 4 0 0 hOl N O.

~ C0 0

V V

L 0 0 al I

LLL C

0 0

~ ~

X8 g O W

~ g~t CLl m

Ol

+

LLL IL, I I II I I II I

CLL I I II C I I II I I II I I II cc CO LLL CO Cl I I II LO ~

I I

~ C O

II D LO t

~

C O V Ml OL ~

V II LLl V LO ol I I ~

oL C II LO LLL ~

C cL ~ C I I

~Q0 LLL Lll LLJ ~Cl I I ~ CS CJ II LLL ~ N O,W

~

4 LO CO 4 C V V I I 4OC  !

II 4 c CL W Chl 0 L-mV II VV O I I I ~ A II, V lLL 4 I C I

V c I I I I I

'l C c O LLL CL II I

I I

I II I I I I C V I CO C CO I I D

I Ir,.

~

~ ~

CIl CO R Xo OI C0

'D4 Chl 4 4

/~

~ H 'Aml M ~

PPaL Forts 2454 llOI522 Cot. f97540% Gale. Ho.: OT-93-RKB-023 Dept.

Date

'IYIIYYLPMIIA

.Te I9 93 AL PIIIIMI IO

\ LIAMI SHE YIIHPARY IR H .~H Designe by PROJECT OOS RAT S TO VA U Sht.~MM ApiH eved b LOCA 0 S MITHIN T ES Reviewed R SO Figure 3 Moisture Separator Model

~ ~

~ ~ ~

~ 40 :37: ~ 34. Unit 2 N W 0

~ ~

.'18 24 Unit 1 N +-

54' a o o r Q

P

1. ~ M

~ ~ 0.40 ~ e ~

27M

<<.21 ~

~ ~

~ TReM

--Qs

~ ~

-+.'5 '.+- ~PMSo~

I Top View I I

~

0

+-'+-~

~

I

~

~

Qs, R~ qM2r 5M% ~ ~ 8L 22e GALS ver. NXe 0 5'fvR-8W~ z eR 25'2o P)OE No.: 2 )OF 7 0 0 ~ 2L fre

~ ~ e o o o ~ ~ o ~ 2L 72e oieCure Separator Steel Shell Cr'oes Seotion- South looking North Oiagraas Not to Seals Coluan Lines 'Ciroled

tMLfare 2C54 110%%

C8L C$ 75401 Cafe. Ro.i OT-93-RKB23 Dept.

Date v Sv 19 93 PKNSYLVNlA POMMER i Ll6N CONPNY ER Ho. 565 LC Oesigne .by ApiHeved by PROJECT DOS Hl T S R Sht.~ttf Reviewed Figure 4 Cross-around Piping/ CIV Morsel "34'

~ ~

. . 39.'  : 37.' Unit 2 N+

~ ~

40.'I8 19 23 Unit +.

24. 1 N

,'+-

~ 8a Cg ~

i aa 87aea Cga I

17 a C17oe C1'C ~ 1 Cleo I

.~

~ '~

I CAt 888t80 at. ~

CCa f8181 ~

~+- W

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ o ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ \ ~ o ~ ~

q Turbine Top View G ~ o o ~ ~ ~ o CAP 888tC ~ ~ olaf I~

o ~ o at 788 X o o o ~ ~ ~ ~ o toCL 788 14o75' '+-1O.C CALL CMVR-N40 ~>z, PhGK NO.1 g -~ OF,7 o ~ ~ L 78e Cl7 Cl. a. 7CCal cIV

~ o ~ ~ ~ ~

lang 78e Croaa Seotion- South Loo11ing North Q f agraaa Hot to Soala Coluan Linea Ci1 oolad Sea Pfgura 3 for Wall Oiaanakona

PPlL Facts 2454 (1044 CeL lll$

Dept.

Oato 40'I Designed by ApIHeve4 by Rev)cued PBBNLPNIIR VIVVI PROJECT 0 7 IONS C

DOS COLA I I LILNV VVRPNN RATES T VAR I TH H

IR II .~

Calc. No.c OT-93-RKB-023 RIht. 59 Of~

5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Oe Q...l: 4-..

8 )R O +- ~ 0 Npr II I

II CJ II II II II 0 0 0 0 0 .IL

+a II II II

~ 0 $ -. II

~ 0 0 ~ NQ Q~

C 0

V C5 0

O L

~

a

~ C

~g

~

f tO 0 ~ 0 0 0 C9 II h~

oil e e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 mal ~~ ce II CO II th 0 e 0~00 coro I)0 J ~ II e 0 0 yr 0 II n +... ~ ~ I 0

t 8 C~ Jg4 ~VR. ]O~g 0 0 0 orr RKK Ill PAGE Ho.s Q ]of

~ g pF

WJ WOL Fera a4a4 CsL delSi0$

0 pi.

Oate Oeskgned peeved Revj end b

IlQNI y

v 19~ S HNHllLVNll~ PNEI PROJECT TR CA 00 ULAT 0 R

SHE VAR OURCE ER II .~

Calc. Ho. t QT-93-RKB-023 I LISNT CIINPNf Sht.~a~

Figure 6 HPT Inlet Piping Geometry Q. f-e t

I o ~ r e dL 704 1D'10 6'~+ 19'0.5'.

~a~ 45~~ 107'~

~

~

75'L Vdd'rose sdctioa- south looking Horth Hote ~ a + ra41ue of ~ lbow < 42 (Sectioa do 15)

Ref ereacea!

ooood ~ c.ISO ahd c-do2 5+2$

0+20 sdo't104 Seoe7

<ALL N4 REV. NO.c y

~VR. 1 PAGE No,)g PF 7

niagraaa Not to Scale coluaa Liaea circled

'b lp