ML18040A220

Semiannual Radioactive Effluent Release Rept Jul-Dec 1993

ML18040A220
Person / Time
Site:	Nine Mile Point
Issue date:	12/31/1993
From:	NIAGARA MOHAWK POWER CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML18040A221	List: ML18040A220 ML18041A024
References
NUDOCS 9403140244
Download: ML18040A220 (80)

Text

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION - UNIT 2 SEMI-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT JULY - DECEMBER 1993 NIAGARA MOHAWKPOWER CORPORA TION

"- 940Z1eOZ 44 9oo22s;,'

'-,'DR,

.ADOCK:.05000410

-.= '-

". w,

~ 'PDR'r'.

1

~

q a,t

Page 1 of 2 NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION - UNIT 2 SEMI-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT JULY - DECEMBER 1993

~Fi~ili:

Nine Mile Point Unit ¹2

~LI ~n:

Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation TE HNI AL PE IFI ATI N LIMIT A)

FISSION AND ACTIVATIONGASES The dose rate limitof noble gases from the site to areas at or beyond the site boundary shall be less than or equal to 500 mrem/year to the whole body and less than or equal to 3000 mrem/year to the skin.

2.

The air dose from noble gases released in gaseous effluents from the Nine Mile Point 2 Station to areas at or beyond the site boundary shall be limited during any calendar quarter to less than or equal to 5 mrad for gamma radiation and less than or equal to 10 mrad for beta radiation and during any calendar year to less than or equal to 10 mrad for gamma radiation and less than or equal to 20 mrad for beta radiation.

BRC)

TRITIUM, IODINES AND PARTICULATES, HALF LIVES ) 8 DAYS The dose rate limit of Iodine-131, Iodine-133, Tritium and all radionuclides in particulate form with half-lives greater than eight days, released in gaseous effluents from the site to areas at or beyond the site boundary, shall be less than or equal to 1500 mrem/year to any organ.

The dose to a member of the public from Iodine-131, Iodine-133, Tritium and all radionuclides in particulate form with half lives greater than eight days as part of gaseous effluents.released from the Nine Mile Point 2 Station to areas at or beyond the site boundary shall be limited during any calendar quarter to less than or equal to 7.5 mrem to any organ and, during any calendar year to less than or equal to 15 mrem to any organ.

D)

LIQUID EFFLUENTS The concentration of radioactive material released in liquid effluents to unrestricted areas shall be limited to the concentrations specified in 10 CFR Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, Column 2 for radionuclides other than dissolved or entrained noble gases.

For dissolved or entrained noble gases, the concentration shall be limited to 2E-04 microcuries/ml total activity.

004447 LL

Page 2of 2 D)

LIQUID EFFLUENTS (Cont'd) 2.

The dose or dose commitment to a member of the public from radioactive materials in liquid effluents released from Nine Mile Point Unit 2 to unrestricted areas shall be limited during any calendar quarter to less than or equal to 1.5 mrem to the whole body and to less than or equal to 5 mrem to any organ, and during any calendar year to less than or equal to 3 mrem to the whole body and to less than or equal to 10 mrem to any organ.

2, MEA REMENT AND APPR XIMATI N F T TAL RADI ACTIVITY Described below are the normal methods used to measure or approximate the total radioactivity and radionuclide composition in effluents.

A)

FISSION AND ACTIVATIONGASES Noble gas effluent activity is determined by on-line gamma spectroscopic monitoring (intrinsic germanium crystal) of an isokinetic sample stream.

8)

IODINES Iodine effluent activity is determined by gamma spectroscopic analysis (at least weekly) of charcoal cartridges sampled from an isokinetic sample stream.

C)

PARTICULATES Activityreleased is determined by gamma spectroscopic analysis (at least weekly) of particulate filters sampled from an isokinetic sample stream.

D)

TRITIUM Tritium effluent activity is measured by liquid scintillation or gas proportional counting of monthly samples taken with an air sparging/water trap apparatus.

E)

LIQUID EFFLUENTS Isotopic Analysis of a representative sample of each batch.

F)

SOLID EFFLUENTS Isotopic contents of waste shipments are determined by gamma spectroscopy analyses and water content estimates of a representative sample of each batch.

Scaling factors established from primary composite sample analyses conducted off-site are applied, where appropriate, to find estimated concentration of non-gamma emitters.

For low activity trash shipments, curie content is estimated by dose rate measurement and application of appropriate scaling factors.

004447LL

ATTACHMENT 11 Summary Data Page 1 of 2 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Uquld Effiuents:

Maximum Permissible Concentration - yCI/ml 10CFR20, Appendix 8, Table II, Column 2 Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 Average MPC (Qtr.+3

~ ~/A Average MPC(Qtr.+4

~ 2.39E-03 Average Energy (Fission and Activation gases-Mev):

Uquid:

Qtr. 3 Qtr. 4 Ey

~ 6.89E-01 E~ ~ 1.03E+00 Ey

~ 1.01E+00 6q 6.59E-01 Number of batch releases 37 Total time period for batch releases (hrs) 1.27E+02 Maximum time period for a batch release (hrs):

3.55E+00 Average time period for a batch release (hrs):

3.43E+00 Minimum time period for a batch release (hrs):

3.23E+00 Total volume of water used to dilute the liquid effluent during release period (L) 8.33E+ 08 Total volume of water used to dilute the liquid effluent during reporting period (L) 1.44E+ 10 Note:

Since there were no releasee during the third quarter, only fourth quarter dilution flow is reported.

UNIT 1 (OIVLYJ Gaseous (Emergency Condenser Vent):

Not Applicable for Unit 2.

Number of batch releases Total time period for batch releases (hrs)

~NA

~NA Maximum time period for a batch release (hrs):

~NA Average time period for a batch release (hrs):

~NA Minimum time period for a batch release (hrs):

N/A Gaseous (Primary Containment Purge):

Number of batch releases Total time period for batch releases (hrs) 3 3.89E+ 01 Maximum time period for a batch release (hrs):

1.49E+01 Average time period for a batch release (hrs):

1.30E+01 Minimum time period for a batch release (hrs):

1.20E+01 An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has indicated a potential for a discrepancy in tho data results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Milo Point have been informed end corrective actions initiated. Futuro Semi. annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will reflect any changes as a result of.

this technical evaluation.

004447 LL

~

~

ATTACHMENT1 Summary Data Page 20f 2 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 Abnormal Releases:

There were no abnormal releases during the reporting period.

'A.

Uqulds:

Number of releases 0

B.

Gaseous:

Total activity released

~NA Ci Number of releases 0

Total activity released

~NA Ci 004447LL

0 l

I

ATTACHMENT21 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 GASEOUS EFFLUENTS - SUMMATION OF ALLRELEASES ELEVATEDAND GROUND LEVEL

'3" QUARTER 4A EST. TOTAL QUARTER

~ERROR D.

Fission 8i Activation sses 1.

Total release 2.

Average release rate lodines 1.

Total Iodine-131 2.

Average release rate for period E rEeet teee 1.

Particulates with half-lives )8 days 2.

Average release rate for period 3.

Gross alpha radioactivity

~Tritiu 1.

Total release 2.

Average release rate for period Percent of Tech. S ec. Liinits Fission and Activation Gases Percent of Quarterly Gamma AirDose Umit (5 mrem)

Percent of Quarterly Beta Air Dose Umit (10 mrem)

Percent of Annual Gamma AirDose Umit to Date (10 mrem)

Percent of Annual Beta Air Dose Umit to Date (20 mrem)

Percent of Whole Body Dose Rate Umit (500 mrem/yr)

Percent of Skin Dose Rate Umit (3000 mrem/yr)

Tritium lodines and Particulates with half-lives rester than 8 da s

Percent of Quarterly Dose Limit (7.5 mrem)

Percent of Annual Dose Umit (15 mrem)

Percent of Organ Dose Rate Limit (1500 mrem/yr)

Ci yCI/sec Ci pCI/sec Ci

/rCI/sec Cl Ci

/rCI/sec 6.59E-05 6.15E-05 8.29E-OS 7.73E-06 5.07E-04 2.90E-03 6.38E-05 3.65E-04 4.99E-05 2.50E-05 3.34E+ 01 7.99E+ 00 4.20E+ 00 1.00E+ 00 3.20E-01 1.61E-01 2.28E-02 4.97E-03 1.76E-01 2.57E-01 1.15E-02 1.40E-02 1.21E-02 6.13E-03 2.63E-03 1.25E-03 3.01E-02 2.24E-02 3.30E-02 4.42E-02 5.97E-04 4.44E-04 2.00E+ 02 6.79E+ 01 2.52E+ 01 8.54E+ 00 5.00E+01 3.00E+01 3.00E+01 2.50E+01 5.00E+01 An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has indicated a potential for a discrepancy in the data results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Mile Point have been informed and corrective actions initiated. Future Semi-annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will reflect any changes as a result of this technical evaluation.

Iron-55, and Strontium results were not received from the off-site vendor at the time of this report. These numbers include estimates, and actual numbers will be provided in the next Semi-Annual Report.

004447LL

ATTACHMENT31 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 GASEOUS EFFLUENTS - ELEVATED RELEASE CONTINUOUS MODE Nucildes Released Fission Gassss Argon-41 Krypton-85 Krypton-85m Krypton-87 Krypton-88 Xenon-127 Xenon-133 Xenon-133m Xenon-135 Xenon-135m Xenon-137 Xenon-138 lodiness Iodine-131 Iodine-133 Iodine-135 Particulatsss's Strontium-89 Strontium-90 Cesium-134 Cesium-137 Cobalt-60 Cobalt-58 Manganese-54 Barium-Lanthanum-140 Antimony-125 Niobium-95 Cerium-141 Cerium-144 Iron-59 Cesium-136 Chromium-51 Zinc-65 Iron-55 Molybdenum-99 Tritium Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci 3"

QUARTER 1.08E-02

~ 0 1.40E-02 9.13E+ 00 8.07E+ 00

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 3.41E+ 00 1.B7E+01 8.65E+01 7.63E+ 01 5 39E-05 1.24E-03 4.84E-04 5.20E-07

~ 0

~ 0 8.14E-OB

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 0 ~

~ 0 0 ~

1.18E-05

~ 0

~ 0 7 735+39 409 QUARTER 6.64E-01 4.30E-01 8.18E+ 00 5.51E+00 00 0 ~

~ 0 3.14E+ 00 7.37E+ 00 3.65E+ 00 3.90E+ 01 6.15E-05 3.41E-04

~ 0 4.84E-04 5.20E-07

~ 0 1.91E-05 0 ~

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 1.76E+ 00 An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has indicated a potential for a discrepancy in the data results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Mile Point have been informed and corrective actions initiated.

Future Semi-annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will reflect any changes as a result of this technical evaluation.

Concentrations less than the lower limitof detection of 1.00E-04 pCi/ml for noble gases, 1.00E-11 pCi/ml for particulates, 1.00E-12 pCi/ml for lodines, and 1.00E-OB pCi/ml for Tritium as required by Technical Specifications are indicated with a double asterisk.

Iron-55, and Strontium results were not received from the off.site vendor at ths time of this report.

These numbers include estimates end actual numbers will be included in ths next Semi-Annual Report.

004447LL

ATTACHMENT41 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 GASEOUS EFFLUENTS - GROUND LEVEL RELEASES CONTINUOUS MODE BATCH MODE There were no batch releases during the reporting period.

3" QUARTER 44 QUARTER 3"

QUARTER 44>

QUARTER Fission Gases 2.

Argon-41 Krypton-85 Krypton-85m Krypton-87 Krypton-88 Xenon-133 Xenon-133m Xenon-135 Xenon-135m Xenon-137 Xenon-138 Xenon-127 iodjness Cj Cj Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci

~ 0

~t

~ 1

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~t

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 0 ~

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 Iodine-131 Iodine-133 Iodine-'I 35 Ci Ci Ci 1.20E-05 3.16E-04

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 Partlcujatess s

Strontium.89 Strontium-90 Cesium-134 Cesium-137 Cobalt-60 Cobalt-58 Manganese.54 Barium.Lanthanum-140 Antimony-125 Niobium-95 Cerium-141 Corium-144 Iron-59 Cesium-13B Chromium-51 Zinc-65 Iron-55 Molybdenum-99 4.

Tritium Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci 1.96E-07

~ 0

%0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 0 ~

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 0 ~

0 ~

~ 0 2.26E- 06 2.57E+ 01 1.96E-07 OO

~ 0 9.24E-05 1.57E-05

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 0 ~

~ 0

~t 0 ~

2.29E-03

~ 0

~ 0 6.23E+00 An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has indicated a potential for a discrepancy in the data results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Mile Point have boon informed and corrective actions initiated. Future Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will reflect any changes as a result of this technical evaluation.

Concentrations less than the lower limitof detection of 1.00E-04 pCi/ml for noble gases, 1.00E-11 pCi/ml for particulates, 1.00E-12 pCi/ml for lodines, and 1.00E-OB pCi/ml for Tritium as required by Technical Specifications are indicated with a double asterisk.

Iron-55, and Strontium results were not received from the off-site vendor at the time of this report. These numbers include estimates, and actual numbers will be included in the next Semi-Annual Report.

004447LL

ATTACHMENT51 Page 10f 2 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 UQUID EFFLUENTS - SUMMATION OF ALLRELEASES 3"

QUARTER 4>>

EST. TOTAL QUARTER ERROR A.

Fission & Activation Products 1.

Total release (not including tritium, gases, alpha>

2.

Average diluted concentration during reporting period B.

Tritium 1.

Total release 2.

Average diluted concentration during reporting period C.

Dissolved and Entrained Gasess 1.

Total release 2.

Average diluted concentration during reporting period D.

- Gross Al ha Radioactivi Ci pCi/ml Ci pCi/ml Ci pCi/ml No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases 1.16E-01 8.06E-09 2.23E+ 01 1.6SE-OB

~ 0

~ 0 5.00E+01 5.00E+01 5.00E+01 1.

Total release Ci No Releases 6.04E-OS S.OOE+Ol Volumes 1.

Prior to dilution 2.

Volume of dilution water used during release period 3.

Volume of dilution water available during reporting period F.

ercent of Technical S ecification Limitss Percent of Quarterly Whole Body Dose Limit(1.5 mrem)

Percent of Quarterly Organ Dose Umit (5 mrem)

Percent of Annual Whole Body Dose Limitto Date (3 mrem)

Percent of Annual Organ Dose Limitto Date (10 mrem)

Percent of 10CFR20 Concentration Umits Percent of Dissolved or Entrained Noble Gas Limit (1.00E-S pCi/ml)

Uters Uters Liters No Releases No Releases 1.53E+10 No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases 3.33E+ 08 8.33E+08 1 A4E+ 10 2.96E+ 00 1.83E+ 00 1.48E+ 00 9.19E-01 6.61E-02 0 ~

S.OOE+01 5.00E+01 S.OOE+01 An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has Indicated a potential for a discrepancy in the data results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Mile Point have been informed and corrective actions initiated.

Future Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will reflect any changes as a result of this technical evaluation.

Concentrations less than the lower limit of detection of 5.00E-07 pCi/ml for gamma emitting nuclides, 1.00E-OS pCi/ml for dissolved and entrained noble gases and Tritium, 5.00E-OS pCi/ml for Sr-89/90, 1.00E-OB pCi/ml for Fe-55 and 1.00E-07 pCi/ml for gross alpha radioactivity as required by Technical Specifications are indicated with a double asterisk.

The percent of the 10CFR20 concentration limitis based on the average concentration during the quarter.

004447LL

C

ATTACHMENT5 Page 20f 2 Unit 1 Unit 2 X UQUID EFFLUENTS RELEASED Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 Nuclides Released Strontium-89 Strontium-90 Cesium-134 Cesium-137 Iodine-131 Cobalt-58 Cobalt-60 Iron-59 Zinc-65 Manganese-54 Chromium-51 Zirconium-Niobium-95 Molybdenum-99 Technetium-99m Barium-Lanthanum-140 Cerium-141 Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci 3"

QUARTER No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases BATCH MODE 44 QUARTER 2.97E-05 5.45E-06

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 1.05E-03 3.39E-02 4.92E-03 4.49E-02 2.14E-02 8.81E-03

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 Tungsten-187 Arsenic-76 iodine-133 Iron-55 Neptunium-239 Praseodymium-144 iodine-135 Silver-110m Dissolved or Entrained Gases Tritium Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Ci Cj Ci Ci Ci No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releasee

~ 0 OO

~ 0 1.39E-05

~ 0

~ 0

~ 0 1.38E-03

~ 0 2.23E+ 01 Concentrations less than the lower limitof detection of 5.00E-07 pCi/ml for gama emmitting nuclides, 1.00E-05 pCi/ml for dissolved and entrained noble gases and Tritium, 5.00E-OS pCi/ml for Sr-89/90, 1.00E-06 pCi/ml for Fe-55 and 1.00-07 pCI/ml for gross alpha radioactivity as required by Technical Specifications are indicated with a double asterisk.

004447LL

ATTACHMENT61 Page 1 of 6 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 SOUD WASTE AND IRRADIATEDFUEL SHIPMENTS A.1 TYPE Volume (m')

~Actlvl (Ci)

Class Class 1.

Spent Resin 4.665+ 01 3.41 5+ 00 0

2.41E+ 02 9.195+ 02 0

Filter Sludge Concentrated Waste 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 Total 4.665+ 01 3.41E+ 00 0

2.415+ 02 9.19E+ 02 0

2.

Dry Compressible Waste. Dry Non-Compressible Waste (Contaminated Equipment)

Total 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 0

0 3.

Irradiated Components 0

0 0

0 0

0 An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has Indicated a potential for a discrepancy in the date results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Mile Point have been informed and corrective actions initiated.

Future Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will reflect any changes ss 8 result of this technical evaluation.

J The estimated total error is 5.0OE+01%.

004447LL

1

ATTACHIVlENT6 Page 2of 6 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 SOUD WASTE AND IRRADIATEDFUEL SHIPMENTS A.1 TYPE Container

~Paaka a

Solidification AAA at 1.

Spent Resin Filter Sludge Concentrated Waste HIC HIC

~NA

~NA

~Te A

~TB

~NA None None 2.

Dry Compressible Waste, Dry Non-Compressible Waste (Contaminated Equipment)

~NA

~NA

~NA 3.

Irradiated Components

~NA

~NA

~NA O04447LL

ATTACHMENT6 Page 30f 6 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 SOUD WASTE AND IRRADIATEDFUEL SHIPMENTS A.2 ESTIMATE OF MAJOR NUCLIDE COMPOSITION (BY TYPE OF WASTE) e.

Spent Resins:

Nuclide ercen (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(B)

Zn-B5 Cr-51 Co-60 Mn-54 Fe-55 Other 7AOE+01 1 AOE+Ol B.76E+00 2.00E+00 1.27E+00 2.04E+00 b.

Dry Compressible Waste, Dry Non-Compressible Waste (Contaminated Equipment):

There were no shipments.

Nuclide

~Percen c.

Irradiated Components:

There were no shipments.

Nuclide

~Percen d.

Other:

There were no shipments.

Nuclide Percent 004447LL

C t I

ATTACHMENT6 Page 4of 6 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 SOUD WASTE AND IRRADIATEDFUEL SHIPMENTS A.3.

SOLID WASTE DISPOSITION 8 mw II SC B.

IRRADIATEDFUEL SHIPMENTS (DISPOSITION):

There were no shipments.

Number of Shi ments Mode of Trans ortatio Destination 0

~NA

~NA 004447LL

ATTACHMENT61 Page 5 of 6 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 SOUD WASTE AND IRRADIATEDFUEL SHIPMENTS C.

SOLID WASTE SHIPPED OFF-SITE TO VENDORS FOR PROCESSING AND SUBSEQUENT BURIAL Below is a summary of Dry Active Waste that was shipped off-site for processing and bur(al by vendor facilities (i.e., ALARON, QUADREX, and/or SCIENTIFIC ECOLOGY GROUP) during Jul

- December 1993.

These totals were reported separately from "10CFR61 Solid Waste Shipped for Burial since (a) waste classification and burial was performed by the vendors, and (b) Technical Specification 6.9.1 requires reporting of Information for each class of solid waste (as defined by 10CFR61) shipped off-site during the reporting period. The information provided in this section, therefore, is in addition to that required by the Technical Specifications.

The following data represents the actual shipments made from the off-site vendors of our non-compacted commingled trash that was processed prior to burial.

C.1.

TYPE OF WASTE - noncompacted commingled trash shipped to Oak Ridge, TN for processing prior to burial at Barnwell, SC Burial Volume Activity

~CI Est. Total

~EIIOP 2.20E+01 1.10E+00 5.00E+01 C.2.

ESTIMATE OF MAJOR NUCLIDE COMPOSITION uclide Percent (1)

(2)

(3)

(4)

(5)

(6)

(7)

(9)

Zn.65 Co-60 Mn-54 Cr-51 Fe-55 Fe-59 Nb-95 Other C.3.

SOLID WASTE DISPOSITIONs 4.61E+01 2.67E+01 9.74E+00 7.93E+00 3AOE+00 1.75E+00 1.30E+00 3.08E+00 Number of Shi ments Mode of Trans ortation Destination 51 Blrnwell SC An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has indicated a potential for a discrepancy in the data results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Mile Point have been informed and corrective actions initiated.

Future Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will refloct any changes as a result of this technical evaluation.

The number of shipments reported here represents the total number that was shipped from the off-site vendor for burial. This does not represent the number of shipments Niagara Mohawk sent to be processed, nor doos it represent the operating history during July - December 1993.

The number of shipments buried represent what was actually buried by the vendor during July - December, but does not necessarily reflect the waste or D.A.W. that was generated during July - December 1993.

The vendor willawait shipment until a full cask is ready which means that NMPC waste can be commingled with other licensees'aste.

However, the vendor performs an analysis for each shipment to determine the volume and activity buried under each utilities'icense, and prepares a separate report for each licensee.

004447LL

I I

ATTACHMENT6 Page 6 of 6 Unit 1 Unit 2 X

Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993 SOUD WASTE AND IRRADIATEDFUEL SHIPMENTS D. SEWAGE SLUDGE SHIPPED TO A TREATMENTFACILITYCENTER FOR PROCESSING AND BURIAL There were no ehipmente of sewage sludge with detectable quantitlee of plant<elated nuciidea from NMP to the treatment facility during the reporting period.

004447LL

ATTACHMENT7 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993

SUMMARY

OF CHANGES TO THE OFFWITE DOSE CALCULATIONMANUAL There was one revision to the Unit 2 ODCM during the reporting period. This Revision 9 ls attached along with a summary of changes presented to and approved by the Station Operations Review Committee In December 1993.

The summary, also, includes a justification for each change.

004447LL

. ~

um ar of Unit 2 DCM Ch n D~~i~mn:

Unit 2 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual

~Ti I:

E~i Revision 9 to the Offsite Dose Calculation Manual Revision 9 to the Unit 2 ODCM was completed to comply with a milk location change in the environmental program.

In addition, various typographical and formatting errors were corrected in Part I and Part II, and section 6.9.1.8 was reformatted for legibility purposes.

The Bases section 3/4.3.7.3, from Technical Specifications, was copied to the ODCM in accordance with GL 89-01.

Until a Technical Specification Amendment is submitted to delete the procedural details of the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications, these procedural details willalso remain in Technical Specifications.

Attached is a summary table of the changes.

B~kk:

The Unit 2 ODCM contains two parts:

Part 1-Procedural details of the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications.

Part ll-Contains the methodology and parameters to determine gaseous and liquid setpoints for effluent streams.

In addition, the Unit 2 ODCM contains dose and dose rate equations and parameters for determining compliance with 10CFR20, 10CFR50 and 40CFR190, in accordance with the requirements of the Unit 2 Technical Specifications and Part I of the Unit 2 ODCM.

The revision is to both Part I and Part II.

Technical Review:

A Technical Review of the changes was completed by B. Zacharek and H. Flanagan, Environmental Group.

004474 LL Page i of 2

,0

Sum ar of Unit 2 ODCM Ch n (Cont'd)

Description Change/

~Ke Poin The changes are as follows:

i, 11~

111~ lv I 1-1 I 3/4 3-75, I 3/4 3-76 I 3/4 3-96, I 3/4 3-102 I 3/4 12-12 I 3/4, 12-14 I B 3/4 3-5 I 5-6 I 6-20, 6-21 I 6-22 II 25 II 59 II 63 105 (Figure 5.1-2)

Reformatted the Table of Contents and added the Individual Bases sections.

The word "CONTROL" is capitalized.

Reformatted the Tables 3.3.7.3-1 and 4.3.7.3-1 to match Technical Specifications.

Corrected format error on the "periods" to match Technical Specifications.

Corrected typographical omission of a letter designation in the equation for LLD.

Corrected a typographical error.

Changed the word "CONTROL'o lowercase.

This "control" refers to the type of sampling location, and is not the "CONTROL" referred to as a transferred "LCO" from Technical Specifications.

Copied the bases section 3/4.3,7.3 from Technical Specifications in accordance with 'GL 89-01.

Until the Technical Specification Amendment is submitted, the Radiological Effluent Technical Specifications along with their bases will, also, remain in Technical Specifications.

Capitalized the word "site" in accordance with the wording from the Technical Specifications, and changed the name of the Energy Information Center to the Energy Center.

Reformatted section 6.9.1.8 and changed single asterisk to double asterisk.

Added the word "also" into text to match Technical Specifications.

Deleted this page due to reformatting of section 6.9.1.8.

Corrected a typographical error.

Section 2.1 should be 3.1.

Added the new Technical Specification milk sampling location ¹73 to Table 5.1, and moved asterisk for milk location no. 46.

Corrected typographical errors on various parameters used in the sample calculation for liquid dose factors.

Added the new Technical Specification milk sampling location ¹73.

~Ah The Unit 2 ODCM - Part I, Part II 004474LL Page 2 of 2

ATTACHMENT8 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993

SUMMARY

OF CHANGES TO THE PROCESS CONTROL PROGRAM There were no changee to the Proceae Control Program during the reporting period.

004447LL

t

ATTACHMENT9 Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Jul

- December 1993

SUMMARY

OF INOPERABLE MONITORS There were no inoperable monitors for a period greater than 30 days during the reporting period.

004447 LL

ATTACHMENT10 Page 1 of 4 SEMI-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT (1993)

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 DOSES TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DUE TO THEIR ACTIVITIES INSIDE THE SITE BOUNDARY JANUARY - DECEMBER 1993 Doses to members of the public (as defined by the Technical Specifications) from the operation of the NMP2 facility as a result of activity inside the site boundary are controlled by activities at the Energy Center.

This facility is open to the public and offers educational information, summer picnicking activities and fishing. Any possible doses received by a member of the public by utilizing the private road that transverses the east and west site boundaries are not considered here since it takes'a matter of minutes to travel the distance.

The activity at the Energy Center that is used for the dose analysis is fishing because it is the most time consuming.

Although there is no specific survey information available, many of the same individuals have been observed to return again and again because of the access to salmonid and lake trout populations, Dose pathways considered for this activity include direct radiation, inhalation and external ground (shoreline sediment or soil) doses.

Other pathways, such as ingestion pathways, are not considered because they are either not applicable, insignificant, or are considered as part of the evaluation of the total dose to a member of the public located off-site.

In addition, only releases from the NMP2 stack and vent were evaluated for the inhalation pathway.

The direct radiation pathway is evaluated in accordance with the methodology found in the Off-site Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM) ~ This pathway considers three components:

direct radiation from the generating facilities, direct radiation from any possible overhead plume and direct radiation from plume submersion.

The direct radiation pathway is evaluated by the use of high sensitivity environmental TLD's. Since any significant fishing activity near the Energy Center occurs between Aprilthrough December, environmental TLD data for the approximate period of April 1 - December 31, 1993 were considered.

Data from two environmental TLD's from the approximate area where the fishing occurs were compared to control environmental TLD locations for the same time period.

The average fishing area TLD dose rate was 7.0E-03 mRem per hour for the period.

The average control TLD dose rate was 5.7E-03 mRem per hour for the period (approximate second, third and fourth calendar quarters of the year).

The average increase in dose as a result of fishing in this area at a conservative frequency of eight hours per week for thirty-nine weeks is 4.1E-01 mRem from direct radiation for the period in question.

The majority of the dose from this pathway is from the NMP1 facility because of its proximity to the fishing area.

A small portion may be due to the NMP2 facility.

An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has indicated a potential for a discrepancy in the data results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Mile Point have been informed and corrective actions initiated.

Future Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will reflect any changes as a result of this technical evaluation.

004447LL

ATTACHMENT10 Page 2 of 4 SEMI-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT (1993)

NINE MlLE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 DOSES TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DUE TO THEIR ACTIVITIES INSIDE THE SITE BOUNDARY JANUARY - DECEMBER 1993 The inhalation dose pathway is evaluated by utilizing the inhalation equation in the ODCM, as

. adapted from the Regulatory Guide 1

~ 109.

The equation basically gives a total inhalation dose in mRem for the time period in question (April - December).

The total dose equals the sum, for all applicable radionuclides, of the NMP2 stack and vent release concentration, times the average NMP2 stack and vent flowrate, times the applicable five-year average calculated X/0, times the inhalation dose factors from Regulatory Guide 1.109, Table E-7, times the Regulatory Guide 1

~ 109 annual air intake, times the fractional portion of the year in question.

In order to be slightly conservative, no radiological decay is assumed.

The 1993 calculation utilized the following information:

NMP2 Stack:

Unit 2 average stack flowrate = 4.40E+01 m'/sec X/0 value = 9.60E-07 (annual NWN sector, historical average)

Inhalation dose factor = Table E-7 of Regulatory Guide 1.109 Annual air intake = 8000 m'er year (adult)

Fractional portion of the year = 0.0356 (312 hours0.00361 days <br />0.0867 hours <br />5.15873e-4 weeks <br />1.18716e-4 months <br />)

I-131

= 1.64E-01 pCi/m'-133

= 1.47E+00 pCi/m's-137

= 3.69E-02 pCi/m'r-89

= 9.56E-01 pCi/ma H-3

= 2.60E+04 pCi/m'r-90

= 1.01E-03,pCi/m3 NMP2 Vent:

Unit 2 average vent flowrate = 1.05E+02 m'/sec X/0 value = 2.8E-06 (annual historical average)

Inhalation dose factor = Table E-7 of Regulatory Guide 1.109 Annual air intake = 8000 m'er year (adult)

Fractional portion of the year = 0.0356 (312 hours0.00361 days <br />0.0867 hours <br />5.15873e-4 weeks <br />1.18716e-4 months <br />)

Cr-51

= 5.13E-02 pCi/m'o-60

= 9.93E-02 pCi/m'n-54

= 1.56E-02 pCi/m'n-65

= 1.90E+00 pCi/m'o-99

= 1.25E-03 pCi/m'-3

= 1.13E+04 pCi/m'r-89

= 2A6E-03 pCi/m'r-90

= 1.61E-04 pCi/m'e-55

= 6.30E-03 pCi/m'04447LL

t I

/,

p g

~

y Ilk

ATTACHIVIENT10 Page 3 of 4 SEIVII-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT (1993)

NINE MILEPOINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 DOSES TO IVIEIVIBERS OF THE PUBLIC DUE TO THEIR ACTIVITIES INSIDE THE SITE BOUNDARY JANUARY - DECEIVIBER 1993 The inhalation dose to a member of the public as a result of activities inside the site boundary is 2.24E-04 mRem to the lung (maximum organ dose) and 2.00E-04 mRem to the whole body.

The dose from standing on the shoreline to fish is based on the methodology in the ODCM, as adapted from Regulatory Guide 1.109.

During 1993, it was noted that fishing was performed from the shoreline on many occasions although waders were also utilized.

In order to be conservative, it is assumed that the maximum exposed individual fished from the shoreline at all times, The use of waders, of course, would result in a dose of zero from this pathway.

The shoreline sediment doses are not taken into consideration by environmental TLD data.

The ODCM equation basically gives the total dose to the whole body and skin from the sum of all plant-related radionuclides detected in shoreline sediment samples.

The plant-related radionuclide concentration is adjusted for background sample results, as applicable.

The equation, therefore, yields the whole body and skin dose by multiplying the radionuclide concentration adjusted for any background data (as applicable), times a usage factor, times the sediment or soil density in grams per square meter (to a depth of one centimeter), times the applicable shore width factor, times the regulatory guide dose factor, times the fractional portion of the year over which the dose is applicable.

In order to be conservative and to simplify the equation, no radiological decay is assumed since the applicable radionuclides are usually long lived.

The calculation utilized the following information:

Usage factor = 312 hours0.00361 days <br />0.0867 hours <br />5.15873e-4 weeks <br />1.18716e-4 months <br /> Density in grams per meter = 40,000 Shore width factor = 0.3 Whole body and skin dose factor for each radionuclide = Regulatory Guide 1.109, Table E-6 Fractional portion of the year =

1 (used average radionuclide concentration over total time period)

Average Cs-137 concentration

= 0.295 pCi/g Average Co-60 concentration

= 0.031 pCi/g The total whole body and skin dose from standing on the shoreline to fish is 6.61E-03 mRem whole body and 7.73E-03 mRem skin dose for the period.

Doses to members of the public relative to activities inside the site boundary from aquatic pathways other than ground dose from shoreline sediment/soil are not applicable.

004447LL

r 4

\\

ATTACHMENT10 Page 4 of 4 SEMI-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT (1993)

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 DOSES TO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DUE TO THEIR ACTIVITIES INSIDE THE SITE BOUNDARY JANUARY - DECEMBER 1993 In summary, the total dose to a member of the public as a result of activities inside the site boundary from the direct radiation, inhalation and shoreline dose pathways is 4.2E-01 mRem to the whole body and 2.24E-04 mRem to the maximum exposed internal organ (lung). The dose to the skin of an adult is 7.73E-03 mRem.

These doses are generally a result of the operation of NMP2. However, a portion of these doses for the direct radiation pathway may be attributable to the NMP1 facility.

004447LL

ATTACHMENT11 ~

Page 1 of 3 SEMI-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT (1993)

NINE MlLE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 RADIATIONDOSES TO THE LIKELYMOST EXPOSED MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC OUTSIDE THE SITE BOUNDARY JANUARY - DECEMBER 1993 Radiation doses to the likely most exposed member of the public outside of the site boundary are evaluated relative to 40CFR1SO requirements.

The dose limits of 40CFR190 are 25 mRem (whole body or organ) per calendar year and 75 mRem (thyroid) per calendar year.

The intent of 40CFR1SO also requires that the effluents of NMP2, as well as other nearby uranium fuel cycle facilities, be considered.

In this case, the effluents of NMP1, NMP2 and the James A. FitzPatrick (JAF) facilities must be considered.

Doses to the likely most exposed member of the public as a result of effluents from the site can be evaluated by using calculated dose modeling based on the accepted methodologies of the facilities'ff-site Dose Calculation Manuals (ODCIVI's) or may, in some cases, be calculated from the analysis results of actual environmental samples.

Acceptable methods for calculating doses from environmental samples are also found in the facilities'DCM's. These methods are based on Regulatory Guide 1

~ 109 methodology.

Dose calculations from actual environmental samples are, at times, difficultto perform for some pathways.

Some pathway doses should be estimated using calculational dose modeling.

These pathways include noble gas air dose, inhalation dose, etc.

Other pathway doses may be calculated directly from environmental sample concentrations using Regulatory Guide 1.109 methodology.

Since the effluents from the generating facilities are low, the resultant gaseous and liquid effluent doses are anticipated to be low. In view of this, doses can be based on calculated data.

Doses are not based on actual environmental data, for 1993 with the exception of doses from direct radiation, fish consumption and shoreline sediment, In addition, in order to be conservative and for the sake of simplicity, it is assumed in the dose calculations that the likely most exposed member of the public is positioned in the maximum receptor location for each pathway at the same time. This approach is utilized because the doses are very low and the computations are greatly simplified.

The following pathways are considered:

1.

The inhalation dose is calculated at the critical residence because of the high occupancy factor.

In order to be conservative, the maximum whole body and organ dose assumes no correction for residing inside a residence.

An independent technical evaluation of the off-site vendor analyses performed by Niagara Mohawk Power Corporation has indicated a potential for a discrepancy in the data results.

The resident inspectors at Nine Mile Point have been informed and corrective actions initiated.

Future Semi-Annual Radioactive Effluent Release Reports will reflect any changes as a result of this technical evaluation.

004447LL

(

ATTACHIVIENT11 Page 2of 3 SEMI-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT (1993)

NINE MILE POINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 RADIATIONDOSES TO THE LIKELYMOST EXPOSED IVIEIVIBEROF THE PUBLIC OUTSIDE THE SITE BOUNDARY JANUARY - DECEMBER 1993 2.

The milk ingestion dose is calculated utilizing the maximum milk cow location.

As noted previously, in order to be conservative and for the sake of simplicity, the likely most exposed member of the public is assumed to be at all critical receptors at one time.

In this case, the member of the public at the critical residence is assumed to consume milk from the critical milk location.

3.

The maximum dose from the milk ingestion pathway as a result of consuming goat's milk is based on the same criteria established for item "2", above (ingestion of cow's milk).

4.

The maximum dose associated from consuming meat is based on the critical meat animal.

The likely most exposed member at the critical residence is assumed to consume meat from the critical meat animal location.

5.

The maximum site dose associated with the consumption of vegetables is calculated from the critical vegetable garden location.

As noted previously, the likely most exposed member of the public is assumed to be located at the critical residence and is assumed to consume vegetables from the critical garden location.

6, The dose, as a result of direct gamma radiation from the site, encompasses doses from direct "shine" from the generating facilities, direct radiation from any overhead gaseous

plumes, plume submersion and from ground deposition.

This total dose is measured by environmental TLD. The critical location is based on the closest year-round residence from the generating facilities as well as the closest residence in the critical downwind sector in order to evaluate both direct radiation from the generating facilities and gaseous plumes as determined by the local meteorology.

During 1993, the closest residence and the critical downwind residence are at the same location.

The measured average dose for 1993 at the critical residence was 54.2 mRem.

The average control dose was 50.0 mRem.

The average dose at the critical residence is slightly greater than the average control location dose.

The net increase in dose is due to the differences between doses from naturally occurring radionuclides in the soil and rock at the different locations and due to the standard deviation in TLD measurements.

This difference in dose rate can be demonstrated by observing the 1993 average dose for an environmental TLD located near the critical residence TLD, but approximately 700 feet closer to the generating facilities.

The annual average dose for this TLD location was 51.5 mRem.

The dose for this location is lower than the critical residence location even though they are close to one another and even though the TLD location with the lowest dose is closer to the generating facilities.

004447LL

(

r J

ATTACHMENT11 Page 3 of 3 SEMI-ANNUALRADIOACTIVEEFFLUENT RELEASE REPORT (1993)

NINE IVIILEPOINT NUCLEAR STATION UNIT 2 RADIATIONDOSES TO THE LIKELYMOST EXPOSED IVIEMBER OF THE PUBLIC OUTSIDE THE SITE BOUNDARY JANUARY - DECEMBER 1993 7.

The dose, as a result of fish consumption, is considered as part of the aquatic pathway.

The dose for 1993 is calculated from actual results of the analysis of environmental fish samples.

For the sake of being conservative, the average plant-related radionuclide concentrations were utilized from fish samples taken near the site discharge points.

Only Cs-137 was detected during 1993.

Adjusting the average concentration of Cs-137 in indicator samples by subtracting the average concentration of Cs-137 in control samples resulted in a net negative concentration.

Therefore, no dose was calculated and assumed to be zero for this pathway.

8.

The shoreline sediment pathway is considered relative to recreational activities, The dose due to recreational activities from shoreline sediment is based on the methodology in the ODCM, as adapted from Regulatory Guide 1.109.

The ODCM gives the total dose to the whole body and skin from the sum of plant-related radionuclides detected in actual shoreline sediment samples.

The plant-related radionuclide concentration is adjusted for background sample results, as applicable.

The total whole body and skin dose from shoreline recreational activities is 1.02E-03 mRem whole body and 1

~ 19E-03 mRem skin dose for the period.

9.

In summary, the maximum dose to the most likely exposed member of the public is 1.67E-1 mRem to the thyroid (maximum organ dose) and 3.97E-02 mRem to the whole body. It should be noted that the maximum organ dose and maximum whole body doses are based on the sum of the maximum doses observed for all three facilities regardless of age group.

This results in some conservatism.

The maximum organ and whole body doses were a result of gaseous effluents.

Doses as a result of liquid effluents were secondary.

The total whole body and skin dose from shoreline recreational activities are 1.02E-03 mRem whole body and 1.19E-03 mRem skin dose for the period.

The direct radiation dose to the critical residence from the generating facilities was insignificant or zero.

The dose to an individual as a result of fish consumption was also zero.

These maximum total doses are a result of operations at the Nine Mile Point Unit 1, Nine Mile Point Unit 2 and the James A. Fitzpatrick facilities. The maximum organ dose and whole body dose are below the 40CFR190 criteria of 25 mRem per calendar year to the maximum exposed organ or the whole body, and below 75 mRem per calendar year to the thyroid.

004447LL

0 I

r

UPDATE TO THE PREVIOUS REPORTS 004447LL

~

I

~i T

, p /7 s"

Unit 1 Unit 2 X Reporting Period Janus

- June 1993 UPDATE OF RELEASE AND DOSE DATAFOR GASEOUS (amATED AND GROUND LEI/EL) AND UQUID EFFLUENTS Update of data using actual results from the offmlte vendors for Strontium, Tritium, and Iron-SS Nuclide~

Sr-89 Sr-90 H-3 Fe-55 GASEOUS 2

QUARTER

~Aetlvt Ci 2.65E-05 2.14E+01 1.61E-OS UQUID 2

QUARTER

~Aetlvit Ci No Releases No Releases No Releases No Releases Particulates Tritium Tritium lodines and Particulates wit hslf-lives rester than 8 da s

1.

Particulates with half-lives )8 days 2.

Average release rate (gaseous) or diluted concentration (liquid) for reporting period

1. Total release 2.

Average release rate for period (gaseous) or diluted concentration (liquids) for the reporting period Ci

/iCI/sec Ci

/rCI/sec (gaseous)

/rCI/ml (liquid)

GASEOUS 3.07E~

3.90E-05 2.14E+ 01 2.72E+00 GASEOUS LIQUID

~NA

~NA

~NA

~NA LIQUID 1.

Percent of Quarterly Dose Umit 2.

Percent of Annuals Dose Umit to Date 3.

Percent of Organ

- Dose Rate Umit (Gaseous)(Quarterly)

- Dose Umit (Uquid)

(Annual Ik Quarterly) 4.

Percent of 10CFR20s Concentration Umit (Uquid) 5.

Percent of Dissolved or Entrained Noble Gas (Liquid) 2.16E-02 (Quarterly) 1.78E-02 (Annual) 4.33E-04 (Quarterly)

~NA (Annual)

~NA

~NA

~NA (Quarterly)

~NA (Annual)

~NA (Quarterly)

~NA (Annual)

~NA Concentrations less than the lower limitof detection, as required by Technical Specifications are indicated with a double asterisk.

The dose is to the whole body for liquid effluents and to the maximally exposed organ for gaseous effluents.

The percent of the 10CFR20 concentration limitis based on the average concentration during the release period.

004447LL

C <j C

t t

~

t II

3 4 wnl~

5

/Qg+

LhÃE OrVIhNI A

vO 7

<<e re'"

9

>nes 10 I

N (A)

I Qo 11 novi2 13 14 15 16 eel 0

0 g CS%TOR LOCelC L TOWER)

IAD AOAD V

~ '

FIGURE 5.I - I Nine Mile Point On-Site Map -

AM87EC APE87VRE CARD

, /I Environmental Sompt ~

Location 5 W Compsss Coorttiastc (M) - Stet<<Ocsitaction 180o-lssica Antic irora ttortb iartss

~

Nso Available oa Aperture Card AQc <<<<

r'0 ON 0

Z II 104 303(y tansvoe S

I'll ttKA.'

ROAQ 4'I..

scIH la AOAD 12 13 14 15 F408 140844-@I Ii 0

rl

'k I'4'

~

~ I I,

V y

~*;,a't f>ilr,b

~ PAR

{ag Q I's~

1

~~V

~

p

~ O~

lh.c 4a n a, l

91.

Sl O

~I CI CI 11 01

~I C

.. ~ S

~

I O ~

0

[I ~

O.

i'e)y 001 <<0 h>6 ~l 0011

~WoIhhI gg

~001 0O shtw9 NI5 stllNt1 10ylhwtJlwI ol!S-uo Iu!Od ol!N ou)N

)-n S))nS)a 0101 f~g 0133/

tr) 5 I

I 0

9 91 0> +A

<<I 01 CI ZW OI w

d LIP sf ht)

~d pe I

NI I

9 ICY I'0 3YVl C

C

~tata)BA gll2e SCALE OF NILES I

LEOEND 4

II.S.l ~

I4 l

yowll Itooda, County Ltnoo..

ToWIILiraoI City 4 VOogo Ueoa..........,.......

tto))rooa)o...........

f)tyl~NIAL~f..........,+

LOCAIIOM FI GURE

5. 1-2 NINE MILE POINT OFF-SITE MAP

(

1 2/'33j

)ter loaaooe Iytc'a twwe~ )am w

~ a Oa~ Cerrea) l)a)t. Oa<<IOIO)a L

)oral) Aloe 944 )Oriole owla 49 61

)loca )eerie

)aee yea L AXE ONTARIO 2

4l 5l 3

I 63 3

)I

~

4 44 33 29 28 I

1 re I

~

aa

)aeasooa aoa arorra eeaah 45 teua a) 6 34 48 I

toa

~ I 0)

<<<<ill<<aire

~r<< le ill

<<lr~ ~

~

<< III<< ill

~a w

We I Il

~I orrw

~I

)OI tree Oeae) r<<eo I<<<<

. ~koaala L

a)..C/I<c

~

rill<<ri

~I ~I~Ir

~ea

~

r os@Ec~o s

C 2

a ollmg ll IIIB,B Kleaas Career)

A I

Vie E

0/

2

~I I

Srraaae Avaarrr'I Comer wit's aa A

Y E

"N Ilelrioa 66 Ol o<<e I

I Nootco

~wrrM

~I

/

E CX I

ri I

Sa

'< 'p/

a Ir )I g) aWga 3l q ':;

8 J~>~,Z

(

~

wa rar II>>

S 2

I l

(II I) 0 I

I M M

\\

LlriCURM

(~

Mwr

)I i 9

M ra aa i.>>p. S<... I I

So)II'I Caro>>s

~)

~'

~I)SR

~

Coo)o I Ccrl>>rs Onan)

SI 8V 6B I SM IM coraMI a

~\\

ro r

~I

~Iaw

~waa M Si >> Morel V

0 l

M Sr

~

IM

~I Pl)iciao Cori>>rs 1)O L2

,a 'p C)

Hannibal

~ C>>P N

R N

)IMaaaal a>>a>> M o

I

~M)oe I)

IM Saoaar I

Il I

Ii 8

A L

I),(

-G l

~ /

~ ai M

III FULTON

)

1p

~

c lsiorolaaarl ri A

N M

~ ~

(

I(

Mr Mlrl>>

.R e)Sin ISIS

~>>ar MW

~\\

~M I~

M

~

• I -.. '$.

g)

I

'I I)

All>>cart Car acr ~

Rail

)Ski o) is CIISQ v~

cAwn III

~I EIII PIIMM>>

I g II 4 H Pool Caraor) /

!RMI)IPS

/

Car airs

~ M l

I L

'Saaoi HMMcel Oi J.

Ta Y Y J10 COUNTY aaa')rraarM aMM>>a M M>>M M

ONONDAGA MIMI~

~\\

IIlc>>>>ill Po Salle air

~al M

~alai>>a ll>>alar lail la

~Ia>>

),M ~ M

'1g WWa I>>,

1

~ I MW N wa Mw WMMIM cas I

%la a)I~

O~

to Soroca>>

C~

RIY+

II 105a 20 M 79

1 I

ATTACHNENT 2 NygtAGARA '%' '<@:""~'>>~w~'"M'.m':Y@ssme&s'i':Ms%~ s'e,',Avie"Mcj y:"z~"'qg'QjQg Ng":;~.'j.'g """, o'Rev.

";QCENS!NG',DQCUM CHANGE:REQUEST"":,

. ~

~MOHA'><

P~r'; s;-,'q"":,;,@@~~~~~';;;,"@>: "~p",~w;~g~;,e~g",.~p

",',4 g 3 P"';,.:>>,,'

g cr )p PARr 1~A'rrON A.

Affected Ooc OPL Plans 8 s

Page ~of~

Q Unit1 gf Unit2 Q Sto Q Facility Operating IJcense Q Technical Specificatkgts Q EnvlronmentalProt Phn Q UFSAR Q QuaRy Assur Program Q Rro Prot Program Q Sto Emergency Phn (SEP)

Q Soauhy Phns(SPS)

Q Process Ctetrol Program (PCP)

Offsite Dose Caic Manual (ODM)

Q IS Program Phn (ISI).

Q IST Program Phn (IST)

Q Core 0perathg Umits Rept (COL)

B. Oescnpthn Lg Porrnairont Q Tanporary, &pocfed DuradNL

<CD'I~ Ch~~

ad >~.

)1 ad &~ UA~ co~~

d'or(~

l Ur'Ar d. /~an+ iq HCtivteS OF'~FIir~n.An &nM ~ &)~ C~+

Q ct,SA S'g,(.

un

'3/~ p,q.s ]su~+~~~'"~ -p~F ca%~~

9 O n~ -r~.<Cd E'er. F'ud u

~ i~

(("CMI I Pgqcg ~ ~e i'o L cH Ihon(~g P T

fe.

Page

~

L

~

P(xe I I

X,mls 3-15 7

>JAN 3-'7l 5)Q + toQ t~p-. ~i W u~S Wu.pic. 3. 3 3 3 I W~tc."t 5. I 3-t

) }4 Not,g cc g, g, 't.ct-t

) 8 i3.1. tc-I mv (~'b.

2 31< I&-th

~ 3lq I y-tg 8 3lq 3-5 5-4 W &-QO,QI

(< Io-o x)

Section, Figure, Table i abc g, I Q.. I,I 9 lg~ tg,~

Sty.3,1,3

~~as W(~

S'.3-t

~a&inls+R'L vc vi&~tb seco<w I',R.t 8 x,-~-O~ t c,;herr(g D. Source of Change/ References QS, 5~ M 3eQ 59, lo i'aeae.S I

> I-<~ +'I

~7 tziv3

~> tR)ai/vs

~ +~W+~ I 8 4~~~& -to c ~~r~ Ih~h..~ >')i~('I 6

~ Q

~>~~~

1~i />>. b.c~.Ve~ + B.s%.~~ ~ ct.kh. ~ ~~<< I 3-C~ ~~ +'~~~ ~ ~~~, Qc +g Pleo Umph+ WW<'L&nit;4, 5 pC,MARCO-+4~~

E NIP4EV4$ Review + Prektlrlr) &afuarfoeSafoty Review Attached Cf EnhatflrNo'

-9 F. Originator (Prior)

Q Li'~St.+4 J3.

Oats

/Rl>~l I 3 PArrr2Ravraw!APRovAr.

A. SME (Prfnttfrr/tfa/) a NN Oats B. Rasp Otg Bntnch Manager (PrfnrMfal) fin Date czar~

i3 I C. Effectivenass Reviow D. SORCO NN F

5g,ea Q htjff Arrachod hftg h/a:

'9 '~- g/ - O g eg Datai q /p urg No MrgData F.HantMgr Q SR Q obtained por Mla/Rr 4f G. NRC (MARMOTsuhnlrfalR~ Q hN Obtained por Doc Covorshoor Q Obrafnod per MP4EV4f toCur PkuUata Q NRC AppfDaro:

PARr 3-4u uursvrAnev A. OPL Only: Affected Oocurttonts Updatod B. UFS Only. Nood'AsZuiit'rAffoctOocumont Q C. Othet: 9~i+ P. 0Q~ Reu'.'f VIA SARCASM AIM+)i It'rg PARr 4-Ct.esuRs A g[ fncorp'dinto Parent Ooc, OR B C3 Not Yet lncorp'd into Parent Close Change Tracking Ooc, App'd for Rev:

C. Chsod by (Prfttrlhtiai)

E l ~W /,7)H

,fit'co

'.d,'Rev:

Date Z~.U/ 5 Page ll NIP-LPP-01 Rev 02

ATTACHNENT 3 N TNIAGARA '"'""-'",."":.""',:.j@EFFEGTLVENESS'REVIENf:"";:..";-;~',",':;~'..'.,:

t-. y;.

g UFSAR A. QualifyAssurance Program

~ Does the change(s) cease to satisfy the criteria of 10CFR50 Appendix B or reduce SAR program commitments previously accepted by the NRC?

Page~o ~

Q Yes QNo 8

R~ Protec/r'on Program

~ Does the change(s) adversely affect the abNy to achieve and maintain safe shutdown in the event of a tire?

Q Yes Q No Q SITE ENERGENCY PLAN

~

Does the change(s) decrease effectiveness of the SEP?

~

Does the SEP, as changed, cease to meet the standards of 10CFR50.47(b) and 10CFR50 Appendix E?

Q Yes QNo Q Yes QNo Q SECIJRm'LaIvs

~

Document

~

Does the change(s) decrease the effectiveness of the Physical Security Ran or Security Personnel Training and Qualification Plan prepared pursuant to 10CFR50.34(c) or 10CFR73?

~

Does the change(s) decrease Ihe effectiveness of the first four categories ofhfonnational Backgrourxf, Generic Planning Base, Ucensee Planning Base, and/or responibi5ty matrix of the Safeguards Contingency Plan prepared pursuant to 10CFR50.34(d) or 10CFR73?

Q Yes QNo Q Yes Q

PROCESS COH7ROL PROQR4N

~

Does the change(s) reduce the overall conformance of the solidified waste product to existing cnteria for soM wastes in accordance with Technical Specifications?

Q Yes QNo OOCN

~

Does the change(s) reduce the accuracy of raEabKty of the dose calcuhtfons or setpoint determinathns in accordance with Technical Specifications?

Q Yos Q No BASIS V

O 7-(

(Print/Initial)

~E en'~

Page 12 Date HIP-LPP-Ol Rev 02

N JPPPPM NIIP I NP Rev.

I Page 1 of 4 1

F PREUMINARY ATI N TlTLE:

Revision 9 to the Unit 2 Offsite Dose Calculation Manual DESCRIPTlON OF PROPOSED CHANGE: ~nangnj or Temporary h

I f

n n

r f1 hn I

E W

I' hi I rrr r

rr hn n

r" 4.

7 frmT hn' rmi nr" "nr 4 Anw n'

i inmil I

inw M n'i Pr r

il 'irnmn I

Frm rr r nT I

..7.

-1 "M r

I i IMn'in In r mn in" n

4,

.7.

-1 "M

rl i IMni rin In rmn in rvilin R

irmn "wr rr DOCUMENTSREVIEWED:

1 M m fr mH.. Fl n n

h r k F

r 1

1 2 Mm fr mH..FI n n

.A.

Il Fbr 241 9.

IVI mo fr m B. Zachar k B. Th m 4

ni 2T hni I

eifi in.

AFETY IMPA T EVAL ATI N A.

Is the SAR affected?

.Th m E.D.Th m A

u 2

1 1.

Does the proposal change the facilityor procedures from their description in the SAR?

(Yest~N) n n

ra hi r

fin rm n

han b

n m

an w hNR R

I T

h n R uir n

inv tv

'n f

f ur in AR a.

Does the proposed change alter the design, function, or method of performing the function or a component, system, or structure described in the SAR?

(YestNo) n n

n hi r

a f

nn n

n w

R R

T h i

n m

n in AR.

b.

Does the proposed change alter procedures discussed in the initial operations and organizational chapters of the FSAR or the other procedural-type commitments, such as the emergency plan and modes and sequences of plant operation described in the SAR? (Yes'~~

n rr n

r hi f

tnf rma n r han bas n

m I n w'hNR R

uta T

hni

à n R uir n

inv tv n

u d

u inthein al a

niza nal ha f

FAR r ocedur mm en 0041 58LL NIP-SEV%1 Rev 0

N JZ&PSL NMP N NP ELI lN (Cont'd)

Page 2 of 4 2.

Does the proposal involve a test or experiment not described in the SAR?

(Yes/~)

n' hi f

n n

wh

/

nR ir n

3.

Could the proposal affect nuclear safety in a way not previously evaluated in the SAR? (Yes/~)

'n hi fin I

w h N

in w

If the answer to all the above questions is "NO", a safety evaluation is not required. Ifthe answer is "YES" to any items in A, a detailed Safety Evaluation is required to determine if an Unreviewed Safety Question exists.

B.

Is a change to the Technical Specifications necessary?

(Yes')

If Yes, go to NIP-LPP-01.

DETAILEDSAFETY EVALUATIONIS REQUIRED?

YES XNO 0041 58LL NIP-SEV<1 Rev 0

N JPNNNNN NIIPI NN FR PRELIMINARY A

Page 3 of 4 (Cont'd)

ENVIR ENTAL IlVIPA EVAL ATI N A.

Willthe change, test or experiment:

'1.

Result in a significant increase in any adverse environmental impact previously reviewed and evaluated in the NMP2 Final Environmental Statement - Operating License Stage (FES-OL) and other NRC Environmental impact assessments7 2.

Result in a significant change in the effluents or power level?

"3.

Result in an activity not confined to on-site areas previously disturbed during site preparation and plant construction7 4.

Concern a matter not previously reviewed and evaluated in the documents specified in question "1" above, which may have a significant adverse environmental impact7

'5.

Constitute a decrease in the effectiveness of the NMP2 Environmental Protection Plan (EPP)?

B.

Is a change to the Environmental Protection Plan necessary?

If the answer to all the above questions is "NO", the Environmental Evaluation is complete and no further action is required.

Ifthe answer is "YES" to any items in II.Aor II.B above, a detailed Environmental Evaluation is required to determine if an Unreviewed Environmental Question exits.

Contact Supervisor Environmental Protection.

DETAILEDENVIRONMENTALEVALUATIONIS REQUIRED?

YES QQ YES YES YES N~

YES N~

YES N~

YES 0041 58LL NIP-S EV%1 Rev 0

N JETS!

~ MPU'~

1 FR PREUMINAR AL A (Cont'd)

Page 4 of 4 IDENTIF ATI N AR HA E

A.

Are SAR changes required?

(Yes/~N)

LDCR No.

Affected figures, tables, text sections (also indicate sheets fortables and figures and pages for text)

IV.

ID NTIF T

N I

A.

Excluding statements made in the SAR, does this change impact any commitments made to the NRC?

(Yes/~N)

If yes, list commitment, agency.

2.

agency agency V.

B.

Does commitment(s) need to be changed?

(Yes')

If yes, notify the NRC Program Director.

I NAT RE Preparer; spo ible Individual

/3 ggpg-Date Approver.

Ap ov r/T Date

'ontact the NMP Supervisor Environmental Protection for assistance in answering these questions, if necessary.

~N:

There is an ODCM change which requires an LDCR No. 2-93-ODM-003, but this is not considered a SAR change.

0041 58LL NIP-SEV%1 Rev 0

1

~

~

~ i I,