ML18283A801
| ML18283A801 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Browns Ferry  |
| Issue date: | 01/20/1975 |
| From: | Gilleland J Tennessee Valley Authority |
| To: | Dicker G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| Download: ML18283A801 (7) | |
Text
~.'
'+f'EC DISTRIB ON FOR PART 50 DOCKET MATER'TEMPORARY FORM)
CONTROL NO:
FILE.
6 /ZQ F ROM.
TVA Chat tanooga, Tn 37401 E r: lleland Mr Hicker CLASS UNCLASS PROPINFO XXXXXXX DATE OF DOC 1-20-75 ORIG one signed INPUT DATE REC'D 1-24-75 CC OTHER NO CYS REC'D LTR TWX RPT SENT AEC PDR SENT LOCALPDR DOCKET NO:
50-259/26 296 OTHER DESCR IPTION:
Ltr re our 12-23-75 ltr...........
in support of their 9-13-74 submitta regarding tech specs change concerni chlorination specifications......
ENCLOSURES:
lf~CVi',;,""".rit;@.9 PLA T A:
Bro<'tns Ferry ] >
2 > 6 3 FOR ACTION/INFORMATION 1-24-75 eh f BUTLER (L)
W/ Copies CLARK (L)
W/ Copies PARR (L)
KNIEL (L)
'/ Copies SCHWENCER (L)
W/ Copies STOLZ (L)
Mt/2Copies VASSALLO {L)
PURPLE (L)
~
W/ Copies ZlEMANN (L)
W/ Copies DICKER (E)
~ W/)Copies KNIGHTON (E)
YOUNGBLOOD (E)
Mt/ Copies BEGAN (E)
W/ Copies LEAR (L)
W/ Copies SPE Ls iail n 1 ~ I
%JvivIvv Mt/ Copies INTERNALDISTRIBUTION EG Fl gA R
GC, ROOM P-506A MUNTZ IN G/sl AF F CASE GIAMBUSSO BOYD MOORE (L)
DEYOUNG (L)
SKOVHOLT (L)
GOLLER (L) (Ltr)"
~,
P~ CO.LLINS.
DENISE RFG OPR
~
WILE 5 REGION (3)
MORRIS STEELE TECH REVIEW SCHROEDER MACCARY KNIGHT PAWLICKI.
SHAO STELLO HOUSTON NOVAK ROSS IPPOLITQ
<<T.F D ESCOC$)
LONG I AINAS BENAROYA VOLLMER
~ DENTON
~GR IMES R.
<<GAMMILL
~KASTNER F.
~ BALLARD SPANGLER M.
ENVIRO S.
MULLER
.M.
DICKER S.
KNIGHTON M.
'OUNG BJ OQD,~H.
REGAN PROJECT LDR G.
V.
HAR LESS LIC ASST DIGGS (L)
GEARIN (L)
GOULBOURNE (L)
KREUTZER (E)
LEE (L)
MAIGRET(0 REED (F)
SERVICE (L)
SHEPPARD (I )
SLATER (E)
SMITH..(L)
TEETS'(L) "
Wl LLIAMS (.E')
Wl LSON (L)
A/T IND 8RAITMAN SALTZMAN ABEL PLANS MCDONALD CHAPMAN DUBE (Ltr)
E. COUPE PETERSON D. THOMPSON (2)
KL'ECKER EISENHVT.
WIG G INTON EXTERNAL DISTR I BUTION
<<1 LOCAL PDR i et. Pl
~1 TIC (ABERNATHY)Q1)&~ NATIONALLABS
<<1 NSIC (BUCHANAN) 1 W. PENNINGTON, Rm E-201 GT 1 ASLB 1
CONSULTANTS 1 Newton Anderson NEMtM ARK/BLUME/AGBABIAN
<<1Z-ACRS+f8~&MWSENT L. A
~ t~vc.gi g.~k 1 PD R-SAN/LA/NY 1 BROOKHAVEN NAT LAB 1 G. ULRIKSON, ORNL 1 AGMED (RUTH GUSSMAN)
Rm B-127 GT 1 R. D. MUELLER, Rm E-201 GT prl
,f %..
Cl
~ \\ k
~ h ll t
~
I
yo - 2 ~~/~~~/~~4 Cp I
II
'I~
~
~ I I PI Mr. Gordon K. Dicker, Chief Environmental Prospects Branch 2 Directorate of Licensing U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D.C.
20545
Dear Hr. Dicker:
TENMERREE IVWLLEY'DTHCIRlTY C".)IQ g !"
C'HW~IiA,I'VC3C3&A,, TE.MMEMCEE,
~
R'7&D'l U
January 20, 1975 g ','I,.-.)
ANNIVEASAI=IY OF PEOPLE IN This letter is in response to your letter of December 23, 1974, concerning TVA's requested change to the Browns Ferry Nuclear Plant chlorination specification.
As we stated in the bases for the proposed change submitted September 13, 1974, the change was requested to correct an over-sight in the original specification.
Asiatic clam infestation has been a serious problem for over a decade to TVA installations and other industries located along the Tennessee River.
Because of the delay in getting this technical specification change
- approved, we were unable to chlorinate at the end of tne
~p~wuing JOI.son in Gl'iover 197>>.
Gn DecellIber 15,
~ g7I>>,
~ @du, was reduced to replace a leaking heat exchanger on B recirculation pump NG set drive motor.
The heat exchanger was approximately 50 percent plugged with asiatic clams.
Xt has been necessary to institute a program to manually remove clams from raw water heat exchangers; however, this procedure would provide only temporary relief as the exchangers would be reinfested by clams carried in from elsewhere in the raw water system.
This is a serious main-tenance problem which could adversely affect power generation unless proper control measures can be applied.
~ I The following responses correspond to the numbered questions in your letter.
~ h
~
.1.. As desCribed. in tpe environmental statement, it is. necessary ";
'o chemin'ate continuous'ly during"the active spa~ining period to control clam concentrations.
Continuous chlorination during
'he critical periods means 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br /> a day.
P lI-7 E~r
%II J I
Chlorine residual in the auxiliary raw cooling water system varied from 0.2 to a maximum of 1.0 mg/1 by actual measurement during the June 1974 chlorinating period.
There was no diffi-culty in limiting the residua1 to 1.0 mg/1 in the raw cooling
Ql A
C I
Mr. Gordon K. Dicker January 20, 1975 water system.
Little or no ad)ustment of chlorine feed was needed to maintain a constant residual after the initial demand. of the system vas satisfied.
he chlorine concentra-tion in the condenser cooling water discharge vas below the detectable limits of the analyses (0.1 mg/1).
Xt was calcu-
- lated, as mentioned. in the environmental statement, that the normal cooling water demand of 0.5-mg/1 vould. readily consume the diluted. concentration of 0.05 mg/1 (a 20:1 dilution of the raw vater by condenser circulating water) and. result in no chlorine residual in the condenser cooling water discharge.
3.
The chlorination of the auxiliary raw cooling water system has no n t been practiced during closed-cycle operation of the cooling d.
towers since construction of the towers is gust 'being complete and they have not yet been put into service.
Chlorination is performed to coincide vith the beginning
- and, end. of the clam-spavning season which occurs about May and October. lt is not likely the cooling tovers will need to be in closed-cycle opera-tion for thermal control during those periods; but, if the tovers
- rcre in closed-cycle operation, chlorination would, probably not present any problems.
At the time of preparation of the Browns Perry final environ-mental statement, there vas some auestion about vhether continu-ous chlorination during closed.-cycle operation might result in a buildup of chlorine in the condenser circulating ~rater system after several days in this mode.
Measurements made during chlorination vith once-through operation, hovever, indicated no detectable chlorine in the condenser cooling water system which bears out the estimates made in the environmental statement.
More recent studies for closed-cvcle systems at other plants indicate that the demand of the closed system is sufficient to prevent a buildup of chlorine residual in the sys em.
'l
~
~
~
4.:,':4's;geytioned, above, chlq7inetioq is..tied tq.'tQe.clam-spawning' season which lists front about'he'Biddle':of O'My CF>rough Octo r; "
'.Mhen the season
- begins,
.clam reproduction is. very prolific'or a fev veeks initially, thon taper" off and continues at a lesser rate throughout the season until it ceases in early fall.
Optimum control of clams is achieved through continuous chlorination during the first few weeks (very active reproduction period) or near the end of Hay.
An additional continuous chlorination period is needed, in October at the end of the season to eliminate clams produced.
k
~
~
w 14r. Gordon K. Dicker January 20, 1975 during the months of June through September.
Normal or typigal riverflow during chlorination periods is more than 20,000 ft /s.
The total dilution of the auxiliary raw cooling water system effluent at the diffusers is about 100:l. It should be reiter-
- ated, however, as pointed. out in the environmental statement, that actual measurement of the reservoir chlorine demand has shown 'that the condenser cool'ing water'will react with all the chlorine"residual from %he auxiliary-cooling system and. result in only chlorides oeing discharged at the diffusers.
5.
Chlorine residual in the raw cooling water system is recorded, during the chlorination periods.
As stated previously, no detectable amount of chlorine has been found in the condenser cooling water discharge.
Very truly yours, TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY S Mgg.~
J. E. Gilleland, Assistant 1@nager of Power C.
C