ML19206B185

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Comments on PSAR Vol 1,2 & 3 Dtd 680429.Assumptions of Dispersion Listed in Table 2-2 for Three post-accident Periods Are Reasonably Conservative
ML19206B185
Person / Time
Site: Millstone, Indian Point, Crane  Dominion icon.png
Issue date: 05/27/1968
From: Shaw M
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Morris P
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML19206B183 List:
References
NUDOCS 7905070676
Download: ML19206B185 (1)


Text

-

~

Cc:ments on 2

Oyster Creek Nuclear Station - Unit Jersey Central Power and Light Company Preliminary Safety Analysis Report Volu=es 1, 2 and 3 dated April 29, 1968 Prepared by Air Resources Environmental Laboratory Envirorsental Science Services Administration May 27, 1968 assumed dispersion ecnditions listed in Table 2-2 for the three Th2 are reasonably can servative as judged periods following an accicent The f ron the on-site meteorological data presented in the report.

relative di.ffusion calculations (X/Q) are also conservative for the 0-2 and 2.' hour perdeds and it is noted that the added dilution because of the building-induced turbulence amounted to a f actor effect For the 1-20 day period we believe there is c computational of abcut 3.5.

L on at the error ir the X/Q value and also, strictly speaking, the equa:

The distance, x, which appears in the top of page 2-5 is incorrect.

because of sector-averaged equation according to Gifford [1] comes about s, where s = x 6 and 3 is the sector an integration over the sector are, Thus, rather than increase x by an amount x', as was angle in radians.

donc ia the equation on page 2-5, the c: value should be taken at a distance of (x v x') rather than x.

Thus the equation should read (7./Q) av =

(E) (O) (1) (1

),

s x

a u

e: (at x v.')

In practice, however, there is very little difference in the X/Q values by the two methods. Using the equation, above, and the assumed dispersion frequengies in Table 2-2 we calculate an average 30-day X/Q sec/m3 at the site boundary of 427 meter s.

This is value of 1.1 x 10-3 about twice the value listed in Table 2-2 and would increase the thyrof.

doses shown in figures 14-63 and 14-64 from 9 to 20 rem and 320 to 720 rem, respectively.

References Gifford, F. A. (1960), " Atmospheric Dispersion Calculations Using

[1]

Generalized Gaussian Plume Model", Nuclear Saf ety, 2(2), eq. (7),

p. 24 Ls 7905070674 2, _.

-