ML19221A765
| ML19221A765 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/28/1979 |
| From: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-0555, NUREG-0555-03.4.2, NUREG-555, NUREG-555-3.4.2, SRP-03.04.02, SRP-3.04.02, NUDOCS 7907090074 | |
| Download: ML19221A765 (12) | |
Text
Section 3.4.2 February 1979 ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARD REVIEW PLAN FOR ES SECTION 3.4.2 COOLING SYSTEM:
COMPONENT DESCRIPTIONS 3.4.2.1 INTAKE SYSTEM 3.4.2.2 HEAT DISSIPATION SYSTEM 3.4.2.3 DISCHARGE SYSTEM REVIEW INPUTS Environmental Report Sections
- 3. 4 Heat Dissipation System Environmental Reviews 2.3.1.
Hydrology 2.7 Meteorology 3.2 Reactor Steam-Electric System 3.4.1 Cooling System: System Description and Operational Modes Standards and Guides None Other The site visit Responses to requests for additional information REVIEW OUiPUTS Environmental Statement Sections 3.4.2 C, cling System: Component Descriptions Other Environmental Reviews 4.1 Land-Use Impacts (Construction) 4.2 Hydrological Alterations and Water-Use Irlacts (Construction) 4.3 Ecological Impacts (Construction)
- 5. 2 Hydrological Alterations, Plant Water Supply and Water-Use Impacts (Operation) 5.3 Cooling System Inpacts (Operation) 5.8.1 Socioeconomic Imp acts, Physical 7 907 0 900V; 3.4.2-1
February 1979 9.3.1 Alternative Heat Dissipation Systems 9.3.2 Alternative Circulating Water Systems I.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE The purpose of this environmental standard review plan (ESRP) is to direct the staff's preparation of descriptions of the proposed intake, dis-charge, and heat dissipation system design and performance characteristics.
The scope of the review directed by this plan will include (1) intake, dis-charge, and heat dissipation system design data, and (2) performance character-istics of these systc s for the operational modes identified by the reviewer for ES Section 3.4.1.
This review will provide input to other reviews Jealing with analysis and assessment of construction and operational impacts of cooling system components and to other sections that deal with design and operational alternatives and benef it-cost analysis.
II.
REQUIRED DATA AND INFORMATION The kinds of data and information required will be affected by site-and station ;pecific factors, and the degree of detail will be modified according to the anticipated magnitude of the potential impacts.
The following data or information are usually required:
A.
Intake Systems 1.
Drawing of intake structure showing the relationship of the structure to the water surface, bottom geometry, and shoreline (f rom the ER).
2.
Location of the intake with respect to the outfall (from the ER).
3.
Description of csoling water purrping f acility (f rom the ER).
O 107 278 3.4.2-2
February 1979 4.
Descriptions M trash racks, traveling screens, trash baskets, and fish return devices (f rom the ER).
5.
Performance characteristics (e.g., flow rates, intake velocities) for the operational modes identified by the reviewer for ES Section 3.4.1 (f rom the ER).
6.
Performance characteristics for specific intake-related functions such as de-icing, trash rack clearing, screen washing, trash basket removal or fish return system operation (f rom the ER).
7.
Location and descriptinn of components for the addition of chemicals (e.g., corrosion inhibitors, antifouiing agents) to the intake system (from the ER).
B.
Discharge Systems 1.
Drawings of the outfall structure showing its location in the receiving water body, relationship to water surface, bottom geometry, and shoreline (from the ER).
2.
Description of discharge canal or discharge lines (from the ER).
3.
Performance characteristics (e.g.,
discharge flow rates, dis-charge velocities, discharge temperatures and temperature differentials) for the operational modes identified by the reviewer for ES Section 3.4.1 (f rom the ER).
4.
Descriptions of specific discharge-related components (e.g.,
dif fusers, fish barriers) (from the ER).
3.4.2-3
February 1979 C.
Heat Dissipation System 1.
Location of heat dissipation system components relative to other site features (from the ER).
2.
Design details of heat dissipation system components af fecting system performance.
a.
Cooling Towers (from the ER)
(1) Type (2) Configuration (3) Materials of construction (4) Numcer and arrangement (5) Rated heat dissipation capacity b.
Cooling Lakes and Ponus (f rom ESRP 2. 3.1)
(1) Surface area (2) Volume (3) Bathymetry c.
Spray Ponds or Canals (from the ER)
(1) Arrangement and configuration of spray modules (2) Pond or canal geometry (3) Surface area and water volume d.
Condenser (1) Heat transfer area and materials of construction (from ESRP 3.2)
(2) Antifouling treatment (from the ER) 107 ~s 3.4.2-4
February 1979 3.
Heat dissipaticn system performance chsracteristics for the cperational modes identified by the reviewer for ES Section 3.4.1.
Cooling Towers (from the ER) a.
(1) Input cnd discharge flow rates and temperatures for monthly average meteorological conditions (2) Wet-bulb temperature, approach to wet-bulb, and range (3) Performance curves (estimates if final design is not established)
(4) Air flow (5) Power consumption (6) Estimated noise levels (7) Dri f t rate and drop size.
b.
Cooling Lakes and Ponds (from the ER)
(1) Flow rates (through condenser)
(2) Flow-through times (3) Flow pattera (4) Monthly average water temperatures (a) Mean for entire lake or pond (b)
Inlet (from condenser)
(c) Outlet (to condenser)
(5) Surface elevation (means, maximum, minimum)
Spray Ponds or Canals (from the ER) c.
(1) Flow rates (through condenser)
(2) Flow-through times (3) Flow pattern (4) Monthly average water temperatures (a) Inlet (from condenser)
(b) Outlet (to condenser) 107 20I 3.4.2-5
February 1979 9
(5) Surf ace elevation (mean, maximum, minimum)
(6) Spray system operating parameters (e.g., power consump-tion, drop size) d.
Once-Through Systems (f rom the ER)
(1) Condenser flow rate (2) Temperature dif ferential across condenser (3) lime-of passage through system (including intake and discharge system passage times).
4.
Site-specific meteorological date (trom ESRP 2.7) 5.
Site-specific water-supply data 'f rom ESRP 2.3.1) 6.
Heat dissipation system performance analyses based on the manufacturer's design data cid site-specific meteorological and hydrological data (f rom the ER).
III.
ANALYSIS PROCEDURE The reviewer's analysis of the intake, discharge, and heat dissipation system component descriptions will be closely linked with the assessment of construction and operational impacts directed by the ESRPs for ES Sections 4 and 5.
The intent of this analysis is to identify and describe those design and performance characteristics of the proposed cooling components that can be expected to cause environmental impacts as a result of component construction or operation.
Those characteristics generally considered are listed in Sec-tion II of this ESRP.
Each cooling system component will be analyzed, and the reviewer will prepare descriptions of those desigr, and performance characteris-tics generally expected to result in environmental impacts (e.g.,
intake configuration, flow velocity through traveling screens, cooling tower drift).
8
_/
4 _0 4 3.4.2-6 iU
February 1979 The review will be based on the cooling system components described in the applicant's environmental report and will consider component performance for the operational modes described by the r eviewer for ES Section 3.4.1.
For all systems, the reviewer will cor sider ir take and discharge temperatures and the temperature rise across the condenser, For cooling towers, the reviewer will determine average discharge tempera-tures for each month of the year using cooling tower performance curves.
The average discharge temperature will be calculated by using the average wet-bulb temperature for the month.
For spray systems, the reviewer will analyze the applicant's estimates of average monthly discharge temperatures.
The depth and extent of this analysis will depend on the seriousness of the predicted impacts of the heated effluent on the receiving body of water and the level of confidence in the applicant's model.
Examplos of information and descriptions of models that may be used for this analysis can be found in the reports listed in the reference section of this ESRP.
In those cases where auxiliary systems are employed to further cool the blowbewn discharged from the main cooling system, the final discharge tempera-ture will be determined.
The reviewer will consult with the appropriate ES Section 4 and 5 reviewers to determine additional cooling system component design or performance charac-teristics to be analyzed and descrioed.
The reviewer will compare the cooling system descriptiens with those of similar operating plants ari will identify design or operating features of the proposed cooling system that represent a major departure from previously reviewed systems.
on -
0-b0J 9
3.4.2-7
February 1979 IV.
EVALUATION The reviewer must determine if the cooling system component descriptions are consistent, accurate, and given in sufficient detail to serve the needs of the reviews of intake, discharge, and heat dissipation system impacts.
The reviewer will ensure that (1) descriptions of the intake, heat dissipation and discharge systems are sufficiently complete to serve the purposes of the evaluations described by the appropriate ES Section 4 and 5 ESRPs, including any special descriptive information needed to evaluate compliance with applic-able regulations, (e.g., noise, FWPCA), (2) the predicted operational character-istics (e.g.,
flow rates and velocities) are consistent with system design, (3) the proposed systems are consistent with good engineering practice, and (4) unusual system designs are identified.
The reviewer will verify all significant performance charat:teristics and, if necessary, will conduct independent analyses to ensure that performance characteristics are accurately described.
The fullowi.ig are examples of such analyses:
~
Intake system flow rates, flow velocities, and velocity dist
' ions Cooling tower performance, e.g.,
approach to wet-bulb tem;
- are, drif t rate anj droplet size, noise-level contours.
Cooling pond performance, e.g., capacity, mean temperature Spray system performance Discharge system performance, e.g., flow velocity.
V.
INPUT TO THE ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT The depth and extent of the input to the environmental statement will be governed by the characteristics of the intake, discharge, and heat dissipation systems, and by the nature and magnitude of the expected terrestrial and aquatic impacts in the site vicinity. The following information will usually be included in ES Section 3.4.2:
107 284 3.4.2-8
February 1979 A.
Narrative descriptico of the intake, discharge, and heat dissipation systems B.
Sketches of intake, discharge, and heat dissipation components C.
Detailed drawings of important subsystems (e.g.,
perforated pipe assemblies)
D.
Tables and graphs of important performance characteristics of the intake, discharge, and heat dissipat'on systems when these parameters will be used (and referenced) by the appropriate ES Section 5 reviewers.
The reviewer wi'1 provide inpu;s or ensure that inputs will be made to the following ES sections:
A.
Sections 4.1, 4.2, 4.3.
The reviewer will ensure that the reviewers for ES Sections 4.1, 4.2, and 4.3 have sufficient cooling system design d.ta to permit analysis and assessment of cooling system construction impacts.
B.
Sections 5.2, 5.3, 5 8.
The reviewer will ensure that design and operating characteristics of the cooling system components are adequate for use by the reviewers for ES Sections 5.2, 5.3 and 5.6 to predict and assess environmental impacts of the proposed cooling system.
C.
Sections 9.3.1, 9.3J. The reviewer will ensure that ES Section 3.4.2 contains sufficient descriptive detail to serve as the basis for a comparison of alternative intake, discharge, and heat dissipation systems.
>n7 qp7 iU/
LUJ 3.4.2-9
February 1979 O
VI.
REFERENCES 1.
Environmental Protection Agency, Reviewing Environmental Impact Statements -
Power Plant Cooling Systems, Engineering Aspects, EPA 660/2-73-016, Pacific Northwest Environmental Research Laboratory, National Environmental Research Center, Corvalis, OR, October 1973.
2.
D. L. Schreiber, C. D. Becker, and J. J. Fuquay, Appraisal of Water Intake Systems an the Central Columbia Rive _r, Battelle, Pacific Northwest Labora-tories, Richland, WA, 1973.
3.
L. D. Jensen, ed., "Entrainmen* and Intake Screening," Proceee 'gs of the Second Entrainment and Intake Screening Workshop, sponsored by the Edison Electrical Institute (Cooling Water Discharge Research Project RP-49) and Maryland Power Plant Siting Program at Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, February b-9, 1973, Report No. 15, 1974.
4.
L. D. Jensen, ed., "The Probiem of Compliance with 316b," Proceedings of the Third National Workshop on Entrainment and Impingement, sponsored by the New York Power Pool and Electric Power Research Institute at New York City, NY, February 2-4, 1976, 1977.
5.
E. E. Huber, Fish Protection at Intake Structures and Dams:
- Guidance, Screens and Collection Devices, ORNL-EIS-74-67, Oak Ridge National Labora-tory, Oak Ridge, TN, 1974.
6.
J. C. Sonnichsen, Jr., B. W. Bentley, G. F. Bailey, and R. E. Nakatani, A Review of Thermal Power Plant Intake Structure Designs and Related Environmental Considerations, HEDL-TME-73-24, Hanford Engineering Develop-ment Laooratory, Richland, WA, 1973.
\\C.,
n,J 3.4.2-10
February 1979 7.
Lake Michigan Cooling Water Intake Technical Committee, Lake Michigan Intakes:
Report on the Gest Available Technology, 1973.
8.
R. K. Sharna, Fish Protection at Water Diversions and Intakes:
A Bibliography of Published and Unpublished References, ANL/ ESP-1, Argonne National 'aboratory, Argonne, IL, 1973.
9 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Development Document for Best Technology Available for the Location, Desion, Construction, and Capacity of Cooling Water Intake Structures for Minimizing Adverse Environmental Impact, EPA 440/1-76/015-a, Washington, D.C.,
1976.
10.
J. L. Schuler and L. E.
Larson, " Improved Fish Protection at Intake Systems," J. Environmental Engineering Division, ASCE, pp. 897-910, 1975.
1.
R. T. Richards and M. J. Hroncich, " Perforated pipe Water Intake for Fish Protection," J. Hydraulics Division, ASCE, pp. 139-149, 1975.
12.
P. J. Ryan and D. R. F. Harleman, "An Analytical and Experimental Study of Transient Cooling Pond Behavior," R. M.
Parsons Laboratory for Water Resources and Hydrodynamics, Department of Civil Engineering, M.I.T.,
Technical Report No. 161, 1973.
13.
" Spray Cooling Workshop," sponsored by National Science Founaation and the American Power Conference, April 23, 1976, Chicago, IL, American Power Conference Pr oceedings, Illinois Institute of Technology, 1977.
14.
A. M. Elgawhary, " Design Considerations and The mal Performance of Spray Cooling Systems for Large Power and Chemical Plants," Paper No. 74e, Presented at the 67th Annual Meeting, American Institute of Chemical Engineers,..ashington, D.C., Bechtel Power Corp., Gaither3 burg, MD, December 1-5, 1974.
107 287 3.4.2-11
February 1979 0
15.
D. P. Hoffman, " Spray Cooling for Power Plants," Proceedings of the American Power Conference, Vol. 35, pp. 702-712, 1973.
16.
J. C. Sonnichsen, Jr., S. L. Engstrom, D. C. Kolesar, and G. C. Bailey, Cooling Ponds - A Survey of the State of the Art, HEDL-TME 72-101, September 1972.
9 107 233 g
3.4.2-12