ML19242C687

Source Term & Radiation Dose Estimates for Postulated Damage to 102 Bldg at GE Vallecitos Nuclear Ctr

ML19242C687
Person / Time
Site:	07000754
Issue date:	02/28/1979
From:	Mcpherson R, Mishima J, Schwendiman L BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY
To:
Shared Package
ML19242C674	List: ML19242C673 ML19242C677 ML19242C680 ML19242C683 ML19242C685 ML19242C687
References
PNL-2844-UC-ZOE, NUDOCS 7908130212
Download: ML19242C687 (87)

Text

-

PNL-2844 UC-20e Source Term and Radiation Dose Estimates for Postulated Damage f.o the 102 Building at the General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear Center J. Mishima E. C. Watson R. B. McPherson J.E. Ayer L C. Schwendiman

....,_,......_m February 1979 Prepared for Division of Environmental Impact Studies Argonne National Laboratory under Contract EY-76-C-06-1830 Pacific Northwest Laboratory Operated for the U.S. Department of Energy by Battelle Memorial Institute er OBattelle E

m c70 7908130hl C

PNL-2844 UC-20e SOURCE TERM AND RADIATION DOSE ESTIMATES FOR POSTULATED DAMAGE TO THE 102 BUILDING AT THE GENERAL ELECTRIC VALLECITOS NUCLEAR CENTER J. Mishima R.B. McPherson L.C. Schtendiman E.C. Watson J.E. Ayer*

• Fuel Reprocessing and Recycle Branch Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission February 1979 Precared for Divisien of Environmental Impact Studies Argenne National Laboratory under Contract EY-76-C-06-1830 Pacific Northwest Laboratory Richland, Washington, 99352 b ET?, C "a".[

SUMMARY

Three scenarios representing significant levels of containment loss due to moderate, substantial, and major damage to the 102 Building at the Valleci-tos Nuclear Center are postulated, and the potential radiation doses to the general population as a result of the airborne releases of radionuclides (hereafter called scurce terms) are estimated.

The damage scenarios are not correlated to any specific level of seismic activity.

The three scenarios are:

1.

Moderate damage scenario - perforation of the enclosures in and the structure comprising the Plutonium Analytical Laboratory.

2.

Substantial dam, age scenario - complete loss of containment of the Plutonium Analytical Laboratory and loss of the filters sealing the inlet to the Radioactive Materials Laboratory not cells.

3.

Major damage scenario - the damage outlined in (2) plus the perforation of enclosures holding significant inventories of dispersible plutonium in and the structure comprising the Advanced Fuels Laboratory.

iii e2,qf72

=

CONTENTS

SUMMARY

.iii FIGURES

.vii TABLES viii INTRODUCTION 1

CONCLUSION 3

5 PROCESS AND FACILITY DESCRIPTION 102 BUILDING 5

Radioactive Materials Laboratory (RML) Hot Cells 6

Plutonium Analytical Laboratory (PAL) 6 Advanced Fuels Laboratory (AFL) 9 POSTLt_ATED DAMAGE SCENARIOS AND SOURCE TEmi ESTIMATES

. 11 DAMAGE SCENARIO

. 11 Moderate Damage Scenario.

. 11 Substantial Damage Scenario

. 11 Major Damage Scenario

. 11

. 12 SOURCE TERM ESTIMATION

. 12 Moderate Damage Scenario.

Substantial Damage Scenario

. 17 Major Damage Scenario

. 21 RADIAT!CN DOSE MODELS FOR AN ATMOSPHERIC RELEASE

. 31 CCSE ESTIMATES AND DISCUSSION

. 37 43 REFERENCES APPENDIX A - DISCUSSICN OF FACTORS USED TO ESTIMATE THE POTENTIAL AIRBORNE RELEASES FROM SEISMIC ACTIVITY AT THE VALLECITOS NUCLEAR CENTER

.A.1 4

V 0Z3c73

REFERENCES

.A.17 APPENDIX B - CALCULATION OF RELEASE TO THE ATMOSPHERE FROM PERFORATED ENCLOSURES AND ROOMS

.B.1 REFERENCES

.B.9 APPENDIX C - DOSE FACTORS FOR INHALATION AND DOSE CALCULATION RESULTS FOR CLASS W PLUT0NIUM.

.C.1 g;,7,[fgI vi

FIGURES 1.

Plan View of the 100 Area, Vallecitos Nuclear Center 5

2.

Building 102 Main Floor 7

3.

Building 102 Basement 9

4.

Scenario 1 - Schematic Diagram of Leak Path of Particulate Material from Perforated PAL

. 14 5.

Volumetric Flows from Perforated Enclosures and PAL Structure

. 15 6.

Scenario 1 - Pu Airborne Concentration in Perforated PAL Enclosures as a Function of Time

. 16 7.

Scenario 1 - Pu Airborne Concentration within PAL as a Function of Time

. 17 8.

Scenario 1 - Mass Airborne Release from Perforated PAL

. 18 with Time.

9.

Scenario 2 - Schematic Drawing of Leak Path of Particulate Material from Collapsed PAL

. 20 10.

Nominal PUO Particle Size Distributio.1

. 23 2

11.

" Respirable F action" of Airborne Particles

. 24 12.

Scenario 3 - Schematic Drawing of Leak Path of Particulate Material from Perforated AFL

. 25 13.

Scenario 3 - Airborne Mass Concentration within Perforated AFL Enclosures as a Function of Time

. 26 14 Scenario 3 - Airborne Mass Concentration within Perforated AFL as a Function of Time

. 27 15.

Scenario 3 - Mars Airborne Release of Pu from Perforated

. 28 AFL with Time

16. Time Dependence of the Environmental Surface Resuspension 34 Factor A.l. Effect of Minimum Superficial Velocity in an Off-Gas Line on the Concentration of Liquid Solution Particles Resulting from Vigorous Mixing of a Solution with Air (Censity of Solution: 1 g/cc).

.A.2 A.2. Particle Size Distribution of a Stable Aerosol that has Encountered

.A.3 Several Changes of Direccion in a Pipeline vii lb M[dk",([M

A.3. Geometric Size Distribution of U0

.A.6 2

A.4. Uranium 0xide Airborne Over the Bulk Powder Following Disruption

.A.7 A.S. Terminal Velocity of Unit-Density Spheres at 1 Atm and 20 C.

.A.8 A.6. Decrease in Mass Airborne Concentration versus Time (Assumed Stirred Settling Only), C = 300 mg/m3

.A.ll g

Powder from Various Surfaces.

.A.13 A.7. Aerodynamic Entrainment of UO2

.B.1 B.l. Flow Paths frcm Enclosure and PAL Structure TABLES 1.

Postulated Airborne Releases for Various Degrees of Containment 3

Loss for Barriers in the 102 Building 2.

Most Likely 50-Year Committed Dose Equivalents and Pu Depositions.

4 29 3.

Mass Airborne Release of Pu from Perforated AFL 4.

Isotopic Composition of the Pu Mixture

. 37 5.

Fifty-Year Committed Dose Equivalents from Inhalation Following

. 38 Damage, Scenario 1 (Class Y) 6.

Fifty-Year Comitted Cose Equivalents from Inhalation Following

. 38 Damage, Scenario 2 (Class Y) 7.

Fifty-Year Committed Dose Equivalents from Inhalation Following

. 39 Damage, Scenario 3 (Class Y) 8.

Estimated Maximum Pu Decosition at Significant Locations 39 Following Damage, Scenario 1 9.

Estimated Maximum Pu Cecosition at Significant Locations Following Damage, Scenario 2

. 39 10.

Estimated Maximum Pu Cecosition at Significant Locations 20 Folicwing Damage, Scenario 3 A.l. Croc Size Distribution of 3 Hollow Cone Nozzles at Various

.A.4 Pressures.

A.2. Craction of Various-Sized Particles (o = 10 g/cm ) Remaining Airborne in Rectangular Chamber (Stirred Settling) 10-ft Tall

.A.10 viii L.;,^ {',i v

A.3. Aerodynamic Entrainment of Uranium Particles in the Respirable Size Range from Various Surfaces

.A.12 A.4. Resuspension Fluxes (Mass Fraction U02 <10 pm AED Per Second) from Various Surfaces

.A.13 A.S. Fractional Release During Air Drying of Concentrated Plutonium Nitrate Solutions (Using 0.72 g Pu as a Source)

.A.14 A.6. Calculateo Resuspension Fluxes for Plutonium Nitrate from Stainless Steel (Mass Fraction /Second)

.A.15 B.l. Symbolic Reference Map (R = 1)

.B.7 B.2. Program Input

.3.8 C.). Fifty-Year Comitted Dose Equivalent Factors from Acute Inhalation for Class W Material

.C.1 C.2. Fifty-Year Comitted Dose Equivalent Factors from Acute

.C.1 Inhalation for Class Y Material C.3. Fifty-Year Comitted Dose Equivalent Factors from One-Year

.C.2 Chronic Inhalation for Class W Material.

C.4. Fifty-Year Comitted Dose Equivalent Factors from One-Year

.C.2 Chronic Inhalation for Class Y Material.

C.S. Fifty-Year Comitted Dose Equivalents from Inhalation Following Damage, Scenario 1 (Class W)

.C.3 C.6. Fifty-Year Comitted Dose Equivalents from Inhalation Following Damage, Scenario 2 (Class W)

.C.3 C.7. Fif ty-Year Comitted Cose Equivalents from Inhalation Follcwing Damage, Scenario 3 (Class W)

.C.a ix L33C ME

INTRODUCTION Various procedures involving significant inventories of radionuclides are performed in the 102 Building (Radioactive Materials Building) at the General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear Center, Vallecitos, California.

Recent geological findings suggest the Verona Fault may extend into the sita, and seismic activity can lead to the loss of containment of some of the radionuclides in the 102 Building. The level of seismic activity required to lead to each cegree of containment loss has not been determined.

Loss of containment of these radionuclides may result in potential radiation exposures of the general popula-tion.

The radionuclides in the 102 Suilding with the greatest radiological significance are the isotopes of plutonium, and thus, the principal mode of exposure is inhalation of radioactive particles.

A comprehensive analysis of the risks involved in the operation of such a facility required an in-depth study of many factors.

These factors include the probability of various levels of seismic activity, the loss of containment associated with each level of seismic activity, and the potential airborne release of radionuclides associated with each level of containment loss.

The components to perform sucn an analysis are not currently available.

As an interim measure, the potential airborne releases of clutonium are estimated for three levels of damage without regard to the levels of seismic activity required to attain the damage levels.

The potential environmental consequences in terms of radiation dose to people resulting from these postulated plutonium releases are estimated.

Argonne National Laboratory, at tSe request of tne U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), has askec Pacific Northwest Laboratory to estimate the poten-tial source terms and resultant radiation doses to the general peculation that are a result of three levels of containment loss in the 102 Building.

i G

1

CONCLUSION The "best estimates" of the source terms generated by the three postulated levels of containment loss are shown in Table 1.

TABLE 1.

Postulated Airborne Releases for Various Degrees of Containment Loss for Barriers in the 102 Building Scenario 1 Perforation of the Enclosures in and the Pu Analytical Laboratory Structure Instantaneous airoorne release Additional airecree re: ease of Pu nitnin next 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> 0.4 mg ou Additional airborne release of Pu within next 6 nours 4

mg Pu Additional airbor e release of Pu within next 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> 10 mg Pu Additional airecrne release of Pu within next 3 days a

mg Pu Scenario 2 Collapse of the Pu Analytical Laboratory and Loss of HEPA Filter-sealing Entry to the Radioactive 'iaterials Lacoratory Hot Cells Instantaneous airborne release 20 mg Pu Additional airborne release of Pu within next 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> 0.8 ug Pu +

4 _Ci FP Additional airecrne release of Pu witnin next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> 3

69 Pu

• 10.Ci FP Additional airborne release of Pu within next 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> 7

.g Pu + 30 aci FP Acditional airtorne release of Pu within next 3 days 10 ug Pu + 130 uCi FP Scenario 3 Collaose of tne Pu Analyt cal Latoratory and Loss of E3A Cilter-sealing Entry to the Radfoactive w teriais Laboratory a

and 3erforation of tre Enclosares in and the Structure Enclosure of tne acvanced Fuels Latoratory Instantaneous airoor9e release 20 mg Pu Additional tiroorne release of Du witnin next 2 nours 2 mg Du +

4 ;Ci FP Additional airoorne release of Pu witnin next 6 hours6.944444e-5 days <br />0.00167 hours <br />9.920635e-6 weeks <br />2.283e-6 months <br /> 50 mg Pu + 10 Ci rP Additional airoor9e release of du mithin next 16 hours1.851852e-4 days <br />0.00444 hours <br />2.645503e-5 weeks <br />6.088e-6 months <br /> 400 mg Du + 30 C1 FD Add 1tional airocrae release of Pu within next 3 days 3 g Pu + 13.Ci FP A sumary of the calculated most likely 50-yr committed dose equivalents for the three damage scenarios is presented in Table 2 for the maximum-exposed individual and the population within a 50-mile radius of the General Electric

'lallecitos Nuclear Center.

The most likely maximum plutcaium deposition at tne nearest pasture is also included.

3 L..T.',o r 7 3 s ~ -

\\

TABLE 2.

Most Likely 50-Yr Conmitted Dose Equivalents (a) and Pu Depositions Orcan of Reference Surface Scenario Description Lunas Bone Decosition 1

Resident (rem) 0.005 0.008 Population (person-rem)(b) 40 60 2

Pasture (uci/m )

0.002 2

Resident (rem) 0.09 0.1 Population (person-rem)(b) 60 100 2

Pasture (uCi/m )

0.05 3

Resident (rem)

0. 7 1

Population (person-rem)(b) 7000 10,000 2

Pasture (uCi/m )

0.2 (a) A translocation class Y has been assumed.

(b) Collective dose to the population residing within 50 miles of the Vallecitos Center.

The calculated 50-yr collective committed dose equivalents for the three scenarios are much lower than the collective dose equivalent from 50 years of exposure to natural backgrcund radiation and medical x-rays.

The most likely maximum residual plutonium contaminants on the ground at the significant loca-tions for the three scenarios are all within the Environmental Protection 2

Agency proposed guideline of 0.2 uCi/m

_..p SO o

4

PROCESS AND FACILITY DESCRIPTION 102 BUILDING The 102 Building (Radica'ctive Materials Building), of one-story construc-tion, is in the fenced portion of the 100 Area o'.' the Vallecitos Nuclear Center (VNC) (see Figure 1).

The basement and ground floor slabs are composed of reinforced concrete.

The roof has structural steel framing and a metal deck supported by structural steel columns.

In the ground floor area (of primary interest to this report) the walls are composed of 8-in. reinforced concrete block, 4-in. reinforced concrete block, precast reinforced concrete, and wood studs with gypsum board.

Resistance to horizontally-acting loads on the ground

(

PG&E O

(

Sus STATION

/

3-.

I I

M

==i i i

,j.

SHOP I

L OPERATIONS 106 l

[

] [I 1051

[ g 1

.u

'l par.A ING LOT L-J g

j-

-N

\\

I

. _ -. ~

. _,j n O!

4 I'i RAD f 0ACTI',E

=

. - ~

r-VATE.ll AL EL u uR j '.'.ETALLURGv AND '~.!

12 i

i

, i CFE.MISTRY 103 h R

r:

}f%

((C2A =o

.',.ECH EOU I P ELDG g

g

\\.,._.-..-.-..-._._._._._.

i

\\

l SECURITY 3LJG FIGURE 1.

Plan View cf the 100 Area, Vallecitos Nuclear Center 5

b.,] h..

floor is provided primarily by interior 8-in. concrete block partition walls and exterior precast concrete walls that connect to the roof system, steel columns, intersecting walls, and floor slab.

Although the structural steel framing was not designed for earthquake loads, it functions as bounding frames for the interior concrete block shear walls and tnus acts as a part of the lateral load system.

The plutonium laboratory is housed in the basement.

The floor slab over the basement area is composed of reinforced concrete, as are the basement walls, columns, floor slabs, and footings.

The construction is monolithic in character with conventional construction joints and is heavily -einforced.

The RML cells are of heavy, reinforced concr ete constructions and are monoli-thic with basement walls and the first floor slab (Engineering Design Analysis Company 1977).

Plan views of the ground floor showing the location of the Plutonium Analysis Laboratory (PAL) and the Radioactive Materials Laboratory (RML) hot cells, and of the basement in which the Advanced Fuels Laboratory (AFL) is housed are shown in Figures 2 and 3, respectively.

Radioactive Materials Laboratory (RML) Hot Cells The RML is located on the south end of the ground floor level of the 102 Suilding (see Figure 2). Most operations involving by-product materials (dissolution, separation, conversion to final product or waste form, etc. )

are performed in the RML not cells.

The four principal hot cells are relatively compact, massive structures with two-to three-feet thick walls of high-density concrete.

Cells handling mixed fission sroducts and alpha-emitters are equipped with a 3/16-in. tnick, free-standing stainless steel liner.

Plutonium Analytical Labor 3 tory (PAL)

The PAL is located in the middle of the east side of the ground floor of the 102 Building (see Figure 2).

The laboratory's primary function is the analysis of plutonium solutions and comocunds.

Although the quantity of plutonium in this area is limited, the plutonium is included due to its accar-ent vulnerability.

D**'d?

cnr 6

- - ~.-

CONCRETE h

PAD

-N-min friin pl l

MAINTENANCE CELLS SHOP fELEV l

,~

l DN a

r

~

CELLS -

l l

l U

DECONTAMINAT10N POCL gy

\\

STOR CHANGE RCOM CHANGE RCOM

'_ I PLUTCNIUM t

CELL; qst

_1 1

ANALYTICAL 9-COLO i

r i

CORCIDOR l

p LA30RATORY

~

J 'r-

- CHANGE RM 7

pt CCK C RADl0 CHEMISTRY I

MANI PULATOR LASCRATORY TC ADVANCED DE-CON REPAIR m

,~d RM i FLELS LAS I

RAMP UP HIGH 3AY AREA M

SAEEMENT EVERCENCY EXIT AIR FLCW

'11 j CELL 1.f ACCESS h CELL 3 C RITICAL CCLUMNS.

s AREA

-THESE EXTERIOR

[ CELL 2 q CELL 4 y

WALLS OF HiGH SAY E,]I CELL 5 T

RML OPERATING GALLERY

,97, 07 3

4 gyqqg57 t "l9 l

1 CRlilCAL COLUMNE.

TFE5E E'<TERICR WALL 2 0F H'GH BAY FIGURE 2.

Building 102 Main Fico- (Scurce:

Engineering Design Analysis Comcany 1977)

O 7

,c L etsU

Advanced Fue 2 Laboratory ( AFL)

The AFL occupies almost all of the basement area of the 102 Building (see Figure 3) and is the primary area at the VNC for plutonium processing.

The AFL is an experimental facility involved in the development of mixed oxide (MO) fuel production.

Plutonium contents may range from 10% to 25% with an operational value of 20%.

Operations are nonroutine in the sense that this is not a production facility, although the procedures followed may be the same from run to run.

The AFL has the capability of dry-blending oxides, although the primary emphasis is on co-precipitation of uranium and plutonium, which are handled as an entity after the initial mixing of solution.

(Defini Mon of the process and scrap recovery chemistry of the co-precipitation process is one of the tasks of the facility.) Thus, the plutonium and uranium compounds and physical forms may be more varied than encountered in a dry-blending production facility.

Fuel elements may be produced by pellet loading or vibration compaction.

Rocm air is drawn into most of the enclosures via High Efficiency Parti-culate Air (HEPA) filters equipped with rain shields.

The rocm is at a aegative pressure with respect to the atmoschere, and the enclosures are at a negative pressure with respect to the room.

Glovebox 40, tne sintering furnace, is an exception and is held at a few inches W.G. positive with respect to the rcom pressure.

All overhead exhaust ducts are currently being c:nnected to stainless steel pipe.

During the transition period, they are compcsed of a combination of stainless steel, painted mild steel, and plastic.

Some enclosuree have flexible (spring-reinforced plastic) connections attached to the exhaust system.

Exnaust flows are contro' led by valves designed to maintain a con-stant pressure c,fferential betweer. the enclosure and exnaust system.

_c s s of a single gloseport or similar item would not result, then, in an aircorne release of a significant amount of the contained radionuclides.

Fire cetection and protection is provided in the AFL.

Both tnermal and smoke dctectors are used.

An overhead sprinkler system is in the AFL, and cry extinguishers fitted with a scecial probe for ? ercing gloves are currently i

. cst of the structural provided.

The fire potential in tne facility is limited.

8 CISC

N DIRT FILLJ l

J' ELEV

, DIRT FILL l

.,. ELEV ECUIP

-N-

[

ROOM b

EMERGENC [

I EXIT BOTTOM LOAD CENTER

-. J STOR OF POOL 3 AIR SHOP

'/AULT 5 LOCK

.l.-.

m e-EMERGE.'.C Y EXIT ONLY L

7

+

2 UP FUEL LAB 7,EST SODIUM FUEL LAB EAST RM

.A NEW

\\

y FILTER ADVANCED RM FUELS LAB SASE!MNT s

s' ENTRY I'

l PROPOSED NEW AREAWAY f.

1 l

[,

j

, - t i l.'_ j r

[

j

/

SOTTCM BOTTOM OFRML OFRML CELLS "C LS s

[9lRT Fil! /

AREA 0F INTEREST l

FIGijRE 3.

Building 102 Basement (Scurce:

Engineering Design Analysis Company 1977) 9 bE.10:3.3

material present (concrete, metal, etc. ) will not burn under normal circum-stances.

A limited amcunt of combustible material (celluloic waste in 55-gal drums, rubber and plastic gloves, wood, etc.) and materials that can provide fuel when heated (plastics, such as the enclosure windows and exhaust ducts) are sometimes present.

Two hydraulic fluid reservoirs are located in the Ceramics Processing area under gloveboxes 38 and 39.

The hydraulic fluid currently in use is water soluble.

A limited, undefined volume of isopropanol (a) is available in glovebox 39 where it is used as a die lubricant.

The normal amount of isopropanol present is 50 mt; the maximum inventory is 200 mt.

(a) Flammable limits in air:

2% to 12%; flash point:

58'F; autoignition temperature:

750 F.

10 b-o 633C V

POSTULATED DAMAGE SCENARIOS AND SOURCE TERM ESTIMATES DAMAGE SCENARIO Three scenarios that result in the release of radioactive materials to the environment are considered.

The scenarios arranged in order of increasing severity follow:

Moderate Damage Scenario:

the seismic event shakes the facility and gloveboxes in the Plutonium Analytical Laboratory (PAL) to the extent tc.at containers inside are broken and their contents are spilled into the glovebox.

More than one breach occurs in each glovebox, and the gluveboxes are parted from exhaust ducts.

This damage is caused by falling debris, toppled equipment, or minor structural damage.

The PAL exhaust ventilation is parted, and a path is provided that permits ccm-munication between the PAL interior and the environment ambient to the 102 Building. Otherwise, the PAL and the 102 Building structures remain intact.

Radioactive material exists in other areas of the 102 Building, specifically in the cells of the Radioactive Materials Laboratory (RML),

in the gloveboxes of the Advanced Fuels Laboratory (AFL) located in the basement of the 102 Building, and the gloveboxes of the Radiochemistry Laboratory (RL). The massive structures of the cells and the belew-grade location of the AFL preclude damage that contributes to releases in terms 90 of this scenario.

Radiochemistry routinely handles up to 8 Ci of

'Mo, 0.C4 Ci of *2' P, and 100 mg of low burnuo mixed oxide fuel in solutions.

These quantities of radionuclides are consicered insignificant uhen com-Cared witn the potential effects of plutonium release frcm the ?AL.

S_ubstantial Damage Scenario:

Sufficient vibratory forces are applied to tre 102 Building to induce the walls en the ground ficar to collapse, bringing the roof dcwn ucon the gloveboxes in the PAL and the RL.

The centents of gloveboxes are scilled curing the early vibratory motion, anc gicvecoxes themselves are then tipped over and/or crushed by falling wall; and roof segments.

The falling structure carries with it the inlet 11

, 7.,,,. c. <. ;'. '

u, t v

ventilation ducts to the RML cells, but the cells proper are not breached by vibratory motion or the falling structure.

The ground-level floor of the 102 Building, which is the ceiling of the AFL, remains intact.

Glass columns in the AFL are broken, and contents are drained onto the floor of the containing gloveboxes, but the gloveboxes themselves and their first-stage filters remain intact.

The stresses imposed upon aloveboxes in the ceramic processing area are insufficient to effect either signifi-cant damage to gloveboxes or appreciable spillage of contained materials.

Major Damace Scenario:

Sufficient vibratory forces are applied such that e

a level of damage that exceeds that of Scenario 2 is sustained.

The above-grade walls and roof of the 102 Building collapse and fall onto the ficor.

Gloveboxes iri the PAL and RL are crushed and their contents spilled.

The floor (ceiling of the AFL) suffers damage resulting in partial collapse, and large segments fall onto gloveboxes in the AFL.

The vibratory motion and subsequent damage to the gloveboxes in the AFL result in the release of plutonium-bearing liquid and powder into the basement laboratory.

As in Scenario 2, the inlet ventilation ducts to the hot cells are carried away by the coil Apse of above-grade structures, but the cells proper are not breached.

SOURCE TERM ESTIMATION 1.

Moderate Damage Scenario In the absence of a detailed study of the response of the equipment and structures to various levels of seismic activity, engineering judgment and experience were used to select responses that could lead to the airborne release of the contained radienuclides.

The assumptions were:

Loss of the exhaust flow from tne facility by significant breaching of e

the main exhaust duct on the roof.

A direct, unfiltered path from the 'lutonium Analytical Laboratory (PAL) to tne ambient atmosphere by breaching of the exhaust duct in the labora-tory or breaching of the roof over the PAL.

12 L 2,'it.N

A higher than normal airborne concentration of plutonium within the o

enclosures generated by the violent breakirq of eouipment and bottles containing plutonium solutions.

Release to the PAL of a portion of the airborne activity by multiple breacning of all enclosures.

Estimation of the potential source term is based upon the following sequence:

The breaking of the equipment generates an airborne concentration of 10 mg of solution per cubic meter (a) in the 17-m3 volume of the six enclosures containing plutonium in the PAL.

The concentration of the solution is 200 g Pu/t (the maximum Pu concentration received) and has a specific gravity of 3

1.5.

Thus, approximately 22 mg Pu are contained in the 17-m volume (1.3 mg Pu/m ).

Wind striking the sides of the building penetrates doonvays, and air flows through the PAL at the rate of 10% of the room volume / hour.

(The 3

approximate volume of the PAL is 8CCO ft, and the indicated flow rate is 3

3 13.3 ft / min or 0.38 m / min).

The air velocity in PAL would be approximately 0.03 to 0.07 fpm.

The enclosures are breached, and air flows through the enclosure at a rate of 10% of enclosure volume per hour.

(The approximate volume of.ii 3

six enclosures is 17 m, indicating flow out of the enclosures of 0.03 m'/ min, or approximately 1 cfm.)

The activity release to the room is C X low.

enc The activity released is assumed to be instantaneously mixed, producing a uniform concentration :nrougnout the rocm.

A resuspension rate of 10-9/sec(#) is assumed for the liquid spilled in tne enclosure.

These postulated conditions are snown schematically in Figure 4 Enclosures in the Radiocnemistry Laboratory are creached, and tne seme response scenario postulated for the PAL is anticipated.

The airoorne release of radionuclides is insignificant comcared to tne release frcm the PAL.

(a) Appendix A presents tne rationale for the choice of the value.

U2,",Cf2

105/ HR EXCHANGE WITH ATMOSPHERE 7

rs

.b a

10%lHR EXCHANGE

^

1

'VITH ROOM

~

~%

/

.~

1 j,

=mm x

N A M' RESUSPENSICN I

10 /SEC

%T b.o 10 mg j ;J g

,?

~~.

4 M

N i [/

/ ' ;i

.N' s

L' TO t.

ANGE ROOM TO s

AFL ~>

N FIGURE 4 Scenario 1 - Schematic Diagram of Leak Path of Particulate Material from Perforated PAL Mass balance equations expressing the relationshio among the airborne concentrations in the various ccmpartments were set up using parameters shcwn in Figure 5.

14

,?onSD

.~,.e

PAL: V 233 m3 I

Cg, g Pulm 3

- 23.3 m3 r

/h pEnc!csure 3

l.7 m ihr 1.7 m /h r ~

1 V

17 m3 2

Cs, g Puirh 6 ug/niin e

(resus)

INITi AL CCNDITICNS, Cg = 0 t0 Cs 1.3 mg Pulm 3 FIGURE 5.

Volumetric Flows from Perforated Enclosures and DAL Structure The relationships among concentrations as c function of time was expressed as follows:

A AD C (t) = C e )t 2

+C e

+C (I) s s

s s

1 2

3 and A

At C (t) = C e )t 2

+C e

• C (2) g 3

3 3

1 2

3 in wnich C

concentration of airborne Pu in enclosure s

C concentration of airborne Pu in PAL 3

t time after event, min A), A2 rate of change.

l.55"l,C[,5,1

The Pu airborne mass concentrations in the enclosures as a function of time were calculated by solving the matrix for the coefficients Cs), Cs 2 '

Cs3, CB, Cg2 nd Cg3, and exponents Aj and A, using a computer program.

1 2

The derivation of the calculational formulae and computer program are presented in Appendix B.

The calculated Pu airborne concentration at various times following its suspension are shown graphically in Figures 6 and 7.

Tne Pu mass airborne concentration in the glovebox decays exponentially (see Figure 6).

The Pu mass concentration in the PAL increases rapidly during the first three to four hours, reaches a maximum value of approximately 1 x 10-4 g/m during the 3

ninth to twelfth hours, and slowly declines.

m ib

~

vi W

S

-3 5 10 P o

G s

E u

5

~

u W

~

N 8

E

-4 L--

E 10 ;

C N

E i[

=

r l

10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 2 24 TIME, HCURS FIGURE 6.

Scenario 1 - Pu Airborne Concentraticn in Perforated PAL Enclosures as a Function of Time 16 pre l+

o%

, e

_.T

$ 10 F

U 5

u E

8 E

R

-6 10 g

i 2

7 i

i i

e i i i

e i

i i

i 10 1 2 3 4 56 7 8 9 10 11 12 24 TIME, HOURS FIGURE 7.

Scenario 1 - Pu Airborne Concentration within PAL as a Function of Time The release rate at any time can be estimated by multiplying the Pu mass airborne concentration of tne PAL shown in Figure 7 by the air excnange rate a

between the PAL and amoient atmosphere (0.38 m*/ min).

The source term for any time increment can be estimated by averaging the mass airborne concentra-tion over that time period x time (in minutes) x 0.38 m*/ min.

The mass release rate of Pu from the PAL is shown graphically in Figure 8.

2.

Substantial Camage Scenario This scenario addresses the potential airborne release resulting frcm the loss of essentially all the 102 Building's walls above grade.

The vibratory forces and collapse of the first-floor walls plus roof result in:

17

'U3030

10-4 c

15

=c.

@n 10-5 ul

~

a:

M 5dc:

10-6

=g r-EE 5

~

E5 si

~

10-7 I

I 0

1 2

3 TIME AFTER PERFORATION, days FIGURE 8.

Scenario 1 - Mass Airborne Release from Perforated PAL with Time Breaking of equipment and bottles in the PAL enclosures, resulting in an e

instantaneous airborne concentration of 10 mg of solution per cubic meter (see Appendix A).

Substantial damage to the enclosure (viewing windows, inlet and exhaust filters, etc.) allows release of all the contained aerosol and unrestricted flow of ambient air.

The walls and ceiling (12-in. reinforced concrete at minimum) of the AFL remain intact, and first stage HEPA remains functional.

Glass equipment within enclosures may be damaged and release their contents, but the enclosures are not breached.

The airborne concentration within the enclosure increases, but no si'gnificant release occurs due to the lack of motive force to expel the contained atmosphere and the absence of an unfiltered opening.

18 C.^. O W

---=e-

--w-w-e we - gam e*

%e--m v-

C The collapse of the walls and roof above grade carry away the inlet e

ventilation ducts (three 6-in. x 6-in. ducts sealed with furnace-type filters outside each cell) to the Radioactive Materials Laboratory (RML) hot cells.

The exhaust outlet and HEPA filters are housed in the massive structure supporting the cells and are assumed to be unaffected, as are the cells themselves.

Contamination on cell walls :nd equipment is assumed suspended in the cell-free volume by the vibratory motion of the tarthquake.

Airflow through the cells is restricted by the pressure drop across the intact filters.

The airborne release is divided into two phases -- an instantaneous and a long-term source tesm.

The contributions from the three building areas are:

PAL -- The instantaneous source term is the total release of all the e

contained aerosol.

The total volume of the six enclosures is 17.0 m3 with an estimated mass airborne concentration of 10 mg solution /m,

3 Thus, 0.17 g of solution at a concentration of 200 g/L with an estimated specific gravity of 1.5 is released and contains approximately 22 mg Pu.

The long-term source term is the resuspension of liquid spilled ento the floor.

A resuspension flux of 10-9/sec (6 x 10-8/ min) (see Appendix A) is used for liquids.

Thus, 6 ag/ min are made airborne from 100 g Pu that is estimated to be present.

The postulated conditions are shown schematically in Figure 9.

AFL -- All the material made aircorne is contained in enclosures tnat e

retain their integrity.

Any release to the AFL is filtered, reducing its concentration by a factor of 2000.

The absence of a mechanism to induce flos for any released material frcm the AFL to the ambient atmo-sphere out of the enclosure and across the pressure drop created by the filter or pathways indicates that airborne release of radionuclides from this area would not be significant under these conditions.

RML -- It is assumed that a fraction of the surface contamination en the e

walls and equipment of cells 1, 2, 4 and 5 is instantaneously made airborne in the free volume of the cells.

A resuspension factor w 10-6/m (see Appendix A) is assumed with a surface area of 82 m2 and 19 GC.'K;S3

i 100'. EXCHANGE WITH ATMOSPHERE r

/l s

?

x

//

1

\\

/\\

\\

\\

~

\\

'I N

~

r

'v

~N I

/, \\

i

,s/

\\

-/

1D19

', i i

m3 ' O

i

/

j

'N.

Q I

i

-u t

,j m

~

N~,

RESUSPENSION 10'9

/SEC

/

7

\\/

,i 9

~~.

/ h [// ~)

To

'N _~i f

i Q ',//

b' '

CHANGE ROOM N'

TO O

N E 5/

v

/

FIGURE 9.

Scenario 2 - Schematic Drawing of Leak Path of Particulate Material from Collapsed PAL 3

a cell volume of 125 m, giving an average airborne contamination of 15 :.Ci 3

3 FP/m and 0.2 Ci Pu/m.

The aerosol is assumed to leak from the cells at a rate of 0.1". voi/hr without reduction of the activity concentration.

Thus, only a long-term source term contribution is estimated 'frem this area under these conditions of 3 x 10'2 aci/ min with 4 x 10-# uCi Pu/ min.

The presence of other enclosures that may contain radionuclides in other areas of the RML (i.e., Radiocnemistry Laboratory, Storage Pools, Cells 6, 9, 10, ll A and 118) is acknowledged.

The cuantity of radionuclides in the Radio-32 chemistry Laboratory is small (8 Ci of Mo, 0.04 Ci of P and 0.1 g of low 20 N,,Cbb

burn-up mixed oxide fuel solutions) and does not contribute signficantly to the source term.

In areas such as the Storage Pool, the material is present primarily as bulk solids in nigh-integrity containers that shoulo be unaffected by the postulated conditions.

The probability of the presence of the inventories assigned to the other cells under a license from the State of California is not kncwn, nor are the characteristics of the cells.

The total inventories of radionuclides are small compared to the cells covered, and thus the quanti-ties of radienuclides at risk are assumed proportionally small.

It was assumed that airoorne releases frem these cells would not be significant.

3.

Major Camace Scenario The scenario postulates:

Total loss of all above-grade walls and roof of the 102 Building.

Complete loss of integrity cf enclosures in the PAL and RCL.

Partial collapse of the floor (ceiling of AFL), providing an unrestricted e

pathway to the ambient at:r.osphere.

Debris causes multiple breachings of some enclosures in the AFL.

Vibratory motion causes soilling of powders and liquids, creating higher than normal airborne concentrations in the enclosures.

A leak rate of iO; of the volume per hour (see Appendix A) is postulated from the enclosure to the AFL and from the AFL to the atmosphere.

• The condition of the RML hot cells is as described in Scenario 2.

The source terms from tne three cuilding areas are:

PAL -- As in Scenario 2, the instantaneous source term is 22 mg Pu.

The long-term source term is 6 ug Pu/ min.

-2 RML Fot Ce !s -- A long-term source term, 3 x 10 uCi, is mixec FP/ min

-4 with 4 x 10 uCi Pu/ min.

AFL -- Three enclosures hold the majority of dispersible, undiluted plutonium.

Ginvebox 37 can contain up to 625 g of Pu02 p wder that is blended with UO in that enclosure. After blending, masses suspended in air will only 2

contain 1/10 to 1/4 the plutonium in undiluted pug 2 pcwder.

Subsequent opera-tions (slug / granulate) make the pcwder coarser and thus less likely to form 21 c,,

t m.". t t 6

stable aerosols or form into pellets.

Undiluted plutonium solutions can be found in gloveboxes 50 and 51 (Scrap Recovery and Nitrate Conversion, respec-tively).

The normal maxima for the two enclosures are 2 and 5 kg Pu as nitrate solutions. The volume of gloveboxes 50 and 51 are estimated to De 17 3

and 18 m respectively.

The quantity of Pu airborne in each box varies with starting material.

Glovebox 37 can contain dry, finely divided Pu02 powder.

Normal maximum inventory during processing is 625 g.

The size distribution of the powder is used in assumed to be that reported by Schwendiman (1977) for a fine Pu02 fuel fabrication and is shown in Figure 10.

Quasi-stable mass airborne concentrations greater than 100 mg/m are not anticipated, but due to the transitory nature of the phenomenon described, an airborne concentration of 300 mg pug 2 (approximately 254 mg Pu) per cucic meter is used (see Appendix A for rationale).

Particles greater than 10 pm Aerodynamic Equivalent Diameter (AED)(a) are not normally respirable.

[ Figure 11 shows several estimations of " respirable fraction" versus AED (Mercer 1977).] Also, particles greater than 10 um AED are lost due to gravitational settling during transport and do not constitute a significant downwind inhalation hazard. Only 10% of the Pu02 p wder airborne is 10 um AED or smaller, and thus 53 mg of Pu is used as the instantaneous source term in glovebox 37.

Gloveboxes 50 and 51 can contain concentrated Pu nitrate solution.

3 Their volumes are estimated to be 17 and 18 m, respectively.

Both are postulated to have instantaneous mass airborne concentrations of 10 mg solu-3 3

tion /m (1.33 mg Pu/m -- see Scenario 1), and therefore, the total mass Pu airborne is 47 mg.

The postulated conditions are shown schematically in Figure 12.

To simolify the calculational procedure, the 100 mg of Pu were considered airborne in a single enclosure with a volume of 37 m giving an initial

-3 3

assumed airborne mass concentration of 2.7 x 10 g Pu/m.

An air exchange (a) Aerodynamic Equivalent Diameter:

having aerodynamic benavior ecuivalent to a schere of stated size with a density of 1.

M 22

9 100 :

u 5

~

!e E 10 5

E

_v E

~

2 3b 5

A of 1 W

s o

wd c-0.1 O.1 1

20 50 90 99 99.5 99.9 PERCENTAGE CF MASS CF STATED PARTICLE SIZE AND SMALLER FIGURE 10.

Ncminal Pu0 Particle Size Distribution 2

3 rate of 10% volume is assumed between the AFL and enclosure (0.C6 m / min) and 3

between the AFL and ambient atmosphere around the facility (2.1 m / min).

The Pu mass airborne concentrations in the enclosure and AFL were esti-mated by solving the matrix (as shown in Equations 1 and 2 on page 15).

23 Th'

LO BRITISH MEDICAL RESEARCH COUNC ll 0.8 8

50.6 ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISS ION

'd Ey 0.4

=

0.2 TASK GROUP ON LUNG DYNAMICS 0

I l

I I

0 1

2 3

4 5

6 7

8 9

10 AERODYNAMIC DI AMETER, pm FIGURE 11.

" Respirable Fraction" of Airborne Particles (Based en Figure 5 in Mercer 1977)

The Pu mass airborne concentrations as a function of time are shown graphically in Figures 13 and 14.

The airborne concentrations in both the enclosure (Figure 13) and AFL (Figure J4) appear to increase with time.

The increasing mass airborne concentration in the enclosure is not consistent with the concept that the initial concentraticn is a maximum value for mass concen-tration in the enclosed volume and is an artifact of the high resuspension rate chosen for the material on the floor of the enclosure and the small leak rate.

Since the artifact leads to a conservative release value (up to a factor of 5 -- see Figure 13), the calculational methodology was not changed.

24 LZ,91CO

M IN4RIGR pq CCRRICCR ON

, IST RCCR g

• CRACE

,j.

AR CERAMIC PROCESSING h~5CbP EC0 VERT ~~

l [

q PCACER J

.I INSTANTANEOUS i

\\

RE'.EA SE: 529 mqPu l'NLCADING LCNG TERM RELEASE; 5 ag pug.5EC 7

Er E,

,ig a LCNG TERM SOURCE:

NITR E CONVERSICN FIGURE 12.

Scenario 3 - Schematic Drawing of Leak Path of Particulate Material from Perforated AFL The release rate as a function of time is shown in Figure 15.

The quantity of Pu released over one hour periods was calculated by averaging the Pu mass airborne concentration shown in Figure 15 over the time period and multiplying 3

by 2.1 (the air exchange rate between the AFL and ambient atmosphere in m / min).

The calculated values are tabulated in Table 3.

a f

- ~.

25

m f

c.

en g' 10'2 {

p 5

-5 u

5v to N

~3h 10 a:

o caE f

f i

i i

r i

I

(

t i

i 1 23 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 24 TIME HCURS FIGURE 13.

Scenario 3 - Airborne Mass Concentration within Perforated AFL Enclosures as a Function of Time

,'u:,w>;C?,

n.

26

g m

_s a

C1.

-4 3 10

<x

-z 0

-5v A

M<b

-3 y 10 x

O

=

c_::_

10 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 2d TIME, HOURS FIGURE 14 Scenario 3 - Airborne Mass Concentraticn witnin Perforated AFL as a Function of Time l

2 f

I 9

F

.I J,

• f*O 27 C,4,3,.: ' s.;

[

f' f

V

10-3

~

.5

_E E

n C

10-4 J

E zy

<d u

10-5

s Eza i

E a

L 104 I

I i

0 l

2 3

TIME AFTER PERFORATION, days FIGURE 15.

Scenario 3 - Mass Airborne Release of Pu from Perforated AFL with Time A

J l

g

TACLE 3.

Mass Airborne Release of Pu From Perforated AFL Average Mass Mass Pu Release Airborne Ccncentration to Ambient Accumulative Mass Time in AFL, g Pu/m3 Atmosphere, g Pu Release, g 0

1 8.4 x 10-6 5 x 10-4 0.0005 2

2.4 x 10-5 1 x 10-3 0.002 3

4.6 x 10-5 3 x 10-3 0.005 4

7.8 x 10-5 5 x 10-3 0.01 5

1.3 x 10-#

8 x 10-3 0.02 6

1.8 x 10-#

1 x 10-2 0.03 7

2.1 x 10 1 x 10-2 0.04 8

2.4 x 10 1 x 10*2 0.05 9

2.7 x 10-#

2 x 10-2 0.07 10 2.8 x 10-2 x 10-2 0.09 11 3.1 x 10-#

2 x 10-2 0.1 12 3.3 x 10 2 x 10-2 0.1 13 3.4 x 10-#

2 x 10-2 0.1 14 3.6 x 10-#

2 x 10-2 0.2 15 3.8 x 10-#

2 x 10-2 0.2 16 4.0 x 10-#

2 x 10-2 0.2 17 4.2 x 10-#

3 x 10-2 0.2 18 4.4 x 10-#

3 x 10-2 0.3 19 4.5 x 10 #

3 x 10-2 0.3 20

4. 7 x 10 3 x 10-2 0.3 21 4.9 x 10-3 x 10-2 0.4 22 5.1 x 10-3 x 10-2 0.4 23 5.2 x 10-3 x 10-2 0.4 24 5.4 x 10 #

3 x 10-2 0.4 43 6.6 x 10-1 x 10-2 3

72 7.4 x 10-#

1 x 10-2 2

96 7.5 x 10 #

1 x 10-2 3

29

RADIATION COSE MODELS FOR AN ATMOSPHERIC RELEASE The more important potential environmental exposure pathways for plutonium released to the atmosphere are inhalation, cloud submersion, ingestion, and direct ground irradiation. Of these, the only significant exposure pathway for acute atmospheric releases of Pu is inhalation during initial cloud passage and inhalation of resuspended environmental residual contamination (McPherson and Watson 1979).

The equation for calculating committed radiation dose equivalents from acute innalation is:

Q (E/Q)BR(DCF)ir (3)

OC u

jp j

where DC the committed dose equivalent to organ r from acute inhalation ir of radionuclide i, rem Qj the quantity of radionuclide i released to the atmosphere, ug E/Q the accident at:rospheric exposure coefficient, pg sec/m per ug relcased BR the ventilation rate of the human receptor during the exposure 3

period, m /sec (DCF)37 the acute comitted dose equivalent factor, rem per ug inhaled; a number saecific to a given nuclide i and organ r which can be used to calculate radiation dose frcm a given racionuclide intake.

Human ventilation rates for three time periods for tnis study were derived from International Ccmmission on Radiological Protection (ICRF i reccmmendations 3

3 (ICRP 1975):

3.3 x 10 m /sec for the period 0 to 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />; ~.3 x 10 m /sec 3

for 8 to 24 hcurs; and 2.7 x 10 m /sec for greater than 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />.

31 L2,'?II'C

Fif ty-year comitted dose equivalent factors were calculated using the computer code DACRIN (Houston, Strenge and Watson 1975).

This code incorpo-rates the ICRP Task Group Lung Model (TGLM) to calculate the dose commitment to the lung and other organs of interest (Task Group on Lung Dynamics 1966).

The organ masses used in the code have been modified to reflect the changes reported in ICRP Report 23 (1975).

The translocation of americium from the blood to the organs of interest has been changed to the values suggested in ICRP Report 19 (1972).

Fif ty-year comitted dose equivalents per unit isotopic mass inhaled for particles with an AMAD(a) of one um are listed in Appendix C, 2

Tables C-1 and C-2, for each Pu isotope and Am.

The organs of interest in Pu dosimetry are the total body, kidneys, liver, bone, and lungs.

The Pu postulated to be released to the atmosphere from the Vallecitos Nuclear Center is in the form of Pu cxides.

Lung retention, as described by the TGLM, depends upon the chemical nature of the compound inhaled.

Comocunds of Pu largely fall into Class Y (retained for years) or Class W (retained for weeks).

There is no evidence of Pu existing in the environment as Class D (retained for days).

Actinides in the oxide form are currently classified as Class Y (ICRP 1972), a classification assumed in this study.

Doses for Pu as Class W material, however, are included in Appendix C.

Plutonium particulates that deposit onto the ground surface from a plume can be resuspended to the atmosphere by natural processes and subsequently inhaled by people. Therefore, ground contamination is an important factor when calculating doses via inhalation. Where deposition values were not pro-vided for this study (distances less than 5000 m for the 0 to 2 hr release period), :ne deposition velocity concept was used to estimate the Pu deposition (Equation 4):

(

Wj = Qj(E/Q)Vd (a) Activity Median Aerodynamic Diameter.

w,. ry 32 og

..~~.

where 2

W 9

the concentration of radionuclide i on the ground surface, ug/m Qj the quantity of radionuclide i released to the atmosphere, ug E/Q the accident atmospheric exposure coefficient, pg sec/m per ug released Vd particle deposition velocity, m/sec The deposition velocity of Pu particles cannot be specified exactly because the velocity will vary, depending on the size distribution of the particles, the nature of the surface on which deposition occurs, the wind speed, and other meteorological variables.

The deposition velocity for Pu has been reported to range frem 1 x 10'# to 3 x 10-2 m/sec (Selby et al. 19?5; Cohen 1977; Baker 1977; Gudiksen, Peterson, Lange and Knox 1976; Atcmic Energy Commission 1974). A value of 1 x 10-3 m/sec is used in this report (Baker 1977).

Resuspension rates for material deposited on the ground are time depen-dent and tend to decrease with time after initial deposition.

Local conditions can be expected to strongly affect the rate, with rainfall, winds, and surface characteristics predominant.

The exact relationships are not well-enough under-stood to account for these effects (Selby et al.1975).

However, the airborne concentration feca resuspended material can be estimated using a resuspension factor, K.

The resuspension factor is defined as the resuspended air concen-tration divided by the surface deposition.

Values for K in the enviror. ment between 10- and 10-13 have been measured and reported (Selby et al. 1975; m

Cohen 1977; Atomic Energy Commission 1974; Friedman 1976, pp. 49-51

Anspaugh, Shinn, Phelps and Kennedy 1975; EPA 1977; 5ennett 1975; Hanscn 1975; Martin and Blocm 1975; Senmel 1977; Healy 1977; Anspaugh 1976, pp.392-395).

Until a mere general model is available tnat considers all the important variables affecting the resuspension process, Anspaugh, Shinn, Phelps and Kennedy (1975) recc.wnd using a Simole time-Cependent mcdel to predict tne average airborne concentration of a resuspended contaminant:

a i

a f

33 me

}

t

K(t) = 10- exp(-0.15 t1/2) + 10-9 (5) where t

time since the material was deposited on the ground, days 10 resuspension factor at time t = 0, m'I

-9

-I 10 resuspension factor after 20 yr, m Figure 16 illustrates the time dependence of the resuspension factor.

10 10 K 10 EXP (0.15/I) + 10 E

y 10 c:

E b 10'I 5

3 10~

se

's 4

10 10 20 30 40 TIME SINCE DE?OSITICN, W.ARS FIGURE 16.

Time Cependence of tre Envircnmental Surface Resuspensict Factor Equation 5 was intecrated cver each year post-depcsition and divided by the integrated time period to determine the average resuspension f actor for each year considered.

Nincty-nine percent of the total 50-yr exposure frcm o

' fin 34 t g,,[.'1.

_ _ _ _ -, -. ~

resuspension occurs in the first five years.

The chronic 50-yr com4 'ted dose equivalent factor for inhalation remains relatively constant ever tnis time period.

Therefore, the 50-yr comitted dose equivalent from 50 years of expo-sure to resuspended Pu can be estimated using chronic 50-yr comitted dose equivalent factors, and only the first five years of exposure to the resus-pended material needs to be included.

The comitted dose eouivalent from inhalation of resuspended material was calculated by:

7 DCir

• Wi Z(BR)(DCF)ir (3.16 x 10 )

(6) where DCir the 50-yr comitted dose equivalent to organ r from one yr of inhalation of radionuclide i, rem /yr of inhalation W$

the concentration of radionuclide i on the ground surface for

?

the year of consideration, ug/m" E

the average resuspension factor for the year of consideration,.

-1 m

(BR) tne ventilation rate of the human receptor (for a duration of 3

greater than 24 hr), m /sec (CCF)ir chronic comitted dose equivalent factor, rem /ag inhaled I

3.16 x 10 conversion factor, sec/yr Radiological decay of the decosited radionuclides and the buildup of Am from the decay of Pu were accounted for.

Chronic 50-yr committed dose ecuivalent factors for a cne-year intake were calculated using CACRIN and are listed in Appendix C, Tables C-3 and C-4.

r-s ~U' 35

DOSE ESTIMATES AND DISCUSSION Using the source terms given in Table 1, comitted radiation dose equiva-1ents to several cig ns of the human body were calculated for the three damage scenarios postulated for this study.

The dose contribution from the postulated fission product (FP) releases is negligible.

Therefore, dose results for the FP releases are not included.

The isotopic composition assumed for the Pu mixture is given in Table 4.

TABLE 4 Isotopic Composition of the Pu Mixture Isotope Weicht Percent (d}

238Pu 0.053 239 Pu 87 240Pu 12 241 Pu 4

242 Pu 0.20 241

,(b) 3 100 (a) All isotopic values including the sum have been rounded to two signi-ficant figures.

(b) 241 Am was not considered in the release.

However, the buildup of 241 Am from residual 241Pu in the environment is accounted for.

is,c tne O to 2 neur time period, accident atmospheric dispersion values for a 5% and 50% condition, calculated by tne NRC for the 'lallecitos site were used to es;imate potential committed dose ecuivalents to the ::opulation and a maximum individual.

Annual average atmospheric dispersion and depositico values also calculateo by the NRC were used for all other time periods.

The calculated comitted dose equivalents via inhalation are listed in Tables 5-7 for the three release scenarios.

The estimated maximum Pu ground denositions at the site bound-ary, the nearest residence and the nearest pasture are listed in Tables 8-10.

37 (92b l.I I

TABLE 5.

Fifty-Year Committed Case Equivalents from Inhalation Following Damage, Scenario 1 (Class Y)

Committed Dose Ecu1valents for:

Organ of Population (cerson-rem)(a)

Nearest Residence (D) (rem)

Reference 5% Meteorology 50% Meteorology 5% Meteorology 50% Meteorologt Total Body

1. 2E+1 ( c )

2.9E+0 1.4E-3 3.5E-4 Kidneys 4.9E+1 1.2E+1 5.9E-3 1.5E-3 Liver

1. ' I+2 3.9E+1 1.9E-2 4.7E-3 Bone 2.6E+2 6.4E+1 3.lE-2 7.8E-3 Lungs 1.7E+2 4.3E+1 2.lE-2 5.2E-3 (a) Population within a 50-mile radius of the site.

(b) Located 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

(c) Notation:

1.2E+! is equivalent to 1.2 x 10).

TABLE 6.

Fifty-Year Committed Dose Equivalents from Inhalation Following Damage, Scenario 2 (Class Y)

Committed Case Ecuivalents for:

Grgan of Poculaticn (person-rem)

Nearest Residence (al (rem)

Reference 5% Meteorology 5.i% Meteorology 5% Meteorology 50% Meteorology Total Body 1.SE+1 4.3E+0 2.3E-2 6.0E-3 Kidneys 7.5E+1 1.SE+1 9.8E-2 2.6E-2 Liver 2.aE+2 5.8E+1 3.lE-1 8.lE-2 Bone 3.9E+2 9.5E+1 5.lE-1 1.3E-1 Lungs 2.3E+2 6.3E+1 3.4E-1 8.9E-2 (a) Located 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

38

TABLE 7.

Fifty-Year Committed Dose Equivalents from Inhala-tion Following Damage, Scenario 3 (Class Y)

Committed Dose Eouivalents for:

Organ of Population (person-rem)

Nearest Residenceld) (rem)

Reference 5% Meteorolooy 50% Meteorology 5% Meteoroloay 50% Meteorology Total Body 1.8E+3 4.5E+2 1.8E-1 4.5E-2 Kidneys 7.6E+3 1.9E+3 7.5E-1 1.9E-1 Liver 2.4E+4 6.0E+3 2.4E+0 6.0E-1 Bone 4.0E+4 9.9E+3 3.9E+0 9.9E-1 Lungs 2.iE+4 6.6E+3 2.6E+0 6.6E-1 (a) Located 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

TABLE 8.

Estims.ted Maximum Pu Deposition at Significant Locations Following Damage, Scenaric 1 Pu Decosition (uCi/tr.2) location 5% Meteorology 50% Meteorology Site Boundary (a) 5.5E-3 1.4E-3 Residence (b) 2.lE-3 5.2E-4 Pasture (c) 6.8E-3 1.9E-3 (a) Located 370 m SE of the 10d Building.

(b) located 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

(c) Located 240 m WNW of the 102 Builoing.

TABLE 9.

Estimated Maximum Pu Deposition at Significant Locations Folicwing Damage, Scenario 2

?

Pu Cecositien (uCi/m9 Location 5% Meteorology 50% Meteorciogy Site Boundary (a) 1.0E-1 2.7E-2 Residence (D) 2.4E-2 6.3E-3 Pasture (C) 1.5E-1 5.lE-2 (a) Located 370 m SE of the 102 Building.

(b) Located 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

(c) Located 240 m WNW of the 102 Building.

39 62,%10

TABLE 10.

Estimated Maximum Pu Deposition at Significant Locations Following Damage, Scenario 3 2

Pu Decosition (uCi/m )

location 5% Meteorology 50% Meteorologyv, Site Boundary (8) 6.9E-1 1.8E-1 Residence (b) 2.8E-1 7.0E-2 Pasture (c) 8.0E-1 2.lE-1 (a) Located 370 m SE of the 102 Building.

(b) Located 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

(c) Located 240 m WNW of the 102 Building.

The dose rate from natural background radiation in the State of California is reported to be 120 mrem /yr to the total body (Klement 1972).

Therefore, an individual receives a total-body dose of about 6 rem from exposure to natural background radiation during a 50-yr period.

The collective dose equivalent from 50 years of exposure to natural background radiation to the total bady of the population within a 50-mile radius of the General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear 7

Center is 3 x 10 person-rem.

The average annual dose to the total body of an individual from medical x-ray examination is about 20 mrem (United Nations 1977).

6 This average dose corresponds to a 50-yr collective dose equivalent of 5 x 10 person-rem.

The dose contribution from fallout is negligible when compared to natural background radiation and medical x-ray exposure.

If a radiation worker was involved in an occupational accident and received a maximum permissible 9

bone burden of Pu, the 50-yr committed dose equivalent to the bone would be greater than 1000 rem.

As can be seen, then, the calculated 50-yr ccmmitted dose equivalents to tne peculation for the three scenarios postulated in this report are much lower than tne collective dose equivalent frcm 50 years of exposure to natural bacxground radiation and medical x-rays.

Existing guidelines on acceptable levels of soil contamination frcm 3u can be found to range frcm 0.01 aci/m to 270 aC1/m2 (Selby et al.1975; EPA 2

1977; Martin and Blccm 1975; Healy 1977; U.S. Code 1976; Healy 1974; Gutnrie and Nichols 1964; Hazie and Crist 1975; Kathren 1968; Dunster 1962).

The proposed E?A guideline for Pu contamination in the general environment is 0.2 uC1/m2 (EPA 1977).

This guideline is based on annual doses of one mrad 40 c?'LY;

to the lung from inhalation and three mrad to the bone from ingestion.

If the broad range of current guidelines are normalized to these lung and bone doses and the same resuspension factor is used, the guidelines are all in reasonable 2

agreement with 0.2 uCi/m.

The estimated maximum residual Pu contaminants on the ground based on the three damage scenarios are all within the EPA proposed guideline at the sigt.ificant locations, except for the 5% meteorological condition during scenario 3.

The estimated contamination levels for this 2

case range from about 0.3 to 0.8 pCi/m at the significant locations.

The highest value is estimated at the pasture which is actually inside the outer property fence.

al C.'lild

REFERENCES Anspaugh, L. R.

1976.

"Aapendix A, Resuspension "lement Status Report:

The Use of NTS Data and Experience to Predict Air Concentrations of Plutonium Due to Resuspension on the Eniwetok Atoll."

In Nevada Aoplied Ecology Grouc Pro-cedures Handbook for Environmental Transuranics.

Vol. 2.

NV0-166, Energy Researcn and Development Acministration, Las Vegas, NV.

Anspaugh, L. R., J. H. Shinn, P. L. Phelps and N. C. Kennedy.

1975.

'Resus-pension and Redistribution of Plutonium in Soils," Health Phys. 29(4):571-582.

Atomic Energy Commission.

1974.

Final Environmental Statement by Fuels and Materials Directorate of Licensing U.S. Atomic Energy Commission Related to the Exxon Nuclear Comoany Mixed Ox1de Fabrication Plant.

Section V, Docket 70-1257.

Baker, D. A.

1977. User Guide for Comouter Program F000.

BNWL-2209, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352.

Bennett, B. G.

1975.

" Transuranic Element Pathways to Man."

In Transuranic Nuclides in the Environment, IAEA-SM-199/40, International Atomic Energy Agency, San Francisco, CA.

Cohen, B. L.

1977.

" Hazards from Plutonium Toxicity." Health Phys. 32(5):

370-371.

Dunster, H. J.

1962.

" Surface Contamination Measurements as an Index of Con-trol of Radioactive Materials." Health Phys. 8,(4):354.

Engineering Decision Analysis Company.

1977.

Structural Condition Documenta-tion and Structural Capacity Evaluatior, of Buildina 102 of tne General Electric Vallecitos Nuclear Center for Eartncuake and Flood.

Task 1 - Structural Condition.

Irvine, CA 92715.

Environmental Protection Agency.

1977.

Procosed Guidance on Dose Limits for Persons Exocsed to Transuranium Elements in :ne General Environment.

EPA 520/4-77-016.

Friecman, Arnold M., ed.

1976.

Actinides in :ne Environment.

American u.. _ uical Society Symposium Series 35.

American Chemical Society, Wasnington, DC.

Gudiksen, P. H., K. R. Petersen, R. Lange and J. B. Knox.

1976.

" Plume Ceple-tion Following Postulated Atmospheric Plutonium Dioxide Releases."

Health Phys.

31(2):127-133.

Guthrie, C. E., and J. P. Micnols.

1964 Theoretical Possi.'ilities and Conse-

uences of Major Accidents in 233U and 239Pu Fuel Fabrication and Radioisotooe Processino Plants.

CRNL-3c41, Oak Ricge National Laboratcry, Oak Ridge, TN 37380.

43

% u,c, 4

h, 1., J.. O

Hanson, W. C.

1975.

" Ecological Considerations of the Behavior of Plutonium in the Environment." Health Phys. 28,(5):532.

Hazle, A.

J., and B. L. Crist.

1975.

Colorado's Plutonium-Soil Standard.

Colorado Department of Health, Occupational and Radiological Healtn Division, Denver, C0.

Healy, J. W.

1974.

A Procosed Interim Standard for Plutonium in Soils.

LA-5483-MS, Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory, Los Alamos, NM.

Healy, J. W.

1977.

An Examination of the Pathways from Soil to Man for Plutonium.

LA-6741-MS, Los Alamos Scientific Lacoratory, Los Alamos, NM.

Houston, J.

R., D. L. Strenge and E. C. Watson.

1974.

DACRIN - A Comouter Program for Calculating Croan Dose from Acute or Chronic Inhalation.

BNWL-B-389, BNWL-B-387, SUPP, Feoruary 1975, Pacific Nortnwest Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352.

International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).

1972.

The Metabo-lism of Comoounds of Plutonium and Other Actinides.

Publication 19, Pergamon Press, Oxford.

International Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).

1975.

Report of the Task Group on Reference Man.

Report 23, Pergamon Press, Oxford.

Kathren, R. L.

1968. Towards Interim Acceptable Surface Contamination Levels for Environmental pug 2 SNWL-SA-1510, Pacific Nortnwest Laboratory, Ricnland, WA 99352.

Klement, A. W., Jr.

1972.

Estimates of Ioni:ino Radiation Doses in the United States 1960-2000.

ORP/CDS 72-1, Environmental Protection Agency.

Martin, W.

E., and S. C. Blocm.

1975.

Plutonium Transoort and Dose Estima-tion Model.

In Transuranic Nuclides in tne Environment, IAEA-SM199/78, International Atcmic Energy Agency, San Francisco, CA.

McPherson, R. B., and E. C. Watson.

1979.

" Appendix A."

In Environmental Consecuences of Postulated Plutonium Releases frcm the Babcock and Wilcox Plant, Leecncurg, Pennsyivania, as a Result of Severe Na-cal Phenomena.

?NL-2833, Pacific Nortnwest Lacoratory, Ricnland, WA 99352.

Mercer, T. T, 1977.

"Mattning Sampler Penetration Curves to Cefinition of Res: -iole Fraction." Health Phys. 33(3):259-264.

Schwe. man, L. C.

1977.

Succortina Information for the Estimate of Plutonium 0xice Leak Rates Throuch very Small Acertures.

SNWL-2196, Pacific Northwest Lacoratory, Ricaland, WA 99352.

Sehmel, G. A.

1977.

Transuranic and Tracer Simulant Resuscension.

ENWL-SA-6236.

Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Ricnland, WA 99352.

44

Selby, J. M.,

et al.

1975.

Considerations in the Assessment of the Conse-ouences of Effluents from Mixed Oxide Fuel Fabrication Plants.

SNWL-1967, Rev. 1, Pacific Nortnwest Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352.

Task Group on Lung Dynamics for Committee 2 of the International Conmission on Radiological Protection (ICRP).

1966.

" Deposition and Retention Models for Internal Dosimetry of the Human Respiratory Tract."

Health Phys. 12,(2):173-207.

United Nations Scientific Committee on Effects of Atomic Radiation.

1977.

Sources and Effects of Ionizing Radiation.

New York.

U.S. Code.

1976.

Title 49, Part 173, "Shipr.ers - General Requirements for Shipments and Packaging." Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Print-ing Office, Washington, DC 20402.

45

APPENDIX A DISCUSSION OF FACTORS USED TO ESTIMATE THE POTENTIAL AIRBORNE RELEASE FROM SEISMIC ACTIVITY AT THE VALLECITOS NUCLEAR CENTER L E'." j_. c

DISCUSSI0il 0F FACTORS USED TO ESTIMATE THE P0TENTIAL AIRBORNE REL?.ASE FRCM SEISMIC ACTIVITY AT THE VALLECITOS NUCLEAR CENTER AIRBORNE MASS CCNCENTRATIONS WITHIN ENCLOSED SPACES Finely divideo solids and liquids can be injected into the air and remain suspended for a finite period of time.

Quasi-stable suspensions of solid or liquid particles in a gas are called aerosols.

The mass concentration that will remain airborne is dependent upon the size distribution and density of the susper.ded material and the lifting force present (turbulent eddies).

Mass 3

concentrations of 25 to 250 ug/m are comonly encountered (Cennis 1976),

3 0.1 to 50 mg/m are representative of industrial atmospheres (Dennis 1976) and 3

can be as high as 5 g/m at 1 to 2 m above the ground in dust devils (Sinclair 1974).

Liouids The airborne dispersion of bulk liquids requires subdivision and injec-tion of the subdivided material into the air.

Film formation and breakup is a subdivision process for liquids.

Due to the fluid properties of liquids, very thin films are necessary to produce fine droplets.

The viscous energy require-ments for atomizer-producing sprays of various particle sizes have been esti-3 mated (Monke 1952, p. 288), and the viscous energy required to form 1 cm gf 6

spray of 1 un and 5-to 10-un particles were calculated to be 10 to 10 cal and 100 cal, rescectively.

Additional energy is necessary to inject the particles into the gas stream.

Cak Ridge National Latoratory (1970) has been able to demonstrate an apcroximate correlation of solution concentration in air or vapors from cooling tcwers, evaporators, and air-sparged(3) vessels (see Figure A.1).

For super-ficial velocities less than 0.15 fps (0.C46 m/sec), the metastable aerosol 3

formed by air sparging was found to have a mass concentration of 10 mg/m (approximately ecuivalent to fog) and had a size distribution shcwn in Figure A.2.

The situation found during air scarging is more favorable for film formation than by spilling, and use of the mass airborne concentration from air sparging (a) Air sparging:

bubbling air through a liquid to stir and remove gases entrained in the 11culd matrices.

A.1 t.2,1$

10' 5.

zo

+4 c:

1 03

>-Zw U

2

/

o O

m 3

1 02 3

h e POINTS CALCULATED USING COOLING TOWER DATA A THOREX SPARGING DATA m.

a FOG 2

D 5

10

• X J

2 9

i i

e i

i i

O 2

4 6

8 10 12 14 16 MINIMUM VERTICAL VELOCITY IN LINE (ft/sec)

FIGURE A.l.

Effect of Minimum Superficial Velocity in an Off-Gas Line on the Concentration of Liquid Solution Particles Resulting from Vigorous Mixing of a Solution with Air (Density of Solution:

1 g/cc) should be conservative (greater concentrations) for these postulated VNC acci-dent situations.

Use of conservative values also ccmpensate for minor contri-butions from sloshing of the liquid ia the enclosure.

An alternate means of estimating airborne mass concentrations for an acci-dent situation is to estimate the mass associated with particles of 10

'_m Aerodynamic Equivalent Diameter or less.

These size particles are those asso-ciatcd with the quasi-stable aerosol mentioned above, a conservative estimate of " respirable" particles (Mercer 1977), and a conservative estimate of particles supported by normal turbulence levels (Dennis 1976).

Cata are not

,y i10 A.2

3 10

/

a uI e

C:f M 1 ua J

9

<c.

e 0.1 e i' i

i 1

20 60 90 PERCENT LESS THAN STATED SIZE FIGURE A.2.

Particle Size Distribution of a Stable Aerosol that has Encountered Several Changes of Direction in a Pipeline available on the size distribution of croolets fonned from bulk 11guids uncer accident conditions.

Spray nozzles are designed to generate fine croplets oy forcing liquids through small ocenings, and assuming a similar distribution for accident aerosols would provide conservative airborne mass concentration estimates.

Table A.1 shows cumulative masses associated with droplets less than various size ranges for three nozzles with crifice diameters ranging frem 0.063 in. (1.6 mm) to 0.128 in. (3.3 mm) at various pressures (Hcugnton 1943, p. 1990).

The size distributions beccme coarser witn increasing orifice A.3 a. 9,/ o n.

v m. v ol./C L

TAbl.E A.I.

Drop Size Distribution of 3 llollow Cone Nozzles at Various Pressures (Source: lloughton 1943)

Drop Weight Percent Drops in Size Fraction Diarneter Size 0.063" 0.086" 0.12B" Orifice Ipml 50 psi 100 psi 200 psi 100 psi 200 psi 200 pst Pressure 1

2 1

2 1

2 1

2 1

2 1

2 10

.038

.038

.079

.08

.17

.2

.01

.01

.03

.03

.01

.01 25

.31

.35

.44

.5

.9 1.1

.09

.1

.24

.3

.12

.1 60 2.0 2.4 2.2 2.7 3.2 4.3

.5

.6 1.3 1.6

.73

.8 100 5.0 7.4 6.0 8.7 7.0 11.3 2.6 3.2 3.4 5.0 3.5 4.3 150 9.1 16.5 10.4 19.2 11.8 23.1 4.6 7.8 6.1 11.1 6.5 10.8 2'

200 15.2 31.7 18.3 37.5 21.5 44.6 7.1 14.9 9.6 20.7 11.3 22.1 300 21.7 53.4 24.5 62.0 29.9 74.5 13.5 28.4 21.9 42.6 21.1 43.2 400 12.8 66.2 25.5 87.5 25.5 100.0 25.3 53.8 44.9 87.5 24.6 67.8 24.8 78.6 12.6 100.0 32.2 100.0 500 12.5 78.7 12.5 100.0 600 21.5 100.0 21.4 100.0 (1) W/o in size fraction.

(2) W/o in all fraction less than stated size.

("

t.o

'. 'P' 10

,3

diameter and decreasing pressure.

The fraction of droplets less than 10 um in diameter for the 0.086-in. orifice at 100 psi and the 0.128-in. orifice at 200 psi is 0.01*. of the mass.

In addition, this fraction of dropiets is 1/4 the fraction of the 0.063-in. orifice at 50 psi.

These conditions appear.to greatly exceed the pressure and are much finer than openings found for the breakage of glass equipment.

Thus, an assumption of 10-4 of the inventory made airborne is conservative.

The maximum anticipated inventory in the PAL is 100 g of Pu as a nitrate solution.

The maximum sclution concentration received is 200 g Pu/2., and such solutions have specific gcavities in the range of 1.5.

The total free volume 3

of the enclosures in the PAL is 16.6 m.

If it is assumed that this volume is 3

filled with a mass concentration of 10 mg/m,166 mg of solution containing

-4 22 mg of Pu would be airborne.

If the spray noz:le data are used, and 10 of the total inventory is asssumed to be airborne, a total of 10 mg of Pu would 3

be airborne in the enclosures.

Thus, the value of 10 mg/m is used in this study to estimate the accident-generated mass airborne concentration of liquids.

Dry Powders 3

Swain and Haberman (1961) calculated a mass concentration of 33 mg/m was a " reasonable value" for Pu0 accident-generated aerosols.

Their basis 2

0 3

was 10 particles per cm of Pu02 particles of density 2.

The particles ranged from 0.04 to 10 um in diameter with a log-nonnal distribution with a slope of 2.

Schwendiman (1977) reports rapidly decaying concentrations for UO dis-2 persed in a r*.

cylinder 6 in. in diameter x 10 in. long.

Four-and-a-half kilograms of fine uranium dioxide powder (see Figure A.3 for the size distribu-tion) were made airoorne by rapidly rotating the cylinder, and a sample was extracted via a hypodermic needle that was inserted into tne air space equipced with a Swinney adapter.

The airoorne concentration versus time for :ne four experiments (shown in Figure A.4) indicates an airoorne mass concentration of 3

~0 10-6 g/cm3 (or 1 g/m ) in 46 sec and decreases to 10 g/cm (10 mg/m ) in 2C0 sec (3.3 min).

Mishima (1973) assigns en ucper-limit mass concentration 3

of 100 mg/m for cuasi-stable accident-generated, airborne concentrations.

A.5 L ?. l ?

99.9

<=

e' y

z c:

M G

90 e:#

g 50

=

j*

8g E

10 w2

-5

)

1.0 3

o

'I I

0.1 O.1 1.0 10 100

$1ZE,p FIGURE A.3.

Geometric Size Distribution of UO2 For aerosols that have not had an opportunity to stabilize, but are not imediately released by the dispersing action, a mass concentration of 3

300 mg/m was arbitr--ily assigned.

ALTERATION OF AIRSORNE MASS CONCENTRATICNS WITHIN ENCLOSED VOLUMES Once generated, tne characteristics of acrosols change with time.

'"W i th i n tne confines of a closed cnamber, the concentration, c, is continucusly decreas-ing owing to 1) loss of particles to the floor by sedimentation, 2) loss of particles to the walls and floor by diffusion, and 3) loss of particles by coagulation" (Cennis 1976).

Oiffusional effects become small above 1 am, whereas sedimentation is not as significant for particles less than I Lm in 9 n ', "d3

~

A.6

1 x10-5,, a 1

8

'1 h

-i 1-.

2 1 x10-* :

2 z

13

--- C = C e -0.0987t + 5.5 x 10, '##

o

~\\

3 By O

e 1x10-7 [,

Q SEC.

a g

c

-olo fa{

O-2100 z

m o

_1 a

z

--e \\

O 1 x10-e o

o o

0

\\

w

- U 's o

o--7200 z

NcN o-3600 g

a o

c-7200 m

a 1500 5

2100 I

I I

I I

I 1 x 10-*

i i

i i

i 0

200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 TIME SEC FIGURE A.4.

Uranium Oxide Airborne Over the Bulk Powder Following Disruption diameter in still air (Dennis 1976).

Tenninal velocities are shown in Figure A.S.

Unfortunately, in most cases the air is not still, and normal turbulence provides sufficient mixing energy to support scme particles up to 10 um (Cennis 1976).

The convective flow velocity in a chamber one meter high at a temperature difference of 0.Ol*C can reach I cm/sec (the terminal velocity of a 20-un unit density spnere) (Fuchs 1964).

Therefore, limiting the discussion of airborne aerosols to the fraction less than 10-um AED provides a reasonable, tncugn conservatise, estimate of the fraction that constitutes the quasi-stable aerosol.

A.7

,3 ; i 3 9

,w..... -

4 10 -

b b.

1[,.--

E 1

10 p E7 8

4 e

- 10 9

E s

5 5

h 10 h x.

t e

V w

10 ' :-

10' -

~

b I

l s

I 1,4 r" i

.i 3

1 10 '

10 10 IT 10' DI AMEU, um FIGURE A.5.

Terminal Velocity of Unit-Density Scheres at 1 Atm and 20*C (Adapted frem Cennis 1976, p.122)

s. < c A.8 b 4,' } ' ~

• S

An additional conservatis e factor is introduced by not considering tne loss of airborne mass concentration with time by natural processes.

Even particles that can be stirred by the existing turbulence can be removed by natural processes if they are very near the walls and floor (Dennis 1976; Fuchs 1973).

Assuming that tne mean velocity of the convective currents in an enclosed space is much greater than the settling velocity of the particles of interest and, therefore, that the aerosol concentration is practically con-stant throughcut the chamber except near the walls (stirred settling), the concentration (c) of particles of radius (r) at time (t) is V (r)t c(r) = c (r) exp - s (Fuchs 1964) g H

where c (r) initial concontration of radius (r) g V (r) settling velocity of particles of radius (r), cm/sec s

t time, sec H

height of enclosed space, cm The fraction of various-diameter particles of density 10 remaining airborne after various time increments is shown in Table A.2.

After 500 sec (8.3 min),

almost all of the particles with physical diameters greater than 10 un (equal to particles 33 un AED) have been deposited on the floor.

After 1C00 sec (16.7 min), all particles greater than 20-um AED are no longer airborne.

I.,

the one hcur that this study has assumed would require the exchange of the 10%

contaminated volume witt, tne outside atmosphere, only particles less tnan 10 am will remain airborne.

Using the mass fraction asscciated with each size of particles, and using the fraction deposited for the smallest size particle in the grcup (a conservative assumption), the mass airborne concentration 3

would decrease to less tnan 3 mg/m in the one-hcur period (see Figure A.6) --

3 an order of magnitude less than the 30 mg/m assumed.

The airborne concentra-tions are based on a chamber height of 10 f t (aporoximately the height of the PAL and AFL) and would be less for heignts less than 10 f t, such as gloveboxes.

A.9

,. %, c> n U tM Q

p

3 TABLE A.2.

Fraction of Various-Sized Particles (p = 10 g/cm )

Remaining Airborne in Rectangular Chamber (Stirred Settling) 10-ft Tall Yt C

s f"*

H o

Diameter Vs Settling h

C/Co (um)

Velocity, cm/sec H

500 sec 1000 sec 6000 sec 0.5 0.0100 3.28 x 10-5 0.9837 0.068 0.821

-4 1

0.0350 1.15 x 10 0.944 0.891 0.502

-4 2

0.1304 4.28 x 10 0.807 0.652 0.077 3

0.285 9.35 x 10-4 0.626 0.393 0.0037 4

0.515 1.68 x 10-3 0.432 0.186 4.19 x 10-4 5

0.777 2.53 x 10-3 0.282 0.0796

-3 6

1.11 3.64 x 10 0.162 0.0263 7

1.51 4.85 x 10-3 0.088 0.0078 8

1.96 6.43 x 10~3 0.040 0.0016

-3 9

2.48 8.14 x 10 0.017 0.00029 10 3.06 0.010 0.0067 0.00004

'12 4.57 0.015 0.00055 14 6.10 0.020 16 9.14 0.030 18 10.70 0.335 20 12.10 0.040 Thus, limiting tne estimates of the plutonium air::orne to particles or drops less than 10 _m AED provides aircorne mass concentrations for release periods in excess of 20 min that are overstated and for release periods greater tnan one hour, are an orcer of magnitude too high.

RESUSPENSION OF OEPOSITED.vATERIAL Particles decosited upon surfaces can be re-injected into the airstream by aerodynamic or mechanical forces.

Under most circumstances, mechanical transfer of force is a much more effective means of resuspension of material scvs M*#

r$s e-

60 e 50 E

e 32 40

=

=

E e

30 T

2c N

m N

m N

3 2C

• s 6

's O

N 10

mm.- -s-~-, '*-g l

l l

i i

t i

i 10 20 30 40 50 TIME, MINUTES FIGURE A.6.

Decrease in Mass Airborne Concentration versus Time (Assumed Stirred Settling Only), C = 300 mg/m3 g

than aerodynamic forces. Aerodynamic forces can be effective under certain conditions (Fish et al.1967).

Resuspension factors (a) (k, m- ) have been reported for a variety of conditions and range over roughly 11 orders of magni tude (Mishima 1964).

The values cover aerodynamic, mechanical, and a combination of aerodynamic-mechanical forces, but quantitative assessment of the influence of various parameters (wind speed, mechanical forces, etc.) and other es,ential information (height above the surface and the time period for which airborne concentrations are measured) are not available and make extra-palation of the data difficult.

(a) Resuspension factor:

k = airborne concentration (units /m )

2 surface concent ation (units /m )

A.I1 L. 7. ?: i ~

c o

~,:

Mishima and Schwendiman (1973) have reported the resuspension of U02 powder and UNH solutions from various surfaces at two air velocities in a wind tunnel.

The data are tabulated in Table A.3.

Under the conditions of these experiments, the resuspension of material is not linear with time (see Figure A.7).

For UO2 p wder from sandy soil, a large fraction was resuspended within the first hour at 20 mph and within 8 hr at 2.5 mph with little or no resuspension for the remainder of the 24-hr samoling period.

A substantial fraction of UO 2 powder is suspended from stainless steel in the first hour at 20 mph with a decreasing fraction of suspension with time.

Assuming a linear rate for the resuspension would be con,servative for time periods greater than 24 hr.

Resuspension fluxes calculated from the values in Table A.3 are shown in Table A.4.

Mishima, Schwendiman and Radasch (1968) measured the plutonium entrained in air drawn across concentrated plutonium nitrate solutions (250 g Pu/1) held in a stainless steel dish at velocities up to 100 cm/sec and at temperatures up to 100 C (see Table A.5).

The data, recalculated as resuspen-sion fluxes assuming a linear rate, are shown in Table A.6.

Orgill, Peterson TABLE A.3.

Aerodynamic Entrainment of Uranium Particles in tne Respirable Size Range from Various Surfaces (Mishima and Schwendiman 1973)

Percent Airborne Uranium Dioxide Powder Uranium Nitrate Solution Surface 2.5 mon 20-23 moh 2.5 mon 20-23 moh

smooth, 0.24 (6)*

1.7 (24) 0.0051("I (24) 0.20(df(24)

N sandy soil 0.023 (24)(b) 9.8 (24) 0.0042 (24) 0.70 (24) 0.005 (24) 0.68 (24) 0.037 (6) 0.027 (28) 0.010 (24)

Vegetation 0.C038 (24) 0.4 (24) cover I

Stainless 0.075 (4.8) 1.1 (24) 0.017 (5) 0.78 M) 0.29(b3 (24) steel 0.033(b)

(5)

Asphalt 0.C87(

(6)

Road-Like Surface (a) Solid residues frcm air-dried UNH solutions.

(b) Solid residues remaining after a gasolina fire.

Nt.mbers in parentheses are hours samole collected.

A.12

,,g g ;;';.J-

9 RESUSPENSION OF UO2 POWDER g

FROM STN STL AT 20 MPH vd

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ /_PH-RESUSPENSION UO POWDER FROM S0ll 20 M 2

d v

100

. s ~ ~ _ __

w 5

2 3

50 -/

\\

RESUSPENSION UO2 POWDER FRCM SANDY Soll AT 2.5 MPH d

E o

0 8

16 24 TIME (hours)

FIGURE A.7.

Aerodynamic Entrainment of UO Powder from Various Surfaces 2

TABLE A.4.

Resuspension Fluxes (Mass Fraction UO2 <10 um AED Per Second) From Various Surfaces (Mishima and Schwendiman 1973)

Uranium Dioxide Power UNH Solution Surface 2.5 mon 20 men 2.5 mon 20 mon

-6

-7 Smcoth, sandy 6.7 x 10

1. 2 x 10-5 1.1 x 10-6 1.5 x 10 soil

-7

-0

-0 1.4 x 10-6(a) 1.6 x 10 6.8 x 10 6.9 x 10

-8(a) 4.3 x 10-6(a) 2.5 x 10-0 4.7 x 10-6 3.5 x 10

-8 ( d

2.9 x 10 Vegetation 2.6 x 10-3 2.8 x 10-6 ccver Stainless 2.6 x 10-6 7.6 x 10 2.5 x 10

-6

-5 steel surface (a) S<id residues from air-dried UNH solutions.

A.13 UE"IJ30

TABLE A.S.

Fractional Release During Air Drying of Concentrated Plutonium tiltrate Solutions (Using 0.72 g Plutonium as a Source) (Mishima, Schwendiman dnd Raddsch 1968) i 1

Weight Percent Plutonium found In:

Air Sampling Time Sweep Air Sweep Air Run Temp.

Velocity Evap.

Residue containment Condensate During Following fio.

_("C)

(cm/sec) _(h r_)_

(br)

Vessel Wash

+ Wash Evaporation Evaporation Id

-3

-7 fil Ambient 10 24 0.0033 8.7 x 10

<10 Id)

-0

<10-6

<10-6 75 10 5

20 0.00027 9.5 x 10 N2

-7 N3 100 10 2

4 0.0046 1.7 x 10-6 0.001 3 x 10 N4 Ambient 50 24 24 0.00035 4.5 x 10 2.5 x 10-7 1 x 10

-7

-7 N5 100 50 1-1/2 3

0.027 1.4 x 10 0.003 6 x 10-7

-4

-0

-0

-6 N6 90 50 2

4-1/2 0.00051 5.4 x 10 5.3 x 10 1 x 10

-8

-8

-0 N7 Ambient 100 24 24 0.020 7.5 x 10

<2 x 10

<2 x 10

-6

-5

-8 N8 50 100 2

4 0.00045 9.4 x 10 1.3 x 10

<2 x 10 N9 90 100 1-1/2 4

0.00013 9.4 x 10-5 5.7 x 10-0 3 x 10-6 (a) 0.86 9 plutonium used during these runs.

CT 19s; 7

?:i

TABLE A.6.

Calculatad Resuspension Fluxes for Plutonium Nitrate from Stainless Steel (Mass Fraction /

Second) (Mishima, Schweldiman and Radasch 1968)

Air Velocity Plutonium Nitrate Air-Dried Residue From cm/sec Temoerature Solution Plutonium Nitrate Solution 10 Ambient

<6.9 x 10-13

<8.3 x 10-12 75*C

<3.3 x 10-"

<l.2 x 10-II 100 C 8.3 x 10-8 50 Anbient 1.7 x 10-12 6.9 x 10-13 90 C 4.4 x 10 3.7 x 10-II 100 C 3.3 x 10-7 3.3 x 10-II 100 Ambient

<l.4 x 10-13

<l.4 x 10-13 50 C 1.0 x 10-9

<8.3 x 10-13

/

90 C 3.8 x 10-7 1.2 x 10-10

-8 and Sehmel (1974) reported resuspension fluxes of I to 7.7 x 10 /sec of DDT deposited in wooded areas.

Sehmel and Lloyd (1974) measured the resuspension fluxes of an inert, submicron powder deposited on sandy soil with a light

-0

-10 cover of vegetation.

Fluxes ranged from 10 to 10

/sec for all material in the cowled cascade impactor and were a nonlinear function of wind speed.

Aver-

-10 age rate during the four-month experimental period was 10

/sec.

The choice of a resuspension flux for powders and liquids released but not made airborne is difficult.

The material could be distributed on a variety of surfaces (metal, concrete, soil with or without vegetation, etc. ).

The roughness of tne surfaces can vary greatly (smooth concrete slabs to very coarse rubble) providing varying degrees of shielding for the deposited material.

If the deposited material is buried under debris and equicment, the quantity resuspended could te negligible.

-0 Sehmel and Lloyd's (1974) value of 10 fraction /sec seems most useful for powders.

This value represents the higher fluxes obtained at a variety of wind speeds over an apareciable time period.

The value is in the range of the DDT va'ues that represent particulates that are deposited on vegetation in the canopy layer. Mishima, Schwendiman and Radasch's data (1968) are for N PIM

air velocities at one foot above the surface and should be considered to be equivalent data for much higher velocities measured at the usual height.

The data for res"spension from soil agree in general with Sehmel and Lloyd's data in the same wind speed range.

The data presented by Mishima and Schwendiman (1973) also indicate higher resuspension fluxes from hard, impermeable surfaces (stainless steel and asphalt) but, undar the situations considered, such surfaces are either enclosed and have greatly diminished air velocities) or have a high potential to be covered by debris.

Thus, a resuspension flux of 10-8 fraction /sec was chosen for powders under air conditions limited by this study.

The choice of an overall resuspension flux for liquids for this study is more difficult.

There are no directly measured fluxes as there are for solid particles.

The mobility of the material means greater or lesser accessibility to air passing over the surface, depending upon the characteristics of the substrate.

The resuspension rates for liquids (concentrated uranium and plu-tonium nitrate solutions) span seven orders of magnitude--from 1 x 10-6/sec for UNH from smooth, sandy soil at 2.5 mph, to <l x 10-13/sec for plutonium nitrate frcm a stainless steel dish at 100 cm/sec (2.2 mph).

Both velocities are much lower than wind speeds measured at the nonnal height (10 m).

It is anticipated that the resuspension rate for liquids should be lower than for a dry powder under comparable conditions due to the liquid surface tension.

-9 Thus, a value of 10 fraction /sec was selected.

The rate is believed to be conservative by up to orders of magnitude and is applicable to the air-dried residues for spillec solutions.

A.16

% ' 'C U m r.N

REFERENCES

Dennis, R., ed.

1976.

Handbook of Aerosols.

TID-26608, Technical Infor-mation Center.

Energy Research and Development Administration.

Fish, B. R., R. L. Walker, G. W. Royster, Jr. and J. L. Thompson.

1967.

"Redispersion of Settled Particulates." Surface Contamination, ed. B. R. Fish.

Pergamon Press, New York.

Fuchs, N. A.

1964.

The Mechanics of Aerosols, Pergamon Press, New York.

Houghton, H. G.

1943.

" Spray Nozzles."

In Chemical Engineers Handbook.

2nd Edition.

Ed. J. H. Perry. McGraw Hill, New York.

Mercer, T. T.

1977.

" Matching Sampler Penetration Curves to Definitions of Respirable Fraction." Health Phys.

33(3):259-264.

Mishima, J.

1964.

A Review of Research on Plutonium Releases Durino Overheating and Fires.

hW-83668, General Electric-HAPO, Richland, WA.

Mishima, J.

1973.

" Data Useful in Evaluation of Airborne Plutonium from Postulated Accident Situations."

In Appendix C of Considerations in the Assessment of the Consecuences of Effluents from Mixed Oxides Fuel Fabrication Plants, J. M. Selby, et al.

BNWL-1697, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Ricnland, WA 99352.

Mishima, J. and L. C. Schwendiman.

1973.

Some Excerimental Measurements of Airborne Uranium (Recresenting Plutonium) in Transoortation Accidents.

BNWL-1732, Pacific Northwest Lacoratory, Ricnlanc, WA 99352.

Mishima, J., L. C. Schwendiman, and C. A. Radasch.

1968.

Plutonium Release S tudi es.

Part IV:

/ractional Release from Heating Plutonium Nitrate Solutions in a Flowino Air Stream.

SNWL-93i, Pacific Nortnwest Lacoratory, Richland, WA 94352.

Monke, G. W.

1952.

" Viscous Energy Dissipated During Atcmization of a Liquid." Journal of Acolied Physics.

23(2):238.

Oak Ridge National Laboratory.

1970.

Sitino of Fuel Reorocessinc Plants and Was?.e Management Facilities. CRNL 145i, Oax Ricge National Lacoratory, Oak Ridge, TN.

Orgill, M. M., M. R. Petersen, and G. A. Sehmel.

1974 "Some Ini tial Measurements of DDT Resuspension and Translocation frcm Pacific Northwest Fo res ts. "

In Atmaschere-Surface Exchange of Particulate and Gaseous Pollutants.

Tecnnical Information Center, Energy Researcn and Cevelopment Acmini s tra tion.

^ L' t.2:;137

l' Schwendimaa, L. C.

1977.

Succorting Information for the Estimation of Plutonium Oxide Leak Rates Through Very Small Acertures.

BhWL-2198, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, WA 99352.

Sehmel, G.

A., and F. A. Lloyd.

1974.

" Particle Resuspension Rates. "

Atmosphere Surface Exchange of Particulate and Gaseous Pollutants, eds.

R. J. Engelmann and G. A. Sehmel.

Technical Information Center, Energy Research and Development Administration.

Sinclair, P. C.

1974.

" Vertical Transport of Desert Particulates by Dust Devils and Clear Thermals."

In Atmosohere-Surface Exchance of Particulate and Gaseous Pollutants, eds. R. J. Engelmann and G. A. Sehmel.

Technical Information Center, Energy Research and Development Administration.

A.18 b2,$[u.

APPENDIX B CALCULATION OF RELEASE TO THE ATMOSPHERE FR0f1 PERFORATED EECLOSURES AND ROCMS by T. C. Kerrigan L 2,"S.CO

CALCULATION OF RELEASE TO THE ATMOSPHERE FROM PERFORATED ENCLOSURES AND ROOMS by T. C. Kerr1gan The release rate and source term (total quantity of Pu released) from Scenarios 1 and 3 are estimated by circulating the Pu mass airborne concentra-tion in the PAL and AFL as a function of time and of the exchange rate from the areas in question to the atmosphere.

For the purposes of this study, an exchange rate of 10*. of the enclosed vo'ume per hour was assumed in the absence uf any strong force (such as mechanical blowers) to induce flow.

The Pu airborne concentration in an area surrounding a breached enclosure was calculated from the quantity of Pu released from the enclosure (which is again the airborne concentration of Pu in the enclosure times the exchange rate) minus the quantity released to the atmosphere divided by the volume of the room.

The airborne concentration within the enclosure was calculated from the quantity of Pu initially suspended plus the quantity carried into the enclosure from the room and resuspended frcm the surface minus the quantity released to the room air divided by the volume of the enclosure.

The system can be represented as a small. box (enclosure) in a big box (room) with air from the big box flowing through the little box, and aii-from the big box being exchanged with the Laosphere. The system is shown schematically in Figure B.l.

! vaj(

'3 4 NC5 P*et i

3

t%CJ$uRt t

Y 's 5

l 3

't, a da'>( JF M SMAC 50X

1. . val.r4 5 M 51G 8CX. m 3

s' mic

',. R0W 'm are0 %T J M $ MAR SCX j. ROW 114N0 %f Of M 81G 3CX m ' min r. aAT J RE5L5 PEN 5tCN IN M 5MAQ SCX q7wmin FIGURE 3.1.

Flow Paths frcm Enclosure and PAL Structure zdh. 2 B.1 gn pgp nq9 j'gid ag O-wm

Let C (t) and C (t) denote the concentrations in the small and big boxes at s

b time t.

These concentrations can be estimated by solving the following system of equations:

hVs s(t) = r + f C (t) - fs s(t),

3b (1) b b(E)

• f C (t) - f C (t) - fb b(t)

C ss sb These equations are simplified statements of the mass balance in the boxes.

Rewriting in matrix notation, r.

C (t)

-f /V fV C (t)

/r/Vh s

3 s ss s

s

=

+

d_

C (t) f /Y

-(f + I )/Y b(t) k0 /

g s b s

b b

Next, make the following substitutions.n order to cast this system in general form. Set

= 0, a = -f /Y '

2=C' Y1 = r/ V '

Y2 s s x) =C, x

b s

3 b = f /V,

c=f!

d=-f

^I I

3 s s

b, s

b b

Thus, x = Ax + y where

• 1}

[Y)

[a b}

l X*

and A=

• 2) y=Y2) d)

c S,2

,_ 79. i1,2 I.',,

The solution of this system is an easy application of the theory of systems of linear ordinary differential equations (Rabenstein 1966, p. 431).

In order to expedite this application, we simply hypothesize a solution of the form e )t /V11h At[V21) [*l)

A 2*2 x(t) = c)

'+'

+c (V12)

(V22) (*2) and proceed to evaluate the parameters in terms of given information.

To find A), A 2

Define Tr = a + d and Det = ad - bc.

Then A) and A are kncwn to 2

be the solutions of the equation 2

A Tr A + Det = 0 These solutions are given by Tr : YTr2 4 Det 2

e To find v53, vi2(i = 1,2):

IV

\\

il ) is kncwn to satisfv The vector 1 (Vi2/

[Vil\\

, {Vil\\

[a b i=4 kc d/Yi2/

( i2/

S.3 nn n

b.N, _LtJC

Thus, A -d 4

and vi2

• I

=

il =,15-a c

v To find w) and w e

2

$(t)=Ax(t)+yimpliesthat A (W I

+y=0

• 2

Thus,

= - A-I y where

/d -b)

A-T 1

=g

\\-c al To find c),

2 c

ilh

\\t /V21 )

V A :

~A)7 x(t) = c) e

.*c2*

12!

V22)

V implies that hilb

[21h j

x(0)=c)Y12) Y22/

+c'

~A Y'

2 S.4 L2.3140

Or

[V11 21)[c)

V j

,)

kV12 22)(c/

V 2

Thus, 21)-l

[c}

[v33 v

j

' (0) + A_j

=

x y

22)

(c /

kV12 V

2 where 21 ) l

[v))

1

[V22 21h v

-V (v12 22 /

' k-V V

V 12 11)

^

In conclusion, C (t) = Csl e

+C e

+C s

s2 s3 and C()=Cbl e

+Cb2 *

• C b

b3 wnere C ; = c)v ),

Cs2

• C V2 21, s3 * *1 C

3 z

and Cbl = c v7 12, b2 = c V2 22' b3 * *2 C

B.5 y < d,'i

• for i = 1, 2, 3 and A for i = 1, 2 were computed using the computer Csi, Cbi 9

program shown in Table B.l.

The input values for Scenarios 1 and 3 are given in Table 8.2.

hb I 8.6

TABLE B.1.

Symoblic Reference MAP (R=1) poCG23M M ISH 74/7*

09 T= 1 1

GR OG R A M MISH ( IN PU T. 0 U TP UT )

00 5 J

1. 2 READ *. VS. J 3, F S. FB.R.C SO.C 30 A=-(FS/vs) 5 3= FS/VS C = F3 / V 3 O s-( (FS +F B ) /V O )

Y1=R/VS Y2=3.

13 X1JsCSO (24=CSO T R = A +0 OE T= A

• 0-B *C OI SC =S CR T ( T R

• T E -*. *0 ET )

15 XLAM1=w.5*(TR+0ISC)

X L AM 2= J. S * ( T R-0I SC )

V11=(XLAM1-01/C V 12= 1.

121=(xLAM2-0)/C 2G V22=1.

QUM 1./DET AI:00M*C 3I=-0UM*9 CI 3UM*C 25 OI=0UM*A S = -( AI *Y1+ 3 I *Y 2)

T=-(CI*Y1+0I*Y2)

JU"=1./(V11*V22-112'V21)

V11Is00M*V22 33 412I =-0UM* V 12 V21Is-00M*V21 v22I: CUM *V11 YS= rig-S rT=x2)-T 33 C C Fl = V 11I

• t S + v 21;

• xi C0 F2=V 12 I* t 3 +V 22 I* XT CSi=CCFl*V11 CS2=CCF2*v21 CS 3= S

• J C S i= C0 F l *V 12 C3 2= C0 F2

• V 22 C S 3= T OR IN T 1, x L AM1.

• L aM 2 1 cop 34rgist,.tagi,t;M2=*.2E12.6)

.5 3R IN T 2.CSI.CS 2. CS 3 2 FO R M A T (1H1.

• C S t. CS 2. CS 3= *. 3E 12.61 5 PR IN T 3.C 51.C 3 2.C s3 i F0 09 A T (1H:.

• C 31. C3 2. C3 3= *, 3E 12.6 )

ENO B.7

_y -e "d [g cc.

n 1 gog $$d #,

eze 43 s

TABLE B.2.

Program Input Definitions Scenario 1 cenario 3 3

3 V

e Volume of small box m 16.6 m 37 m 3

3 3

3 V

e Volume of big box, m 226 m 1250 m g

3 3

3 F

e Flow through small box, m / min 0.028 m / min J 162 m / min 3

3 3

3 F

e flow through big box, m / min 0.38 m / min 2.08 m / min 3

-4 R e Resuspension rate, g Pu/ min 6 x 10-6 9 Pu/ min 7.5 x 10 g Pu/m Initial Pu c ncentrati n in small box, g Pu/m 1.3 x 10 g Pu/m 2.4 x 10-3 of Pu/m 3

-3 3

3 C

e so Initial Pu concentration in big box, g Pu/m 0

0 C

e 00 6N W

-b 9

0

REFERENCES Rabenstein, A. L. 1966.

Introduction to Ordinary Differential Ecuations.

Academic Press, New York.

(N sh O,d, 2.'i43 B.9

~

APPENDIX C DOSE FACTORS r0R INHALATION AND DOSE CALCULATION RESULTS FOR CLASS W PLUT0NIUM

'51,'].1.A b

DOSE FACTORS FOR INHALATION AND DOSE CALCULATION RESULT 3 FOR CLASS W PLUTONIUM TABLE C.1.

Fifty-Year Comitted Dose Equivalent Factors from Acute Inhalation for Class W Material (a)

(rem per ug inhalta)

Isotope Total Body Kidneys Liver Bone Lunas 238 1.2E+3(D) 4.8E+3 1.5E+4 2.4E+4 9.2E+2 Pu 239 Pu 4.6E+0 1.9E+1 5.9E+1 9.7E+1 3.0E+0 240Pu 1.7E+1 6.9E+1 2.2E+2 3.6E+2 1.lE+1 2#I Pu 1.3E+2 6.lE+2 1.8E+3 3.2E+3 1.8E+0 242 Pu 2.8E-1 1.lE+0 3.6E+0 5.7E+0 1.8E-1 241 AM 2.0E+2 1.SE+3 3.2E+3 5.2E+3 1.7E+2 (a) Committed dose equivalent factors calculated using CACRIN for 1-um AMAD (Activity Median Aerodynamic Diameter) size particles.

Organ masses are those reported in ICRP-23.

3 (b) Notation: 1.2E+3 is equivalent to 1.2 x 10.

TABLE C.2.

Fifty-Year Committed Dose Equivalent Factors frem Acute Inhalation for Class Y Material (rem cer uo inhaled)

Isotoce Total Body Kidneys Liver Bene Luncs 938 Pu 4.3E+2 1.8E+3 5.8E+3 8.9E-3 9.0E+3 239 Pu 1.7E*0 7.lE+0 2.3E'1 3.7E*1 3.0E*1 C Pu 6.3E-0 2.6E+1 8.3E*1 1.3E+2 1.lE+2 241 Pu 4.3E'l

?.CE+2 6.0E+2 1.lE+3 9.6E-1 242 Pu 1.CE-1 4.3E-1 1.4E+0 2.2E*0 1.8E+0 2al Am 7.8E+1 5.6E+2 1.2E+3 1.9E*3 1.7E+3 62iTc l

C.1

TABLE C.3.

Fifty-Year Committed Dose Equivalent Factors from One-Year Chronic Inhalation for Class W Material (rem oer ug inhaled in first yearl Iso tooe Total Body Kidneys Liver Bone Lungs _

Pu 1.2E+3 4.8E+3 1.5E+4 2.4E+4 9.2E*2 9 Pu 4.5E+0 1.9E+1 5.8E+1 9.7E+1 3.0E+0 ODu 1.7E+1 6.8E+1 2.2E+2 3.6E+2 1.lE+1 2'I Pu 1.3E+2 6.1E+2 1.8E+3 3.2E+3 1.8E+0 242 Pu 2.8E-1 1.1E+0 3.6E+0 5.7E+0 1.8E-1 241 Am 2.0E+2 1.5E+3 3.2Ev3 5.lE+3 1.7E+2 TABt' C.4.

Fifty-Year Committed Dose Equivalent Factors from One-Year Chronic Inhalation for Class Y Material (rem cer ug inhaled in first year)

Isotooe Total Body Kidneys Liver Bone Lunas 23S 8.8E+3 9.0E+3 Pu 4.3E+2 1.8E*3 5.7E+3 239 Pu 1.7E+0 7.0E+0 2.2E+1 3.6E+1 3.0E+1 240Pu 6.2E+0 2.6E+1 8.2E+1 1.3E+2 1.lE+2 I Pu 4.3E+1 2.0E+2 6.0E+2 1.0E+3 9.6E+1 242 Pu 1.0E-1 4.3E-1 1.4E+0 2.lE*0 1.BE+0 Am 7.7E+1 5.6E+2 1.2E+3 1.9E+3 1.7E+3 C.2 t'iG1Eb

TABLE C.S.

Fifty-Year Committed Dose Equivalents from Inhalation Following Damage, Scenario 1 (Class W)

Committed Dose Ecuivalents for:

Pooulation (person-rem)

Nearest Residence a)(reml Organ of Reference 5% Meteorolooy 50% Meteorology 5% Meteorology 50% Meteorology Total Body 3.2E+1 8.0E+0 3.8E-3 9.8E-4 Kidneys 1.4E+2 3.4E+1 1.6E-2 4.lE-3 Liver 4.2E+2 1.lE+2 5.0E-2 1.3E-2 Bone 7.0E+2 1.8E+2 8.4E-2 2.lE-2 Lungs 1.7E+1 4.2E+0 2.0E-3 5.2E-4 (a) Located 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

TAELE C.6.

Fifty-Year Comuitted Dose Equivalents from Inhalation Following Damage, Scenario 2 (Ciass W)

Committed Dose Eouivalents for:

Pcoulation (oerson-rem)

Nearest Residencek ) (rem)

Orcan of Reference 5% Meteoroloav 50% Meteoroloov 5% Meteorolacy 50% Meteoroloav Total Body 4.9E+1 1.2E+1 6.4E-Z l.7E-2 Kidneys 2.lE*2 5.0E+1 2.7E-1 7.lE-2 Liver 6.4E+2 1.6E*2 8.aE-1 2.2E-1 Bone 1.lE+3 2.6E+2 1.4E'O 3.7E-1 Lungs 2.6E+1 6.3E*0 3.4E-2 8.8E-3 i

(a) 5.ocated 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

C.3 L2P' 0 9 5

TABLE C.7.

Fifty-Year Comitted Dose Equivaler.ts from Inhalation Following Damage, Scenario 3 (Class W)

Comitted Dose Eouivalents for:

Population (person-rem)

Nearest Residence (a)(rem)

Organ of 50%.eteorology M

Reference 5". Meteorology 50% Meteorology 5% Meteorology Total Body 5.0E+3 1.2E+3 4.9E-1 1.2E-1 Kidneys 2.lE+4 5.2E+3 2.lE+0 5.2E-1 Liver 6.5E*4 1.6E+4 6.4E+0 1.6E+0 Bone 1.lE+5 2.7E+4 1.lE+1 2.7E+0 Lungs 2.6E+3 6.6E+2 2.6E-1 6.6E-2 (a) Located 560 m WSW of the 102 Building.

. - < w' ' iQ

" "~~~

C.4

t PNL-2844 UC-20e DISTRIBUTICN No. of Mo. of Cocies Cooies 0FFSITE ONSITE

~

A. A. Churm DOE Richland Operations Office DOE Patent Division H. E. Ransom 9800 5. Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439 38 Pacific Northwest Laboratory R. L. Conley 27 00E Technical Information R. B. McPherson Center J. Misnima (25)

L. C. Schwendiman U.S. Nuclear Regulatory C. L. Simpson Commission G. B. Long Division of Technical Information E. C. Watsan and Document Control Technical Information (5) 7920 Norfolk Avenue Publishing Coordination (2)

Bethesda, MD 20014 James E. Carson Division of Environmental Impact Studies Argonne National Laboratory 9700 5. Cass Avenue Argonne, IL 60439 25 L. C. Rouse U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20F55 J. E. Ayer U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 W. Burkhardt U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555 R. T. Kratze U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Ccmmission Wasnington, CC 20555 Distr-1

%o,, -f * ' d,. z a...

I