ML19263D573

Forwards Input to Sections 5.5 & 6.2.4 of Des Re Radiological Impacts from Routine Operation & Radiological Environ Measurements & Monitoring Program

ML19263D573
Person / Time
Site:	Fermi
Issue date:	03/19/1979
From:	Kreger W Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Ballard R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
NUDOCS 7904130029
Download: ML19263D573 (32)

Text

e g.

a

/

/

'A*R 1 0 1979 MEMORRIDU.!! FOR: Ronald 3allard, Chief Environmental Projects Branch 1, DSE,I.RR FROM:

W. E. Kreger, Chief Radiological Assessmcat Branch, DSE

SUBJECT:

P.AB INPUT FOR FER:!I-2 DES PLNiT NA"E: Fermi 2 LICENSI:iG STA3E: CL DCCKET NU?!3ER: 50-341

!!ILESTONE NUGER/GRA."CH CCOE: 33/~i3 PROJECT PA'!ACER: Cliff Haupt RESPO.P.SIBLE BRA.';CH: EP-1 REQUESTED COMPLETIO:1 DATE: March 16, 1979 DESCRIPTION OF RESP 0nSE:

Input for DES sections 5.5 and 6.2.4 REVIEW STATUS: Complete Attached is the Radiological Assessment Bracch's input to section 5.5 and G.2.4 of the, Fermi-2 DES.

This review was perforned by Wayne Britz, RIS/ Rid.

//

d

~

Williaa E. Kreger, Chief Radiological Assessment Branch Division of Site Safety and Envircnmerital Analysis, NRR

Enclosure:

as stated cc:

R. Hartfield (w/o encl.)

R. DeYoung D. Muller DISTRIBUTION L. Crocker geaxx D. Crutchfield Docket File D P

' D ' ] D fj k k f3 J. Collins NRR Reading ll J L LU V. Moore RAB Reading '

• r C. Haupt W. Kreger F. Congel W. Britz

'd)()413OQN7

.a e

/

..EASj.Dg...

LAB;DSE.f.

. RAS E o

'c = *

MA ~

recnael.i

.AEKrecer ov...*

3/16/79 3//d79 '

.. _. }.......3e{/79 oava

• NRC IORM 313 (9 76) NRCM 0240

• h u: s. aavs nw ar. em!*mes ar ric s 1 e7s - a ze-e a4

o

.4 RADIGLOGICAL IMPACTS FRCM RCUTIME OPERATION

.4.1 Exposure Pathways The environmental pathways which were considered in preparing this section are shcwn in Figure 5.1.

The specific pathways evaluated were:

1.

Direct radiation fecm the plant 2.

For gasecus effluents, a.

Irr.ersion in the gaseous plume Inhalation of iodines and particulates b.

Ingestion of iodines and particulates through the milk ccw, goat, c.

meat animal and vegetation pathway d.

Radiation from iodines and particulates deposited on the grcund 3.

For liquid effluents, a.

Drinking water b.

Ingestion of fish and invertebrates c.

Shoreline activities, boating and swimming in water containing radioactive effluents.

Only those pathways associated with gaseous effluents which were reported to exist at a single location were combined to calculate the total exposure to a maximally exposed individual.

Pathways associated with liquid effluents

&nk were ccmbined without regard to locatienpf1f were assumed to be associated with a maximally exposed individual other than the individual from gaseous effluent pathways.

The models and considerations for environmental pathways leading to estimates of radiation doses to individuals near the plant and to the population within an 80 km radius of the plant resulting from plant operations are discussed in detail in Regulatory Guide 1.109. Use of these models with additional assump-tions for environmental pathways leading to exposure to populations outside the 80 km radius are described in Appendix of this statement.

.4.2

~ Dose Ccami tments The quantities of radioactive material that may be released annually frcm the plant are estimated based on the description of the radwaste systems given in the applicant's environmental report and NM

-(PSAi1CR."SARt and using the calculational model and parameters described in MUREG 0016 and 0017 (Ref.

).

The applicant's site and environmental data provided in the environmental report and in subsequent answers to NRC staff questions are used extensively in the dose calculations. Using these quantities of radioactive materials released and exposure pathway information, the dose commitments to individuals and the population are estimated. Population doses are based on the projected population distribution of the year Addd.

The dose ccmmitments in this statement represent the total dose received over a period of 50 years follcuing the intake of radioactivity fcr one year

=*=**9'Tt

'"""la "O-~M r W7w

under the conditions existing 15 years af ter the station is started up.

For the ycunger age groups, changes in organ mass with age after the initial intake of radioactivity are accounted for in a stepwise manner.

In the analysis of all effluent radionuclides released frce the plant, 8 ]

2b tri tium, carbon-14, eni-] cesium, e:dierbal t, -end h IN 1

~

c' pl' _.

an b% OQap hi,.:.,

d ~f,L:; Vinhaled with air and ingested with fcod and water were found to acccunt 3f for essentially all total-body dose cccmitments to individuals and the population within 80 km of the plant.

Dose Commitments frca Radioactive Releases to the Atmoschere w

~~ ? -

Radioactive effluents released to the atmosphere frca tha facility will result in small radiation deces to individuals and populations. NRC staff estimates of the expected gaseous and particulate releases listed in Table 5.1, and the site ' meteorological considerations discussed in Section 2.

of this statement and summarized in Table 5.4 6 tere used to estimate radiation dces to individuals and populations. The results of the calculations are discussed below.

1)

Radiation Dose Ccanitments to Individuals Individual receptor locations and pathway locations considered for the maximum individual are listed in Table 5.3.

The estinated dose cccmit-ments to the maximum individual frca radioicdine and particulate releases at selected offsite locations are listed in Tables 5.5 and 5.6.

A-,

W'

The maximum individual is assumed to consume well above average quantities of the foods considered (see Table E-5 in Regulatory Guide 1.109).

The maximum annual beta and gamma air dose and the maximum total body and skin dose to an individual, at the maximum site boundary, are presented in Tables.5.5 and 5.6.

2)

Radiation Dose Commitments to Populations The estimated annual radiation dose commitments to the populati within

~

m 80 km of the M ;<

nuclear plant frca gasecus and particu-1 ate releases are shcun in Table 5.6.

Beyond 80 km the doses were

~~

evaluated using average poculation densities and fcod production values discussed in Appendix Estimated dose commitments to the U.S.

population are shown in Table 5.7.

Background radiation doses are pro-vided for ccmparison. The dose ccmmitments from atmospheric releases 1

n e

from the

/ Eb;.'A facility during normal cperation represent a small increase in the normal population dose due to background radiation sources.

Dose Commitments frca Radioactive Licuid Releases to the Hydroschere o

Radioactive effluents released to the hydrosphere frcn1 the 7#o

.)

facility during normal operation will result in small raciation doses to individuals and populations.

NRC staff estimates of the expected liquid releases listec in Table 5.2 and the site hydrological considerations discussed in Secticn 2._ of this statement and su=arized

in Table 5.8 were used to estimate radiation dose ccamitments to individuals and populations. The results of the calculations are discussed below.

1)

Radiation Dose Comitments to Individuals The estimated dose ccmaitments to the maxiat.n individual from liquid releases at selected off-site locations are listed in Tables 5.5 and 5.6.

The maximum individual is assumed to consume well above average quantities of the foods considered and spend more time at the shoreline than the average person (see Table E-5 in Regulatory Guide 1.109).

2)

Radiation Dose Ccamitments to Populations The estimated annual radiation dose commitments to the population within 80 km of the 2,e[ d nuclear plant frca liquid releases, based on the use of Ed and biota frca 1 [

v.a x.,.. o L )-

e c7'ab b/

, are shown in Table 5.6.~

Dose ccmitments beyond 80 km were based on the assumptions discussed in Appendix _. Estimated dose commitments to the U. S. population are shown in Table 5.7.

Background radiation doses are provided for ccaparison. The dose cornit-ments frca liquid releases from the

.,, $ ' acili ty during normal operation represent a small increase in the normal population dose due to backgrcund radiation sources.

~

Direct Radiation 1)

Radiation frca the Facility Radiation fields are produced in nuclear plant envircns as a result of radioactivity contained within the reactor and its associated components.

[Although these components are shielded, dose rates around the plants have been observed to vary frca undetectable levels to values of the order of 1 rem / year. (

f) is;-)ivi Y N H j'Dbses from sources within the piant are primarily due to nitrogen 16, a radionuclide produced in the reector core. IForboilingwater reactors, nitrogen-16 is transpcrted with the primary coolant to the turbine building. The orientation of piping and turbine components in the turbine building determines, in part, the exposure rates outside the plant. Because of variations in equipment lay-out, exposure rates are strongly dependent upon overall plant design.s ince the primary j

coolant of a PNR is contained in a heavily shielded area of tha plant, dose rates in the vicinity of PWR's are generally undetectable (less than 5 mrem /yr).

(Basedontheradiationsurveyswhichhavebeenperformedaroundseveral C

operatings BWR's, it appears to be very difficult to develop a reasonable model to predict direct shine dcses. Thus, older plants should have actual measurements performed if information regarding direct radiation andsky-shineratesisneeded.d, U it J

%il4 6 )

__,, _.~.

.,,. _. _, -,. -. =--

s

+ :m

For newer BWR plants tdth a standardized design, dose rates have been estimated using sophisticated "onte Carlo techniques. The turbine island design proposed in the Graun SAR* is estinated to have direct radiation and skyshine dose rates of the order of 20 mrem / year / unit at a typical site boundary distance of 0.4 mile frcm the turbine building.

This dose rate is assumed to be typical of the new generation of boiling water reactors. The integrated population dose frca such a facility would be lessthanonenan-rem / year / unit.},,_ _

Low level radioactivity storage containers outside the plant are estimated to contribute less than 0.01 arem/ year at the site bcundary.

2)

Occupational Radiation Exposure Based on a review of the applicant's safety analysis report, the staff has determined that the applicant is ccmnitted to design features and operating practices that will assure that individual cccupational radiation doses can be maintained within the limits of 10 CFR Part 20 3raun Safety Analysis Report, Docket No. STM 50-532, p.12.156 (June 27,1975).

. i rvy%

- - ' ~

""'MT

- = - -+

g and that individual and What population doses will be as icw as is reasonably achievable.U) For the purpose of portraying the radio-logical impact of the plant operaticn en all on-site personnel, it is For a necessary to estimate a nan-rca cccupational radiation dose.

plant designed and proposed to be operated in a nanner consistent with 10 CFR Part 20, there will be many variables which influence exposure and make it difficult to determine a quantitative total necupational Therefere, past exposure radiation dose for a speciffe plant.

experience from operating nuclear pcwer stations (2) has been used to provide a widely applicable estimate to be used for all light water

_.::a for D2;y1

-2 reactor pcwer plants of the type a.m Q.UUutaC.

This experience indicates ey/alde of E[ man-rem per year per reactor

&co unit.

On this basis, the projected occupational radiation exposure impact of the uni t J4u

-2

_ _ station is fr. :.1 -

estimated to be

/oa man-ram per year.

l&wLM 3)

Transportation of Radioactive Material The transportation of cold fuel to a reactor, of irradiated fuel frca the reactor to a fuel reprocessing plant, and of solid radioactive waste frca the reactor to burial grounds is within the scope of the NRC 10 CFR Part 20, Standards for Protection Against Radiation

1) REG.,E,.1 3, Occupational Radiation Exposure at Light '.hter Cooled Pcwer Peactors 1) 2)

.,9 6 969-L9 M, A -.4 M )

3

'^

/0 %, h y d, / ? 7 l'

report entitled, " Environmental Survey of Transportaticn of Radioactive Materials to and from Muclear Pcuer Plants." The estimated populaticn dose commitmelts associated with transportatien of fuels and wastes are listed in Tables 5.7 and 5.9.

4.3 Radiolacical Imcact on Man The actual radiological impact associated with the operation of the proposed hh,w.', O nuclear pcwer station will depend, in part, en the manner in which the radioactive waste treatment system is operated. Based on the NRC staff's evaluation of the potential perfomance of the radwaste

' system, it is concluded that the system as proposed is capable of meeting the dose design objectives of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I fand those of w

RM50-2 contained in the annex to Appendix I.

The applicant chose to shcw 02 compliance with the design objectives of FJ150-2 pVan optional methcd of d

demonstrating ccmpliance with the cost-benefit section of Apppendix I,Section II.D. Table 5.6 ccmpares the calculated maximum individual doses to the dose design cbjectives. i{cwever, since the facility's cperation will be governed ay operat.ing license technical specifications and since the technical specifications will be based on the dose design objectives of 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I, as shcwn in the first column of Table 5.6, the actual radiological impact of plant operation may result in doses close to the dose design objectives. Even if this situation exists the individual doses will still be very small when ccmpared to natural background doses As a (s 100 mrem /yr} or of the dose limits specified in 10 CFR Part 20.

result, the staff concluded that there will be no measurable radiological impact en man frcm reutine operation of the plant.

C, % lm 9::: p ' r Z,, c... ; :'50 : i, g :2'C m g W*

7 m

f,'y

[, Y j '

Effective December 1,1979, the licensee will be regulated according to the p-4+"

Envircnmental Protection Agency's 40 CFR Part 190, Environmental Radiation k

Protection Standards for Nuclear Pcwer Operations, which specifies that the i'

annual dose equivalent does not exceed 25 mrens to the whole body, 75 mrems to the thyroid, and 25 mrems to any other organ of any member of the public as the result of exposures to planned discharges of radioactive materials, radon and its daughters excepted, to the general environment from uranium fuel cycle operations and radiation frca these cperations.

4.4 Radiological Imeacts to Biota Other Than Man

" Depending cn the pathway and radiation source, terrestrial and aquatic biota will receive doses approximately the same or sonewhat higher than man receives. Althcugh guidelines have not been established for accep-tabel limits for radiation exposure to species other than man, it is generally agreed that the limits established for humans are also ccnser-vative for other species.

Experience has shown that it is the maintenance of population stability that is crucial to the survival of a species, and specier in most ecosystems suffer rather high mortality rues from natural causes. 'dhile the existence of extremely radiosensitive biota is possible, and whereas increased radiosensitivity in organisms may result frca environ-mental interacticns with other stresses (e.g., heat, biccides, etc.), no biota have yet been discovered that show a sensitivity (in tems of increased morbidity or mortality) to radiation expcsures as icw as those 3

~~

expected in the area surrounding the 7U nuclear pcwer

(.n..y plant. Furthemore, in all the plants for wnich an analysis of radiation exposure to biota other than man has been made, there have been no cases of exposures that can be considered significant in tert:s of ham to the

-.-=,;-

aww,

species, or that approach the exposure limits to members of the public permi tted by 10 CFR Part 20.3 Since the BEIR Report concluded that the evidence to date indicates that no other living organisms are very much incre radiosensitive than man, no measurable radiological inpact on populations of biota is expected as a result of the routine operation of this plant.

hAl

3. G. Blay.lco) land J. P. 'Jitherspcon, " Radiation Doses and Effects Estimated for s

Aquatic Biota Exposed to Radioactive Releases from L'JR Fuel-Cycle Facilities,"

!ucl. Safety 17:351 (1976).

N'The Effects on Fcpulations of Exposure to Lou Levels of Icnizing Radiation,"

(BEIR Reports), NAS-NRC, 1972.

/'

m.-

4sev e...

m

Table 5.[

e CALCULATED RELEASES OF RADICACTIVE t'ATERIALS IN GASECUS EFFLUEtiTS FROM ENRICO FERMI NUCLEAR PLANT, UNIT NO. 2 (BWR - Mark I Containment)

(Ci/yr)

Reactor Turbine Radwaste Building 8uilding Building Nuclides (Periodic W (Continuous)

(Continucus)

(Continuous}

Total Ar-41 a

25 a

a 25 Kr-83m a

51 a

a 51 Kr-85m a

95 68 a

160 Kr-85 a

280 a

a 280 Kr-8/

a 320 130 a

450 Kr-88 a

320 230 a

550' Kr-89 a

1300 a

a 1300 Xe-131m a

7 a

a 7

Xe-133m a

4 a

a 4

Xe-133 2300 310 250 10 2900 Xe-135m a

130 650 a

780 Xe-135 350 410 630 45 14C0 Xe-137 a

1500 a

a 1500 Xe-138 a

1200 1400 a

2500

~.

Total' Noble Gases 12000 6(-4)b 1.3(-2) c 1.4(-2)

Cr-51 c

Mn-54 c

6(-3) 6(-4) 3(-4) 6.9(-3)

Fe-59 c

8(-4) 5(-?)

1.5(-4) 1.5(-3)

Co-58 c

1.2(-3) 6(-4) 4.5(-5) 1.9(-3)

Co-60 c

2(-2) 2(-3) 9(-4) 2.3(-2)

Zn-65 c

4(-3) 2(-4) c 4.2(-3) w Sr-89 c

1.8(-4) 6(-3) c 6.2(-3)

S r-90 c

1(-5) 2(-5) 3(-6) 3.3(-5)

Zr-95 c

8(-4) 1( a) c 9( a)

Sb-124 c

4(-4) 3(-4) c 7(-4)

Cs-134 c

8(-3) 3(-4) c 8.3(-3)

Cs-136 c

6(-4) 6(-5) c 6.6(-4)

Cs-137 c

1.1(-2) 6(-4) c 1.2(-2)

Ba-140 c

8(-4) 1.1(-2) c 1.2(-2)

Ce-141 c

2(-4) 6(-4) 2.6(-5) 8.3(-4)

Total Particulates 9.3(-2)

C-14 a

9.5 a

a 92' Q.af

.H-3 7/(

I-131 3(-2) 4(-2) 1.9(-1) 5(-2) 6.7(-1)

I-133 a

1.6 7.6(-1) 1.8(-1) 2.6

-4 a-less than 1.0 Ci/yr for ncble gases and garbcn-14; less than 10 Ci/yr for iodine.

b-expcnential notation; 6(-4) = 6.0 x 10 '.

c-less than 1% of total nuclide d - pericdic releas.e, 4 times /yr at 2? hcurs duraticn each.

_, ; :. me.w =, _.

Table 5.A CALCULATED RELEASES OF RADICACTIVE MATERIALS If1 LIQUID EFFLUEtlTS FRCl1 EilRICO

..'s.MI l1UCLEAR PLAtlT, UllT i;0. 2 fluclide Ci/yr flucl idq Ci/yr Corrosion & Activation Products gntin 1

fla-24 1.1(-2)a,b Rh-103m 4(-5) 3.5(-4)

Tc-104 2 -5)

P-32 Cr-51 0.9(-3)

Ru-105 9.8 -4)

Mn-54 1.1(-3)

Rh-105m 9.8 -4)

'Mn-56 1.2(-2)

' Rh-105 2.4(-4)

Fe-55 1.8(-3)

Ru-106 2.4(-3)

.Fe-59 5(-5)

Ag-110m 4.4(-4)

Co-58 4.4(-3)

Te-129m 7(-5)

Co-60 9.4(-3)

Te-129 5(-5) til-65 7(-5) 4 Te-131i -

1.4(-4)

Cu-64 3.3(-2)

Te-131 3(-5)

'Zn-65 3.6(-4)

T 131 1.3(-2)

- Zn-69m 2.3(-3)

,ie-132 2(-5)

I-132 7.7(-3)

Zn-69 2.4(-3)

Zr-95 1.4(-3) 1-133 3.7(-2) tib-95 2( -3 )

1-134 2(-3)

Z C:-134 1.4(-2) 11-18/

4.1(-4) flp-239 1.1(-2) 1-135 2(-2)

Cs-136 3.5(-4)

Fission Product-

'Cs-137 2.5(-2)

Ba-137m 1.2(-3)

Br-83 8.3(-4)

• Cs-138 4.1(-4)

Br-84 2(-5)

Ba-139 7.2(-4)

Sr-89 1.8(-4)

Ba-140 7.1(04) '

Sr-90 1(-5)

La-140 1(-4)

Sr-91 3.7(-3)

La-141 2.9(-4)

Y-91m 2.4(-3)

Ce-141 6(-5)

, Y-91 9(-5)

.La-142 5.2(-4)

Sr-92 2.5(-3)

• Ce-143 4(-5)

Y-92 5.7(-3)

Pr-143 7(-5)

Y-93 3.9(-3)

Ce-144 5.2(-3)

Zr-95 1(-5)

All Others 5(-5)

Total (except H-3) 2.7(-1)

~

fi-3 11 3.3(-3)

Mo-99 Tc-99m 1.5(-2)

RD-103 1.8(-4) a = expcnential notation; 1.1(-2) e 1.1 x 10-2

-5 b = nuclides whose release rates are less than 10 Ci/yr are not listed incjividually but are includei in the category "All Others".

J

Table 5.3 Receotor and Pathway Locations Considered for Selecting Maximum Individual Dose Commitments Sector Distance a

// 21 J. E7 Site Boundary b

pf 3)

J,C Residence kJDJ C. 72 Garden Milk Cow

// W

2. C Milk Goat

//EJ A

.C

~

Meat Animal

//

/ f.

~mit' ~.e;e;; or cc 'nh~j

1. eta and Gama air doses, total body and skin doses, frcm noble gases are determined 3

at site boundaries.

bDose pathways including innalation of atmospheric radioactivity, exposure to deposited radionuclides and submersion in gaseous radioactivity are evaluated at residences.

xn n

5.4 SU:2tARY OF AT!!OSPHERIC DISPERSI0:1 FACTORS A:iD DEPOSITI0:4 VALUES FOR MAXI:tUM SITE BOU?iDARY AtlD RECEPTOR LOCATICil5 tiEAR THE 11/errJ fiUCLEAR P0;IER STATI0:1 RELATIVE 3

LCCATIOi SOURCE X/0 (sec/m )

CEPOSITI0fl(ft')

2 =,

H+t

.-A-um :-

r

(

)

T 4 4 E-5 3 7 0'~ ~ E tiearest Site A

Land Boundary B

236-6 2 h6~2 4 3 E-6 f.? E- ?

(g S 9,y,,, fjp))

c D

1. I f ~ b

1. " : -

tiearest t:' 'z:,

A

,3. 3 E~- 7 4/E#

CHen, liilk B

. / f "

/." E - f An i ma l, c a.' " y t -

^H C

g,rg. 9 4.a :.a I. I 5~ =

D.C.:. !N)

D

1. 0 L~

i e.

Source A is Jh.At e " $).'fs L. w. !* '., v - n f u m :

Source B is r.?; v o n t d/.4 Source C 1s ~t%7 t. d&/ P t' 3 i.< A s /.- a c -

t

> - Q ',

. % 1,s n + >i ; t y,c Source D is n

The dose presented in the follcuing tables are corrected for radioactive decay and clcud depletion frca deposition, where appropriate, in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.111, Rev.1 " Methods for Estiaating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersicn of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases frca Light flater Reactors," July 1977.

b":learest" refers to that type of location where the highest radiation dose is expected to occur frca all appropriate pathways.

J J O'6e 1

. _ _ 3 -- _

~

e 't sion s

Du a

/

h rr n

n iy3 a

a e

s A/

h h

v y

t t

a a

d aag h

w t r r

r h

em e

e s

t B(

t t

t a

a a

n p

e e

e r

r u

e g

g l

l f

b f

f f

a e) i i

e c

st i

oi s n) n)

s l

Dn t

ae ae u

p u

n gs gs o

p e;

r/j e ro ro e

a i r u

od od s

n Ay l

o a

l s

/j f

rf rfo g

l t

ad e f

eo e oB O a

o ma h

n E

h r

t%

t%

t m

eu am sO0 O0 o

R l

G(

u(1 (1

e r

A

)

f o

u f

E t

f e

d l

i E

s l

f n

a s

a L

u s

G e

u A

/

u s

d U

r o

n o

i D

y e

i d

v I

/

s d

d i

VT m

a s

i 3

i n

d e o 4

o f

0 o

n I l e

G DA r

n9 t

r o/

)'

r 2

t i

i l L m

n i

a y

y t

l g,

d4 6

O' l

h h

a n

I P,

(

i k

u T s T d

i a

S 1

UI S

s c

t d

E e

i n

a o

S s

t e

r t

4 I

O a

r u

X D

G a

l t

e

5. A P

f s

s 5 11 e

f e

o l

d E

h d

A b

n g

e lfo a

d i

n O/

y y

i y

h o

lbT p d

e d

/

u d i

a o

n o 3

/

q o

/

e t

TSh d

o t

B 7 i

B 0

e i

B h

a L

6 lo t

i T

0 o.

l l

l o

l d

l E

a g I

a o.

o t

d

/

r r

a e

a 1

t t

4 l

T4 o

o o

e Q-T T

T h

t Y

w s

e 0

n h

CE o

g l

i i

i ET t

h S

a O

c e

D o

h n

l t

L o

)

n A

i t

r o

n y

e V

t t

o i

o n

r r

l l

ae s

t t

i a

a e

fi im o

p s

t h

d h

A d u pnn a

e s

t n

w ct al eoo g

e r

u RP Dii 4a n

g o

n Y

tt r4 I

n e

b o

A t m daa nf r

a e

t i

t i

l co nl t a

t l

er uaekt n

e h

e t

a iT rF oh gl ao i t

s r

i c

A i

rneiet a

i g

s o

P D

GIV! 1(

l

! 1 l

F l

4 t

2 l

ar e l

h u h A

l y

t c t

a c

C w

oo o

.d

/

h t

t L

t o

/

}

a-st s U

g )y p) r r.

t

,k n /j tlY

- e ed ed rs f e f e k9 aV i/

u eo et et e

,~

n h 6 hd ra ra n

p s/

t

)

t -

m ' im i

rt ue

" i g

d r

I i

Fb' h.

tt

't t Da y ;,

i b 4 A

l K

e ss ss i

f0 t r t

t r t

d ee ee sa%W l

9 sl0 u r r

r se 1

s ed e+

T e

l u

an an et ra r1 A

f, cF f

e e

rn r

O leop e

t e

c i e

" b

"!!ee n

lee C

au a4#

a\\

a l

b L

f B(

l a

l l

(l b

i l

i bli iI

):)[

i

}

[I!

ii y'

~

. TABLE 5.6.(a)

CALCULATED DOSE C0iO!ITMENTS TO A MAXIMUM INDIjIDUAL

'AND THE POPULATI'ON FROM THE }JbdNUCLEAR PLANT CPERATION

~~

MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL DOSES AFF_" DIX I CALCULATED DESIGN CBJECTIVES DOSES Annual Dose Per Reactor Unit Liquid Effluents Dose to total body frca all pathways 3 mren

/0 mren Dose to any organ frcm all pathways 70 mrem

,7 mrem Noble Gas Effluents (at site boundary)

Garrma dose in air 10 mrad

1. /

mrad Beta dose in air 20 mrad -

3. I crad Dose to total body of an individual 5 mrem

, 9 mrem Dose tc skin of an individual 15 mrem r,

mrem b

Radiciodi6es and Particulates Dose to any organ from all pathways 15 mrem

'J, 0 mrem POPULATION COSES WITHIN 80 km (50 mi)

TOTAL BODY THYROID Annual Dose Per Reactor Unit e

Natural Radiation Background ffC,Joo man-rem 9,f man-rem Liquid Effluents 9.1 man-rem Noble Gas Effluents

//

man-rem

/ / man-rem Radiciodines and Particulates 2

man-rem S / man-rem

. -... - ~.

aAppendix I Design Objectives frca Sections II.A, II.B, II.C and II.D of Appendix I, 10 CFR Part 50, considers doses to maximum individual and population per reactor unit.

From Federal Register V. 40, p.19442, May 5,1975.

bCarbon-14 and tritium have been added to this category, c" Natural Radiation Expcsure in the United States," U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, ORP-SID-72-1 (June 1972); using the average Pr %, state background dose e

(

/07 ~ " mrem /yr), and year.; d e ^

projectea population of 7;JA No.

N.

-- gw

TABLE 5.6.(b) CALCULATED COSE CC: NIT:4EiiTS TO A !!AXIliU:t IriDIVICUAL Edttr;

//wrj

,;: r;UCLEAR PLAliT OPERATIO:1 Fli-50-2 CALCULATED DESIGil CBJECTIVES DOSES Annual Dese Per Site Liquid Effluents Dose to total body or any org3n frcm all, pathways _

5 mrea S. 7 mrem /yr Noble Gas ffluents (at site bcundary) 5 Co / /yr ko.c3 AL< :ws Win. ib,Lx!a.w, ;3taa L

g, ; e Cz y Gamma dose in air 10 crad/yr Y/

mrad /yr Beta dose in air 20 mrad /yr 3.?

mrad /yr Dose to total body of an individual 5 mren/yr

?,7 mrem /yr Dose to skin of an individual 15 mrem /yr

( f area /yr b

Radiciodine and Particulates Dose to any organ frca all pathways 15 mrem /yr 7, O mrem /yr I'-I? I ac?h th:.chw I f.'.i /q -

C,&7 &;/*t Y

u a

Guides on Design Objectives proposed by the IIRC staff on February 20,1974(considers doses to individuals from all units on site.

Frca "Ccncluding Statement of Position of the Regulatory Staff," Docket No. R'1-50-2, Feb. 20,1974, pp. 25-30, U.S. Atcmic Energy Ccmaission, Washington, D.C., also published as Annex to Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50.

bCarbon-14 and tritium have been added to this category.

/

/

ria!

Ir v,,j,j n ~, n J-il*

?

i n.

_w

]

Y \\/<

'l

~

i

"~

k.

,c e

Table 5.7 Annual Total Bcdy Population Dose Ccmaitments in the Year 2oo o CATEGORY U.S. POPULATIO:1-00SE CCMMITME:IT a

tlatural Background Radiation y k,,,, go o (man-rem /yr) 9 >ae...

Nuclear Plant Ope, ration

!_)

(man-rem /yr/ site) w.

.y.

do0 Plant Ucrkers X

$cceralPublic!

Radiciodine and Particulates J </

,/

Liquid Effluents j[u

&# N'/ Noble Gas Effluents

/

Transportation of Fuel 7

I and Waste

/od Using the average U.S. background dose 6Wrem/yr) 4r ' ', and year JJdC a

projected U.S. population frca " Population Estimates and Projections," Series II, U. S. Dept. of Ccmmerce, Bureau of the Census, Series P-25, No. 541 (Feb.1975).

~.

TABLE 5.8 SUt2ARY OF HYER0 LOGIC TRAILS? ORT Att0 DISPERSIO t FOR LIQUIQ RELEASES FROM THE i->A-re2 fiUCLEAR PO' DER STATIO 1 TRAftSIT TIftE (Hours)

DILUTIO?i FACTCR LOCATIO:1 flearest Drinkin Water Intake (?g/' rr,90)

/

[

( L,.

f

)

C

'l t;earest Sport

~

Fishing Location [ '#02: < SO.W.htfc.

(

)

GMR.

ilearest 5,horeline

'j j

(6lL J"rv

' lt m. : n. p:+

G-cp:

(

)

\\

.. j

/

)

(

i

(

/

\\

)

{

See Regulatory Guide 1.113, " Estimating Aquatic Dispersion of Effluents Frca a

Accidental and Rcutine Reac+.or Relea;es for the Purpose of Implementing Appendix I," '

April 1977.

7 Assumed for purposes of an upper limit estimate, detailed informaticn not available.

b es==

e m

m s-e

TABLE 5.9 E iVIR0 iME: ITAL IMPACT OF TRAMSPORTATI0tl 0F FUEL AtiD yASTE TO AND FROM k

ONE LIGHT-WATER-CCOLED liUCLEAR PCUER REACTOR -[

Normal Condittens of Transport Heat (per irradiated fuel cask in transit) 260 MJ/hr Weight (governed by Federal or State restrictions) 33,000 kg. per truck; 90 tonnes per cask per

< 1 per da P @,n % b !

rail car y

p crd Traffic density.'

Truck'h il

< 3 per month p rte 3

Na.u Exposed populaticn Estimated Range of doses Cumulative dose to exposed population number of to exposed 34 persons individuals (man-remy per reactor exposed (millirems per year P reactoryear)

Transportation Worker 200 0.01 to 300 4

~

k General Public*

Onlookers 1,100 0.003 to 1.3 Along Route 600,000

. M O M o 0.06 3

AJ.') I Accidents in Transport Small d' C

4 Radiological Effects Common (nonradiological) causes 1 fatal injury in 100 reactor years; 1 nonfatal injury in 10 reactor years;

$475 property damage per reactor year i

1. 'a'ta su$orting this table are given in the Ccamission's Enviror-ental survey of M

~

0 Transcorta' tion of Radioactive Materials _f,to and fton Nuclear Power Plant

' /J h_44d m /y>

O Gse 4L %.m O.4 u fheJ % 24w/rn2u.cn n Z& Aud g g4af. a." G~% *

• Ciejne h ctnues M.

f

~t avw 2e r.c Aa:

The Federal ifadiation Council has reccamended that the radiation doses frcm all sources of radiation other than natural background and medical exposures should be limited to 5,000 millirems / year for individuals as a result of occupational exposure and should be limited to 500 millirems / year for individuals in the general population. The dose to individuals due to average natural background radiation is about yf2' millirems / year.

/*S QMan-rem is an expression for the summation of whole body doses to individuals in a group. Thus, if each member of a population group of 1,000 people were to receive a dose of 0.001 rem (1 milliren), or if 2 people were to receive a dose of 0.5 rem (500 millirems) each, the total cumulative dosegeach case would be 1 man-rem.

g

^

c. #Although the environmental risk of radiological effects stemming frcm transportaticn accidents cannot currently be numerically quantified, the risk remains small regardless of whether it is being applied to a single reactor or a multi-reactor site.

s

~.

APPENDIX NEPA Poculation Dose Assessment Population dose commitments are calculated for all individuals living within 80 km (50 miles) of the facility employing the same models used for individual doses (see Regulatory Guide 1.109, Rev.1).

In addition, population doses associated with the export of food crops produced with.the 80 km region and the atmospheric and hydrospheric transport of the more mobil effluent species such as noble gases, tritium, and carbon-14 have been censidered.

_.1 Noble Gas Effluents For locations within 80 km of the reactor facility, exposures to these effluents are calculated.using the atmosphere dispersion models in Regulatory Guide 1.111, Rev.,

l., and the dose models described in Section 5.4 and Regulatory Guide 1.109, Rev. 1.

Beyond 80 km, and until the effluent reaches the northeartern corner of the United States, it is assumed that all the noble gases are dispersed uniformly in the lowest 1,000 meters of the atmosphere. Decay in transit was also considered.

Beyond this point, noble gases having a half-life creater than one year (e.g., Kr-85) were assumed to completely mix in the troposphere of the world with no removal mechanisms operating.

gm

= em e s.

• =

e an ea g

e

Transfer of tropospheric air between the northern and southern hemispheres, although inhibited by wind patterns in the equatorial region, is considered to yield a hemisphere average tropospheric residence time of about two years with respect to hemispheric mixing.

Since this time constant is quite short with respect to the expected mid-point of plant life (15 yrs),

mixing in both hemispheres can be assumed for evaluations over the life of the nuclear f acility. This additional population dcse ccmmi tment to the U.S. population was also evaluated.

_. 2 Iodines and Particulates Released to the Atmosonere Effluent nuclides in this category deposit cnto the ground as the effluent moves downwind, which continuously reduces the concentration remaining in the plume. Within 80 km of the facility, the deposition model in Regulatory Guide 1.111, Rev.1, was used in conjunction with the dose models in Regulatory Guide 1.109, Rev. 1.

Site specific data concerning production, transport and consumption of foods within E0 kn of the reactor were used. Beyond 80 km, the deposition acdel was extended until no effluent remained in the plume.

Excess food not consumed within the 80 km distance was accounted for, and additional food production and consumption repre-sentative of the eastern half of the country was assumed. Coses obtained in this manner were then assumed to be received by the number of individuals living within the directicn sector and distance described above. The population density in this sector is taken to be representative of the Eastern United States, which is about 62 people per square kn.

4

_. 3 Carbon-14 and Tritium Released to the Atmoschere Carbon-14 and tritium were assumed to disperse without deposition in the sama manner as krypton-85 over land. Hcwever, they do interact with the oceans. This causes the carbon-14 to be removed with an atmospheric residence time of 4 to 6 years with the oceans being the major sink.

From this, the equilibrium ratio of the carbon-14 to natural carbon in the atmosphere was determined. The sane ratio was then assumed to exist in man so that the dose received by the entire population of the U.S.

could be estimated. Tritium was assumed to mix uniformly in the world's hydrosphere, which was assumed to include all the water in the atmosphere

~and in the upper 70 macers of the oceans. With this model, the equilibrium ratio of tritium to hydrogen in the environment can be calculated. The same ratio was assumed to exist in man, and was used to calculate the population dose, in the same manner as with carbon-14.

_. 4 Liouid Effluents Concentrations of effluents in the receiving water within 80 km of the facility were calculated in the same manner as described above for the Appendix I calculations. ilo depletion of the nucl s

in the receiving water by deposition on the bottom of the (W was assumed.

It was also assumed that aquatic biota concentrate radioactivity in the same manner as was assumed for the Appendix I evaluaticn. Hcwever, food consumption values appropriate for the average individual, rather

--a<~

-2

than the maximum, were used.

It was assumed that all the sport and ccmmercial fish and shell fish caught within the 80 km area were caten by the U.S. population.

Beyond 80 km, it was assumed that all the liquid effluent nuclides except tritium have deposited on the sediments so they make no further contribution to population exposures.

The tritium was assumed to mix uniformly in the world's hydresphere and to result in an exposure to the U.S. population in the same manner as discussed for tritium in gaseous effluents.

.2 Environmental Measurements and Monitoring Programs:

Radiological

.2.1 Radiological Environmental Monitoring Radiolegical environmental monitoring programs are established to provide data en measurable levels of radiation and radioactive naterials in the site environs. Appendix I to 10 CFR Part 50 requires that the relation-ship between quantities of radioactive material released in effluents during normal operation, including anticipated operational occurrences, and resultant radioactive doses to individuals from principal pathways of exposure be evaluated, ilonitoring programs are conducted to verify the effectiveness of in-plant controls used for reducing the release of radioactive materials and to provide public reassurance that undetected radioactivity will not build up in the environment. A surveillance program is established to identify changes in the use of unrestricted areas to provide a basis for modifications of the monitoring programs.

The preoperational phase of the monitoring program provided for the measure-ment of background levels and their variations along the anticipated important pathways in the area surrounding the plant, the training of personnel and the evaluation of procedures, equipment and techniques.

Qcs.syL.2w wu' qdiscussedingreaterdetailinMRCRegulatoryGuide4.1,Rev.1, Ti. m

" Programs for Monitoring Radioactivity in the Environs of Nuclear Pcwer Plants," and he Radiological Assessment Branch Technical Position,

?}?a xb li2 >

Dc n.T.ba' 1977, An cceptable Radiological Environmental Monitoring Program." [s

==

== -

_.. _.,.. a

.9-2

_ _Preocerational programs The applicant has proposed a radiological environmental monitoring program to meet the objectives discussed above. The applicant's proposed preopera-tional radiological environmental monitoring program is presented in Section 6.1.5 of the applicant's Environmental Report and sammarized here in Table 6.1.

The applicant proposes to initiate parts of the program two y9ars prior te operations of the facility, with the remaining portions beginning either 6 months or one year prior to operation.

The staff concludes that the preoperational monitoring program proposed by the applicant is tes_ fr37 acceptable.

.2.3 Operational Programs The operational offsite radiological monitoring program is conducted to measure radiation levels and radioactivity in the plant envircns.

It assists and provides backup support to the effluent acnf taring program as recommended in MRC Regulatory Guide 1.21, "Iteasuring, Evaluating and Reporting Radioactivity in Solic Whstes and Releases of Radioactive fiaterials in Liquid and Gaseous Effluents from Light-Water Cooled Nuclear Pcwer Plants." The effluent acnf toring program is required to evaluate individual and population exposures and verify projected or anticipated radioactivity concentrations.

- ~ = = - =

~~:----. --

-:..u s_w

The applicant plans essentially to continue the proposed preoperaticnal program during the operating period. Ucuever, refinements may be made in the program to reflect changes in land use or preoperational monitoring experience.

An evaluation of the applicant's preposed operaticaal monitoring program will be performed during the operating license review, and the details of the required monitoring prcgram will be incorpcrated into the Environmental Technical Specifications for the operating license.

9 M MW= W Am mm

~~fm=

~f w

. m s

(3'T t

I

)

l I

(

,I N

sQ st l gQ o/

i na n/

l D s ai iD sc ad c k

a t

b nr ne ss u e agsae nb n r ae h

oa n r vl g oe yerl i M

d yci b veeh el r

A asw t ehE s

d h

cvt R

k el h st eioe G

r t acai l t bk a

cua w

ea a

O m

ene r sl sL e

l nB oy ei R

R ea t t h r n

P s

l ci c

ti eaen r aa sd r s u e

ht G

not m

pgt r omst m n

o N

i - Eso wiep I

td ec oeis a e - s t>c l

R cx ot l

ed O

oiEl s ef pn mN ce Y os a t

T I

N

)

)

a a

O

(

(

y y

y y

l l

M c

l l

l n

r a

a e

e u

u L

u t

n n

A q

r n

n e

a a

a C

r u

F Q

l i

a m

I e

e G

s S

S i

O s

L y

l O

a e

)

n s

I n

A o

c o

c D

d iei ip pl t A

a aob R

e m

mt i r ao o

mt p

m mod mo g

gG a a se as L

3 i(

Gi AT)

N3 E

y s -

d d

c u

y n

n Mf n

og l

u a

u a

2 o

e un d r n

sr s n

sr s t

u ri ee n-gaet n - ga et O

q il sgt a

n hi lal rl a r a

n hi R1 e

t p nr n m 'h a a i yil t m yil t m r

ml rl ar I

F oat h u el pae e el pae e Vt CsTcq S aSF wp S aSF wp 3

e g

f n

Ee i

l h

p e

LS m

t l

a A(

n p

S t

n e

m N

)

a o

l a

e 2

i a

s OR c

(

s t

v IA

' h a s

i b

_i v

oD cc t

u a

TE e

wL a o er q r

D TTel N oe G

AY R

ED PN e

e OO n

g x

g EC o

yy r

t u

r i

yr r W

a n

a a

RE t

h r aay E

h na ehh a

cadd s N

s c

ol e P cc PS c

ad nna e e

s t P r as n

e nuud c yeh) al f

i n

u s ei oI B uoonn t vc r i d

er t uDd ODD ue ioa a m r ec A

h rd l B od nl e F

f Twu l 2 s

e n a

eeBi uaB 3

o or ea e

ta r et t s

a

- 1 Pt t ri t

s t t il ee a sl y

s u s siSi t R oaa l r t

l l tnt m a

n r c

t i I

N e ES C

r oo cee uE e i

i l

- - S -

et r

n c nk P

F l

p

- ms t 1 i

t na p

6 ma EMtMM u

t aE n1 c

nat a

s o

oh n E

d E

!E. (

C i

cCi SNE

]!

NI N MNh v

n L

i d

B e

A z

n y

T o

l e

i h

a t

c n

lp a

r a

in i

e a

d P

s S

a es e

R w

f v

int l

n p

o t

l e

m c

em a

e e

h e r '

S p

r sY od yi i

h e D

r sS a

l

,.i f

' r 3

• (

fh g. 6 f

,s i

e h e i

A

e

,1 TABLE 6.

-1' 0 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM, c

SECOND YEAR (Sheet 2 of 3)

}

(

)

Number of Sampling Analysis

(

3 pe of Sanyle Samples and "ncation Device Frequency type Frequency Remarks Direct Radiation

)

)

Sample regime remains same as Fish

) Same as first year

)

first year.

f shorelins Sediments)

)

Airborne NE - Estral Beach

1. Particulate Change la. Gross Weekly (a) -

1. Initiate sampling program on Pa r ticula t es (b)

NW - Site Boundary sampler -

filters beta (b) following gross beta and gamma isoto-HNW - Residence continuous weekly each fil-pic, January ter change j

NE - Community

2. Radiolodine Change Ib. Ca:nma Quarterly (a)

2. Initiate sampling program on IT (same as above NE canister weekly isotopic composite by fodine - 131, June C

- Estral Beach) loca t ic.n Control - Farm

2. Iodine - 131 WeeklyI8)

T )

o 11 or 13 elles W c,

Il Surface Water Fermi 1 gastable Composite mnthly

1. Camma h>n t hly I83 Composite sarpler must be capa-water intake sampler isotopic ble of collecting an aliquot at hourly time intervals relative f

Control - Trenton

2. Tritium Quarterly 83-to monthly compositing period I

• j Channel Power Plant composite by

' O, intake location Dsinking Water (b)

City of mnroe Composite mnthly

1. Cross mnthlyta)

Corposite sampler must be capa-I water intake sampler beta (b) ble of collecting an aliquot at h)nthlyta) hourly time intervals relative Control - Detroit

2. Gamma corposite to monthly compositing period.

water intake at isotopic by location righting Island

3. Tritium Quarterly (a).

con posite by I

s location l

J

)

a Samples analysed in duplicate j

b If gross beta in air or water is greater than 10 times the mean of control samples for any medium, gamma isotopic performed on individual (

)

samples.

1 t

s

's TABLE 6.1 1 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING PROGRAM, SE'COND YEAR (Sheet 3 of 3) 1 Number of Sampiing Analysis hpe of Sample Samples and I,ocation Device Frequency ype Frequency Remarks Hilk Goat - tu (3.18 km)

Coat, cow

1. Mnthly

1. Camma mn t hly

1. Initiate sampling program Cow - IM (4.15 km) isotopic on gamma isotopic - January

2. Semi-Control - Para monthly

2. Iodine - 131 Semi-

2. Initiate sampling program

(

11 or 13 miles W when monthly for Iodine - 131 when gras-j animals when ing season starts, May-on pas-animals October ture on pas-3 4

ture i'

k i

a samples analyzed in duplicate b

If gross beta in air or water is greater than 10 times the mean of control samples for any medium, gamma isotopic performed on individual samples.

g O.

l$

1 I )

I

")

i r Si k

u I

I i

J O

i f