ML19321A497
| ML19321A497 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden  |
| Issue date: | 07/18/1980 |
| From: | Shineflug M ILLINOIS SAFE ENERGY ALLIANCE |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8007230524 | |
| Download: ML19321A497 (12) | |
Text
i, l.S.E.A.
ILLINOIS SAFE ENERGY ALLIANCE P.O. Box 469 Antioch, Illinois 60002 Meetings:
407 South Cearborn, Room 370 Chicago, Illinois 60605 July 18, 1980 PUBLIC COMMENT ON DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT ON DECONTAMINATION OF DRESDEN I Director Division of Licensing U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
'4ashington, D.C.
20555
Dear Sir,
Rather than a thorough investigative study, the "Dmf t Environmental Statement related to Primary Cooling Systen Chenical Decontamination at Dresden Nuclear Power Station Unit No.1," is, in general, merely a publication of correspondence between concerned individuals, members of the Nuclear Regulatory Connission (NRC), and the Departnent of Energy (DOE). In the opinion of the ISEA, a project of the scope and size of the Dresden I clean-up warrants a complete, detailed, and fully documented environmental study. The draft environmental statement falls far short of this goal for many reasons, a few of which include:
1)
Sec. 2.3, Need for Decontanination "The decontamination effort will facilitata inplementation of other actions ordered by the Consiss!on such as the installation of a new high pressure coolant J
injection system, in service inspection, and modifications to the reactor pro-tection system."
Comment: Nowhere in the draft environnental statement are the implications for reactor safety of an extended wet lay-up period raised. According to a Brook-haven National Laboratory Memorandum dated April 16, 1979 from John Weeks to Frank Almeter:
'4 hat has not, however, been adequately demonstrated is the effect of leaving residual NS-1 solvent at anbient temperatures for a period of ten Months between the planned August,1979, cleaning and the June,1980, return to service...However, in creviced areas such as those used around, for example, type 610. bolts, or in creviced pockets of the type shown where the NS-1 has by galvanic corrosion caused. substantial undercutting of the vessel clad in the vicinity of the defect, I suspect that signifi-cant amounts of the NS-1 solvent may indeed be trapped. There is a further,
possibility that potentially harmful impurities such as chlorides or sul-fates that had been absorbed in the crud deposits on the piping and removed by NS-1 could also be trapped in these crevices; with air in the reactor vessel, local galvanic cells could be set up that could cause corrosion to continue during the period of wet layup...The NRC has seen enough prob-less with the residuals of corrosive solutions lef t in reactors during j
THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS h \\
QT P00R QUAUTY PAGES
. go0 W J
ISEA PUBLIC COMMENTS-PAGE 2 long periods of wet layup, as in the Palisades steam generator incident several years back, that we should be somewhat cautious in this area.
The memo continues Further, Table 1.C.1 of the Dow report states that the type 410 steel is used in a nunber of pins, screws and bolts in the core support structure where there would undoubtedly be crevices around this naterial from which NS-1 solvent may not be properly rinsed following the cleaning and in
. which possible copper deposits may remain following the copper rinse proced-ure. As stated in the Dow report, some areas continue to have sna11 patches of undissolved copper typically within tight crevicess copper deposits are known to produce a potential at which intergranular stress corrosion of sensitized stainless steel is most likely to occur.
(Coaplete memo attached)
While the above dates are obviously in need of revision, the concerns raised by Weeks still apper to be valid particularly in light of the extended time period which may be required for the stated installations, inspections and nodifications to be completed.
2)
Sec. 4.2.1 3 Occunational Radiation Exoosure Because of Decontanination Ooeration "The NRC staff has reviewed the licensee's methods of estinating occupational exposure during this project. We conclude that these methods are conservative and that the estinates realistically bound the anticipated dose and are acceptable to the staff."
Comnant: Since the NRC itself states in its news announcenent dated June 3,1980 that one of the " major" issues in the environmental review is "the occupational radiation exposures associated with t.se proposed decontanination...," it seens negligent to omit from the draft environmental statement the licensee's methods of estimating occupational exposures expected during this project. While the NRC concludes "that these methods are conservative and that the estimates realis-tically bound the anticipated dosc and are acceptable to the staff," the methods are not presented in the environmental statement for public scrutiny. How can the public adequately judge the correctness of the NRC's conclusion when the basic data is not included? What projected ex sure levels from what accidents have been taken into account? For example, " ' he radwaste facility specifically constructed for the process has been iesigned or remote operation of all phases, including filling, capping, and storage of the waste drums." What exposure levels would result if this remote systen breaks down and the work needs to be conpleted by nanual labor? Could potentie.1 exposure levels be high enou6h to preclude completion of the project?
3)
Sec. 4.2.1 C Conclusion from Occusational Exuosure Review
" Based on the estiaated occupational exposure savings of 7500 to 12,500 man-rem because of the decontamination operation, we conclude that the expenditure of the ectimated total exposure of 300 man-rem for the decontamination operation would result in a significant net reduction of exposure over the remaining years of plant operation. The decontamination operation itself, therefore, can be an effective method of maintaining the long-ters overall occupational exposure to ALARA."
Comment: The logic of this conclusion is devastated by the fact that electricity from the Dresden I reactor is not needed. The attached chart
- demonstrates Edison has large reserve margins which would not be significantly reduced by continued removal of the relatively small Dresden I from the company's generating capacity.
'" Troubled Edison Faces Fight Over Growth," Chicago Sun-Times, June 3,1980
' ISEA PUBLIC COMMENTS-PAGE 3 4)-
Sec.4.2.1C(con't)
"For the decontamination operation, the estimated radiation exposure of 300 man-rem represents an increased risk of prenture fatal cancer induction prediction of less than one-tenth of one event...The increased risk of this exposure on genetic effects to the ensuing 5 genentions is also predicted to be less than one-tenth of one event."
Comment: The accuracy of the above prediction is questionable. New information contained in a Natural Resources Defense Council Bulletin states that Arthur Tamplin and Elizabeth Shafer conclude that the report of the National Academy known as the EEIR Report underestimated the effects in the low-dose exposure range possibly by a factor of 10. For example, new studies suggest that the estimated effects of 1 million person-rem are not 100 to 450 induced cancers, but 4500. Genetic disorders from the exposure, listed only as30-750 in the BEIR Report, may be in the range of 240-6000. These findin5s seem to suggest that there is a super-linear effect openting, i.e. that low doses cause proportionately higher damage than would be predicted by the linear theory of dose-effect. While the NRC currently does not recognize the validity of this new information, the public should be aware of the reat controversy surrounding the safety of exposure to low-level ndiation and the adequacy of the NRC's standards.
5)
Sec. 4.2.1 C (con't)
"The estimated dose of 300 mn-rea will apread over about 350 workers over at least a one-year period. Therefore, the average dose to a worker for this operation will be roughly 1 man-rem or one-fourth of the variation in natural background radiation between Denver and Washington over an average lifetime of an individual. It is not evident that the variation in natural background l
would be a significant factor influencing any decision on an individual'%
activities (i.e. moving from Denver to other locations of lower background radiationlevels). Therefore, the fractional increase in comparison to Mck-ground radiation resulting from the decontanination operation represents an insignificant and acceptable impact."
Comnent Be ecmparison of projected exposures from the Dresden decontamination to variations in background radiation is unwarranted and misleading. Some persons may interpret this comparison to mean exposure to background radiation is safe. However exposure to even small amounts of radiation from any source including background radiation increases one's risk of sustaining cell damage the effects of which are cumulative.
Also, exposure to background radiation is unavoidable while exposure to radiation from the decontanination project is avoidable.
6)
Sec. 4.2 3 Radioactive Waste Discosal "The solidified radioactive waste from the Dresden Unit 1 Decontamination will be shipped to a commercial low-level burial site in either Beatty, Nevada or Hanford, Washington. These sites have been chosen as waste burial locations Wuse of their (iry, arid environment and their favorable geologic, hydrologic and meteoro agic features. These two sites are located in dry desert locations where th.*re is a very low annual rate of precipit4 tion and a very deep water table. These two features combined with the ranote location of these burial sites, provide assurance that the waste can remain isolated from the human environment for a period long enough to allow the princial rsdionuclides to decay to significant levels."
Comment: The solution of burial in dry commercial sites (or a federally-owned site as suggested in response to Question 3, ISEA, in the Appendix if trans-uranics appear in unexpectedly high concentrations) remains inadequate in light of man's inability to predict clinatic con.11tions over the long time sans this
ISEA PUBLIC C0f0ENTS-PAGE 4 1
waste remains dangerous to life. Recent volcanic activity and possible changing weather patterns already challenge the acceptability of both the federally-owned and commercial sites in Washington. Public pressure and/or state actions may force closure of the Nevada and Washington sites. With no other dry sites available in the country, the ISEA's concern that the chelated wastes may stay in Illinois remain 5 valid.
Disagreement still exists regarding the " principal" radionuclides which may appear in the chelated waste and thus the length of time required for waste isolation. The table presented in Response 3 to Question 3, Drey, excludes nickel 63 which has a half-life of 92 years. However because Dresden I feedwater tubing was 70-30 copper-nickel and originally had admiralty condenser tubing, could not significant concentantions of nickel isotopes appear in the crud?
(See p. 11, 24, 25 from " Primary System Shutdown Radiation Levels at Nuclear
. Power Generating Stations, PB 251 343--attached) 7)
Sec. 4.2 3 (con't)
" Decontamination wastes containing chelating agents will be segregated from other wastes, stored separately, and be disposed of either in separate trenches t
or in specifically segregated areas within an existing trench, and isolated from other wastes with 10 feet of soil. However, this waste does not require segre6ation from wastes containing toluene, xylene or other organic material."
Comment While segregation of chelated wastes is proposed, why isn't separation from toluene and xylene or other organic material required? Aren't these chemicals capable of dissolving polymers?
a.
j AdditionalComnents/Theprosandconsofdeactivatingorbreakingdownthe cholate complexas are treated only in a response to question 4d, Drey. While a response to her question 3c seems to indicate "the leach rates were slightly better for Cobalt 60 when NS-1 waste was compared to the other reactor wastes tested," no numerical data is presented in the draft envirenmental statement to demonstrate how much better the Cobalt 60, NS-1 sar.ple performed. Therefore i
the public cannot judge the validity of the conclusion that deactivation of chelatae is not a superior choice when a total risk / benefit comparison of burying chelated vs. burying nonchelated or deactivated wastes is made.
e b.
What assurance does the public have that " full scale qualification tests using simulated waste.." can be used as an accurate prediction of the behavior of actual wastes?
c.
What measures can be taken in the event wastes in drums do not completely solidify? While a layer of liquid in the waste drums apparently is not expected if wastes are " solidified in accordance with the procedure speci-fled by the manufacturer," the possibility of this occurrence should not be ruled out. Accortiing to certain testa cited, under " worst case" conditions, containers could corrode through during hanaling and storage if' not buried within a few months of solidification.
Another figure cited elsewhers is 1 month. (The data on leach rates is perhaps the most coorg ornahed of all subjects presented in the draf t environmental statenant.)
8)
Sec. 4.3 Environmental Imoact of Postu_l _ated_Ac_cidents Comment This section does not/ describe possible accidents nor the exact 4
procedures to cope with them. If specific postulated accident scenarios are not presented, how can their environmental impacts be adquately assessed i
by the public?
9).
Innact of Alternatives
. Sec.13 2 Shut The Reactor Down Permane.n,th
.."The permanent shutdown of. the reactor would, therefore, result in the need to d
v c.
-y..
.w
ISEA PUBLIb COMMENTS-PAGE 5 purchase approximately 300 million dollars worth of replacement power over the remaining 15 years that the Dresden I license is in effect."
Comment: Justification for the choice of decontamination over rea tor shutdown c
is based on the assumption that electricity from the plant is needed.
'4 hat demand projections are being used as a basis of the claim that "300 million dollars worth of replacement power over the remaining 15 years..." will be needed? Edison's large present and future reserve generating capacities (see chart from Chicago Sun-Times, June 8,1980, attached),
the lower than expected growth rates in peak demand, and the untapped potential of conservation incentives conbine to show that electricity from Dresden I simply is not needed.
The ISEA formally requests the public comment period be extended as the public meeting to be held in the vicinity of the plant has not yet even been scheduled.
Persons learning of the decontamination can then be afforded an opportunity to submit their comments.
Sincerely,
/'
,,/
-L..}7,j;,/-1 G, / > W,i.:u;&*/
Marilyn J. Shineflug Chairperson, ISEA
s.
v-
'.?SG R
- ~ '
y
%.i
. e. <
e
.q
+ - -.. ~. -
.y BROOKHAVEN NATIONAL LABORATORY MEMORANDUM QATE: April 16,1979
'To:
Frank Almeter FROM:
John R., Wee p
sus;EcT: t;hemical Decentamination of Dresden 1 Review of Documents Submitted in March, 1979 ( t/.thf C ffe Yo Wd As a general rule, I thin'c sufficient data have now been obtained to give some confidence that the chemical cleaning of this unit can be carried out without significant damage to the materials. There are sufficient stress cor-resion data on most of the material and on the rates of crack penetration on specimens simulating defects in the vessel cladding. However, all of these dath were taken under conditions ths.t simulated return of the unit to service' shortly; following the chemical cleaning operation. Under these conditions the remaining NS-1 solvent will be decomposed by the higher temperatures into relatively harmless constituents and no additional corrosion will occur. This has been adequately demonstrated. What,has not,. however. been adequately _ demonstrated is._t_he effect of leaving residual NS-1 solvent at a=bient
~
te=peratures for a period of ten months between the 'plann'ed August, 1979, cleanins and~thei u'ne7 19 @, return to
'I dlscussed 'this particular point with W'.IT. kalker durihg the course service.
~~'
of the NACE meeting in March.
He advised me at that time that there will be a number of rinses following the chemical cleaning.
Walker also advised me that at room temperature the corrosion rates of most =ateria19 in the NS-1 solvent are significantly lower than they are at the higher temperatures at which the cleaning will take place. However,.in creviced areas such as those used around for example, type 410 bolts, or in creviced pockets of the type shown where the NS-1 has by galvanic corrosion caused a substantial undercutting of the vessel clad in the vicinity of the defect, I suspect that significant a=ounts of the NS-1 solvent may indeed be,trapged. There is a further possibility that potentially harmful impurities cuch as chlorides or sulfates that had been absorbed in the crud deposits on the piping and removed by NS-1 could also be trapped in these crevices; with air in the reactor vessel, local galvanic cells could be set up that could cause corrosion to continue during th_e pe-iod of_ wet layup. I think the subject should be addressed by the applicant if indeed the information that Walker gave me can be demonstrated by existing results or can
,be demonstrated by rather a simple test 7the residuals of corrosive soluticas left The NRC has seen enough problems with in reactors during long periods of wet layup, as in the Palisadet steam generater incident several years back, hat we should be somewhat cautious in this arca.
'.i N.9.-W p
s
- ....
- q r,
April 16, 1179 TO:
Dr. Frank Almeter he Dow report DNS--Dl-029 said that highly stressed sa=ples of type 410 stainless steel show relatively high rates upon exposure to the Dow solvent However, they indicated that maximum expected. stress levels in the Dresden system for this material are much less than the 85% of yield at which NS-1.
In the absence of detailed information on thermal stresses, it was tested.
bolting strasses or other residuals from fabrication or frcm heating up to some of the the operating te=perature, I think we should assume that at least l
type 410 material may be at the higher stress level and examine what actual yThe Dres has happened to this material during the cleaning.
indicates that cretal surveillance including this =aterial will be perfor=ed during This is all well and good. I am, however, somewhat concerned at that what the cleaning.
the relatively high corrosion rates of this material and that the f act are given are average corrosion rates _ as ind,1cated by weight change measurements -
whereas figures 1.C.2 and 1.C.3 from the Dow report indicate that the corrosion ~@or is so=ewhat locali:ed, and the maximum penetration rates _ cust_Je-'at[Teast a
~
Further,
of_2 greater than the average penetration rates given in the report.
Table 1.C.1 of the Dow report states that' the ' type "410 'steiTTs-used in a number of pins, screws and bolts in the core support structure where there would un-doubtedly be crevices around this material frcm which the NS-1 solvent may not be properly rinsed following the cleaning and in which possible copper deposits.
As stated in the Dow report, '
=ay re=ain follcwing the copper rinse procedure.
some areas continue to have small patches of undissolved copper typically within tight crevices; copper _ deposits _are known to_ produce, ajotential at,vh. ich inter-likely to occur.
granular stress corrosion _ of, sensitized stainless steel _is most I,
(This is,'of course, t'he principal of the Strauss test for sensitization?.
therefore, would sugge.;t that so=e of the type 410 surveillance speci= ens be stressed heavily and contain crevices so that f ollowing the chemical decontamination 3
is going on in the real system and copper rinse it will be possible to ascertain what i
is in the creviced (bolts, etc.) areas within the core support structure.
that The possible crack extension underneath the siculated cladding defects on the reactor vessel
- should, of course, be carefully evaluated by the fracture mechanics I as concerned in this area particularly that qnrg;;gyfgl people within the NRC.
solvent during the rinsing process =ay cause these cracks to extend more than described _in Walker's work, in which the system'was rapidl" heEed"tsi BIE
~
operating te=pratures and. the solvent =aterials decomposcLth~cFAlly'.
Once these reservations are satisf actorily resolved, I believe that the Dresden 1 unit can Se saf ely cleaned and saf ely returned to service for continued cperation, subject possibly to increased in-service inspection, par ticularly of stress corrosion sensitive areas such as heat af fected zones of welds in piping.
Do we know whether such defects exist, < r is this enly a hypothetical possibility?
4 4
JRW:ob Dist.
W.Y. Kato Corrosion Science Grcup Files (10)
V. Noonan W. Hazelton J. Knight S. Pawlicki 2
9
ti em
.o,-
m s
e s'.
roua'ed Edaison " aces "ic it su se
%m _
' ; 7# - D$'q$,O Ctaudia Ricci and Tom Furlong -
8'iN Commonweanth Edison's nuclear corJtrucuen program.
stricken by poverty and encircled by critics. goes on trial later '.
is i
l
., /
t this month before the Elinois Commerce Comsgasion.
a In the short term, the commission will consider the econom-(ca of further delsytng completica of the uti!:ty's Bra.dwood ' -
^
fluclear plant near Joliet.
Ultimately. Bowever. the debate wu! shift to a score funda..
mental quesuon: how guickly should Edisotr culld new plants now that growth to the public's appetite for electt;ctty is sub-siding?
.~*
Moreover, the commission is trying to pinpotat what the unlity's new plants wul coat inflacon. weary customers.
$. 11 & T g* g g ",
-Thew. no question that constructio of these piants fs twnday, Jtste 8.1980 forcing up rat s. said wand Kamphuis, who's acting as the examlaer in this week's headngs. "The quescon is whether st's more economical to forte up the rates and build those plants now."
. "The costpany l'as dug themselves la over their heads." saad u.
1
_ ~. ~
Desoran Senn, attorney for the !!!!no!s Office of Consumer Ed. son's muldbillon dodar constructica progrant has seast - }
Services, who opposed Esson's last rate Increase..
larger electricity bula. That and infurion are the prime rea y.4 Md so reany tmts whta there is so much evidence that cent rate nike,' ally wobbly titality recent!y received a 19 pere -
'Trankly." she saed. "we wonder wny Edison contuiues to wans the f;nanc the tilghest ever granted by the ICC. -. jj g-owth in electricial demand is down."
Everycne agrees ctistatners will be diggmg even deepes late *,
their pockets agsta soott Slote inco*De from the rate payers is g{
The trearings are la two phases. Phase ! which concerns the economics of the Braidwood plant, wtG reco:nmence (!! began needed so the company tan attract lavesters and contfaue tBe,
tast yearl June 30 la Chicago,and should last no more than a building program. The udtlty now plans to base three ne%,,
week. Phase II. which concerns the utility's entire butl ding nuclear plants on !!ne by the nud-1980s.
? *7 prograrn. should commence by !ata sutarcer Kamphuis said.
Recency, however. Edlson unexpectely annwnsed delays la 2 The consumer advocates who requested the beartrigs say those nuclear plants, including a two-year delay at 33raadveoca..j electric.ty bits have been 6kyrocketing because Edison p!anned !ct tno much electrical demand during the mid.1970s. because of " additional engineering and cci6tructics rMulve ?.
ments" Kamphuis said the hearings wdl proceed nonetheless. ,
WhCe concedlag the utility's "crynal ball
- was way off, with a further delay of Braidwood utd 1943 possbne. y4 George Rtfakes, utility v'ce president for fuel and budgets.
The heartags are coming at a time when utiht;es from kingM vays r:0 one could have predicted the 1973 Arat oil emoargo' 14and to Californla are shelving or stalur's power planta. 'N rhe main cause of hagher petreleura prices and lessened elec.
In Califortita, energy regulators be less that through cooperd j We d a e:luva gooit record on forecasting undt 1974."
.s... a ws(-
Turn to Fase
't. fakes tid. In tce near term, tt.ere s 11rtle argument that..
y,,
.; g t t+
W Cnticsmacison grown 'p ans@
+.,,
q Controuse front Pste 8 *,
p s [s..g j - a
,,,m ties overestimate future de.
tandem with a 1.5 percent mand la order to Juauty more en electricity growth. Detroit gp '**1 'i&
cuestructica and higser prut.
M If*
its. These forecasts fad to ac-
~
E tison announced two a
montas ago 6 Sad scrapped
"***'** l c c.c sr.
count for the impact conser-sw.
prans to aut!d two nuclear Ay ta peemes sation and higher prtces ails
(%
piartts m part because it
- N' have la farther reducing eacc..
a.cn t need the power.
,#/
1980 14,750 17'717
+ 20.1'6
""CY 8'.* *. 'h I" "' f *"* -
Oce of the core issues la,
+
they say We Ccmmonweaith Edison.l. g,y1981 15.270 18.755
+22.9%
g,Robmns er:a se,cer Epi.ert Golds nath atter'tey Saaritig.a the et>calhd re-q c3 serve margia. whica le the ' wr.c,d,b
~~
ronment and one of Edisoe's 1982 15.910 19.510
+ 22.6%
i. p /N ncess capacity the utmty q
mon acuve advenarias, says mamtains oser and aseve the f suminer realc :oad. !n 1979.
1983 16.670 11501
+ 17.0'e, excess capacity cost custom.
tent. more cas twece the 14 - /,
- p' s ers saa malos in :979. witti
- s f.gure was above 30 per.
er 2.9 milllon customers, that
-pl,;-"
1984 17.470.
40.621
+ 18.0%
con es to about $32 per cus-percent tr.at evea Edasoa says
~ u, tomer' t
1985 18.290 2!,741.
+18.9%
i,fC)S it *ece t2 prevent pass.bie TIIE CTILITY replies that
'4acm3uts an4 brownouts.
H#.
1986 19,150 22.003
+ 19.1%
p; ant deta>s are wr.at ca a
EDISON EXECt,"!TWS ex.
f'.
the customer ccat dearly. A E
mam tms cor:dittoa is tempo.
4J -
1987 20,000 24.1 t3
+ 20.4%
one-year delay at a rariste site ra y. They say irs tf:s result can reets increased instana-tricar control, such as caos -.6e 1988 20,900 20.M
+ 13.7'h tron costs and opera. ng cos:s of cir smstances beyond n *
(
.s of nearly $300 rher says weatNr and the unexpected ;,;.J m 1989 21.g30 24 36
+ Jg,te.
chairman James J. OT mor.
wr demand. They admit.
1! i '
- o. Conner says' Ed soa vil
'awts. Ihr reserve marer.a
-7
- val contme to te substan-war ~ -
w.
request anoM rate me Wy m excess of 14 ;<rcent sa rnm ene'this year, cut he doess t say g
7ee aam unul 'ste la the aevit expan on-growt'n
'ti ter af crsteMa particularly Some ladustry naaaysts pre.
sace. To Ecsons crecies, de'r.and kgan to ptange. It past trends is etettricity co dict the actount wel te m the Ngh, me exceuive reserve has aversged nW13 percent age and weather. Usage is range of tt:e te migo.
mrcas are prsof rhewtdy most of tr.e decace.
rnessured 4s terms of "pealt they renerted (5339 ntdua
%s cecome dangerously As recettiy as 379. Edis-demar.c." the maximum elec grante6) 'ast t;me.
^#f** @
ovs forecast cal:ed for a tr'c3v used caring a Sear.
The higher rates are need.
ehtencaily, the demand growtn ra e of 6.5 peccent. Typicany, electricity use ed..ay 13e anansts. to in.
, r stectriccy merea.ed 43out nie cwy now acticcstes peaks on the hottest day of prove Ediso'!'s !!nascias pic.
y W"ns.wr year. Ikrt beca* 4 4 percrat asaui mcream te wmmer, when air to:tdi-ture. dep:sted la terms rang..
tag in '973-4mt the cme terough the D%s.,
29r.ers rua all day.
- lag from "very hed'* $'
we
..a enartirg is prti-A fer,cajg r,f?ests a r.nm-
-Consumer g tn.ps say utui ";atMtic
- 4
- x.
i.-
&.,m:=
s
-- ~. - - - - - - _.
.=
~
g.g, cow-e o A,A 3.as-.w
,,,,,O,_,_
pg g51 343 2.
~
- 5. Report Dave *
- 4. Title and Subsiste December 1976 Primary System Shutdown Radiation Levels at Muclear Power Generating Stations organizanon Rept.
j
~
- 7. Author (s)
LI. Pearl, 4. Jacob. 5. Sawochka
- N',tormans
- 10. Pro >ect/ Task /Woak Una No.
- i. Performing Orgsassessen Name and Address RP 404-2 l-Nuclear Mater 1 Haste Technology 8 8 Ca*"*"/G'*** N*-
l P. O. Box 6406
~
San Jose, CA 95150
- 13. Type of Repect a Period
- 12. Sponsoving organsassion Name and Aderess c..
ed Electric Power Research Institute FINAL REPORT 3412 Hillview Avenue H-Palo Alto, CA 94304
- 15. Supplernessary Notes This recort docur'ents the results of a survey of oneratina nuclear stations
- 16. Abstreets to detemine the extent and seriousness of radioactivity buildun in nuclear olants; to access the value of the available data base for extracolatinn observations to lonner coeratino times; to define corrective antions and associated RP0 nronrams; and to define additional information riatherinn nrograms where needed.
o
?y Words and DeCument Ana6ysas. 4 7e. Descriptors U ht Hater Reactors f
i dajiationlevels
~
R.411aactivity Builduo Survey strecoucto tv lib. Identifiers /Open Ended Tera.,
gA7jcgA(7 g g g INFORMATION SERVIG
"!M2ltd il'E""""
17c. CosATt Field,Geowp
- 69. Security Gass (This
[21. No. or Pages i
ng. Avas aoibey insiement
"' Z'<!.. m i e n RELEASE UNLIMITED a seconir u.a.. vais Pa W sC o.ams.oC s ets 89 4 e-a
- r. n. as e a s e..e.s s' t.NuGR$F.O sy ANdi ANU (.,N PXO.
, TMi$ PONne WAY 3> ALPMODUCCD 1
7'
_ Q,
-~
Inconel-600 tubed systems. Assuning a fixed cobalt impurity level In trie base metal nickel, Co-60 inventory would be similarly af fected.
it should be noted that as of 1970, Westinghouse reported insigni ficant di f ferences in steam generator radiation levels between all stainless and stainless-inconel plants.I This observation is not necessarily incompatible with the di f ferences in possible parent nuclide system inventories because of the c::rnplexity of the contamination process. For example, the di f ference in corrosion product c::rnposi tion could also af fect the tendency to deposit release f rom :n-core on in-core surf aces (whicn is recuired for activation),
surf aces af ter activation, or removal by the puri fication system.
-ar-mian a r-A c" anteeina the crimarv in a system, the /na ior sour-* 9 removal bv the condensatg gem i s p th_e f eedw a te r as a res ul t_ oj i ncve t e +e dcminerali zer system.[ Oi f ferences in system materials can signi ficantly dg.pg,.
af fect the f eedwater corrosion product c:rnposi tion and input rate to the core. For this reason, large di f ferences in shutdewn radiation levels can exist ber.een early generatien and current generation plants. Of major k, Jg,
signi ficance are the expected di f ferences between plants with coocer or I
i nickel alloy f aeewatar heatars ( Acmi ralty, copper-nickel, Monel) and those e
l with stainless stae_I heater materi als. The rate of nickel input to tha core has been as great as 90 kg/y in the f ormer type systems even in plants rated at <,300 MWe.
in large stainless steel heater systems ( >500 MWe),
the nickel input is less than 5 kg/y.
in addi tion to this major ef fect, di f ferences in corrosion product input i
ende-~ e -
f and comcosition are also expected with di f ferences in condenser alloys and medes of condensate treat *.ent.
It should be recogni:ed that all SWRs have Either deep beds ocerated at 70 to 125 m/h full ticw condensate treatment.
ce pcwdered resin precoat demineralizers operated at 8.6 to 10.5 m/h are emp l oyed. Wi tn Acmi rat ty tuted cancensers and ceec ced deminerali zers, very
-^--ar W ?ine are observed in the reactor water.
Icw levels of _sc M !a This generally corresponcs to low Cu-64 and Zn-65 levels in tne reactor
- V 11
.I
i.
cj pr.t
~
j',
.,...s' s.
- e v.
,t4r.ss.s,
e gj M,
e,y.r 4
Shutcown Radiation Levels
's 6
Radiation level data were collected f rem 13 SWR units. Major system variables for each unit are given in Tables 12 and 13.
Results catained at each plant are surmiarl Zed in the Appendices.
Ibe following nine surveyed SWR plants were consicered representative of current generation BWRs, in particular relative to major sources of corrosion products and therefere Co-60 and Cc-58.
e Dresden 2 Mon ti ce l lo Dresden 3 Millstone i t
Quad Cj ties l Verment Yankee Quad Ci ties 2 Pilgrim I i
Nine Mile Point i 1
i l
Each of these plants has stainim steet reci rcu iati on oici no, a stai n 'au 4
i s tee l clad nressure vessel, Zircitoy-2 fuel cl addi no, and an _31_f _fe_rrous n
t c_t_1_M_a r _s v s_+m.
d s
fneremainingfour' plants,BigRock Point, Oresden I, Humcolot Say, and l
i
. Lacrosse, nave operated f or varying periods of titre w i th Admi ral ty, copper-nickel, and/cr Monel feedwater hea ters.
I. Since large inputs of ccpper, nickel, anc zinc curing sucn periccs will 1 have an overriding ef fect on corrosion product inouts, fuel deDosits, act-I !vated corrosion " product levels and consecuently cu t-of-core snutccwn rad-iaticn levels, observations at inesa plants are not consicered representative of current generaticn cesigns. Desults fcr these f our plants are discussed separately.
Current Generaticn Plant Jata: M a l t r.* r.cmcari g:. s amcng the 9 surveyed plants represen ta ti ve of carrent generaticn cesigns, radi ation i g *o 3nd f rer: fne reactor were selected.
levels en recirculation niS
k IABLE 12 MAJOR PARAttElERS f 0R SURVLYLD BWR PLAtilS t
Appendix tie t feedwater fuel Reci rculat ion Condensate owr tam.o i<e t Mwe tieater lubing Condenser Clodding Piping Treatment i Lacrosse 1
52 2tP stainless
Admiralty Stoinless Stointess Deep-bed f
litP Monet
, ilumt.ol d t Bo g 2
63 Stainless" Aluminum bross Zircaloy-2 none Deep-bed Mon t i cu l l o 4
545 Stainless Adm rol ty Zi rco loy-2 S tain less Powdex 8
Zircaloy-4 i
rJine Mi le l'oin t
'n 620 S tainless Admiralty Zircaloy-2 Stainless 0%,> aed QudJ Cities 1 8
810 Stainless S tai n less Zircaloy-2 Sta nless Powdox
'd
- Quad Cities 2 6
880 Stainless S tainless Zircoloy-2 Stainless Powdex
. Millstone i 10 652 Stainless Alurisinum P ass Zircoloy-2 S tai n less Deep-bed g..
and 70-30 Cu ?'i I
grim II 655 Stainless A'uminum bross I;<caloy-2 Stainless Deep-bed and 90-10 Cu-tai i
d Big Hod Point 15 70 Stainless' Admiralty Zircoloy-2 S tainless Deep-bed
- i
> Oresden i 16 200 2t P 70-30 Cu-fli Stainless" Zircaloy-2 Stainless Deep-bed l'j 3,e mnoi
~
Dresden 2 19 810 Stainless Stainless Zircaloy-2 Stainless Deep-bed t
Dresden 3 19 610 Stainless S tain less Zircaloy-2 Stainless Deep-tied
,. Vermont Yonkee 20 511 Stoinless Admi ral ty and Zircaloy-2 Stainless Powdex Stainless i
o) Originally 70-30 Cu-fli; relubed in mid 1975 b) Originally Admiralty; retubed in 1967 i
4 c) Lov and intermediote p. essure hooters originally Admiralty, high pressure heaters originally 70-30 Cu-Ni; I
retubed in March 1968 d) les t bundles of s toinless, loconel-600, i nco l oy-800, 2i rconium-chrome, and Zi rcaloy-4 cladding in termi i tant ly emp loyed e) Originally Admiralty; retubed in 19S9 i
b :.
);f;fi n
.