ML19345E813
| ML19345E813 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Prairie Island  |
| Issue date: | 01/30/1981 |
| From: | Mayer L NORTHERN STATES POWER CO. |
| To: | Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| TASK-1.A.1.1, TASK-3.D.3.4, TASK-TM TAC-12428, TAC-12429, NUDOCS 8102060192 | |
| Download: ML19345E813 (71) | |
Text
r o .
NSP NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY u ss s c Aeou s, un u s c oora ss4oi 2
- ;q
'E January 30, 1981 Ni ;
- E 55 c
Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation U S Nuclear Regulatory Commission [ $
Washington, DC 20555 PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT Docket No. 50-282 License No. DPR-42 50-306 DPR-60 Information Related to Post TMI Requirements NUREG-0737, " Clarification of TMI Action Plan Requirements," issued on October 31, 1980 requires the submittal of infr emation for NRC Staf f review of the implementation of many of the TMI Action Plan requirements. The schedule for providing this information is summarized on Enclosure (1) of NUREG-0737 for operating reactors. The purpose of this transmittal in to provide the information required for review of the following Action Plan Items:
I.A.1.1 (3&4) Shift Technical Advisor III.D.3.4(1&2) Control Room Habitability In our letter dated December 30, 1980 we committed to provide this informa-tion by February 1, 1981. The required information is attached.
Information related to Action Plan Item III.A.2 will be separately mailed the week of February 1,1981. This will consist of a revised Emergency Plan and description of a meteorological system intended to meet the first phase requireaents of Appendix 2 to NUREG-0654 Revision 1. A description of further upgrading of the meteorological systems by staged implementation can be furnished only af ter final regulatory guidance (Regulatory Guide 1.23 Revision 1 and NUREG-0696 Revision 1) is promulgated. ,
Please contact us if you have any questions concerning the information we have provided.
C.
L 0 Mayer, PE Manager of Nuclear Support Se rvices LOM/DMM/jh cc J G Keppler NRC Resident Inspector G Charnof f Attachment 8102060 \@ (
t .
Attachment Director of NRR January 30, 1981 Attachment.1 Shif t Technical Advisor Program (NUREG-0737 Item I.A.1.1(364))
Attachment 2 Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Unit 1 and 2 Main Control Room Habitability Study.
(NUREG-0737 Item III.D.3.4(1&2))
O
--__-u_-u_.2._ma_-_u - .. .mamm._._ ._am - ...m.- _.___
v
. e ATIACHMENT 1 NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY SHIFT TECHNICAL ADVISOR PROGRAM
1.0 INTRODUCTION
The purpose of the Shif t Technical Advisor (STA) training program is to provide qualified technical support personnel to assist the operating staff in the event of off-normal plant behavior at the Monticello or Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant. This program is established to comply with the NRC-NRR letters to all operating licensees, dated September 5,1979 and October 30, 1979.
An individual shall be considered qualified as STA who meets the requirements described herein.
2.0 STA QUALIFICATIONS / EQUIVALENCE The STA candidate may meet the education and training requiremeats deemed necessary to meet the STA function by a variety of methods. This section establishes the equivalence-of those methods.
A degreed individual may qualify as Shift Technical Advisor by meeting any of the following criteria:
(1) Possess a BS or higher degree in engineering or related science, hold or have held a senior reactor operator license (including training in accident and transient analysis described in Section 3.3), and actively participate in an SR0 requalification or STA continuing training program.
(2) Possess a BS or higher degree in engineering or related science, have one year commercial nuclear plant experience, and complete the training program dec-cribed in Section 3.0.
(3) Possess a BS or BA or higher degree in any field, have one year commercial nuclear power plant experience, complete a Navy officer reactor engineering or nuclear power school .(or the equivalent Bettis Atomic Power Laboratory, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, or Combustion Engineering training programs), and complete the plant specific training described in Sections 3.2 and 3.3.
A non-degreed SRO licensed individual may qualify as Shift Technical Advisor by meeting any of the following criteria:
(1) Possess an Engineer-in-Training certificate, pass a comprehensive written examination covering those subjects listed in Section 3.1, and complete the training described in Section 3.3.
(2) Possess ten years of commercial nuclear plant operations experience, five years of which is control room experience on the specific type of plant (BWR, PWR), pass a comprehensive written examination covering those subjects listed in Section 3.1 and complete the training described in Section 3.3.
Page 1 of 6
Approval of the Manager - Production Training, General Manager -
Headquarters Nuclear Group and General Manager - Nuclear Plants is required for a non-degreed SR0 licensed individual meeting the aforementioned criteria to be qualified as STA.
3.0 STA TRAINING PROGRAM This program consists of lectures, self-study, checkoffs, examinations, and/or simulator training. The following subjects are covered:
Reactor Physics Chemistry and Materials Power Plant Thermodynamics, Heat Transfer & Fluid Flow Radiation Safety Instruments and Controls Reactor Operations Transient and Accident Response Topical content of each of the above areas is described below. It should be noted that this program presumes the individual has had college level mathematics through integral calculus, basic physics, basic chemistry, and basic heat transfer, fluid flow, and thermodynamics (as taught in basic physics, chemistry, or engineering courses).
Non-degreed individuals must demonstrate adequate knowledge by passing a comprehensive exam 3 0ation on these subjects.
In this program, lecture attendance may be waived for those exceptional individuals who through self-study can pass comprehensive examinations.
Waivers shall be controlled by the Plant Training Superintendant.
3.1 FUNDAMENTALS (PHASE A)
- 1. Reactor Physics This course addresses the following subjects:
Atomic and Nuclear Structure Neutron Multiplication Six Factor Formula Flux and Power Control Rods and other Nuetron Poisons Reactivity Coefficients Fission Product Poisons Fuel Burnup Effects Subscritical Multiplication Fuel Loading and Startup Behavior Power Operation Load Following Shutdown Behavior Page 2 of _6
. e
- 2. Chemistry and Materials This course covers the following subjects:
Basic Chemistry Review Corrosion Effect of Nuclear Plant Operations Methods of Chemistry Control Primary and Secondary Water Chemistry (as appropriate to plant type)
Material Failure Mechanisms NDTT and Effect of Radiation
- 3. Reactor Thermodynamics, Fluid Mechanics, and Heat Transfer This course covers the following subjects:
Thermodynamic Properties Pumps - Types and Characteristics Flow and Head Loss' Modes of Heat Transfer Heat Flux and Temperature Boiling Heat Transfer DNB and DNBR; CHF and CPR (as appropriate)
Core, fuel, and steam generator behavior (as appropriate to plant design)
- 4. Radiation Safety This course covers the following subjects:
Interaction of Radiation with matter Biological Effects Radiation and Contamination Survey Instrumentation Shielding and Protection
- 5. Instruments and Controls This course covers the following subjects:
Detection methods and systems Nuclear Instrumentation Radiation Monitoring and Instrumentation Reactor Control Reactor Protection Some of these subjects may also be included as part of Section 3.2 training.
Satisfactory completion of the five areas above may be achieved by any of the following methods:
Page 3 of 6
i .
(a) Lecture attendance, or (b) Passing individual course examinations, or (c) Passing a comprehensive fundamentals exam (approximately an 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> examination).
A passing grade in these examinations (course or phase comprehensive) is 70% or greater.
, 3.2 REACTOR OPERATIONS (PHASE B)
The objective of this training is to ensure that the STA is familiar with the major systems that are important to the specific plant design.
Emphasis is placed on these systems as operated from the control room.
Major Systems Reactor and Coolant System Reactor Coolant Inventory and Chemistry Control Main Steam Condensate and Main Feedwater Main Turbine and Generator Electrical Distribution (Substation, 4160VAC, 480VAC, DC Systems)
Engineereed Safeguards Emergency Core Cooling Safeguards Cooling Water Safeguards Electrical Distribution Reactor Protection Radiation Monitoring Safeguards Ventilation Containment (primary, accondary, cooling)
Containment Hydrogen Control and Monitoring (as appropriate)
Instruments and Controls Nuclear Instrumentation Non-Nuclear Instrumentation (related to safeguards, protection and major control functions)
Reactor Control (reactivity control system)
Steam Generator Level Control (PWR)
Pressurizer Level and Pressure Control (PWR)
Reactor Vessel Level Control (BWR)
Main Steam Pressure Control (BWR)
Support Systems Residual Heat Removal closed Cooling Water Radioactive Waste Disposal (overview as related to possible releases and accidents)
Instrument Air Page 4 of 6
Process Computer Plant Ventilation (overview)
The STA should be familiar with the function, major components, major flow paths, and major operations using these systems.
This phase may be covered by lectures and/or system checkoffs and/or comprehensive examination.
3.3 TRANSIENT AND ACCIDENT RESPONSE (PHASE C)
The purpose of this training is to ensure the STA is familiar with the response of the plant during off-normal conditions.
This phase may be fulfilled by lectures and/or checkoffs and/or simulator training or comprehensive examination. This course may cover a review of plant and fuel heat transfer and fluid flow principles as may be appropriate to the discussion of the accident response. Emphasis in lectures should relate the real plant response compared to the FSAR basis. Appropriate recent industry events should also be included.
Normal and emergency procedure training is accomplished by lectures and/or procedure checkoffs and/or simulator training.
Personnel who have not received simulator training shall complete a longer lecture course of equivalent duration as the simulator course (40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br />). In addition, these individua1L shall complete a 40 hour4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> simulator course prior to January 1,1982.
4.0 CONTINUING TRAINING PROGRAM The continuing training program for the qualified STA shall include 40 hours4.62963e-4 days <br />0.0111 hours <br />6.613757e-5 weeks <br />1.522e-5 months <br /> of lectures on subjects selected from the following areas:
Reactor Theory Reactor Chemistry Nuclear Materials Thermal Sciences Electrical Sciences Radiation Protection and Health Physics Plant Systems and Procedures Technical Specifications Transient Analysis Industry Events Management and Supervisory Training Mitigation of Core Damage Areas covered each calendar year shall be determined and scheduled by the Training Department. Emphasis shall be given toward upgrading knowledge based on information obtained from INPO, NRC, and other industry and college sources.
Periodic quizzes shall be used to determine the effectiveness of the training program.
Paga 5 of 6
Each calendar year, the qualified STA should attend a 32 hour3.703704e-4 days <br />0.00889 hours <br />5.291005e-5 weeks <br />1.2176e-5 months <br /> retraining program at a simulator facility. This program should cover transients, accidents, systems, system interrelationships and operations.
On an annual basis, each STA shall satisfactorily complete a comprehensive written examination. Satisfactory performance is deemed to be a score of greater than or equal to 70% overall. Less than satisfactory performance requires upgrading in the deficient areas prior to being assigned as STA. Upgrading may involve lectures or special assignments as deemed appropriate by the Training Department.
Satiniactory participation in the SRO requalification program fulfills the STA continuing training program requirements.
5.0 LONG TERM STA TRAINING PROGRAM The long term program is the same as the short term program except that all new STA candidates qualified after January 1,1982 shall complete the Section 3.3 simulator training prior to being qualified as STA. In addition, they shall complete the mitigation of core damage training described in prior correspondence (J. A. Gonyeau (NSP) to Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation (NRC) dated August 1, 1980).
Each new candidate qualified after January 1,1982 shall pass a comprehensive examination for each fundamentals area listed in Section 3.1 as well as pass an overall comprehensive examination covering Fundamentals, Reactor Operations, and Transient and Accident Analysis.
Satisfactory completion of pre-NRC RO and SRO audit examinations will meet this overall requirement.
6.0 DOCUMENTATION The documentation associated with the STA qualification and continuing training programs shall be maintained by the training de9artment.
This documentation shall include:
i (1) Course and/or comprehensive examinations associated with the Fundamentals Phase.
(2) Lecture attendance or system checkoffs or comprehensive examination associated with the Reactor Operations Phase.
(3) Lecture attendance or comprehensive examinations or simulator evaluations associated with the Transient and Accident Response Phase.
(4) Comprehensive examinations covering all Phases (after January 1, 1982).
i 7.0 LONG TERM PLANS It is our plan to upgrade the SRO training program to the level stated in the.STA program. We are continuing to investigate the possibility of having , in the long term, a degreed individual in charge of the operating and technical shift personnel. For the interim, we intend to maintain the STA position.
Page 6 of .6 1
ATTACHMENT 2 PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT UNIT 1 AND 2 Main Control Room Habitability Study NUREG - 0737 January, 1981 O
e- r
.--, -__e + -s.- _ma m-asunL,, ._ A m-A4 ---s am.a -
k - -- .A -- - , . - -Ax - -- s-----._.- - A - _ - -- - aa i 9 9 r
SECTION I 1
4 PRAIRIE ISLAND CONTROL ROC:1 TOXIC CHEMICAL STUDY J
e
.g -)-
t ,
1.0 INTRODUCTION
Due to the toxicity of commonly used che nicals, which may be transported near the Prairie Island Nucisar Generating Station by railroad, highway or the nearby M2ssissippi river, a survey was performed to predict which chemicals may become hazardous in the event of a spill. This anal-ysis is specifically required and modeled to conform to forth thegyjdanceset 1.78 and NUREG 0570(gy the Nuclear Regulatory GuideThe purp is to determine which chemicals are shipped near the site and which chemicals must be monitored in order to prevent concentration in the control room for reaching toxic levels in the event of an accident.
2.0 REGULATORY GUIDE 1.78 Regulatory Guide 1.78 discusses the requirements and guide-lines to be used for determining the toxicity of chemicals in the control room following a postulated accident. The guidelines for determining the toxicity of a given chemical include shipment frequencies, distance from source to site, and general properties of the chemical such as vapor pres-sure and its toxicity limit.
Two types of standard limits are considered in defining hazardous concentrations. One is the threshold limit value (TLV), defined as the concentration below which a worker may be ex;oned for 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> a day, 5 days a week without adverse health effects. Another limit is the short term exposure limit (STEL), which is defined as the maximun concentration to which workers can be exposed for 15 minutes without suffering from irritation, tissue damage, or narcosis leading to accident proneness or reduction of work efficiency.
The effects of concentrations between the TLV and STEL are not generally predictable. Both these limits are considered in the analyses.
The NRC guidelines for shipment frequencies provide the maximum number of shipments which can pass by the site before the chemical is to be examined for toxicity limits in the control room. For trucks (highway shipments), the minimum number of shipments is 10 per year. Railroad traf fic has a minimum number of 30 shipments per year and barges have a minimum number of 50 shipments per year. The distance from the trans-portation mode , railroad, highway or barge also controls whet-her the mode-is to be examined for shipments of toxic chemicals.
D7 0
,yX D lW Y
Highway US 61, the Chicago - Milwaukee - St. Paul and Paci-fic Railroad (CMSTP & PRR), the Burlington Northern Railroad (BNRR) and barge traffic on the Mississippi River are all within 5 miles of the Prairie Island Plant, as shown on
' Figure 1, and should be considered as possible toxic chemical sources for evaluations of the Prairie Island plant.
3.0 TRANSPORTATION ROUTES CONSIDERED The Mississippi River is navigable by barges up to Minneapolis, thus river traf fic is expected to travel pr.st Prairie Island.
The Mississippi river runs next to the pl ant site, at the closest approach of 1/4 mile to the control room air intake.
But, as seen on Figure 2, the closest navigable portion of Mississippi River would be approximately 1/2 mile from the control room air intake.
The'BNRR has a two track trunk line on the east side of the Mississippi River approximately 2 miles from the control roon air intake. The CMST & PRR has a two track trunk line on the west side of the plant 1/2 mile from the control room air intake. Both lines connect the Minneapolis - St. Paul area with points east, principally the cities of Chicago and Milwaukee.
Highway US 61 runs approximately 21/2 miles from the control room air intake. This road connects Red Wing to Minneapolis -
St. Paul. Chemicals travelling on the road to Minneapolis -
St. Paul were not expected to travel on US 61, since major interstates connect Minneapolis - St. Paul with points east and south. Therefore, only traffic between Minneapolis -
St. Paul and the Red Wing area need to be considered. There are areangi lgpoducers
', therefore or US major 61users is notofconsidered chemicals infurther the RedinWing the report.
4.0 SOURCES AND DATA FOR CHEMICALS The list of chemicals to be initially considered as poten-tially hazardous was drawn from several sources in a wide range of industries. The majority of the chemicals which are to be exam from Regulatory Guide 1.78{gyd are given as and NUREG 0570(2 a gartial Also, list two other sources were found tolisthazardouschemicals-theAssociation7j)
- of American Railroads under Specifications for Tank Cars andthecommipgyeonSafetyofNuclearInstallations A complete list of the hazardous chemicals
- Organization .
i liste? from the above sources are given in Table: 1.
> i IT 4 .
D *,*
o, D *D
'j}g j
Additional information concerning the physical properties was obtained alone -!ith the above list of chemicals.
This includes the .aolecular weight, boiling point, density, heat of vaporization, vapor pressure, dif fusion coef ficient and the threshold limit value. These chemical properties along with the critical pressure and temperature of some of the chemicals are given in Table.2 using references 2 and 5 through 13. <
5.0 CONTRCL ROOM TOXIC CONCENTRATIONS:
The models developed to calculate the concentration of toxic chemicais in the control room in the event of an accident are consistent with the models described in NURF3-0570. A description of the model used to determine the control room toxic concentrations is given in Appendix A.
Tnese include a consideration of the following factors:
- a. There is a failure of one container of toxic chemicals being shipped on a barge or tank car releasing all of its contents to the surroundings. Instantaneously, a puff of that fraction of the chemical which would flash to a gas at atmospheric pressure is released.
The remaining chemical is assumed to spread uniformly on the ground and evaporate as a function of time due to the heat acquired from the sun, ground and surround-ings. Further, no losses of chemicals are assumed to occur an a result of absorption into the ground, flow into the river, cleanup operations, or chemical reac-tions.
- b. From the geography of the area near Prairie Island, a spill from a railroad is assumed to spread roughly over a circular area. A spill from a barge is conservatively assumed to spread over a circular area on the Mississippi,
- c. The initial puff due to flashing as well as the continu-ous plume due to evaporation is transported and diluted by the wind to impact on the control room air _ inlet.
The atmospheric dilution factors are calculated using the methodology of R.G. 1.78 and NUREG-0570, with partial building wake ef fects conservatively considered.
O
+
E 6
c
~
w D *,*
- D 2 1 u
ww 1 o .I .r d .:2
~
- d. To determine which chemicals need monitoring, the con-trol room ventilation systems were assumed to continue normal operation for the analysis. The chemical con-centrations as a function of time were calculated and the maximum levels determined. These were compared to the Threshold Limit Values (TLV) published by the American Conference of Governmental Industria'l Hygienists (ACGIH). Where TLVs were not available, toxicity limits were obtained from available literatu:o.
- e. Concentrations were calculated as a function of time for eight hours following the accident to compare with the published 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> TLV levels for all cases. For conser-vativeness, the maximum concentratior reached in the 8 hour9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> period were compared to the TLV levels to determine which cheT.icals need monitoring.
The control room ventilation system is designed to draw 4000 cfm of outsid " "' **
- volume of 40,560 ft 3* . At present, there are no toxic chem-ical monitors installed to alarm in the control room, there-fore it was assumed that the control r'om ventilation system operates continuously at the design flow rates throughout the duration of the accident.
6.0 METHODOLOGY Two railroad lines and ti.o Mississippi River need to be examined for the shipment of hazardous chemicals as stated in Section 2. The specific location of railroads and the river are shown in the Prairie Island of f-site map in Figure 1.
The railroad analysis was performed by generatino an initial list of chemicals to be examined. This was done 1,y assuming the maximum load on a railroad car, for each chem cal in Table 1, as a 13,750 gallon tank car. Then, a conputer evaluation was run using the models in Appendix A, and 98 chemicals which could pose a problem to the_ operators were listed as a result. These chemicals are shown on Table 3.
At this point, Burlington Northern Company of St. Paul, Minnesota, was also contacted and asked to examine their shipments through_the area of Prairie Island Site for quang"i-)
ties and shipment frequencies of the hazardous chemicals I .
The results of their survey are given in Tacle 4; and shows
- The CMSTP & PRR was also 2 chemicalp ceatacted ggich may be However, hazardous.
the results from their survey are i not yet available. +
I
A survey of barge traffic on theThe Mississippi tonnage River was shipped is given performed using Reference 17.
for sections of the Mississippi River, and for the survey, the section from Minneapolis to the mouth of the Missouri is used. Conservatively, all traffic in this section is assumed to pass by Prairie Island, with the exception of upbound traffic going to the Illinois River. The amount #
of chemicals shipped is shown on Table 5. ChemicafS8'$9) shipped on barges with capacity of 1500-3000 tons There-with shipments generally using the larger barges.
fore, a barge size limit of 3000 tons was used to determine the shipment frequency. Table 6 shows the chemicals whose shipment frequency exceeds 50 shipments per year.
The effects on the control room habitability from an acci-dont involving chemicals stored on site was also evaluated.
The chemicals stored on site are shown on Table 7.
7.0 RESULTS Seven of the chemical's found by the survey near Prairie Island (Table 4 and 6), were found to be shipped in quantities and shipment frequencies which may affect th'e control room habitability. These chemicals are shipped on the BNRR and by barge on the Mississippi River. The results from CMSTP & PRR Of the will be provided later if our results are affected.
chemicals stored on site, only chlorine and hydrazine are potentially dangerous.
An analysis of these chemicals was performed using theThe assumptions and models of Section 5 and Appendix A.
chemicals shipped by the BNRR are assumed to be contained by 30 ton tank cars to determine the net weight of the chemicals. Of the chemicals shipped by barge, only gaso-line and distill.te fuel oil are considered further, since fertilizers are generally non toxic and shipped in dry bulk fashion. Some of the fertilizers are shipped in ammonia tanks. A calculation of the ammonia concentration in the con-trol room was not performed for this case because our results for the railroad car shipment evaluation already indicate that ammonia needs to be detected. The effects of an accidental release of chlorine were assumed to occur at its storagewas Hydrazine lo-cation, 100 meters from the fresh air intake.
assumed to be spilled in the turbine building, where the vapors were taken up by the ventilation system, exhausted at the-roof
- and then entrained by the control room ventilation system.
. ~
r i The results of the analysis, shown on Table 8, show that three chemicals; chlorine, ammonia and hydrochloric acid spilled near Prairie Island would produce concentrations in the control room well above the TLV levels if no provisions for isolation are available.
./
D**O P FDi.' '
W w 1. ,
Therefore, to ensure that the control room habitability re-quirements of R.G. 1.78 are met, the control room need: to be isolated on receipt of high concentration alarm from one of these chemicals.
The results mentioned above do not in clude information from the CMSTP & PRR, which is unavailable at the present moment.
As the information becomes available, it will be evaluated to determine if f urther monitoring requirements are necessary.
8.0 RECOMMENDATIONS Table 8 shows that 3 chemicals would exceed TLV levels in the control room if an accidental release occurred, thus necessi-tating the addition of monitors to detect toxic concentrations of these chemicals.
The monitors would need to be set to isolate the control room at a sufficiently low level to ensure that adequate time (2 minutes is specified by footnote 6 of Regulatory Guide 1.78) is availabl.e for the control room operators to put on a breathing masks. The TLV levels for the chemicals can be used as the monitor set point. If the control room is isolated when the TLV is reached at the monitor location, the operators will have adequate time to don breathing ap-paratus before the concentrations in the control room reach the STEL levels. Possible monitor s-t points, TLV and STEL levels are shown on Table 9.
To ensure rapid detection so that the operators have adequate time, the location of the monitors and the monitor response times are important. Monitors should be placed in the duct-work as close as possible to the fresh air intakes, and up-stream of the isolation dampers, so that hazardous chemicals are detected at the earliest time possible. The maximum response time should be governed by the time required for the concentration in the control room to reach the TLv levels after they have been reached at the monitor location.
A monitor for chlorine, which is stored on site, could be placed near the storage tank, thus assuring ample time for the operaters to take protective action. Monitors for the other i
chemicals, would have to be located at the fresh air intake.
- Monitor system responsa time (the time needed for the monitor
- to act and isolation dampers to close) need to be evaluated to enssre that operators have adequate time to take_ protective i actions. Monitor response times along with the detector levels f
should be used to determine which monitor systems will be used.
ji x
- D *]DO O l D *AN WM U S a I
' u
Figure 3 illustrates the ef fects of a typical hazardous chemical spill on the control room atmosphere. If the control room is not isolated, the control room air concen-tration quickly approaches the air concentration at the con-trol room fresh air inlet. The monitor for the isolation mode , is cet to isolate when the air concentration at the inlet reaches the TLV level (time TO ). The monitor system requires a certain time to detect the chemicals and isolate the control room. Isolation is achieved at the tim) Trgo.
The control room concentrations continuesT STEL, to increase due to the control inleakage from the outside air. At time room concentration reaches the STEL level. As described above, the monitor and the isolation response time (TISO~
T)O should allow at least 2 minutes for the time perid TSTEL - TISO' i
i
=
m *' '
6' , e 6 D ,
1
=. h D @ ; y
' I 5 l _
., . ~ .
TABLE I RAZARDOUS CHEMICAL SOURCES (1) (2) (3) (4)
AAR ,
TANK CAR R. C. NUREC-0570 CSNI X X Acetaldehyde X X
Acetic Anhydride 7 X Acetone X Acetone Cyanohydrin X X Acrolein X Acrylonitrile X AJiphatic Mercaptan Mixtures X (See individual Mercaptans)
X X Allyl Chloride X X X Arc:nonia Anyl Mercaptan X X X .
Aniline X' (See Tetramethyl lead and Tetraethyl lead)
Antiknock Co= pound i
Arsine ,
X X Benzene Benzyl Chloride X X
Butane A I Brottine X Bro =obenzyl Cyanide (6) -
X X X Butadiene X Butanol X
Butenes Butyl Mercaptan X ,
X X X Carbon Dioxide X Carbon Disulfide X X X Carbon Monoxide X Carbon Tetrachloride X X X Chlorine Chlorine Trifluoride X Chloroacetyl Chloride X Chloropierin X Chloroprene X X
CNB (6) =
x CNC CNs 6{((6) . x X
Cresolj Cumene: Hydroperoxide X Cyanogen Chloride (6) X [
X Cyclohexane ,
+ , , . - - - - , , , - - , . - <, g -
.- i l
TABLE J (Continued)
(1) (2) (.3) (4)
AAR
- TANK CAR R. G. NUREG-4570 CS?.I X
Diethylamine Di-isopropyl Ben:ene X (See Cumene Hydroperoxide)
Hydroperoxide X
Difluoroethane Di=ethylamine X Dimethyl Dichlorosilane Z Dimethyl Ether -X X
Dimathylfo=uncide Di=echyl Hydra ine X
- 6) X Diphenylchloroarsine(I0) X Diphenylcyanoarsine X
Diphosgene (6)
X Epichlorohydrin Ethane X X
Ethyl Acetate X
Ethyl Benzene X X Ethyl Chloride Ethyldichloroarsine(6) X Ethyldichlorosilane X X X Ethylene Dichloride X X X Ethylene Oxide X X Ethyl Ether Ethyl Mercaptac X Ethyl Trichlorosilane X Ethylene X Ethylene Glycol X X X Fluorine X Formaldehyde X Formic Acid X Gasoline X X Belium X
Hexylene Glycol X X Hydrazine X X Hydrochloric Acid Hydrogen X X X X Hydrogyn Cyanide -
X X f Hydrog'en Fluoride -
Hydroghn Peroxide X 8 X X X Hydrogen Sulfide ,
TABLE 1 (Continued)
(1) (2) (3) (4)~
AAR TANK CAR R. G. NUREG 0570 CSNI X
Isopropyl Alcohol ,
X Isopropyla=ine Isopropyl Mercaptan X X
Lewisite(6)
Liquified Natural Gas X Liquified Petroleus Gas X Mercaptans X (See individual Mercaptans)
X Methane X X Methanol Methyl Chloride X Methyl Dichloroarsine(6) X Methyl Dichlorosilane X.
Methyl Trichlorosilane X Methyl Mercaptan X Monochloroacetic Acid X Monochlorodifluorosechane X X
Monomethyl g ne X Mustard Gas y Mustard - Lewisite Mixture (6)
Muriatic Acid (Hydrochloric acid) X Methyl For: ate x X X Nitric Acid X Nitrogen X Nitrogen Dioxide X Nitrogen Mustard (IC:-1) X X
Nitrogen Mustard (ICi-2) 6) X Nitrogen Mustard (D -3)
Nitrogen Peroxide X Nitrogen Tetroxide X Nitrosyl Chloride X Oleum (&J1furic Acid, Fuming) X X
Parathion X Paramethane Hvdroperoxide y
Pentaboratie-9(6)
X Perchloryl Fluoride X ,
Phenot y ;
PhenyI!dichloroarsine(6)
X X ;
Phosgene Phosgene Ox*~e(6) , x -
Pentaborane(01 4
TABLE 1 (Continued)
(1) (2) (3) (4)
AAR -
TANK CAR R. G. i.'tREC 0570 CSNI Phosphorus X Phosphorus Oxybromide. X Phosphorus Oxychloride X Phosphorus Trichloride X Potassium Nitratt/
- Sodium Nitrate X Propionaldehyde X Propylene Oxide Propyl Mercaptan X Pyroforic Liquids X Propane X
Sarin (0)
Sodium X-Sodig/ Chlorite (Sol.) X X
Soman X Styrene X X X Sulfur Dioxide X X X
Sulfuric Acid X Sulfur Trioxide X Sodiur. Oxide y Tabun (6)
X Tetraethyl Lead X Tetramethyl Lead Thiophosphoryl Chloride X X
Titanium Tetrachloride X Toluene X Trichloroethylene X
Trichlorosilane Trifluorochloroethylene X Trimethylamine X Trimethylchlorosilane X X
Vinyl Acetate X X X Vinyl Chloride Vinyl Fluoride X Vinyl Methylether X Vinyl Pyridine ,
Vinyl Trichlorosilane X t
I X X g Xylene 1
NOTES: (1) Reference 4 (2) Reference 1 .
(3) Reference 3 (4) Reference 2 (5) Reference 5 (6) Military poison gases, Ref. 6 Y
f.
i
k I
TABLE 2 PitVSICAL PROPERilE S OF foulc CtfEMICAES Md BP DENS CP HV VP OlFF TCRIT PCRIT TVPE CHEMICAL TLV
- ea 1 2
t.OO*02 44.I 20.2 .783 .510 136.2 7.600'02 1030 2 ACETALDEHVDE 5.00'00 102.1 140.0 1.057 .398 92.2 t.000'01 .0750 569.00 46.20 2
ACETIC ANHrORIDE 56.2 798 .528 128.1 4.000802 .t340 t.00803 58.1 2 ACETONE 82.0 .912 8.000-01 0802 496.40 42.00 ACETCNE CVANOHVDRIN t.00'01 85.1 2 52.5 .841 .588 !26.9 4.750*02 .0911 506.00 59.00 ACROLElH f.00-08 56.9 2 2.00*05 53.t 77.3 .506 .500 2.250*02 .0845 536.00 45.00 ACRYLONITRILE 45.0 . 9.58 .383 90.5 6.500*02 .0830 513.50 46.50 2 ALLYL CHLORIDE I.00'00 76.5 2.50800 17.0 31.4 .674 1.800 327.4 2 i
AMMONIA t.OO*0J 804.2 126.6 842 1.380*01 .0936 328.00 34.50 AMVL MERCAPTAN 2 ANILINE 5.00'00 93.8 184.4 1.022 .528 103.7 1.500*00 .0790 9 5.00-02 77.9 -62.5 8.604 .283 58.2 ARSINE 2
- BENIENE 1.00'01 78.9 80.8 .880 .449 103.6 1.900'02 .0770 2 4.00'00 82G.6 879.0 9.903 .323 76.0 1.300*00 .0810 BEH2VL CHLORIDE 107 44.9 3.800'02 1090 2 9.00 04 159.8 58.7 3.120 35.50 2 GROMINE 6.80-09 196.0 242.0 9.470 55.7 7.000-02 .0539 737.40 BROM00ENZYL CVANIDE 628 .545 99.8 1 ButADIENE l.OO*03 54.0 -4.4 t 5.00*03 58.t .6 608 .564 92.0 DUTANE 2 l.00802 74.5 117.5 .850 .563 141.3 f.800*01 .0920 BUTANOL -6.3 .595 .355 93.4 9 1.43*05 56.1 2 BulENE 98.0 .836 45.9 4.600*06 .07 4 563.20 38.90 Butyl MERCAPTAN 5.00-01 90.2 1 5.00803 44.0 78.5 468 .184 83.2 CARBON DIOKIDE 84.I 6.250802 9090 2 2.00'04 76.t 46.5 I.293 .24I CARHON Oh5ULFIDE 3 4
w CARBON MONOXIDE 5.00'01 28.0 -198.5 .515 58.6 47.3 2.990'02 .0890 2 I.00'01 853.8 76.8 f.597 .208
' CARHON TETRACHLORIDE .226 68.8 CHLORINE t.00'00 10.9 -34.I t.570 0 l,00 01 92.5 18.8 9.770 .303 71.2 2
CHLORINE 1RIFLOORIDE 2.320601 .0760 579.90 50.40 CitLOR0ACETYL CHLORIDE 5.00 02 182.9 805.0 l.495 44.IO 2 t.00 0t 164.4 882.0 9.692 4.000*01 .0695 582.00 2 CHLOROPICRIN 958 6.770*02 .0778 525.50 42.00 2.50*08 88.5 59.4 2 CHLOROPRENE 5.00 02 l19.7 75.0 8.140 l'2OO*02 CN6 9.270*02 2 5.00 02 129.6 60.0 1.400 2 CHC 60.0 9.470 f.270*02 CNS 5.00-02 144.5 50.80 2 5.00'00 108.1 198.0 1.080 .550 102.9 1.000'00 .0678 704.60 33.70 2 CRESOL 1.00$00 852.2 153.0 9.050 2.500*00 .0629 576.10 t CUMENE HVOR0 PEROXIDE .358 103.0 3.00-05 61.5 13.8 f.288 2 CVANOGEN CitLORIDE 3.00'02 84.2 80.7 .779 432 93.8 f.000'02 .0738 2 CVCLOHEXANE 55.5 .585 .564 96.4 4.250802 1090 DIETHYL AMINE 2.50801 73.I 9 I.43*05 66.8 -26.5 8.004 .333 .78.0 DIFLUORDETilANE 6.9 .G80 724 f30.5 l 1.00608 45.1 2 DIMETHYL AMINE 5.00*00 129.9 70.0 1.100 0.080*02 .0676 599.80 33.10 D.lME f t,4VL DICitLOROSILANE 668 535 lit.6
- 1 OIMtIHYL ETHER 4.00602 46.1 -23.7 155.4 3.700'00 .0706 647,10 43.70 2 t.OO*08 73.I 153.0 .953 2 OlMElllVL FORMAMIDE 5.00-08 60.t 63.3 .782 f.570'02 .0902 529.90 53.60 2
DIMEitlvL ttVDR AZINE 56.6 8.600-03 OIPHENYL CitLOROARSINE 5.00-02 264.5 307.0 1.387 79.3 5.000-05 2 DIPHENV L CVAP.OARSINE 5.00-02 255.0 290.0 8.320 0.030'01 2 e OlpilOSCENE t.00 01 897.9 821.0 f.6f>0 4.000'06 .0709 596.00 42.00 2 5.00000 92.5 t16.I t.88I t EPICHLORottVDRIN -88.6 446 328 887.0 E ltlANE l.43605 30.7 2 4.00802 88.9 77.2 895 459 102.0 9.860'02 .0935 2 ETHYL ACLTATE 1.00'02 TOG.2 136.2 .867 409 95.I 2.000*01 .0810 ETHYL BEN 2ENE .
6
~
wa to p
p e e*NN*NN*nnNnNNNnNn-nNNN=NNNNnN*NNNoNNo-NnN=NNNNnN*N e
00 O a,
e 0 88 00
- n. . 8. O O
- c. 8 8 8. Oe. . N. 8. O
. .8 8. Oe.
o s.
s e .
n ne n e- . e.
s ce W.
, m, w
. O n, e
-e ne ec e- n, 8 8-
=
e e e
e *
- R. 88 88. 88 28 8 8. 2 2 2. ?. 2 2. S. ?. 8
.e en -- oc w -
ue e -e en so en om On ne e nn om -e n e n o
- v ne n og we we es v we ww ve e .
e e **
e e
Ow Cen O Ce we e en e e e nw eee es e ee n en en w n e e
Ce nn n -
se
- m. e C.eOee ~n,e m
n8 -n -n 8Ne
=00 e- e
=
-e 00 00
- e. O
= ~
n * *
* O OO OOO*- =
O= - -
N=
Ce *
- n n e
nne nw- == nno nNNO n =NN N* -O* N=ON e On nn 000 . 000 00 000 0000 000 00 000 0000 O. O.
e O.
e O. O. C. 0 000 O O Ce O 00 O O 00 O 000 O O e eo e O nec e C een O C Om >
A. Ce e w w. e. e. . . e. e. n.
De e e. O. e. . w n. e.. e. . . . .
en
. e. .
we=
O. e. n.
=w--
. e.
N
-ne ==
g== ec-M e e *= -m wcN -ww g .l . e. w. n. O. v. e. c. e. e. O. O. . O c. c. O. w. O. C. e. e. n. o. w.
nn
. e. . .O. O. c. e.
eeween O. . O. N. O. .
nonee-w-eneno -eO e-n-e meec-w epoome
. eOnmeeneene ->cneo e o cOOOws ne- enWOw en-an e- - - -
e - n- - en--n ===
e OnOC=%C eOc 00= ee Ow ew 000 non se *=~ene moengo e enwonn- mee eCe =n Om =>
.te e
- v. o n. o. g. n. o. o. g N. n. N.
e u e n. o. n. e. v. e. n. M. m. e. m. e. n e. s.w o. n. .
J e
-Om u eswo 4
= 2*Ne e
O -e-cone n n a r-c o Cmc Ono noe new knonewwo so-mee-e NMOOceCownOOce= e-nomom.medme-Oece* COO eee
- e. n. e.
1 w
. s e. e. n. . n. o. e. O. e. c. e. e. m. e. n e.m. e. .. e. . m. e. r. O. . e. n. e. w. s. w. C. . n.
cee e. s. . e. n. ... -.- ==.- .--
m w .= -. .
= e.
p e .N --
= u e e m. o. n. e. c. e. m e. N. e. n. o. m o. e. . e. C. e. ennm. e. O. m. e. w.00c o. o. e. m. M O. c. e. s. e. .
Q g
- C e. *n e n eem Le U
- x
= se e-erome-nneer neCen~Owesen ee~nence-Oca vee.-een-Owenv e n =e Emennen
-- e-m cow e -e n---
e n e n n e n- e. g0 o , - - - - n. e e e o e e p . e M e s e
=. *. = C. C.=. =.=.=.0 0 0 0 0 0.n 0 0 0 0 0 0.=.~.=. O. w. O. O. c. e. O. =. ~. e. v. e. =. *. @. O. O. O. *. =. e. O. O. O.
wwesen*wNneceOwenen>OwwOecaenOceCee-O-eenmecewOcce O 3
- d, J e Xe eemnneewmeonne-
== - e
-nn e
Nonnecoc-Mee-owweenemenwmeonwee N -- e -- --n g w= e e nonN< On-O -nnCeOnnn-O-
< ~m eence-n-n-CCCOne--Ce-CO-no00000!
- C000000000000000000000000 0000 000000000000 H
E m $ ! $. $. 5. 6. 5. 5. 5. 5. $. 5. 5. 8. 5. 5. 5. 5. $. ->>NameMMNe=
5.$.$.
- 5. 6. 5. 5.6.5.5.$.$.5.5.5
- 5. 5. 5. 5. 5. 5.
& **Me*=-m40e=neman-*==n*=we*e=Name=ee e
e J e 4 e u e
= e e e W w
> e 2 w , ama O g a =
I e
- Nn W k a w I O e ww 20= m e ** O Je w 22 4=w 4 gg{ a 4 e ww 2 ~4 JuE = === w ue 22 w 4 2 e4 =40 I www w &
4 wowO
a =4 O J O ww J > a= m a Xe ma =
e = woowg a me 2Ocow w woOOc=ca wa s= a J u c==c.wg WOO <a=32 > cass=4=O
-4444Ca>
s em od To =mw=O2u caaw>ows= =
uswCo sow na o 4
=OO*Lsww2 u=4 e ww==Omo:
u 2Oomu=a eoma Zuo up=
- =co =J434:
- O Es w oo
> 0 J =
40m442w
- swC442 Egs44:.:xuv4C esc Ommem-s =
=ss ont5swu2 4 ww:w es4J OCowuu >= 0 m UsLe Juuma=OOJ4w= u e 02 wo JJJ Z~ ~ O waa m pod. 4222CT22J:
eguu ra- zu w2s22222*>>w JUSQw2=CO
=wwwwwwaww4w WJeOO www==ww>
o eUCO2222w1-20 2 2=Zwwwww&&amwo
- wwww -JU=EwNuc0000 COO =22JJJJJJ :wam.uc0CoC00ew>>>>>>uuS44=oOOOOOOoK-e *JJJJJJJJJJm4=J3J4OOOOOcamme44 32:22:0Q ee ==>>=-**a e>>>>>>>>>>OXIQ=>mmatamm414==::::
e: 22:3mmeJ4000CoocOOO3====>>==2=Q.ww= =======4 e>>>>>>>>>>JoO4wwww>>>>>ecewwwwwwwwwCOc11321111211RXZ32==22222222&
ewwwwwwwwwwwwwC -
- ===J e
f 14 9
e we non=n*nn=nn=nnnnnnn=nnnnnnnnnn=-nnee-nnn se e e e
000 C 00 00 00 000
- O w
-e O. e. O. n. o. e. O. e. O. n. o. e.
ae &. .
On ene n m e es a w= 00 .
Oe e vvv n Oe= ww nw nnn
& e e
e 000 O 00 00 00 000
> 0 O. n. o. O. =. O. n. w. n. o. w. o. n.
- e.
s e. -p em enO Oe
- enn > *= >> en cwn e een w =e we oce e e a e wwc e av nw e
e mom e wme we eOm e-m w n n e, nne me own me n emm em ese me e som e eO 000 00 000 w e 000 O. O. - -
Qe O.
e -=nn nn ==*
n e n eO O.
O-00 00
=n n n n O = = =0 000000 nn=O=00000 00000 00 000 e
O COeO O O 00 00 00 L e e O n O noso = 0 00 wo *O ye . .=. . . c. . n. @ e. @.
. . . O. . . . .N. d. e. . e. n. v. =. .
e g
-= we Ow-O=>n e-==ON=O=v en -bn e n O
De e
e p - w. C.
- O. s. e*
e
- eme=
e- ca en en e s.
- n o. n. e+
OO-@ *-
= owne an T e=nn e me we poen Ie
- n weem On e eOen- =
m = e.
e = - -=
e
- =O *n nn MOmw O e = ** n eN en =en nn en neev 0
& e N ce
- w ye O. N. @. n. n. O. * .M. n e. n. n. W. w. n. 4. M. .
e e s e e
y u-4
- e e
cOOneOvewe@=~eOneOOCnefone@OOnwNO**Cc0 e== Coo =emmonweOncennaconneococonnemmem C K~
2e w*
o*e-ne@OOeweeccesO=Oewevowecmswnece@@enene
=
O n==-== -~~ -====--* --=
C, u a u h 6 C. O. w. m e. .O. . . .N
- n = e n. O. O. =. O. N. O. O. e. O. C. O. O. w. O. w. e. e. O O. O. O. O. O. O. O.
e .
y -
w ee c
> o c owmo c ~ Omn n e w vnewoese n, e *ngw
- m - m e C o w e gw O =n cn e=
ce a n- an.n mem-m n ne ne e eoew OO o
e e n e =n = = ====*n nn====
- e u.
e m -*
o O n n e.
- e e v * -*- ~* C. == w*-***-*** n = = = = n* e*n o m =****=**= wwe-s*oO= = o n-C o
< e 3 e ze *MnnenannwemeConeweOnnmennaccemenecone me@Oen@4necceopeOcemen@emenn=cceewcCJO *== - ===
Y w e e n = n == = =* =nn==
- e nnnOO=-O*enn-n NNO=ONnn OnnOe=O=OewOOn C.0000000000000 00000000 00000000000000
~ e a e w >e 8
a e
88888888.8.".8888 8882888.". --. .=n- 8888.".888.8.".888.8
.-=.--e-e-=e.-
a e e
...n.--..----n .
J e 4 e u
e M e
> e 7 e w a w a a ww a ow w u2 w W w e
Oc * =c 2 Je w -- s a- > s 2 4 4 e O Om w > 4 Ue w a su n gO J s
-o 0 - 00 w .s w > - E -
2e - e ss 00: z w
- w
- we a a : 2 w u wwo o I o o e uu wwd W 04 wwwwu In > w o ( wse s2awa esa ao wa --
ye 00= ws>a >40Zowoowzo e >-a -
a 00=
--w s am Iss-s>==s-s O om Zwe
- e a
e ww e w zzs :Ua ce wou O o swwa s Muo c4- s>gw s
=-
--32:
weU4u-co:-u ocowJws3*a=
43a>O e 244> 3D - M >=4
-wsm eZ2 U Ouw :=eX man >>utsw>m +
.e Onau
.eZeesssw.gw2w to-coo 02g
.zoss E Emum w - =wg=3wooo:14Ww3&>
ws. ZssDew w oweba4 - > > Z 3 2 W .7 3 J 2 e 4 & 2 w : sWWJJJJdd2
- ee>44 u22me@&LC4--gammm333Qdguum13>>>>>=w eazzawwgggooocaOs>sssen-~~s-----z:1:zza e 4p p e (www: :...aamaaoo-someww:-casama------>
a e 4&&&&&b444444@@d@@@@MPM>>P PP PMM M)>>>>M e
. i Table 2 -
TLV= THRESHOLD LIMIT VAttJE (PPM)
MW= MOLECULAR WEIGHT (GM/ MOLE)
- '8 P = RO I L I NG PO I N T (OEGREE CENTIORADE)
DENS =DENSITV 0F L10tJID (GM/CM**3)
CP= HEAT CAPACITV 0F LIOUID (CAL /GM-DEGREE CENT)
HV= HEAT OF VAPORIZAfl0N (CAL /CM) L VP= VAPOR PRESSURE OF LIOulD (MM-HG) .
i DIFF = DIF FUSION COEFFICIENT (CMa*2/SEC) -
TCRIT=CRITICAE IEMPERATURE (DEGREE MELVIN)
PCRIT= CRITICAL PRES 5URE (ATM)
TVPE= TYPE OF CHEMICAL l
t= LOW-BIOLING POINT )
2* NORM 4L-BOILING POINT 3=COMPRE55ED GAS I
1 l .
1 d
h 1 ,
1
- . . . . . . s
- e a
S
Table 3 List Of Chemicals To Be Reviewed For Number of Yearly Shipments And Container Shipping Size 1
Acetaldehyde Diphosgene Nitrogen Dioxide Acetic Anhydride Epichlorohydrin Nitrogen Mustard (HN1)
Acrolein Ethyl Chloride Nitrogen Mustard (HN2)
Acrylonitrile Ethyl Dichloroarsine Nitrogen Peroxide Allyl Chloride Ethyl Dichlorosilane Nitrogen Tetroxide Ammonia Ethylene Dichloride Nitrosyl Chloride r
Amyl Merlaptan Ethylene Oxide Pentaborane Arsine Ethyl Ether Pentaborane - 9 Benzene Ethyl Mercaptan Perchloryl Fluoride Benzyl Chloride Ethyl Trichiorosilane Phenyldichloroarsine Bromine Fluorine Phosgene ,
Butadiene Fo rmaldehyde Phosphorus Oxychloride Butane Formic Acid Phosphorus Trichloride Butyl Mercaptan Hydrazine Propionaldehyde ,
Carbon Dioxide Hydrochloric Acid Propylene Oxide !
Carbon Disulfide Hydrc~en Cyanide Propyl Mercaptan Carbon Monoxide Hydrc9en Fluoride Sarin Carbon Tetrachloride Hydrogen Peroxide Soman l Chlorine Hydrogen Sulfide Sulfur Dioxide l Chlorine Trifluoride Isopropyl Amine Sulfur Trioxide Chloroacetyl Chloride Isopropyl Mercaptan Taban l Chloropicrin Lewisi te Tetraethyl Lead Chloroprene Methanol Tetr amethyl Lead CNB Methyl Chloride Titanium Tetrachloride !
CNC Methyl Dichloroarsine Trichloroethylene CNS Methyl Dichlorosilane Trichlorsilane l Cumene Hydroperoxide Methyl Formate Trimethylamine f l
Cyanogen Chloride Methyl Mercaptan Trimethyl Chlorosilane Diethyl Amine Methyl Trichlorosilane Vinyl Aetate Dimethyl Amine Monomethyl Amine Vinyl Chloride Dimethyl Dichlorsilane Mustard Gas Vinyl Piridine Dimethyl Ether Mustard Lewisite Mixture Vinyl Trichlorosilane Dimethyl Hydrazine Nitric Acid l
l i a I
M19/15 I
Table 4 Gemicals Shipped By Burlington !brthern Past Prairie Island (1 July 1979 - 5 July 1980)
G emical Nu:ter Of Gross Weight of Shipment (tons)
Shiprents Average Maximum Acetaldehyde 21 87.6 111 Amrnonia, AnhydrousIII 526 126.6 132.5 Caroon Bisulfide or 30 Carbon Disulfide 1 30 15 88.3 98 Chlorine 32 32 Chlorine Trifluoride 1 83.9 124 Dimethyl Mine, td.ydrous 11 41 41 Hydrocyanic Acid 1 53.9 76 Hydrofluoric Mid, Anhydrous 8 Hydrochloric teid III 162 90.2 127.9 i
71 71 Hydrochloric teid Mixture 1 29 117.5 124.8 HW rogen Sulfide 30 30 Irritating t<3ent, N.C.S. 1 2 119.5 127
.bnochlorodiluoro Methane 51.5 51.5 Nif.ric Acid 4 66.6 85 Sulfur Dioxide 13 90.3 108 Vinyl Acetate 4 131 131 Vinyl Chloride 1 e
ch'emicals shipped over 30 time / year need to be evaluated to :
determine the of fect of an accidental spill on the control roon ,
cperators Table 5 Barge Traffic Ch he Mississippi River Past Prairie Island. Calendar Year 1977 Chernjeal 2nnage Shipnent Frequency (shipments / year) 50131 17 Alcohols 109942 37 Benzene Arx121uene 31037 10 Sulfuric Acid 577983 193 Basic Chemicals And Products 532410 177 Nitrogenous Chemical Fertilizers 23714 8 Ibtassic Chemical Fertilizers 97700 33 Phosphatic Chemical Fertilizers 606711 202 Fertilizer And Materials 9862 3 Miscellaneous Chemical Products 2718821 906 Gasoline 107506 36
- Jet Fuel i
25373 8 Kerosene 1337511 446 Distillate Fuel Oil l
63102 21 l Naphta, Ibtroleum Solvents 55325 18 Liquified Gases Shipnent frequencies wre calculated using 3000 tons,targe capacity.
t .
I .
I 1 a 4
Table 6 Chemicals Shipped By Barge Which Exceed 50 Shipment / Year .
Basic Chemicals And Products Nitrogenous Chemical Fertilizers (Ammonia)
Fertilizer And Materials Gasoline Distillate Fuel Oil 0
e i
f .
i
- 1 a
t Table 7 Chemicals Stores On Site 4
Chemical Number Of Container Location Containers Size Chlorine 6 1 Ton 100 meters Ammonium Hydrcxide 10 55 gal Turbine Building 1 5000 gal Turbine Building Sufuric Acid 35 gel Turbine Building Hydrazine 8 5000 gal Turbine Building Sodium Hydroxide 1 3
t %
i 2 +
Table 8 FINAL ANALYSIS RESULTS Chemical Quantity TLV Maximum Control Room Concentration (ppm)
Ammonia 102 tons 25 -
3246 Hydrochloric Acid 98 tons 5 7067 Chlorine 1 ton 1 2446 Hydrazine 35 gal 0.1 0.0065 Gasoline 3000 tons 500 306.8 Distillate Fuel Oil 3000 tons 200 23.60
~
+
f i
few++- W+= yw-r--w,y-J,.,- . - -
. . . . . - . -. _ - . _ _ . - . . - - . . - . - - . = _ _ . - - - - . _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ .
Table 9 Monitor Setpoints And Toxicity Levels i
4 Chemical Monitor TLV STEL Set Point (ppm) (ppm) .
' (ppm) i 25 25 35 Ammonia 1
15
- Chlorine (1) 1 1 i
Hydrochloric Acid 5 5 10 4
4 1
The STEL for chlorine was obtained from R. G. 1.95 (1)
(2-minute level).
i .
l 1 "
i
{
t.
l l
l l
~ 4
' t t i
~
t l
t l1 :
i F ' 1 i . .
/ \ %
~ in
,.,i /' ~ w% n 0 5. 3. &
, 3. .. 4
~ .
4 ,. -
,(
g-
'p*
- \
a /
\ ~
Hp, f
~
.& kY' N~~r . No r r h E, '-
ih -
Y Q}
j
'h l T-
. ,\ ,
43
- w. - =r., ; ., _..n % .u- #fn h _ _ _
==
Vs x-n -:%%'* .,
~
\
B/ uf k g. :: 3L [ %
m35gN"TW I
s i.\
n:n 9 N. )
>; , 9.Q !E3' ,
xpp ag -
) ;I j ..
y y::...- Q N.e w
p- 5i y ,:- y y/ J b
- t j
g'r' }. 7'D { <. / g l l & h .
- g l ( ' Q
- e. ; '5$$}$g f g g. 9 Dh
^ ; /
I >> J f.m.' J.
- 9. 2
<E - . -
N , . A- A'c
. .s . - _ - / - 1 '5-
..n .s.. .
m yJ- - - ,
g.? > -.
l gr. -
O. 3 s' 15
. Cann
+ . . . n \, -
l 9 f . a 'Gy . . -
- p. . .
.,m@
l
- 'C r1 i , y*' R y-
"a y%
i l
r -: n f
'-#^k, [ f,, \-
\[ i ' ;M_m. ; Q Y [ - Q h '
, '* - - - " f
,.s> g 4 sy&&y ---
l ?_ _ . _ _ ;
g ,p T .
.e. ;
2 ,
e ,,
FIGURE 1
\Ns (f .
, i -
- y. /
-[ ..
bI % reeg PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR t J: / </E GENERATING PLANT OFF-SITE
'[l l l T, .,., . 't 3, d. ,
g4 33 AREA MAP ,
l j ,j ge W "T
\. ., .a .- .g t-y :. : <: . : i
\o
. :I '
m .N -
d'a J 6g l
,/ i-
_ +L. . ..
-:-:-i e , . . .
_ __ _+___ __-
W s. %b *
'k g
- l~=':. +
l
,, %% p a, m& $ -
[
m - hh.onessag
~
x W s4- ~\
.43 -.f ---- - - - -:--* , . c, ,,
g, h ~24-,N .-.w s ,.
7 's, xs.- e -
Nr r9N . .- cet. N
..% f- .
s o sf.33 g,4
.f'.-
- i g
.-d ED; g G ph e * ';<,,.%" b.9,,7'79:.g .
'". e- .
g_ t ,
. < . _ ___e
, -e- - s:, ..gg = m~_ ..
--q s q%,
, m ss s, -
.,:.~
.t
. ^ 3,r . f
..,. ~- < 6 s. - - -_
,, 'd_.[; 'f(M' _5_~ r;526
('
'. ~~ *
,p
-t - s . s ' N.. wm .e.
. \
\ n ' ~
32 + - - --
g ,;; * :. - N.- # " ,
- s. ,
NpN . q,
. i . '-f: 4._ 44 % ;': ;
. . s
, j; w. . s ., _ % l qm
't.
. ;. s.
- . s w '
L. :: '. ,; ,we .,e
/ _ ._ ._.,4.A c{-[. ...- l :. .
,c-x,
...s. .-
1 a .
. .i
., gi . _.
s;:
, e, ong i ie .'
t1 s
) .- .- .---..,
- gm--7%W .D i ?-
- ~
- .can - ,.. i\ . -
.g
.s
-~
- .~_.f .c- '
- g .ii.... 3_...__......,.--.e g_
... gig . . -- _ _
. s._ : ., .
._ .......------.c s ~ s e.
n; g.- .
. , g
. . . s ,
b p
1 4
4
. , v,, -
4
' -sA
'x 4. Fr' ..~.l20....... p. -
? " '~/ / != V / c 30 ";'
s 41 ,n _ -
J 4,u / ;[ 5.e( ,. -g 7"w . j.
o i :
. w -' p/~
% i.. - j' . =
i .,
.g ..
l .. .C8' > - ,
i:
. , . '-~v , , _
N
/. o u u .
%, C' ine.
.-geN'"-agg5 I
t3
- rea'th. e . . . ' "-
..- N w
L;
-' rg<he )
&g% *l .u; 25! %
CetSt.A N D -4 6
-$l - -
.\ - -
1.& '
.s
,kh', % l eq g
's
-W- -.hR- s/ -
i 'ss J
. , i ,
( i .
c;7 '
id - M f.5... .% ..,l ~~' % '!_' M._ sa . d. '. < -
/w li . W:s . ,3 61 ' s-I' x
D .9'v ' oo,< '(' ~-
% g* %. /1 -
bo, V 9 M m.
- ~
- % 31 ' -
<. %g~. ' _ _ T -
=4,.-' >'c.
.I
- - s -
e .
'N . % g)f., --
['hhx ,
7
%s s A . h' _j%,%eI.%
- 'rm--
RC_2 /,p&,%v@d ) ;- '
~: -
\
- j. p-y y~f.- pu. 2.h.~X _Ns Uf _"EA'?,Q& N s
+Mdf %?.'(d %e p - % /
l . J ) 5 f,l.;.3
-7 .. y,,g- = @ rl.. .N c. W,. ~.
--?':.$ d ~ s- ':..'- .. , . %.%.
i@(. h- ?.s.. r
? ?'9.,, , , , , , n,
.W \ ?p_
.kh lb. I. . . - '
c '
-C$ * . '
,.'- \. R;'y: s r
? .-, .:L %2.? W' .'s 4 % 6c - -
W n% ._t .
- r.
t - ,
. -d y. ,. ' :
neo
.n. .
p 40 :4.A-~~.
%~. _y/_' m\ '.qr>- \
c :' x :-
.p,, a y; jV .;. i.
_ 1-s g : ." L ~-
= - NN N -
r-y _ . ..
t .{ . ./-. . -
s'-
e
[' .,.e <
) s ., ~~~. -v -
~.
t
.. ~, v:.,
.. %' y .. '.
t l
'3 ..
i s -
G.-s,: G v.; }
d yn
'y s*
A )4 '. 77 Guar 2
- . . - .m e,-,a
en X-'i .f 8e- MyY_./'
l .C- PRAIRIE ISLAND NUCLEAR x is.g.y l 3 , .6 - .
7 e [ MsO hev'-
Mn ogngaA,'ING PLANT OFF-SITE p g~ . ,esA MAP snowing RIVER l
9k' D s g :l -- -
- T- .,
c.~
..A '.. ?, d.
M-J7?sif
" y -- ' M ~'- f ; NAVIGATION CHANNEL
^
- '.- { 4,9 ' ,,, s1, ,-~ -irs./~%> e m
&' 0 'N,
.o D 3
~
*. D 4} . r,n v-x t - -- i ,
. 'r u '. , : 4 ] 2. q :re W% qs x1- 2-on o =
l
a.mA-_m -
D .
e 9 e
e
. W
.4
. M p.
[O e-
- e e
g O
O _c
- c>
2 W a5 C o Ez o
E U h5 C2 J*
Zo J
< Oz u-Oj m
E -
EB - -
A O- - *
> u
>=
8 m
N -
t C
2 -
o 5..
.f
< u.
c -
>= < E 1-Z y
c g (
- 2 W o 9 .
o g -
E 3 O
o . i
=
o '. -
. .cO
. w .
~
e 0
_ >.2 c l l .
.- ~
2 . >"
O .
u '
e .
s' . . .
t=1 .
- .C e
6 .
2 _: O
- 0 n6 e
~
4 4
'o" g 4 8
a M,
- g a o 'O
- 8 g ,O O y. v= " *
$ e " "
(Au do saldt.L7nW) NO!.LV81N33NO3 2s. . .
9
REFERENCES
- 1. Regulatory Guide 1.78, dated June 1974.
- 2. NUREG-0570, " Toxic Vapor Concentrations in the Control Room Following a Postulated Accidental Release", James Wing ,
June 1979.
- 3. Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Plant Red , Wing , Minn Of fsite Area Map, 11/20/79.
- 4. Association of American Railroads, " Specifications For Tank Cars", Standard M-1002, A. A. R. , Washing ton D.C. , July 1, 1972.
- 5. Committee on the Safety of Nuclear Installations Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Nuclear Energy Agency,
" Physical and Toxic Properties of Hazardous Chemicals Regularly Stored and Transported in The Vicinity of Nuclear Installations",
Paris, France, March 1976.
- 6. Field Manual of Military Chemistry and Chemical Compounds, Headquarters, De pt . of the Army, October 1975.
- 7. American Cv'ference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists, "TLV's Threshold Limit Values for Chemical Substances and Physical Agents in the Workroom Environment with Intended Changes for 1978".
- 8. Sax, N. Irving, " Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials",
Third Edition, 1968, Van Nostrand Reinhold Co.
- 9. Weast, Robert C., " Handbook of Chemistry and Physics", 53rd Edition, 1972-1973, The Chemical Rubber Co.
- 10. De an , John A., "Lange's Handbook of Chemistry", Twelf th Edition, Matheson Gas Products, 1971.
- 11. Braker, W. and A. L. Mossman , "Matheson Gas Data Book", Fifth Edition, Matheson Gas Products, 1971.
- 12. Braker, W., A. L. Mossman , and D. Siegel, " Effects of Expo-sure to Toxic Gases - First Aid and Medical Treatment",
Second Ed. tion, Matheson Gas Products,1977.
Reid, R. C. J. M., Prausmitz, and T. K. Sherwood, "The h3. ,
Properties of Gases and Liquids", 3rd Edition, #cGraw-Hill, i 1977. S
- 14. Red Wing Area Chamber Of Commerce - Manufacturers .
- 15. Letter John E. Baker, Bechtel to R. Griffin, Burlington Nortt.ern Inc . , " Hazardous Chemicals Surey, P. C.
10040-M30-SBC Northern States Power, Prairie Island Station" 3 De c 19 8 0. (DCN 3494). .
- 16. Letter C. B. Hogg, Bechtel To R. W. Riedl, CMSTP & PRR
" Prairie Island Nuclear Generating Station, Northern States Power, Request For Hazardous Materials Shipments" 11 Dec 1980, (DCN 3565).
- 17. Waterborne Commerce of the U.S., Calendar Year 1977, Depart-ment of the Army Corp Of Engineers - Part 2 Waterways &
Harbors; Gulf Coast, Mississippi River System.
- 18. Telecon Jorge Schulz, Bechtel to Glenn Banks, Corp of Engineers, 8 Jan 1981.
- 19. Telecon Jorge Schulz, Bechtel to Neil Schuester, American Waterway Operators', 12 Jan 1981.
~
+
3 8
SECTION II PRAIRIE ISLAND CONTROL ROOM DESIGN BASIC ACCIDENT RADIOLOGICAL STUDY i
E ~
7 L
f _
1.0 CONTROL ROOM SHIELDING (DIRECT RADIATION)
The control room design has been reviewed to determine the direct radiation dose rates in the event of a Design Basis Accident (D.B.A.). This design review was performed in conjunction with the requirements of NUREG-0737. ,
The design review determined the dose rates in the control room from various systems that, as a result of an accident, ,
may contain highly radioactive fluids. Systems that were evaluated included the following: Residual Heat Removal (RHR), Safety Injection (SI), Containment Spray (CS),
Auxilary Building Special Ventilation (ABSVS), Shield Build-ing Ventilation (SBVS), Chemical and Volume Control System (CVCS), and the Containment Vessel itself. Due to the phy-sical arrangement of the systems, the sources assumed within these systems and the existing shielding, only the CVCS and the Containment Vessel contribute any significant amount to the DBA radiation levels in the control room.
The activity levels in the RHR, SI, and CS systems have been conservatively assumed. It was assumed that 100% of the core equilibrium noble gas inventory and 50% of the core equili-brium halogen inventory had been diluted into the combined volume of the Reactor Coolant System and the Refueling Water Storage tank (RWST). This assumes that the water in the RWST has been injected and that the RHR recirculation mode is in use. This is conservative because the dose rates are based on a time = 0 activity and assumed no degassing of the recir-culation water by the blowdown into containment.
The containment was assumed to have 100% of the core equili-brium noble gas inventory and 50% of the equilibrium halogen inventory uniformly mixed within the containment atmosphere.
The build-up of radioisotopes on the Shield Building Venti-lation System charcoal beds was modeled using the design J. .ilcriteria leakage of 0.25 w/o per day from the containment to the'SBVS. .The, Auxiliary Building Special Ventilation System dose ~ rates were based on the RHR pump seal failure in conjunc-tion with the 0.1 w/o per day leakage from containment which by passed the SBVS and was deposited on the ABSVS' charcoal beds.
The dose rates from the Chemical and Volume Control System
! have been calculated assuming letdown.was isolated af'ter a gap i activity release accident. The Letdown System should not be used in a high activity situation.. The letdown portion of the CVCS will be isolated at a predetermined radioactivity level in the event of large fuel failure. With the addition
of the Head Vent System letdown will not be required to mitigate the accident. Isolating the Letdown System also eliminates the need for analyzing the dose rates from the Waste Gas Systems. .
Dose rates in the control room at time = 0 have been calcu-lated giving credit for the existing shielding. tradit was given for the Shield Building, Control Room walls, and the walls and floors within the Auxiliary Building. The result-ant dose rates at time = 0 in the control room show that the room is adequately shielded for direct radiation in an acci-dent situation. The maximum dose rate of 20 mrem /hr occurs in the corner of the control room behind the control board nearest the CVCS piping. Approximately 6 mrem /hr would be encountered in front of the control board nearest the af-fected unit. The rest of the Control Room would be at or less than 1 mrem /hr at time = 0.
The dose rates from containment decay quite rapidly. The dose rates at 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />, 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br />, and 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> are expected to be 43%, 30% and 12% respectively of the time = 0 dose rates.
Calculations have been made by Fluor Power Services for the dose to Control Room Operators in a Maximum Hypothetical Accident. These calculations were based on source terns of TID-14844. No credit was taken for shadow shielding provided by the structures around various components in the Auxiliary Building, and Control Room occupancy af ter the event of 4-40 hour weeks. A dose of approximately 1 rem resulted from these calculations. The actual dose should be much less due to the shielding provided by the Auxiliary Building structure.
However, the maximum dose of 1 rem shows that the control room is adequately shielded for direct radiation in an accident situation.
l t
e r .
w G
r l
L
i 2.0 Control Room Airborne Doses 2.1 General Licensing Consideration The requirements to show acceptable post LOCA doses in the Control Room (CR), (NRC's letter of 5/7/80) result in the need to evaluate the DBA-LOCA and the subsequent pathways for release of radioactivity.
The dose calculations were performed to show compliance of the Control Room (CR) with GDC 19.
2.2 Methodology The guidelines given Xin SRP 6.4 and R.G. 1.3 were used with Atmospheric dis-an exception of the /Os for CR and TSC.
persion factors are based on the Halitsky Methodology for Meteorology and Atomic Energy 1968, as discussed in Section 3.2.2.
2.2.1 Assumptions and Bases Regulatory Guide 1.4 was used to determine activity levels in the containment following a DBA-LOCA. Activity releases are based on a containment leakage rate of 0.25% per day for the first day and 0.125% per day thereafter Table 1 lists the assumptions and parameters used in the analysis.
The majority of the containment. leakage will be collected in the shield building and exhausted to the atmosphere through the 954 efficient SBVSHowever, filters as an elevated there exist certain release from the main stack.
release pathways from the containment which will bypass the SBVS filters. The bypass leakage was quantified by as-suming that 1% of the primary containment leakage bypasses both the SBVS and the AMVS systems directly to the atmos-phere.
2.2.2 Atmospheric Dispersion Factor _(X79)
The following discussion is an explanation of the reasons for the use of the Halitsky X /O methodology and a value of Kc =2 instead of the Murphy methodology (Ref. 2) which SRP 6.4 suggests as an interim position.
X Historically, the preliminary work on building wake /Qs was based on a series of wind tunnel tests by James Halitsky et al. Halitsky summarized these results in Meteorology'and Atomic Energy in 1968 (Ref. 1). In 1974 K. Murphy and K. CampeofNRCpublisgedtheirpaperbased on a survey of existing data. This /Q methodology which 4
0
presented equations without derivation or justification, was adopted as the interim methodology in SRP 6.4X in fg 1975.
Since that time a series of actual building wake (Ref. 3) measurements have been conducted at Rancho Seco and several.other papers have been published documenting the results of additional wind tunnel tests.
Reviews of the Murphy Eq. 6 and discussions with the author th over the years have rection factor, (K+2)/A, determined thatandK=3/(S/d)y*guildingwakecor-were derived from the Halitsky data in Figure 37 of Ref. 2 from Murphy's paper. The Halitsky data was from wind tunnel tests on a model of the EBR-II rounded (PWR Type) containment and1, the validity of the data The was limited origin and to .5 <s/d reason
<3 (Ref.
for.the +2 in K+2 is Sect. 5.5.5.2).
not known.
All other formulations use K only, and for sit-uations where K is less than A 1 the use of K+2 imposes an unrealistic limit on the /Q.
For the Prairie Island plant, the building complex is com-posed of low, square Foredged buildings the HVAL intakeand ontwothecylindrical Auxiliary shield buildings.
Building roof, the intake will be subject to a building wake caused by the portion of the shield building above the roof of the Turbine Building-Auxiliary Building complex.
Since the Murphy methodology is overly conservative, a sur-vey of the literature was undertaken. It was found that 1, Section 5.5.5) the Halitsky wind tunnel test data (Ref.
conservatively overestimated K values "by factors of up to possibly 10". Given this conservatism, it was felt that the use of a reasonable K value from the Halitsky data on A review of square edged buildings should be acceptable.
Figures 5.29c from M&AE (Ref. "1) resulted * #
in K values 9
in i ghe2to3 range.3 Information from other sources, as l /0 of 5.33 x 10-indicated below, has also shown that this should be a con-servative value, X
i l In a paper by Walker (Ref. 4), control room /Q's were experimentally determined for floating power plants in wind tunnel tests. Different intake and exhaust combina-l tions were considered. UsingX the data for intake 6, and.,
l stackAexgaust,were (infound 4) /O Ref. after values of 2.95 x 10-3 and adjusting the wind speed from 3.73 x 10- These values are approximately one 1.5 m/sec order to 0.6 m/sec.
of magnitude lower than tra conservatively calculated l
value for P,rairie Island, i
l
i l
l l
In a wind tunnel test by Hatcher (Ref. 5), a model indus- l trial complex was used to test dispersions due to the wake.
Data obtained from their tests show that K has a value less than 1, and decreases as the test points are moved closer to the structure. Meroney and Yang (Ref. 6) in a study to determine optimum stack heights, show that for short stacks
( 6/5 of building height), K reaches a value of approximately 0.2 and decreases closer to the building. They concluded that the Halitsky methodology was " overly conservative".
These recent experimental tests show that K = 2.5 used to determine the X /Q for Prairie Island is a conservative estimate by, at least, a factor of 2 and possibly by 10 or more.
Field tests were made on the Rancho Seco facility (Ref. 3),
and g X/O were obtained. Data from round topped contain-ment releases and square edged auxiliary building releases wereusedtosimulatethePrairieIsgand, case. Measured m ' to app gX/Q values ranging from 8.07 x 10-Although most/0values 1 x 10-D were #ound. were of U goxima in the 10~3 m -2 range for those cases approximating the PrairieIslandconfjguration,tneworstRanchoSecocase value of 8.07 x 10- at Pasquill G and 1.8 m/sec with a 2 is used for comparison purposes.
building area of 2050 m When speed ofadjusted 0.6 m/secto and the an Prairie Islandconjitionswithawind/Qof3.g3x1 area of 782 m ,a X
calcu-which is 1.5 times smaller than the value 5.33 x 10-lated for Prairie Island using the Halitsky wind tunnel data.
It was concluded that suf ficient data and fieldX /O tests is aexist con-to give a reasonable assurance that the chosen servative one, over and ab'ove the conservatism implied by using the 5th percentile wind speed and wind direction factors.
2.2.3 Results 2.
The radiological exposures in the CR are included fall in Table within The doses, with the exception of the skin doses, the GDC 19 guidelines values. The skin doses are within the guideline of 15 rem if protective clothing is used.
TABLE 1 LOSS-OF-COOLANT ACCIDENT: PARAMETERS TABULATED FOR POSTULATED ACCIDENT ANALYSES DESIGN BASIS ASSUMPTIONS I.
Data and Assumptions Used to Estimate Radioactive Sources from Postulated Accidents 1721.4 A. Power Level (MWt) NA B. Burnup 100%
C. Fission Products Released from Fue_ (fuel damaged)
D. Iodine Fractions 0.04 (1) Organic 0.91 (2) Elemental 0.05 (3) Particulate II. Data and Assumptions Used to Estimate Activity Released Pcimary Containment Leak 0.25 (0-1 day)
A. 0.125 (1-180 days)
Rate ( %/ day)
B. No mixing is assumed to occur in the shield building prior to release to the atmcsphere 1 C. Bypass leakage (% of primary containment leak rate)
D. SBVS Adsorption and Filtration Efficiencies (%) 95 (1) Organic iodines 95 (2) Elemental iodine 95 (3) Particulate iodine 95 (4) Particulate fission products III. Dispersion (sec/m3 ):
A.{R-BuildingWake/0 for Time Intervals of 5.33 x 10~3 (1) 0-8 hrs 3.14 x 10-3 (2) 8-24 hrs 2.00 x 10~3
( 3) 1-4 days 8.79 x 10-4
-(4) 4-30 days 4.40 x-10-4 (5)30-180 days
a 4
di TABLE 1 (Continued)
DESIGN BASIS ASSUM7rICM i
IV. Data for CR:
116,840 A. \blume of CR (ft3 ) 2,000 i
B. Filtered intake (cfm)
C.. Efficiency of Charcoal (%) 99 pdsorber D. Unfiltered Inleakage (cfm) - 10 E. kcirculation Flow Rate 0.0 F. Occupancy Factors:
0-1 day 1.0 1-4 days 0.6 1 ,
4-30 days 0.4 1
30-180 days 0.4 d
e W
.[
]
i
-: ..=. . -. .. . _ . _ - .,-.;-_.-,,-..... . - - . . . , . . . . , , . _ . . . , . - - ._ ..- . .- - . .. . . -
4 P
TABLE 2 AIRBONE ACTIVITY INSIDE WE CINrPCL POO4 DOSES FPCM A TA IDCA (0-180) DAYS i
! % yroid hhole Body Skin 5.8 2.8 59.3 Doses (REM) 30 5 30 GDC 19 tose Guidelines (RPI) 75*
i
- If protective clothing is worn T
i j
f i
i I
t 4
I 1
i i .
i l.
I l
l i
l APPENDIX A Toxic Vapor Concentrations in the Control Room - Models e
e O
4
?
INDEX PAGE A.1 INTRODUCTION A-1 A.2 MASS TRANSFER FROM SPILL TO ATMOSPHERE A-2 A.2.1 Low Boiling-Point-Liquids and A-2 Compressed Gases A.2.1.1 Instantaneous (PUFF) Release A-2 A.2.1.2 Vaporization A-3 A.2.2 Normal Boiling-Point-Liquids A-5 A.2.2.1 Evaporation Rates A-5 A.2.2.2 Diffusion Coefficient A-6 A.2.3 Spill Area A-7 A-9 A3 VAPOR DISPERSION Instantaneous (PCFF) Release A-9 A.3.1 A.3.2 Continuous Plume Diffusion A-12 A.3.3 Standard Deviations and Stability A-13 j
Conditions CONTROL ROOM CONCEN',4' ATIONS A-15 A.4 A-17 A.5 CONCENTRATIONS IN PARTS PER MILLION CPPM)
REFERENCES A-18 A.6
?
E
- I t
l i
l l
A.1 INTRODUCTION The models used to calculate the concentrations of toxic chenicals in the control room atmosphere are consistent with the models described in NUREG-0570.
Several conservative assumptions consistent with NUREG-0570 were made to calculate the concentrations of toxic vapor. Some of these are:
- 1. The entire inventory or cargo in one container is released.
- 2. The area of the spill, as predicted by eg. (2.3-1) spreads until a depth of 1 cm for the spill is achieved.
- 3. The vapor, in the form of a puff or plume, moves directly-towards the air intake of the control room.
It should be pointed out that the probabilistic nature of the catastrophic spill of toxic chemicals, during transpor-tation and in storage, is not considered here. That is, the frequency of shipment and cargo size of each toxic chemical past the Prairie Island site, the accident rates of on-site release and of each shipment type, the distri-bution of wind speeds and directions, and the uncertainty of the weather conditions will not be included in the assess-ment of vapor concentrations.
I-1 A-1
1 A.2 MASS TRANSFER FROM SPILL TO ATMOSPHERE The volatility of a substance is a direct function of its vapor pressure. Compressed gases, liquified gases, and many liquids have sufficiently high vapor pressures so that when released to the atmosphere, they will either vaporize or evaporate. For compressed gases and liqui-fied gases and those liquids where normal boiling points are far below the ambient temperature, instantaneous flashing will first take place. The remaining liquid will vaporize by drawing heat from the surroundings. On the other hand, if the normal boiling point is above the ambient temperature, the liquid will evaporate into the atmosphere.
A.2.1 Low Boiling-Point-Liquids and Compressed Gases For simplicity, a low boiling point liquid is considered to be a compressed gas, liquified gas, or a liquid whose boiling point is below the ambient temperature.
A.2.1.1 Instantaneous (PUFF) Release For liquified gases and low boiling point liquids, the heat balance in the instantaneous puff formation assuming an adiabatic change is g'ven by:
mT Cp (Ta-Tb) = myo Hy (2.1-1) where: ,
mT = total. initial mass (g)
Cp = heat capacity of the liquid (cal /g 0C)
Ta = ambient temperature (OC)
A-2
s.
Tb
= normal boiling point of the liquid (OC) $Ta myo = mass of the instantaneously vaporized liquid (g)
Hy = heat of vaporization of the liquid (cal /g)
A.2.1.2 Vaporization As a result of flashing, the temperature of the remaining fluid is reduced below ambient levels. The remaining liquid,,Lm7-mvo), will vaporize by absorption of heat from atmospheric radiation, solar radiation, convection of air, and ground conduction.
The rate of total heat transfer, in cal /see from all of
- these sources can be described as follows (NUREG-0570 p. 9).
(2.1-2) f = Alt) (Er+9c+9a) where:
A(t) = area of the spill (m }2 ,
solar and atmospheric radiation fluxes
=
gr (cal /m2-sec) ge = heat flux due to force convection of air over the spill (cal /m2-sec) gd = heat transfer due to earth conduction (cal /m2-sec)
Various values at different locations in the southwestern region have been measured for Gr. The maximum values are 4 Roosevelt Reservoir AR) 115 cal /m2-sec and 97 cal /m2-sec h for atmospheric and solar radiation, respectively for a j of 212 cal /m 2-sec . (NUREG-0570, P. 7).
total qr ,}
s 9
\
A-3
,m -w a -- - --a oa
The heat flax, qc, due to forced convection of air over the spill is UTUREG-0 57 0, p . 8 ) :
(2.1-3) 9c " hc(Ta-Tb) .
where a value of 1.6 cal /m2-sec OC is used for he (NUREG-0570.,
- p. 8).
The heat transfer by earr.h conduction, qd, is given by the following relation (NUREG-0570, p. 9),
qd = 197 (Tg-Tb) /t (2.1-4) where Tg = ground temperature (OC) t = time (sec)
For TE, the ambients temperature Ta is used.
Placing all of the above relations into 2.1-2, we obtain 212 + 1. 6 (Ta-Tb ) + 197 (Ta-T b ) /t (2.1-5) hf = A(t)
The vaporization rate, dmy/dt, in g/sec, is then dmv dO (*J .1-6 )
dt l_ (Tt)
Hy
= A(t) 212 + (1. 6 + 9b ) (Ta-Tb) * (2.1-7)
HV t
~
I where my = mass of the vapor ..
A-4 l
t I
~ *' - - _ _ _ . , .
. o A.2.2 Normal Boiling-Point-Liquids When exposed to the atmosphere, the liquids with normal boiling points above the ambient temperature will, evaporate by diffusion into the air. The main driving force here is the vapor pressure difference, i.e., concentration gradient, between the liquid phate and the air.
A.2.2.1 Evaporation Rates The evaporation of a liquid at ambient temperature in an open space with wino can be described as a mass transfer process by forced convection.
The evaporation rate can be calculated by the follosing formulae (NUREG-0570, p. 12)
=hd M A (t) (Ps-Ea) /Rg lTa+273.16) , (2. 2-1) d where, for laminar flow, .
hd
! (2.2-2)
= 0.664 f (Re)b (Sc)
A (t) = area of spill (cm 2)
Re = Reynold number = Lup/p .
Se = Schmidt number = p/Do hd = mass transfer coefficient (cm/sec)
Rg = universal gas constant u = wind speed (cm/sec)
$ p = density of air (g/cm 3} e
- = viscosity of air (g/cm-sec) p
- M = molecular weight of liquid (g/ mole)
.O A-5 w e -. y
P3 = ttaturation vapor pressure of the liquid at temperature Ta C* IIg l Pa = actual vapor pressure of the liquid in air L = characteristic length (cm) ,
D = diffusion coefficient (cm2f3eg, Pa is normally zero for all liquids. The diameter of the spill is used as the characteristic length L. Since the spill reaches its maximum dimensions quickly, the maximum diameter of the spill is used.
A.2.2.2 Diffusion Coefficient The diffusion coefficients of the liquid into air are given for a few ccmpounds in NUREG-0570 pp. 31-33. The diffusion coefficient, DA3, of a gas A diffusing into a gas B may also be estimated by (Bird , et al., p. 511):
+ h (Ta+273,161 /2 ( y DAs = 0.0019583 PoA32 UA3 where l MA
= molecular weight of gas A {g/r ole)
M3
= molecular weight of gas B (g/ male)
P = atmospheric pressure (a c=)
l o = Lennard-Jones parameter DAB = dimensionless function of temperature and intermolecular potential field EAB l
)
The Lennard-Joe.es parameters are empirically estimated to
} be:
s C
B)/2 (2.2-4)
(2. 2-5) i i CAB " /CA CB A-6
D A3 is tabulated as a function of k(T+273.16)/tA3 by Bird, et. al.
c/k and a for each gas can be estimated using the-following relations (Bird, et. al. p. 22),
c/k = 0.77 Te (2.2-6)
(2.2-7) o=2.44[T _\l/3 c
5Pc/
for diffusion in air, the following parameters are used cA = 3.617 k cA/k = 97 OK MA = 28.84 g/ mole P = 1 atmosphere were tinobtainable, a dif-For chemicals where Tc and P c ~
2 fusion coefficient of 0.2 cm /sec was used.
A.2.3 Spill Area The rate of mass transfer, i.e., vaporization er evapora-tion, of a liquid into the atmosphere is, among other things, directly proportional to the surface area of the spill. Initially, the liquid is casumed to be in the shape of a cylinder, with ths hei'..Ft equal to the radius of the base. The liquid is assumed to spread quickly by gravity
- to a thin pancake. The surface area, A, is given by (NUREG-057 0, p. 4): l f
- g De-) ,
(2.3-1)
A(t) =n ro 2 + 2t 9e
,w
)
t 3 (2. 3-2 )
and Vo = wro A-7
e 4 i
l where r o = initial radius of the spill (cm) 2 g = gravitational constant = 981 cm/sec -
Vo = volume of the spill (cm3}
p1 = density of the liquid (g/cm3) p = density of air (g/cm )3 t = time (sec)
The surface area, however, does not in reality expand I indefinitely as eq. (2.3-1) indicates, but a maximum surf ace area is reached at some time. If the spill occurs on a surface that will restrict the spread of the spill, then the maximum area of the spill can be calculat'ed. In cases-where the condition of the ground cannot be accurately determined, a depth of I cm for the spill is assumed.
For the ca'1culation of the surface area for a spill from a tank car on the Conrail ~line, from the topography of the area, the spill was considered to be rectangular in shape, with a width of 25 meters.
It should be noted that Vo is the volume of the liquid spill remaining after instantaneous flashing to puff has taken place and is given by:
(2.3-3)
Vo = mT mvo 91 i
t
-A-8
A.3 VAPOR DISPERSION The vapor from instantaneous flashing (puf f) and~from continuous vaporization of evaporation (plume) moves in the direction of the wind,and disperses by diffusion into the atmosphere. The dispersion is assumed to follow a Gaussian distribution for short travel times (a few minutes to one hour). That is, an individual puff may or may not be well-described by a Gaussian formulation, but ca ensemble el puffs is assumed to disperse in a Gaussian functic .
This diffusion model is applicable only to the vcrors whose densities do not differ greatly from that of air (Slade). The' wind is assumed to be in the direction from the source of spill to the control room air intake.
It should be noted that the topography between the source and receptor is ignored in this treatment.
A.3.1 Instantaneous (Puf f) Release The diffusion equation for an ins'tantaneous puff with a finite initial volume and a receptor at the air intake is given by the following equation (NUREG-0570, p. 18)
I v2 3 X -3/2 (0XIU YI ZI)~1exp l- 2 y (xg ;+6 2) g (puff) = (2n )
I 1 (:-h)2 1 (:>h)2 (3*1~1) exp (7 0 2 I * **P ~I 0 ,g 2 )
h X /Q (puf f) is given in m-3 ,
O XI, U YI, 0 Z1 = adjusted standard deviations of the puff concentration in the horizintal along-wind (X), horizontal-x cross-wind (Y) ,' and vertical cross-wind directions (Z),
respectively (m).
A-9
x, y, z = distances from the puff center in the X, Y, and Z directions, respectively (m) . z is also the effective above-ground elevation of the receptor, e.g., the fresh-air intake of a control room. .
h = effective above-ground elevation of the source.
To account for the initial volume of the puff, it is assumed that 2 2 XI 2 = 0 XI + c o (3.1-2) 2 U YI 2 , c'yy , c 2 .( 3 . 1- 3 )
o 2I 2 , c '277,a2 0 (3.1-4)
- 2 , o y7 2 (3.1-5)
XI and letting x = xo - ut
~
~
1/2 u 3/2 py) 1/3 Co" j*vo/ (2 ,.
where Co = initial standard deviation of the puff (m)
U = standard deviation of puff concentra-XI' YI' ZI tion in the X, Y, and Z directions, respectively (m)
"vo = mass of the instantaneously released puff (g) 3
= density of the puff (g/m ) ,
f-oy
= ground distance between the source of splill and xo receptor (m) u = wind speed (m/sec)
., t = time after release (sec)
A-10
l l
The density of the puff is calculated using the ideal gas law. .
PV = nRT ,
(3.1-6) and the relation between density and volume p ,
M- n (3.1-7) which leads to:
Dy = (3.1-8)
RT where ,
M = molecular weight (gm/ mole)
P = atmospheric pressure (atm) n = number of moles R = universal gas constant 8.205x10-5 atm.m3U mole K T = ambient temperature, UK .
V = volume On3} ,
Then, Eq. (3.1-1) may be used for the calculation of the center-line concentration where y = 0.
Since the control room air intakes are located 22.9 meters above ground level, heavier than air vapor must overcome gravity to rise to the intake, while lighter than air j vapors will reach tha intake easily. To account conserva-
} tively for this effect, the puf f dispersion, Eq. ;(3.1-1) is modified as follows:
A-ll
. o For the vapors much heavier than air, the puff centerline is assumed to cove up the hill to the ground levol eleva-tion of the plant. Dilution will occur due to the puff rising up the hill, but no credit was taken to account for this effect, z=h=0 is used in Eq. (3.1-1). For vapors much lighter than air, the puff centerline is assumed to move directly to the level of the air intake, therefore h is replaced by z in Eq. (3.1-1).
A.3.2 Continuous Plume Diffusion The diffusion equation for the continuous release of a plume with a finite initial volume and a receptor at z above the ground level is given by the following equation (Slade, p. 99):
~
-1 f-v2 ( (z-h)2 X/Q (cont) = (2-u c yc z) exp b2 )"5**E -
3c2
- z (z+h) 2 ,
( y ,
y . ..
+ exp - 1 (3. 2-1) 2eZ -2 .
d where X/Q(cont)is given in sec/m 3 oy, c z= standard deviations of the plume concentrations in the y and z direction, respectively.
To give credit for the finite initial size of the spill, cy here is replaced by (c2+c yo2 )1/2 , where c yo is the i
l y effective width of the spill. Although the distribution cf a circular spill of a liquid in the cross-wind direction
[
is not a normal function (it is of the (orm P = (1 - F2 )l/2, l
j where - 1.0 i F i 1.0), cyg
- ay be approximated by the following method (NUREG-057 0, p. 20). ,
A-12
-s
o ,
oy ,=N r n 1/2 /4.3 ( 3 . 2 -2')
where r = radius of the spill. Similarly, az may be replaced by (0:2+ozo2) to account for the building effect, azo 2 may be approximated by the following method:
.522 (3.2-3) ozo 2=
r Again, to account for the differences for heavier than air and lighter than air vapors, : = h = 0 is used in Eq.
(3.2-2) for vapors heavier than air. For vapors lighter than air, h is replaced by : in Eq. (3.2-1).
A.3.3 Standard Deviations and Stability Conditions The stability categories, i.e., the Pasquill's types of weather conditions, are defined as:
Pasquill's Stability Catecory Weather Condition A extremely unstable.
B ,
modcrately unstable C slightly unstable D neutral E slightly stable F moderately stable G extremely stable Although the Pasquill-Gifford curves are appropriate only l ,for plumes, they may be assumed to be applicable for estimating the puff dispersion coefficients. Using the j Pasquill-Gifford curves (Slade,pp. 102 and 103) a func-
- tional dependence for and c z was developed of -the form: .
\
A-13
log 10e = A + B loglox + C(logiox)2 + D (log 10x) (3.3-1) where x is the distance from the spill to the control room air intake in km ,
The coefficients are as follows:
Coefficients for oy A B C D Pasquill Stability A 2.3237 0.89182 0.00028741 -0.01228 B 2.1556 0.91347 0.028256 -0.02334 C 2.0142 0.91977 -0.0022985 -0.008289 D 1.8288 0.92394 -0.0056984 -0.0062276 E 1.7006 0.92826 -0.0017835 -0.009115 F 1.5289 0.92159 -0.011057 -0.0032318 1.0648 -0.014857 -0.0020555 G (x in n) -1.6212 Coefficients for o g A B C D Pasquill Stability 2.73Q1 2.6383 1.68666 0.59749 A
B 2.1003 1.3655 0.407576 0.0888029 1.8087 0.87272 -0.06512 0.00184558 C
1.4901 0.72583 -0.093465 0.011157 D
1.3284 0.67969 -0.10332 -0.0005092 E
1.1391 0.65602 -0.128E9 0.0037608 F
G(x _n m) -1.8981 1.1243 -0.036447 -0.0086351
. e t
\
A-14 l
l l
A.4 CONTROL ROOM CONCENTF.ATIONS The concentrarions of the toxic chemical, CCR, in g/m3, I in the control room, at any instant, is calculated by solving the following differential equation:
dCCR(t) (4-1) dt
=
Ar X (t) - Ao CCR(t) where AI is the control room air inflow rate, (sec~1)
Ao is the control room air e:haust rate (sec-1)
X (t) is the concentration outside the air intake (g/m 3)
CCR (t) is the concentration in the control room (g/m3 )
t in seconds The control room cir inflow rate, A:, is given by:
FI (4 -2 )
AI=VCR.60 and similarly, Ao, is given by:
F0
=
A o VCR.60 (4-3) where VCR is the control room volume (ft3)
FI is the control room air intake flow (cfm)
Fo is the control room air exhaust flow (cfm)
J
- The concentration of the toxic chemical, X (t), at the air intake just outside the control room is the sum df the puff and plume concentration at eny instance and is given by:
A-15 9
X(t) =myoypuff(t) , (dmv) cont (t) (4_4) where myo is given by Eq. (2.1-1), puf f (t) is given Eq. (3.1-1) .
dmv dt is zero for t < Du and is given by Eq. (2.1-7) for any time thereafter. hcont(t) is also zero for t<h and is given by Eq. (3. 2-1) for any time thereafter.
The concentration of the toxic chemical at any time, t, in the control room is given by the following solution of Eq. (4-1) :
t At
-o e Act' AI L4-5)
CCR(t) =e X(t'.) dt o
l i
4.
A-16
. e A.5 CONCENTRATIONS IN PARTS PER MILLION (ppm)
A convenient method of presenting concentrations of toxic gases in the atmosphere is in units of parts per million (ppm). -
To convert to ppm from gm/m 3 , we use the ideal gas law:
PV = nRT (5-1) where for a volume V, n moles of total gases are present.
The number of moles of toxic gases is given by:
C (gm/m3) .y (5-2) n1 = MW 3
where C(gm/m3) is the concentration in gm/m 3
V is the volume in consideration, m MW is the gram-molecular weight of the substance (gm/molel .
The concentration in ppm is then.given by:
ni x 106 =
c(gm/m3).R.T x 10 6 (5-3)
C (ppm) = -
MW.P where R = gas constant 8.205 x 10-5 atm-m3 mole OK U
T = ambient temperature, K.
P = atmospheric pressure (1 atm).
a 4
h -
t t
A-17
4 A.6 f
REFERENCES f
(
D. H. Slade, "Meterology and Atomic Energy", TID-24190, 1
U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, Washington, D.C. (1968). .
l
\ J. Wing, " Toxic Vapor Concentrations in the Control P.ocm
^i Following a Postulated Accidental Release", NUREG-0570, U.S. NRC, Washington, D.C. (1979).
I R. B. Byrd, W. E. Stewart, W. N. Lightfoot, " Transport
) Phenomena', John Wiley t. Sons, N. Y. (1960).
.]
I 5 h I
i A-18
1 APPENDIX B Included in Appendix B are control room and other system charac-teristics required by NUREG-0737 Section III.D.3.4, Attachment I related to the toxic chemical study to aid in an independent evaluation as required by NUREG-0737.
The habitability of the control room during a DBA is discu'ssed in Section II titled Prairie Island Control Room Design Basis Acci-dent Radiological Study.
Control room characteristics air volume control room - 116,840 ft 3 tofalsegloortofalso (148,030 ft including ceiling.
plenum space) air volumes do not allow for equip-ment volume but do include the relay and computer rooms serviced by this air.
infiltration leakage rate
- zero in normal and high radiation condition (control room is press-urized). Zero (est.) in isola-tion mode, 100's recirc. , no press-urization. (Control room has no walls or doors exposed to the out-side air.)
high efficiency particu- - HEPA 99.97% on 0.3 micron particles late air (HEPA) filter Charcoal Adsorber-Elemental Iodine ,
and charcoal absorber 95%
efficiencies
- organic Iodine 95%
(Both charcoal adsorber efficien-cies per 2" bed depth)
Closest distance between - 65 ft. from main control room air intake to reactor. building wall.
containment and air in-take Automatic isolation cap- - damper closing time, damper leakage ability and area damper closing time - 7.5-15 sec.
2 - normal air intake opening -
12" dia. = 0.79 ft at 1" W.G. assumed leakage = 12 cfm*
20" x 16" = 2.22 ft2 - fresh air intake opening"-
assumed leakage = 23 cfm 20" x 16" = 2.22 ft2 - exhaust opening - assumed leakage = 23 cfm*
- Assuming Class II type, equivalent and no credit for the two in
, series.
e B-1
-e e p w-ss- --
g--g,->,,. ~p---- -
w - e- ~- -, - *----,e
d *5 i N7 2 3 6'2
- I f 3 d2 fj3 f
YJ ~
~ 7ba $
1m- -
- .e s@1 v i s 4' *?
~
mt J !
lh-y a 2
a 5 h 3
- y 8 a-f r.:
N
\m H JP __ Q
,.o t aE a
. -..., P n Ig~- g h
{ e ype O E
y2 bt I Am FOC O
0i d.s 4 s...J 6 Ju f T
sJ7 32 2 #
>.2 1 e a
ff os 072 1 fu ; a v43 [D - M 1
L j g
'F'~~~-
- ~~ _, p
' Y >
., ~-
g y u 5 d
3r g a e i$
Q e-
^ b d 0 , 4 * * * ?I 2 to ,
u _ _.
I b *
,- s 84>2N i. hs an su J U I" s.
m 1F
}g s. o.
a FT' 33083 0 D ,,
L1M C WZ b N uJa Wh 9 "
gg g onmw H,o 2h . 5
-n f
!o T/-x- ,
E.
0 ---
d f., u g a I 'JI
- d
'H"i i[- x
\ k ~j l $
Is s.,
83 b
ai wJ! . 27 3d au -,
g S
e-
>.,,- uro sr r
g B-2 N Ik '
e e
I ' -
~
g .f l' r
I l-i i b8 k I
N .
- s m
. =j= _
a um j
i 0
O
, ! /. .
O t
I s
O e
t O N !
l sk F
! y O &
s
? o ,I Y -.I v
u s
' N J
w
- L' .
6f I
. tl l I
is 'e a g r
-s
,, u .1 e,.
~
[]
,' i ,
i s
.] . o i g :
(LI I sw- . _ _ _ _ . a '
E '
l l -
- l-
.... _I O' ,
D
.i l
1, . a
- Q . ,
y j s. . . , . . ; . - -
g-
- 2 B
o N. .
~*
o 8* .. , - - -
j
.Jh e ,
s *
,9
[ s g s
% .s k-
<M : J . , . r-m m f
l l .
. ~_
,a-vz "{ - ~ - -.o-s2 g+ ,
6(
r e .
e 6
Q en
==
.o,n BEL , .%L .
.W _-
3 4_ r . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _
15
'AO ,. - -
-r "
t>
r '
(
- h- e4 i i _ _ __
Ce g, _
w s
.. = = =
- _I
. .8 J.
O 7 55 .
- ; d F1 s ,
.T _ =
~
'
- T d
- g. .
-a.
N*? (~~
.L .- -_ -mm- $ ., 0 g
y_e XI j i 3 Mi a .
z 3
Jl b
,41 l ,
,_ .2
, Z
}.
j 'i -
O s
p j .
g
- T-
. l- .
\
I .
I 4 . . .
W li
- 1 -[_, g i -
M 4 e mm
- ~ 1.
y l
'9 _
o
-.j! } i _ .
e' =t.
. y ..
g '
_g B-4 6 , ,