ML19347A575

Comments on 690605 Psar,Amend 2

ML19347A575
Person / Time
Site:	Point Beach, Midland
Issue date:	07/28/1969
From:	COMMERCE, DEPT. OF
To:
Shared Package
ML19347A574	List: ML19347A573 ML19347A575
References
NUDOCS 8007290991
Download: ML19347A575 (3)

Text

,

T:

2. a

_.:_.m _ _

~

k',

4Co

~

~ '

^

...- :.: :=5 m,

' ~

Commenta:on

/ '

Midland Plant Units 1 and 2

-Consumers Power Company ~

4

' Preliminary Safety : Analysis Report

. Amendment No. 2 dated June'5,~1969 Prepared by.

Air Resources Environmental Laboratory' Envirormr.tal Science Services Adminictration July 28, 1969 E

The' additional meteorological data' presented in Amendment 2 is the analysis of'5 years of routiae hourly weather data'from Saginaw to obtain a frequency distribution of Pasquil1~ diffusion categories.

~ To ~ quote from our previous Mmments:(2/3/69), "it should be pointed out that this method is ar. approximate one which is used when more precise categm ization, as with q,-is not possible. The method, by definition,' limits Pasquill Types;E and F to. nighttime hours and.

conversely limits Types A, B and C to daytime hours". A number of recent final-safety analysis reports where itlwas possible to compare

~

the two~ categorization techniques (hourly weather versus g data) show serious discrepancies. - For ; stample, an analysis of og data from a' Great lakes reactor site (Docket:50-266) compared to an analysis-of routine hourly weather data from the nearest Weather Bureau Station shows _ a 36 percent frequency of Type D (neutral) for the q approach compared to 65 percent for the hourly weather approach. Furthermore,

' the Cr. approach showed a 51 percent ~ frequency!in the three stable g

categories while thelother.' approach showed 22 percent. From this we would conclude that the unusually high. neutral categorization is arbitrary and erroneous ~ and tends _to underestimate the stable category frequencies. ~.Since the:same high frequency for Type D1is shown'in the Saginaw hourly data (64 percent,' Table 2A-14b) we feel the 11 percent

~ frequency for Type E and 12 percent for Type F would be underestimated

~

by at least' a-factor of 2 -if the og. approach had-been used.

The:only(7g data available for the site'are,these from the Dow.

meteorological installations and are surnarized in the original report.

The : summarization,"however, :is-by means of gross averages with no frequency distribution between crt, wind speed and. wind direction.

1 c-

. In su$ nary,.we see no reason ~ to change our conclusion expressed in the

~

cements of 2/3/69 stating that it.would seem reasonably. conservative to assume'for the~ postulated 2-hr ground release a diffusion rate-1

~

'l 2718 1

M

^

80l07290

}

d g..

_.e-y y_.

g g

.--y 9

,9 9 y g

9 g,

m,.y,,

,,9.,y p

.yA,,

y 4,

p

,- 9y y

y

s

~

.y.

r t

2 equivalent-to Pasquill Type F and 1 m/sec. For the new site boundary-

of 400;m this would result in a. relative concentration of 1 x 10-3 s m_3, 5

- allowing a. factor of 3 for' the diffusion effect of the building.. This

~~

to the applicant's value. of. 2 x 10-4 's m-3.

Part of the

. compares difference is due to the.use ~of a building diffusion factor of 5 9_by -

the applicant as compared to our, factor. of 3

. j k

th-1-

se r

4 m,

9 i

t I b k

4 5

.bu g

~D*

j

'l 1

l s

4

~

~)

1, c-3

'~:

+

W7-w

' ~ '

..;)

~fhf Qshb,.- W ~1 TE R

~~

aoa c47s acctwto

. o41: or oocuurur:

~ Y N f Essacar D m legn e t & Te d mo S-25 8-2' 57 2718 1

OTHER.

REPORT:

M EMO; E

Y 1.T A.

1 OTHER; ORiGa CC.

l' 1

T O-Norris acnow nteessaaT O

!co~cuaaract O

oars ^~5weaso:

4 onenouare~ ~ O Icou=rur O

av:

,a co QO-3 $ 330... W 336... W 342-843... W 344...

ros7 o,rics cussm 50 'll hTi m... MO wt RECENEO.y OATEj ff MEG.No-oATE REFERREO To DEscasp TSON; ( M ust 6. U RC1333ttred) 3 2Me Ness trans the follesing Comments fm Air anseuros Enrierummetal Lab.(ESSA) V/2 cys of es. enel foe ACTION (6

1. Comments, dtd 7-24-69 an Ammit # 2 51unt/Ms11er orig omments & 3 cys W 329 - 1 For Midland Gaits E2(50-329-330) steele/Isossco oris comments a a eye au-33o dEd 8*0-08 f8' F#'Aaept Vol's kson/Ireisad orig (*omments & 3 cys 50-342 auct.osvRu

2. ""2..far M111stsee Inmit 2,(50-336 -

nuat/muer wig oumanata = a cys m->a s

Karss/Imag or tg Comments & 3 cys W315-31G' 16 dtd 8-1-09 for PSA38Pt h1' 3* "1 thru 4. Indian Poine 4 & 5, (W3-1-3.5) Kars/x mth orts comments a a cys so-Ju a="""**

• s 4, Commaats,ded 8-11-49 for PSA3ept Ve1 e!1 erig returned 1 thru 4 for Trojan Flaat (50-344 angJ.1e T-

5. Comments dtd 8-8-69 for Tsumeds &

u.

ror -. m Merris/Schree'lar j

m s

50-315 & 315.....

, dtd 8-1169 for Andts 1-ggm a

.~

sa=

E 6

3.& for os.61. en.y vise 2, OGC 50-323) p,jf&9_g4/' g.324 u.s.4rouc eurna comuisioN MAIL CONTROL FORM roRu..a.

mcaun D**}D *]D ]VM' ooJu oJu.2uk h

.........