ML20004D076

Forwards Addl Info Re Environ Rept,Ol Stage,In Response to NRC .Remaining Outstanding Responses Will Be Forwarded During Aug 1981.Info Will Be Incorporated Into Revision 2 of Environ Rept

ML20004D076
Person / Time
Site:	Wolf Creek
Issue date:	06/05/1981
From:	Koester G KANSAS GAS & ELECTRIC CO.
To:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
KMLNRC-81-082, KMLNRC-81-82, NUDOCS 8106080315
Download: ML20004D076 (200)

Text

{{#Wiki_filter:- 9 KANSAS GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY 7tg ELE C TFaC CCp.4 PAP 4y \\' S\\ 3 GL E NN L ROESTER \\'

1. f wi<t eat tace %f evu s am

/ % ~A\\ W' N $ ? Yc x 9- 'b, -12 D N ~ June 5, 1981 Y Q' f 3e / . (fN /s 4 /J7 rg NW Mr. Ilarold R. Denton, Director Office of tiuclear Reactor Regulation U.S. tiuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 KMLIIRC 81-082 Re: Docket Number STN 50-482 Re f t NRC Letter dated 5/12/81 from RLTedesco, NRC, to GLKoester, KG&E

Dear Mr. Denton:

The referenced letter requested additional infonnation concern-ing the Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit No. 1 Unvironmental Report - Operating License Stage. Transmitted herewith are responses to questions in the referenced letter. The remaining outstanding responses will be forwarded to you in August, 1981. This information will be formally incorporated into the Wolf Creek Generating Station Unit No. 1 Environmental Report - Operating License Stage in Revision 2. This information is hereby incorporated into the Wolf Creek Generating Station Operating License Application. Yours very truly, %x%k GLK:bb Attach 810 0 08 f)pg (/ \\ 20t N Marhet -Wocnota, Kansas - Mail Address: PO. Bow 208 I Wochsta. Kansas 67201 - Telephonn' Area Code (316I 2616451 ^

ft..

. g;

.f, Mr.. Haroid R. DentonL 'KMLNRC-81-082' - June 5, 1981 - cc s : Go'rdon Edison . Division of Project Management Office 'of Nuclear Reactor. Regulation U.S. ' Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Washington, D.C.

20555 Thomas;Vandel Resident NRC Inspector Box'311 Burlington, Kansas 66839 Bernard Jaroslow Argonne National Laboratory Building 10 9700 South-Cass Avenue Argonne, Illinois 60439

[ __Maurice Messier Environmental Review Coordinator U.S.- Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington,-D.C. .20555 J

'1P., OATil OF AFFIRMATIOfi STATE OF KANSAS- ) ) SS: . COUNTY OF SEDGWICK ) I, Glenr. L. Koester, of lawful age, being duly sworn upon oath, do' depose, state ar.d af firm that I am Vice President - fluclear of Kansas Gas and Electric Company, Wichita, Kansas, that I have signed the foregoing letter of transmittal, know the contents thereof, and that all statements contained therein are true. KANST.S GAS At1D ELECTRIC COMPANY .rt! f sj.l t By Glenn L. Koester'~ -k j Vice President - Nuclear W.B. Walker, Secretary STATE OF KNISAS ) ) SS: COUt1TY OF SEDGWICK ) BE IT REMEMBERED that on this 5th day of June, 1981 , before me, Evelyn L. Fry, a Notary, personally appeared Glenn L. Koester, Vice President - fluclear of Kansas Gas and Electric Company, Wichita, Kansas, who is personally known to me and who executed the foregoing instrum'.it, and he duly acknowledged the execution of the same for and on behalf of and as the act and deed of said corporation. IN WITt1ESS WilEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal the ..***"'t' and year above written.

4..N..?..: '....

. >..f.,4., 7., l!$^%.\\ An . A1 i i ,i. j Evelyr/L. rry, peary ,.o l i$ l/DL\\g/N! Ib %... /g ission expires on August 15, 1981. 1 -- -m...

r=: - 4 ~ NRC Question 240.1(ER) (3.3) ER-OL, p.~3.3-2, Sec. 3.3.6. Please indicate.the rakeup water rates used in simulating the Wolf-creek cooling lake drawdown during the 16-year (1948-1964) design weather period.

Response

The makeup rate for the 16-year cooling lake analysis was divided; into three makeup schedules given as follows: For the predrought, January 1, 1949'to July 31, 1952, the makeup' rate varied from. 0 to.120 cfs; during the drought, August 1, 1952 to May 31, 1957,'the makeup rate was fixed at a constant 40 cfs; and for the post-drought, June 1, 1957 to December 13, 1964, the makeup rate varied from 0 to 120 cfs.- In the predrought and post drought periods where the makeup varied from 0 to 120 cfs, the LAKET program calculated the amount of makeup required to maintain a constant cocling lake elevation of 1087 feet MSL. The attached tables list'the average monthly makeup flow rates for~the 16-year cooling lake analysis for-Unit 1 and Units 1 and 2 respectively. Y h @i JUNINI m RECEIVED 4 NUCtEARj? r, DEPT. 40n# p Qg# b 0

e ~ e-1 SAZOENT & LUN0Y CHICA00. ILLINOIS M 6LE 0401 -l Kansas Cas & Electric Ce=pany

• • olf Creek Statien - t* nit 1 a

Monthly Averane Coolfet Lake Makeus Flev Rata, cfs. From 1949 to 1964 Month / Year 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 19'5 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 JAN O 26.07 24.37 18.14 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 58.64 62.99 50.03 67.30 28.2'7 61.44 63.24 FE3 0 23.35 9.18 20.94 40.0 40.0 ~40.0 40.0 40.0 54.27 59.34 44.75 51.99 43.21 59.20 65.46 MARCH 0 34.67 20.85 40 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 5.70 69.26 20.66 37.48 40.50 47.76 73.74 APRIL 0 44.57 9.43 0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 46.27 67.04 32.52 31.33 78.74 96.34 43.85 X.1Y 0 16.67 0 35.03 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 53.05 43.40 54.56 0 103.56 89.63 79.21 J"NE O 18.04 0 81.65 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 0 52.64 87.42 83.83 36;02 25.74 84.55 ~46.78 JULY 14.07 0 C 63.25 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 57.71 11.28 32.91' 79.61 93.95 93.55 108.55 115.02 AUG 62.04 0' O 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 118.33 85.36 96.66 76.76 92.31 108.52 117.54 92.53 SEPT 25.05 0 0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 79.25 54.96 103.25 115.36 10.72 12.04 102.06 95.69 oCT 33.94 24.40 0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 63.34 93.90 12.60 48.60 59.44 75.35 107.42 95.0 N0*.* 48.76 51.54 0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 54.28 73.87 78.92 75.36 54.08 64.31

• r 80.44 83.68 DEC 23.56 28.83

.94 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 40.0 57.71 59.98 58.39 65.89 58.43 66.84 72.53 65.04 g e

-7 ., i 1 i SAPCE'!T & LL%*DY CHICA00. ILLINOIS TA E.Le, Jn 6.) n Kansas Caa & Electric Company L'olf Creek Station - Units 1 & 2 Monthly Average Cooling 1.ake Makeup Flow Rste. cfs. From 1949 to 1964 Month / Year 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1955 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964. JAN .55 37.58 36.74 29.31 40 40 40 40 40 '120 73.68 60.42 78.39 46.46 70.30 74.68 Ft3 0 34.70 13.42 34.31 40 40 40 40 40 120 70.45 56.65 63.40 57.92 71.92 78.93 MARCH 0 48.27 39.94 3.45 40 40 40 40 40 120 83.65 31.33 51.64 52.95 62.05 87.15 APRIL 10.82 59.0 24.53 10.62 40 40 40 40 40 120 82.40 69.02 44.16 93.98 112.02 58.21 MAY 24.04 31.51 0 68.84 40 40 40 40 40 120 61.40-71.85 0 115.61. 107.94 92.96 .frNE 45.63 39.17 0 100.27 40 40 40 40 120 120 101.67 101.18 74.30 49.51 101.11 68.83 rLY 36.15 4.94 0 84.3S 40 40 40 40 120 70.2S-56.06 99.02 110.62 111.69 120 120 AUC 82.67 0 0 40 40 40 40 40 120 103.92 116."13 97.21 112.78 113,71 1-20 120 SEPT 42.37 16*.S7 0, 40 40 40 40 40 120 80.37 119.59 119.33 26.27 42.20 120 118.50 OCT 51.07 75.16 0 40 40 4e 40 40 I20 110.86 29.33 76.68 78.09 94.83 120 111.58 1 Nov 61.83 64.67 9.72 40 40 40 40 40 120 87.80 91.89 90.19 67.15 76.10 120 98.74 DEC 35.0 39.48 39.18 40 40 40 40 40 120 70.01 70.34 76.93 69.45 79.59 86.29 74.92

• m m

Q240.2.. ER-OL, p. 3. 4 -1,.. Se c. 3. 4.1. - For one '1150 MWe (ER) ' unit operating at a 100-percent average annual (3.4) load factor, will the yrculating water heat re-jection rate be 8.1 x.10 Btu /hr as stated in-Sec. g

3. 4.1.or ' 7. 8 7 = x 10 Btu /hr as indicated in Sec.

3.4.4? .R240.2 The. circulating water heat rejection rate for one 1150' MWe unit operating at -1g 0 percent average annual load factor is 7.87 x 10 Btu /hr. 9 The 8.1_x 10 Btu /hr heat rejection rgte mentioned 'in Sec cion 3.4.1 should be 8.0 x 10 Btu /hr and represents the heat rejection rate fpr the circu-lating water. system plus 0.13 x 10 Btu /hr' heat rejection rate for the service water system. J

T y .i-s.. L: NRC ' Question - 24 0.'3 (ER) (3. 4) ER-OL, p.13.4-3, Sec. 3.4.3.2. The calculated velocities of the water-approaching and within the circulating-water intake - structure do not'seem to be accurate. The staff has presented in_the FES-CP, Table 3.1 the various_ intake velocities for a . total flow-rate of_1256 cfs.- Please prepare the similar table for the modified intake structure and the revised flow rate of - 1204-cfs. 9esponse: The fourth and fifth paragraphs of ER(OLS) Section 3.4.3.2 (original text) will be revised for clarification as follows: "The-Circulating Water Screenhouse sump floor is located at an elevation of 1058' feet MSL. A steel plate is provided at the sump inlet of the-Screenhouse as a weather protection device (Figure 3. 4-9). This steel plate extends from elevation 1075 feet MSL, upwards to the_ operating floor, 1092 feet MSL. The velocities of circulating water and service water flow downstream of'the steel plate are essentially independent of woling lake water level." " Based on a total birculating water and service water combined) flow rate of 1204 cfs for one unit, the average inlet water velocities are calculated to be: Approach velocity to the 0.87 feet Screenhouse: per second Velocity through the bar 1.06 feet grill: per second Approach velocity to the 1.06 feet traveling screens: por second Velocity through the 1.95 feet traveling screens: per second" The water intake velocities listed above replace the Table 3.1 of the FES-CP. D l .]

p 'Q240.4 ER-OL, p. 3.4-3, Section 3.4.3.2. Please provide (ER). an engineering - drawing showing the width of the (3.4) modified circulating water discharge chute, and also indicate the discharge velocity ' for-a total flow rate of.1204 cfs. R240.4 The width of the modified circulating water dis-charge chute is 75 feet as shown in the plan view of the attached drawing S-500. The discharge velocities below the circulating water discharge chute for 'a total flow rate of 1204 cfs are calculated to be 1.15 ft/sec and 1.5 ft/sec for the lake levels of'1087.0 ft (normal operating level) and 1085.0 ft (low water level for 1-unit) respectively. l

4 NRC QUESTION 240.5 (ER) - (3.4) : ~ ~ER-OL, p.-3.4-4,Sec. 3.4.4 Please indicate the. service water temperature rise and the combined circulating and service water temperature. rise for.the station operating at full load.

Response

. The service water temperature rise and the combined circulating and service water temperature rise for one unit operating at-100% load are given as follows: Service water' temperature rise 6.4 F = Plant temperature. rise-(Combination of circulating and service water) 29.60F = Circulating water temperature rise 31.50F =

NRC Question 240.6 (ERO (3.4): ER-OL, p._.3.4-4,.Sec.13.4.4 -Please provide a copy of the manual describing the LAKET. computer model used to calculate the cooling lake temperature distribution. L'

Response

.The LAKET program'is. proprietary so that only the LAKET program abstract is attached for your review. The LAKET user's manual is ,available in Sargent & Lundy-offices for NRC's inspection. c 4 i s ,.~ ,,,.g... e-_.

m. --

7 Q 2 '/O le, ^ .c PROGRAM ABSTRACT TITLE: LAKET - One-Dimensional Lake Thermal Prediction 'erogram PROGRAM NO.: 09.5.072-5.0 ~~ AUTHOR: R. J. Slezak ~. PROGRAM SCOPE: LAKET analyzes the transient thermal performance of one-dimensional lakes, rivers, and channels. Varying p.lant flow rate and rise temperature are treated. Lake TDS and turbine back-pressure may be computed. Runs may switch.between open and closed cycle, and between constant level and varying level. d . INPUT: Lake configuration, meteorological conditions, and plant operational data. OUTPUT: Lake temperatures, elevation, and water balance components. Full statistical monthly, seasonal, yearly, and total summaries for all variables. Computer-generated plots of all calculated variables versus time are available with the LAKPLOT (09.5.115-1.0) post processor. COMPUTATIONAL APPROACH: A LaGrangian formulation of the mass and energy conservation equations is implemented. Plug flow is assumed through the channel. A 3-hour t.me step'is used for all variables. ESTIMATED RUNNING TIME: One CPU minute per year of simulation. MACHINE: UNIVAC 1106 i Core size E 22k words l I o

~ NRC Question 240.7 (ER) (2.4) Describe the effects of plant. consumptive water use on existing and projected downstream water users under low. flow conditions up.to and including'the 2 percent chance droughtJ. The ' description should include current information on water use and current projections of future use.

Response

4 A-discussion of the effects of plant consumptive water use on ' downstream water users during the period of record drought.of 1952-1957 was discussed by'the NRC staff in the Supplemental Testimony, dated January 6, 1976, on contention I-l during the ' Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hearings. This period-of-record drought is estimated to have a recurrence interval of fifty years (2% chance drought). -'11he NRC staff in their discussion concluded that'even if all the water rights, senior to Kansas Water Resources Board's right to John Redmond Reservoir storage, set out in Kansas. Department of Agriculture list, are included as downstream users, there is sufficient storage available in John Redmond Reservoir to provide 41 cfs to the WCGS and to satisfy r.ights of the downstream users through the period-of-record drought. 4 e G G I e e D r

a _i- ? NRC Ouestion 240.8 (ER) (2.4) Provide a flow-duration curve for the'Neosho River at Wolf Creek ~ reflecting regulation by'the-John.Redmond Reservoir. 'Also,_ provide an estimate-of-the 7 consecutive day.once in 10 year low - flow'for'the river at Wolf ~ Creek under~the same conditions. Discuss - the effect_of plant operation on these parameters. Provide in your discussion-your.assunptions:regarding reservoir release rates and plant withdrawals used in your analysis. ~

Response

The' nearest U.S. Geological Survey gaging station on the Neosho River: downstream'of John Redmond Reservoir and near the confluence.ofLNeosho'RiverJand Wolf Creek is at Burlington, .Th s gag ng station at Burlington, Kansas,is i i Kansas. approximately five miles downstream of John Redmond Reservoir and the confluence of Neosho River and Wolf Cree.k is-approximately 4 miles downstream of this gaging station. The flow-duration 'information for Neosho River at Burlington,-Kansas, for the period October 1964 to September'1979 is! presented in Figure 1. . The 7-day 10-year low flow for the same period is 17.3 cfs. During low flows, the flows in Neosho. River.below John Redmond Reservoir would constitute the releases from the reservoir for water rights and water quality purposes. Even with plant operation ~ at WCGS, the releases for water rights and water quality will be made from the Reservoir and, hence, the flow-duration for the low-flow range would not be affected at.Burlington nor at Wolf Creek. The Attachnent M to the supplemental testimony by NRC staff dated ' January 6, 1976 on contention I-l during Atomic Safety Licensing Board hearings (Construction Permit Stage) gives average monthly -flows in the Neosho River below John Redmond Reservoir with WCGS operation for the period 1951-1959. Attachments A and B to the above testimony tabulate the water quality and water rights releases below John Redmond Reservoir..The plant makeup water rates (withdrawal from John Redmond Reservoir) arc discussed in Section 3.3.6 of WCGS, ER(OLS). Soc response to ~ Question 240.7 regarding the effects of plant consumptive water use on existing and projected downstream water users under low flow conditions. e e

c G 9 c o, ~ 100A03.0 W y,- 10000.0 x, y-- T s 3p0'0.0-i t i i i l k l o 5 \\s 1 \\ = r b 10 0.0 I o i i g i O i" s -4 g m 5 N M N %.g 10.0 i l 1 I i I.0 0.1.2 0.5 1.0 2 5 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 95 98 99 99.5 99.9 TIME IN PERCEtiT OF INDICATED PERIOD 99.0 PERICO OF RECORO: i-OCT. lD64 -SEP.1979 Q 2'l o. 'b ~ FIGUf?E FLOW-DURATION CURVE-i DAILY FLOW OF N505HO RIVER AT BUT<L!NGTON

1 t I NRC Ouestion - 240.9 (ER) (2.4) Provide the dates of the minimum daily flows shown in Table 2.4.3 lof the ER. If these low flows were a result of reservoir filling, provide minimum daily flows (and dates) for.the period after the- ~ -reservoir began normal operation.

Response

A revised Table 2.4-3 listing dates.of' minimum daily flows for the

period September'1, 1964 through September 30, 1977 is attached.

Regulated. storage of John Redmond Reservoir began on September 1, 1964. 2 e 9 e e 4 e

p WCGS-ER(OLS) i l Q 21/0.' 9 i TABLE 2.4-3 REGULATED STREAM FLOWS OF Ti!E NEOSl!O RIVER FROM '1964 TO 1977 ~ ~ (All Values ~in Cubic Feet per Second) RECORDED DISCHARGES AT RECORDED D' SCI!ARGES AT BURLINGTON, KANSAS IOLA, KANSAS (RM 332.4) (RM 284.4) Monthly Mar.imum Minimum Date of Monthly Maximum Minimum Date o- ' Month Average-Daily Daily Min. Flow Average Daily Daily Min.Flf Oct. 1,774 13,400 2.8 10/2/74 '2,284 29,500 25 10/16/66 N:v. 1,397 13,400 29 11/30/66 1,897 24,900 27 11/2/66 Dec. 1,005 6,240 14 12/31/66 1,316 15,200 21 12/31/66 'J9n. 951 < 7,180 14 1/10/67 1,339 12,800 14 1/12/67 Pcb. 1,024 - 12,400 21 2/11/67 1,299-14,200 18 2/M/67 13 Mar. 1,461 15,100 20' 3/18/67 2,035 22,100 15 25 3/M/67 Apr. 2,002 14,000 30 4/2/67 2,633 30,200 38 ~. 17 4/12/77 May 2,433 12,200 21 5/24/70 2,758 15,100 40 5/23-28/67 June 4,080 14,700 '31 6/22/70 5,314 26,100 68 ~ 6/30/66 July 2,884 13,000 18 7/19/73 3,412 29,500 37 7/15/66 Aug 532 9,750 2.0 8/31/76 698 11,100, 31 8/31/66 Ssp 930 11,900 5.9 9/30/74 1,495 24,100 19 9/4/76 Sources: U.S. Geological Survey (1969) and U.S. Department of the Interior (1966-1977). Note: Period of record is from September 1, 1964 through September 30, 1977. Regulated storage of the John Redmond Reservoir began on l - September 1, 1964; flow at regulated by the reservoir _ since 1963;the Burlington gauge has been completely flow at the gauge near Iola has reflected considerable regulation since 1963. l e s

t L NRC '0UESTION. 24 0.10- (ER) (2. 4 ) Provide a description of,the analysis used to determine the-runoff into Wolf Creek CoolingLLake for the-cooling lake simulation study; De' scribe the gaged basins used to extrap-olate flows for. Wolf. Creek including location, size period rof record, whether the streams are effluent.or influent, and-any adjustments made.other than for drainage area. ' Response: Since. Wolf Crock is ungaged, no. records of-stream flows-are

available.

Streamflow data for the Wolf Creek were synthesized from the U.S. Geological Survey records for the following gaging stations: Drainage Area -Period of Gaging Station (sq. mi.) Record Used 1. Neocho River at Council Grove, Es. 250 1938-1977 2. Neosho River at Americus, Ks. 622 1963-1977 3. Neosho River at Strawn, Ks. 3015 ^ '1922-1963 4. Neosho River at Burlington, Ks. 3042 1962-1977 5. -Neosho River at Iola, Ks. 3818 1917-1977 6. Virdigris River at Madison, Ks. 181 1955-1976 All the above stations are located adjacent to the Wolf Creek drainage area and the available data is adjusted to correlate with the creck's drainage area. The average intensity of streamflow at the gaging stations was applied to the drainage area of Wolf Creek to obtain the runoff into Wolf Creek cooling lake. No adjustments are made other than for drainage area. The Neosho River and' Wolf Cptek are characterised as effluent streams in ER(OLS) Section 2.4.1.2 4 7 6 t ,n, ~. -e....,

.t NRC ~ 0unation ' 240.li -(EN) (3.3) : I' Justify the conservatism of the estimates of Wolf _ Creek Cooling Lake-scepage, c'vaporation, and inflow that have'been used as input

to.the' consumptive water use-analysis and cooling lake drawdown studies.

' Response:- -Seepage The maximum seepage estimated from the cooling lake and through'the cooling lako-dam is 0.102 cfs, when the lake level is at the normal operating. level of 1087.0-feet MSL. (See Section 2.4.2.4.2 and Table 2.4-10of ER(OLS) and'Section 2.5.6.6.1 of FSAR.) A seepage of.3.5 cfs st.the lake level of 1087.0 feet MSL was used in the cooling lake analysis.- The use of the higher seepage of 3,5 cfs is conservative because, during drought conditions (August 1952 through ~May 1957), the~ higher seepage would force the cooling lake to operate at more severe conditions, greater-lake drawdown and higher lake temperatures. Evaporation The evaporation-predicted by LAKET are based on the most-accurate predicted method available from published sources and experimental studies listed below. Patrick Ryan_and Donald Harleman, "An Analytical and Experimental Study or Transient Cooling Pond Behavior," MIT Report No. 161, 1973. D. K. Brady, W. L. Graves and J. C. Geyer, " Surface Heat Exchange at Power Plunt Cooling Lakes", Cooling Water Studies for Edison Electric Institute, Report No. 5, John Hopkins University, November 1969. B. A. Tichenor and A. G. Christianson, " Cooling Pond Temperature vs. Size and Water Loss", presented at ASCE National Water Resources Enginec~ ring Meeting, Phoenix, Arizona, January 1971. Inflows The inflows into Wolf Creek cooling lake are estimated as described in response to 0240.10 (2.4). The estimated flows are shown in Tabic 2.4-22 of the FSAR. During the historic drought period of 1952-1957, for a period of six consecutive months (September 1956 to February 1957), the flows are l negligibly small. Also for the 7 month period, from August 1953 to February 1954, the flow is less than 0.2 cfs. Therefore, it can be concluded that the inflows used in the analysis are conservative. l l 9

i. .c 0240.12 Provide detailed stratigraphic sections used for (ER) seepage calculations along the scepage sectors (2.4) shown on Figure 2.4-17. These sections should clearly, identify the various stratigraphic members, their length, thickness, and elevations; and the location of wells or streams intersecting these membe rs in the vicinity of the plant. Photo copies of sections plotted for Table 2.4-10 calcu-lations are acceptable. R240.12 The detailed stratfgraphic sections are attached. The same stratigraphic se ct ior.s, as well as other supporting technical information, were previously provided as written testimony on Contention I-2 during the earlier environmental hearings (Con-struction Permit Stage ).

Q240.13 Calculate the radiological consequences of a li-(ER) quid pathway release from a postulated core melt (7.1) accident. The analysis should

assume, unless otherwise justified,-that there has been a pene-tration of the reactor basemat by the molten core mass, and that a substantial portion of radioac-tively contaminated sump water was released to the ground.

Doses should be compared to those calcu-lated in the Liquid Pathway Generic Study (NUREG-0440, 1978). Provide a summary of your analysis procedures and'the values of parameters used (such as permeabilities, gradients, populations affected, -water use). It is suggested that meetings with the staff of the Hydrologic Engineering.Section be arranged so that we may share with you the body of information necessary to perform this analysis. R240.13 The requested analysis to calculate the radiolog-ical consequences of a liquid pathway release from a postulated core melt accident will be performed. The analysis will be conducted in accordance with guidance received from the NRC staff. The results of the analysis will be provided to the NRC in the form of a revision to the Environmental Report (OLS) in the near future.

1 NRC Qunstions 240.14(EM(2.4) and 240.15(ER) (5;7) j i Question 240.14 Descriptions of floodplains, as required'by Executive Order 11988, Floodplain Management, have not been provided. The definition used in the Executive Order is:- Floodplain: The low 2and and relatively flat areas adjoining inland.and coastal waters including floodprone areas of offshore islands, including at a minimum that area subject to a one percent or greater. chance of flooding in any given year. (a) Provide descriptions of the floodplains adjoining the Neosho River, Wolf Creek and Wolf Creek Cooling Lake adjacent to the site. On a suitable scale map (s) provide delineations of those areas that will be' flooded during the one percent (100 year) and.2 percent (500 year) chance floods both before and after plant construction. (b) Provide details of the methods used to. determine the floodplains in response to a. above. Include your assumptions of and bases for the pertinent parameters used in the computation of F.he one percent flood flow and water elevation. If studies approved by the Federal Insurance Administration (FIA) are available for the site and adjoining-area, the details of the analysis used in the reports need not be supplied. You can instead provide the reports from which you obtained the floodplain information. (c) Identify, locate on a map and describe all structures and topographic alterations in the floodplains. Question 240.15 (a) Discuss the hydrologic effects of all items icentified in response to question 14c. Discuss the alteration in flood flows in Wolf Creek below Wolf Creek Cooling Lake. Determine the effect of the cooling lake on the 50, 10, 1, and.2 percent chance floods (2 year, 10 year, 100 year, and 500 year floods) in Wolf Creek below the cooling lake. Expected reservoir water level and storage and the time of the storm should be taken into account. (b) Provide details of your analysis used in response to a. above.

Response

These two Questions (240.14 and 240.15) ion of the Neosho River b, sin are interrelated. Therefore a ctenon response is provided. A descript a and Wolf Creek watershed is given in Section 2.4.1.2 of the ER(OLS) and Section 2.4.1.2 of the FSAR for the Wolf Creek Generating' Station (WCGS). 240.14/240.15-1 l ~.

Tha flood prone croa, the crea flooded due toa 100-year flood, in thJ vicinity of the cite prior to the construction of the WCGS cnd its facilitics is shown in Figure 1. The flood prone area is taken from Flood Hazard Boundary Maps for Coffey County, developed by the Federal Insurance Administration, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, dated August 1977. Maps showing the area flooded by a 500-year flood are not ~ developed by the FIA and, hence, are not available. However, a Standard Project Flood (SPF) was developed for the Wolf Creek coc~.ing lake and is presented below. The f ar'ilities for WCGS, which may potentially alter the flood plains of the streams in the site area are the coolina lake dam, the makeup water screenhouse on the Neosho river below John Psahond dan, the circulating water screenhouse and discharge structure, the makeup discharge structure and the offsite roads and railroad track. All these facilities are identified in Figure 2. The circuluting water screenhouse, discharge structure and the makeup discharge structure are built along the shoreline of the cooling lake and will have negligibic effect on the Wolf Creek floodplain. A description of other facilities and their potential effects on the flood plains of the streams is given below. Floods in Cooling Lake A cooling lake was developed for WCGS by constructing a dam across Wolf Creek. The 100-year flood level in the cooling lake is estimated to be 1089.8 MSL. The flood prone areas above the dam due to a 100-year flood before and after the construction of the dam are shown in Figure 2. The boundaries of the property owned by the applicant are also shown in Piqure 2. The area covered by the 100-year flood in the cooling lake is well within the property boundaries (Figure 2). Beyond the property boundary in the upper reaches of Wolf Creek, the 100-year flood in the cooling lake does not affect the flood prone area which existed prior to construction of the main dam. The 500-year flood was not generated for the Wolf Creek cooling lake. However, a standard project flood (SPF) was developed for WCGS and is discussed in Section 2.4 of the FSAR. The cooling lake level during a SPF is estimated to be at an elevation of 1091.7 feet "SL and the area potentially flooded due to SPF would be within the property boundaries. The complete description of the development of flood hydrographs (100-year flood, and SPF) with and without the cooling lake is given in Section 2.4 of the PSAR. These flood hydrographs ure presented in Figures 2.4-17 and 2.4-19 of the FSAR. Floods in Wolf Creek Below Cooling Lake Dam The peak flood flows in Wolf Creek below the cooling lake will be considerably smaller, compared to the peak flood flows prior to the construction of the cooling lake due to the storage capacity of the cooling lake,availabic above the lake normal 240.14/240.15-2

opsrcting level of'1087.0 foot MSL. The peak flood flows.iti Wolf Crcok below'the cooling lake for 2-year, 10-year, 100-year and standard project floods were obtained by-routing the respective flood hydrographs through-the cooling lake and over the service and auxiliary spillways. The~ description of the spillways and the flood routing procedure are described in detail in Section 2.4 of the FSAR. The starting elevation in the cooling lake was assumed to be at the service spillway crest level of 1088.0 feet MSL though a part of the flocd could be absorbed by the storage capacity available between the normal operating level of 1087.0 feet . MSL and spillway crest level. Table 1 presents the peak flood flows in Wolf Creek downstream of~the cooling lake dam together with peak flows during preconstructicn condition without the cooling lake. The' table clearly shows that the post-construction peak flood' flows are much lower than the corresponding preconstruction flood. peaks. Hence, the flooding of the areas below Wolf Creek dam due to Wolf Creek flood flows is much reduced after the construction of the cooling lake. Makeup Screenhouse The makeup screenhouse was built downstream of the stilling basin for John Redmond' dam spillway, and on the east bank of the discharge channel. Figures 3.4-4, 3.4-5, and 3.4-6 (Er.(OLS ) ) ' show the general arrangement and location of the makeap screenhouse. The screenhouse is built on the east bank of the discharge channel and as can be seen from Figure 2, its encroachmen', into 100-year flood zone is.very little. Hence, the additional flooding in the Neosho River below the John Redmond dam, due to the makeup screenhouse, is negligible. I Offsite Roads and Railroad Track' The offsite roads and railroad track are shown in Figure 2...The offsite railroad track crosses Long Creek, Scott Creek, Crooked Creek and Taucket Creek. Suitable bridge and culvert openings are provided wherever the roads and track cross the creeks. W 240.14/240.15-3

4

• ~

' y. ( yo?o.I Alf)^@b TABLE I + PEAK FLOOD FLOWS IN WOLF CREEK (Below Cooling Lake Dam) ~ Recurrence Peak Flow-Peak Flow Maximum Cooling ' Interval (Natural . (With' cooling -Lake Water y..* (Years) Condition) . lake) Level-(cfs) (cfs) (fect M.S.L.) 3,725

• 290 1088.78

+.. 2 -3. 10_ 5,941 497 1089.31 2 100 8,363' 928 3089.80 3 ~ 20,00'O 4,188 1091.70 4 SPF ~~ it O e g

-13 290.0~ gRONMENTAL ENGINEERING BRANCH Q290.1 Der ribe any changes in the routing of the trans-(ER) mission 'line corridors since the ER-OL (Sec. 3.9). (3.9) What. is the current state' of completion (ER-OL Sec. 3.9)? R290.1 Wolf Creek-Rose Hill Transmission.line (345-kV) No changes to route, to be completed in 1983. Wolf Creek-Craig Transmission line (345 kV) -- The s Wolf Creek-Craig line has been changed and will terminate at a new substation West Gardner. The La Cygne-Craig transmission line will be inter-cepted and brought through the West Gardner sub-station where a ring bus arrangement will be used to connect these lines to the Wolf Creek 345 kV line. The West Gardner Substation will have three 345 kV lines (Wolf Creek-West

Gardner, West Gardner-Craig, and West Gardner-La Cygne).

Term-inating the 345 kV Wolf Creek line at West Gardner will result in saving approximately 14 miles of 345.kV line. The transmission line. corridor from Wolf Creek to West Gardner has not changed. Wolf Creek-West Gardner is to be completed in 1983. no change. Wolf Creek-Benton transmission line Completed in 1976. Wolf Creek-La Cygne transmission line - no change. Completed in 1976. Wolf Creek tap of Athens-Burlington transmission line - no change. Completed in 1975. Wolf Creek to Cof fey County REC transmission line - no change. Completed. 1 l

Q290.2 Give. details on the present status of the railroad .(ER) spur routing and have there.been-ani changes since l (3.9) the FES-CP Sec. ~ 3.9? R290.2 a.~ Railroad Spur Route: The route of the completed railroad spur is shown-on drawing S-300. b. . Changes since FES-CP Section 3.9: .The right-of-way for the 'of fsite railroad spur varies from a width =of 60 feet to 180 feet. i-a-

a s Q290.3[ . ita s the water. _ pipeline been completed and have (ER) there been any changes in the proposed route (FES-(3'.9) CP Sec. 3.9)? R290.3 a. The _. cons truction of the makeup. water pipeline is complete. b. The route of the existing pipeline varies from the proposed route shown in FES-CP Section 3.9 at the makeup water screen house (Corp s of Engineers property) and at the makeup water discharge struc- .ture (KG&E property). The existing route of the- . pipeline is shown on drawings S-1, M-84, M-85, M-86 and M-87.

0290.'4 - What.. are the current plans for recreational and . (ER)- agricultural land ' use on site when WCGS becomes ~ (3.9) operational? R290.4 No, changes ' will result ~ in recreational land use ~ when WCGS becomes operational because there are ~~ 'no plans to open the lake. for public recreational use as described in Section 2.8. I Land owned by, the applicants is ' presently being utilized - for agricultural purposes. It is the applicants' policy to lease.such lands when such leasing is consistent-with prior commitments and does not interfere with the future ' operation of WCGS. No change. from this policy is anticipated when WCGS goes into operation..Section 2.8 also. describes this land use policy for land adjacent 'to 'the' cooling lake and inside the WCGS site boundary. F d k l 4 c l l l l i l.. I

q Q290.5 ~ What mitigative measures will be taken by the (ER). applicant- (or other agencies) for the protection of_ bald and golden eagles that may be attracted to the cooling lake? This is in regards to both pro-tection from plant operation and structures and from' recreational users of the cooling lake. R290.5 Because the construction of the WCGS cooling lake will create habitat favorable for wintering Bald Eagles, mitigative measures have been taken for the protection of these endangered raptors. The Golden Eagle, since it occurs only rarely in this part of the state (Schwilling,_ Pers. Comm) would be of lesser concern. Management conside rations and their corresponding mitigative measures for Bald Eagles include: 1. Potential Hazards A. Hume.n disturbance The WCGS cooling lake is closed to the public and there-fore human dis tu rbance of Bald Eagles roosting or feeding on the cooling lake will be minimized. B. Shooting Shooting is the most preva-lent single cause of death among Bald Eagles (Coon et al. 1970). Restriction of public access will minimize the inci-dence of eagle shootings on the WCGS cooling lake. C. Electrocution Electrocutions occur when an eagle, or other bird, with a wide wing span makes simultaneous con-tact with any two phase conductors or with a phase conductor and a ground wire. Powerlines with electrical ratings over 69 kv do not present a hazard because of wide line spacing. On powe rlines with ratings of 69 kv or less, crossarr type distribution poles are the most likely to be involved with electrocutions (Ansell et al. 1980). The distribution poles used on the 69 kv line near the WCGS cooling lake are not the crossarm type. 2. Food Supply Wintering Bald Eagles feed primarily on crip-pled or healthy waterfowl and winter-killed

or. live fish. They also feed on other water-birds, upland game and small mammals. All of these food sources are available on or near the WCGS cooling lake. Wintering Bald Eagles 3. Vegetative Habitats usually perch in large trees that are adja-cent to foraging areas and provide protection from the wind (Griffin et al. 1980, Steenhoff et al. 1980). Modifications of the initial cooling lake basin clearing plan were made to increase the amount of standing timber left in the upper porticus of the lake. Fuch c:eas will probably be utilized as perch sites. In addition, small stands of trees left at va rious locations around the lake will also provide excellent perch sites. It is also quite likely that Baffle Dikes A and B will be utilized for perching and foraging. This variety of potential perch sites should reduce usage of power poles for perching. 4. Avifauna Surveys - Surveys of the WCGS cool-ing lake have been initiated by the Applicant to determine the amount of Bald Eagle usage and identify any developing problems. Sur-veys are conducted on a semi-monthly basis during the months of January-April and Sep tembe r-Decembe r. Three ground surveys (each at a different time of day) are con-ducted during each half-month period. Aerial surveys of both the WCGS cooling lake and John Redmond Reservoir will be conducted on a monthly basis beginning in September, 1981. REFERENCES

Ansell, A.

R., and W. E. Smith, 1980, Raptor Pro-tection Activities of the Idaho Power Company in Workshop on Raptors and Energy Develop-

ments, R.

H. Howard and J. F. Gore, ed. p. 56-70.

Coon, N.

C., L. N.

Locke, E.

Cromartie and W. L. Reichel, 1970, Causes of Bald Eagle Mortality, J. Wildl. Dis. 6(1):70-76.

Griffin, C.

R., T. S. Baskett and T. S.

Sparrowe, 1980, Bald Eagles and the Manacement Program at Swan Lake National Wildlife Refuge in Trans.

45th North Am.

Wild, and Nat.

Re-sources Conf.

d k Schwilling, M., Non-gario, Thraatened and Endanger-ed: Project Leader, Kansas Fish and Ganc, 1981, Personal Communication. Steenhoff, K., S. S. Berlinger and L. H. Fredrick-

son, 1980,. Habitat' Use by Wintering Bald Eagles in South ' Dakota, _

J. Wildl. Manage. 44(4):798-805. l' e l

6l } V I / l j W ""Q290.6 Was the crawfish. frog observed in the area to be (ER) inundated by the: cooling lake mudflat area? If so, are there:other preferred habitat areas within the area that~ currently maintain -a localized popula-tion of thir species? 'R290.6 Records exist which document the occurrence of the northern crayfich frog (Rana areolata) for twelve eastern Kansas counties, including Coffey County. Although thcre was a single observation of this species in.1976 on the mudflats of John Redmond Reservoir, there have been no observations made of the crayfish frog on the WCGS site. While the lack of observations for this species.on site does not entirely' rule out the possibility of their . occurrence, it dces indicate that no la rge colon--

ies, similar to those referenced by Collins (1974), exist on site.

REFERENCE

Collins, J.

T., 1974, Amphibiane and Reptiles in Kansas, Univ. of Kans. Museurr. of Natl. Hist., Publ. Ed. Ser. No. 1, 283 p. 3-,,

,4-t - Q290'.7 Ilas.the baseline _ terrestrial ecology been done for (ER) the - proposed - ROWS? Please provide-the. data. R290.7 No baseline terrestrial ecology data has been col-lected-for the, transmission line right-of-ways N During the ER(CPS).no commitments were made by the Applicant and no recommendations were made by the-Commission in the WCGS Final Environmental State-ment to perform such monitoring. Consequently, there-are. no plans to perform ROW monitoring, t i 1 W Ndw - * - -*+ ? --e-r-N T

Q290.8 IIave there been any changes in the site boundaries? (ER) Where'are they? R290.8 The site. Soundary was changed in a few minor ways between:that described in the Environmental Report Construction Permit Stage (ER[ CPS]) and the Environmental Report-Operating. License Stage (ER[OLS]). Figure 2.1-8 of the ER(CPS) and 2.1-6 of the ER(OLS) should be compared to show the changes. The changes resulted in less property being purchased for WCGS_ proper. The nominal acreage within the site boundary in the ER(CPS) was 10,500 acres and the actual amount purchased was 9,818 acres. The. specific changes are: - Sections 13 and 24, T21S-R15E -- Boundary moved east to section line; - Section 30, T21S-R16E -- Boundary moved north to half-se^ tion line (See revised ER(OLS) Figure 2.1-6); Section 17, T21S-R16E -- Bounda ry excludes NW. 40 acres (See revised ER(OLS) Figure 2.1-6); Section 9, T21S-R16E -- Boundary mcVed west - to section line; and - Section 36, T20S-R15E -- Boundary moved west to follow lake contour. 1 I l

Q290.9 Ilow many hectares on site are grazed. prairie and (ER)- how many are old farmland? -R290.9 In. answering this question, grazed prairie was understood to-be grasslands in-which the sod has never been tilled, and old farmland was interpret-ed as land that was once cultivated and has since been returned to grass. There are an estimated 626 hectares of grazed prairie and 72 hectares of old farmland that are above clovation 1087 and within.the site boundary. Information concerning demography of land below elevation 1087 is given in Section 4.1.1 of the.ER (CPS).

0290.10: -Provide a Table'similar to. Table 3.9-1 indicating (ER).. the percentage of prime and unique farmlands-onsite. .(2.1.3) R290.10, 'IABLE 290.10 PRIE AND UNIQUE FARMLANDS O' N WCGS SITE Prime Unique 'Ibtal Percent Farmland Farmland Acres Prime & Unique Onsite 7,756 acres O acres 9,818 79%

• The total. acreage is based on field inspection sheets and is an estimate.

Exact acreage of prime farmland can be supplied upon issuance of the US Soil Conservation Service Master Soil Map of Coffey County. J

Q290.11 Provide an update of the listing of Rare and En-i (ER) dangered Species. (2.2.1) R290.11 One_ species, the Bald Eagle, named on the official list of threatened and endangered species for the United States (U.S. Dept. of Interior, 1979) and classified as' endangered by the state of Kansas, was observed on a near the WCGS site. No other species on the federal list has been observed du ing monitoring activities. One species listed on the state of Kansas endan-gered species

list, the Neosho madtom (Noturus has been collected during monitoring placidus),.

It has been collected consis-activitics'at WCGS. tently at two Neosho River locations since 1978. Two bird, one fish, and one amphibian species classified as threatened by the state of Kansas have been collected or observed near UCGS. The prairie f alcon was observed in 1979 and again in 1981 as a winter resident. The least tern was observed at John Redmond Reservoir (JRR) in 1977. The blue suckar has censistently been collected at several Neosho River locations since 1978. This species has been collected at JRR (Location 1) most frequently. The northern crayfish frog has been obse rved only once on the JRR mudflats in 1976. The bobcat, a species previously listed as endan-gered (federally), has been observed by tracks in the north floodtlain area in 1977 during moni-toring and in 1980 as an incidental siting by site pe rsonnel. The following list includes those species classi-fied as endangered or threat med by the state of Kansas. ENDANGERED WILDLIFE IN KANSAS 1. Black-footed Ferret Mustela nigripes 2. Gray Bat Myotis grisescens 3. Peregrine Falcon Falco peregrimus 4. Whooping Crane Grus americana 5. Eskimo Curlew Numenius borealis 6. Bald Eagle

• llaliacetus leucocephalus 7.

Neosho Madtom

• Noturus placidus 8.

Pallid Sturgeon Scaphirhynchus albus 9. Sicklefin Chub Ilybopsis meeki 10. Central Newt Notophtalmus viridescens louisianensis

11.- Gro'tto Salamander .Typhlotriton spelaeus - 12. Gray-bellied Salamander Eurycea multiplicata griscogaster 13. Cave Salamander Eurycea.lucifuga 14. Small Amphibious Snail Pomatiopsis lapidaria 15.. Warty-backed Mussel. Quadrula nodulata ~ 16.. Heel-splitter Mussel Anodonta suborbiculata THREATENED WILDLIFE IN KANSAS - 1. Prairie Falcon

• Falco mexicanus 2.

Least Tern

• Sterna albifrons 3.

Blue Sucker

• Cycleptus elongatus

- 4. Arkansas Darter Estheostoma cragini 5. Topeka Shiner Notropis topeka

6..

Alligator Snapping Macroclemys temmincki Turtle 7. Northern Crawfish Prog

• Rana areolata circulosa 8.

Riffle Beetle Optioservus phaeus

• Found on or near WCGS site I

m ~

Q290.12 Provide a discussion on the potential short-term (ER) and long-term ef fects of electric fields on humans (5.5) and describe the grounding procedures to be util-ized to prevent primary and secondary shocks. .R290.12 Electric utilities commonly employ various ground-ing practices and techniques as simple and highly ef fective methods for keeping induced voltages and currents from having harmful effects. All trans-mission lines associated with Wolf Creek are 345 kV - or less. Transmission at these voltages is called EllV (extra high voltage) transmission. When electric utilities began building UIIV (ultra high voltage) transmission lines (greater than 500 kV) in the 1960's the potential for increased effect on humans was recognized and studied. One study conducted by American Electric Power during 1962-1972 with the assistance of the John ilopkins medical group' studied electrostatic field -effects on the human body (Scherer, et al. un-dated). One of the objectives of the study was to determine if the electric field could cause either short or long-term effects on human health. Medical examination was mada on 11 linemen who performed live line maintenance at 345 kV using both barehand and hot-stick methods. The medical study consisted of opthamological, otolarynogo-

logical, urological, and neuro-psychiatrial as well as physical and laboratory examinations.

The nine year continuous study revealed no effects in their health resulting from exposure to high volt-age lines. No evidence of any malignancy, or changes in physical, mental, or emotional states were found. Numerous other studies have also been completed or are ongoing. EPRI collected and reviewed this information and published two reports summarizing the biological effects of high-voltage electric fields (EPRI RP381, 1975; EPRI EA-1123, 1979). The 1975 report concluded and the 1979 report con-firms the conclusion that it is highly improbable that electric ficids from transmission lines have any significant biological effects on healthy in-dividuals who encounter such ficids in a normal way under normal conditions. Iloweve r, the reports also relate that there may be subtle and as yet un-detected effects of such electric fields. Further studies to determine if other effects exist are presently being conducted.

Years of operating experience have indicated that with proper grounding EliV and UliV transmission lines pose no hazard to the health and well being - of humans. - Grounding techniques. employed by KG&E and KCPL include for. 345 kV lines: 1. Static wires-overhead of the lines; 2. Ground wires on wcoden structures; 3. Ground rods on wooden or steel struc-tures,- if

required, to limit ground resistance to 10 ohms or less; 4.

' Fences grounded at 1/4 _ mile intervals that run parallel to the line or within 200

feet, of the center line; 5.

Fences that cross the line grounded 50 feet on each side of the center line for KG&E and 80 feet for KCPL; and 6. Minimum ground clearance of 30 feet in open country and higher elsewhere. These features limit the potential shock hazard to secondary or imperceptible shocks well below the painful shock or let-go shock threshold. REFERENCES + EPRI RP 381, 1975, Biological Effects of fligh-Voltage Electric Fields. EPRI EA-1123, 1979,. Biologica1 Effects of liigh Voltage Electric Fields: An Update.

Scherer, Jr.,

II. N., and B. J. Ware, Undated, Environmental Effects of Ifigh Voltage Trans-

mission, American Electric Power Service Corporation.

~ L - -,, ~ - -

et 4' -Q290.13 Provide a discussion of the potential. problems of (ER) seasonal' waterfowl impacting the proposed trans-(5.5) mission lines bordering the Wolf Creek Cooling Lake. R290.13 There is no doubt that birds collide with trans-mission lines and that populations utilizing Wolf Creek Cooling ' Lake (WCCL).!ill be susceptible-to such collisions. However, the potential for such collisions can be greatly reduced through a wide variety of mitigative measures (Thompson, 1978). Preventive measures taken by 1 the Applicant to reduce the potential for transmission line colli-sions include siting of lines, tower design and prevention of fright / flight collision potential. 1. Initial siting of lines only a small percentage of the existing 345 and 69.kV transmission lines pass over WCCL. In the arcas where crossings occur standing timber should help to reduce the potential hazard. Standing timber will reduce the cles;ance between lines and the land config-

r. ration, thereby channeling the birds over.

the lines. In some cases, existing lines. paralleled each other thereby clustering the corridors to reduce collision potential. Two additional 345 kV lines are to be con-structed to transmit power from WCGS. n ~ '- enter the area from the east, with one iro-veling to the West Gardner substation in a NNE direction and the other going down the east. side of WCCL then west to the Rose Hill substation. The Wolf Creek-Rose Hill line is positioned close to the existing 69 kV line. Paralleling these lines should reduce colli-sion potential. l 2. Tower Design B.' reducing the number of horizontal planes I formsi by powerlines, the collisions involv-ing ficcks flying through the lines will be i reduced. The existing 345 kV lines at WCGS have both two plane and three plane sections. l The new 345 lines will have two horizontal planes. l

i '3 Prevention of Fright / Flight: Reactions l The WCGS cooling lake is closed to public access. By restricting human disturbance and

hunting, nortality due to collisions when birds are' startled or distracted will be minimized..

4. Surveys . Surveys of the WCGS cooling lake have been initiated by the Applicant in. order to deter-mine the amount of waterfowl usage and iden-tify any developing trends. Surveys are conducted on a semi-monthly basis during the months of January-April and September-December. Three ground surveys (each at'a different time of day) are conducted during each t.alf-month period. Aerial surveys of both the WCGS cooling lake and John Redmond Reservoir will be conducted on a monthly basis beginning in September, 1981. 4 4 .J

291.0 ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING' BRANCH Q291.1 Provide-the following information on the lime ( ER). sludge pond: a. Location on the station eite, including the distance from the pond wall to the cooling lake; b. Major diversions; c. Materials of construction; d. Need for and frequency of clearout and ulti-mate disposal of wastes removed; e. Estimated seepage rate from the pond into the groundwater; f. Estimated composition and flow' rate of ef flu-ent from the pond into the cooling lake. R291.1 a. The lime sludge pond is located north of the switch yard and west of the meteorological tower (see Figure 2.4-14). With the cooling lake at normal operating pool level (elevation 1987.0 ft), the distance from the base of the lime sludge pond to the cooling lake will be approximately 50 feet, b. The lime sludge pond has two dive rsions, a sluice structure and an emergency spillway. The spill height for the sluice structure is at elevation 2003'5" and for the emergency spillway at 2004'. c. The lime sludge pond is unlined and has been con-structed by excavating the existing grade of the pond area to a maximum height for the bottom of 1997.5' elevation. The excavated soil (inorganic cohesive soil) was used to build the dikes around the pond. The dike slopes are 3:1, vertical to horizontal. Dike slopes are covered with either four inches of seeded topsoil or twelve inches of filter type II covered by twelve inches of riprap class facin. a d. The lime sludge pond is sized to contain all the influent from the lime softener blowdown, carbon and sand filter backwash, and regenerative waste for 2 units in operation and 40 years of plant life. The resulting lime sludge pond size is 180 acro-ft with an average depth of 7.8 ft and cor-responding surface area of 1 million square feet.

a 1 R291.1 ~ Cont'd e. The seepage rate from the lime sludge pond is ex-pected to be less than 10 gpm assuming upper, bound permeability values for underlying soil and rock formations and will probably be less than.1 gpm. The runof f into the lime sludge pond will be neg-ligibly small due to dikes on three sides and a intercepting drainage ditch on the fourth side. f. At the end of 40 years of plant operation, the sludge accumulated in the lime sludge pond for 2 units in operation is estimated to be 19 acre-ft and approximately 1 f t deep (for the influent val-ues listed in Figure 3.3-1 of.the ER(OLS); values are doubled for 2 units in operation). The re-mainder of the lime sludge pond (161 acro-ft and 6.8 ft depth) at - the end of 40 years will still have sufficient capacity to accommodate the worst rainfall. The 100 year-24 hour rainfall in the vicinity of the Wolf Creek Station is only 8 inches (U.S. Commerce ' Weather Bureau, Technical Paper No. 40). Also, the lime sludge pond volume will have sufficient capacity to accommodate the worst recorded wet years (from the Chanute, Kansas weather data used in the LAKET analysis) from 1949 to 1951 (typically, on an annual average basis, the precipitation rate in the Wolf Creek Station area is lower than the natural evaporation rate). These three consecutive wet years would increase the sludge pond water level by only 2.5 ft, leaving 4.3 ft margin in the lime sludge pond (the 1 ft sludge accumulation included). The spillway in the lime sludge pond was origin-ally designed for use during heavy rainfalls. Ilow-

ever, with reduced demineralized makeup water design demand and thus, the corresponding reduc-tien in pretreatment and demineralizer wastes (reduced lime softeners blowdown, carbon and sand filter

backwash, and regenerative waste),

the spillway is no longer required even during the heaviest of rainfalls as discussed previously. I

t NRC Ouestion 291.2 (ER) (3.6) (a) Provide a complete description of-the model used to calculate the allowable blowdown limits; (b) Indicate the values used for the diffusion parameters and t flow velocities in these calculations. Describe the model assumptions made in these calculations; (c) The data given in the e,-ER imply that the concentrati~ ohs of TDS, SOj and Cl in the blowdown are the same a.m those in the cooling lake. However, such factors as incompleto diffusion or mixing of solutes or concentration stratification in the cooling lake might make the blowdown solute concentration different from that of the lake as a whole. Indicate whether such factors have been considered and, if so, what analysis has been made. (d) Provide tNe basiF of or the source (s) for the criteria for TDS, SO] and Cl cited for the Neosho River. Response (a,b): d .The following is a brief description of the analysis and results for the dispersion of blowdown discharge from Wolf Creek lake in the Neosho River. The TDS concentration distribution in the Neosho River is analyzed with a steady state'disporrion model assuming the effluent discharge as a point continuous source on one of the banks of the river. The dispersion in the vertical and transverse directions of the river is considered. The longitudinal dispersion is neglected as it will be lower in comparison with the convection due to the ambient velocity of the river. The velocity in the river cross-section is assumed constant and an equivalent rectangular cross-section of the river is assumnd for computation. The.following equation is used to find the concentration under steady state conditions: "*E ~ + 4n zX in which: C = Concentration at any point in the river C = Effluent concentration g O = Rate of flow of effluent g U = Average velocity of flow in the cross-section = Dispersion coefficients in the y and z directions Dy,Dg O X = Longitudinal distance Y = Lateral distance 291.2-1

r_ Z = Vertical distance As the model is for unbounded channel, the effect of boundaries of the channel are taken care of by using method of images. The dispersion coefficients were calculated from the following empirical equations developed for natural streams (Ref. 1). -3.547 + 1.378 log h Equation 2 log hf = Z -8.1 + 1.558 lo9' Equation 3 log = y in which: B = Top width of flow in river H = Hydraulic depth of flow v = Kinematic viscosity of water Different combinations of Neosho River dischargo, blowdown discharge and. initial effluent TDS concentration are used in the computations. Figurc 1 is a summary of the results. The maximum flow area in the cross-section along the length of the river which is having a concentration > 500 mg/l (includes 400 mg/l Neosho River ambient TDS concentration) is computed and plotted against the blowdown discharge with Co as a variable. From these curves the blowdown discharges and Co values corresponding to the maximum flow area equal to 25% of the total flow cross-section are picked and plotted on Figure 1 with the Neosno River discharge as a variable. The 25% flow araa is designated as a mixing zone according to Kansas Water Quality Criteria for interstato and intrastate waters of Kansas. The following is used as input for the dispersion calculations: l. An average section of the two surveyed cross-sections, one at the confluence with Wolf Creek and the other 600-feet downstream, is assumed downstream of the confluence of Wolf Creek with Neosho River. The rectangularized cross-section adopted for computation has a width of 92 feet and depth of 9.0 feet for a discharge of 1335 cfs. 2. The average velocity through the river for a discharge of 1335 cfs is computed as 1.6 ft/sec. The bottom slope of the river is obtained from the USGS (Burlington and Leroy Quadrangle Shoots, 7.5 minute series) topographic maps. A Manning's 'n' of 0.05 is assumed in the velocity computations. 291.2-2

~ l 3. The concentrations are computed'at intervals of' distances both laterally-and vertically. 4. The point of. injection'for'this computation is assumed:to be at 5 feet from the bottom. 5., The values of dispersion coefficients used for a river discharge of 1335 cfs are calculated from 1 equations (2) and (3) - and they are: 2 Dy = 0.101'ft /sec 2 Dz = 0.00031 ft /sec s O t p 4 8 h,' e a ? 291.2-3

.c ~l 4 - Response (c): The cooling _' lake water quality _ calculations were based on ~ complete mixing in the cooling'-lake. This issue of using complete; mixing in the' cooling lake. water quality calcu-lations has.been discussed previously.during the Atomic Safety and Licensirig Board hearings (Construction Permit Stage). In this testimony, the NRC staff agreed that the uscLof. complete mixing in the water quality calculations' was valid. - Response (d) : 4 The' Kansas Water Quality Criteria for interstate and intrastate waters of Kansas, approved by Environmental Protection _ Agency August 1978, is used to-establish criteria for TDS, SO4 and Cl-(see.ER(OLS) Section 3.6.2.2). REFERENCE l.

Bansel, M.

K., " Dispersion.in Natural Streams," Journal of' the Hydraulics Division,'ASCE, Vol. 97, No. Hyll, Proc. Paper 8540, November 1971, pp. 1867-1886. e a S 9 4 291.2-4

. c. 9 s. 3 v ()

+. [

3 ]; o a. J ykMi'a 4. ~, .....s. ~ ...}.m g.u.%4 4.aLav 4 f, g ;,h 'l . -kY fh'ff.?-h, f f . h5'$s'f'*Y

If.1

} { 8 .2 jg _. . r s t-M ses << ;~ ..M[ A % D$

r:m 1

gg 0" 0 go J + sN K5: a 4 4y y y n g c (y: sh. i) &;L:k., ..,...- m p m s t$,I,

• Y,,,'

.I;h [I h ff '.'.,\\; * {y'r),~[,'h;( >'.7, "."[.,N' f,,i / If ',, f y-..- 0 .,-4. Au, 1 lI[/ i Dl r, '.%e a b A(' ,q w -o p. ,4 Gm.

• n e

V , $' ( t*[Q ' % * ' , d ', [

• • * / e
• 'ga

'? fp.s# 9 a, " ( ..+1"'** 9) J *: s .{t8), - J (, [ j O MP ' * .ap*eeg gynem,e j: u O ~ e L' ' f /

r 93rt; : >;

e.- ffpy-q g.vy.g.p g c M _ _ __.~_.2,, y,,_. j h

• T?* %

p.%., D. 7-O 'gug 't,w *.4 r. pew TMJQf4p[H 2 -yt# ,R, *;We$, ${t$,$i ?ljg 7ge. ,sp' ' fJ f. h*gg W hi:' t, y,d., -o s ;' % NWW $W' W h ,') L'bll!!% 9 g wl., n a esh- ) a D,;s,1, ;g,,&. a y,. w g.,. c%m..% -n->r r+ g >,ena .f .,r w yg <y y f. Kw p s :~,c 1r- ., :c q ~.- . -9 ,~%w.;y,. + p r~.+ v- . +- >.1 ) s ? .O. h %<) b L s io$ W +be y k sabedNk $4 i j ,? ?*,

• ] *$

f, O ) g ^' (

I

~ Y,,

f a

-. =. Q d g C O O o e 3 o o O G w ~ 6/40 so.l. rwoMota c % h., 8.

• I 4

e

430G C 29 I.L 'Wll6 ~ g t5p.. 'innly!E: les, sir. E' lit'. QUGROFF: 'le:1, sir. 3 C;14IR!U\\i. JENSCi!: Very.tcl.'.. The reflucst of the ' g* j. /, Ra.tulatory Staff counuc1 is granted cnit i.i e previously pro-l 5 pt: red ct:lt iment by Char 12.1: R. T;o2 ton c'en.kisting of five pages-6 riny be ph'/aically incorporated uithin the tran::cript and than y che.ll constitute tentimony in evidence on behalf of the 0 J.M.gulatory S taf f. g { Testimony follmni) 10 11 12 13 14 O 15 - ~ ~6 17 la 19 20 21 r2 ./ 23 24 .dfi P00R 011glyAt I

D

~ c Ut11TED STATUS OF A>!CRICA l c NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0}DlISSION BEFORE Ti!E ATO>!IC SAFETY A!!D LICEt1SI!!C BOARD In the !!atter of ) Q.' ) I '/ KANSAS CAS A!:D ELECTRIC C031PANY ) ./ & KANSAS CITY Potter AND LIGitT ) Docket No. 50-482 ~ C0!!PANY

• )

~. ) (Wolf Crcck Generating Station ) Unit No. 1 )- ~ i j

• SUPPLE!! ENTAL TESTI!!ONY OF CilARLES R. BOSTON IN RESPONSE TO BOARD QUESTIONS I.

~ , DEALING WITil COOLING LAKE UATER QUALITY ~ i 3 s g 6 .9 O 9 e 4 9 '::h 8 P00R ORIGINAL y

1 ) Th; value fo/ maximum TDS in the cooling lake which appears in j the FES, Table 3.8 is the applicant's estipate as indicated in footnote I "c". The staff considered this to bc.a reasonabic estimate and using' this value (1200 ppm) and the highcot value of Neosho River TDS measured by the applicant during the sampling period (326 ppa, 9-11/73, Sampling Point No. 4, ER, Table 2.5 A-2) calculated a concentration factor of 3.7. This. factor was then used to estima.tc the maximum concentration of other chemicals in the cooling lake." The calculation was considered to be reasonably conservative and non-critical to the overall assessment o.f impacts to either the cooling lake (FES, p. 5-34) or the Neosho River (FES, p. 5-27). Most organisms expected to cxist in the cooling lake can tolcrate TDS levels several times higher than the predicted 1200 ppm (FES, Table 5.23). Impacts to the Ucosho River will also be acceptable regard-g, less of TDS levels in the cooling lake since blowdown must meet State water quality criteria which the staff considers to be adequate. .At the request of Dr. Anderson, I have made an independent estimate of the maximum TDS cxpected in the cooling lake using the following assumptions: One unit operating at an annuai averaga plant factor of 75%. Maximum TDS will occur near the end of the period or record . drought (August 1952 to d.pril 1957; 56 months). Zero blowdown during 56 month period (ER, Table 3.3-5). Average makeup during 56 month period of 46.6 cfs (ER, C4 Q.r Table 3.3-1). TDS concentration assumed to be 326 mg/1. Volume of cooling lake will be 111,280 acre-ft. PDDR BRIGINM

j Tha value for; m ximum TDS in the cooling lake which appearc in the FES, Tabic 3.8 is~the applicant's estimate as indicated in footnote "c". The staff considered this to be a reasonabic estimate and using' g. this value (1200 ppm) and the highest value of Neosho River TDS measured by the applicant during the sampling period (326 ppm, 9-11/73, Sampling Point 1 o. 4, ER, Tabic 2.5 A-2), calculated a concentration factor of 3.7. This. factor was then used to estima,te the maximum concentration of other chemicals in the cooling lake.' The calculation was considered to be reasonably conservative and non-critical to the overall assessment o,f impacts to either the cooling lake (FES, p. 5-34) or the Neosho River (FES, p. 5-27). Most organisms expected to m ist in the cooling lake can to1 crate TDS levels several times higher than the predicted 1200 ppa (FES, Tabic 5. 23). Impacts to the Neosho River will also be acceptabic regard-g,, 1 css of TDS 1cycls in the cooling lake since blowdown must ncet State water quality criteria which the staff considers to be adequctc. .At the request of Dr. Anderson, I have made an independent estimate of the maxinum TDS cxpected in the cooling lake using the following assumptions: One unit operating at an annuai average plant factor of 75%. Maximum TDS will occur near the end of the period or record, . drought (August 1952 to April 1957; 56 months). Zero blowdown during 56 month period (ER, Table 3.3-5). Average makeup during 56 month period of 46.6 cfs (ER, A q? l Tabic 3.3-1). TDS concentration assumed to be 326 mg/1. Volume of cooling lake will be 111,280 acre-ft. l ?00R BRIGINAl.

2-o. f g , 3. Wh:rcas hs dominant driving feree for ths establishment . of thermal stratification is density differences, the . l same forces actually oppose chemical stratifiedtion. The t 'nputohsolarandplantvasteheatatthesurfacepromote's h. i I thermal stratification. On the other hand, the input of chemicals at the surface by direct additions and by evapo-concentration effects actually opposes the thermal stratifi-cation' forces. The more concentrated, higher density solutions. near'the surface would tend to sink, thereby enhancing the mixing operation, if we were dealing with concentrated solutions rather than extremely dilute solutions it is con-ceivabic that these forces could overshadow the thermal ' stratification forces. ] 4. Other effects such as diffusion would also reduce the likeli-hood of significant. chemical concentration gradients. i For these reasons one can safely conclude that chemical stratification will occur to a much lesser extent than thermal stratifica' tion and since the phenomenon is seasonal and occurs over a relatively s:nall portion ~ of the lake,'the effect on TDS calculations should not be significant. 0 P00R BRIGINAI. \\

.~ m.- Tabla 3.8. Increass in chemical concentration of effluent to Neo'sho River dus to cooling lake concentration-Maximum Maximum Incremental conecntration in concentration increase in Chemical parameter b Neosho Rivera in cooling lakc Neosho River" (mg/ liter) (mg/ liter) (mg/ liter) ~ Biological oxygen demand '2.7 8.5 1.2 Chemical oxygen.femand 24 77 11 Dissolved oxygen 14.1 ~ ' Sulfate 56 ' .787,e 146 d . ~ Chloride 17.5 56 8 Nitrate as N 1.2 3.8 0.5 ~ ~ Phosphate as P ~ 0.16 0.51 0.07 ~ Total dissolved solids (TDS) 326 120,0* 174 ' g

• ER, Tabic 2.5A-2.

b ~ Based on concentration cycle of 3.2. ~ c Based on minimum river flow of 32 cfs and 8 cfs blowdoln which would be the . ' maximum permissible to meet State standard of 500 mg/ liter for TDS concentration in the' river-. d Based on concentration cycle plus added U SO. 2 4

• ER, Table 3.6-3.

Staff estimates maximum sulfate of 546'mg/ liter and maximum ~ TDS of 1600 mg/ liter. ~ 5 .O u N g RODR BRlGlNAL

mu . ~... Affiant having been first duly sworn, on oath deposes and says: That th'c facts contained herein are true to th'c best of his . knowledge and belief. l I .i ..m ' /.'/yz' . j /:* / / oo c'. . css.4 Subscribed and sworn to before me this 28 day of u./ .1976. s Y M . s g \\ Ih Can.id.1 [g.i s (;9337 g, y; i ........s,.* m t ,,e e 9 e e r P00R BRIGINAL s

A-

w D

..t i NRC Question 291'. 3 (ER) (2. 4)' ~ Outline tne' derivation of the concentrations given in Tabic 3.6-1. Arc-the values for the cooling lake averages over the whole ' lake - are they' steady state values? Discuss why the normal values-for the Redmond Reservoir are so much higher than those 'given in Table 2.4-11.

Response

. Table 3.6-1 lists the chemical constituents of the water in the John Redmond Reservoir and the Wolf Creek cooling lake (for one and.two units in operation) covering a period of 1949 through 1964 which-includes a 2% chance drought. Since the' regulated storage of the John Redmond Reservoir did not begin until September 1,

1964,

the John Redmond Reservoir water quality data in Table 3.6-1 were developed on~the basis of published Neosho River water quality data (obtained from " Water Resources Data for-Kansas," U.S. Geological-Survey and Kansas State Board of Health, Division of Sanitation).

With these Neosho River data as input, the LAKET program was used to predict the total dissolved solids (TDS) levels in the John Redmond Reservoir. The predicted TDS levels in the reservoir provided data for'the calculation of the cycles of concentration (the cycles of concentration is defined as the ratio of the concentration of TDS in the circulating water to that in the makeup water and represents the effect of evaporation on the concentration of dissolved minerals). The concentrations of the other constituents in the water, listed in Table 3.6-1, were then determined by simply increasing these constituents concentrations for the Neosho River by-the cycles of concentration, i.e., cycles of concentration times the concentration of the constituents. The cooling lake water quality data listed in Table 3.6-1 were developed in a similar fashion. The John Redmond Reservoir water . quality data were used as input into LAKET to predict the TDS levels in the cooling lake. The cycles of concentration were then determined which was used to cycle up the other water quality constituents. However, the coolinq lake data includes sulfuric acid addition (for scale control in the mondenser). This means that, with the added acid, the TDS and sulfate levels are increased by nore than the cycles of concentration value, while the alkalinity is reduced due to a lower pH. The effects of acid addition are described in ER(OLS) Section 3.6.2. The Wolf Creek cooling lake water quality data tabulated in Table 3.6-1 worc predicted by the LAKET program based on the conservation of total ~ dissolved solids and water as a function of time. For a given time interval, the cooling lake water quality is assumed constant over the entire lake.(i.e., complete mixing). l The John Redmond Reservoir water quality data given in Table 3.6-1 are different than those given in Table 2.4-11 because the water quality data in Table 3.6-1 are based on a longer time interval r I 291.3-1

p, f(the TDS~ data'are for a period.of 1949 to 1964) than justtthe three , years tabulated-in Table 2.4-11.- This difforence in data base results in higher water quality data values.for the John Redmond- - Reservoir.an'd represents the record period of watcr quality data. ' For'the cooling lake design,.a record period of water quality data - is essential and the use of these higher values are conservative. 0 0 E e 0 e 1 l j.. e I~ t 291.3-2

] -l .Q291.4 Indicate whether' essential' service water is with-(ER)- 1 drawn continuously ~~ or only during an' accident or l shutdown? R291.4 Essential service water (ESW) is not withdrawn continuously:or used during shutdown. ESW is used during accident conditions and for testing. 4 l l - t t l y

. = -. -- .~: .-.~ NRC ' Question 291. 5 (ER) Provide estimates:of the maximum t'otal' residual' chlorine' concentration .(including thaticombined as chloramines ahd. chloro-organics) to > a Ebe/ expected at the. circulating-_ water discharge outlet _to the. cooling. ^ lake.

f

' Response: -Chlorin'ation of:the condenser cooling ' water 1is designed for threeL'; 30-minute. applications per day.. The. chlorine dosage-will be varied-.to maintain'a. free-residual chlorine between 0.1 and 0.5 mg/l at the. condenser outlet during each chlorination period. The. total . chlorine residual ' (including chlorine combined as chloramines ~ and chloro-ogranics) will depend-on the chlorine-demandLof water.. However,.-during. Atomic Safety 7 Licensing Board hearings. (Construction Permit' Stage) in:1976,mit was reported that the total chlorine-t -residual would range between 0.68 mg/l and-1.0R ag/1.at the circulating water discharge outlet to the cooling lake. O O i e -1 Y

Q 2 91 '. 6 ' Where-is the service-water discharged? Is sulfur-(ER) ic acid added to the service water? If so, how .much is added? R291.6 The service water is discharged into the circulat-ing water (CW)- system downstream of the condensers prior to CW system leaving the power block. Sul-furic acid is not added to the service water system. The principle-expected corrosion products from water. passage through the circulating and service water systems will be from the piping and heat exchange rs. The concentrations of these corrosion products will be low, on the oroer of ppb or less. lThe potential chemical species are summarized below: Carbon Steel - Fe 0 Fe 0 Fe(OH)3' 23, 34, Fe 0 3H O 23 2 90-10 Cupronickel - Cu 0, Cu0, NiCu0 Ni 0 2 2, 34 Stainless Steel - Fe 0 3 4, Fe(OH)3' 0 2 3' 2 3 3H 0, NiFe 02 4, Cr2 4, 0 e0 F 2 NiCr 02 4,.Ni 0, Cr 034 34 The concentration of the species will depend upon the ratios of metals ~ present in the system, temp-erature and chemical composition of the water. The underground service water piping will have cathodic protection which will reduce corrosion in this pipe.

t Q291.7 According to the OLER, Ammonia, Hydrazine, Potas-(ER) slum Chromate, and Turco Decon 4521 and 4520 are used in the power block system. Provide estimates .of the usage of these chemicals. Also discuss the-ultimate fate of these chemicals. Identify the pathways to the environment from the plant and indicata the amount and concentrations of these-chemicals in the pathways. R291.7 Ammonia Expected blowdown -from normal operations should not exceed .25 ppm NH FSAR Table 10.3-4). The blowdown from Hct Skan(See dby is less than 10 ppm. All other conditions should have NH concentration 3 of less-than-or-equal-to.5 ppm. Hydrazine~ FSAR. Table 10.3-4 shows hydrazine concentration as 75-100 ppm during cold hydro and cold wet lay-up. Otherwise the hydrazine content should not exceed the 0 by 5 ppb. The maximum 0, concentra-7 tion in blowdown and feedwater is leis than 100 ppm. 5 The pathway to the environment for NH and hydra-g zine would be from condenser tube le nage to the circulating water. Potassium Chromate Potassium Dichromate is used in the component cooling water system. Pathways to the environment would be from heat exchanger leakage to the ser-vice water system. Normal operational levels of K Cr0 in the CCW are 2 4 (Cr0 1008). Initial system conditioning 175-225 ppm will require ppm (Cr04) for the first week after filling the system The initial filling residue and any subsequent system drain down would be collected, tested and disposed of in an approved manner, e.g. wastes treated to bring the chromium concentrations to less than 5 ppm, or the waste would be removed to a disposal facility. Turco Decon 4521 and 4502 (not 4520) Turco Decon is used to decontaminate parts / equipment and its usage is dependent on the work being done. When used, Turco Decon 4521 is mixed with wat.er, 8 oz to the gallon; and 2 lbs of Turco Decon 4502 is mixed with a gallon of water. Turco Decon is disposed as drummed solid waste via the chemical waste tank.

t Q291.8 Indicate the concentration and types of chemicals (ER) discharged in the rad-waste system effluent into the cooling lake. R291.8 The reactor coolant system is the normal source of chemicals'which may be discharged, after treatment by the liquid radwaste processing system, via the radwaste effluent to the lake. . Maximum releases are provided in Table 291.8-1. Each concentration is based on an average expected flow rate of 1,394 gals / day. l i l l

a 3 TABLE 291.8-1~ TYPE AND' CONCENTRATION OF CHEMICALS IN RADWASTE-EFFLUENT TO COOLING WATER. LAKE ITEM OUTPUT CONCENTRATION r Boric Acid 4 ppm Chlorides 0.15 ppm Fluorides-0.15 ppm Suspended Solids 1.0 ppm pH Control Agent (Li OH) 2.2 ppm (as Li) Silica 0.2 ppm Aluminum 0.05 ppm Calcium 0.05 ppm Magnesium 0.05 ppm 4 d i.

Q291.9 - According to the OLER.Section 3.6.3.2.cach domin- -(ER). eralizer train will be regenerated once every 26 (3.6) ' days, and only one 'will. be used at "any given time with the other train kept as a spare. Explain why the relevant entries'of Table 3.6-2 are calculated for twice the above. regeneration rate. R291.9 Section 3.6.3.2 will' be. changed to show that each domineralizer train will be regenerated once every 13_ days instead of 26. days, l l I 1 [ J

l l 10291.10 According to Table 3.6-2 of the OLER 'about - two '(ER) ' mole equivalents of 11 ~ are used in regeneration of .(3.6 ). 'the demineralizers for. each mole equivalent of -Oli As a result, -during - each regeneration, one-half the acid is discharged unused into the alkaline -lime sludge pond. Please ' verify or correct the above entries-in the Table. .. R291.10 Two -corrections will be made to Tabic 3.6-2 for Sodium Ilydroxide used to regenerate - primary bed demine ralize rs. The dosage will be changed from 535 lb/ regen -to 625 lb/ regen which causes the -annual quantity to change from 15,020 to 17,548. . This table provides the. quantity of chemicals going into the primary and mixed bed domineral-iz e rs, but the ef fluent - from the demiperalize rs may contain different proportions of II and 011 --.-w... w., ~%,-~.--_w... +. _, -. .. ~ ~

s. a NRC - Ques tion 291. ll (ER) ( 3 ^. 6) . Provide details:on the. derivation of the numbers given in i Table-3.6-6 of the OLER.

Response

~ . Table 3.6-6_of the OLS-ER lists the impurities removed by one demineralizer train'in the treatment of 216,000 gallons of makeup -condensate. Based.on the specified influent water quality and the. design offluent' water quality, the demineralizer manufacturer's guaranteed thisLremoval of impurities.. 4 r 4 O O 4 4 0 4 m _.,,, ~

r - -- o- \\ Q291.12' . Describe the program formonitnringTDS,SO{,and (ER) C1 concentrations in the ' Neosho River or in the ' blowdown to ensure that discharge criteria are met. R291.12 ' Blowdown' discharges from Wolf Creek Cooling Lake -(WCCL) iwill comply with Kansas water quality cri- -The monitoring program which will document teria. -compliance with the criteria will be delineated by the requirements of the operating NPDES permit issued - by the State of Kansas. 'At.this-time the- ' NPDES permit has not been modified to cover WCCL - dischargec. See ' the response to Question 291.15 for additional discussion concerning the Wolf Creek NPDES permit. e 1

r_. ; t Q291.13 Indicate whether disch'arged fluids, including oil (ER)- -spills in the transformer vault discharged through ~ the oily waste separator system. If not, describe the discharge system where the ' effluents go and the amount of. oily discharge ~ to be expected. De-scribe the oily waste separator system and the

• fate of the separated oil and aqueous wastes after leaving the system.

R291.13 Any potentially oily waste, including oil spills in the transformer vaults, can be directed to the oily ~ waste. separator where oils and liquids are separated by their density dif ferences. Should an oil spill be well contained, the oil.could instead be cleaned up and drummed for reclaiming.- The attached drawing shows the site drainage plan and-routing of piping to the oil separator. Table 3.6-7 gives a summa ry of oily waste discharge rates. Separated oil is reclaimed from the sepa- -rator and aqueous wastes are routed to-the cooling lake.

P Q291.14 -Verify or correct the following changes in the (ER) OLER supplied during the site ~ visit. Annual use (3.4) of NaOCL for potable water disinfection 315 lbs/yr instead of 1315 lbs/yr (Table 3.6-2). Lime. soft-ener blowdown contains ferric hydroxide instead of ferrous hydroxide (page 3.6-5). R291.14 Annual use of Na0C1 for potable water disinfection should be 315 lbs/yr instead of 1,315 lbs/yr. The. lime softner blowdown contains ferric hydrox-ide-instead of ferrous hydroxide. i e 4 6

+ 7 e Q291.15 Please.. supply a list, and copies if available, of (ER) all permits needed to - discharge effluents during station operation. The OL-ER, Section 12, states that the discharge permit No. 1-NE07-R002 will be modified ' as WCGS becomes operational. Describe the expected modifications. If available give pollutant. limits for the modifications. Identify and describe effluent discharges into the cooling i lake or the lime sludge pond that will not be covered by a permit. R291.15 A. copy of the present NPDES permit (No. I-NE07-P001) issued by the Kansas. Department-of Health and Environment (KDHE) is. attached. This permit controls effluents at three onsite locations: 001 Domestic waste treatment plant discharge 002 Stormwater runoff from the construction site 003 Concrete batch plant holding pond discharge Since closure of the Wolf Creek Cooling Lake (WCCL) dam in November 1980, all plant effluents are being contained in the WCCL impoundment of water and there have been no discharges from Wolf Creek. Consequently, monitoring of the NPDES pa ramete rs is presently not required. The re-sponse to Question 291.17 discusses the range of time intervals which are projected to be required to fill the WCCL. Prior to discharging from the lake the present NPDES permit will be modified to reflect the dis-charge point being the WCCL outlet. Discussions with KDHE personnel indicate that pollutant limits required in the present pe rmit would be typical of those required to be in compliance with Kansas Water Quality Criteria if the operating NPDES per-mit were issued today. All effluent discharges from Wolf Creek are either into the cooling lake or the lime sludge pond. (See Question 291.1 concerning discharges from the lime sludge pond.) All drainage in the vicinity of the plant is into the cooling lake so monitor-ing at the outlet of the cooling lake means that all effluent discharges will be cove red by a permit.

~ Stufe of Kansas... soun ca,un. a>.,no, .c m' ' / ~

• I l

I (.] l ll .2 ll 1 ]\\ ] O j f ortes behJ Joseon r na:ans. secreta,y 10,ria x,u,c,ce2a ~' 913 OG2 9360 March 21,1980 Kansas Gas & Electric Co. - Wolf Creek Station D ke 201 North Market v &. C 'i. P.O. I$ox 208 Sl " 8.Y'8 W Wichita, Kansas 67201 - ((.pNg f; Re: Kansas Water Pollution Control y*, <.v a-p T ,f Permit No.1-N E07-P001 <%g Gentlemen: This is to inform you that you have fulfilled all filing requirements for a Kansas Water Pollution Control Permit and Authorization to Discharge under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDl'.S). We are pleased to forwar d your new permit. While it is permissible to make as many copies as needed for monitoring and reporting purposes, you need to retain the original permit for your files. We suggest you carefully read the terms and conditions of your permit and that you understand that these terms and conditions are enforceable under both State and rederal law. We look forward to working with you in the achievement and maintenance of high quahty water for the State of Kansas. Sincerely yours, lCg,fd ((. f ic; = ( Gerald Stoltenberg, P.C Director Division of Environment GS:am1Q1 1:nclosure cc: Southeast District

Kansas Permit Number: 1-N1:07-P001 Federal Permit Number: KS-0079057 KANSAS WATI:R POI.l.UT!ON CONTROL. PERMIT AND AUTilORIZATION TO DISCil ARGl'. llNDi'.R Till: NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCilARGC CLIMINATION SYSTEM Pursuant to the arovisions of Kansas Statutes Annotated 65-164 and 65-165, the rederal Water Po lution Control Act as amended, (33 U.S.C.1251 et seq: the " Act"), Owner: The Kansas Gas and Electric Company Owner's Address: 201 North Market, P.O. Box 208 Wichita, Kansas 67201 facility Name: Wolf Creek Station Facility Location: Burlington, Kansas 66839 Coffey County Receiving Stream & Basin: Neosho River via Wolf Creek Impoundment Neosho River Basin is authorized to discharge from the waste treatment facility described herein, in accordance with effluent limitations and monitoring requirements as set forth herein. This permit shall become effective March 21, 198n will supersede all previous permits and/or agreements 7n~effect betwecii~thsT5nsas Department of llealth and Environment and the permittee, and will expire April 3n, 1983 FACILITY DESCRIPTION: Discharge consists of package plant effluent from domestic wastes, stormwater runoff from the plant site, and overflow from sediment control holding ponds treating process water from a concrete batch plant. T\\ n,n r ug -~s- \\' ~ i Secr6tary, Kansas Department of Ilealth andThVironment

1) ate

[b P00R ORIGINAL

Page 2-Kansas Permit No.1-NI'07-P00: A. CITI.UCNT l.lMITATIONS AND MONITOillNG llEQUlliCMENTS The permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) with serial number (s) as speci-fied in the application for this permit. The effluent limitations shall become effec:ive on the dates specified herein. Such discharges shall be controlled, limited, and moni-tored by the permittee as specilied. The initial reporting period shall begin in April 1980 and end in June 1980 1:ach consecutive three month per-iod therealter shall constitute a repo"'ing period. There shall be no discharge of float-ing solids or visible loam in other than teace amounts. CITLUENT I, IMITATIONS MONITORING REQUlitEMENTS lin~il I. imitations Upon Effective Date Issuance OUiliill Nuniber and -~ Measurement Sample Effluent Parameter (s) Frequency Type _ 001 - Domestic Waste Treatment Plant into Wolf Creek Flow - MGD (Base I' low = 0.03 MGD) Biochemical Oxygen Demand (5-Day) Weekly Weekly grab Daily Average-mg/l(Ibs/ day) 30( 7.5) Daily Maximum-m t/l(Ibs/ day) <l5(11.3) s Total Suspended Solids Weekly grab I)aily Average-mg/l 30( 7.5) Daily Maximum-mq/l 15(11.3) Pree Available Chlorine Weekly grab Daily Maximum-mg/1 1.0 pil - Standard linils 6.0-9.0 Weekly grab 002 - Stormwater runoff f rom construction site During the period beginning on the effective date and lasting through the date of expir-ation the permittee is authorized to discharge trom outfall(s) serial number (s) 002 Such discharges shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below: Monitoring of the elliuent will not be required unless there is a significant change in the quality or quantity of the subject discharge. The Water Quality Criteria for Inter-state and intrastate Waters of Kansas as formulated by the Kansas Department of llealth and 1:nvironment, llegulation 211-16-28, will be applicable. 1. The pil shall not be less than 6.0 standard units nor greater than 9.0 standard units. 2. The discharge shall be essentially free of visible oil or grease and in no circum-stances result ir cleterioration of the receiving water's quality. 3. Contr01 of excessive suspended solids shall be undertaken as necessary to prevent receiving water <leterioration. P00R ORIGINAL

Page 3 Kansas Permit No. I-NE07-P001 4. There shall be no sludge banks or deposition of solids downstream from the outfall. 5. There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amoun ts. Any violation of the above referenced Water Quality Criteria shall be reported immediately to the Kansas Department of ilealth and Environment, llureau of Water Pollution Control, in Topeka, Kansas. 003 - Discharge from sediment control holding pond receiving process water from the concrete batch 1515nt ~ Total Suspended Solids Monthly grab - Daily Maximum-mg/l 50 pil-Standard Units E.0-9.0 Monthly grab B. STANDAllD CONDITIONS in addition to the specified conditions stated herein, the permittee shall comply with the attached Part i Standard Conditions dated May 1,1979. C. SCilEDULE Ol' COMPLIANCE None D. SUPPLEMI:NTAL CONDITIONS 1. This permit shall be modified, or alternatively, revolied and reissued, to com-4 ply with any applicable effluent standard or limitation issued or approved under Sections 301 (b)(2), (C), and (D), 304 (b)(2), and 107 (a)(2) of the Clean Water Act, if the effluent standard or limilai;oa so issued or approved: Contains different conditions or is otherwise more stringent than a. any.elfluent limitation in the permit, or b. Controls any pollutant not limited in the permit. The permit as modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain any other requirements of the Act then applica'%. 3

• • 4w

~

Itfective Hav 1, 1979 %TA.\\9ARD C0hul110Ti FOR KANSAS WATLR p0LLUTION CdN120L 4ND . NATIONAL FOLLUTANT DISCHAFCE ELlHINATION SYSTEM PEPHITS PART I CLNLRAL CONDITIONS 1, pepresentative Samplant A. Samples and measurements taken as requtreJ herein shall be representative of the natuse anJ volume of the monatored discharge, All samples shall be taken Jt the locations designateJ an this permit, anJ unless specified, at the outf all(s) before the ef fluent joins or as diluted by any other boJr of water or substance. B. Monttoring results shall be recordei anj reported on forms acceptable to the Divtssan anJ post-markeJ na later than the 28th day of the month following the completed rerotting perioJ. Signed coples of these, anj all other reports requtred herein, shall be submitted to: Kansas Department of Health 5 Environment Division of Environment heter pollation Control Section Topeka, Kansas 660:0 1913) 5o2-9300 2. Schedule of Compliance: No later than it calendar Jays following each date iJentified in the "5cKel31e of Compliance", the permittee shall submit to the above aJJress, either a report of pro-gress or, in the case of specitic actions being required by identified dites, a written notice of coepliance or noncompliance, in the latte, case, the notsce shall include the cause of noncomplian:e, any rereJial actions taken, and the probabliity of meeting the next schedule reautrements, or, af there are no more schedule requirements, when such noncompliance will be corrected. 3. Defanttions A. The "Jaily average" discharge means either the total discharge by weight Juring a calendar month Jivtded by the nu+ber of days in the month that the facility wa s opera t ing, or the average concen-tration for the conth. The daily aversge disc'arge shall be determancJ by the summation of all reasured daily discharges by weight divsJed by the number nt days during the calenJar manth when the measurerents were male, or by the sumsation of all concentrations Jetermined Juring the calenJar menth Jiviled by the number of samples collected anJ analy:cd. B. The "Jaily risinum" discharge means the total dtscharge by weight or average concentration Juring a24 hour ptrio1. C. The " monthly everage", other than for fecal colaform bacteria, is the artthmetic mean at the values tor effluent samples collected an a period of 10 consecutive Jays. The conthly average tor fecal coliform bacterna is the geometric mean of the value of.he effluent sanples cellected in a period af 30 consecutive days. D, the "=eekly averige", other than for fecal colitorm bacteria, is the arithaette mean of the values for effluent samples collected in a period of seven consecutase days. The weekly aserate for f etal coliform bacteria is the geometrte mean of the values for eftluent samples colle:ted in a pe riod o f seve, consecutive days. E. The "grah sample" is an injividual sample collected ir, less than 15 minutes. F. A " composite sample" is a combination of individual samples in ihich 'he volune of each indi-v Jual sample is proportional to the discharge flow, or the sample frequency is proportioned to the flaw rate over the sample period. G. The "Act" means the Clean hater Act, Publis . sa .ai. H. "Dittssen" means Division of Envnronment, Kansas Department of Health and Invarone.ent. 1. " Department" means the kansas Department of Health anj Environment. 4. Tes rr,celure<. All analyses rey L ed by this permit shall conform to U.c r: quart:cr.ts of Se: tion ITT(h) oi~the'J t, anJ shall be conducted in a laboratory certified by the Department. For each a messurement or sample the permittee shJll record the esset plJce, date, anj time of saNpling; the date of the annivses; the analyttcal techniques or methods used; anJ. the :asults. If the permittee moni-tors any pollutant at the locatica(s) JestgnatcJ herein more frequently t he n required by this permtt, using approveJ proceJurcs, the results shall be inclujcd in the Discharge Stanitoring Report form requirej in 1.6. above. Such incressed frequen:y shall also be inJieateJ. ResurJs Retention; All records and information resultang from the monitoring activities requireJ by IEla permit, inclujing all records of anityses anj c alibration anJ maintenance af ir 3trumentatiin and recorJings from continuous monitoring instr mentation, shall be retasnel for a minimum ot' 3 years, or langer ( requesteJ by the Division. 6. Change in Discharge. All.inscharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and con-Jit7onsiir tEli permit. Tae discharae of any pnliut ant not authorised b, this pernst or of anv pollutant LJentified in this permit more frequently than of at a level in eteess at that authors:ed shall constatute a vtolation of the permit. Ae' Iteility expanssons, production or flow increases, or process e>Ja fic ations which will result in new, datterent, or sacreased Jischarges of pollutants shall be reported to the Division at least one hundred eighty (1801 Jays before such changes. 7. Nonco*gliance Nottfications: I f, for any reason, the permattre does not compiv with or will be unable tn compfy wiTh iny JIity minimum or weekty sserage effluent limitattu, SrecificJ in this permit, the permtttee shall prowtJe the Department with the tallowing information an writing witnin i Jays of becaming aware of such conJttson: P00R ORIGINAL

e D 1#v s ig40r64 W 4a wbrk and s aust is wrworritance, and 8. th3 pertaJ of ren692n!!1rce, ancluding eaa..t dates and ticeJ~3r, if' nut correwted, the antact. ^ pitsJ tlEt the nonco 78:4Eco is Capected to cont inue, and steps being taken to r*Jucs, en tninato .and prsvsnt r curtsnce of the noncoaplyind JischJrge. Th2 abces information shall he provided with the subetttal of the regular Discharge Monitsrtng Raport fora ich skolations of monthly average of daily average effluent limitations. 8. fic h t te tes 0 eration: The permittee shall at all times maintain in gooJ working orJer and efficiently 1 etiectiseli 6Ferate all treatment, colleetton, and control systems or anJ f acit et tes used to achieve compliance with the terms and conj 4tions of this permit, >htntentnce of treatment f acilit ses which results in Jegradation ci ef fluent quality snalt be scheduled Juring non critical water quatsty periods anJ thall be strried out in a manner approveJ ir aJeance by the Division. The pernittee 7t;!! tJke all necessarr steps to mansette any JJeerse impact to waters et the State resulting from noncompliance with ant effluent 14mitJtions specified in this permat, including suCh acCelerited or aJJ4ttonal monitoring as necessary to detetagne the nature and impact of the noncomplying discharge, 9. SvpastLng:hib6ted, enceptAny diversion from or bypass of facilities necessary to maintain compliance with this per-mit as pro where necessary to prevent loss of human life or seveer property damage; or where escesstse storm Jrainage or runoff would Jamage any facilities necessary to comply with this per-mit. The permittee shall -immediately notify the Division by telephone of each bypass and shai; cont'irm the relephone notificattun sith a letter explanning what caused the spill or bypass anJ what actiens hate been tJken tJ prevent reCurrenco. 10 Removed Substances: Solids, sludges, filter backwash, or other pollutants temoved in the course of 1 treatment or control of wastewaters shall be disposed of in a manner acceptable to the Division. l 11. power rattures: The permittee shall prowlJe a'n alternate pwwer source suf ficient to operate anJ waste-facilities or halt or otherwise control production and all discharges upon the ;oss of water control the prisary source of 1.ower to the wastewater control facilities. 11. Rijht of intrg: The permittee shall allow authorized representatives of the Division or the Environ. mental f ratection Agency upon the presentation of credenttals, to enter upon the permittee's premises where an ettluent source is located or in which any records are requireJ to be kept ey this permit, and reasonable times to have access to and copy any records requireJ to be kept by this permit; to in-at spect any sonttoring equipment or monitoring method required in this cermit; and to sample any discharge f rom the facility anJ any waste or materials generated or stored on the premises. 13. Transfer of ownership: the permittee s5411 notify the succeeding owner, controlling person, or operator of the existence of this permit by certified let ter, a copy of which shall be forwarded to the Division. 14 Asatlability of Reports: Except for Jats Jetermined to be confidenttat under sectton lot of the Act, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this permit shall be available for public inspec-tion at the offices of the Department. Effluent data shall not be constJered contLJential. Knowingly

m. kang any false statement on any such report may result in the imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in Section 309 of the Act and K.S. A. 65 170c.

15. Permit '4o d i f ic a t io n: Af ter notice and oppos tunity for a hearing, this permit may be modified, suspended, or revokeJ in whoTe or in part during its terms for cause incluJing, but not limited to, violations of my terms or conditions of this permst; obtaining this permit by misrepresentation or f ' lure to Jat-close tully all relevant facts; or, a change in any condition that repatres either a te sorary or permanent reduction or elimination of the autharised discharge. 16. Tante Pollutants: Natutthstanding Paragraph 15 above, if a toxic effluent standard or prohibition 2 tincluJing any schedule of compliance specified in such ef fluent standard or prohibition) is estabitst ed under Section 307(a) of the Act for a tonic pollutant which is present in the discharge an1 such stanJarJ or prohibition is more stringent than any limitation for such pollutant in this permit, this permit shall be revised or modified in accordance with the toxic ef fluent standard or prohibition c.d the permittee so notified. 17. Civil and Crtelnal Liabilitg:d to relieve the persistee from civil or criminalas authortted by statute and Pa Except This permit shall be construe penattles for ncncom-pliance. 15. Ost and Ha:irdous Substance Liab6lity: Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institdtion of any legJi action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabiltttes, or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject to under Sectinn lit of the Act, or K.S.A. 65 164 et seg. 1he municipal permittee shall promptly notify the Davision by telephone upon discovering crude att or other petroleum Jcrivative in its sewer system or waste ater treatrent facilities. 19. InJust rial thers: the municipal permittee shall requi e any inJustrial user of the treatment works to cisply with 5sett46w 107 4 308 of the Act, and any industrial user of storm sewers to comply wath Section lot of the Act. 20. [rgrerty Rights: The issuance of this permit.loes not convey ant property rights in either rest or personal proper ty, or any esclusive privileges, nor Jnes it authors:e any iniury to private property er inv insasion of personal raghts, nor any infrangement of or violation of federal, state or local laws or regulat ions. 21. Operator cer t i f icit.e n: The permittee shall assure that hss wastewater factisties are under the super-vision or an operator certified by the Department, if the permittee does not have a certified operator, or lo*es its certified operator, he shall tske the appropri.ste steps to obtain a certafsed operator as requared bi k.A.R. 28 16 29. 22. pro 67 pertv Rights? The provisions of this peritt tEo YpVI Iifton of any provision of this permitare severable, ani if any provision of this permat. t to any circumstance is he!J anvaltJ. the tpptt-cttion of Such provision affected thereby. to other circumstances, anJ rhe remainder of this permit. shall not be 23. Demovil From service: The permittee shall inform the Divisten at leasr 3 months before a pumping station er other waste treat ent f ac ti stv acceptable to the Diviston of decanmtssioning that will provtJeis to be removed from service, and shall make arrangemen adequate protection for the public health, anJ ground and surface wtters, u -~ P00R ORIGINAL g e c -lwu

s w Q291.16 Indicate the'present status of Wolf Creek Cooling (ER) Lake (WCCL) with respect to completion of the Dam and filling. - R291.16 The Wolf Creek Cooling Lake (WCCL) construction i was completed' in late 1980. Filling began on November 13, 1980, and has continued intermittent-ly until the present time. As of 5/28/81, WCCL' level is 1060.55 and per Figure 2.4-20 (Cooling Lake Area - Capacity Curves) of the FSAR, the lake is at 23% of its normal capacity and 41% of its - low level operating capacity. i 6 a 9 y -y.., ~~ ,-n ,my,--,-,----y ,-.---e

---

---,---,--,-..-~

s

Q291.17. .In'dicate.the present prediction for completion of (ER) filling of Wolf Creek Cooling Lake (WCCL). R291.17 The prediction for the filling of WCCL during the worst case drought at a 41 cfs fill rate is 23 months to the minimum operating level and 41 . months to the normal ~ operating level.

However, the prediction for an average year-at.120 cf s is-5 months to minimum operating. level and 14 months to the norma 1. operating level.

J s. .)

(',.

• c w

- Q291.18. Please. provide the results of aquatic biological '-(SR) surveys conducted-to date relative -to aquatic organisms in WCCL. R291.18 Scheduled aquatic monitoring 'on WCCL.has been .. accomplished. in February and April of 1981. How-ever data analyses has not been completed by con-sultants. Data' will be submitted.to KG&E in May_ of 1982 and.will be available - for review by the NRC at WCGS.. 4 4

r-l 0291.19 Provide details of-the monitoring program on UCCL (ER) during filling and as planned after station oper-l ation begins. -This should' include information on icthyoplankton and young-of-the-yeat fishes, espe-cially in thu area of cooling water intake. R291.19 The Applicants have initiated the lake filling phase environmental monitoring program on Wolf Creek Cooling Lake (WCCL). Cooling lake monitor-l -ing includes limnological and fishery studies de-signed to investigate the cooling lake as it fills. l Lake monitoring will characterize the chemistry and biology of the cooling lake while providing information on the success of the fish stocking program. The sampling schedule for this phase of monitoring s outlined in Tables 291.19-2 and l 291.19-3. Details of the lake filling phase are outlined as follows: WATER QUALITY l-Surface waters will be collected six times per year in the cooling lake at Locations 2 and 6 (Figure 6.1-1). Duplicate ' water samples will be collected from a depth of. one meter using non-metallic water samplers with the exception of bac-teriological and oil and grease samples which will l be collected at the surface of the water. l l-Water quality parame te rs are presented in Table l 291.19-1. Preservation and analytical methods for water quality appear in ER(OLS) Table 6.1-5. PHYTOPLANKT N Water samples for phytoplankton analysis will be collected six times per year at Locations 2 and 6 (Figure 6.1-1; Table 291.19-2). Tgc samples will be stored in bottles containing m preservative. The inverted microscope method will be used to determine phytoplankton species composition and abundance. Oil immersion will be utilized for identificati.on and enumeration using the following reporting units: Algal Form Reporting Unit units /ml) Diatoms Each frustule l Unicellular Each cell Colonial 4 cells (colonial blue-greens like Microcystis are reported in 50 cell units) Filamentous 100 m lengths

l i i R291.19 Cont'd Biovolume determinations will, be made using the geometrical configuration that best suits the species and will be expressed as microliters per liter ( p1/1). Appropriate taxonomic keys will be used as identification aids. Carbon fixation rates and chlorophyll a concentrations will be determined and used as indices of phytoplankto.a primary productivity. ZOOPLANKTON Duplicate zooplankton samples will be collected six times per year at Locations 2 and 6 in the cooling lake (Figure 6.1-1; Table 291.19-2). The zooplankton community will be sampled with a conical plankton net. At each

location, two bottom to surface hauls. will be collected, com-bined, and preserved.

Samples will be examined qualitatively to generate a checklist of zooplank-ton occurring in the cooling lake. Replicates will be collected at each location to determine mean zooplankton standing crop (mg/1). PERIPilYTON Periphyton collections in WCCL will not be initi-ated until the cooling lake reaches operating pool level (1087 MSL) or one year prior to station ope ratior.. Sample analysis, upon initiation of collections, will be similar to analytical methods utilized on Neosho River samples. MACROINVERTEBRATES Duplicate bottom samples will be collected six times per year from Locations 2 and 6 in the cool-ing lake (Figure 6.1-1; Table 291.19-2). Samples will be collected using a Ponar grab quantitative collecting device. All quantitative samples will be sieved and the organisms that are retained will be fixed and stained. All organisms will be identified to spe-cies, if possible, or to the lowest positive taxo-nomic level. Identifications will be made using appropriate taxonomic keys. All benthic data will be reported as the number of organisms per square j meter of substrate (no./m ). . FIS il The fishery study will provide data useful to KG&E's management effort. The fish study has been designed _ to evaluate KG&E's stocking program by targeting stocked species of fish. The year and sampling effort utilized in the cooling lake fol-lows recommendations made in The Kansas Fish and

1 i i 1 ~R291.1'9 Cont'd Game Commission manual. of survey techniques for reservoir manageme nt. The sampling schedule for fishery studies during lake-fill appears in Table 291.19-3. Specifications for gear to be utilized is shown in Table 291.19-4. Catch data will be expressed in units of effort. Additional parameters measured in the cooling lake will include conductivity, secchi disk readings, and temperature profiles. Physical data (depth, secchi disk and temperature) will be recorded at the beginning and end of each net set. Sample locations will be established and identified with land marks to ensure consistency over time. A semi-balloon trawl will be tised to sample young-of-year (YOY) fish during summer and fall months (Table 291.19-3). No larval fish sampling is scheduled for WCCL during the la:ce filling phase. The planned operational monitoring program will be designed to assess the ef fects of station dia-chargen on the environment. The operational stud-ies w.11 be continuations of the pre-operational lake filling phase studies with modifications based on study findings, lake use, and other fsc-tors. Changes to sampling frequency and addition-al studies as described in Section 6.2.1 of the ER(OLS) will be implemented. The proposed schedule for operation monitoring is shown in Table 291.19-5. Larval fish sampling will be included in the operational phase monitor-ing of WCCL. Larval fish will be collected on a twice a month basis from April through July at i Location 8. YOY and adult fish sampling Nill fol-Icw the methodology used in the last year of lake filling phase monitoring. i

d TABLE 291.19-1 WATER QUALITY 1 PARAMETERS MEASURED IN SURPACE WATER SAMPLES General Water Quality Parameters Indicators of Industrial and Municipal Contamination Alkalinity,. total Calcium Bacteria, fecal coliform Chlcride Bacteria, fecal streptococci Color, true Biochemical oxygen demand (5-day) Conductance, specific Chemical oxygen demand Iron, soluble Hexane soluble materials Iron, total Organic carbon, total Magnesium Magnanese, total Trace Metals oxygen, dissolved Oxygen, saturation Copper, total pil Lead, total Potassium Mercury, total Residue, filtrable (total Selenium, total dissolved solids) Zinc, total Residuo, nonfiltrable (total suspended solids) Sodium Sulfate Temperature Turbidity Aquatic Nutrients Ammonia Nitrate Nitrite Organic nitrogen, total Orthophosphate, soluble Phosphorus, total Silica, soluble

TABLE 291.19-2 SAMPLIN'G SCHEDULE FOR THE AQUATIC PORTION OF THE 1981 LAKE FILLING. PHASE OF THE CONSTRUCTION MONITORING PROGRAM FOR WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION DISCIPLINE Feb Apr Jun Aug Oct Dec Water Quality " Cooling Lake X X X X X X Aquatic Ecology Cooling Lake Phytoplankton X X X X X X Zooplankton X X .X X X X Macroinvertebrates Benthos X X X X X X ^ = Cooling Lake' Locations 2 and 6 4

q i TABLE 291.19-3 FISH SAMPLING SCHEDULE FOR.THE LAKE FILLING PHASE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM AT THE WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION, 1981-Month Jan Feb Mar Apr My Jun Jul Aug Sy Oct Nov Dec Cooling Lake Electrofishing" X X X X X X X X X X

X X

Trap netting X X Gill netting X Seining X X X X X X Trawling X X X X-X

• Winter sampling will depend on ice conditions.

b Trap netting will be in March or April depending on water temperature. I e 4 I ) I i

v-TABLE 291.19-4

SUMMARY

OF GEAR TO BE. UTILIZED FOR FISil SURVEYS IN THE COOLING LAKE FOR WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION GEAR TYPE DESCRIPTION" UNIT OF EFFORT D.C. electrofishing Boat mounted boom Approximately 30 shocker min per location Trap net Large frame 4 not nights fyke nets Gill net Uniform mesh flag 4 net nights neto 100 ft x 8-ft with monofilament panels of 1, 1.5, 2.5, or 4 in. bar mesh Seine 50 ft x 6 ft bag 2 - 90' arc drags seine per. location Trawl Semiballoon otter trawl a From A Manual of Survey Techniques for Reservoir Management, Kansas Fish and Game Commission. u

TABLE 291.19-5 SAMPLING SCHEDULE IN THE COOLING LAKE DURING THE OPERATIONAL MONITORING PROGRAM Month Location-Sample Type Feb Apr May Jun Jul-Aug Oct Dec 2. 6 8 9-Water Chemistry # X X X X X X X X X. X X 'X-Phytoplankton X X X X X X X X X X Zooplankton X X X. X X X X X X X Macroinvertebrates X X X X X X X-X '. X b Larval Fish X X X X X Adult Fish X X X X X X X X X. X

• Water chemistry samples will be collected monthly for the first year of operation.

b Twice monthly April - July, c i Winter sampling will depend on ice conditions. i

Figure i s [ .N t? SCALE IN WILE S 1 ,_ \\.-I c m.u w. - -m i O t 2 3 4 ~., h.) . } ;2 ./0HN REDMOND I v. BESERVO/R A = Surface water Sompting Location AAC D4M New .\\. I Str o wn

(:

,.' y ,5 ' *. L

i U,..

l'5.PL ANT SITE ..t o p. ~e. ( 1 ,a A 1. t. .s s r s s ~s E E. UP C' ~l CZ I' "' I \\ 2A bh > CCOUNG UKE ( \\ ^ Burlingion d b d A B. f J 10 5 WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION UNIT NO. I ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT (OPERATING LICENSE STEE) g FIGURE 6.1-1 SURFACE WATER sat 1PLItJG LOCATIOtJS l 4 l l

W-0291.20 Provide better senematics showing the siting and (ER) configuration of the make-up water intake, the (3.4) cooling water intake.and the essential service water intake. The ER-OL.provides figures showing locations, but details of configurations and adja-cent shoreline are

needed,

[ER-OL p. 3.4-2,

p. 3.4-3].

R291.20 a. Fiakeup Water Screen House (MU Intake) 1.- Siting of the MUSH is shown on S-1 and S-128. 2. ~ Configuration is shown on A-100 and A-101. 3. Adjacent shoreline is shown on S-125, S-126 and S-127. b. Circulating Water Screen House (Cooling Water Intake) 1. Siting is shown on S-1 and S-11. 2. Configuration is shown on A-115, A-116, A-117, S-490, S-491, S-492, S-493 and S-494. 3. Adjacent shoreline is shown on S-62, S-183, S-185 and S-188. c. Essential Service Water Pumphouse (ESW Intake) 1. Siting is shown on S-1 and S-11. 2. Configuration is shown on A-K901, A-K902 and C-KC305. 3. Adjacent shoreline is shown on S-80 and S-184.

Q291.21 Clarify the following: The statement "The Wolf (ER) Creek Generating Station cooling system is design- .(3.4) ed to support ' two 1150-Mwe pressurized water re-actors operating at 100 percent average annual load factor" (p. 3.4-1) is contradictory to-the following statement, " Analyses indicate that the cooling lake will supply adequate water for the operation-of one unit operating at 100 percent average annual load factor and two units operating at 88.5 percent average annual load factor" (p. 3.4-2). R291.21 The statement on page 3.4-1 will be changed to read: 'The Wolf Creek Generating Station, Unit No. 1 (WCGS) cooling _ system is designed to support two 1150-MWe pressurized water reactors (PWR) operating at a 100_ percent average annual load factor for normal conditions." The analyses referred to on page 3.4-2 (should be 3.3-2). indicated that during the once-in 50-year

drought, that the cooling lake water level was lower and could support two 1150 MWe PWRs operat-ing at an 88.5 percent average annual load factor.

l I l' l

0291.22 Discuss the aquatic biotic monitoring program for (ER) area of makeup water intake in the Neosho River. Indicate the parameters to be monitored, the fre-quency and timing of sampling, the date(s) of pro-gram initiation, its duration and the location of the sa'mpling stations. R291.22 The aquatic monitoring program for the area of the Neosho River near the makeup water intake began in 1373. The results from that monitoring phue un-til. the present can be found in the consultant's annual reports and in the ER(CPS), Sections 6.1.1.3.2 and 6.1.1.3.1.1, plus ER(OLS), Sections 2.2.2 and 2.4.3.1.1.1. In 1981, the monitoring in this area will include the following parameters-water quality, phyto-

plankton, zooplankton, macroinvertebrates and fish.

The schedule of sampling is enclosed and begins on January 1, 1981. The location of the sampling is the Neosho River directly below the stilling basin at John Redmond Reservoir. All fish impingement work is performed at the makeup water screen house (MUSif) which is located on the east side of the Neosho River about 150 yards below the John Redmond Reservoir dam. The impingement study is performed exclusively by KG&E and was committed to by the utility in the

FES, Section 6.1.3.2.

Sample dates within the months are randomly selected. Collection work is performed twice per month from August to March and twice per week from April to July. This impinge-ment monitoring is a one year program which was started in November, 1980. SQlEDULE OF SAMPLIIC NEAR fAKEUP UATER INTAKE Discipline Jan Feb Mar g M_ay Jun Jul A_uj Sep Oct Nov Dec Water Omlity X X X X Phytoplankton X X X X Zooplankton X X X X Macroinvertebrate X X X X Fish Electroshock X X X X X X X X X X X X Seining X X X X X X X Larval Fish y in pg o o o o o o o o

• - ewice monthly
• - twice weekly X - once monthly

0291.23'. Outline the aquatic biotic monitoring program for (ER) the.' site area during station operation (see re-quests-by staff in FES-CP. Sectioris 6.1.3.2.

p. 6-3, 6.2.3.2. p. 6-7).

R291.23 The planned operational monitoring program for the site area will include activities on Wolf Creek Cooling Lake WCCL) as-described in response 291.19 and the Neosho River. Biological sampling on the Neosho River during the operational moni-to:;ing ' program will be essentially the same as established in the last year of the Lake Filling Phase (Tables 291.23-1 and 291.23-2). i w r

v l-TABLE-291.23-1 PROPOSED SAMPLING SCHEDULE FOR THE AQUATIC BIOLOGICAL -PORTION OF.THE OPERATIONAL' MONITORING PROGRAM FOR WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION Discipline Apr Jun Aug Oct 'Dec Aquatic Ecology Neosho River Phytoplankton X X X X Periphyton" X X X X Zooplankton X X X X Macroinvetebrates Benthos X X X X Qualitative X X X X Drift X X X X

1. Neosho Ri'cer Locations 4 and 10 b

Neosho River Location 1 h

!~ TABLP 291.23-2 PROPOSED FISH SAMPLING SCHEDULE FOR THE LAKE FILLING PHASE ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM AT THE WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION, 1981 Feb AE g Jun Jul A_ug Oct Dec u Neosho River Electrofishing" X X X X X X X X Seining X X X X X X X e Larval fish X X X X " Monthly at Location 1; Locations 4 and 10 in April, June, October and December. bLocations 4, 10 and 11 in-April, June, October and December; Location 1 during all indicated months. Day-night sampling twice monthly at Location 1.

Q291.24 Describe any stocking of fish in WCCL that has al-(ER) ready taken

place, including date introduced,

_ species and number. introduced. Also provide a de-o scription of future plans for stocking fish in the WCCL. R291.24 Stocking activities on WCCL, both past and future, are designed to establish a desirable fishery in the lake. A fishery dominated by predator species will reduce negative impacts on plant operations -t i t .due to impingement of forage and roughf,ish species. Stocking activities will additionally maintain options concerninJ future use of the lake. The WCCL stocking program was initiated in 1978 and continued in 1979 with the renovation of se-1ected ponds in the lake area followed by restock-ing with forage and gamefish. In 1980 that por-tion of Wolf (, re ek owned _by KG&E and all ponds on KG&E prope rty not previously renovated were treated to remove roughfish. Major stockings of forage and game species have followed renovation during preliminary filling of the cooling lake in 1980 and into 1981. All stocking activities to date are outlined in Table 291.24-1. Table 291.24-2 outlines scheduled stocking of fish into the WCCL for 1981 and proposed stocking for the next several years. The number and species outlined la Table 291.24-2 after 1981 are based on a typically developing fishery. However, long-term stocking plans will be modified based on the success of various species and may result in increased or decreased rates for a given species. 1

~- +. TABLE 291.24-1 STOCKING RECORD OF WOLF CREEK. COOLING-LAKE SPECIES DATE(S) NUMBER LOCATI,0N Flathead Minnow 8/78 56,000 Subimp. Largemouth Bass 8/78 3,500 Subimp. Flathead Minnow 9/79 75,000 Subimp. 11/79 52,000 Subimp. Bluegill' 9/79 5,000 Subimp. Smallmouth Bass 11/79 40 Subimp. Largemouth Bass 9/79 2,400 Subimp. Flathead Minnow 5/80 90,000 UHS 6/80 65,000 UHS 8/80 270,000 Subimp. 9/80 57,500 Subimp. Bluegill 5/80 130 Subimp. 6/80 3,150 UHS 8/80 16,000 Subimp. 9/80 12,700 Subimp. Red-ear Sunfish 8/80 2,000 Subimp. Black Crappie 10/80 1,000 Subimp. Smallmouth Bass 8/80 500 Subimp. Largemouth Bass 6/80 6,000 UHS 10/80 1,000 Subimp. Striped Bass 6/80 1,200 UHS Walleye 6/80 7,000 UHS 7/80 5,000 UHS Blue Catfish 10/80 35,000 WCCL Channel Catfish 5/80 100 S*bimp. 6/80 3,100 UnS 8/80 25,000 Subimp. 10/80 25,000 WCCL Striped X Uhite Bass 5/81 50,000 WCCL Hybrid Subimp = cubimpoundment of WCCL UHS = Ultimate Heat Sink Basin WCCL = Wolf Creek Cooling Lake

g;-- TABLE 291.24-2 PLANNED STOCK, , PROGRAM FOR WOLF CREEK C0OLING LAKE SPECIES 1981 1982 1983 1984 Black Crappie -25,000 Smallmouth Bass 50,000 50,000' -25,000 Spotted Bass. 25,000 25,000 25,000 Largemouth Bass 100,000 50,000 Striped Bass 50,000 50,000 Striped X White-Bass 50,000 50,000 50,000 Hybrid Walleye 120,000 120,000 120,000 50,000 Blue Catfish 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000 Channel Catfish 50,000 50,000 50,000

• Actual Number Dependent on Supply
  • Stocked 5/81

( Q291.25 Provide the details and discuss the impacts of re-turn of material collected from the plant intake screens to the Neosho River. R291.25 .The plant intake screens are located on the Wolf Creek Cooling Lake (WCCL).- Any material impinged on these screens would be either removed from the collection pit and disposed of onsite or returned 4 to WCCL. There is no possibility of material being impinged on the screens being recurned to the Neosho River which is approximately five miles away. lioweve r, the makeup water screen house (MUS!!) in-take will impinge material which could be returned to the Neosho River. This material is washed off the vertical

• ravelling screens (VTS) into a col-lection pit w'.ich drains into the makeup channel.

During low flow, the channel dead ends but still remains contiguous with the reservoir stilling basin. The channel becomes a~ flow-through system-whenever John Redmond Reservoir releases large amounts of water. Some fish fall back into the channel from the pit.

Ilowever, because the makeup channel dead ends during the winter months, the fish will either be recycled on the VTS or eaten by the large groups of gulls whtch visit the area.

Decay is slow be-cause of the cold temperatures, thus allowing the gulls ample time to clean up the dead fish in a coup'e of days. The slow decay rate of the fish would also minimize any limnological offects which might occur due to the dead fish. ~ During the winter months, the la rge number of im-pinged fish are pumped from the collection pit into a dumpster and then disposed of onsite. From April to November, the impingement is less than one percent of the numbe r of fish impinged during the winter. These fish will be allowed to drain back into the channel via the collection pit unless a significant number is present.

Whereby, the fish will be collected in a 4h foot deep buc-ket net and disposed of in an onsite landfill according to state and local regulations.

A sig-nificant number of fish is that which impedes the flow of water through the VTS to such a degree as to endanger the operatior of the pumps. The effect of these fish being returned to the Neosho River woold be minimal. The numbe rs in-volved are small,, usually less than 100 per 24-hour period. High BOD concentrations would be

l r R291.25 Cont'd spotty and would probably be the highest near the - outfall of the collection pit drain pipe. In other areas of the channel, the BOD levels should be comparable to the Neosho River BOD levels be-- cause the pumps would be continually drawing " fresh" water into the channel. When the channel and the Neosho River merge during high flow, the effects of the returned.uaterial would be even less because the la rge r volume of water would dilute any effects from so few dead fish. .In conclusion, there will be no material returned to the Neosho River from the plant' intake screens. Material from the MUSH screens could be returned to the Neosho River but the effects should be

minimal, o

4 1 h

3 310.0 SITING ANALYSIS BRANCH 0310.1 Are there any substantial changes in the station (ER) external appearance or layout which have been made subsequent to the description in the OL-ER? If so, please describe. R310.1 .The following buildings / structures have been added to the immediate power block area: 1. An Auxiliary Warehouse located just east of the Shop Building; 2. Technical Support Center located between the Administration Building and Shop Building; 3.- Security Building located south of the Admin-istration Building; 4. Security Diesel Generator located immediately north of the northwest corner of the Security Building; and 5. A covered walkway connecting the Turbine Building, Administration Building, Technical Support Center, Shop Building, and Security Building. These are low visibility structures and do not change the skyline appreciably. The Emergency Operations Facility (EOF) - Simula-tor Complex has been located on the site but 2.8 miles northwest of the power block area (see re-vised Figure 2.1-4). 3

~ ^ ;.1 l l' ~n -W i l 3 %.c.c : L :=- i i I e ( ) =D \\ ~. %,.I(x) 9[ ! 4 osc a msitt sscou wa j ~ - 7::a/ x % 1 I '41 m t, s. .i TSC ~~,s . 4,\\. m< ( {

1...

_4. j.1=I q. sc nitt i me. i a A In ma-- i 0, '.j k L t Room N ,i l .7. (=.= controi "'13 e p,2 ) e

4. T i.,

i' t C"3 .-y, l l...L. 5 4 a e y ,U J.L _l ] / V 4 mma\\.....q / o rp:t = _I, h. W [1 4 l l / A=:n LS& wC e m,f, C"l.). = _g.._ _ \\,+g.e. m. -1 < ' mm. . 2 >C ) i _ _ t.__ , t~ a- _---- e ?E=$rs=-- / 1 *.:,v, / u_'--.- j i r===

;.- s-

• _

5::n =2.-*:A:: = =.=._ = ~- Q _ ~ - ~ {a E'S50D.70- -- t 3iTs* /

5. mJne-ec ge-p, I 4

MmdCc-v / W news. = ~. r : =.:::. m 3 h zn m:N,o.c.o i R y j n f* T.SWlb1". d j i Rev. t

=w~:

a g-

E 6/8i

~ M Ai:.for A'W 11 n x-.- cS M C "F i E E!!3P. E T. - ~ WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION UNIT NO. I i l f.NVIRONMENTAL REFORT OPERATING LK:ENSE STE j Figure 2.1-4 Plant Site Features i

y ?; Q310.2: 'Are there.' any new roads or rail lines or reloca-

(ER) tions of roads..or rail lines near the plant which have been proposed. subsequent to the description i

in the OL-ER? ~If so, please describe. ~ 'R310.2 There'are no new roads or rail lines and no relo-cations of existing roads or rail lines since the description in the ER(OLS). k i 1 4 C l l l I I~ i -t w g 9 m;y y---s-w - w. e 9i,-

1 -Q310.3 Section 2.1.3.3.4 of the OL-ER states: " Currently, (ER) there are no plans for public use of the cooling (2.1.3) lake or~1 ands within'the site boundary adjacent to the cooling _ ' lake not needed during operation of the station and related facilities." It also states thTt'the visitors center location has not been selected. Have the plans for public use of the cooling lake and adjacent lands been revised? If so, please describe. Also, has the visitors center site been selected? If so, please give its description and location. R310 3 Section 2.8 of the ER(OLS) addresses public use of the cooling lake and adjacent lands. As stated therein, there are no plans for public use of the cooling lake. Lands adjacent to the cooling lake and inside the WCGS site boundary will be used to the extent practical as it was prior to its pur-chase for the WCGS site. The Visitors Ce'nter is located about 2.8 miles e ~ northwest of the plant at the Emergency Operations Facility' (EOF) complex (See Figure 2.1-6). The center occupies 760 square feet of display space in the EOF / Simulator / Visitors Center building. I l l l l I I l-l

4 -Q310.4 Section 2.1.3.2.11. mentions "an increase in the (ER) number of large rural homesites on nearby agricul-(2.1.3) tural land." .i'.e., within five miles of the site. Because of this increase, have the.1980 census results differed significantly from the 1980 pop-ulation forecasts in Table 2.1-2, ER-OL? If so, please revise the population data for the five mile area around the site. R310.4 Since census results are not generated based on distances from Wolf Creek, the applicants con-ducted a house survey in 1980 to determine the population distribution around the site. The actual 1980 population wichin 5 miles of Wolf Creek was 3,734 - versus 3,640 projected in Table 2.1-2, a difference of less than 3 percent. The sectors _ whose populations differed the most from that projected were those which contain Burlington and New Strawn. This is primarily attributable to increased numbe rs of temporary construction per-sonnel settling in these communities. Once Wolf Creek construction is complete the operations staff will only number 10 percent of the peak con-struction staff so that return to population fig-ures projected for the future in Table 2.1-2 is anticipated. Table 2.1-2 will be updated to re-flect the 1980 population information. 'l 4

+ Q310.5 Provide an estimate of the average annual number (ER) of - workers required for the operation of Wolf Creek Unit No.~1. State whether the workers are employees or contractors. Also provide an esti- ' mate of the average annual operating workers' pay-roll for.the unit.' R310.5 It is estimated that 284 persons including secur-ity personnel will be - required for the permanent operating staff of WCGS. All are expected to be KG&E e.aployees. '(This does not include additional or contract employment during refueling. ) The annual payroll for the first full year of operations is estimated to be $5.5 million. D 9 -,u

l -Q310.6 Local purchases of ~ goods and services for a nuc-(ER) lear power plant operation may frequently have a significant impact. on the local economy. (For these purposes local may be defined as either the host county or the host county and one or more contiguous counties.) Please provide information on local purchases of goods and services expected to be made by the plant during a typical year of aperation. To the extent possible, identify specific types of dollar amounts of these purchases. If it appears that there will be no significant -local purchases, ex-plain why. R310.6 Once-WCGS is in operation local purchases of goods and services will no longer be at the level of those purchases during che construction period. Many of the supply and maintenance items and the specialized services required for operations and maintenance are not available in the local area or are not price competitive. Most purchases will be made in Wichita and Kansas City. Local purchases i of goods - such as small tools and office supplies are unlikely to exceed $25,000 per year. I 5 J h l l 5 l l I

0310.7 Construct a table containing dollar estimates of (ER) taxes attributable -to Wolf Creek No. 1, for each of the first five full years of operation. Pro-vide - the dollar estimates by type of tax, and by taxing jurisdiction. What percent of the juris-dictions' tctal tax revenues are represented by the taxes attributable to the Wolf Creek No. 1 Plant? R310.7 The most significant impact of taxes attributable to WCGS will be on local jurisdictions within Coffey County. As shown in Table 310.7-1, WCGC will be paying taxes to 20 individual county jur-isdictions in amounts ranging in 1985 from $11 to $6,499,187 and contributing up to.99 percent of the revenues received by various' jurisdictions. In addition, WCGS will be paying about $600,000 per year to the State of Kansas for its education and institutions building. fund, based on property owned in Coffey County. Taxes will also be paid to other nearby counties through which_ transmission line will pass. Esti-mated amounts for these taxes are shown on Table 310.7-2, together with estimated income and fran-chise taxes for 1987. i J

.o O, $$ ef' M i'- f TABLE 310.7-1 J f VOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION i AD VALOR m TAX ESTIETES COFFEY COUNTY TAXI?G JURISDICIIONS 1985 - 1989 1985 1986 1987 % of '1UIAL % of 'IOTAL % of 'ICIAL ~ TAXIIC JURISDICTION VCGS TAX REVFRUES VCGS TAX REVmUES VEGS TAX REVDNES 1

i State of Kansas 593,089 3.61 S

600,166 3.59 606,155 3.57 Coffey County 6,499,187 89.61 6,576,910 89.30 6,642,726 88.82

• j Townships Avon 236 41.99 238 41.75 241 41.62 Hanpden 1,356 99.27 1,373 98.99 1,386 98.44 Pottawatomie 500 43.03 500 42.37 500 41.74 Star 194 48.87 197 48.76 199 48.54 Unified School Districts No. 243 32,778 5.43 33,079 5.39 33,379 5.36 No. 244 5,011,288 95.78 5,071,103 95.44 5,121,778 94.92 '

Ib. 245 32,139 5.22 32,987 5.28 33,332 5.25 Cemetary Districts Altanont 126 48.84 127 48.47 129 48.50 Bownan-Adgate 579 46.58 586 46.40 592 46.18 Pleasant Hill 272 53.23 276 53.18 279 52.94 Stringtown 2,980 99.33 3,014 98.95 3,045 98.42 Wharton 32 10.88 34 11.41 34 11.22~ Watersheds No. 24 11 .04 11 .04 11 .03 .No. 4C 635 4.03 675 4.21 681 4.19 No. 90 62 .10 63 .10 63 .10 No. 93 3,983 44.97 4,027 44.77 4,053 44.36 Fire Districts No. 5 581 4.96 588 4.95 5 94 4.92 lb. 40 1,304 11.92 1,304 11.73 1,304 11.55 i Southeast Kansas Regional ~ Library 197,668 54.16 200,042 53.97 202,119 53.69 4 Total $12,379,000 $12,527,300 $12,652,600 $1 l 1 U'

' LAB:2 310.7-1 T.E CREEK GENERATING STATION .O VALTEN TAX ESTIETES 'J COUNTY TAXING JURISDICTIONS 1985 - 1989 5 198'7 1988 1989 4 of 'IUIAL % of 'IOTAL % of 'IUTAL % of 'IOTAL REVENUES NCGS TAX REVENUES NCGS TAX REVENUES ICGS TAX REVENUES 3.59 606,155 3.57 612,200 3.55 618,411 3.53 89.30 6,642,726 88.82 6,709,070 88.34 6,776,197 87.86 41.75 241 41.62 243 41.33 246 41.21 98.99 1,386 98.44 1,400 97.83 1,414 97.32 42.37 500 41.74 500 41.08 500 40.45 48.76 199 48.54 201 48.32 204 48.43 5.39 33,379 5.36 33,780 5.34 34,081 5.30 95.44 5,121,778 94.92 5,173,035 94.40 5,214,721 93.89 5.28 33,332 5.25 33,672 5.22 34,013 5.20 48.47 129 48.50 130 48.15 131 47.64 46.40 592 46.18 598 45.93 604 45.69 53.18 279 52.94 282 52.71 284 52.30 98.95 3,045 98.42 3,074 97.84 3,104 97.27 11.41 34 11.22 35 11.36 35 11.22 .04 11 .03 11 .03 11 .03 4.21 681 4.19 688 4.17 694 4.14 .10 63 .10 64 .10 65 .10 44.77 4,053 44.36-4,078 43.95 4,104 43.56 4.95 594 4.92 600 4.89 606 4.87 11.7? 1,304 11.55 1,304 11.38 1,304 11.20 53.97 202,119 53.69 204,135 53.40 206,171 53.11 $12,652,600 $12,779,100 $12,906,900 a.

a - y TABLE 310.7-2 [ ESTIMATED AD VALORH4 TAXES 1985 - 1989 ($000) Coffey Anderson Butler Franklin Greenwood Johnson Lyon Miami Total Year County County County County County County County County All Counties 1985 12,379 34 66 116 77 17 5 48' 12,743 1986 12,527 34 70 118 81 17 12 49 12,909 l 1987 12,653 35 71 119 82 17 12 50 13,038 f 1988 12,779 35 72 120 83 18 13 50 13,169 i l 1989 12,907 35 72 121 84 .18 13 50 13,300 OIllER ESTIMATED TAXES 1987 N j (S000) } Federal Incorm $92,945 Kansas, Inocme & Frandlise 32,600 Missouri, Income & Gross Receipts 10,021 i l i l 4 I l-i I f

Q310.8 Please provide the distances of the proposed trans-(ER) mission corridors from the following properties , listed in the National Register of Historic Places: Samuel J. Tipton House Harris Vicinity Anderson County Columbia Bridge Peoria Franklin County I.-O. Pickering House Olathe Johnson County Please give the same information for any other archeological and historical sites or properties listed or eligible for listing located within 2 km of the corridors. R310.8 The distances of ' the proposed Wolf Creek-Craig transmission corridors from the following proper-ties are: Samuel J. Tipton House, 9.8 km; Colum-bia Bridge, 2.1 km; and I. O. Pickering House, 16.9 km. The Wolf Creek-Craig transmission line has been shortened (approximately 14 miles) and is now the Wolf Creek-West Gardner transmission line terminating at the West Gardner Substation (See response to NRC question 290.1). The National Register of Historic Places for Kansas dated February,

1981, obtained from the

-Kansas State Historical Society in Topeka, was examined to determine if any other archaeological and historical sites or properties were located within 2 km of the transmission corridors. None 'were found within 2 km of the corridors. The nearest site (greater than-4.3 km) was the C. N. James. Cabin, 305 S. State

Street, Augusta in Butler County.

i

311.0 -SITING ANALYSIS BRANCH Q311.1 As published' in the Federal Register (Vol. 45, No. 116, June.13, 1980, Pages 40101-40104) the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has revised its policy regarding accident considerations in. National-Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews._ Informa-tion regarding _ the site as well as events arising from causes external to the plant which are con-sidered possible contributors to - the risk asso-ciated.with the plant are to be discussed. Refer-ences to safety evaluations is acceptable provided the Environmental Report contains a complete over- . view with references to specific sections of the FSAR. Accordingly, please provide an analysis of all offaite activities and an assessment of poten-tial. hazards' including: (1) transportation, -(2) mining and mineral exploration and/or opera-tions, (3) industrial activities, and (4) military activity. R311.1 The requested analysis is presently provided in WCGS FSAR Addendum Section

2. 2.

.The necessary references will be included in the next revision to ER(OLS). f

Q311.2 Section 2.1.2.3, Page 2.1-9, discusses. peak month-(ER) ly transient population at John Redmond Reservoir. ~ .(2.1~.2.3) Please provide an estimate of peak daily usage.as well. R311;2 The. Corps of Engineers has recreational use sta-tistics which indicate that during an average summer month daily use of the. recreational area averages 1,400 persons. Peak usage of the John Redmond ' Reservoir occurred on July 5, 1979 when 10,820 persons entered the recreational area. I i l i i l i r n - e.,

w -- I i 0311.3 Section 2.1.3.2.9,1Page 2.1-18, and Figure 2.1-23 (ER)- identifies several abandored.and one operating (2.1.3.2) quarry within 5 mi3es. It is difficult to read Figure 2.1-23.- Please clearly identify the loca-- tion-of these quarries. Please identify the maxi-mum quantity and type of any explosives stored at the quarries. Please identify the frequency, quantity and transportaton route for each explo- -sive type delivered to each quarry. R311.3 Active and abandoned quarries within 5 miles of the plant site are identified in-new Figure 2.1-23a. Abandoned quarries do not have explo-slves stored at the quarry. The only operating quarry is ' located 3 miles south-southeast of the plant site (See Figure 2.1-23a). The maximum quantity' of explosives stored at this quarry is approximtely 15 tons of ammonium nitrate-fuel oil mixture. Irregular shipments of up to 15 tons of this explosive are delivered to the qua rry via US75 and FAS10 (Figure 2.1-7). US75 is utilized to deliver explosives to other quarries located beyond five miles from WCGS. The maximum load the shippe r 's trucks can carry is 20 tons of explo-sives. Usually less than a maximum load is loaded on a truck for delivery with the explosives con-sisting of 75 percent ammonium nitrate-fuel oil mixture and 25 percent class A explosives. l 1 l l t

Q311.4' Figures 2.1-3,.5, 6 and 7, etc., show an abandoned .(ER) A.T. & S.F. railroad line passing through the Wolf ~ .(2.1) . Creek Site. FSAR question 310.01 requested an ex-planation of the status of this line and' discus-sion of any easements which. may exist relative to this railroad line. For completeness, please in-clude your response to FSAR question 310.01 in the E R. R311.4 The information requested-by FSAR question 310.01 .was already contained in the FSAR Addendum Section 2.2.1.4 as follows: The Santa Fe Railroad and right-of-way located 0.3 mile west of the plant site is abandoned. By Interstate Commerce Commission Order in Finance Docket No. 26591, dated February 4, 1972, caption-ed Atchinson, Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad Company Abandonment, B.H. Junction and Gridley, Franklin and Coffey Counties, it was orde re d that the branch line of the ' railroad extending between milepost 0.0 at B.H. Junction, Kansas, and mile-pos t 5 2 plus 1,518 feet at Gridley, Kansas, be abandoned. With this abandonment, title of the right-of-way property reverted to the fee simple title owners. This' paragraph will be included in the next revi-sion to the ER(OLS). 4 I i l 1 l

320.0 UTILITY FINANCE BRANCH Q320.1 Please provide further information on KEPCo, in-(ER)' cluding present status of purchase of 17% of WCGS (1.1) and of applications for membership in SPP and MOKAN,. and the ' latest annual report. Please pro-vide - information available for KEPCo which corre-sponds to that given for KG&E and KCPL in Tables 4-6, 16-18, 25-34 of the section 1.1. R320.1 The purchase of a 17 percent interest of WCGS by KEPCo has been approved by the Kansas Corporation Commission, and the Kansas State Legislature has passed an authorization measure.. This measure was signed by the Governor on April 17, 1981. EEPCo will apply for membership in SPP and MOKAN as soon as the purchase is completed. This is ex-pected by October,1981. It is not possible to provide more detailed infor-mation on KEPCo than is provided in the text and tables of the ER(OLS) revised. As shown in Table 1.1-3, KEPCo's only owned capacity will be the 195.5 MW of WCGS in 1984 and two low-head hydro projects with 29.35 MW in 1986. Consolidated data are not available on system fuel costs, peak hour conditions, interchanges, etc., nor are comparisons maintained on system forecasts and actual peaks and energy for the 27 member cooperatives. m

k Q320.2: In section~1.3.'l of the ER-OL, reserve margin'de-(ER)' ficiencies due to-delay-of WCGS operation are (1.3)- stated which for Sunflower Electric exceed expect-ed sales to Sunflower by KEPCo. Please given de-tails of KEPCo/ Sunflower generation and purchases to support the margins stated. 7 R320.2 Section 1.3-1 of the ER(OLS) has been revised. The earlier ' statements are not applicable. ? f, 3

d - Q320.3~ .On p. I' 1-27 of the ER-OL in thy description of (ER) 'the KCPL.econometric model C, R and DW are not (1.1) defined. Please do so. R320.3 Definitions of terms not identified are as follows: C = Constant R = :Coef ficient - of determination -2 2 R =R. adjusted DW =.Durbin/ Watson. coefficient J 4 i i l l f r o

Q320.4 There-~ appear. te. be typographical slips, in the (ER) tables for Section 1.1 of the OL-ER.- For exam-( 1.'1 )

ple, in - Table 1.1-12 all' entries in the third column (GWII increase) from 1980 on are inconsist-ent with columns 2 and 4.

Please provide any cor-recte.d tables for Section 1.1. R320.4-Table 1.1-12 has been corrected and revised. All tables in Section 1.1 of the ER(OLS) have been up-dated with the exception of Table 1.1-7a..-

Q320.5 Please provide current. revised numbers for any

(ER)-

entries-in Tables B.2-1 and 2 which have been sig- .(1.3) nificantly affected by changes in interest and escalation rates since completion.of the ER-OL. Please provide any corresponding revisions of the text tables on p. 1.3 -3. ~ R320.5 Tables 8.2-1 and 8.2-2 have been revised, as have the text tables on pages. l.3-3 and 1.3-4. 4 l l l

4 10320.6-Please provide the most recent ' forecast (if-any) (ER) updated by the current actual numbers of the elec-tricity demand and the capacity for the applicants and the powerpools. R320.6 The most recent forecasts of energy and demand, together with 1980 actual experience are given for KG&E and KCPL in Tables 1.1-12 and 1.1-13. KEPCo actual experience through 1979 - and forecasts are provided in Table 1.1-14. Capacity data for the Applicants are presented in Tables 1.2-1, 1.1-2, 1.1-3, 1.1-4a and 1.1-Sa. SPP and MOKAN energy, peak load and capacity data are presented in Tables 1.1-8, 1.1-9, 1.1-10 and 1.1-11.

g, Q320.7 Please provide, the estimate or evaluation of a -- ( E R ) reduction -in the demand for electricity-(use-and capacity) as a result of various Ioad management programs by the. Applicant. R020.7 The forecasts ~ for energy ' and peak load in Tables 1.1-12, 1.1-13 and 1.1-14 take into account the effects of loaa management programs and reduced. rates of growth- . demand related to population, economic and social factors.. It has not yet been possible to isolate the individual factors that contribute to a reduction in a growth rate. n s + l

s 1Q320.8 Please provide the-change (if any) in the reserve '.( ER) - i requirements.of the applicant and the powerpool. R320;8-There have. been ' no changes ' to date in the reserve -requirements for the Applicants and the-power pools.' f V a-1 T 4 P O 1 + ---m-m 9c--*------&i e t' +- q-w,y ++-e, -7, y= 9 y 9-.- e ey.y. 9~-+ 9,----

e 1 Q320.9 Please provide the fuel mix'you would use in pro-(ER)- viding the replacement energy in case WCGS does not.come on line. Also, provide the cost of pro-ducing, electricity (mil ;/kwh) by each fuel type. R320.9' The fuel mixes to be used in providing replacement energy : in.the event of a delay for WCGS are given in Table 1.1-30 and shown below: FUEL MIX WITHOUT WCGS IN PERCENT ~1. Year Delay 2 Year Delay 3 Year Delay KG&E Coal 61.7 57.4 60.4 Oil 0.3 5.4 4.9 Gas 38.0 37.2 34.7 KCPL Coal 97.3 97.0 93.2 Oil 2.6 2.9 6.8 ' Gas 0.1 0.1 0.1 Estimated fuel costs for replacement energy are: FUEL COSTS IN MILLS PER KWH 1 Year Delay 2 year Delay 3 Year Delay KG&E KCPL KG&E KCPL KG&E KCPL Coal 18.8 19.6 20.5 21.9 22.4 24.7, Oil 61.1 191.6 71.0 207.6 76.7 199.6 Gas 37.7 55.4 45.3 70.2 51.4 91.5 Oil costs went down for third year of delay for ECPL because the oil units will change from low-load spinning reserve units to operation as base load. units. The oil units operate at a more i efficient heat rate when fully loaded. These fuel costs may be compared with the follow-ing estimated nuclear fuel costs in mills per Kwh: l MILLS PER KWH AT CAPACITY FACTORS OP: l .60 .50 .75 .65 [ 1984 8.9 9.1 1987 8.1 8.3 i

Q320.10 Please provide the capacity-charge, and the price (ER) of electricity paid to the powerpool to satisfy i the future demand increase in case WCGS does not come on line. Please provide the portion of total incremental demand satisfied by in-house genera- ' tion and the purchase from powerpool. R320.10' It is assumed that this question refers to charges that are based. on pool obligations. Therefara, the capacity deficiencies used are those shown in Tables 1.1-1 and 1.1-2 which contain data reported' to the MOKAN pool. If WCGS were delayed, KG&E and KCPL would have to make capacity purchases from outside their systems to cover projected deficien-cies in capacity responsibility. These capacity deficiencies are based on each utility's expected " capacity responsibility" which includes its sys-tem-demand plus firm purchases and sales, etc. ~ On this basis the projected capacity deficiencies will be as follows, in the event of a delay: Capacity Deficiencies in MW Delay in Years KG&E KCPL One '37 178 Two 97 285 KCPL 's deficiencies are based on 20 percent re-serve margin while KG&E's are 15 percent. KG&E estimates the capacity charge would be $156.30/KW per _ year. through 1984, calculated as follows: Capacity charge = $610 per KW x fixed charged rate of approximately .23 $140.30 plus = fixed ope rations and maintenance (O&M) costs of $16/KW per year = $156.30 Through 1985 the capacity charge would be $140.30 plus fixed O&M costs of $17.60/KW per year = $157.90 I KCPL estimates that the capacity charge in the time frame 1985-1987 would range between $125 and $250/KW per year. If the capacity charges estimated by KG&E are ap- -plied to the capacity deficiencies above, the fol-lowing total capacity charges are obtained.

1 c R320.10 Cont'd Capacity Charges-Delay in Years KG&E KCPL 'One $ ' 5,7 83,100 $27,821,400 Two '$15,316,300 $45,001,500 in addition.to the capacity cha ges there would be energy costs. In the event of a delay for-WCGS, KG&E would use all available coal capacity but then purchase as much outside coal capacity as possible before burning more expensive oil or gas .in KG&E plants. It is assumed that the full capa-city deficiency would be purchased about 60 per-cent of the time. On this basis the costs would be as follows: For a one year delay: 37,000 x 8760'x.60 x 1.47C per KWH = $2,858,738 For a two year delay: 97,000 x 8760 x.60 x 1.620 per KWH = $8,259,278 If 'for the purpose of illustration KCPL's energy costs are computed on the same basis, they would be for one year: 178,000 x 8760 x.60 x 1.47C/KWH $13,752,850 = For two years: 2 8 5, 0 f.s 0 x 8760 x.60 x 1.62C/KWH $24,266,952 = The total capacity charges and energy costs would then be: Ibtal Cost in Thousands Delay Cost Elenent KG&E KCPL One year Capccity charge $ 5,783 $27,821 E ergy cost 2,859 13,753 'Ibtal $ 8,642 $ 41,574 Two Years Capacity charge $15,316 $45,002 Ene w cost 8,259 24,267 'Ibtal 23,575 69,269 Two Years Total Cumulative $32,217 $110,843 Costs Any delay of '1 CGS would cause KG&E to burn large . quantities of gas and oil.

R320.10 Cont'd. It is assumed that " total incremental' demand" re-fers _ to the increase in capacity responsibility without WCGS for the years 1984 over 1983 and 1985 over 1984. The table which follows gives the pro-jected.KG&E system capacity responsibility ~both with and without WCGS. Projectal KG&E Systen Capacity Responsibility 1983-1985 KG&E Total System KG&E Capacity System Capacity Responsibility" Capacity Balan With ICGS 1983 2050 2111 +61 1984 2091 2549 +458 1985 2151 2549 +398 Without ICGS 1983 2050 b 2111 +61 98 Incmase 1984 2148 b 2111 -37 60 Incmas 1985 2208 2111 -97 ^ Includes KG&E system demand plus firm transactions. bThe 57 MW increase in capacity responsibility in 1984 and 1985 without WCGS is due to KG&E's power supply obligations to REC's which cre different with and without WCGS. If the " total incremental demand" is defined as the increase in capacity responsibility without WCGS for the years 1984 over l'J 8 3 and 1985 over 1984, then the following situation would exist: In 1984 without WCGS, there would be a 98 MW in-crease in demand, 37 MW of which would have to be purchased outside KG&E. The remaining 61 MW would be satisfied by existing generation. In 1985 there would be an additional 60 MW increase in de-mand, all of which would have to be purchased out-side KG&E. On a cumulative two year basis the increase would amount to 158 MW of which 97 MU would have to be purchased outside KG&E. KCPL will have to ..ake up any deficits through purchases outs ide the utility ' based on a 20% reserve).

.s .\\- O'320.11 What fixed charge. rate has been used to calculate. -(ER) .the capital cost portion of the total cost of gen-erating electricity by nuclear fuel? Please refer to Table - B. 2-2. Why is fixed charge into year c.,- 1986-higher.than the year 1983 -(26 9.10 vs. 217.58 million dollars)? :What inflation rates have been used to arrive - at 1986 numbers in this table. and other placas? R320.11- . Fixed chargc rates used to calculate the capital cost portien of the cost of generating electricity by. nuclear fuel are-as fo14ows: 1984 (Applied for 9 months) 1987 K G & E - 23.0% 24.0% KCPL 27.23 21.63 KEPCo 13.82 12.71 The differences in the calculated amounts shown in Table 8.2-2 ~ are due to the facts that the fixed charge is applied for 9 ' months in 1964 and that taxes and costs of money are different for the _ndividual owners year by year. i Inflation rates vary by year but in general are thoso estimated by Data F.asources, Inc. For 1980 and future years they are as follows: INFLATION RATES BY YEARS 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 Materials 9.5 9.9 10.0 9'. 0 8.6 9.8 9.6 Labor 10.0-10.9 10.6 10.5 10.5 11.4 10.4 The composite escalation rate over the life of the project is estimated to be 8.3 percent. s 1 I l Iz { l j

a. sv 3..- e c w,, 0 fA$f 9<>4*%, i + %/// l MAGE EVALUATION N TEST TARGET (MT-3) 4 t I l.0 Em HM Ef El lE o m l-l 's E 2 E l e ' e.: / II l.8 !.25 l I.4 '11.6 ll- / 4 6" $p*<>+>, # ^ ++sp f,/ '%gQ)(4 b c, s, s l-J

F .~ .li ( Q320.12 Please; refer to pages l.1-a3 and 1.3-3. -Please T .(ER)_ or - consumptions (in terms of quantity-and dollar provide the basis for calculating the fuel savings . ( 1.1 ) 'both)'resulting from bringing or not bringing WCGS -l on 'line. The unit of coal consumption on.this 1 table appears to be incorrect. The response to Question 3 may be extended to answer Question 6. R320.12 Both KG&E and KCPL use computer runs to estimate future system consumption of fuels and to optimize station use so as to -achieve lowest total cost. Unit fuel costs projected to exist in future years are applied to the quantities obtained to deter-mine the costs for additional ~ fossil fuels. -In comparing costs with and without WCGS, a-credit'is taken for nuclear fuel not burned in the without WCGS case..The results af these computations are given on page 1.3-3 and shown below: ADDITIOtRL FUEL Q NSUbFIION AND QSTS WITHOUT ICGS AND WITH INDICATED DELAYS Unit 1985 1986 1987 Fuel Measure One Two Cumulatim Three Cumulative Year Year Year Delay _ Delay Delay KG&E Coal (000) Tons Oil (000) Bbls 236 697 933 683 1,616 Gas f4CF 31,639 29,352 61,171 29,929 91,100 Net Mditional Fuel Cost (000) $89,156 $137,590 $226,645 $167,034 $393,780 KCPL Coal (000) Tons 800 954 1,754 1,057 2,811 Oil (000) Bba 129 206 335 693 1,028 Gas MSCF 50 15 65 0 65 Net Additional Fuel Cost (000) $21,270 $32,994 $54,264 $82,211 $136,475 '1UTAL Coal (000) Tons 800 954 1,754 1,057 2,811 Oil (000) Bbls 365 903 ,268 1,376 2,644 Gas fGCF 31,689 29,367 61,236 29,929 91,165 Net Mditional Fuel Cost (000) $110,426 $170,584 $280,910 $249,245 $530,255

T. 'O e

t. '

4 - l i. . Q320.13:

Please provide' new 1 estimates, if any,. of. decom-

-l ~ ~ (ER)/ 'missioning and' dismantling costs. R320.13 -No'new'estim'ates'.have been~made of decommissioning. -and" dismantling' costs. M

450.0 ACCIDENT EVALUATION BRANCH 0450.1 Will applicant initiate pre-operational fog moni-(ER) toring program to provide baseline data? If so, provide details of the plan. If not,_ explain why such.a study will not be undertaken. R450.1 A pre-operational fog monitoring program is being planned. The purp'ose of the study is to. document-the frequency.of occurrence of. natural fog (as- . opposed to fogs induced by the operation of the cooling lake) along Highway 75 which is located from 0.5 miles to

2. 0 miles west of the cooling lake.

Table 2.3-29 of the WCGS FSAR Addendum Revision 1 2/81 shows that the predominant frequency of light wind (less than 3 meters per second) is from the sectors southeast through south. This corre-sponds with the Dames & Moore Program FOGALL anal-yses which shows the maximum increase in cooling lake induced fogging frequency along IIighway 75 to occur approximately 3 miles south through 2 miles nc -h of New Strawn, Kansas. Whi2a the details of the fog monitoring program are not completely defined at this time, it is anticipated that a transmissometer and continuous analog recorder will be installed along Ifighway 75 at a point within 2 to 3 miles of New Strawn, Kansas. The instrument will continuously monitor visibility at an elevation of 1.5 to 2 mete rs above ground level. Maximum visibility resolution will be at least 100 meters. The fog monitoring program will be initiated in 1981 and will continue through plant startup. An annual analysis will be pe rformed to categorize fogging occurrences by visibility classes and to correlate fog occurrences with the meteorological data acquired at the WCGS meteorological tower. A detailed description of the specific fog moni-toring program will be provided in forthcoming revisions to the WCGS ER(OLS) and FSAR Addendum. l l

t ~Q450.2 Please provide a transportation map detailing any - (ER) controlled roads,- uncontrolled -roads, and = rail-roads within two miles of 'the cooling lake. In addition, if available, provide data on the extent of - traffic density on ' the : controlled and uncon-trolled roads. R450.2 See Figure 450.2-1. Cof fey County-has not developed traffic ~ flow data for the-roads near the cooling lake. The-follow-ing data are annual ave rage daily traf fic_ esti-mates (AADT) made by the Kansas Highway Commission for Highway 75 north of-Burlington between the city limit and New Strawn. Year AADT 1972 3000 1976 2880 1978 3800 1980 4685 Traffic counts were made by KG&E in 1979 to deter-mine the impact of construction-related traffic on local highways. These counts would not be relevant to the operational period for WCGS. It is estimated that during operations the average daily traffic on the controlled access road to the plant will be between 350 and 400 vehicles. d-----

? ff** 9 g g g,l c., e av,, - ~- --AA ~y< . fi. ., "g _ .n. _.. l._ =..,....l... 5 8 t .c lh.... 1 -. f.. - --~ r, l*' l o j 3 s sj..is j. o , 9..' w , s,. kt. .,r 2.,..:.., ).......p... ..'pa._k.. -

.. 3~,

3. ~,,

u j t y, 3 j .l..n....j.. _ , g... ... 7 N ___,7.. y. l o j. ._g . p....g..m. ...p.... ,...a t q & l3.h,..._l.J..... ..L.c..l..=- @ml,.:..,. ..L I ._t. +-...._, A,: ~l. ._s g. !.p i. n l A .i. 3 g.. f.......;.....g. _.-r m.. # .t. 4 - g _. s. ._+..o. I 13 A 16 _' y.h;y -- ~ I a ...i......'....,_.. . $e_ ~ 4... 4 ; 49_ q c 4 l. ~~ e 2:, 9 lt ._ g,,g..,.., 3..A ~ +-

i..

.i i-- t,. ,.n.i..,...f........, ) e., l. T.,. n +..l.... l o 'y 3 a,., L. ....s ..:__.. L.. .... A..+...,.... s. i..u. -s , __..ct..'l_...ww.., .fr. 7. m s, _. i..v t,.%.,.,. v..,,,.;, 1. (.. t /- w ,... +. .y .s ..,...a..,. w. 3., 6 i .p/ s j (sjerg..'l..s 2,t.i4. ' ,{ y.- -yl g ,,m i. .l .j '.. g,. { .i. g l y dt....:....h,L a.L.,1.. A,l.~... ..r.- t \\yb; ' u. ! .i i i l (hrLyI )/ 4 I.: =.7 3..... r,[-. - p )g, l 1 l ....l" ,f..{ .t.,.., . r -- - - i,->. .]

(,

>I QM I

}

a.> t_..>.. . t M, e*i ['--!. _S +- l--{ { J, T..l. 4......,..$..s..r-- 4 f,d- ...l.-,--i. r..-l,- L, M,--- r ].i-I .a. .l. ,\\ l I . _..... 4.... _...{a.....!. _ p., .s .w ..,. )l..,.. g .~.. s. .....p t r...,.... ._i t_ ...1r l 6 k I.. 9>,....i [- g 2 l f . % nt, 2

• 2 2

(\\ 8 'i. WA.O[,.,\\, _9 ,t ' m, m ^ Ci

l. ' t l' D r

7.g.. ).. - l. g'. i j i ~. , = --.4 ,2... _.. ' ._p.+. 8,..Q.y' \\. O g._ I i ).' e .s g

- _ -/m;l 10 i.

m. ,i

4. _ 4... s.

4....

4. j_ ._)._......__ u n-l .J' i r rr .,g ._ _... I l 9r 1

r. ' -

v.- k, a j J l_ 4.._s... 4 = .....l.. i

g..,

4 w# .. k.p

l.,

c .g y.. j f l !_.a.. . I...j.f.j -4.. L g. 4,.43p- .g l l l-7' - * '_ ll ...l .L.,..,_, N_p .a.._l_..n,..,._.... N _ ....s _.u,. s _g p i.e d. J.,.. f* I I L,., _ __ __,,.. i /, I. l ' t.

1..

g.: l l 1 1 l -l.3......~ ;.j.. p __+... ;- s...._ l g i . i...I. ... e ..,.,g. u.4".. 4.... ; w 1 i

g..{

t 5 u -.. i

• '. 4.,.. l-V-- -V--,+ - ;

-- q.1 .b %..,...... + ..- - ---. 4 - + -- 1 w ,- i., .0 l r .-2 l_..._l.u.1{.....j..l_...h.....'... q....d. -,..... l a {. ...... ;..L.p $ 4'.[p 1 ] 39 )s [f<. l n i..., T-. i i .L _..;_._.g.iq..4..gg{.i

g...

o _ _.s.,..d j g 4' . l l Q, l. s l. s., a i

3. s e * "+ -.- ;.---. 4 7

I l. l } *. g g b- -M 2- - --J l- ' I ' '" .. L. i...r b --- - --.---- ,Q WoODsO* 9 C OU f, I I, .t t 07 ? t P e y e P00R ORIGINAL l 1 l l FIGURE 111.1 l l l EVACUATION ROUTES l REV.2 Q q W, 3, 4 /81 L

h .? ( Q L( 5>O 7 [. 4 J TABLE III.1 W b .y Evacuation Routes (Sheet 1 of 2) 9,! k Subzone Route Identification per Figure III.1 .[- IA y8 p f,, Center (a) FAS 1935 east (1) to Anderson County ?,, f (0-2 mile) (b) FAS 153 east (2) to FAS 149 north (4) t u to Kansas 31 north (5) to Osage County F c, ,,ft.S. '.: y, ]:- Al U.S. 75 north (3) to Osage County j ' g [%. p D1 FAS 153 cast (2) to FAS 149 north (4) to 3 Kansas 31 north (5) to osage County

s p,

,Q i C1 (a) FAS 149 north (4) to Kansas 31 north (5) ji L f ( to Osage County f (b) FAS 10 east (6) to Anderson County jf 4 'f.L lf,. D1 (a) U.S. 75 south (7) to Woodson County 5ffI ,dg49 (b) FAS 10 west (8) to Lyon County j (_ (c) FAS 1472 (10) east to Anderson Coun;;y 41l (*' n] 1 El (a) U.S. 75 north (3) to Osage County g[ iz/ (b) U.S. 75 south '7) to loodson County W. tl ki A2 (a) U.S. 75 north (3) to Osage County QW( { (b) Kansas 31 north (5) .o Osage County 'l B2 FAS 1134 west (9) to FAS 149 north (4) to Kansas 31. north (5) to Osage County .g4 ![ C2 (a) FAS 1935 (1) to Anderson County Q 'Z ( .f (b) FAS 10 cast (6) to Anderson County f C3 (a) FAS 10 east (6) to Anderson County t (b) FAS 1472 (10) to FAS 1135 north (11) to ].y . + f.. FAS 10 east (6) to Anderson County .l[)h ,I ,$e (c) FAS 1135 south (11) to Kansas 57 cast (12) ,J,7% ; ' i-to Anderson County b f. n '. C4 (a) Kansas 57 east (12) to Anderson County ?, 7,ggj,;j l l '[. (b) FAS 1135 south (11) to Kansas 57 east (12) g g. to Anderson County

f. 3 gs y-D2 U.S.

75 south (7) to Woodson County j 4.j- ? l t D D3 (a) FAS 10 west (8) to Lyon County s .lb (b) U.S. 75 south (7) to Woodson County Y, h,f y o z"1 E2 FAS 10 west (8) to Lyon County n e t[f[ [ l $ Rev. 2 . Li 4/81

g c{ 50.1 -- g .,m: 9 ~[ T-TABLE-III.1' (Sheet 2 of.2)' h) Subzone Route Identification per Figure III.1 E3 (a) FAS 793: north (13) to old U.S. 50 west (15) to Lyon' County. -(b) U.S. 75 north (3)-to Osage County E4- .(a) U.S. 75 north (3)-to Osage County. (b) FAS 793 north (13) to old U.S. 50 west (15) to-Lyon County K l^ Kansas 57 east (12) to Anderson County K2 Kansas-57 cast (12) to Anderson County. K3 Kansas 57 west (14) to Greenwood County K4 Kansas 57 west (14) to Greenwood County K5 FAS 10 west ( 's ) to Lyon County K6 FAS 152 nort- (16) to old U.S. 50 west (15) to Lyon Cov.ity ) K7 (a) U.S. 75 north (5) to Osage County i (b) Old U.S. 50 west (15) to Lyon County K8 Kansas 31 north (5) to Osage County \\_ / Note: Numbers in parentheses indicate road segment numbe rs as identified in Figure III.1. Rev. 2 4/81

V a 1.0450.3~ ' Please provide ' a - copy of 'the ' latest ' version ~ of the' -(ER)1 FOGALL Model. User's. Guide.

R450.3-

One --_ complete' copy of 'the FOGALL' certification / ;

users manual-is being provided.- This ' manual con ' tains proprietary program code : listings. which.are not to become public. record. This information is provided. only to assist the NRC in its evaluation of WCGS ER(OLS) and WCGS FSAR Addendum. 9 9 . e i i i I o r

= j., s v .Q450.4 ilease provide. documentation of_-the: procedure used . ER). to' talidate the FOGALL Model. ( R450.4 The procedure used to validate the FOGALL model is' - descri'Jed.in the certification / users manual pro-vided-in response to Question 450.3. The verification of ' FOGALL was performed by-exe- ~~; two test cases and -manually calculating the <;+ ced results. One test ' case utilized source wucer temperatu re constant with time and area. The second case varied - the source water tempera-ture over the source prea'cach hour. In addition, hand, calculations were performed to verify-that the' results of each subroutine conformed with the respective. applied theoretical model or mathmeti-cal equation. The model design is based upon accepted principles of atmospheric physics; computed values _ wore hand ve rified ; and the - test-cases were designed to- . detect fog, no fog, ice, and no ice conditions at. defined receptors. The valida tion procedure, therefore, provides a high degree of confidence that' the FOGALL results are 'tepresentative of. actual conditions. i

r I s I t-I.- 4 7 0. 0 ' ' RADIOLOGICAL' ASSESSMENT BRANCH I .Q470.'1 ' Confirm that:.the land : use in : Table 2'.1-18 has ' not

(ER)

. changed since 1978. (2.1.3.2.4) ~ .R470.1 ..See new Table 2.1-18a which provides' updated'near-est receptor information determined-in 1980. Dose calculations presented in Section 5.2 are -based upon the 1980 receptor information. 1 4

TABIE 2.1-18a DISTANCC 'IO NEAREST PIANT BOUNDARY, RESIDE?CE, VEI;ETABLE GARDEN AND LIVESIOCK WITHIN 5 MILES ^ Distance From Reactor (Miles) Nearest Nearest Ibarest Nearest Nearest Plant Nearest Vecytable Meat Dairy Dairy Sector Boundary Residence Garden -Animal Cow Goat Milk Consumers'. N 1.1 1.4 1.4 1.1 None None 2 adult's NNE 1.1 2.6 2.7 0.8 4.7 None 3 adults /2 children NE 1.3 1.8 2.1 0.8 tbne None ENE 1.5 2.0 2.2 0.8 None None E 1.2 1.8 1.8 1.2 1.8 None 2 adults ESE 1.2 1.6 1.6 1.2 1.7 None 2 adults SE 1.2 1.4 1.4 1.2 1.4 None 2 adults /2 teens /2 children-SSE 3.0 3.0 3.2 ,3. 2 5.0 None 2 adults /1 infant S 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.3 None None SSW 1.7 4.6 4.6 4.6 lbne None SW 1.5 2.2 2.2 1.6 None Ibne WSW 1.5 2.7 2.7 1.5 4.7 None Variour local families W 2.2 2.2 2.8 None ?bne hMI 2.1 2.9 2.9 2.1 tbne Ibne ?M 2.6 1.3 1.4 2.2 3.5 tbne various local families' Ntu 1.5 2.2 2.2 2.0 lbne None Sour : Field In vestigation, Kcaas Gas and Electric Company,1980. u

+ 1a % ' ' ~ .Q470.2 ' Provide information concerning the ' location of the (ER) . visitors center and an estimate-of the number-of (2.1.3.3.4) visitors anticipated annually. -R470.2 The Visitor's Center is located:in the EOF complex about. 2.8 miles northwest of the power block (See Figure 2.1-6). The numLar of visitors anticipated annually at the Visitor's Center is -5,000 - 7,000 based on~ projections of visits to the Wolf Creek construction site.

e 1 S 1 j ~Q470.'3 What'is the fraction of daily ' intake of. cows de-

(ER) rived ~ from 2 pasture lduring' the ' grazing '. season?

-(2.1.-15) R470'.3 Essentially 100 percent -' of the daily intake of cattle is-derived from pasture :-during the grazing season. _. As the pasture. becomes : depleted ' late in each. annual grazing --. season, farmer-stockmen may. ' provide-supplemental feed to. their pastured -live-stock. b J

~ H, j ?- ~

~Q470~4:

. Provide information : concerting -the'. population (ER) served. by the City of. Le oy's. Municipal Water ~ (2.1.3.4.1)= System. - 'R470.4 The.. population of LeRoy-determined during the 1980 census is 624 persons. L

3 L 1 n,. -Q470;5-Provide i a - copy of the :information referenced in L(ER) Section~5.2 that.was to have been updated in -mid-l(5.2)' J1980. R470'.5= Updated gaseous and-' radiological dose information will be'provided.in June 1981. f J 1 s... u r,..

-m iL ~;o WCGS-ER(OLS) v,,

APPEND'X SA I

DOSE-CALCULATION MODELS.AND ASSUMPTIONS , Tall' dose cale:ulations have been ' revised by means of the NRC computer codes GASPAR. and. LADTAP II. Computer programs. ARRG, CRITR, _GRONK, and FOOD developed at the Pacific North-west Laboratory of Battelle Memorial L Institute - are no--longer being used. The models and assumptions ; used in LADTAP II .and - GASPAR are ~ identical or similar to those suggested in NRC Regula tory Guide 1.109. A list _ of. assumptions and pa ramete rs _used for the Wolf Creek site _ are presented in Table SA for liquid effluents and Table SA-2 for gaseous-effluents. SA.1 INTERNAL DOSES TO AQUATIC ORGANISMS .Ieses to aquatic and terrestrial organisms other than man kere calculated using NUREG/CR-1276 LADTAP II - "A Computer Program for Calculating Radiation Exposure-to Man from Routine Release of Nuclear Reactor Liquid Effluents." The models used by this program are taken from Regulatory Guide-1.113, 1.109 and USAEC publication, WASH-1258. SA.2 DOSE TO IlUMANS' Doses.to ~ man from liquid effluents were calculated using NUREG/CR-1276 LADTAP, - II computer program. The models used by this program are taken from Regulatory Gri.de 1.113 and 1.109. Doses to man from gaseous effluents were calculated using NUREG-0597 GASPAR - "A Computer Program for the Eval-uation of Radiological Impacts Due to the Releaue-of Radio-active Material to the Atmosphere During Normal Operation of Light Wate r Reactors. " The models used by this program are taken from Regulatory Guide 1.111 and 1.109. 5A.3 RECONCENTRATION FORMULA USED TO CALCULATE RECONCENTRA-TION FACTORS FOR LIQUID EFFLUENTS ACCUMULATING IN A REACTOR COOLING LAKE Reconcentration models were based on Reg. Guido 1.113 and "Radionuclide Accumulation in a Reactor USEPA EPA-520 Cooling Lake." Calculated reconcentration factors for the lake and at the circulating water discharge are presented in Table 5A-3. Reconcentration was -determined as follows: Rev. 2 5A-1 6/81 J

7:.,:= q , p .g.,

. a.

..

l '! L WCGS-ER(OLS)1 t.,.a f ' ) +HCo e Lake A of f t ~ C=Y "If (1 - e T-Concentration .C = concentration-'of radionuclide in~the lake at the end.of'thelperiod Co = ~ concentration in the lake at the beginning-of - time period t-W = Ci/yr rate radioactivity is added to the lake .VT = lake volume ft O A + pb Aeff = T

• 693

\\ = the radionuclide: decay constant. T T = radiological half life L Ob = lake blowdown rate cfs ~t = time O = plant pumping rate cfs g R = reconcentration of radionuclide in the lake at-the end cf the period R = reconcentration in.the lake at the beginning of time period t 9 R= C= therefore g QP P U - A ef f t ~ R=V Aeff (1 - e ) +R e L ke o T Reconcentration Ccw = concentration at circulating water discharge point Ccw = C +S and S 0 C=0 P P W therefore (R + 1) -- = Ccw Circulating Water Op Discharge Concentration R + 1 = reconcentration of radionuclide at the circulating water discharge j Rev. 2 SA-2 6/81

e. -

.. e WCGS-ER(OLS) m. 5A.4: REFERENCES A ttachment - ~ to Concluding Statement-of Position of the Reg. ulatory Staf f. _ Public Rule-making Hearing on: Numer-ical Guides - for Design Objectives 'and -Limiting Condi-tions :for Operation to Meet the Criterion "As Low As Practicable" for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled' Nuclear Power

Stations, USAEC, Docket No.

RM-50-2, February 20, 1974.

Eckerman, K.

F. and Lash, D. G., 197-8 GASPAR version marked " revised 8/19/77": ~ US. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Radiological Assessment Branch. Eckerman, K. F.,

Congel, F.

J., Roecklein, A. K. and Pasciak, W. J., 1980,- NUREG-0597 Users Guide to GASPAR Code: U.S.N.R.C. Radiological Assessment Branch. Final. Environmental Statement Concerning Proposed. Rule Making Action: Numerical Guides for Design. Objectives and Limiting Conditions for-Operation to Meet the Cri-terion "As Low as Practicable" for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Ef fluents, USAEC Report. WASH-125 8, Washington, D.C., July 1973.- Fletcher. J. F., and Dotson, W. L. (compilers). HERMES-A Digital Computer Code for Estimating Regional Radiolo-gical Effects from the Nuclear Power Industry, USAEC Report HEDL-Tf!E-71-168, Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory, 1971.

Lyon, R.

J.,

Shearin, R.

L., 1976, EPA-520 Radionuclide Accumulation in a Reactor Cooling Lake: USEPA, Office of Radiation Programs. Regulatory Guide 1.109, Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Ef fluents for the Pur-pose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appen-dix I, Office of Standards Development. Regulatory Guide 1.111, Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Tra nspo rt and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Rou-tine. Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Office of Standards Development. Regula to ry Guide-1.113, Estimating Aquatic Dispersion of Effluents tram Accidental and Routine Reactor Releases for the Purpose of Implementing Appendix I, Office of Standards Development. t l .Simpson, D. D.,

McGill, B.

L., 1980, NUREG/CR-1276 User's Manual for LADTAP II Computer Program: U.S.N.R.C. and Oak Ridge National Laboratory. Rev. 2 5A-3 6/81

~3 y ~- n ~

w p -;.

~ (.; ' WCGS-ER(OLS);

Wa rmin s k i, :. N. C.,.1979, llorticulture Agent for the Sedgwick County; Extensio~n :.Of fice 'of the Kansas State University Cooperative' Extension Service, Wichita, _ Kansas, tele-ir phone. converration : (25, 26 January), written communica- ~

.1 ' tion:(29 January).- A e-9 f- ' I i Rev. 2 5A-4 6/81

g 3 WCGS-ER(OLS) TABLE SA-1 (Sh'cet.1 of 4) The following assumptions and pa rameters were used in LADTAP II ' for estimating ~ doses at the Wolf Creek Generating Station' site from liquid ' ef fluents : ~ PARAMETER INDIVIDUAL POPULATION ~ REFERENCE 4s Cooling Lake volume, 3 3 Normal 4.847E+009 ft 4.847E+009 ft WCGS-ER(OLS): 3 3 Pre-drought 4.649E+009 ft 4.649E+009 ft page 3.4-3 3 3 Low-drought 4.451E+009 ft 4.451E+009'ft Seepage 3.5 ft /sec 3.5.ft /sec WCGS-ER(OLS)- page'3.3-3 . g Blowdown Discharge Sargent & Lundy Normal-post drought 40.0 ft /sec 40.0 ft /sec Report SL-3204 Revised: Pre-drought 3.5 ft /sec 3.5~ft /sec -March 26, 1976,fon-Drought 0.0 ft /sec 0.0 ft /sec . Cooling Lake Operation-pgs. 10,"11, 13, 14 &f15~ 3 Ave. Neosho River 1335 ft /sec 1335 ft /sec WCGS-ER(OLS) flow rate 5.1.2.2 page 5.1-3 Dilution at Le Roy 31.69 31.69 i. Population at Le Roy 624 1980~ Census from Coffey, County Clerk Telephone Call Record L4/17/81. Population - 50 mile 1980 168,130 WCGS-ER(OLS) 2000 184,470 Table 2.1-4 Circulating water 1204 cfs 1204 cfs WCGS-ER(OLS) discharge f lc v rate Section~3.3 page 3.3-1~ Circulating Water and Service Water Rev. 2 .6/81 m

= }'. WCGS-ER(OLS) TABLE SA.(Sheet 2 of 4)~ ~ PARAMETER INDIVIDUAL POPULATION REFERENCE Shore width factor, .3 .3 Reg.. Guide 1.109 j Cooling Lake p. 15 Table-A-2 Shore width factor, fReg. Guide [1;109 Neosho River .2 .2 p'.-15 Table'A-2 Drinking' Water Reg.' Guide 1.1091 Adult 730 1/yr 370 1/yr pgs.'39.& 40,. Teen 510 1/yr 370 1/yr Tables E-4, E-5 Child 510 1/yr. 370 1/yr Infant 330 1/yr 370 1/yr i Fish Consumption Reg. Guide 1.109 Adult 21 Kg/yr 6.9 Kg/yr Pgs. 39~&'40, Teen 16 Kg/yr 5.2 Kg/yr. Tables'E-4 & E-5 Child 6.9 Kg/yr 2.2 Kg/yr Infant 0.0 Kg/yr 0.0 Kg/yr Invertebrate Consumption ' Reg. Guide 1.109-Adult 5 Kg/yr 1.0 Kg/yr- 'Pgs~. 39 & 40, Teen 3.8 Kg/yr .75 Kg/yr . Tables E-4 & E-5 Child 1.7 Kg/yr .33 Kg/yr Infant 0.0 Kg/yr 0.0 Kg/yr Shoreline Exposure Reg.. Guide-1.109 Adult 12 hr/yr 8.3 hr/yr Pgs. 39 &?40, Teen 67 hr/yr 47 .hr/yr Tables E-4 &'E-5 Child 14 hr/yr 9.5 hr/yr Swimming hrs pe r pe rson HERMES Pgs. 144 &'145, Adult 7.8 hr/yr 3.42 hr/yr Tables III-31-&:32-Teen 45.0 hr/yr 19.2 hr/yr Child 28.2 hr/yr 12.0 hr/yr Rev.12 6/81 j ?J

4 s: y 'T WCGS-ER(OLS) TABLE S A '(Sheet 3 of~4) 5 PARAMETER INDIVIDUAL POPULATION-REFERENC'E o Boating h rs pe r pe rson' HERMES Pgs. 144 &'145;. Adult 52.2.hr/yr-29 hr/yr TablesfIII-31 & 32 Teen 52.2.hr/yr 29 hr/yr-Child 29.0 hr/yr 16.53 hr/yr Hold up time h rs hrs-Inherent to' program '. Water 12 24-Reg. Guide 1.109 P. 69-Fish 24 168 Pgs. 12E& 69 Invertebrate 24 168 'Pgs. 12 &-69 Shoreline exposure 0 0 P. 69 Swimming 0 0 P. 69 Boating 0 0 P. 69 POPULATION ' Fraction of Population . Inherent to program Adult 71% Teen 11% Child 18%, ,Le Roy Population - 1980 50 Mile Population - 1980 Reference calculated Adult 443 Adult 119,372 f rom Le Roy - 1980 ' Teen 69 Teen 18,494 Census from Coffey Child 112 Child 30,263 County Clerk.- 50 Mile:- Total 624 Total 16d,130 WCGS-ER(OLS) Table'2.1-4' Sport Fish Harvest - Hazleton Lake Use Feacibility Study WCGS-ER(OLS) ' Appendix 2A Page 2A-8 Lake Capability 54,000 fishing trips annLally 2 lbs per trip.from lak e '.. Page 2A-4 18.4% of Kansas population are fishermen. Sport Fish Harvest Fish Harvest Site Specific 675 Kg/yr 48,990 Kg/yr Sport Invertebrate Harvest Invertebrate Harvest ' Site Specific 97.9 Kg/yr 26,350 Kg/yr 'Rev.'2 6/81 k~_ <J

-' g g N -l %, WCGS-ER(OLS) L '% TABLE SA-1 (Sheet ~ 4: of 4 ) e- . h 's POPULATION ~ REFERENCE ~ v s l Le'Roy Population - 1980 50 Milo' Population'- 1980' Shoreline Recreation . Shoreline Recreation 7,984-hrs /yr 2,147,00" hrs /yr ~ Site Specific-Swimming Swimming-., Site Specific 4,184 hrs /yr 1,126,500 hrs /yr Boat.ng Boating l 16,700 hrs /yr 4,498,000 hrs /yr Site ' Specific '. l s Nearest Downstream Water Intake Location - Le Roy i l Individual Intako Population Intake Reg. Guide l'.109 .2678 gal / day 167 gal / day . Site Specific Annual Liquiu Release Source Terms WCGS-ER(OLS). l Tabic 3.5 ! l l s l l Rev. 2 6/81'.

y 4 NCGS-ER(OLS) TABLE SA-2 - The following assmptions and parameters were used 'in GASPAR for estimating doses at the Wolf Creek Generating Station site from gaseous effluents: PARAMETER-VALUE ASSIGNED REFER 12K'E Distance fran facility to the 1546 miles Map nuasurenent: NE corner of the US (Maine) in miles Fraction of. year leafy .75 K-State Extension Service -vegetables are grown Fraction of crop fran garden Default value.76 Reg. Guide 1.109-7 Fract. ion of year cows are on .5' K-State Extension Service. pasture Fraction of daily intake of Default value 1.00 Reg. Guide 1.109-28 cows derival from pasture while on pasture Fraction of year gaats are on .5 K-State Extension Service pastur Fraction of daily intake of Default. value 1.00 Reg. Guide 1.109 gaat frcm pasture ahile on pasture Fraction of year teef cattle .5 K-State Extension Service are on pasture Fraction of daily intake of Default value 1.00 Reg. Guide 1.109 beef cattle derival fran pasture while on pasture Absolute humidity over 63.11 Table 2.3-3 growing season' VCGS-ER(OM) Average tarporature over 64.4 F Tabic 2.3-1 growing season VCGS-ER(OLS) Total anntal release tine 1925 hrs /yr Bechtel letter to of intennittent purge SNUPPS BM E-6610 operation Oct. 31, 1978 Anntal gaseous release Table 3.5-3 VEGS-ER(O M) source terms l Average noteorological Table 5.2-1 Dar:cs & Moore X/Q Reixart relatim concentrations ECGS-ER(OLS) 7699-062-07 (X/Qs) Rev. 2 6/81

~ jC j.. r q. [ WCGS-ER(OLS)' ,n. ~ TABLE SA-3 40 YR.?: RECONCENTRATION FACTORS NUCLIDE RECONCENTRATION'IN: LAKE ~ RECONCENTRATION AT-CWD m. H 6'.13E+001' 6.23E+001 Cr-51 9.35E-001 _.1. 9 4 E + 0 0 0 Mn-54 9.90E+000 1.09E+001 Fe-55 2.75E+001 2.85E+001 Fe 1.51E+000 2. 51 E+ 0 0 0 Co 2.~ 3 8 E + 0 0 0 3.38C+000 Co-60 4.37E+001 4.47C+001 Br-83 3.37E-003 1.00E+000 Mo-99 1.00E-001 .1.10E+000 Tc-99M 8.42E-003 1.01E+000 Te-129M 1.14E+000 2.14E+000 'I-131 2.72E-001 1.27E+000 Te-132 1.09E-001 1.11C+000 I-132 3.23E-003 1.00E+000 I-133 2.95E-002 1.03E+000 Cs-134 2.27C+001 2.37E+001 I-135 9.40C-003 1.01C+000 Cs-136 4.'37E-001 1.44E+000 Cs-137 7.30C+001 7.40C+001 Zr-95 2.18E+000 3.18E+000 Nb-95 1.18E+000 2.18C+000 Rb-86 6.290-001 1.63E+000 Ru-103 1.34E+000 2.34E+000 Ru-106 1.20E+001 1.30E+001 -Ag-110M 8.31Ee000 9.31E+000 Ce-144 9.30E+000 1.03C+001 Br-84 7.45E-004 1.00E+000 Sr-89 1.75E+000 2.75E+000 Te-127M 3.64E+000 4.64E+000 Te-127 1.32E 302 1.01E+000 Te-129 1.61E-003 1.00E+000 I-130 1.75E-002 1.02E+030 Te-131M 4.22C-002 1.04E+000 Br-85 7.01E-005 1.00E+000 Rb-88 4.18E-004 1.00E+000 Sr-91 1.35E-002 1.01E+000 Y-91M 1.17E-003 1.00E+000 t Te-131 5.87E-004 1.00C+000 l I-134 1.24E-003 1.00E+000 (1) 40 yrs of reconcentration hised on: Years Blowdown + Scepage Lake Invol 3 Hontal-ynt drought 31.59 40 cfs 3.5 cfs 4.847C+009 ft3 Pre-drought 3.58 3.5 cfs 3.5 cfs 4.650E+009 ft3 Drought 4.83 0 cfs 3.5 cfs 4.451C+009 ft (2) Drought occurs at tne end of the 40 yr Inriod. Rev. 2 6/81 l

[p;$7%,. _ x ~ ~ Ryy;y ~ ' r .a [' W ~ ~- v f-Q j A ' ...f , l_ CGS-CR(OLS jf-W 1 1 ,.-A. ,_;n _ ' TABLE 3.5-2' r r ' ANNUAL EFFLUENT RELEASES (1) LIQUID re: - ~ = . [ Adjusted Detergent .~ 4 Half-life. Boron Recycle _:. Mise. Wastes. Socondary - Turb. Bldg. Total-LWS: JTotal(2)- -- Wastes - Totai-

1. Puclide

- (Days ) - (Curies)? (Curies) (Curies)._ (Curles) - (Curies) (C1/yrl-(Ci(grl; (C1/yr) C rrosion &' activation- , prod 1 cts- 'CEm51 2.78+001. .00001 .00000- .00000 .00000 .00001- .00007= .00000 .00007 ~HN :3.03+002; ~.00000: .00000 .00000- .00000 .00000 .00001 .00010. .00011-FE-55. 9.50+002 .00001 .00000 .00000' .00000 .00001. .00006' .00000 .00006 FE-59.2- '4.50+001 .00000' .00000 .00000. .00000 .00001- .00004' .00000 .00004 Co-5 8 ~ 7.13*001. .00007 .00002 '.00000: .00000 .00009. .00059_ .00040 .00099. ECO-60 1.92+003; .00001. .00000 .00000 .00000 .00001 .00007 '.00087 .00094' ':3R-95 6.50+001 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 : .00014 .00014. ,_NT '3.50+001' .00000- .00000' .00000- .00000 .00000 .00000 ".00020' .00020 c NP-239 - 2.35+000 ~.00001 .00000 .00000- .00000 .00001 .00004 ~.00000- .00004.- 1 F130 ion products JB2-83 1[00-001_ '.00000. .00006~ .00000 .00000 .00006' .00038 .00000- .00038 7BR-84 E2.21-002 .00000._ .00003 .00000 .00000 .00003 .00020'- .00000 .00020

EO-85

'2.06-003 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 00002' .00000- .00002 RI-86 1.87*0015 .00000- .00000 00000 .00000. .00000~- .00003 .00000' .00003' RB-88 1.24-002. .01050 - .00024- .00000 100000 .01074 .06768 .00000. .06800 SR-89 5.20+001 .00000- .00000- .00000' .00000 .00000 .00001 .00000 .00001 SR-91. '4.03-031. .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00002; .00000 .00002 Y-91M 1.47-002 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00001 .00000- .00001 MO-99 2.79*000 .00037. 'TC-99M~ ~2.50-001 .00021 ~ .00010 .00000 .00002 .00049 .00307 .00000 .00310' .00006'.. .00000 - .00002- '.00028 .00179 .00000 .00100 :' ,RU-103-3.96*001: .00000 .00000 .00000 ' .00000- .00000 00000- .00001 .00002 LRU-106: 3.67+002 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000. .00024 .00024 AG-110M 2.53+002. .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000- .00000 .00004 .00004-TE-127M' -1.09+002- .000001 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00001 .00000- .00001 TE-127 3.92-001. .00000' .00000- .00000 - .00000 .00000 .00003 .00000 .00003 - TE-12 9M 3.40+001 .00001~ .00000 '.00000 '.00000 .00001 .00005 .00000 .00005z TE-129-4.79-002 .00001- .00000 .00000- .00000- .00001~ .00006 .00000 .00006 . 1-130 f5.17-001 .00000 .00002 .00000 .00000- .00003 .00018 .00000' .00018 .TE-131M 1.25+000 .00001~ .00000 .00000 .00000 .00001 .00009 .00000 .00009- . TE-131- ,1.74-002 .00000 .00000- .00000 .00000 .00001 .0000*- .00000 .00004-I-!J1 .8.05+000 .00012 .00321 .00000 .00040' .00373 .02*,49 .00006 .02400 ? -132- .3.25*009' .00012- .00003 .00000 .00000 .00016 '.00098 ,00000 .00098 1-132 9.59-002 .00004 .00119 .00000 .00003 .00126' .00795 .00000 .00790 - I-133 8.75-001 .00017' .00452 .00000' .00045 .00514 .03238 .00000' .03200> .. I-13 4 -

3.67-002

.00002 .00056' ,00000 .00000 .00058 .03366 .00000 .00370-CS-134 . 7.49+002 .00131 .00003 .00006 .00001 .00135 .00350 .00130 .00980 1-135. 2.79-001 .00008 .00226 .00000 .0001) .00248 .01562- .00000 .01600' CS-136 .1.30*001 .00068 '.00002 .00000 .00000 .00070 .00442 .00000 .00440-CS-137 1.10+004 .00075 .00002 .00000-- .00000 .00097 .00612 .00240 .00850 BA-137M 1.77-003 .00007 .00002 .00000 .00000 .00009 .00059~ .00000 .00059 CE-144>. 2.84+002 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00000 .00052 .00052 All Others ' .00000, .00000 .00000 .00000 .00001 .00003~ .00000' .00003 Tots! (Except Trattum) .01491- .01242- .00000 .00107 .02830 .37830- .00629' .19000 Trittua Release 410 curies ger year (1). Releases are based on assueg-tions given in Appendix 34. (2) Ad j us t ment as 0.15 C1/y: bashd on Regulatory Guld( 1.112. Rev. 2 6/81 i' I 4 b 1 r A il' l t-

.~ t WCGS-ER(OLS) -5.2 RADIOLOGICAL IMPACT PROM ROUTINE-OPERATION Normal operation,of the Wolf Creek Generating Station _(WCGS) will result in the release. of only ivery low level liquid and gaseous. radioactive discharges. In order to. evaluate any potential impact from these releases, the dose-contribution of the.adioactive materials in.the environment was predict- ~

ed - on the basis of, terrestrial and aquatic pathways dis-cussed. in -- this " section and - in Sections. 5.2 - and 5.3.of the

Environmental Report-Construction Permit -Stage'. (ER(CPS ) ).

In summary, negligible radiological impact is expected on-man and the aquatic blota or terrestrial mammals as_a result of. the ~ quantity of radionuclides to be released f rom ' the WCGS. A detailed. ~ discussion of important dose pathways and resultant exposure rates - was presented in Sections 5.2 and 5.3 of the ER(CPS) and.is updated below. An update of-this section was necessitated to reevaluate the potential impact-from liquid and gaseous radioactive effluent discharges using the 11RC computer codes 'GASPAR and LADTAP II. This update is based on a full three-years of meteorological data-collected at WCGS and a revised set of liquid source te rrr s which are being incorporated into Section 3.5 at this time. The NRC computer codes used in this revision are based on the methods and models outlined in Regulatory Guides 1.109, 1.111 and-1.113. 5.2.1 EXPOSURE PATilWAYS 5.2.1.1 Egposure Pathways for Radiation Exposure of Biota Other Than Man Dose rate estimates to biota as herein presented should be considered extremely conservative since they are predicated on the following assumptions: 1. Liquid discharges are diluted only by the circulating cooling water. tio credit was taken for further reduction of radionuclide concentrations in the cooling lake; 2. Buildup of the radionuclides in the cooling lake over the period of the life of the plant; 3. Aqua t ic orga nisms are continuous ly subme rged at the point of discharge to the cooling lake; 4. Predatory species obtain their entire diet from primary organisms in equilibrium with water at of fluont concentrations. Rev. 2 5.2-1 6/81 l

.WCGS-ER(OLS). l Liq uid 'iandL gaseous releases 'will result in radiation doses ~ Lto aquatic and~ terrestrial biota.through path' ways summarized: in' Figure;5.2-1. Many of the pathways. of exposure for biota are similar-to those for-man. These pathways include inges-tion of water and aquatic foods, submersion ' in air,- imme r-sion in water. and exposure to sediments and. shorelines. Other pathways-such. as inhalation' and direct radiation from air deposition of radionuclides on soils are not conr f dered significant - for inclusion in the total' dose to such organ- -isms.. Pathways _of exposure _from liquid effluents are gener- . ally the mos t 'significant contributors to radiation dose to organisms other ' than man. Because aquatic organisms can actively concentrate some -radionuclides, these food chain components.are potentially the most important contributors to radiation-dose to terrestrial. animals. The impact through the food chain pathway is expected to reach a maxi-mum in predatory species such as muskrats, raccoons and herons which could conceivably obtain their total diet from aquatic organisms in equilibrium with water at effluent con-- centrations. The dose rate estimates for biota other than man'are discussed in Section 5.2.3. 5.2.1.2 Exposure Pathways to Man Radioactive efflue ts from the WCGS will become distributed ~ throughout the te restrial ecosystem by dispersion of gas-eous releases, deposition of radioactive particulates and dilution of liquid radioactive discharges. Liquid and gas-eous releases will result in radiation doses to man through pathways summarized in Figure 5.2-2. Gaseous exposure pathways to man include: 1. Submercion in the cloud.of gaseous effluents; 2. Inhalation of gaseous effluents; 3. Direct radiation exposure from deposition of radionuclide deposition on vegetation, soil and exposed surfaces; and 4. Ingestion of contamynaed food chain compon-i ents. The annual individual dose f rom "$ nob le gases was evaluated in each of the 16 directional secto rs around the plant at the Exclusion-Restricted Area Boundary (.75 miles), to evaluate cloud submersion and air dose from beta and gamma radiations. Also the calculated population dose rates from subme rsion in gaseous effluents were evaluated within a 50 mile radius of the plant. Radioactive iodine and par-ticulate gaseous pathway doses were evaluated for a hypo-thetical worst case and fo r the controlling existing resi-dent in the prevailing X/Q sector which is north. The Rev. 2 5.2-2 6/81 ]

c . WCGS-E R ( OLS ) " hypothetical ' wors't case ' assumes a resident lives in the. ' north. sector'at the Exclusion-Restricted Area Boundary (.75 ' miles) with : members. of 'each age group present and all path-ways present. The controlling. existing. resident lives 1.4-miles north of the plant and was : evaluated. as the maximum . - existing case. The dose rate estimates ~ for man are pro- 'sented in Section 5.2'.4.- ^ Liquid exposure pathways to man: include: 1. . Internal exposure from ingestion of water or-contaminated-food chain components;

2.

External-exposure from contaminated water or shoreline sediment. Dose-rate estimates tio maximum individuals from liquid effluent concentrations were evaluated at the circulating water discharge ' point. Water is not available for public consumption at the plant site and no population or individual exposure is expected from this pathway. Although recreational uses of the cool-ing lake are not planned it is conservatively assumed that individual exposures from

swimming, boating, fishing or ingestion of fish could result.

Discharge water concentrations, bioaccumulation factors, and ingestion rates were used to estimate internal dose rates. Although such. activities may not be allowed on the lake, external dose rates were estimated for individuals boating or swimming in the vicinif.y of the discharge. The exposure rate from contaminated s' oroline sediments was also calcu-lated. Evaluation of each pathway is based on maximizing condi-tions. No credit was taken for dilution of the effluents in the cooling lake; buildup of the radionuclides in the lake over the life of the plant is assumed; all interactions are assumed. to occur with radionuclide concentrations as they .will. occur et the point of discharge. Aquatic food chain elements are assumed to be in equilibrium with discharge concentrations prior to consumption. Since any swimming,

boating, or fishing activities, if

allowed, would be expected to be conducted in places in the cooling lake other than at the discharge point, evaluation of this path-way provides an upper estimate of the potential dose.

Dose rate estimates to maxj aum. individuals and the popula-tion,of the town of Le Roy were also evaluated for exposure from liquid effluent concentrations. Importar,t aquatic pathways for consideration are summarized in Figure.5.2-2. Rev. 2 5.2-3 6/81 )

3' + 'WCCS-CR(OLS) 5'2.2 RADIOACTIVITY IN THE ENVIRONMENT Estimated gaseous and liquid effluents from the WCGS are presented in. Section 3.5. 'On-site meteorological data collected over three full years was used to predict gaseous effluent distribution in the environment. Both the PUFF and straight-line Gaussian dis-pe rsion' models,. described in Regulatory Guide 1.111, were used for determination of ground level and mixed mode annual average diffusion _ ostimates. Resultant CHI /O values are summarized for each sector in Table 5.2-1. For estimation of effluent dispe rsion a combination of -both a mixed mode and ground-level release was assumed. The meteorological data indicates that maximum concentrations would be expected to ' occur -in the north sector. Gaseous dose calculations were done using GASPAR computer - code. Dose calculation models used in GASPAR are outlined in Regulatory Guides 1.109 and 1.111. Assumptions used were either site specific or default va lues taken from the Regulatory Guides. These assumptions are presented in Appendix SA. 1 Liquid-dose calculations were done using LADTAP II computer code. Dose calculation model? used in LADTAP II are out-lined -in Regulatory Guides 1.109 and 1.113 for doses to man and USAEC Report WASH-1258 for doses to biota other than man. Site specific va lues were used when ava ilab le. Default . values used were either recommended in Regulatory Guide 1.109 or taken from HERMES USAEC Report HEDL-TME-71-168. The assumptions used in LADTAP II are presented in Appen-dix 5A. Liquid radioactive releases will be diluted by cooling water with a flow rate of *114 cfs and service water with a flow rate of 90 cfs for a total discharge of 1204 cfs. This is the only dilution assumed for dose calculations to the max-imum individual interacting with the cooling Ic.ke environ-ment. Buildup or reconcentration of the radionuc1 ides in the cooling lake and at the circulating water discharge is taken into consideration over a 40 year plant life expect-ancy. The last five of these years are conside red to be during a drought. The model used for calculating buildup of the radionuclides in the lake is presented in Appendix SA. The-models were taken from Regulatory Guide 1.113 and USEPA EPA-520 Radionuclide Accumulation in a Reactor Cooling Lake. The town of Le Roy, Kansas, is the nearest downstream water user intake from UCGS. Dose rates to an individual residing in Le Roy and to the population at Le Roy have been eval-uated. These dose rates take into consideration a 40 year buildup of radionuclides in the lake and then a further dilution in the Neosho River. No credit is taken for the radionuclides decay during transition from the lake to l Rev. 2 l 5.2-4 6/81 L )

y. t 'WCGS-ER(OLS) 'Le Roy Estimated radionuclide concentrations in the offlu-ent water at the discharge to the cooling lake 'and at Le Roy. are listed in Table 5.2-2. Bioaccumulation factors used to - predict ~ uptake of radionuclides by fish and invertebrates are listed in Tabic 5.2-3. 5.2.3 DOSE RATE ESTIMATES FOR BIOTA OTilER TIIAN MAN - The pathways for: radiation exposure of biota other than man were discussed in Section 5.2.1.1. For calculation of these dose rates it was assumed that aquatic organisms and terres-trial species live at the circulating water discharge point. Buildup 'of : radionuclides was considered over the 40 year plant life.- All food consumed has been grown or.has lived i in the liquid effluent at discharge concentrations. Inter-nal and external dose rates to biota are summarii d in 4 Table 5.2-4. The primary aquatic organism, fish, receive an estimated maximum internal exposure of 13.6 mrad /yr and a maximum external exposure of 9.41 mrad /yr. The muskrat is a terrestrial animal which could receive an estimated maximum internal exposure of 51.6 mrad /yr. and a maximum external exposure of 6.42 mrad /yr. According to informatica presented in USAEC report WASit-1258 i doses to biota at WCGS are well within expected annual-doses when assuming the organisms live at the discharge point-in offluent concentrations. While these doses may be experienced by a few organisms which live at the discharge point of the station, the doses received by an entire population of aquatic or terrestrial organisms would be significantly less. ' 5.2.4 DOSE RATE ESTUIATES FOR MAN 5.2.4.1 Liquid Pathways Radionuclide concentrations in the discharge water were calculated based on'a total discharge of 1204 cfs. Release rates and resultant radionuclide concentrations are listed in Table 5.2-2. Dose rate estimates to maximum individuals from liq uid effluent concentrations were evaluated at the circulating water discharge point. No credit was taken for dilution of the effluents in the cooling lake; buildup of the radionuclides in the lake over a 40 year life expectancy are assumed to occur with radionuclide concentrations as they will occur at the discharge point. Pathways to man are discussed in Section 5.2.1.2. Assumptions used in dose cal-culatiens are given in Appendix SA. Dose rate estimates were calculated for maximum individuals and to the population residing at Le Roy. No credit was taken for the radionuclides decay during transition between discharge from the lake and Le Roy. Rev. 2 5.2-5 6/81 r

't WCGS-ER(OLS) -Dose rates 'to maximum 1 individuals from' liquid of fluents ' are listed in Tables 5.'2-5 and 5.2-6. Population doses ;at. lLe Royc are listed in. Table 5.2-7. ~ The maximum f organ and total body doses to individuals re-siding in Le. Roy were ' calculated to be 1.96E-001 mrem /yr to 1 the liver of_a child and 1.49E-001 mr m/yr to the total body of an adult, Table 5.2-5. The most significant intern-al doses will _ be f rom eating' fish (1.29E-001 mrem /yr. to the live r of. ' a teenage r.. and 8.92E-002 mrem /yr to the total body of an. adult). - The most s.:.gnificant external dose rate will be to the skin of a teenager from exposure to radionuclide . deposits ~in shoreline sediments 5.19E-004 mrem /yr. Estimated dose from liquid effluents to the population of Le:Roy are presented in' Table 5.2-7. The maximum' organ and total body-doses to individuals at the circulating water discharge point were calculated to be 4.27 mrem /yr to the liver of a teenager and 2.95 mrom/yr to-4 the total body of-an adult, _ Table 5.2-6. The most signifi-cant internal doses will be from eating fish ~(4.19 mrem /yr to the liver of a teenager and 2.90 mrom/yr to the total body of-an adult). The most significant external dose rate will be to the skin of a teenager from exposure to radio-nuclide deposits in shoreline sediments 2.52E-002 mrem /yr. t 5.2.4.2 Gascous Pathways The doses from gaseous effluents were calculated assuming . intermittent purge operation. Intermittent purge mode re-lease rates were taken from Table 3.5-3. The values of the dispersion and deposition coefficients, X/O (non-decayed), X/Q (depleted and non-decayed) and D/Q used in the calcula-tions are listed in Table 5.2 -1. The north sector was determined to be the prevailing X/Q . sector for calculating annual dose from noble gases as well -as.from pa rticulates and iodines. Exposure pathways to man are discussed in Section 5.2.1.2. Assumptions used in these dose calculations are given in Appendix SA. The annual doses due to normal gaseous effluents from WCGS are listed in Tables 5.2-9a, b and 5.2-10. Doses attribu-table ' to radioactive iodines and particulates at the con-trolling sector Exclusion-Restricted Area Bounda ry are con-tained within Table 5.2-9a (llypothetical Worst Case ). Doses f rorr iodines and particulates at the controlling residence are contained within Table 5.2-9b (Controlling Existing Resident ). Tab le.5.2-10 contains doses from nobic gases 'at-the Exclusion-Restricted Area Boundary. l 4 Rev. 2 5.2-6 6/81 I )

WCGS-ER(OLS) ~ Results .~o f, noble l gas ca lcula t ions _- at the Exclusion- . Restricted Area Boundary (.75 miles) show the cloud submer-

sion dose to. the - total. body to. be 2.2E-002 mrem /yr and 7.24E-002 mrem /yr to the skin in the north sector.

The air . dose. resulted in exposure rates of'3.55E-002: mrad /yr. gamma and 1.00E-001 mrad /yr from beta. Doses attributable to. radioactive particulates and iodines l were ' evaluated at the north sector Exclusion-Restricted Area - Bounda ry. - A hypothetical worst case ' assumed: members of each t age group were present-and all pathways were present~at the ~ boundary. Members ' of each ~ age ~ group were assumed to ingest goat milk rather ' than cow milk to consider the worst case milk ingestion. pathway. The maximum organ and total body ^ dose was 6.51' mrem /yr. to the thyroid of an infant and 4.66E-001 mrem /yr to the total. body of a child.~ Doses attributa-ble to the actual controlling existing resident'(1.4 miles-north sector) for. the maximum organ and total body dose were ~ 3.07 mrem /yr to an infants thyroid and 1.94E-001 to the 5 total body of an, adult. Calculated population dose rates from submersion in gaseous -effluents were predicted based on the population in the year '2000.. The results of these calculations are presented in. Table 5'.2-8. 5.2.4.3 Direct Radiation From Facility This subject was-discussed in Section 5.3.4 of the ER(CPS). Although the source strengths involved have changed slight- 'ly, the conclusion reached-that negligible annual population -exposure would be received in direct radiation from UCGS-has not changed. 5~.2.4.4 Annual Population Doses Population dose rates at radial distances are summarized in Table 5.2-8. From these calculations, the average person within_g0 miles of the site would receive an annual dose of 2.9x10 mrem. The actual doses would be much lower due to shielding effects-of housing. 5.2.5

SUMMARY

OF ANNUAL RADIATION DOSES The design-of the'WCGS will assure that gaseous and liquid effluent concentrations are within the guidelines stated in 10 CFR 20. During reactor operation, actual radionuclide concentrations in the environment will be determined by continuous environmental monitoring. .A series of previously discussed tables from Sections 5.2.3 and. 5. 2.4 estimate individual, population and biota annual doses from liqui ~ nd gaseous effluents. A brief summary of Rev. 2 5.2-7 6/81

WCGS-ER(OLS) calculated - total. body and thyroid dose rates from liquid and gaseous ef fluents is presented in Table 5.2-11 for_ max-imum' individual' exposures and population ~ exposures. .The exposure pathways considered for calculation of doses to man and biota are outlined in Sections 5.2.1.1 and 5.2.1'.2. ' A ' conformance summary with 30 CFR 50, Appendix I, is out-lined in Table - 5.2-12. 5.

2.6 REFERENCES

Attachment to Concluding Statement of Position of the' Reg-ulatory. Sta f f. _ Public Rulo-making IIcaring ' on: Numer- .ical _ Guides for Design Objectives and-Limiting Condi-tions for Operation to. Meet the Criterion "As Low As Practicable", for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power

Stations, USAEC, Docket No.

RM-50-2, February 20, 1974.

Eckerman, K.

F. and Lash, D. G., 1978 GASPAR version marked " revised 8/19/77": US Nuclear Regula to ry Commission, Radiological Assessment Branch.

Eckerman, K.

F., Ccngel, F. J., Roccklein, A. K. and Pasciak, W. 'J., 1980, NUREG-0597 Users Guide to GASPAR-Code: U.S.H.R.C. Radiological Assessment Branch. Final Environmental Statement Concerning Proposed Rule Making Action: Humerical-Guides for Design Objectives and Limiting Conditions for Operation to Meet the Cri-terion "As Low as Practicable" for Radioactive Material in Light-Water-Cooled Nuclear Power Reactor Ef fluents, USAEC Repo rt WASII-1258, Washington, D.C., July 1973.

Fletcher, J.

F., and Dotson, W. L. (compilers), llERMES-A Digital Computer Code for Estimating Regional Radiolo-gical Effects from the Nuclear Power Industry, USAEC Repo rt IIEDL-TME-71-16 8, Hanford Engineering Development Laboratory, 1971.

Lyon, R.

J.,

Shearin, R.

L., 1976, EPA-520 Radionuclide Accumulation in a Reactor Cooling Lake: USEPA, Office of Radiation Programs. Regulatory Guide 1.109, Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Ef fluents for the Pur-pose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR 50, Appen-dix I, Office of Standards Development. Regulatory Guide 1.111, Methods fo r Estimating Atmospheric Transrort and Dispersion of Gaseous Effludnts in Rou-g ', tine Releases from Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Office of Standards Development. Rev. 2 5.2-8 6/8J ]

7. f. .WCGS-ER(OLS) Regula tory Guida: 1.113,. Es tiima ting Aqua t'ic Dispersion of Ef fluents J f rom Accidental 'and Routine - Reactor Releases ~ - for the. Purpose of ~ Implementing Appendix 'I, Office.of Standards 00velopment. S impson', D.- B., McGill,~ B. L., 1980, NUREG/CR-1276 User's !!anual for LADTAP II Computer Program: _ U. S. N. R.C..~ and ' Oak Ridge-National Laboratory. - liarminski, N.~C., 1979,- llorticulture Agent for the Sedgwick County Extension Of fice of - the Kansas State University.

Cooperative Extension. Service, trichita, Kansas, tele-

. phone conversation (25, 26 January), written communicaa tion (29 January). J 4 e T 1 e ? Rev. 2 S.2-9 6/81 N

CCGS E3(OLS) TAM.C 5.2-1 Sheet I of 3 AVEPAGC PET!UOLOGICAL RI2ATIVE (DtCENTRATION NIALYSIS l' titta Periot! 3 yeats: Ibnus and tbore 7699-062-07 (6/1/73 - 5/31/75, 7/12/80, (Grctux3) 3/5/79 - 3/4/80) 7/19/80 (titxed tiode) MIXfD RUE GOUtD !Rurest Plant Sector Dourtla ry X/Q Fel. X/Q Depl. X/O Depos. X/o Rel. X/o Depl. X/0 Deles. ICI 1.1 2.8E-07 2.50-07 4.lE-09 S.90-07 5.lE-07 5.lE-09 NE 1.3 9.3C-08 8.2C-08 1.10-09

2. 4 C-07 a.00-07 1.5C-09 ENE 1.5 5.40-09 4.RE-08 4.3E-10 1.7E-07 1.5E-07 7.3C-10 E

1.2 8.0C-08 7.lE-09 7.5E-10 2.8C-07 2.4E-07 1.4C-09 ESE 1.2 1.2C-07 1.1E-07 1.lE-09 3.3E-07 2.9C-07 1.7E-09 SE 1.2 1.5E-07 1.3C-07 1.6C-09 3.8C-07 3.3C-07 2.3C-09 SSE J.0 4.8C-08 4.0E-03 4.7C-!G 1.0E-07 7.9E-09 6.3C-10 S 3.3 4.6C-08 3.8C-08 3.9E-10 8.5E-08 6.6C-09 4.9E-10 SSW l.7 1.0E-07 8.9C-08 1.0E-09

2. 5 E-07 2.lE-07 1.5E-09 SW l.5

8. lt-09 7.2E-08 6.3C-10 2.5E-07 2.10-07 1.2C-09 kUW l.5 8.3C-08 7.3C-08 6.5E-10 2.60-07 2.2E-07 1.2E-09 W

l.8 9.0C-08 7.85-08 5.9C-10 2.3C-07 1.9C-07 1.0C-09 5253 2.1 7.5E-09 6.4E-08 4.9C-10 1.8C-07 1.50-07 8.5E-10 tai 2.6 8.5C-09 7.00-09 4.10-10 2.00-07

1. t E-0 7 7.0E-10 14 51

?.5 2.5E-07 2.1E-07 1.6C-09 6.30-07 5.3C-07 3.0C-09 N 1.1 5.6C-07 3.9C-07 6.4C-09 1.0C-06 C.8C-07 8.00-09 Nearest Renk nce t3I 3.1*

7. '3C-0 9 6.6C-08 7.7C-10

1. 4 C-0 7

1. l t-0 7 9.3E-10 II 1.8 5.8C-03 5.0E-09 6.1C-10 1.50-07 1.2C-07 8.6C-10 ENE 2.0 3.7C-09 3.2C-01 2.7C-10 1.10-07 9.0C-04 4.3C-10 C

1.9 4.7E-03 4.lt-08 3.9C-10 1.6C-07 1.3C-07 7.1E-10 ESC 1.7* 9.10-08 8.10-09 7.7E-10 2.4C-07 2.00-07 1.2C-09 SE 1.4 1.lE-07 9.8C-08 1.2C-09 3.lE-07 2.6C-07 1.8E-09 SSE 3.0 4.SC-09

4. 0 C-09 4.7C-10 1.0E-07 7.9E-03 6.3E-10 S

3.5 4.3C-09 3.5E-03 3.5E-10 7.8C-Of 6.10-08 4.4C-10 SSU 2.5* 6.2C-08

5. 3 C-09 5.3C-10 1.5C-07 1.2C-07 7.6C-10 SW 2.1 5.0E-09 4.4E-OS 3.5E-10 1.5E-07 1.2C-07 6.50-10

&EAi 2.7* 5.3C-C8 5.5C-09 3.4C-10 1.6C-07

1. 3 C-07 7.3E-10 51 2.2 7.3E-08 6.2C-08 4.55-10 1.7C-07 1.4C-07 7.lE-10 v433 2.9

5. 2C-08 4.4C-08 3.0C-10 1.2C-07 9.2C-03 4.8C-10 tal 1.3*

2.9E-07 3.3E-07 1.9E-09 8.3E-07 7.30-07 3.7E-09 taaf 2.2* 1.7C-0 7 1.9C-07 1.0C-09

4. 3C-07

3. 6 C-07 1.9C-09 N

1.4 4.lE-07 3.5E-07 4.4E-09 7.3C-07 6.2E-07 5.5E-09 Nearest Veg. Garden NNE 3.6* 6.3C-04 5.2C-08 5.70-10

1. 2 C-07 9.2C-08 7.6E-10 NC 2.l*

5.lE-08 4.4E 5.1E-10 1.3E-07 1.0E-07 7.3C-10 ENE 2.2* 3.8C-08 3.3E-08 2.7E-10 1.1C-07 9.2C-09 4.4E-10 E 1.R 4.7E-09 4.16-22 1 9E-10 1.6E-07 1.3C-07 7.lE-10 ESE 1.7* 9.4C-08 8.10-08 7.7C-10 2.4E-07 2.0C-07 1.2C-09 SC 1.4 1.lt-07 9.8C-08 1.2C-09 3.10-07 2.6C-07 1.8C-09 SSE 3.2* 4.8C-09 4.0C-08 4.7E-10 1.00-07 8.0C-09 6.4C-10 S 3.5 4.3E-08 3.5E-08 3.5C-10 7.8C-08 6.lE-08 4.4E-10 SSW 4.6* 2.50-08 2.00-08 1.7E-10 6.2E-08 4.6E-08 2.6E-10 SW 3.0* 3.3C-09 2.8C-08 1.9C-10 8.9E-08 7.00-08 3.5C-10 IEni 2.7* 5.3C-08 5.5E-09 3.4E-10 1.40-07 1.lE-07 5.8C-10 W 2.2 7.3E-08 6.2C-08 4.50-10 1.7E-07 1.4E-07 7.lE-10 12A4 2.9

5. 2 C-09 4.4C-08 3.0E-10 1.2C-07 9.2C-08 4.PE-10 thi 1.4*

2.9E-07 3.3E-07 1.9E-09 8.3C-07

7. 3 E-0 7 3.7E-09 taaf 2.2 1.5 C-0 7

1. 3 E-07

8. 4 C-10

3. 8C-07 3.lE-07 1.6C-09 N

1.4 4.lE-07

3. 5 E-07 4.4E-09 7.3E-07 6.2C-07 5.5E-09 Rev. 2 3 IN cimest conservatim distance X/0G wre usol for these distances.

P00R 6/81 J

WI GS-ER(OLS)- C TAPII 5.2 - 1 Sheet 2 of 3 AVEIEC PETIGOILGICAL PHATIVE (DtATtTTPATIO1 MALYSIS p Data Period 3 )vars: Dares and Moore 7699-062-07 (6/1/73 - 5/31/75, 7/12/80 (Grounl* 3/5/79 - 3/4/801 7/19/80 (Mixed Skxis) FUX1D P10E GtX.i.D . Exclusion-Festricttd Sector Area rosala ry X/O Pel. X/Q Dept. X/O Depos. X/O Fel. X/O Depl. X/O Dryos. tRE .75 4.7E-07 4.2E-07 7.5E-09 1.00-06 8.9E-07 9.lE-09 tE 75

1. 9E-07 1.70-07 2.8E-09 5.2C-07

4. 7E-07 3.6E-09 DE

.75 9.2E-08 8.3E-09 8.6E-10 4.50-07 4.0E-07 2.1E-09 E .75 1.6 E-07 1.5E-07 1.60-09 5.0E-07 5.2E-07 3.0E-09 ESE 75 2.2E-07 2.0E-07 2.1E-09 7.10-07 6.4E-07 3.8E-09 SE 75 2.5E-07 2.30-07 3.0E-09 7.5E-07 6.6E-07 4.7E-09 SSE .75 2.9E-07 2.60-07 4.2E-09 7.6E-G7 6.80-07 6.3E-09 5 .75 3.40-07 3.0E-07 4.40-09 7.50-07 6.7E-07 5.8E-09 SSI .75 2.9E-07

2. 6 E-0 7 3.4E-09 8.4E-07 7.50-07 5.40-09 SW

.75 2.2E-07 2.0E-07 2.0E-09 7.00-07 6.2C-07 3.7E-09 &GW .75 2.0E-07 1.8E-07 1.SE-09

8. 0E-0 7 7.10-07

4. 2 E-09 11

.75 3.0E-07 2.7E-07 2.4E-09 1.0E-06 9.00-07 5.20-09 R31 .75

2. 5 F.-0 7

2. 2 E-0 7 2.10-09 7.6C-07 6.80-07 4.2E-09 ti;

.75 4.20-07

3. 8 E-07 2.8E-09 1.3E-06 1.2E-06 5.9E-09 t:31

.75 6.2E-07 5.5E-07 4.40-09 1.8E-06 1.6E-06 9.7E-09 N 75 9.2E-07 P.2E-07 1.10-08 1.9E-06

1. 7E-06 1.60-08 L.P.

kne 17 I 2.5 1.00-07 8.6E-CB 1.10-09 1.PE-07 1.50-07 1.3E-09 f.I 2.5 3.(E-08 3.lE-00 3.2E-10 8.50-08 6.6E-08 4.'E-10 ENE 2.5 2.60-09 2.4E-03 1.8E-10 7.80-08 A.2C-09 2.8E-10 E 2.5 3.30-08 2.PE-08 2.3E-10 9.6E-08 7.?E-09 4.0E-10 ESE 2.5 4.8E-09 4.00-08 3.3E-10 1.30-07 1.0E-07 5.3E-10 SC 2.5 6.0E-09 5.0E-08 5.20-10 1.30-07 1.00-07 6.30-10 SSE 2.5 6.10-08 5.1E-03 6.40-10 1.40-07 1.1E-07 9.3E-10 S 2.5 6.4E-03 5.4E-08 6.lt-10 1.30-07 1.00-07 7.90-!0 SGi 2.5 6.1E-08 5.20-08 5.2E-10 1.5E-07 1.2E-07 7.9E-2 Su ?.5 3.9E-08

3. 4 E-09 2.50-10 1.2E-07 9.40-09 4.9E-Ir

&E;J 2.5 5.2C-08 4.40-08 3.4E-10

1. 4 E-0 7 1.1E-07 5.7E-10 W

2.5 6.4E-09 5.4E-08 3.7E-10 1.40-07 1.lt-07 5.5E-10 143J 2.5 6.0E-08 5.0E-08 3.7E-10 1.5E-07 1.2E-07 6.4E-10 .'Ai 2.5 9.0E-08 7.5E-08 4.4E-10 2.lt-07 1.70-07 7.50-10 faA 2.5 1.3E-07 !.10-07 6.8E-10 3.2C-07 2.6E-07 1.3E-09 PJ 2.5 1.90-07 1.6E-07 1.6E-09 3.2E-07 2.6E-07

2. lE-09 tharest Picat Anirml l#E

.8 4.3E-07 3.9E-07 f.8E-09 9.lE-07 8.lE-07 8.2E-09 t:E .8 1.7E-07

1. 5 t:-07 2.4E-09 4.8E-07 4.3E-07 3.3E-09 DE

.? 9.5E-09

8. 5 E-08 9.6E-10 4.lE-07 3.6E-07 1.9E-09 E

1.2 8.0E-09 7.lE-08

. 5 E-10 0.00-07

2. 4 E-07 1.4E-09 ESE 1.2 1.20-07 1.10-07

1. lE-t 9 3.3E-07 2.9E-07 1.7E-05 SE 1.2 1.50-07 1.3E-07 1.60-05 3.80-07 3.30-07 2.30-09 SSL 3.2 4.5E-08 3.7E-01 4.2E-10 9.3E-09 7.20-09 5.7E-10 S

3.3 4.6E-08 3.8E-08 3.9E-10 0.50-08 6.6E-08 i.9E-10 SS; 3.3 3.BE-08

3. 2 E-08 2.90-10

. 1E-07 8.2E-08 5.0E-10 EW l.6 7.4E-08 6.6E-08 5.6E-10 2.2E-07

1. 8 E--0 7 1.0E-09

&cli 1.5 8.3E-03 7.30-09 6.5E-10 2.6E-07 2.20-07 1.20-09 E! 1.7 9.5E-08 8.2E-08 6.4E-10 2.6 E-0 7 2.2E-07 1.2E-09 52AJ 3.0* 5.lE-08 5.20-09 2.9E-10 1.1E-07 8.9E-09 4.6E-10 ini 2.3* 1.2E-07

1. 3 E-07 6.5E-10 3.00-07 2.5E-07 1.lE-09 13AJ 2.0 1.7E-07 1.4E-07 9.9E-10

4. 3 E-07 3.5E-07 1.90-09 t3 1.1 5.6E-07 4.9E-07 6.4E-09

1. 0 E-06 8.8E-07 8.0E-09

• 7tc cimest corrervattw distance X/CG wre uso3 for these distances.

Fev. 2 6/81 P00R ORIGINAL

F ~l r WCGS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-1 Sheet 3 of 3 AVEPAGE FETEOPCUEICAL RCATIVE (DtCEffrHATIQ1 N;ALYSIS 7 Iuta Periot! 3 Wa rs: funes and Fbore 7699-062-07 (6/1/73 - 5/31/75, 7/12/80 (Ground) 3/5/79 - 3/4/80) 7/19/80 (Mixed Mode) fIIXID H UE GOC;D ficarest Ibity Sector Goat X/Q Pel. X/Q [1pl. X/Q Dq cs. X/Q Rel. X/Q [rpl. X/O Depos. taa: 5.0 3.6C-08 2.9C-08 2.8C-10 6.7E-08 5.0C-08

3. 8 C-10 NE 5.0 1.6 C-04 1.3C-08 9.6C-Il 2.DC-08 2.0C-08 1.2C-10 Da; 5.0 9.0C-09 7.5C-09 4.00-11 2.lC-08 1.50-09 5.8C-Il C

5.0

1. 4 C-08 1.10-08 7.00-11 2.SC-08 2.0E-08 R.8C-11 CSE 5.0 1.9C-03 1.40-08 9.0C-Il 4.6C-03 3.40-09 1.5C-10 SC 5.0 2.2 C-08 1.7C-08 1.4C-10 4.0E-08 2.9C-04 1.5C-10 SSC 5.0 2.2E-09 1.8C-08 1.8C-10 4.5C-09

3. 4 C-08 2.4C-10 S

5.0 2.9C-08 2.3C-08 2.lC-10 4.SC-08 3.5C-08 2.4C-10 SS.! 5.0* 2.1C-08 1.7C-08 1.3C-10 5.lC-08 3.RC-08 2.10-10 SW 5.0* 1.9C-08 1.5C-01 8.2C-11 4.3C-08 3.2C-oi 1.4C-10 bEli 5.0 2.2C-09 1.9C-08 1.0E-10 5.2C-08 3.8C-09 1.7E-10 il 5.0 2.4C-08 1.9C-08 1.0C-10 5.7C-08 4.2C-08 1.8E-10 12 34 5.0 2.3C-08 1.8C-08 1.0E-10 5.5C-08 4.00-08 1.8E-10 tai 5.0

3. 4 C-08 2.70-08 1.2E-10 8.lt-08

6. 0 C-08 2.2C-10 taal 5.0 6.1C-0C 4.7C-08

2. 4 C-10 1.3C-07 9.40-08 4.00-10 5.0 7.*C-08

5. 9 C-08 4.9C-10 1.1C-07 8.2C-08 5.7C-10 if 1.1 5.6E-07 4.9L-07 6.4E-09 1.0C-06 8.8E-07 8.0E-09 f >:a rest Dairy G.ra taz 4.7 3.9C-08

3. 2 C-08 3.2C-10 7.3C-08 5.50-09 4.2C-10 ric 3.0*

2.80-08 2.4C-09 2.3C-10 5.8C-08 4.6C-08 3.0C-10 D;E 5.0/none 9.0E-09 7.5C-09 4.00-11 2.1C-08 1.50-08 5.8E-Il E 1.8 4.7C-08 4.lE-08 3.9C-10 1.6C-07 1.3C-07 7.lE-10 ESE 1._ l.50-07 1.4E-07 1.4C-09 4.5C-07 4.0L-0 7 2.3C-09 SC 1.2* 1.8C-07 1.6C-07 2.0E-09 5.00-07 4.3C-07 3.lE-09 SSE 4.0* 3.3C-08 2.6C-08 2.8C-10 6.50-08 5.0C-08 1.7E-10 S 5.9/None 2.9C-08 2.3C-08 2.1C-10 4.8C-08 3.50-08 2.40-10 SSil 5.0/none 2.lC-08 1.7C-08 1.4C-10 5.1C-08 3.8C-08 2.10-10 SW 5.0*/None 1.8C-08 1.5C-08 8.2C-Il 4.3C-08 3.2C-08 1.4E-10 leaf 4.7

2. 4 C-0 8 2.0C-08 1.2C-10

5. 7C-08 4.3C-08 1.9E-10 11 5.0/Done 2.40-08 1.9C-08 1.00-10 5.70-08 4.3C-08 1.8C-10 1452 5.0/none 2.3C-08 1.8C-08 1.0E-10 5.5C-08 4.0C-08 1.8C-10 tal 3.5*

5.9C-08 6.0E-08 2.4C-10 1.3C-07 1.0.C-0 7 4.2C-10 hC f.J 2.0*

1. 7C-0 7 1.9C 07 1.0C-09 4.3C-07

3. 6C-07 1.9C-09 t1 5.0*/Ucr.e 7.7C-08 6.lC-08 4.7C-10 1.10-07 8.3C-08 S.8C-10 N

1.1 5.60-07 4.90-07 6.40-09 1.00-06 8.8C-07 8.0C-09

• 7he closest conservatim distance X/0G were usal for these distances.

Rev. 2 P00R ORIGINAL.

WCGS-ER(OLS) TAHLE 5.2-2 CALCULATEC LIQUID EFFLUENT DISCHARGE CONCENTRATIONS FROM ROUTINE OPERATION pCi/l Release Circtilkilg Coolt[19 d I sot ope Ci/yr Water Lake LeRoy li-3 4.10C+002 2.38C+004 2.34E*004 7.38C+002 Cr-51 7.00C-005 1.26E-004 6.090-005 1.920-006 '!n-54 1.10E-004 1.12C-003 1.01E-003 3.19 C- 0 0 5 Fe >5 6.00E-005 1.59E-003 1.530-003 4.82'.;-005 re 59 4.000-005 9.34E-005 5.62C-005

1. 7 /E-006 Co-38 9.90C-004 3.11E-003 2.190-003

6. ',1 E-0 0 5 Co-60 9.400-004 3.910-002 3.82C-002 1 71E-003 Dr-83 3.90C-001 3.53E-004 1.19E-006

,61:-008 l1o-99 3.100-003 3.17E-003 2.88C-004 3.09C-006 Tc-9 9:1' l.80E-003 1.69C-003 1.410-005 4.45E-007 T L-12 9:1 5.090-005 9.95C-005 5.300-005 1.67E-006 I-131 2.400-002 2.84t-002 6.07E-003 1.92C-004 Te-132 9.80E-004 1.01E-003 9.94C-005 3.14E-006 1-132 7.90E-003 7.35C-003 2.37C-005 7.48C-007 I-I33 3.20E-002 3.070-002 9.7AC-004 2.770-0C5 Cs-134 9.80E-00 3 2.16C-001 2.07C-001 6.53C-003 1-135 1.600-002 1.500-002 1.400-004 4.420-006 Cn-136 4.40E-003 5.89E-003 1.79E-003 5.65E-005 Cs-137 3.500-003 5.85C-001 5.7'E-001 1.R20-002 "r-95 1.400-004 4.14E-004 2.84E-004 8.98C-006

b-9 5 2.00E-004 1.06C-004 2.200-004 6.94C-006 Pb-86 3.000-005 4.55E-005 1.760-005 5.550-007 Hu-101 2.000-005 4.350-005 2.49C-005 7.960-007 stu-10 6 2.40E-004 2.900-003 2.680-003 a.46C-005 A,

110f t 4.00C-005 3.46C-004 3.09C-004 9.75E-006 Cc-144 5.20C-004 4.98E-003 4.500-003 1.42E-004 Dr-34 2.000-004 1.86E-004 1.39C-007 1.39C-009 Sr-89 1.00C-005 2.56C-005 1.63C-005 5.14E-007 Te-127!' 1.000-005 4.32E-005 3.39C-005 1.070-006 Te-127 3.00E-005 2.92E-005 3.680-007 1.16C-008 Te-129 6.00E-005 5.5HE-005 8.99E-008 2.84E-009 I-130 1.800-004 1.710-004 2.93C-006 9.25C-008 Te-131M 9.000-005 3.71L-005 3.53E-006 1.llE-007 Dr-85 2.00E-005 1.860-005 1.30E-009 4.10C-011 Rb-88 6.80E-002 6.33E-002 2.64E-005 3.31E-007 Sr-91 2.00E-005 1.880-005 2.5]C-007 7.92C-009 Y-91 t1 1.000-005 9.300-006 1.090-008 3.44E-010 Te-131 4.00E-005 3.72E-005 2.18E-009 6.88C-010 I-134 3.70E-003 3.44E-003 4.270-006 1.350-007 All others 3.000-005 "It = retastab'e bBased solely on dilutton by the circulating water dischirge and but idop or radionuclides over 40 year plant Itfe. "Haned on dilution by the circulating water discharge and build-up of adionuclides in the cooling lake over 40 year plant life, dConcestratton of radionuclides at the LcHoy water works intake. j Dase.J on dilution by circulating water discha rge ar d build-up of radionuclides in the 7ooling lake over 40 year plant life and additional dilution.n the Neosho R ive r. Rev. 2 6/81 P00R ORIGINAL u

u _c

]

i-m F y 1 ~UCGS-CR(OLS) ~ ~ TABLE 5.2-3 BIOACCUMULATION FACTORG (pCi/kg per pCi/ liter) r PRESilWATER SALTWATER ELEflENT - PISii. INVERTERRATE' FISit INVERTEBR' ATE 11 - '9.0E 9.0E-01 9.0E-01 .9.3E-01 - C 4.6E 03 9.1E 03 1.8E 03 1.4E 03 NA:

1;0E102 2.0E 02 6.7E-02' J.9E-01

- P 1.0EiOS .2.0E 04 2.9E 04 3.0E 04 .CR~ 2.0E 01 2.0E 03 4.0E 02 220E 03 MN 4.0E 02 <9.0E 04 5.5E 02 4.0E 02 - FE' 1.0E 02 3.2E'03 3.0E 03 2.0E 04 COL 5.0E 01 .2.0E 02 1.0C 02 1.0E 03 'NI '1.0E 02 1.0E 02 1.0E 02 2.5E ~ 0 2 CU - 5.0E 01 4.0E 02 6.7E 02 1.7E 03 ~ZN 2.0E 03 1.0E 04 2.0E 03 5.0E- 04 BR 4.2C 02 3.3E 02 1.50-02 3.1E 00 ' RB 2.'0E 03 1.0E 03 8.3E 00 1.'7E 01 SR 3.0E'01 '1.0E 02 2.0C 00 2.0E 01 Y 2.5E 01 1.0E 03 2.5E 01 1.08 03 ZR 3.3E 00 6.7E 00 2.0E 02 8.0E 01 NB 3.0E 04 1.0E C2 3.0E 04' l.0E 02 MO 1.0E 01 1.0E 01-1.0E 01 1.0C 01 I TC 1.5E 01 5.0E 00 1.0E 01 5.0E 01 RU 1.0E 01 3.0E 02 3.0E 00 1.0E 03 . Hit 1.0E~01 3.0E 02 1.0E 01 2.0E 03 TE. 4.0E 02 6.1E 03 1.0E 01 1.0E'02 I 1.5E 01 5.0E 00 1.0E 01 5.0E 01 CS 2.0E 03 1.0E 03 4 9E 01 2.5E 01 BA 4.0E 00 2.0E 02 1.0E 01 1.0E 02 LA 2.5E 01= 1.0E 03 2.5E 01 1.0E 03 CE 1.0E 00 1.0E 03 1.0E 01 6.0E 02 PR 2.5E 01 1.0E 03 2.5E 01 1.0E 03 ND 2.5E 01 1.0E 03 2.5E 01 1.0E 03 W 1.2E 03 1.0E 01 3.0E 01 3.0E 01 NP' 1.0E 01 4.0E 02 1.0E 01 1.0E 01

• Regulatory Guide 1.109 Rev. 2 6/81 J

G- '.7 . 'i'- [ 3 1 ^ -1 + vs y . WCGS-ER(OLS) ^ o TABLE 5.2-4 MAXIMUM ~ INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL DOSE RATES- .TO BIOTA OTilER TilAN MAN AT - Tile. CIRCULATING WATER" DISCHARGE POINT. ^ B'iotic Type Dose' Rate -(mrad /yr) Primary ' Organisms. ' Internal External ETotal Pish 1.36E+001! 9.4]E+000 2.30E+001 Invertebrate'- 5.12E+000' 1.88E+001 2.39E+001 Algae. . 5.72E+000 1.37E-002 5.73E+000- . Secondary ^ Organisms Muskrat- . 5.16E+001 6.42E+000 5.80E+001 Raccoon 2.80E+000 4.84E+000 7.64E+000 lieron 2.84E+002 6,41E+000 2.90E+002 ' Duck - 4.64E+001 9.55E+000 5.60E+001 Assumes aquatic and -terrestrial organisms and speci2s live at Lthe circulating' water discharge point. Build-up of radionuclides is considered over-the'40 year. plant life. A11~ food consumed is considered to be in equilibrium with-water at ef fluent-concentrations. Rev. 2 6/81 ~ j

P00R ORIGINAL TAllLE *.2-5 LSTIPnTID DLUE IGTES 1U f nXIf ul ifDIVltX1AIS 11tJet LIQUID IMLWt.TS PISIDItG ItJ VlE B.L.?J O' ILPLY N CLT PR!?! PLit YEAR PAtif.AY SrJ t4 li t!; L t\\T.R '!UTAL ttVY TifYTOID K!Lt;LY LliC GI-LLI Fish 7.80-002 1.25-001 8.92-002 1.57-003 4.24-002 1.52-002 3.94-003 Inwrtebrate 9.47-004 1.'20-001 1.42-003 3.63404 9.36-004 5.13-004 9.29-004 Drtnktm3 1.36-003 5.87-002 5.R0-002 5.69-002 5.72-002 5.67-002 5.66-002 Storelim 9.30-005 7.97-005 7.97-005 7.97-005 7.97-005 7.97-005 7.97-005 7.97-005 Sw arring .00 3.38-007 3.39-007 3.28-007 3.38-007 3.39-007 3.33-007 3.38-007 Imtlig .00 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 Total 9.30-J05 9.03-002 1.86-001 1.49-001 5.8R-002 1.01-001 7.25-002 6.16-002 T't AJR FATtit AY St irJ lt u LIVI.R BfrAL larY 'IhYiolo K!!*:1Y Lt!G GI-LLI Ftsh 9.27-002 1.29-001 5.05-002 1.23-003 4.37-002 1.76-002 2.98-003 Ir:w rtd>cate 1.00-003 1.86-003 8.76-004 2.82-004 8.72-004 4.64-004 6.87-004 Drtnkin; 1.32-003 4.19-002 4.06-002 4.01-002 8.05-002 4.01-002 3.93-002 Sty;rol a m 5.19-003 4.45404 4.45-004 4.45-004 4.45-004 4.45-004 1.45-003 4.45-004 Sw tmin] .01 1.95-0C6 1.95-006 1.95-006 1.95-006 1.95-006 1.95-006 1.95-006 ikut ies] .00 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 1.13-006 Total 5.19-C04 d.55-002 1.73-001 9.24-002 4.20-002 8.56-002 5.86-002 4.40-002 di!!D PATif. AY SK ! '. It t.i: LIVP H "UTAL f t OY 71fYIUID Elit:1Y l ltU GI-LLI Fish 1.03-001 1.14-001 1.99-002 1.03-003 3.73-002 1.4'-002 1.65-003 Inwrtd; rate 1.30-003 1.69-003 4.09-004 2.46-003 7.65-004 3.91-004 3.84-004 Detnkuvy

3. R2-00 3 0.05-002 7.70-002 7.69-002 7.77-002 7.68-002 7.64-002 Storelim 1.09-004 9.29<05 9.29-005 9.29-005 9.29-005 9.29-005 9.27-005 9.29-005 Swinan]

.00 1.21-006 1.21-006 1.21-006 1.21-006 1.21-006 1.21-006 1.21-006 thatin) .00 6.23-007 6.28407 6.23-007 6.29-007 6.29-u07 6.28-007 6.28-007 Total 1.09-004 1.09-001 1.96-001 9.75-002 7.82-002 1.16-001 9.13-002 7.85-002 I !!TN.T PA717. AY SKIf4 IME LIVf.R 'IUTAL ltJDY V MOID kit t.1Y Llt G GI-LLI Fish 00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Drinkary 3.95-003 8.01-002 7.53-002 7.53-002 7. f. 3 -002 7.55-002 7.50-0-2 Stureline .00 .03 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 .00 Total .00 3.95-n03 8.01-002 7.53-002 7.58-09. 7.63-002 7.55-002 7.50-002 (1) Assures dr tnkun citer is tje? only liquid tauway an infant wmid remam og osure f rom, l<cv. 2 6/81

P00R ORIGINAL LLui-l:!t(Oli;) l TAlitJ' 5.2-6 LST!mT1D ttCL leTES 19 fnX1l0f t !!4)!VIDUAIS tlof t LIQUID iTittTNT 0]t02.TitATIOtG AT Tlif' CDs.t!AT!!G mTER DISOW12: IUlKT &JLT title PER YEAR PA115AY SKiti lt t:0 LIWR 1UTAL lit)Y TilYlOID f!tt;lY trtC GI-LLI Fish 2.52+000 4.07+000 2.90+000 6.47-002 1.39+000 4.94-001 1.31-001 InwrteL 3.19-002 6.25-002 4.66-002 1.36-002 3.75-002 1.66-002 6.27-002 De nnkiny{ ate .09 .00 .00 .00 .C0 .00 .00 Shorclarn 4.51-003 3.86-o02 3.86-003 3.86-003 3.86H101 3.86-09) 3.36-003 3.86-003 Swirrin] .00 1.22-055 1.22-005 1.22-005 1.22-005 1.22-005 1.22-005 1.22-005 but ary .00 4.08-005 4.088)US 4.08-005 4.09-0Ca 4.09-005 4.08-005 4.0S-005 Total 4.51-003 2. ,6 + 0 00 4.14+000 2.95+000 8.22-002 1.41+000 5.14-001 1.98-001 11.L!a2 S PATir. AY LE!!. Isg: Livi R iurA! lu)Y 11rda it t) KJit:1Y IL* C GI-LLI Fish 2.67+000 4.19+000 1.64+000 5.29-002 1.42+000 5.70-001 9.88-002 Inwrtebrat e 3.36-002 6.13-002 2.91-002 1.09-002 3.57-002 1.50-00' 4.53-002 De t nk b vJ. .00 .00 .00 .00 09 00 0? Sturelity?

2. 52-on 2 2.16-o92 2.16-002 2.10-002 2.16-002 2.16-n02 2.16-00.

2.16-002 Sa u s"ut) 00 7.06-035 7.05-005 7.06-005 7.06-005 7.00-005 7.06-005 7.06-015 hat a rs] .00 4.09-005 4.03-005 4.03-005 4.09-005 4.03-4105 4.01-005 1.08-005 Total 2.52-002 2.71+000 4.27 000 1.69*000 8.53-002 1.4H+000 6.07-001 1.66-001 Ult!D PA rt r. AY E4 !!; li lf.E L IVf.P 1TGI. IM)Y ';1 rim *!I) E !! f.t Y IAiG GI-LLI I trh 3.31*000 3.70 000 6.47-001 4.73-002 1.21+0n0 4.51-001

5. 4 n-002 Inwrt4 rate

4. 3 7+M 2 5.55-002 1.66-002 1.01-002 3.14-002 1.26-002 1.96-002 Drinkin]

.00 .09 .00 .00 .09 .00 .00 51*;re l ue

5. 26-) )

4.51-003 4.51-003 4.51-003 4.51-003 4.51-003 4.51-003 4.51-003 Swtacury .00 4.31 '305 4.39-005 4.39-005 4.1'l-005 4.19-005 4.39-005 4.39-005 hut try .00 2.27-005 2.27-005 2.274)05 2.27-005 2.27-005 2.27-005 2.27-005 Total 5.26-003 3.33+000 3.76+000 6.68-001 6.19-002 1.25+000 4.71-001 7.82-002 Assures tJy? 1A? m ret a rmrw of drinkir*J water. Asstr=s an inf ant witti nut le c>;osul to t3e existtrwJ lat] ways. Rev. 2 6/81

p,, 1 [f ~ v. PCGS-CR(OIS) ~ ' ' TABLE 5.2-7 -ESTDnTED DOSC FFOM LIQO1D EFFLUEffrS TO POPULATION OF LEROY ~ a POPUIATION DOSC - (person-rem /yr) ~ SKIN BONE-LIVER 'IOTAL EODY T!IYPOID ' KIDNLY- . LUtU - GI-LLI-ItGESTION Fish ~ 3.06E-003 4.56E-003 2.68E-003 5.15E-005 1.55E-003 5.62C-CJ4 "1.26 E-004 - Inwrtebrate 2.27C-005 4.16C-005 2.67C-005 7.36C-006 1.97E-005

1.0 9E-005

-1.65E-005 Drinking Water 5.69C-004 1.92C-002 1.88E-002 1.85E-002 1.87E-002- .1.85E-002 1.85E-002-E:tTERNAL EXFCSURE Shoreline 6.19E-005 5.30E-005 5.30E-005 5.30C-005 5.30C-005 5.30E-005 5.35E-005 - L5.35E-005 Swimning 1.81C-007 1.81E-007 1.81E-007 1.81C-007 1.81C-007 l'. 81C-007 - 1.81C-007 Boating 3.62E-007 3.62C-007 3.62 C-007 3.62C-007-3.62C-007 . 3.62E-007- '3.62E-007 Totals 6.19C-005 3.71C-003 2.39E-002 2.16E-002 1.86E-002 2.03C-002. 1.91E-002 1.87E-002~ 'Rev.-2. 6/81

) WCG S-1:R (O LS ) TABLE 5.2-8 CALCULArl:D PUPULATIOt1 DOSC ltATES PROtt SUBflCRSION IN GASCOUS EFFLUCliTS Cumulative Cumulative Cumulative Avera;je Ratli u s 2000 Dose Annual Dose (miles) Populationa ( pe rson-rein /y r ) (mrem /yr) 1 20 0.002., 0.12 2 100 0.0055 0.055 3 200 0.007b 0.029 4 2,750 0.021 0.008 S 4,870 0.026 0.0054 10 6,180 0.026 0.0043 20 12,100 0.026 0.0021 30 72,020 0.041 0.00058 40 114,630 0.046 0.0004 50 184,470 0.054 0.00029 aDee.ographic data are presented in Section 2.1.2. Since population in the vicinity of the site will be reduced, the calculated doses are conservative, b

RODR ORIGINAL WCGS-E R (OLS ) TADII 52-90 CAICULATfD F/OIOTCTIVE ItOltE N2D PMrTICUIATE CASELUS PA'nfhM DOSES (ifypothetical Wrst Case) If Ace Location Grwp PatN ay Critical Organ tuse Contributions (mPem/yr) Mult Skin Thyruid ibm Total Body Controlling Grnni Centamination 1.26 E-02* 1.08 E-02 1.08 E-02 1.08 E-02 Sector Exclusion-Air Inhalation 3.69 E-02 6.13 E-02* 9.63 E-05 3.69 E-02 Restricted Area Vetytable Irypstion 8.92 E-02 3.97 E-01* 1.78 E-01 9.35 E-02 C3undtry.75 rniles Ctv Milk Ingestion t tJorth Sector Gmt Milk Ingestion 5.35 E-02 8.68 E-Ol* 7.98 E-02 6.13 E-02 ficat Insicction 2.15 E-02 4.60 E-02 6.69 E-02* 2.18 E-02 Total Ibse (rRem/yr) 2.14 E-01 1.38 E+00 3.36 E-01 2.24 E-01 Wen Skin Thyr oid Ibm Total ikx!y Grant Centar,ination 1.26 E-02* 1.08 E-02 1.08 E-02 1.09 E-02 Air Inhahtion 3.71 E-02 6.75 E-02* 1.29 E-04 3.71 E-02 Vef2 table Ingestion 1.20 E-01 3.78 E-01* 2.92 0-01 1.24 E-01 Ccw Milk In pstien =- =- Goat tiilk Incf!stion ~' 76 E-02 1.37 E+00* 1.47 E-01 8.60 E-02 thnt Ingestion .61 E-02 3.38 E-n2 5.65 E-02* 1.63 E-02 Total tuse (rRer/yr) 2.63 E-01 1.86 C+00 5.06 E-01 2.74 E-01 Cit 1i Skin Thyroid Ibre Tota 1 Body Grm! Contani:ntion 1.26 E-02* 1.08 L-02 1.0R C-02 1.08 E-02 Air Irtulation 3.28 E-02 6.73 0-02* 1.65 E-04 3.29 E-02 Voptahic In(f mt ion 2.37 E-01 6.30 E-01

7. 0 5 E-Ol

• 2.40 E-01 Ctv Milk In<pstion Gnat tiilk Irypstion 1.46 E-01 2.69 E+00*

3.60 E-01 1.55 E-01 teat Ingestion 2.70 E-02 5.38 E-02 1.06 E-Ol* 2.71 E-02 Tetal tbse (trFer/yr) 4.55 E-01 3.45 C+00 1.18 E+00 4.66 E-01 Infant Skin Thyroid Ibre Total Body Groun! Contamination 1.26 E-02* 1.0R E-02 1.08 E-02 1.08 E-02 Air Irhalation 1.89 E-02 5.05 E-02* 1.16 E-04 1.89 E-02 Vtwytable In<pstion = C(w Milk Incy'stion Goat tiilk Irypstion 2.60 E-01 6.45 E+00* 6.98 E-01 2.72 E-01 fDat Ingestion Total Ime (rPen/yr) 2.92 E-01 6.51 E+00 7.09 E-01 3.02 E-01 Arjendix I Limit (rnPm/yr) 15.00 E+00 15.00 E+00 15.00 C+00 15.00 C+00 ibte: (1) Assures rrriers of cirh a<f3 group are present and all [utluays are present at tJe Controlling Exclusion-Pestricted Area Dound.iry. (2) Assumes reriers of cadi age grwp irypst goat milk rather than cow milk to consider the worst case milk irypstion pithway. (3) Assures no wgetable or rmat ingestion by infants. Id?ntifies the critical ortpn dow for each giwn pitNay. Rev. 2 6/81

P00R ORIGINAL wCGS-ER (OLS) TAllLE 5 2-9b CAlfUIATfD HADICACTIVE 1m!! E N.'D PARTICUIATE GVWUS PATEMY DOGES (Cbntrolling Existing Resi&nt) y Age Ixxation Grct:p PatJway Critical Organ Ibse Contributions (trRem/yr) Mult Skin Thymid Ibre Total lhly 1.4 miles N Gromil Contam1. nation 4.78 E-0 3* 4.08 E-03 4.08 E-03 4.08 E-03 1.4 miles N Air Inhalation 1.64 E-02 2.67 E-02* 3.96 E-05 1.64 E-02 1.4 miles t1 Vort.able Irvrstion 3.77 E-02 1.58 E-Ol' 6.91 E-02 3.94 E-02 1.L miles t1 Ctw Milk Irvrstion 1.94 E-02 4.05 E-Ol* 4.04 E-02 2.12 E-02 1.1 miles il Meat Insiection 1.20 E-02 2.60 E-02 3.55 E-02* 1.22 E-02 Total Dose (rmtw/yr) 9.03 E-02 6.20 E-01 1.49 f.-01 9.33 E-02 Teen Skin Thyroid Ik w Total tbly 1.4 iniles N Ground Cbntamimtion 4.78 E-0 3* 4.08 E-03 4.08 E-03 4.08 E-03 1.4 miles N Air Irhalation 1.65 E-02 2.94 F-02* 5.30 0-05 1.66 E-02 1.4 miles N Veertable Impstion 5.04 E-02 1.51 E-Ol* 1.13 E-01 5.19 E-02 1.1 miles il Cow Milk Irvrstion 2.94 E-02 6.39 E-Ol* 7.4 5 E-02 3.17 E-02 1.1 miles N Meat In<rstion 8.93 E-03 1.90 E-02 3.00 E-02* 9.03 E-03 lbtal tose (rPi r/yr) 1.10 E-01 8.42 E-01 2.22 E-01 1.13 E-01 G ild Skin _ 1hyanid rare Total ihly 1.4 miles ti cronul contarination

4. 7 8 E-0 P 4.08 E-03 4.09 r-03 4.09 E-03

1.4 milesf

Air IrMlation 1.46 E-02 2.42 E-02* 6.80 E-05 1.46 E-02 1.4 miles !! Vtwy table Ingestion 9.76 E 2.51 E-01 2.74 r-Ol* 9.91 E-02 1.1 miles N Crw Milk Incrstico 5.89 E-02 1.27 E+00* 1.83 E-01 6.18 E-02 1.1 miles it Meat Irvyntion 1.48 E-02 3.00 E-02 5.64 E-02* 1,49 E-02 Total Dtr.e (rtte/yr) 1.91 E-01 1.58 E+00 5.18 E-01 1.94 E-01 Infant Skin 'Ihyroid Icic Total Dody 1.4 miles N Ground Cor.tanimtion 4.78 E-0 3* 4.08 E-03 4.08 E-03 4.08 E-03 1.4 miles N Air Irhalation 8.41 r-0 3 2.17 E-02* 4.81 E-05 8.42 0-03 1.4 miles N Ve'rtable In<rstion 1.1 miles N Ccw Milk Irrrstion 1.10 r-01 3.04 C+00* 3.57 E-01 1.14 E-01 1.1 miles N Meat Ingestion Total tose (rtem/yr) 1.23 0-01 3.07 I:+00 3.61 E-01 1.27 E-01 top?ndix 1 I,irtit (r$tn/yr) 15.00 E*00 15.00 I;.00 15.00 E+00 15.00 C+00 Note: (1) All pit 1 ways actually exist for this resident exort the etw milk intrstion pitNay which in as sten 1.

(2) Assm.'s twiers of each a

sures: a Liquid offltents Ingestion. fish 2.90E+000 mran/yr 5.28E-002 mran/yr inwrtebrate - 4.66E-002 mrem /yr 1.09E-002 mran/yr drinking water 0.0 - mrem /yr 0.0 mran/yr External exlosure storeline 3.86E-003 mrem /yr 2.16E-002 mran/yr swinmiry] 1.22E-005 mrem /yr -7.06E-005 mran/yr boating 4.08E-005 mrem /yr 4.08E-005 mrem /yr Subtotal 2.95E+000 mran/yr 8.53E-002 mran/yr b Gaseous ef fluents noble gas subnersion 2.20E-002 mrem /yr particulate and ialine gases 1.27E-001 mrem /yr 3.07E+000 mrem /yr Subtotal 1.49E-001 nran/yr 3.07C+000 mran/yr Pcpulation Exposures: C Liquid of fltents Ingestion fish 2.68E-003 parson-ran/yr 5.15E-005 person-ran/yr inwrtebrate 2.67E-005 person-ran/yr 7.36E-006 Inrson-ran/yr drinking water 1.88E-002 person-ran/yr 1.85E-002 p2rson-ran/yr External exposure storeline 5.30E-005 person-ran/yr 5.30E-005 Intson-ran/yr swimming 1.81E-007 person-ran/yr 1.81C-007 Inrson-rem /yr boating 3.62E-007 Irrson-rem /yr 3.62E-007 p2rson-ran/yr Subtotal 2.16E-002 parson-ran/yr 1.86E-002 person-rem /yr d - Gaseous of fluents submersion 5.4E-002 Inrson-ran/yr direct radiation 1.0E-003 inrson-ran/yr Subtotal 5.5E-002 person-ran/yr " Doses were calculated at the circulating water discharge for nnxinum individtnl exposures. Total bcrly doses were for an adult and thryoid doses were to a teen. bDoses woru calculatal at a point 1.4 miles from the vont in the maximally exlosal sector for an infant. dTo the population in the town of 's2 Roy. To the lxpulation within a 50 mile radius. Rev. 2 j r, in t 1 WCGS-ER(OLS) TABLE 5.2-12 4 APPENDIX I CONFORMANCE

SUMMARY

TABLE FOR LIQUID AND. GASEOUS.: EFFLUENTS Design Calculaged Point of Dose Type of Dose Object 2Ve Dose Evaluation Liquid Ef fluents b Dose to total body 5 mrem /yr 2.95 mrom/yr Point of' Discharge from all pathways per site Cooling Lake-Dose to any organ 5 mrem /yr 4.27 mrem /yr Sameias above-from all pathways per site Gaseous Effluents Dose to total body 5 mrem /yr 0.0220 mrem /yr .75 gi N of stack .of an individual per site vent Dose to skin of an 15 mrem /yr 0.0724 mrem /yr .75 mi N of~ stack individual per site vent Radioiodine and Particulates Dose to any organ 15 mrem /yr 3.07 mrem /yr* Residence, 1.4.mi. from all pathways per site N of stack vent. Milk cow 1.1 mi..N of stack. I-131 releases 1 Ci/yr 0.0577 Ci/yr . gaseous per unit 0.0240 Ci/yr. liquid ^ Total 0.0817 Ci/yr

1. Design objective as specified in. the Commission's Appendix I Conformance b ption, 40 FR, 40816, September 4, 1975, RM -5 0-2.

O Maximum dose to an individual from all liquid pathways. Maximum dose to a teen liver from all liquid pathways. dMaximally exposed sector. UDose to an infant thyroid. Rev. 2 16/81- . 1 Y

GASEOUS EFFLUENTS NUCLEAR FACILITY 4 Illllllid u outo _ M"""E" EFFLUENTS ' ~ - t,L 'I -6&-_.. FISH INGESTION SHORELINE EXPCSURE ' ~ A UAT f4 tgg @/ ( OP sf, i [Q-M h y}$,2 ~ ~ ~~ ~ g hs~ ~-- \\ g 5,< $* 4 tt! j hs ~' - ~ ~ - - ~ S AIMMING, ~ (/ ~ w ATE R IM M EFISION ~ ~ ~ j ~~ ~-- ~~ (,, '~ _r, ;- - / d PLANT INGESTION - ' ~ ~ ~~- W h %'+ mbp .c MD %. f3

• g'%

\\ 2 N INGESTION I (I7 \\ N ~ w ( SEDIMEN T J EXPOSURE g c.sp / MQ IN ON ~ WOLF CREEK GUNERATING STATION UNIT NO. I ENVIRONMENTAL REPC6T (CFERATING UCEt4SE STt43E] FIGURE 5.2-1 U S Atomic Energy Commission,1973 EXPOSURE PATIIWAYS TO ORGANISMS

GASEOUS EFFLUENTS NUCLE AR FACILITY .-b r1 -5

-.)'./.

-.. '/4 M lNO[b i g-9 ei L10Ul0 r-~----=g" EFFLUENTS z 0, p -~ N a 4 h}1}S ;,, ,[' ci DIR EC T .. r - - 3 B IRR ADIATIO N a-4 3 2 c ,g o, g E 5 ":4 f ' Iq1 > <f ,p g 1 = L.. _ _ " li..t ..M... A. g% n k FUEL TRANSPORT ~'~ 7 ~ i I /\\ _.__.. mt., . i ' ".',1;,,..nvi w 'q, . ) f,. - SHORElltiE gp0509g U \\, w \\ EXPOSURt. IO "i DEPOSITED MATERIALS l , AT E R g, , _, ' ~ w \\f _~ $ fo M~g r.14 63 G U 9,4 [p <q. / ~ dQf G) Q, Qi g "- - 9,, -- _ k-y b Ace-e ej iion 4s" y t a o -h '\\F"E' bicGE / t[- -TS 5_

2P -

-~ g y INGEST 3, ' "--~ ~ ' ~ \\ n== \\ .-y

f. rQTFT a

x-. - - ~ ~ ,) 9 - n,_ \\ \\ j\\ ~ 1 1_ - - \\ g \\ \\g-:-I d19P . _. ~- 7. ,yh.'t Y Q1r.t Y f.'!6 t \\ ,,a e44 L h> %' g$ f qq 1., p 3 W W. % fP y effj f fCf N M WOLF CREEK GENERATING STATION UNIT NO. I ENVIROtMENTAL REPORT O'ERATING LENSE STtG3 FIGURE 5.2-2

REFERENCE:

U. S. Atomic Energy Commission.1973 EXPOSURE PATilWAYS FO'l llUMANS l

A '. g_ Q470.6 Appendix S A _. o f. t h e ER states that a summary of. .(ER) dose models and.a list of assumptions used for (Appendix Wolf Creek were presented in Appendix 5.2A of the SA) ER-Construction Permit Stage, however in reviewing this.. information, the addition of the computer code FOOD in the ER-OL became apparent. Therefore, please provide an updated. summary of the dose models and assumptions used. R470.6 Appendix SA has been revised. Computer Code FOOD and..other dose models have been replaced with more current i computer codes (GASPAR, LADTAP II) and information in Appendix SA is for these current ~ Codes. C .}}