ML20033B405
| ML20033B405 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Perry  |
| Issue date: | 11/30/1981 |
| From: | CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20033B399 | List: |
| References | |
| ENVR-811130, NUDOCS 8112010373 | |
| Download: ML20033B405 (22) | |
Text
-
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATO COMMISSION 50-441 O
PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT UNITS 1 & 2
$NVIRONMENTAL 0
@EPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGEE SUPPLEMENT 3 NOVEMBER 1981 O
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING CO.
p2n88K eaaajh
THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMIN ATING COMPANY TELEPHONE (216) 622-9800 m ILLUMINATING BLOG.
e 55 PUBLICSoVARE P o Box 5000 e CLEVELAND, oHlo 44101 e
ewing e Best Location in the Nation Datwyn R. Davidson vlCE PRESIDENT SYSTEM ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION November 30, 1981 Mr. Robert L. Tedesco Assistant Director for Licensing Office of thclear Reactor Regulation U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C.
20555 Perry IMelear Power Plant Docket Nos. 50-W O; 50-W 1 ER-OL Supplement 3
Dear Mr. Tedesco:
In Supplement 1 to the PNPP ER-OL, we committed to provide a response to ER-OL Acceptance Review Question E 240.03 in November 1981(RcrerencePNPPER/0LSup.1,PageQ&R 7.1-1, dated 8-10-81). The enclosed forty-one (41) copies of PNPP ER-OL Supplement 3 include that. response in addition to some minor corrections and infor=ation updating.
( )
Very Truly Yours, dho Dal R. Davidson Vice President System Engineering and Construction DRD: mlb Enclosures cc:
G. Charnoff, Esq.
D. Hauser, Esq.
NRC Resident Inspector OV
Dalwyn R. Davidson who, being duly sworn, deposed and said that (1) he is Vice President, System Engineering and Construction of The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company, (2) he is duly authorized to execute and file this report on behalf of The Cleveland Electric. Illuminating Company and as duly authorized agent for Duquesne Light Company, Ohio Edison Company, Pennsylvania Power Company and the Toledo Edison Company, and (3) the statements set forth therein are true and correct to the best of his knowledge, information and belief.
/\\
p1wynR.Davidson O
A Sworn to and subscribed before me, this k
~ day of MO@6ER 1981.
M JOSEPH C. SZWE1KCW Netmy Public. State of Ohio Co,.
s,.
4 hssaors Igiras My 14. 1936 4
5 w+---w~
- ~, -.* s *
~+'w--~wre"-
i i
SUPPLEMENT 3 INSTRUCTION SHEET t
PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT
' UNITS 1 AND-2 4
ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE 4
I The following listed pages and figure of the Cleveland Electric i
Illuminating Company's Environmental Report Operating License Stage for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant are to be removed and replaced, where applicable, with revised sheets 11/30/81.
4
- - O 4
i 4
4 O
]
PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 11/30/81
L Section Remove Pages Insert-Supplemental
(}
Q&R Q&R i to ii Q&R i to ii
(
Q&R 2.1 Q&R 2.1-8 Q&R 2.1-8 Q&R 2.1-19 Q&R 2.1-19 Q&R 2.1-20 Q&R 2.1-20 1
Q&R 2.1-22 Q&R 2.1-22 i
Q&R 2.6 Q&R 2.6-1 Q&R 2.6-1 Q&R 2.6-4 Q&R 2.6-4 Q&R 2.6-6 Q&R 2.6-6 Q&R 3.4 Q&R 3.4-1 to 3.4-3 Q&R 3.4-1 to 3.4-3 4
i l
Q&R 5.5 Q&R 5.5-3 Q&R 5.5-3
()
Q&B 7.1 Q&R 7.1-1 Q&R 7.1-1 to 7.1-5 1
3 4
i t
O PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 11/30/81
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES (QER)
O-INDEX NRC Q&R QUESTION TOPIC.
SUPPLEMENT PAGE NO.
Request for Additional Information, June 9 and July 31, 1981 240.00 Hydrologic Engineering 240.01 1
2.1-1 to.2.1.2 240.01 1
5.2-1 240.02 1
2.4-1 to 2.4-4 240.03 3
7.1-1 to 7.1-4 l
290.00 Terrestrial Resources 290.01 1
3.9-1 290.02 1
2.1-6 to 2.1-7 290.03 1
5.1-12 to 5.1-13 290.04 1-5.1-14 290.05 1
5.1-15 l
290.06 1
5.5-1 to 5.5-2 290.07 2
6.2-2 290.08 2
5.5-3 290.09 3
3.4-1 to 3.4-2 l
291.00 Aquatic Resources 291.01 1
2.2-1 to 2.2-2 0
291.02 1
2.1.3 to 2.1-5 291.03 3
3.4-3 l
291.04 1
2.2-3 291.05 1
2.2-4 291.06 1
2.2-5 to 2.2-6 291.07 1
2.2-7 to 2.2-8 310.00 Socioeconomic 310.01 2
2.1-8 to 2.1-10 310.02 2
2.1-11 to 2.1-18 310.03 2
2.1-19 to 2.1-22 310.04 2
2.6-1 to 2.6-7 310.05 2
2.6-8 320.00 Need for Power, Alternatives and Cost Benefit Summary 320.01 1
1.1-1 320.02 1
1.1-2 320.03 1
1.1-3 320.04 1
1.3-1 320.05 1
1.3-2 320.06 1
1.3-3 320.07 1
1.1-4 320.08 1
11.2-1 320.09 1
1.1-5 320.10 1
1.1-6 O
i PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 11/30/81
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES (Q&R)
O INDEX (Continued)
NRC Q&R QUESTION _ TOPIC SUPPLEMENT PAGE NO.
Request for Additional Information, June 9 and July 31, 1981 451.00 Meteorology 451.01 1
2.3-1 451.02 1
5.1-1 451.03 1
5.1-2 to 5.1-5 451.04 1
5.1-6 to 5.1-11 451.05 1
6.1-1 451.06 1
6.2-1 O~
1 i
5 l
l
'I
!.O PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 ii 11/30/81-r-ee-,- vm.
y p w., -s
.p na
- -m- - m - m w +, - w ww w -,, w,,r --w w-s--n e-.
{}
Update the population forecasts in Figures 2.1-9 to 310.01 (2.1) 2.1-17 OL/ER, using the 1980 preliminary census count.
Using the 1980 census count, update the population centers within 50 mile radius of PNPP, as found in Table 2.1-1 in OL/ER.
In addition, update the transient population estimates found in Table 2.1-2 and Section 2.1.2.3, OL-ER.
Response
The poptilation forecasts reflected in Figure 2.1-9 ER/OL are considered to be reasonably comparable to (within 10 percent of) the 1980 final census data.
This conclusion is based on oLLached Tables A and B.
In light of this data, updates of projected population estimates in Figures 2.1-9 to 2.1-17 are deemed to be unnecessary.
Updates of the population centers within a 50-mile radius of O
PNPP, as found in Table 2.1-1 ER/OL, were performed using the 1980 final census count.
In addition, specific transient popula-tion estimates found in Table 2.1-2 and Section 2.1.2.3 ER/OL were brought up to date.
(These pages are revised in Section 2.1) i 2
l l
PNPP ER/OL Sup. 3 Q&R 2.1-8 11/30/81
310.03 Identify any places where traffic congestion or problems (2.1) of interference with patterns of local traffic might
(~-
be anticipated due to plant operation or maintenance.
Traffic counts of major access roads to the plant site would be useful to support your position.
i
Response
Construction of the PNPP has caused substantial congestion at a number of points in the area.
The heaviest congestion occurs on Center Road between U.S.
20 and the plant, on Parmly Road between Perry Park Road and the plant, and on Middle Ridge Road, east and west of Center Road.
As Figure 310.03A indicates, average daily traf fic (ADT) on Center road north of U.S. 20 increased from just over 700 in 1972 to about 4000 in 1980.
Much of this increase can be attributed to the Perry Plant, which employed per 3000 workers in 1980.
On Parmly Road between Perry Park Road and Center Road, traffic increased over 100 percent between 1972 and 1980.
ADT on Middle Ridge Road east
()
and west of Center Road experienced a similar increase as drivers are using the road to avoid congestion elsewhere.
The data
[
in Figure 310.03A is a summary of information mainly obtained from Douglas T.
Harrison, Lake County Engineer I I' who notes in his letter that examination of the data suggests that about "three-fourths of Center Road traffic can be attributed to Nuclear Plant Construction and ancilliary activities."
Although the State of Ohio does not have road capacity data, Mr.
Harrison nctes thTt "in the absence of capacity data, Level of Service
'E' would appear to be descriptive of that traffic situation."
Level E is defined as follows:
Extremely heavy flow and relatively low speeds.
It is the condition under which the largest number of vehicles O
PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 2.1-19 11/30/81
(}
could be accommodated by the street or roadway.
The traffic flow is unstable and short stoppages may occur.
The number of workers currently (July 1981) onsite is 3678, and this figure is expected to increase to about 3900 by May 1982, one year before the fuel load is installed in Unit 1.
About 313 of these will be operating employees and the remainder 1
will be conatruction workers.
After 1982, employment will gradually increase until it reaches 4000 in May 1986, one year before the fuel loading for the second unit.
At this time, there will be about 399. operating workers, and the construction work force will begin to decrease until it drops to zero in 1988.
After this, the 399 cperating workers will be present throughout the plant's life.
Thus, the congestion on Center, Parmly, and Middle Ridge Roads will continue and increase slightly until 1986.
During this year, as the construction work force begins to decline, congestion will abate.
In 1989, when only operating workers are present at the plant, congestion should decrease dramatically.
It will remain at a low level throughout the rest of the plant's opera-l tion.
i a
PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 2.1-20 11/30/81
,,,---c-
-,,-.,,,,,.,,7,-,,,,,...,,,,.,,--,,,~,.,,-,.w-
,-,,-v g
w ww-
-,g--
+ - - - -,,-
E O
d1 Lake Erie ff j
8
\\N O
.1 g
o,,#
'b n
e n
J
/ Clark N Rd \\ 0' i
k o,.
D Middle h H ~y i
U.S.
m i
N t
E Manchester (
t I
e
/
/
A i Narrows Rd.
Q d.
Y 6'
O 9
1980 1979 1977 1972 A - Center Rd. N of U.S. 20 3860 3640 2190 718 B - Center Rd. S of Parmly 4070 717 C-Center Rd.S of Middle Ridge 1850 1285 740 l
D - Center Rd. N of Middle Ridge 2050 1235 1754 E - Parmly Rd. W of Center Rd.
1080 525 1530 F - Parmly Rd. E of Perry Park Rd.
980 389 i
G - Middle Ridge Rd.W of Center Rd.
1950 1545 982 H -Middle Ridge Rd. E of Center Rd.
2300 1770 1303 1 - U.S. 20 W of Center Rd.
18A50 J - U.S.20 E of Center Rd.
15,570 i
l Sources: Lake County Engineers. Traffic Engineering Department.
Ohio Department of Transsortation, Bureau of Transportation Technical Services.
l TRAFFIC COUNTS ON ROADS j
MOST AFFECTED BY THE PNPP PERRY NUCLEAR POWER PLANT THE CLEVELAND ELECTRIC lLLUMINATING COMPANY FIGURE 310.03A PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 2.1-22 11/30/81 4
310.04 Tables 2.6-1 and 2.6-2 in the ER-OL describe the cultural (2.6) resources within the area of the PNPP site listed in the National Registers of National Landmarks and of Historical Places.
Provide such a list of resources within 2 km of the transmission corridors.
Include in the listing sites nominated for the Register.
Response
Figure 310.04A is a map of the area in which the site and the proposed transmission lines are located.
The two proposed transmis-sion lines, Perry-Hanna (PH) (preferred and alternate) and Perry-Macedonia (PM), are indicated on the figure.
Also indicated or the map are the National Register Historic Sites and Natural Landmarks which are near these lines.
Historic sites are labeled "H"
and Natural Landmacks "N."
Those along the Perry-Macedonia Line have the subscript "A" followed by a number and those along the Perry-Hanna Line have the subscript "B"
followed by a number.
O-In the description which follows, if a resource near a transmission line is within 2 km of the line, the estimated distance is given; otherwise it is indicated to be greater than 2 km away.
The letters "P" and "A" following the PH refer to preferred and alternate routes.
There is only one proposed route for the PM line.
It is the same as the PH alternate from the start at North Perry Until just north of the Geauga County-Lake County line whure the lines split.
From this point, PM goes southeast and PH (P and A) goes south (see Figure 310.04A).
A.
Historic Sites All sites are on the National Register; no new sites have been nominated for the National Register in the area.
O PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 2.6-1 11/30/81
9B Hiram vicinity, Johnson, John Farm, 6203 Pioneer Trail (12-12-76) (PHP, 0.9 km E; PHA, > 2 km W) 10B Mantua, Mantua Station Brick Commercial District, Main and Prospect Sts. (12-24-74) (PHP, > 2 km W; PHA, > 2 km W) llB Mantua, Hine, Horace L. House, 4624 W. Prospect St. (12-12-76) (PHP, > 2 km W; PHA, > 2 km W) 12B Ravenna, Riddle Block, Public Sq., Chestnut and Main Sts.
(3-17-76) (PHP, > 2 km W; PHA, > 2 km W) 13B Garrettsville vicinity, Ellenwood House, NW of Garretsville on OH 82 (6-20-75) (PHP, > 2 km E; PHA, 0.6 km E)
B.
Natural Landmarks The National Register Natural Landmarks in the general area are provided in the folloiwng list.
One site, Kimbal Woods, has been nominated as a potential National Register site, but has not yet been designated.
B.1 Sites located along the combined route for both lines Lake County:
lA,B Mentor Marsh - Near Painesville.
The site consists of marsh vegetation, aquatic plants, swamp and bottomland forest, and upland forest.
A migration stopover and year-round habitat for birds and maminals, the site is a rarity l
in heavily populated northern Ohio.
(October 1964)
Owner:
State, Municipal ( > 2 km W)
O PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 2.6-4 11/30/81
I (']
B.3 Sites located along the Perry-Hanna Line
%/
Geauga County:
1B White Pine Bog Forest - Three miles south-southwest of Burton.
The only remaining near virgin remnant white pine boreal bog in Ohio.
(January 1976)
Owner: Municipal, Private (PHP, > 2 km W; PHA, > 2 km W)
Portage Countv:
2B Mantua Swamp - At the southeastern edge of Mantua.
The area contains many different wetland communities, including a floodplain swamp forest, cattail marshes, a beaver pond, and relict boreal bog.
(January 1976)
Owner: State, Private (PHP, adjacent; PHA, 2.0 km W)
Review and recommendations concerning the impact of the transmission S
lines on the Historic Sites and Natural Landmarks have been i
requested from the State Historic Preservation Officer and the Department of Nr.tural Resources (see response to Question 310.05, i
I t
O PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 2.6-6 11/30/81
I i
290.09 In addition to responses to other specifically requested (3.4) information provide a summary and briei discussion in table form, by section, of differences between currently projected environmental effects of the nuclear power station (including those that would degrade, and those that would enhance environmental conditions) and the effects discilssed in the environmental report submitted at the construction stage.
Response
The major design changes that result in changes in potential environmental impacts are those related to the revision in the cooling system from open-cycle to closed-cycle cooling.
These changes are outlined in the following table.
O I
f 1
I I
()
1 PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 3.4-1 11/30/81 e
y.,- -.
,-,--r,-,.
e...--r,n-
- -, - -e-.
-r y-
,_,y-,-4--e,--r-.,.
y.-.---,,
c,-y..
,~v.-,
t~( ))
PNPP MAJOR DESIGN CHANGES Open-Cycle Cooling
- Closed-Cycle Cooling **
Intake Flow (GPM) 1,150,000 69,400 Discharge Flow (GPM) 1,150,000 46,000 (average)
Overall T (OF) 29.1 18.l'(average)
Intake Structure 12 PODS 2 PODS (each 35.5' in diameter)
(each 36' in diameter)
Discharge Structure 6' PORTS 1 NOZZLE (each 4' in diameter)
(3' in diameter)
()
Heat Rejection to 280 7 (average)
(x 10 BTU / min)
Pumphouses 2
4 one combination circulating one service water, one and service water, and one emergency service water, emergency service water and two circulating water (one for each unit)
Heat Sink 100% to Lake Erie 97% to atmosphere 3% to Lake Erie
- From ER-CP: Information based on normal operation of both units
- From ER-OL: Information based on normal operation of both units l
O PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 3.4-2 11/30/81
()
291.03 Section 3.4.4 states that water will enter the offshore (3.4) intake structure through vertical inflow ports around the periphery.
Figure 3.4-1 (Section A-A) shows a 7' diameter opening in the center of the top plate (velocity cap).
Clarify the function of the 7' opening for withdrawal of cooling water.
Response
The 7' diameter opening indicated in Section A-A of Figure 3.4-1 has been permanently closed by means of a bolted blind flange.
The purpose of the opening shown in Figure 3.4-1 was to facilitate installation of the intake head.
The term " opening" has been deleted from Section A-A of Figure 3.4-1 for clarity.
(Figure 3.4-1 has been revised to show this change.)
O i
l 1
)
t O
PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 3.4-3 11/30/81 l
t
!.O 290.08 Provide an assessment of the effects of transmission (5.5) line maintenance procedures on the spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata).
Indicate whether herbicides will 5
be.used along any portions of the Perry transmission
- lines, i
Response
)
It is not the policy of CEI to use herbicides for vegetation control along the Perry transmission lines.
CEI cuts the vegeta-tion periodically with a brush hog.
To date, there have not been apparent effects on the spotted turtle.
j
? O k
l 4
4 f
4 J
!O PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 5.5-3 11/30/81
_.., _ - -. _ - _. _ -., -. _. _, _ _....... -.. _, _ _ _. _,, _ _ _ _. - _ _ _. - _. _ _,, _. _, _ _ _ ~.. -,,. _ _
1
' (}
240.03 Calculate the radiological consequences in terms of (7.1) population dose for:a liquid pathway release from a postulated core melt accident.
The analysis should assume, unless otherwise justified, that there hss been a penetration of the reactor basemat.by the molton core mass, and that a substantial quantity of radioac-tivity-contaminated suppression pool water has been released to the ground.
The possibility of rapid l
movement of contamination to Lake Erie through the underdrain system should be taken into account in the analysis, t
Doses should be compared to those calculated for the Liquid Pathway Generic Study (NUREG-0440, 1978) land-i based Great Lakes site.
Provide a summary of your analysis procedures sad the values of parameters used (e.g., permeabilities, retardation factors, gradients, populations af fected, water use).
It is suggested that meetings with the staff of the Hydrologic Engine-ering section be arranged so that we may share with you the body of information necessary to perform this analysis.
Response
The " Liquid Pathway Generic Study" (NUREG-0440, 1978)III and the recent report "The Consequences from Liquid Pathways After a Reactor Meltdown Accident" (NUREG-1596, 1981)(2) have assembled a comprehensive set of methodologies for calculating the radiologi-cal consequences in terms of population dose for liquid path releases from a postulated core melt accident.
It is believed that these two reports and their major referenced studies represent l
a reasonable state-of-the art approach to the requested analysis.
Accordingly, this analysis will follow and make use of the metho-dologies and calculations presented in them.
PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 7.1-1 11/30/81 i
While NUREG-0440 and -1596 use the same or similar release,
{}
transport and dose calculation models, generic parameter selection is quite different in many cases.
Since it has been requested' to compare the doses calculated for the Perry Nuclear Power Plant (PNPP) to those calculated in NUREG-0440, the NUREG-0440 doses and associated parameters will be used as a scaling basis for the calculations of Perry doses.
However, information and data contained in the NUREG-1596 report have been used where applicable to supplement information in NUREG-0440 in order to develop scaling factors.
The PNPP design contains a foundation underdrain system which provides a dewatering capability.
This system normally maintains the groundwater level below the basemat elevations.
The presence of this system and how it would be operated in the years following a melt down accident significantly affects the pathway analysis of liquid releases.
Accordingly, this analysis treats three potential underdrain system operational modes to bound the poten-tial liquid pathway population dose resulting from a melt down accident.
These modes are:
Mode 1 Underdrain system operational in the passive mode only; i.e.,
gravity discharge system opera-tional and system pumps turned off.
This mode is essentially the "do nothing" scenario and represents the worst case analysis.
Mode 2 Underdrain system operational in the passive mode only, and basemat penetrations opened.
Stand pipes extending from the underdrain system to inside safety buildings and flow pathways to non-sa5ety buildings would have to be manually opened by removing pipe caps or seals sometime before flow through the gravity discharge pipe is started (before 6.57 years).
This mode would use the storage volume of the buildings to further O
PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 7.1-2 11/30/81
(~]
delay the release of activity to the gravity
~'
discharge system.
Mode 3 Underdrain system totally inoperable.
Tuis mode would require an overt decision to close the gravity discharge system.
Closing after the accident could be by either filling two discharge man holes with concrete (the simplest method) or by installing control devices such as valves or removable plugs in the gravity discharge piping.
Modes 2 and 3, while interdictive measures, have been included because they represent actions that have an extremely high benefit-cost ratio i.e.,
large decrease in population doses for relatively small financial cost and no social costs.
A fourth mode, not considered here, is use of the underdrain
(-)
system as part of an interdictive system.
The underdrain system,
\\/
either with pumping or gravity discharge, would effectively collect contaminated groundwater which could be treated to remove radioactivity.
In essence, the underdrain system represents an inplace interdictive system which could be used or not used, dependent on the evaluation of actual conditions following a melt doun accident.
The results of the liquid pathway analysis of a melt down accident for PNPP cre as follows:
Underdrain NUREG-0440 Ratic of Operation PNPP Population Population PNPP Dose to Mode Dose man-rems **
Dose
- man-rems NUREG-0440 Dose 7
7 1
1.6 x 10 1.7 x 10 0.96 6
2 2.4 x 10 1.7 x 10 0.14 7
3 0.00 1.7 x 10 0.00
- Mean of range
,f si L,/
PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 7.1-3 11/30/81
I 4
As can be seen, the population doses for PNPP are in all cases, less than to the doses calculated for a generic site and reference plant in NUREG-0440.
A discussion of the basic scaling methods used, the calculation of each scaling factor, the calculation of doses, and their comparison to NUREG-0440 doses is presented in NUS-3910, a copy of which was transmitted to the NRC by CEI on November 30,1981.
i 4
O
+
I 1
i O
PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 7.1-4 11/30/81 i
i
---,,-w,-
,,,,,---w-,-,,e----,ym n.
,,w.
m.
v. ww w.
g,,-, e w.nnn,-
age,-,,,,_...
__.,,-.,.e..,n,..-,+,,--.
i
- O References 1.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Liquid Pathway Generic Study, NUREG-0440, 1978.
2.
Sandia National Laboratories, The Consequences From Liquid Pathways After a Reactor Meltdown Accident, NUREG/CR-1596, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, June 1981.
3.
L. J. Perez, Jr., Response to NRC Staff Question 240.03 Concerning Consequences of Liquid Pathway Releases from a Core Melt Accident, NUS-3910, NUS Corporation, Rockville, MD, November 1981.
t 0 1
O PNPP ER/OL, Sup. 3 Q&R 7.1-5 11/30/81
-. -. -