ML20052B643

Responses to Discovery 1 Re Routine Tritium Releases from Plant.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence

ML20052B643
Person / Time
Site:	Catawba
Issue date:	04/13/1982
From:	Gwyn D DUKE POWER CO.
To:	CHARLOTTE-MECKLENBERG ENVIRONMENTAL COALITION
References
NUDOCS 8205030406
Download: ML20052B643 (7)

Text

\ ,

R R. Cran corr %

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA N@N NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION JBEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD:R 29 P133 In the Matter of ) .

DUKE POWER COMPANY Docket Nos. 50-4 p

) 50 'l (Catawba Nuclear Station, )

Units 1 and 2) ) y D EWED 3 new,b WM APPLICANTS' RESPONSES TO CMEC " DISCOVERY #1 \, (;wiju M

g ur

-- ROUTINE TRITIUM RELEASES FROM CATAWBA" -

'i> / ~ 6 Enclosed herewith are Applicants' responses, together with a su per affidavit, to " Discovery #1 -- Routine Tritium Releases from Catawba", dated March 15, 1982 from the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Environmental Coalition (CMEC):

DISCOVERY M -- ROUTINE TRITIUM RELEASES FORM CATAWBA QUESTION : Table 3.10 in the December 1973 FES for Catawba- estimates an annual release of 350 Ci per unit of tritium in liquid effluent.

Table 3.4 in the April 1976 FES for McGuire (NUREG 0063) estimates an annual release of tritium per reactor of 960 Ci.

Table 3.13 in the October 1972 FES for McGuire estimates an annual release of 1000 Ci tritium per reactor. In support of this figure , the FES cites " detailed evaluation of similar reactors." (page 3-42)

Inasmuch as the design of McGuire and Catawba are essentially similar, and, inasmuch as there is a large difference between a j 350 Ci per ' unit p.a. release and a 1000 Ci per unit p.a.

l release, -Intervenor requests both Applicant and Staff to l

account for this three-fold discrepancy , asking specifically:

a. On what facts are these tritium release estimates based?

! RESPONSE 3 In response to the numbers contained in the applicable Final ,. ,

Environmental Statements Applicants would refer the Charlotte-Mecklenburg Environmental Coalition to the response 0 '

Q60 8 2 0 5 0 R o4c4 6#//  :

~. ~

1 4

2-by the NRC Staff.

However, inasmuch as the request was also

,. made to Applicants, the following constitutes the differences in the tables. -

McGuire Catawba - -

Liquid 470 ci/yr/ unit 350 ci/yr/ unit (NUREG 0063 Table 3.3) (FES CP Table 3.10)

Gaseous 960 ci/yr/ unit 710 ci/yr/ unit (NUREG 0063 Table 3.4) (ER Table 3.5.3-1)

QUESTION: b. If the discrepancy in the estimates is based on design differences in the two plants , what are these . design differences?

l

c. If the discrepancy arises from improved tritium control in '

the Catawba design , specifically what are the improvements?

4 RESPONSE: CMEC should note that as operating experience with similar reactors increased (i.e. 1972-1976), the Staff revised the expected release of tritium so that the relative amounts of tritium released are of a consistent nature. (See also response below to d. and e. which applies to liquid as well as gaseous releases . ) As explained above, the differences in the numbers  ;

would appear to result from inclusion of an expanded data base.

There are no differences in tritium control equipment between l l

Catawba and McGuire. g QUESTION: In respect to the problem of- gaseous releases of tritium from  !

Catawba, Intervenor requests the following information: .-

- q,, -,l

d. How many curies of tritium do Applicant and Staff l

. anticipate will be released from Catawba? _

l

?

e. What is the basis of Applicant's and Staff's -1 l

projections of gaseous tritium releases?

H m > '-s

yr . ..:

l s n

. +S' N.';3- h ;:

y*.

,' -i' s, y L ' '

A-s

,1 c e s

s g

' 1 j L ,s

(

• '\ f Wiat. percentage ' of ' gaseous tritium releases does ss Applirant and Staff project as being returned to the

,s

_A < Catawba River %through ' rain-out' or other means?

.Intervenor requests that this information be given for

'hi N, 'M"" '1the Catawba River, at two points; the Charlotte Water -

", ' % s s Intake and the dam at- Late Wylie.

s ..

44  % , i.S -

v ,s .

( ,  ;-

$ . RESPONSE:'. d. , e. As?noted in the ER, Table 3.5.3-1, Applicants s-g ,

% ' , y

~> -

, estimate 'the annual tritium release in gaseous form to Applicants' estimates of this

- be '710 ci/yr/ unit.

c .,

% + release is based .on - NUREG 0017 " Calculation of Releases of Radioactive Materials in Gaseous and Pressurized Water Reactors

~ '

N Liquid Effluents from (PWR GALE Code)" and the computer codes discussed therein. .

s

f. Applican[s' currently estimate that the percentage of e,,

gaseous tritium that will be returned to the Catawba River at the Charlotte Water Intake and the dam at f x Lake Wylie will be less than 1%.

- ~

s s QUESTION:V ' Intervenor reauests the following infomation about tritium release procedures at Catawba:

g. How frequently will tritium be released at Catawba in the liquid effluent?

l 1 How frequently will tritium be released as gaseous

~

h.

effluent i.e.'. as tritiated water vapor and how will its s

radioactivity .be monitored?

I '

- s RESPONSE: g. Current estimates are that on the average, 2.0 curies' 3

wk, -

'I[

s per day of . tritium in the liquid effluent will be s s A >

s N -

i l . ' w '7* '-

9 4 $e \

( i '

i* -

t .

released for each unit. See ER Table 3.5.2-1. 1 Releases will be periodic based on normal operations.

h. Current estimates are that on the average, 2.0 curies per day of tritium in the gaseous effluent will be released for each unit. Samples are made of gaseous effluent on all releases such that the quantity of tritium is known. See ER Table 3.5.3-1. Releases j will be periodic based on r.ormal operations.

QUESTION: Intervenor requests the following information about somatic and genetic effects of ingested tritiated water:

i. Inasmuch as, owing to the established fact of tritium--hydrogen sxchange, tritium will replace normal hydrogen throughout the body fluids and cellular tissue until the tritium / hydrogen ratio in body fluid and cellular tissue is in equilibrium with the tritium / hydrogen ration in the drinking water, on {

what studies do Applicant and Staff base their contention that further tritiating the drinking water of communities along with Catawba River will result in no adver e genetic and helth effects?

RESPONSE: Applicants will operate Catawba such that releases of tritium are below regulatory limits in 10 CFR Part 20.

l

~

l r

( .; . , . .- .

.s.... . . . . . ~ . . . . - . - . - . . . . . . .. .

g UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ,

In the Matter of )

Duke Power Company, et al. ) Docket Nos. 50-413 (Catawba Nuclear Station, ) 50-414 Units 1 and 2) )

AFFIDAVIT OF DEALIS WILSON GWYN I, Dealis Wilson Gwyn, being sworn do depose and state that:

1. I am an employee of Duke Power Company. My present position is Engineer Associate in the Mechanical Nuclear Division. I hold a Bachelor of Science degree in Nuclear Engineering. I am familiar with the calculation of effluent source terms for nuclear power reactors and participated in the preparation of the ER for Catawba.

2. I am duly authorized to participate in answering Interrogatory 3a, b, c, d, e, f, g, and b and I hereby certify that the answers given are true to the best of my knowledge.

l kidb $ ~ Naus Dealis Wilson Gwyn #

Subscribed and sworn before me this W.h day of April, 1982.

I W we o ekit, O O cci A -n (COc6croi 0 . No';Mry Public My Commission Expires: 0Lwpi. i 199,4 f

o r, t , -

Ujf!.'U.C.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

• NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

.BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD '82 f93 29 p I IIs,

~

In the Matter of ) . -

)

DUKE POWER COMPANY, et al.

) Docket No. 50-413

) 50-414 (Catawba Nuclear Station, )

Units I and 2) )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of " Applicants' Responses To CMEC ' Discovery #1 -- Routine Tritium Releases From Catawba,'"

dated April 13, 1982 in the above-captioned matter, have been served upon the following by deposit in the United States mail this 26th day of April, 1982:

James L. Kelley, Chairman Richard P. Wilson, Esquire Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Assistant Attorney General U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission State of South Carolina Washington, D.C. 20555 Post Office Box 11549 Columbia, South Carolina 29211 Dr. A. Dixon Callihan Union Carbide Corporation Robert Guild, Esquire Post Office Box Y Attorney at Law Oak Ridge, Tennessee 37830 314 Pall Mall Columbia, South Carolina 29201 Dr. Richard F. Foster Post Office Box 4263 Palmetto Alliance Sunriver, Oregon 97701 2135i Devine Street Columbia, South Carolina 29205 Chairman Atomic Safety and Licensing Mr. Henry A. Presler Board Panel 943 Henley Place U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 Washington, D.C. 20555 Mr. Jesse L. Riley Chairman 854 Henley Place Atomic Safety and Licensing Charlotte, North Carolina 28207 Appeal Board U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Mr. Donald R. Belk Washington, D.C. 20555 Safe Energy Alliance 2213 East Seventh Street George E. Johnson, Esquire Charlotte, North Carolina 28204 Office of the Executive Lega1' Director U.S. Nucleir Regulatory Commissi'on Washington, D.C. 20555

+

4

s .

(2) l Mr. Chase R. St'phens e

Docketing'and Service Section U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 J. Michael McGarry, III, Esquire Debevoise and Liberman 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20555 k . b-E11bn T. Ruft U 6

Pe- .e p .