ML20053D687
| ML20053D687 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Clinch River |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1982 |
| From: | ENERGY, DEPT. OF |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20053D685 | List: |
| References | |
| ENVR-820531, NUDOCS 8206070206 | |
| Download: ML20053D687 (200) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:, CRBRP ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT O. AMENDMENT XlV PAGE REPLACEMENT GUIDE F L _ THESE PAGES INSERT THESE PAGES Volume 1 14e, 15, 15a 14a, 15, 15a 32 32 . 53, 54 53, 54 57, 57a 57, 57a 73, 73a 73, 73a 2.6-11, 12 '2.6-11, 12 2.6-43, 44 2.6-43, 44 Volume 2 3.1-9, 10 3.1-9, 10 3.2-3 thru 8 3.2-3 thru 8 3.8-2 thru 7 3.8-2 thru 7 3.8-10, 11 3.8-10, 11
) 4.1-9, 10 4.1-9, 10 V 4.1-19 thru 22 4.1-19 thru 22 l
ENTIRE SECTION 5.7 ENTIRE SECTION 5.7 ENTIRE SECTION 5.8 ENTIRE SECTION 5.8 (including Page 5.9-1) (including Page 5.9-1) Volume 3 8.1-1, 2 8.1-1, 2 8.2-3, 4 8.2-3, 4 8.2-7, 8 8.2-7, 8 8.2-11, 8.3-1 8.2-11, 8.3-1 8.3-2, 3 8.3-2, 3 8.3-6, 7 8.3-6, 7 8.3-12 thru 15 8.3-12 thru 15 10.1-42, 43 10.1-42, 43 10.9-10, 10.10-1 10.9-10, 10.10-1 13.0-10, 11 13.0-10, 11 13.0-24a, 24b 13.0-24a, 24b 13.0-27, 28 13.0-27, 28 13.0-31, 31a 13.0-31, 31a 13.0-33, 34, 34a 13.0-33, 34, 34a, 34b 14.0-1, 14.1-1 14.0-1, 14.1-1
- =es;8ee=8eg a C
I ._. -_ _ . - _ -. . -... _ _ _ _ _ . , _ . . _ . . , _ _ _ , , . _ . . _ _ _ , _ . . . . _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . _ . _
l_......_____._.._.._._.._..__._._.__._.__.-._. l. l e ) Volume'4 i i C-3 thru 6 C-3 thru 6 . C-9 thru 16 C-9 thru 16 l C-19 thru 36 C-19 thru 36 l 'C-39, 40 C-39, 40 i C-43 thru 46 C43 thru 46 [ C-49, 50 C-49, 50 l l Volume 5 l l t Insert Amendment XlY +ab - and Page AXIV-1 l l l l l l ' I l l k i t O il 1 ! B i i I
..__,.n..---,,,.-,,,-.~.t
AMENDMENT XIV May 1982 TABLE OF CONTENTS [) Page 5.6.2.3 Access Roads 5.6-7 5.6.2.4 Aesthetics 5.6-7 Other Effects of Plant Operations 6 5.7 5.7-1 5.7.1 CRBRP Fuel Cycle 5.7-1 5.7.1.1 CRBRP Fuel Fabrication 5.7-3 5.7.1.2 CRBRP Fuel Reprocessing 5.7-6 12 5.7.1.3 Radioactive Wastes from the CRBRP Fuel Cycle 5.7-15 14 5.7.1.4 Doses from CRBRP Fuel Cycle 5.7-22 5.7.1.5 Safeguards and Security 5.7-40 5.7.2 Power Plant Operational Noise and Impact 5.7-69 12 0 5.7.2.1 Estimated Ambient Noise Level 5.7-69 0 i I i l 14a . l
AMENDMENT XIV May 1982 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 1 5.7.2.2 Predicted Noise Levels 5.7-70 12 14 5.7.2.3 Impact of Operational Noise 5.7-71 5.8 Resources Committed 5.8-1 5.8-1 Commitment of Land Resources 5.8-1 5.8.2 Commitment of Water Resources 5.8-1 5.8.3 Commitment of Fuel Resources 5.8-2 5.8.4 Irretrievable Commitment of Other 5.8-4 Resources 5.9 Decommissioning and Dismantling 5.9-1 6.0 EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.1 Applicant's Preoperational Environmental 6.1-1 Program () 6.1.1 6.1.1.1 Surface Waters Baseline Monitoring Program 6.1-1 6.1-1 6.1.1.1.1 Physical and Chemical Parameters 6.1-4 6.1.1.1.2 Ecological Parameters 6.1-7 6.1.1.2 Preconstruction-Construction Effects 6.1-25 j Monitoring 6.1.1.2.1 Monitoring Program Description 6.1-25a 6.1.1.2.2 Results of Preconstruction Monitoring Program 6.1-28a g 6.1.2 Groundwater 6.1-29 6.1.2.1 Preconstruction Groundwater Quality Monitoring 6.1-29 Program 6.1.3 Air 6.1-30 1 I l l l CE) 15 l -- , _ _ . - - _ . _ . _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ , . _ _ . . _ - - _ _ _ _ _ . - - _
O NENIEEh'T X Decenber 1981 TABLE OF CIETENTS 6.1.3.1 Meteorology 6.1-30 6.1.3.1.1 Terqorary Monitoring System 6.1-31 8 9 6.1.3.1.2 Permanent Monitoring System 6.1-32 9 6.1.3.2 Models 6.1-33 6.1.4 Land 6.1.33 6.1.4.1 Geology and Soils 6.1.34 6.1.4.1.1 Regional Investigation Program 6.1-34 6.1.4.1.2 Site Investigation Progr a 6.1-35 6.1.4.1.3 Results of Investigation 6.1-37 6.1.4.2 Land Use and Dernographic Surveys 6.1-38 6.1.4.2.1 Distribution of the 1980 Population 6.1-38a 10 6.1.4.2.2 Population Projections 6.1-38b 10 6.1.4.3 Ecological Monitoring 6.1-39 O ISa
Os s AMENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 LIST OF TABLES Table No. and Title Page 2.3-1 Distribution of Burials by Mound Con- 2.3-15 struction Stage at 40RE124 0 2.3-2 Site Components and Recommendations 2.3-16 13 2.4-1 Stratigraphic Units - Vicinity of the 2.4-17 CRBRP Site 2.4-2 Radiometric Age Determinations, 2.4-19 CRBRP Project
, () 2.4-3 Measured Velocities in Unit A Upper Siltstone Stratum 2.4-20 9 2.5-1 Clinch River Stream Gage Locations, 2.5-21
-1936-1968 >
2.5-2 Periods of Zero Release from Melton Hill 2.5-22 9 Dam, May 1963 - December 1979 2.5-3 Average Monthly Turbine and Gate Discharge 2.5-23 in Day-Second-Feet, Melton Hill Dam O 32
#tENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 LIST OF TABLES ,
Table No. and Title Page 2.8-44 Dose Equivalent Rates Calculated f rom 2.8-75 Measurements Inside Test Houses in the Oak Ridge Area 2.8-45 Changes in Data Pertaining to Diagnostic X-Ray 2.8-76 13 Procedures in a Six-Year Period, United States of America, 1964 and 1970 2.8-46 Annual Per Capita Dose to Bone Marrow, USA 2.8-77 2.8-47 Currently Available Products Containing 2.8-78 Radionuclides 9 3.0 TH E PL ANT i 3.2-1 Principal Plant Characteristics 3.2-5 3.2-2 Principal Reactor Parameters 3.2-6 3.3-1 Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Water 3.3-5 Usage - Maximum Power 3.3-2 Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Water 3.3-6 Usage - Minimum Power 3.3-3 Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Water 3.3-7 Usage - Temporary Shutdown 3.3-4 CRBRP Water Usage Seasonal Variation 3.3-8 3.4-1 Design Parameters and Conditions 3.4-5 l 3.4-2 Component Description 3.4-6 l l O 53 i
AMEND. X DEC. 1981 O LIST OF TABLES Tab',e No. and Title Page J.4-3 Estiamted Wet Bulb Temperatures Based on Readily 3.4-7 Available Dry Bulb Temperatures and Relative Humidities at Knoxville, Tennessee 3.4-4 Water Temperatures fo the Clinch River and the 3.4-8 Cooling Tower Blcwdown 3.5-1 Estimated Annual Concentration of Low and Intermediate 3.5-20 Activity Level Input Streams 3.5-2 Expected Activity Inventory Stored After Processing 3.5- 22 3.5-3 Concentration of Radionuclides at Discharge to 3.5- 24 Clinch River: Expected Values 3.5-4 Raps Performance Summary Data 3.5-26 f9 3.5-5 CAPS Performance Summary Data 3.5- 27 3.5-6 3.5-7 Production Rates of Radionuclines 3.5-28 10 h Radionuclide Release Rates and Release Paths for 3'.5-30 the 0.1% Failed Fuel l9 3.5-8
~
Annual Releas6 ' Rates 'for the 0.1% Failed Fuel Service 3.5-31 Condition 3.5-9 BOP Gaseous Tritium Release 3.5-32 3.5-10 Estimates of Solid Radwaste Shipment Per Year in Terms 3.5-33 g of Annual Quantities 3.5-11 Solid Radwaste Shipments Per Year 3.5-34 3.6-1 Preliminary Estimates of Effluent Water Concentration 3.6-6 3.7-1 Sewage Disposal System Estimated Effluent 3.7-4 9 Characteristics 3.7-2 Exhaust Effluents from Plant Diesel Operation 3.7-5 3.9-1 Community Types of the Proposed Transmission Line 3.9-13 Route of the CRBRP Site Area O 54
LIST OF TABLES 2 O Table No. and Title Page 5.2-9 Annual Doses to Terrestrial Organisms 5.2-33 Near the CRBRP Site 5.2-10 Annual Dose to Man from Liquid Effluent 5.2-34 Releases 5.2-11 2020 Clinch and Tennessee River Fish 5.2-35 Harvest Data 5.2-12 Use of Clinch and Tennessee River System 5.2-36 13 { in 2020 for Recreational Purposes 5.2-13 CRBRP - Individual Doses from Gaseous 5.2-37 Effluents 5.2-14 CRBRP - Population Doses from Gaseous 5.2-38 Effluents 5.2-15 Summary of Annual Radiation Doses to 5.2-39 Population from CRBRP () 5.3-1 thru 5.3-7 DELETED in Amendment XIII 13 5.4-1 U. S. Environmental Protection Agency 5.4-18 National Interim Primary and Secondary Drinking Water Regulations 9 5.4-2 Surface Water Criteria for Domestic Water 5.4-19 Supplies 5.4-3 Guides for Evaluating the Quality of Water 5.4-21 Used by Livestock 5.4-4 Trace Element Tolerances for Irrigation Water 5.4-22 5.4-5 Criteria for Water Quality: Freshwater 5.4-23 99 Constituents for Aquatic Life I t 5.4-6 Permissible Chlorine Concentrations in 5.4-25 Effluents from New Sources 5.4-7 Average and Maximum Values of Some Chemical 5.4-26 Constituents in Clinch River 5.4-8 Concentrations of Chemical Constituents in 5.4-27 the CRBRP Discharge and the Six Percent 4 Isopleth of the Summer Short Duration No I'}-
\- Flow Plume 9 5.4-9 Surface Area Affected by Chemical Plumes and 5.4-29 Increases in Chemical Concentrations 57
AMENDMENT XIV May 1982 Page 5.4-10 Concentrations of Discharged Chemicals in the 5.4-30 6 Extended No Flow Plumes 5.5-1 Principal Parameters and Exhaust Effluents 5.5-4 13 f rom Plant Diesel Operation 5.7-1 CRBRP - Summary of Environmental Consider- 5.7-74 ations for Fuel Cycle 5.7-2 DRP Process Capability 5.7-78 5.7-3 Atmospheric Releases from Reprocessing 5.7-79 CRBRP Spent Fuel 5.7-4 Radioactive Wastes from the CRBRP Fuel Cycle 5.7-80 5.7-5 Comparisons of Quantities of Wastes 5.7-81 5.7-6 Comparison of Annual High-Level Waste 5.7-82 Constituents (C1) 5.7-7 Transportation Radiological Impact 5.7-83 5.7-8 CRBRP Fuel Cycle Security Costs by Plant Type 5.7-84 5.7-9 HUD's Acceptability Categories for Non- 5.7-85 Aircraft Noise 5.7-10 City of Oak Ridge Noise Limits 5.7-86 6.0 EFFLUENT AND ENVIRCNMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.1-1 Clinch River Aquatic Baseline Survey Sampling 6.1-44 Schedule 6.1-2 Sampling Methods for the Clinch River Aquatic 6.1-45 Baseline Survey 6.1-3 Clinch River - Summary of Aquatic Baseline 6.1-50 Survey Program O 57a
AMENDMENT XIV May 1982
/~h LIST OF FIGURES U
Figure No. and Title Page 5.1-2 Typical Case-Summer 5.1 -57 5.1-3 Hypothetical Worst Case-Winter 5.1-58 5.1-4 Hypothetical Worst Case-Summer 5.1-59 5.1-5 Surface Isotherms for Winter Extended No Flow 5.1-60 Case 6 5.1-6 Surface Isotherms for Summer Extended No Flow S.1-61 Case 5.1-7 Clinch River Temperatures and Blowdown 5.1-62 Temperatures 5.1-8 Areas of Bottom Scouring 5.1-63 5.2-1 Exposure Pathways to organisms Other Than Man 5.2-40 5.2-2 Exposure Pathways to Man 5.2-41 l8 5.4-1 Chemical Plumes for Typical Case-Winter 5.4-31 5.4-2 Chemical Plumes for Typical Case-Summer 5.4-32 ( 5.4-3 Chemical Plumes for Short Duration No Flow 5.4-33 6 (Hypothetical Winter Worst Case-Thermal Mixing) 5.4-4 Chemical Plumes for Short Duration No Flow 5.4-34 (Hypothetical Summer Worst Case-Thermal Mixing) 5.7-1 CRBRP Equilibrium Fuel Cycle Plutonium and 5.7-87 Uranium Mass Flow 12 5.7-2 Fuel Reprocessing Schematic 5.7-88 14 5.7-3 One-Mile CRBRP Sound Level Contour and 5.7-89 Nearest Dwellings 6.0 EFFLUENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL MEASUREMENTS AND MONITORING PROGRAMS 6.1-1 Location of Sampling Transects on the Clinch 6.1-54b River for the Baseline Monitoring Program 8 6.1-2 Location of Sampling Stations for Zooplankton 6.1-55 (Pumping and Towing), Phytoplankton and Water Samples for Physical and Chemical Routine Labora-tory Analyses and Bacteriological Analyses for the Baseline Monitoring Program 73
AMENmENT XII January 1982 Figure No. and Title PAGE 6.1-3 Periphyton Saplers Located Approximately 30 Feet 6.1-56 Frm Right Shore for the Baseline Monitoring Progtm 6.1-4 Sampling Locations for (A) Benthos by Dredging 6.1 -57 (B) Physical and Chmical Field Measurments, (C) Sediments, for the Basaline Monitoring Progrm 6.1-5 'barshore Benthic Artificial Substrates are Located 6.1-58 30 to 50 Feet Frm Right Shore. Mid-River Substrates are Located 50 to 100 Feet Frm Right Shore, for the Baseline Monitoring Progra O l l 73a
AMENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 the region, including the Site. Fogs which restrict the visibility to 1,100 4 yards or less were observed, on the average, 91 days per year at the Bull Run 8 Creek site (about 15 miles northeast of the CRBRP site) and 119 days per year at the Melton Hill Dam site (about 4.5 'ailes east of the CRBRP site) for the period January 1964 to October 1970. Fog which restricted visibility to less than 550 yards was recorded at the Melton Hill Dam site on an average of 106 days per year (24) Wis value is l8 about three times that recorded at Oak Ridge. 2.6.2.6 WIND AND STABILITY DATA Source of this information for developing a diffusion climatology to represent the Site is a one-year record of wind and tmperature measurments made on a l 11 370-foot tower at the CRBRP site. We year of record covers the period l13 February 17, 1977 through February 16, 1978. W e joint recovery rate for wind 9 II and stability data (33- to 200-foot temperature differences) is 97 percent for [ the 33-foot wind level and 97 percent for the 200-foot wind level. {11
'Ihe method of sorting the observations into the Pasquill Stability Classes is g based on the tmperature gradient schee of NRC Regulatory Guide 1.23 which associates a Pasquill Class with a discrete range of temperature difference values for a 321-foot vertical interval. We values obtained frcun the Site 11 tmperature measurments at 33 feet and 200 feet (167-foot interval) were g converted to corresponding values for the larger interval of 321. 9 o
Annual wind records are sumarized in Table 2.6-5 through 2.6-12 for the 11 33-foot level aboveground and in Tables 2.6-13 through 2.6-20 for the 200-foot level aboveground. Wese tables present the joint percentage frequency distribution of wind speed and direction for the seven Pasquill Stability Classes, A through G, and for all observations. Annual and seasonal wind roses are shown for the 33-foot level in Figures 2.6-4 through 2.6-8 and for the 200-foot level in Figures 2.6-9 through 2.6-13. Annual, winter, spring, sumer and fall wind roses for the 33-foot level show the tendency for the wind to align with the general west-northwest to 8 9 11 2.6-11
AMENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 cast-southeast orientation of the portion of the Clinch River valley where the Site is located. At the 200-foot level, the tendency is toward alignment with the approximately southwest to northeast orientation of the ridge in the area. Most frequent wind directions for annual wind roses are west-northwest at 33 feet and 8 9 11 west-southwest at 200 feet. The winter season wind roses, for both levels, show the influence of winter storms and passage of cold frontal syst ms by the increased percentages of winds frm the west-northwest sector. The sumer and fall wind roses reflect meteorological conditions with a high frequency of occurrence of Il light winds. This is consistent with persistence of high pressure over or slightly to the north of the Site area. Pressure patterns published in the Climatic Atlas of the United States (6) support this conclusion. 0 %e 33-foot winds for the annual period are frm the west-southwest plus or minus one 22.5 degree sector approximately 26 percent of the time, frm the west-northwest plus or minus one 22.5 degree sector approximately 25 percent of the 9 time, and frm the west plus or minus one 22.5 degree sector approximately 29 percent of the time on an anmal basis. The percentage of south-southwest winds 13 increases slightly during the spring months. During the fall season the percentage 8 of winds is very similar (within two percentage points) to the annual wind rose. The 33-foot model wind speed group is 0.8 to 3 mph for the year, as can be seen in Table 2.6-12. Calms are few in all seasons of the year. The annual percent 11 occurrence of calm is 3.19 percent at the 33-foot level and 0.47 percent at the 8 200-foot level. The distribution of the seven Pasquill Stability Classes on a monthly basis is summarized in Table 2.6-28. Adverse dispersion categories, Stability Classes F and lg )) G, contribute about 85 percent of the weight in the calculation of atmospheric - factors. Type G stability is a minimum in the month of January with a frequency of 11 occurrence of about five percent. Type G is a maximum in the month of March, with 8 a frequency of about 28 percent. Type F stability is a minimum in January with a frequency of about six percent. 8 11 Type F stability is a maximum in the month of July with a frequency of about 25 percent and August and Septaber are close behind the frequencies of about 24 percent in these months. At the other end of the atmospheric 2.6-12
i l Amendment XI ! January 1982 1, TABLE 2.6-22A
- 11 i MONTHLY 4WERAGE RELATIVE HUMIDITY VALUES FOR THE CRBRP SITE l FEBRUARY 1977 - FEBRUARY 1978 i
l l Relative Humidity i Monti in Percent (%) . February 60 1 i March 64 I l April 69 1 May 77 9 i June 77 ! July 77 ! August 81 l September 86 ; 1 i October 80 ! November 80 1
- December 74 1 January 75 ,
! Annual Average 75 i l
- 1 i
l Derive from dew point and ambient temperature data collected at the ! 370 ft, permanent meterological tower. l i t .i s !O i 2.6- 43 4
..___.-m._-._..,-...-....~.-.m_-.-.. . - . - .,._ --., -.--. _- , - - - . - - . _ _ _ _ _ , _ . - - , - - - . .
TABLE 2.6-23 l 11 FREQUENCY DISTRIBUTION OF RELATIVE HUMIDITIES ACCORDING TO AMBIENT TEMPERATURES FOR BULL RUN STEAM PLANT Temp.,
'F 5 15 25 35 45 55 65 75 85 93 97 100
-25 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
-15 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
-5 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 5 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.08 0.12 0.09 0.02 0.03 0.05 no 15 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.14 0.30 0.40 0.29 0.12 0.01 0.01 0.01 25 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.15 0.57 0.96 1.08 1.00 0.72 0.16 0.05 0.04
$ 0.43 0.76 0.98 1.42 1.19 0.22 0.10 0.07 32 <0.01 <0.01 0.01 0.20 37 <0.01 <0.01 0.05 0.32 0.51 0.78 1.20 1.46 1.48 0.31 0.09 0.06 45 <0.01 <0.01 0.20 0.78 1.40 2.01 2.44 2.81 3.91 1.38 0.81 0.29 55 <0.01 0.01 0.31 1.00 1.46 1.74 1.86 2.55 3.92 2.49 1.35 0.59 65 <0.01 0.01 0.33 1.00 1.27 1.64 2.25 3.58 7.14 3.26 2.13 0.84 75 0.01 0.02 0.23 0.69 0.97 2.07 3.23 4.00 4.67 1,54 0.45 0.21 85 0.02 <0.01 0.03 0.26 0.82 2.15 2.43 1.01 0.10 0.01 <0.01 <0.01 95 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 0.02 0.05 0.11 0.02 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 105 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 ET$"
a2 115 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 m g-Q co
-a
$5 O O O
[ HTRUE G AT E g _ ,3 1. REACTOR CONTAltNENT BUILDING
, h 7 REACTOR SERVICE BUILDING 3 3. RADWASTE AREA p_" , . , ." . *, 4. PLANT SERVICE BUILDING I 5. CONTROL BUILDING
", ". M 3 6. DIESEL GENERATOR BUILDING
, 7. INTERMEDIATE BAY 4 1 6 i 21
- 8. STEAM GENERATOR BUILDING w if _,
-}f "o s .~ 9. MAINTENANCE BAY
- 3 I e J 19
= 10. AUXILIARY BAY l = 11. TURBINE GENERATOR BUILDING 15 *U1y
~
- - 7 4
- 7 -
- ~ , , _
- 12. MAINTENANCE SHOP & WAREHOUSE
* " U t -
', / ff. Nste ha er Treatment Area 9 p ._ , , 14 9- 2 -*- & 15. Sewage Treatment Plant t ; 4 / 16. EMERGENCY COOLING TOWERS Equalization [
/ 17. COOLING TOWER Basin I + 18. C. W. PUMP HOUSE SludgeLagoon_j i O' / 19. GENERATING SWITCH YARD g i er ll ir 1 / 20. STARTUP RESERVE YARD
+ 21. SWITCHYARD RELAY HOUSE
'*-* , , , 22. FIRE PR9TECTION PUMP HOUSE
* " " 23. Waste Disposal Building
%E o 200 400 800 I200 $g "52 SCALE IN FEET hh m
Figure 3.1-4 LAYOUT OF PLANT STRUCTURES IN RELATION TO THE SECURITY BARRIER
N.TRUE PLANT SERYlCE CONTROL OlESEL CORRIDOR ~ 'O INTERMEDIATE BAY [ REACTOR TURBINE CONTAINMENT STEAM g GENERATOR y R.S.B. BLDC CEN. BUILDING m . _ _ _
.L RADWASTE REACTOR BLOC 54Y AREA SERVICE 9 BLDG CORRIDOR I ,
ENANCE MAINT. SHOP AND 3CALE BAY 0 50 10 0 WAREHOUSE
\ - abo, b-NOTE: HEAVY LINES INDICATE CATEGORY I STR'MTURES gQ
-e m Figure 3.1-5 MAIN BUILDING LAYOUT OF CRBRP h,5
$M O O e _
AMEND. XIV May 1982 (~N Shielding will be provided to limit radiation exposure to
\-s personnel in accordance with 10 CPR 20. Exposure records for plant personnel will be maintained and filed regularly with governmental agencies. Principal plant characteristics and reactor parameters are provided in Tables 3.2-1 and 3.2-2, respectively.
3.2.2 FUEL DESCRIPTION The reactor of the CRBRP has a central core zone, consisting of a 9 heterogeneous mixture of fuel and blanket assemblies, surrounded l by radial and axial blankets. Fuel used will be in the form of sintered ceramic pellets of mixed uranium-plutonium dioxide which g are encapsulated in stainless steel rods. Each fuel assembly 9 consists of an array of 217 such rods placed in a hexagonal l' channel which acts as a support for the rods and as a coolant channel. O The initial core consists of 156 fuel assemblies, all containing j the same plutonium enrichment. Eighty-two inner blanket assemblies are dispersed heterogeneously through the central region of the core. The core is surrounded by 126 radial blanket 14 i assemblies. Fourteen-inch thick axial blankets lie above and below the 36-inch fueled core region. Plutonium enrichments r,ange from 32-33 w/o PuO 2 in PuO2 + U02 . Depleted uranium 9
' dioxide (0.2 w/o U235) is used throughout the fuel and blankets.
, The inner and radial blanket assemblies contain 61 stainless' steel-clad UO 2 rods enclosed in hexagonal channels. + Further information on the fuel elements may be found in Section 3 . 8.1'. i ' 4 O1 : 3.2-3 _. , ___- - _ . _ . - e ___.
AMEND. XIV May 1982 3.2.3 POWER OUTPUT Power output rating for the initial core of the CRBRP is 975 6 megawatts thermal (MWt) whier will result in a gross electrical output of approximately 380 megawatts electric (MWe). It is estimated that in-plant consumption will reduce the electrical 7 output from the plant to approximately 350 MWe net. The CRBRP will have a design capability for a power output rating of 1,121 MWt (420 MWe) for cores other than the initial core. O O 3.2-4
Al1ENDt1ErlT VIII February 1977
- O
! TABLE 3.2-1 PRINCIPAL PLANT CHARACTERISTICS Reactor power 975 fWt j Gross electrical power 380 MWe Number of primary and intennediate heat 3 4 transport loops Location for sodium pumps, primary Hot Leg Location for sodium pumps, intermediate Cold Leg Principal plant materials 316/304 SS/2-1/4 Cr-1 Mo Reactor vessel outlet temperature 9950 F 6
Total core sodium flowrate 41.45 x 10 ^1b/hr 6 Total intermediate sodium flowrate 40.47 x 10 lb/hr Feedwater temperature 468 F Steam pressure at turbine throttle 1,450 psig Steam temperature at turbine throttle 900 F 6 Total steam flow to turbine 3.34 x 10 lb/hr } Turbine generator plant gross efficiency 39.0% 1 i O ! 3.2-5
AMEND. XIV May 1982 TABLE 3.2-2 g PRINCIPAL REACTOR PARAMETERS Core Fuel Assemblies Core fuel material PuO2 /UO 2 Fuel cladding and assembly duct material 316 SS (20% cold worked) 9 Fuel rod outer diameter 0.23 in. Cladding thickness 15 mils. Rod pitch to diameter ratio 1.25 Core height 36 in. Axial blanket height at both ends 14 in. Fuel rods per assembly 217 Number of fuel assemblies (initial core) 156 Peak fuel burnup goal (equilibrium) Maximum linear power 110,000 mwd /T 15.9 kW/ft. 9 lh Average liner power 8.2 kW/ft. Inner / Radial Blanket Assemblies Blanket fuel material Depleted UO 2 Rod outer diameter 0.506 in. l9 Cladding thickness 15 mils. Blanket rods per assembly 61 Number of inner / radial blanket assemblies 82/126 M g Maximum linear power 20.0 kW/ft. Control Rod Assemblies Poison material BC4 Number of control rods 15 (Continued) 3.2-6 i
AMEND. XIV - May 1982 TABLE 3.2-2 (Continued) 4 O
- Refueling i Frequency, mo 12 Average number of fuel assemblies l
i replaced: 81 l Average number of inner / radial 9 I blanket assemblies replaced: 41/28 { Nuclear Performance
; Initial fissile loading to power ratio 4.0 kg/MWe l9 Initial breeding ratio 1.29 y9 Equilibritm breeding ratio 1.24 l9 i
!O e l 4 4 l 1 e i l l lO 1 3.2-7 l I I I
----_.-.----..---.-,.-_--,__m-. _ _ . _ _ . . , . ,m. _ . . .,% ...m %.,- . -,, , ,r-__ ,.m~w% vm----..-.--y, p---e,,.,-,...
u & a Reactor Superheater " " Generator 4> N N Inter- ( 3 High Low Pressure mediate Pressure 3r Turbine Drum Heat V Turbine Exchanger g 1r 1r Condenser h)C 4 u m g 7 Circulating m Primary Evap- Water to Sodium orator Feedwater condensate 3r cooling Tower L 6 Loop Pump Pump m m m
~ __,
w ~ Intermediate Feedwater Sodium Loop Heaters Power Generation y System yg OM Figure 3.2-1 G5 SCHEMATIC DIAGRAM OF THE CRBRP CYCLE M< O O O
Amendmsnt XIV May 1982 () Six fuel assemblies per shipment is expected. On this basis, average yearly shipments of fuel assemblies would be about 14. 6 9 12 3.8.1.2 INNER / RADIAL BLANKET ASSEMBLIES 9 A blanket assembly is composed of 61 rods arrayed in a triangular pitch and supported in a hexagonal metal duct similar to that of the fuel assembly. Rods are made of stainless steel and have an 9 outer diameter of 0.506 inches. The dimension across the flats of the duct is the same as the f uel assembly, 4.7 inches; the total weight of the assembly is about 536 pounds. Longitudinally, each rod consists of a 64-inch blanket region and l9 associated fission gas plenum. The fertile material in the blanket region is depleted uranium oxide sintered into pellets and encapsulated in stainless steel rods. The 64-inch blanket length of 208 blanket assemblies (82 () inner blankets and 126 radial blankets) contains approximately 21.0 tons of heavy metal (99.8 w/o U-238 and 0.2 w/o U-235) . 14 The inner blanket assemblies are replaced as a batch at two year intervals, with the exception of six assemblies which are replaced by fresh fuel assemblies at the mid-term ref ueling. Radial blanket assemblies in the first and second radial blanket rows are replaced as a batch at four and five year intervals, respectively. Therefore, on the average, during annual refueling, approximately 69 blanket assemblies will be shipped inl6 9 14 a similar container as the unirradiated fuel assemblies. Based upon 6 assemblies per shipment there will be, on the average,12 shipments arriving each year at the CRBRP carrying blanket assemblies, 6 12 o 9 O V 3.8-2
AMEND. IX OCT. 1981 3.8.2 IRRADIATED FUEL ELEMENTS 3.8.2.1 CORE ASSEMBLIES Irradiated properties of the Clinch River core fuel assemblies were developed based on annual refueling and a core full power capacity factor of 75 percent (equivalent to 274 full power days of operation). An 9 average of 81 fuel assemblies will be discharged from the plant per year at equilibrium core conditions. Total weight of these irradiated assemblies is approximately 18 tons. The burnup averaged over all the l6 g fuel assemblies discharged from the plant is approximately 80,000 MWD / Ton of heavy metal in the core portion of the assembly. The peak pellet burn-up design goal is 110,000 MWD / Ton of heavy metal. 9 o 9 Burnup averaged over all the axial blankets in the discharged assem-blies is approximately 2,200 MWD / Ton of heavy metal in the blanket region l9 of the assembly. During irradiation, neutron capture in the fertile material (U-238) of the axial blankets breeds, on the average, 0.3-0.4 kg 9 of fissile plutonium per discharged assembly. This gain in fissile content partially compensates for the loss of fissile material in the core region during operation. 9 The Ir-Vessel Transfer Machine (IVTM) mounted in the reactos head carries j out withdrawal of spent fuel assemblies from their positions in the ! reactor core and deposits them into a sodium filled Core Component Pot 6 (CCP) in a transfer position outside the core but inside the reactor vessel. liorizontal motion of the In-Vessel Transfer Machine is accom-plished by means of triple rotating plugs mounted in the reactor head. l 1 O 3.8-3
Am:ndment XII Jcnunry 1982 () By rotating these plugs in sequence, the In-Vessel Transfer Machine, which is a simple straight pull device, can be indexed over any c : or transfer position in the reactor. After the spent fuel assembly has been placed in the transfer position, the Ex-Vessel Transf er Machine (EvTM) withdraws the CCP container with the assembly and transfers it to the codium-filled Ex-Vessel Storage Tank (EVST) located in the ' Reactor Service Building. Fuel assemblies will remain in the EVST for at least 100 days
-9 prior to being loaded into a shipping cask for transportation.
Irradiated fuel assemblies will be transported and protected in 6 a cask approximately eight feet in diameter by 22 feet in length. Irradiated fuel assemblies are inserted in removable canisters. The approximate weight of the cask is 100 tons and 9 () is designed for transportation on a standard high capacity railroad flatcar. The cask and car combination is designed in 6 accordance with NRC and DOT regulations and is provided with crash protection and passive cooling capability. The actual number of fuel assemblies per cask shipped will be determined on 6 9 the basis of economic considerations and the heat load limit of the cask. It is estimated that during the spent fuel shipping phase there g g will be 14 shipments per year. 3.8.2.2 INNER / RADIAL BLANKET ASSEMBLIES l9 Irradiated properties of the blanket assemblies were developed based on the same reactor operation conditions as those used for O 3.8-4
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 the core fuel assemblies. On the average, 69 blanket assemblies l9 g h will be discharged f rom the plant per year. The burnup averaged over all the discharged blanket assemblies is approximately 8,000 l9 MWD / Ton of heavy metal (depleted uranium) . During irradiation, neutron captures in the fertile material (U-238) of the radial blanket breeds on the average 2.5-3.0 kg of fissile plutonium per 9 discharged blanket assembly, o The expected mode of protection for packaging of the discharged ,9 blanket assemblies for shipment is the same as the core fuel assemblies. One day after shutdown, the peak inner / radial 9 blanket assembly heat generation would be 19.7/12.0 kW. Thirty days after shutdown, these heat generation values are 2.61/1.64 6 KW and 2.53/0.88 KW, res pectively. Thi.s lower heat generation rate would allow for shipment of blanket assemblies earlier than 14 the 100 days assumed for fuel assemblies. It is estimated that the number of inner / radial blanket assemblies removed f rom the reactor will require about 12 shipments per year. 3.8.3 Radioactive Waste Material 3.8.3.1 Replacement In-Vessel Components 3.8.3.1.1 Control Rod Assemblies and Drive Lines l Control rod assembly consists of a bundle of stainless steel clad, boron carbide pins. The 9 primary control rod assemblies have bundles of 37 pins while the 6 secondary control rod assemblies have bundles of 31 pins each. The bundles of pins are 9 arranged in hexagonal inner ducts within outer ducts having the same external geometry as the fuel assembly ducts. The 20 percent cold worked Type 316 stainless steel tubing is O 3.8-5
NIEND. IX OCT. 1981 O of sufficient wall thickness and plenum size to safely contain the full volume of helium released in one year of operation (up to 2,700 psi for 275 Full Power Days -- 75 percent core capacity factor). Due to lifetime limitations from pressure buildup in the rods, pellet swelling, and bow-ing considerations it is anticipated that the fifteen control rod as- 9 semb11es will be replaced after either one or two year lifetimes. Each of these assemblies weighs approximately 300 pounds. Expected mode of protection for shipment of these assemblies from the plant is in the same casks used for the fuel assemblies. The use of such a cask is proposed due to possible leaks and migration of activated gases from the control assemblies. g The control rod assembly drive lines are fabricated with Inconel-718. i Each of the fifteen drive lines are 30 feet long and consist of three l9 concentric shafts with a two-inch outside diameter. O Current estimates indicate that the 15 drive lines will be replaced over 15 year intervals. It is expected that the drive lines will be 9 cut into shorter sections and shipped in approved shipping casks. 3.8.3.1.2 RADIAL SHIELD ASSEMBLIES A shield assembly is constructed of a 20% cold worked type 316 stainless steel duct tube that is drawn into a hexagonal shape. The duct tube g contains closely packed, 20% cold worked, type 316 stainless steel rods. The dimension across the flats of the assembly is approximately 4.7 inches; l the total weight of the assembly is about 362 pounds. Relative posi- 9 tioning of the shield assemblies is shown in Figure 3.8-1. O V 3.8-6 i l
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 Based on the expected neutron flux levels in the CRBRP, the entire first row of shield assemblies (72 assemblies, total 9 weight approximately 13 tons) will be replaced every 10 or 15 years to maintain their required mechanical properties. Being in a lower neutron radiation environment, part of the second row (78 9 14 assemolies, total weight approximately 14 tons) will be replaced after 10 to 25 years of service. The third row (84 assemblies, total weight approximately 15 tons) and the fourth row (78 assemblies, total weight approximately 14 tons) are not expected 9 '4 to be replaced during the operating lifetime of the plant. The expected form of shipment of these assemblies from the plant is in the casks designed for transporting spent fuel and blanket assemblies. On removal from the reactor, the shield assemblies can be immediately shipped f rom the plant without exceeding the heat load limitation of the cask (26 kW). The decay heat associated with the shield assemblies would be 0.34 kW/ assembly one day f after shutdown. Current judgment is that shield assemblies will be shipped immediately upon removal from the reactor. The result is a full utilization of the shipping casks. Current considerations call for not more than twelve assemblies per year af ter 10 years of plant operation except for miscellaneous assemblies used for surveillance specimens. This 9 will require two shipments per year. The number of shipments is based on six shield assemblies loaded per cask. The actual 4 number of assemblies per cask will be determined on the basis of economics and on heat load considerations in the casks and in accordance with applicable NRC and Department of Transportation regulations. 3.8-7
O
\
s Y O # s # # #' * $ $ 8 ,o /
@ s e# ' #*'
@ * # # / ,ss
'#' O /ss.*' s.<'-*0*,*+*
g 9 PRIMARY CONTROL ASSEMBLIES I4 Figure 3.8-1. Clinch River Breeder Reactor Core Layout O 3.8-10 l -- _. __.
AMEND. XX OCT. 1981 0 TOP END CAP 1 b
.J Q r.
i l ![ TAG GAS CAPSULE
.l l(l PLENUM SPACER
.:r FIS$ LCM GAS
PL EMUH 4
- CLA DING hn .;.l.
SPRING
*:is u Gg- t.
n 9 UPPER AXI AL 4
'- SLAkxET PELLET 3
!t
__ t 46
'kt CORE
_' , PELLETS __ s __ I.- t: ... '" i.oWER axial l
, BLANKET PELLET 3 n
bH vlRE WRAP
.c.). _
f soTToM END CAP iEYWAY O Figure 3.8 2. FUEL R0D 3.8-11
P AMEND. IX OCT. 1981 The location and extent of specific problem soils, relative to proposed construction activity, will be determined by on-site investigation. g Construction guidelines will be responsive to consideration of erosion and revegetation problem areas. 4.1.1.7 IMPACT ON HUMAN HABITATION Ine CRBRP Site is a forest area devoid of human habitation; therefore, construction of the CRBRP will involve no relocation or association problems. A small industrial park is located 1.5 miles to the north, a commercial camping area is located about one mile southeast and several houses are 9 scattered throughout the area south of the Clinch River within one or two miles of the Site. Noise associated with construction activities could disturb people in these areas to some degree because of the natural quietness of the area. Construction noise will vary with the particular phase of construction, the mix of equipment used for each phase and the cycle of the equipment. Phases of construction for the CRBRP will include preparing the Site, excavating, placing foundations, erecting structures, finishing details and cleanup. Construction equipment noise ranges are listed in Table 4.1-4 and the noisiest equipment types operating during 9 each construction phase at an industrial construction site are listed ir, Table 4.1-5. To characterize the noisiness, a Noise Pollution Level (NPL) 1 i ( l i 4.1-9 l
has been calculated for each phase of the construction. The NPL in deci-bels (dB) is defined as the sum of the A-weighted average sound pressure level and 2.5 times the standard deviation of the A-weighted average sound pressure level. ) Table 4.1-6 is a list of descriptors of NPL values which can be used in interpreting the NPL levels in Table 4.1-5. Locations of existing dwellings are given in Figure 2.1-7. The two dwellings nearest the generation portion of the facility are more than 0.6 mile away. Another dwelling is located over 0.3 mile from the river-water pumphouse. Construction noise impact may be assessed with consiJer-ation of: (1) probable construction noise levels (see Table 4.1-4 and 4.1-5), (2) NPL Descriptors (see Table 4.1-6), (3) the distances in-volved, (4) the temporary nature of construction and (5) the intermit-tent nature of construction noise. Construction noise would be noticed by few residents south of the site and, for occasional, limited time periods, may cause some annoyance. As stated earlier, explosion noise will be minimized by the use of small 6 multiple charges. Construction of plant and transmission facilitie.1 will cause negligible aesthetic disturbance to resident and transient populations because of the limited construction duration, the limited number of viewing locations and the distances involved. Plant and transmission facilities are des-cribed in Section 3.0. Existing and projected resident and transient populations are described in Section 2.2 and site layout and topography are described in Section 2.1. The main plant structures are to be located in a wooded area with higher elevations northward and a slope southward down to the Clinch River. Locations for viewing construction of the main plant structures are limited by the natural terrain and the surrounding forest (see Section 3.1). A portion of the largest structure, the reactor containment building may be visible at a distance of approximately 1.6 miles 4.1-10
O O O V V V' TABLE 4.1-3 S0IL SERIES RATINGS AND ESTIMATE OF ACRES AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AT THE CRBRP SITE Soil Degree of Heavy Equipment Degree of Level of SW1 Soil Type Acreage Erosion Potential Impact Potential, Seedling Mortality Productivity Cc Clarksville cherty silt loam 52.4 Slight to Moderate Slight to Moderate Moderate Low Cc1 Clarksville cherty slit loam. Hilly phase 60.0 Slight to Moderate Slight to Moderate Moderate Low to Moderate Ccz Clarksville cherty silt loam. Steep phase 12.8 Moderate slight Moderate Low Cs Colbert silty clay loam 11.9 Slight Moderate Moderate Low C1x Colbert slit loam. Slope phase 6.0 Slight Slight Moderate Low to Moderate As Armuchee silt loam 3.9 Slight Slight M erate to Severe Low Avk Apison very fine sandy loam. 1.0 Slight Slight Slight Low Eroded slope phase Al Atkins very fine sandy loam 0.2 Slight Severe Severe Low to Moderate p FC Fullerton cherty silt loam 3.5 Slight Severe Slight Moderate Fcr Fullerton cherty silt loam. Eroded phase 6.4 Moderate to Severe Moderate to Severe Moderate to. Severe Low to Fct Fullerton charty silt loam. Eroded 3.7 Moderate to Severe Moderate to Severe Moderate to Severe Low Fcz Fd lerton cherty slit loam. Steep phase 6.7 Moderate Slight Moderate Low 9 Fr 1 Fullerton cherty silt loam. Hilly phase 2.7 Slight Moderate Slight to Moderate Low i Ls Lehew stoney very fine sandy loam 2.4 Slight to Moderate Slight to Moderate Moderate to Severe Low Myr Nolichucky very fine sandy loam. 0.5 Slight to Moderate Slight Slight Low to Moderate Slope phase Ps Philo very fine sandy loam 0.6 Slight Moderate Moderate Moderate Pv Pope very fine sandy loam 7.9 Slight Slight Slight Moderate to High Sv Sequatchie very fine sandy loam 9.5 Slight Slight Slight Moderate to High Rsc Rolling stony land Colbert and Talbott 30.3 Slight Severe Moderate to Severe Low soll materials og Upshur silty clay loam. Valley phase Us 29.6 Slight Moderate Moderate Moderate UE o Ws Wolftever slit loam 2.5 Slight Slight Moderate Moderate U* Co - Wsz Wolftever sitt loam. Slope phase 3.7 Slight Slight Moderate Moderate "X TOTAL 258.2 nui t.: Based on description of soils from 1942 soll study of Roane County. Tennessee. For an explanation of soil series ratings see Section 2.7.
i l O TABLE 4.1-4 CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE RANGES I4) Approximate Range of Noise Type of Equipment Level (dBA) at 500 feet Internal Combustion, Earthmoving Compacters (Rollers) 73-75 Front Loaders 72-84 Backhoes 72-93 Tractors 76-95 Scrapers, Graders 80-92 Pavers 86-88 Trucks 82-93 Internal Combustion, Materials Handling Concrete Mixers Concrete Pumps 75-88 81-83 h Cranes (Movable) 76-87 Cranes (Derrick) 86-88 Internal Combustion, Stationary Pumps 69-71 Generators 71-82 Compressors 75-86 Impact Pneumatic Wrenches 83-88 Jack Hammers and Rock Drills 81-98 Pile Drivers (peaks) 95-105 Other Vibrator 69-81 Saws 72-81 Note: Based on limited available data samples. 4.1-20
i O O O i l TABLE 4.1-5 NOISIEST EQUIPMENT TYPES OPERATING AT INDUSTRIAL. CONSTRUCTION SITES (4) I
+ dBA NPL dBA NPL dBA NPL
! Level (dB) Level (dB) Level (dB) 1 Construction Phase Equipment (50 feet) (50 feet) (1/2 mile) (1/2 mile) (1 mile) (1 mile) I Site Preparation Truck 91 ' 57 9 51 ' 102 e 68 62 i Scraper 88J 54 .' 48 J ; ! Excavation Rock Drill 98' 64 ' 581 105 71 > 65
- Truck 91 J 57 J 51 3 '
i'
= Foundation Jack Hammer 88' 54 % 48 't ,
_. e 89 e 55 49 4 i Concrete Mixer 85J 51 J 45.i . l '3 Erection Derrick Crane 889 54 9 48 g Jack Hammer 88J 54 0 48 J ! ! Finishing Rock Drill 987 64 9 589 105- e 71 65 Truck 91 0 57 J 51 J i l i I 4 s B
O TABLE 4.1-6 DESCRIPTION OF NPL LEVELS I4 ) Clearly Acceptable: The noise exposure is such that both the indoor and outdoor environments are pleasant. NPL less than 62 dB Nonnally Acceptable: The noise exposure is great enough to be of some concern but connon building constructions will make the indoor environment acceptable, even for sleeping quarters and the outdoor environment will be reasonably pleasant for recreation NPL between 62 and and play. 74 dB Normally Unacceptable: The noise exposure is significantly more severe so that unusual and costly building constructions are neces-sary to ensure some tranquility indoors, and barriers must be erected between the site and prominent noise sources to make NPL between 74 and the outdoor environment tolerable. 88 dB Clearly Unacceptable: The noise exposure at the Site is so severe that the construction costs to make the indoor environment accept-able would be prohibitive and the outdoor NPL greater than environment would still be intolerable. 88 dB Note: These criteria have not been officially or unofficially adopted as " standards", but are only to be used as an aide in determining the amount of acceptable noise. O 4.1-22
Amand2cnt XIV Mny 1982 5.7 OTHER EFFECTS OF PLANT OPERATION Operation of the CRBRP should institute no changes in land use not already abrogated during the construction phase. Comparison of the construction phase to the operational phase should, in fact, result in relief of some of the man-induced stresses due to significant reductions in the motion and noise of heavy equipment and vehicular traffic at the plant site. Stabilization of routing should result in greater tolerance of the installation by the terrestrial population. The effects of plant operation are discussed in Sections 5.1 through 5.6. Because of the plant design and the distance of the Site from other industrial or power plants in the area (ORGDP is three miles north-northwest) the CRBRP should not have either thermal or radioactive waste interaction with effluents released by other plants in the area. No wastes from the plant are anticipated to be disposed of by means other than those discussed in Sections 5.2 through 5.5. O 5.7.1 CRBRP FUEL CYCLE The CRBRP fuel cycle includes mixed oxide (MOX) fuel fabrication, blanket element fabrication. reprocessing, management of the wastes generated by facilities in the fuel cycle and transportation of wastes and products among the various I4 facilities. Some of the facilities required to support the CRBRP fuel cycle are not yet available. Notable examples are a fuel reprocessing plant capable of handling CRBRP fuel, and a federal repository for ipposal. The environmental impacts estimated herein use exist.ing information regarding the most likely design of these facilitias for those that are not yet available. This assessment also resumes that appropriate facilities will be available in time to support the CRBRP fuel cycle such that interim measures like away from reactor fuel storage and product storage are not required. O 5.7-1
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 A simplified schematic diagram of the CRBRP fuel cycle employing plutonium recycle is shown in Figure 5.7-1. The mass flow parameters are characteristic of those for the CRBRP under pseudo-average equilibrium-cycle conditions (where the cycle-to-cycle variations in the batch CRBRP fuel management have been averaged out). At equilibrium, approximately 0.9 MT of plutonium and 11 MT of depleted uranium are fabricated into mixed-oxide fuel and blanket assemblies per year. One half of one percent heavy metal has been assumed to be lost in the fabrication process. In the reactor core, irradiation at 975 MW(th) for 274 equivalent full power days destroys approximately .28 MT of plutonium and 0.38 MT of uranium per year through fission and nuclear transmutation reactions. 0.27 MT of fission product isotopes are produced per year. Because of the breeding characteristics of the CRBRP, plutonium is both produced and destroyed in the core and the discharge fuel and blankets contain approximately 1.00 MT of plutonium. This spent fuel is g chemically reprocessed, where once again 1/2% of the heavy metal isotopes are assumed to be lost or unrecoverable. Fission products, irradiated structural material and other wastes are shipped to a waste disposal facility. The recovered plutonium ( 0.99 MT/ year) , and perhaps the uranium as well, is recycled as fresh fuel input to the fuel fabrication facilities. The net gain of approximately 0.10 MT of plutonium per year can be stored for later use. The contribution of the plant fuel cycle to the environment is in Table 5.7-1, "CRBRP Suminary of Environmental Considerations for Fuel Cycle." Below is a description of the facilities and methods used to estimate the Table 5.7-1 impacts. DOE will supply plutonium to startup and operate CRBRP during the five-year demonstration period. The plutonium will come from existing DOE inventories, processed domestic nuclear power reactor spent fuel and, if necessary, foreign sources. No O S.7-2
l Amandaent XIV ' May 1982
; () impacts are included in the estimate in Table 5.7-1 for 1
production of this material. These impacts have been addressed in other environmental impact documents. Table 5.7-1 includes estimates of environmental impacts from reprocessing of CRBRP spent fuel, including oxide conversion. Reprocessing of CRBRP spent fuel would produce adequate plutonium to fuel the CRBRP. The DOE-supplied plutonium may require conversion to an oxide form at a yet to be determined facility prior to fuel fabrication. Oxide conversion is planned as a step at the ! reprocessing plant. The impacts of conversion are bounded by the impacts of operating the reprocessing plant given in Table 5.7-1. 5.7.1.1 CRBRP FUEL FABRICATION Fabrication of the mixed oxide core fuel is planned to be 4 performed at the Secure Automated Fabrication (SAF) line, to be I4 installed in the Fuels and Materials Examination Facility (FMEF) at DOE's Hanford reservation. CRBRP fuel fabrication will require about 65 percent of the SAF line operational schedule (15 of every 24 months). The data presented in Table 5.7-1 for mixed oxide fuel fabrication are based on the impacts in DOE /EA-Oll6
" Environmental Assessment for the Fuels and Materials Examination Facility," July 1980, and supplement.(6),(7)
The Secure Automated Fabrication (SAF) Program has as its objective to develop and demonstrate an advanced manufacturing line (SAF) for plutonium oxide breeder reactor fuel pins. This line will be the source of fuel for the FFTF and the CRBRP. The i SAF line will utilize technology that focuses on improved safety ( features for plant operating personnel, the public, and the i environment. I l 5.7-3 l
Am:ndment XIV May 1982 Fabrication of fuel on the SAF line in the fully automated and remotely operated mode results in the following important advances over current manual fuel fabricaton technology: o Reduced radiation exposure to plant personnel o Reduced access to Special Nuclear Materials (SNM) o Improved containment of SNM o Near real-time accountability of SNM o Improved product cost and quality o Increased protection of the public and the environment from radiation or contamination The basic fabrication process includes receiving and assaying nuclear ceramic powders, blending of the powders, pelletizing and sintering the powders into fuel pellets, and loading these pellets into finished fuel pins. The SAF line will include necessary support systems for nondestructive assay, SNM accountability, rapid chemical analysis, waste and scrap handling, maintenance, and material handling. All processing equipment and support systems will be combined to form an interdependent, fully integrated, automated and remotely operated fuel fabrication system. Prior to introduction of feed materials to the fabrication line, an analysis and characterization of the feed will be performed. As the feed material progresses, automatic measurements of the quantity of SNM will be conducted and recorded in the process control and safeguards computers to maintain a continuous record for process monitoring and for safeguards and accountability purposes. The SAF line is designed to minimize the spread of contamination and the threat of diversion. Process enclosures are designed for O 5.7-4
Am2ndment XIV May 1982 () each subsystem. Glove ports and windows will be incorporated to allow for " hands-on" maintenance. All containment structures will have built-in shielding, and the process equipment will incorporate supplemental shielding as necessary to meet radiation exposure criteria. SAF equipment is within contamination control enclosures physically located behind isolation walls that function as a secondary confinement barrier. Plant operating personnel are j normally located in an operating corridor that is on the opposite side of the isolation wall or in the operations computer center where all process operations are monitored and coordinated. Under normal operating conditions, plant personnel located in the operating corridor can control and monitor the performance of process equipment. There will be no penetrations in the isolation walls that would provide direct access to the process equipment by the operators. Under abnormal conditions, the O operator can utilize local controls that can be activated to control operation of the process equipment while visually 14 monitoring its performance. If tooling changes must be made or when routine maintenance must be performed that requires the presence of an operator at the working face of the containment, the fuel material will be removed from the equipment as necessary l to maintain personnel exposure limits and to minimize SNM access. The mechanical assembly of the welded fue) pins produced by the SAF line into fuel assemblies will be performed in Building 308 on the Hanford Reservation. This is an existing, multi-purpose, plutonium facility that is safeguarded as described in 5.7.1.5. The first four cores of the FFTF were assembled into driver fuel i assemblies here. The CRBRP assembly operation will produce no gaseous, solid or liquid radioactive or toxic effluents and will have no significant environmental impact. O O 5.7-5
Am:ndm2nt XIV May 1982 Uranium dioxide feed material for the SAF line will be obtained by having existing UF6 at DOE's diffusion plants converted at a to be determined commercial facility. For tne purpose of estimating environmental impacts in Table 5.7-1, conversion is assumed to take place at the blanket fuel fabrication facility. The total uranium conversion capacity required to support the CRBRP fuel cycle, including blanket fabrication, on an annual average basis is 11MT. Blanket fuel fabrication for the CRBRP will be carried out at a yet to be selected commercial facility. An average of approximately 70 blanket fuel assemblies will be required per year. There will be about 100 kg of uranium per assembly. Thus, a conservative throughput of about 7.5 MT/yr of uranium is assumed. For the purpose of estimating the environmental impacts in Table 5.7-1, the impacts of the model UO fuel fabrication 2 facility in WASH-1248, were apportioned to a 7.5 metric ton / year 14 throughput. 5.7.1.2 CRBRP FUEL REPROCESSING Demonstration of technology for reprocessing and recycle of LMFBR fuels is planned to begin a few years after the planned initial criticality of the CRBRP. The Department of Energy plans to demonstrate technology for commercial reprocessing of LMFBR fuels by reprocessing of CRBRP (and other) fuels in the Developmental Reprocessing Plant (DRP) (formerly called the Hot Experimental Facility). There has been some preliminary conceptual design of the DRP, sufficient for completion of an environmental analysis which indicates that such a faciltiy can be operated within existing and proposed environmental guidelines (8) . A description of the DRP design follows. O l 5.7-C , i 1
Amendment XIV May 1982 Study and plans to date for the DRP have focused on a new stand-
} alone facility at a new site. However, some preliminary thought has been given to constructing a " breeder head-end" (fuel receipt and storage, shearing, dissolution, feed clarification, first cycle solvent extraction, and waste processing) at an existing reprocessing plant, (e.g. at Savannah River, Hanford or Barnwell). Final decision on a " stand-alone," " breeder head-end," or alternative DRP will consider cost, environmental impact, impact on existing reprocessing plant programs, and importance of'a reliable demonstration.
Reprocessing capacity for the DRP has been set at about 1/2 metric ton.of heavy metal.(MTHM) per day. This capacity is a compromise between the minimum-that will permit scale-up to a production-scale operat' ion with reasonable assurance of success,
~
and the maximum that will permit a meaningful demonstration of reliable reprocessing systems with the limited quantities of () LMPBR type fuels that will be available during the demonstration period. In order to provide economical operation during the y early periods of. operation,and in order to have a full reprocessing load'to provide-an adequate demonstration of operability (300 day-per-year operation is contemplated), reprocessing of LMFBR fuels will be supplemented by reprocessing of LWR fuels in the DRP.. { The DRP design is based on the following philosophy: o The DRP will be a U.S. ' Government owned developmental fuel reprocessing demristration facility o Public and worker health and safety are of fundamental concern U 5.7-7
Amendm:nt XIV May 1982 o Safety and safeguards-related features will be designed and will be constructed and operated in accordance with lh industrial standards applicable to nonreactor nuclear facilities. Nationally recognized codes such as the ASME, ANSI, and similar codes will be followed. The NRC Regulatory Guides, which provide guidelines in meeting those requirements, will be utilized, o The DRP will be operated and mai"itained withinDthe constraints of 10 CFR 20 for radioactive effldents and personnel exposure, and of 40 CPR 190 for environmental standards for exposure of the general public to LWR generated radioactive material. The DRP is also designed , to guidelines equivalent to the 10 CFR 100 sccidental s release limits for power reactors. . Nonradioactive i effluents will meet applicable state and local air and water quality standards. In addition, the ALARA principle I4 will be applied to this f acility and its emissions. hh o The DRP will be a developmental facility. Operzting flexibility, including the ability to change equipment, is needed to meet U.S. Government progrni objectives. DRP Support Pacilitiga. The DRP provides all of the f acilities l ~ and services necessary for routine operation and icaintenance of fuel storage and processing activities. The services include ' water supply, sanitary waste disphsal, electrical supply, steam and compressed gas supply, access roada, rail'spurr, etc. Support f acilities include on-site : maintenance shops, mockup creas, laboratory and routine analytical se vices) cooling 't services, warehouses, and offices. i i, . 4 t i s 5.7-8 i i '
,A Am:ndmcnt XIV May 1982 DRP Fuel Receivino and_SipIage The DRP is capable of receiving
( and storing currently conceived types of spent oxide fuel assemblies from plutonium breeder reactors as well as from light-water reactors. Space is also provided for future storage and reprocessing of carbide breeder fuel, consistent with U.S.
' ~
Government decisionn regarding use of carbide fuels. The
.i specific reactors ar'd fuels that the DRP currently has capability j~ for reprocessing u are listed in Table 5.7-2.
t The DRP is capable of receiving fuel assemblies that have cooled
,a minimum of 150, days. For purposes of calculating 4
trhrsportai1bn impact however, the spent fuel and blanket was assitned to be shipped after 100 days, which is conservative. , DEP fugLSMpoing Casks The DRP is capable of (1) unloading ? cask,sthaphavebeenshippedbyeithertruckorrail, (2)
\
refo,ving road dict and external surf ace contamination f rom casks () ' upon receipt, and (3) decontaminating casks prior to shipment from the DRP. The DRP is capable of removing fuel from all of the casks which will be used to ship fuel from the reactors i , listed ir, Table 5.7-2.
. C. ,
' Capability is also provided to identify fuel assemblies for
, ; verificationi and inventory control, and to assay fuel assemblies (forfissilematerialcontent.
YI s (; s QFliFuel Storage A water-filled pool is provided with capacity lo, store enough fuel for 100 days of operations at 0.5 MT/ day f capacity with CRBRP-type fuel assemblies. The storage facility has~ provisions for detecting, handling, and canning (if l lhqcessary) suspect or known failed-fuel assemblies.
, ?
,f
%v p
l 5.7-9 p
'I
Am:ndm:nt XIV M y 1982 DRP.Cank_Maint2Dancs. The capability to perform limited maintenance operations on shipping casks is provided. This capability is limited to removing contaminated water coolant from casks and canisters and placing them in storage tanks; decontaminating the internal surfaces of casks; and limited repair of cask internals and externals. DRP Fuel ReprocCHR1Dg The reprocessing facility initially provides equipment to reprocess fuel assemblies containing uranium, plutonium, and radioactive fission products, clad in either stainless steel or zirconium alloy. The process functions, as shown in Figure 5.7-2 are: o Fuel receiving, cleaning, non-destructive analysis and storage o Mechanical processing and shearing o Dissolution, feed clarification, and feed adjustment o Solvent extraction for purification of uranium and 14 plutonium o Uranium oxide production o Reagent makeup and distribution o Rework of off-specification process liquids o Process heating and cooling o Waste o Off gas collection and confinement 5.7-10
Am:ndatnt XIV Msy 1982 () DRP Type of Process. Separation of the fission products from the fissile and fertile material is based upon liquid-liquid solvent extraction. The conventional Purex process, modified as required for specific nuclear fuels, is the basic process. The Purex process utilizes a tributylphosphate (TBP) extractant in a normal paraffinic hydrocarbon (NPH) solvent. The uranium and plutonium products are converted to oxides in a form to be used directly in' fuel fabrication. Storage capacity for all oxide products is provided for 100 days of operation at the maximum production rate for the two oxide producto stated above. Capacity to store liquid products temporarily for 30 days of operation is also provided. The design for storage and shipment of uranium and plutonium is in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 70,10 CFR 73, and 14 applicable Department of Energy Orders. () DRP Process Liquid Recycle and Disposition. Contaminated water and acid used in the processes will be recovered, purified, and recycled to the extent practical. Water additions to the process will thus be minimized, and excess water will be decontaminated prior to release from the stack as a vapor. Radioactivity limits in the vaporised water are consistent with the design objectives for fission product emission. There are no radioactive liquid releases. O V 5.7-11
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 DRP Waste and Ef fluents The DRP will be capable of being operated and maintained within the environmental constraints imposed by Federal, state, and local regulations. This specifically includes consideration of the provisions of 10 CFR 20 and 40 CFR 190 for routine operations, and 10 CFR 100 for accident conditions. Consistent with these regulations, effluent control systems were designed to provide overall plant confinement factors when processing typical breeder reactor fuel as shown in Table 5.7-3. The annual effluent releases from the DRP as a result of processing CRBRP fuel after 150 days of decay are also shown in Table 5.7-3. DRP Waste Management Systems. The high-level liquid waste system is designed to accommodate the wastes resulting from the liquid I4 reprocessing of 150 metric tons per year of heavy metal. The waste storage capacity is designed for two years' processing capacity, concentrated to 200 gallons per ton of heavy metal. High-level liquid wastes are concentrated, solidified, and packaged for subsequent transfer to a Federal repository accordance with the requirements of Appendix F, 10 CFR 50. The current interpretation of anticipated repository guidelines is that the centerline temperature of the canistered waste after solidification (assumir.g solidified glass process) shall not exceed 800 C, the waste canisters shall not exceed 12 inches in diameter by 10 feet high, and the decay heat output of the individual canisters shall not exceed 5 kW at the time of shipment to a repository. O 5.7-12 1
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 Radioactive metal scrap originating from the fuel assemblies, process operations, and nonrepairable in-cell equipment will be consolidated and packaged for shipment to a Federal repository. The overall size, weight, capacity, etc., of waste shipping casks to be handled by the DRP are not yet established. Nonprocess, potentially contaminated wastes, such as change room showers, sink effluents, and fire-protection water discharges. are routed to a collection system for monitoring (and processing if required) to assure compliance with the effluent release requirements. All liquid wastes discharged to the environment will meet Federal and State requirements. All solid wastes that are potentially contaminated are inspected, processed or packaged, as required, and shipped to a suitable
)4 burial site.
Combustible wastes, including waste process organics. are treated by a suitable combustion process to reduce them to a noncom-bustible material for disposal. The remaining wastes will be packaged as required and sent to a suitable disposal site. EDYiXDDmental Impacts The fuel reprocessing plant presented in the PFES (WASH-1535) was assumed to have a processing capability of five metric tons of heavy metal (uranium plus plutonium) per day, which would permit the plant to serve about eighty LMFBR power plants, each having a capacity of 1000MWe. O 5.7-13
. e s Am:ndm nt XIV
; May 1982 Environmental impact and public health effects, due to radiological emissions that would cceult from normal as well abnormal (accidents) operations of the DRP, having a throughput capacity of 1/2 metric tons of heavy metal per day, will be significantly less than those impacts from the much larger capacity reprocessing plant (five metric tons per day) described in the PPES. However, impacts on a unit capacity basis (i.e.,
per MWe) would be essentially the same as those given in the PFES. I For the purpose of estimating atmospheric radiological releases from reprocessing CRBRP fuel, gaseous radioactive effluents were calculated by applying the confinement factors of the model reprocessing plant in WASH-1535 to the average annual CRBRP fuel 14 source term (see Table 5.7-3) . For comparison, we have also estimated the environmental impacts which would result where the CRBRP spent fuel reprocessed in the Development Reprocessing Plant (DRP). Table 5.7-3 shows that the radiological releases from reprocessing CRBRP fuel in the DRP are similar to those for the model reprocessing plant. The bounding reprocessing impacts, those from the DRP, are included in Table 5.7-1. Other effluents from the preprocessing plant, provided in Table 5.7-1, were estimated by apportioning the effluents of the model plant in WASH-1535 to the 12 metric ton / year throughput required for CRBRP. These are expected to bound the actual CRBRP reprocessing impacts regardless of what reprocessing a]ternative is eventually used. O 5.7-14
Amendment XIV May 1982 5.7.1.3 RADIOACTIVE WASTES PROM THE CRBRP FUEL CYCLE Radioactive wastes are a by-product of the CRBRP fuel cycle. Table 5.7-4 summarizes the types, quantities, key constituents, and disposition of the wastes from the CRBRP fuel cycle. Table 5.7-5 compares the quantities of wastes expected to be produced in the CRBRP fuel cycle with those of the once-through and uranium-only recycle fuel cycles for LWR's. The following discusses the truste generated at each step in ths fuel cycle and the environmental impacts from disposing of these wastes. Adequate supplies of depleted uranium in the form of UF 6 are i currently available at DOE enrichment plants to supply material for the CRBRP indefinitely. The depleted UF is left over from 6 production of enriched uranium for LWR's. No incremental waste generation nor environmental impacts are attributed to the CRBRP for production of this material. Operation of the CRBRP does not require the use of enriched 14 uranium for fuel material. This is an important difference between the LWR fuel cycle and the CRBRP fuel cycle. As such, the CRBRP fuel cycle generates no radioactive wastes nor environmental impacts from uranium production or enrichment. Conversion of depleted UF 6 to UO f r CRBRP blankets is planned 2 to be performed at the blanket fuel fabrication facility. As noted in section 5.7.1.1, both UO f r blanket fabrication and 2 for fabrication of core fuel would be converted. During UF 6 conversion, CaF will be formed. This is the most significant 2 waste generated at the blanket fuel fabrication plant. The CaF 2 will be contaminated with about 0.01 pCi/gm of uranium. The 11 MT/ year of CaF2 generated by the CRBRP fuel cycle is based O 5.7-15
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 on the production rate of one metric ton for each metric ton of uranium processed as given in section 3.2.5, NUREG-0116(9) . The CaF is expected to be disposed of at the blanket fabrication 2 facility in bulk form. Based on the solubility of CaF ny 2, uranium leached out would be present in the leachate at concentrations of about 10-3 of MPC, which is so low as to be insignificant as a potential radiation hazard (see WASH-1248, page E-16). Operation of the SAP line is expected to produce about 200 m 3 og transuranic contaminated wastes per year (6) . As CRBRP requires about 65 percent of the SAF line capacity, about 130 m3 of transuranic wastes will be generated from fabrication of the annual CRBRP core fuel. These wastes will be contaminated with uranium, plutonium, and daughter products to levels in excess of 10 nanocuries per gram. The CRBRP wastes will be partially compacted and packaged into about 145, 55 gallon drums annually. The transuranic wastes generated from operation of the SAF line 14 will be transported to an existing DOE transuranic waste storage site on the Hanford Reservation. Environmental impacts from operation of the Hanford Reservation are addressed in ERDA-1538,
" Waste Management Operations, Hanford Reservation," December 1975. CRBRP transuranic waste will be a small addition to over 155,000 m 3 of transuranic waste already in storage at the Hanford facility and will result in an insignificant incremental environmental impact compared with the totality of Hanford waste
- management.
As the LWR fuel cycle does not involve plutonium recycle, as yet, a key difference between the LWR and CRBRP fuel cycle is the generation of transuranic contaminated wastes from fuel fabrication. This difference is evident from Table 5.7-5. For the purpose of estimating the environmental impacts from this 5.7-16
Amendmsnt XIV May 1982 O(_/ unique CRBRP f uel cycle waste stream, it was assumed that- these wastes would be ultimately disposed of in a Federal respository. The environmental impacts f rom disposing of about 85,000 m3 of transuranic waste in the proposed Waste Isolation Pilot Plant (10) were apportioned to the 130 m3 annual generation rate for CRBRP, and included in Table 5.7-1. Wastes generated at the CRBR plant are addressed in section 3.5. Low-level wastes from the plant will be transported to a shallow land burial site for disposal. An estimate of the environmental impacts f rom disposal of these wastes is based on section 4.7.3.4 l of NUREG-0116 ( 9) . Disposal of this waste will require the commitment of about 0.006 acres of land annually. As indicated in the reference, the routine atmospheric ef fluents f rom disposal of low-level wastes are insignificant. 14
< O Appropriate fuel reprocessing capability is expected to be available in time to support the CRBRP f uel cycle. No need to supplement the approximately 4 years of spent fuel storage capacity at CRBRP with away from reactor storage is anticipated.
Thus, no wastes are identified from operation of such a facility to support the CRBRP f uel cycle. The types and quantities of waste in Table 5.7-5 from reprocessing were estimated based on the conceptual DRP design. The DRP is expected to generate about 25 m3 of miscellaneous low-level wastes annually in support of the CRBRP fuel cycle. These wastes will be generated from fuel storage, handling and cleaning operations prior to reprocessing. The key contaminants are short lived fission and activation products with a total activity level typically of 10Ci/m3 The low-level wastes will j contain less than 10 nanocuries per gram of transuranic contaminants. O 5.7-17
Amendment XIV May 1982 For the purpose of estimating environmental impacts, it is assumed that the low-level wastes will be fixed in concrete, packed in about 120, 55 gallon drums annually, and shipped to a shallow land burial facility for disposal. Based on the analysis ' in section 4.7.3 of NUREG-0116, the reprocessing plant low-level wastes will require the commitment of approximately 0.0025 acres of land annually and result in insignificant routine atmospheric effluents. Metal scrap waste is generated at the DRP consisting of hulls and hardware from fuel element and in-vessel component disassembly and nonrepairable in-cell equipment. The bulk of this waste, that from fuel element disassembly, will be contaminated with about 0.05 percent of residual fuel material and with activation products formed during irradiation. The metal scrap is expected g to have a total activity of about 4 X 10 5 Ci/m3 . For the purpose of estimating environmental impacts, the metal scrap is assumed to be partially compacted, packaged into about 102, 10 inch diameter by 10 feet high stainless steel cylinders annually and shipped to a Federal repository for disposal. Operation of the DRP also produces some transuranic contaminated wastes. Essentially all wastes produced from operation of the plant, except for fuel storage and handling, are assumed to be contaminated with greater than 10 nanocuries per gram of transuranics as well as fission and activation products. These wastes range from 1000 Ci/m 3 to 10 6 Ci/m 3 in total activity. For the purpose of estimating environmental impacts, these wastes are assumed to be fixed in concrete, packaged in 50, 55 gallon drums annually, and shipped to a federal repository for disposal. Approximately 1 m 3 of; solidified high-level waste is expected to be generated from reprocessing CRBRP fuel on an annual average O 5.7-18
Amendment XIV May 1982 basis. The high-level waste will be fixed in a matrix with a ( very low leach rate (such as borosilicate glass) and packaged in 12-inch diameter by 10 feet long stainless steel cylinders for disposal at a Federal repository. When overpacked for disposal, these cylinders occupy about 0.55 m 3 each. About six cylinders of high-level waste will be produced annually from CRBRP fuel reptocessing. The volume for disposal is, therefore, about 3.3 m 3 annually. The key constituents of CRBRP high-level waste are in Table 5.7-6. These were calculated to contain 10% of the tritium, 0.5% of the uranium and plutonium, and all of the non-volatile fission products and other transuranic elements. The fuel was conservatively assumed to be reprocesced 150 days after reactor discharge and the waste is stored as a liquid until solidification 1 year after discharge from the reactor. () NUREG-Oll6 estimates the environmental impacts from disposal of the transuranic and high-level wastes from reprocessing LWR spent 14 fuel in a uranium only recycle mode. For this study, the plutonium produced in the LWR is assumed to be disposed of with the high-level wastes in a geologic repository. The constituents of this high-level waste are shown for comparison to those generated from reprocessing CRBRP fuel in Table 5.7-6. These constituents were calculated to contain all of the non-volatile fission products and transuranic elements, 0.5 percent of the uranium and all of the plutonium for spent fuel 1 year after reactor discharge given in NUREG-Oll6, Appendix A. It is evident from Table 5.7-6 that most CRBRP high-level waste constituents are enveloped by the constituents of LWR high-level wastes from U-only recycle. There are three exceptions. Ru-103 and Cm-242 have relatively short half lives and can be expected to decay to negligible levels before any significant release
) would be anticipated from the waste package. The third is 5.7-19
Am:ndment XIV Mny 1982 Am-241. Am-241 is a daughter product of the much shorter half-life Pu-241, of which the LWR waste has much more than that from CRBRP. As such, the Am-241 in LWR wastes will surpass that in CRBRP wastes in less than 1 year. The environmental impacts of disposal of CRBRP high-level wastes are therefore expected to be similar to those from the LWR high-level wastes given in NUREG-Oll6. Similarly, the environmental impacts frcm geologic disposal of transuranic contaminated and metal scrap waste f rom LWR fuel reprocessing envelope the impacts from disposal of similar CRBRP wastes. The impacts included in Table 5.7-1 for geologic disposal of fuel reprocessing plant wastes are those calculated in section 4.4 of NUREG 0116. 14 The DRP does not vent all of the Kr-85 and I-129 in the CRBRP spent fuel to the atmosphere. Instead, Kr-85 is captured and implanted in a metal (nickel-lanthanum alloy) matrix by a sputtering process.Ill) The metal matrix containing the krypton is loaded into 9 inch diameter by 65 inch high steel cylinders. Approximately one cylinder will be generated for every 28 years of CRBRP operation. These cylinders are expected to be disposed of in shallow dry wells at a federal geologic repository. j l l I-129 will be fixed in concrete as barium iodate and packaged in about 0.05, 55 gallon drums annually. This waste stream will be sent to a Federal repository for disposal. 9 5.7-20
Amendment XIV May 1982 () For the purpose of estimating the environmental impacts of waste management in Table 5.7-1, the captured Kr-85 is assumed to be retained within the metal matrix for a period of 100 years. After this time, the remaining krypton (about 55 curies) is assumed to be released to the atmosphere. Disposal of the very long half-life (1.72 x 10 7 years) but low specific activity I-129 should not result in a significant incremental environmental impact over those estimated from disposal of other wastes in the Federal repository. 14 The nonradiological environmental effects of the shipment of materials from the CRBRP fuel cycle are similar to those characteristic of the trucking industry in general. The CRBRP fuel cycle and waste transportation has been estimated to add 450,000 miles of transportation, including the return shipments
- of empty casks, shipping containers, and protective overpacks.
s_- Based upon NUREG-0116, the emissions from transportation are presented in Table 5.7-1. I l 5.7-21
Am:ndmnnt XIV May 1982 5.7.1.4 DOSES PROM CRBRP FUEL CYCLE Doses from Facility Operations CRBRP core fuel fabrication is planned for the SAF line. The SAF line is a portion of the FMEF. For the purpose of estimating atmospheric releases and doses from CRBRP core fuel fabrication, those resulting from operation of the entire FMEP were conservatively used. Actual releases and doses due to CRBRP core fuel fabrication would be a portion of those from the SAF line, which are a portion of those from FMEP operation. Routine atmospheric releases of plutonium from FMEF are given in the following table. i Annual Release (6) Isotopic (6) l 1spippa (Ci/yr) Composition f%) 8x10 -6 Pu-236 9 Pu-238 2.0x10 6 0.5 !14 2.2x10 6 4.3x10 - Pu-239 72. Pu-240 2.2x10 -6 20. Pu-241 3.0x10 ~4 6. Pu-242 3.0x10 -9 1.5 These releases are based on the above isotopic composition, release factors (from the SAF line) of 10~3, and cleanup factors of 1.25x10-0* (for 3 HEPA filters in series, where each HEPA filter would have a separate tested efficicncy of 99.95%). The plutonium throughput used was 4 MT/yr, the total FMEP capacity.
~
There are no liquid radioactivity releases associated with SAF line operation.
- This is a consgrvative assump n. Actual cleanup factors would O range from 10~ to 1.25 x 10 5.7-22
1 Amendment XIV May 1982 Routine atmospheric releases of uranium (total FMEF throughput of 6.0 MT/yr of uranium) and other radionuclides from the SAF line were calculated on essentially the same basis and are given below. Note that although depleted uranium is expected to be used for CRBRP fuel, natural uranium was conservatively used for those calculations. Annual Release 161 ' Isotopic 161 Isotops (Ci/yr) Composition (%) U-232 - - U-234 5.8x10 -11 5x10-3 U-235 2.5x10-12 0.72 U-236 - - U-238 5.4x10 -11 99.27 Th-231 <2.5x10 -12 _ Tu-234 <5.4x10 -11 - Pa-234 <5.4x10 11 _ Accidental releases of radioactivity and resulting consequences 14 are given in Reference 7. The FMEP annual 50-year dose commitments to maximum individuals and the general population within 50 miles of the FMEF are as follows:
- Maximum Individual Population Oraan Dose (millirem) Dose (Man-rem)
Whole Body 1.5x10-34 4.6x10 -3 Thyroid 2.2x10 3 9.0x10 -4 Lung 2.9x10 3 1.1x10 -2 Bone 2 Liver 9.5x10 3 5.3x10 4.0x10 2 2.1x10-i O 5.7-23
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 Natural background and medical exposures would give an annual average exposure to individuals of about 150 millirem. The annual whole body population doses due to natural radioactivity would be about 25,000 man-rem for the year 2000 population within 50 miles of the FMEF. Blanket fuel fabrication for the CRBRP will be carried out at a yet-to-be selected commercial facility. For purposes of this assessment, it is assumed that the commercial facility selected will have three stages of HEPA filters (with an efficiency of 9 99.9% per staae) , yielding an overall confinement factor of 10 . Atmospheric releases for blanket fuel fabrication calculated on this basis are given in the following table. 14 Annual Release Isotope (Ci/yr) U-234 - U-235 3.2x10-11 U-236 - U-238 2.5x10-9 Th-231 <3.2x10-11 Th-234 <2.5x10-9 Pa-234 <2.5x10 -9 O 5.7-24
^
Amendment XIV May 1982 f3 (_) The releases are based on a 7.5 MT/yr throughput and isotopic composition of 0.2% U-235 and 99.8% U-238. This 7.5 MT/yr throughput is less than 1% of the annual throughput of the model fuel fabrication plant described in WASH-1248 (900 MT/yr) , which could handle the fuel fabrication requirements of 26 light water reactors annually. Thus, CRBRP blanket f.uel fabrication environmental impacts, on an annual basis, would be about 1/4 of the comparable impacts normallized to the model LWR fuel requirement given in WASH-1248. The 7.5 MT/yr throughput provides the CRBRP radial blanket requirements. Although not fabricated into fuel rods at the blanket fabrication facility, an additional 3.5 MT/yr of uranium dioxide would be converted from UF to 00 at this facility to 6 2 supply the core fuel and axial blanket requirements. The total U0 14 2 conversion throughput would therefore be 11 MT annually.
- The higher required capacity for UO conversion would increase 2
the land used, the gaseous release of F, the liquid chemical releases, and the liquid radiological releases of the blanket fuel fabrication facility. These impacts in Table 5.7-1 were calculated to be 1/3 of the comparable impacts normalized to the model LWR fuel requirement given in WASH-1248. Annnal 50-year dose commitments to maximum individuals and the general population within 50 miles of the model LMFBR fuel reprocessing plant in WASH-1535 for atmospheric releases given in Table 5.7 . would be as follows: Maximum Individual Population Organ Dose (millirem) Dose (Man-rem) Whole Body 0.06 1.01 Thyroid 0.87 9.0 (~S Lung 0.10 1.02 (_) Bone Liver 0.15 0.08 2.33 1.38 5.7-25
Am:ndment XIV May 1982 Natural background exposures would give an annual average exposure to individuals in the vicinity of the model plant site l of about 102 millirem. (12) The annual whole body population dose ! due to natural radioactivity for the population within a 50 mile l radius of the model plant is estimated to be 1.02x10 5 man-rem.(12) l t I It should be noted that there would be no liquid releases of i 1 radioactivity from the model plant. The C-14 released would j produce a world-wide population dose commitment, over all time, j of 37 man-rem, based on a constant world population of 6x109 people.(13) The doses associated with reprocessing spent CRBRP fuel in the 14 DRP were calculated assuming the model fuel reprocessing plant site described in WASH-1535. Conservative confinement factors were chosen to estimate radioactivity releases. Table 5.7-3 l gives information on confinement factors and atmospheric releases g of radioactivity associated with reprocessing CRBRP fuel in the . DRP. Annual 50-year dose commitments to maximum individuals and the ; general population within 50 miles of the DRP at the model LMFBR , fuel reprocessing plant site for these atmospheric releases would l be as follows: . Maximum Individual Population DISAD Dass (millirem) Dose ( Man- r em) Whole Body 0.06 1.01 Thyroid 3.9 81.2 Lung 0.10 1.02 ~ Bone 0.15 2.33 Liver 0.08 1.38 O 5.7-26
Amendmnnt XIV M:y 1982 Natural background exposures would give an annual average exposure to individuals in the vicinity of the model plant site of about 102 millirem. (12) The annual whole body population dose due to natural radioactivity for the population within a 50 mile radius of the DRP is estimated to be 102,000 man-rem. (12) It should be noted that there would be no liquid releases of radioactivity from the DRP. The C-14 released would produce a world-wide population dose commitment, over all time, of 3.7x10 3 man-rem, based on a constant world population of 6x10 9 people.(13) Note that the DRP doses differ only slightly from those resulting from the model reprocessing plant, primarily due to use of different confinement factors for C-14 and I-129. Impacts from high level waste product solidification are included () within the total impact from operation of the reprocessing facility. 14 Doses from Transportation Impacts from transportation of new core assemblies (based on 84/yr of fuel and 72/yr of blanket) to CRBRP, from operation of CRBRP and from transportation of spent j core assemblies from CRBRP are identified in Section 5.3. l This dose impact conservatively assumes that no partial shipments occur, and that all shipments contain 6 assemblies. Hence, the number of assemblies assumed in the radiation impact is greater than that described in Section 3.8. The transportation of irradiated fuel assemblies by rail, as described in Section 3.8, has been selected over shipment by truck as a result of a cost / benefit analysis. The comparison has been made between a multiple-assembly, rail-car transported cask () and a single-assembly, truck transported cask. Shipment using a single-assembly, truck-transported cask was eliminated from 5.7-27
+ .-y - --
Am:ndmnnt XIV May 1982 consideration due to the higher number of shipments required. This higher number of shipments increased (1) the operational costs of mating the cask both to CRBRP and to the fuel reprocessor, (2) the radiation exposure to the personnel handling the cask at both the CRBRP and the fuel reprocessing site, and (3) the transportation radiation exposure. Furthermore, weight limitations imposed on a truck, with resultant limits on shield thicknesses, would require decay of the irradiated fuel assemblies beyond 100 days. The doses from transportation of wastes from reprocessing are given in Table 5.7-7. The transuranic wastes from core fuel fabrication are to be 4 stored at the DOE's Hanford Reservation. Transportation from the fuel fabrication plant to the waste management site occurs over a route completely within the Hanford Reservation. As there are no g permanent inhabitants along this route, there will be only minimal public exposure from this transportation phase. However, to be conservative, doses from transportation of the transuranic wastes from the core fuel fabricator to a repository have been calculated and are presented in Table 5.7-7. The calculational approach identified in NUREG-0170 was used to determine the population doses due to all different phases of the fuel cycle. The assumptions made for these calculations are as follows: O 5.7-28
Amendment XIV May 1982 Shipment of New Fuel from Fabricator by Truck (SST) High Med. Low Population Population Population Shipment Parameters Areas Areas Areas Average Speed (MPH) 30 50 55 Population Dgnsity (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 One way traffic per hr. 3,000 800 500 14 Additional Assumptions: () o Fuel / food stops in population areas of 200/ mile 2, 4 hr/ day. o 14 shipments / year, 2500 miles o Shielding of new fuel gives same external dose as fog spent fuel shipping cask. Dose Rate Factor - K = 10 o Four lane traffic exists only in high population zones. This contributes 2% of high-population traffic. o Shipment duration 2.5 days. O 5.7-29
Amandzent XIV May 1982 Shipment of_New Blanket from Fabricator by Truck High Med. Low Population Population Population Shipment Parameters Areas Areas Areas Average Speed (MPH) 30 50 55 Population Density (person / mile #) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 One way traffic per hr. 3,000 800 500 Additional Assumptions: 14 o All stops in low population areas for rest. o Fuel / food stops in med-population areas, I hr/ day o 14 hr/ day lay over o 12 shipments / year, 2500 miles o Dose Rate Factor K=10 o Four lane traffic exists only in high population zones. This contributes 2% of high-population zones. ; i o Shipment duration 5 days : O 5.7-30
Amund;2cnt XIV Mr.y 1982 Shipment of TRU from Fuel Fabrication Plant by Truck High Med. Low Population Population Population Shipment Parameters Areas Areas Areas Average Speed (MPH) 30 50 55 Population Dgnsity (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 One way traffic per hr. 3,000 800 500 14 Additional Assumptions: o All stops in low population areas for rest. o Fuel / food stops in med-population areas,1 hr/ day o 14 hr/ day layover o 5 shipments / year, 2500 miles o Dose Rate Factor K=10 3 o Four lane traffic exists only in high population zones. This contributes 2% of high-population traffic. o Shipment duration 5 days. O V 5.7-31
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 Shipment of Spent Puel from CRBRP by_ Rail High Med. Low Topulation Population Population Shipment Parameters Areas Areas Areas Average Speed (MPH) 15 25 25 Population Dgnsity (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 Stop Duration (hrs) 0 0 36 14 Additional Assumptions: o 14 shipments / year, 2500 miles o Dose Rate Factor K=10 3 o Per NUREG-0170, on-link persons dose considered negligible.
)
i i 1 l 1 5.7-32
Amendm:nt XIV May 1982 () Shipment of Spent Blanket from CRBR by Rail High Med. Low Population Population Population Shipment Parameters Areas Areas Areas Average Speed (MPH) 15 25 25 Population Dgnsity (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 14 Stop Duration (hrs) 0 0 36 Additional Assumptions: o 12 shipments / year, 2500 miles o Dose Rate strength Factor to compared - nospent creditfuel. taken for g) eduction in source (K=10 o Per NUREG-0170, on-link persons dose considered negligible. O 5.7-33
Am:ndment XIV May 1982 shipmgnt of Irradiated Control and Removable Radial Shiels) Assemblies from CRBRP by Rail High Med. Low Population Population Population Shipment Parameters Areas Areas Areas Average Speed (MPH) 15 25 25 Population Dgnsity (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 14 Stop Duration (hrs) 0 0 36 Additional Assumptions: o 4.5 shipments / year, 2500 miles o Dose Rate Factor K=10 o Per NUREG-0170, on-link persons dose considered negligible. O 5.7-34
Amendment XIV May 1982 Shipment of PuO from Reprocessing Plant by Truck ( SST) High Med. Low Population Population Population Shipment Parameters Areas Areas Areas Average Speed (MPH) 30 50 55 Population Dgnsity , (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 l One way traffic 14 per br. 3000 800 500 1 Additional Assumptions: () o Fuel / food stops in population areas of 200/ mile 2, 4 hr/ day o 14 shipments /yr, 3000 miles o Dose Rate Factor K=10 3 o Four lane traffic exists only in high population zones. This contributes 2% of high-population traffic. o Shipment duration 3 days 1 O 5.7-35
Am:nd_2Cnt XIV May 1982 , ShipEnt of HLW from RepI0 cogging Plant by Rail High Med. Low ' Population Population Population Shipment Parant2IA _. Areas ___ Areas Areas Average Speed (MPil) 15 25 25 i Population Dgnsity (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 14 Stop Duration (hrs) 0 . 0 36 Additional Assumptions: o o 3 shipments / year, 2500 miles Assume 36 hour layover in train yards, 65 person / mile 2 h l i 1 l 4 O l 5.7-36
i ,
. , i
\ Amsnd2Gnt XIV g May 1982 t ,
f i Shipment _of_TEU_and_ Metal _ Scrap _from_Beprocessing_ Plant _by_ Truck High Med. Low Population Population Population Shipment _Parametera __ Arena __ Arena __ Arena Average Speed (MPil) 30 50 55 l Population Dgnsity (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 t
' 14
\' One way traffic per hr. 3000 800 500
,i. i Additional Assumptions o 24 shipment / year, 2500 miles o Dose Rate Factor K=10 3 o 7 containers / shipment for TRU, 6 containers / shipment for
- / ,
metal scrap t o All stops in low population areas for rest. o Fuel / food stops in med-population areas,1 hr/ day o 14 hrs / day layover O o Four lane traffic exists only in high population zones. This contributes 2% of high-population traffic. o Shipment duration 5 days I i l i ( 5.7-37 l L
Am:nd: nt XIV May 1982 ShismsnLDI_LLW_f1Dm Reprocessing _Elant by Truck High Med. Low Population Population Population Shipment _EaramSt2IR __Arean .. Areas Areas Average Speed (MPil) 30 50 55 Population Dgnsity (person / mile ) 10,000 2,000 15 Fraction of distance traveled 0.05 0.05 0.90 One way traffic per hr. 3000 800 500 14 Additional Assumptions: o All stops in low population areas for rest h o Fuel / food stops in med-population areas,1 hr/ day o 14 hr/ day layover o 2 shipments / year, 2500 miles o Dose Rate Factor K=10 3 o Four lane traffic exists only in high population zones. This contributes 2% of high-population traffic. o Shipment duration 5 days 3 o 882 ft 3 of material / year 0 0.3 Ci/ft o 60 drums per truck O 5.7-38 l
Am:nd2Cnt XIV M2y 1982 Doses to maximum individuals were calculated for the two different modes of transportation, truck and rail shipment. For truck shipments, the maximum allowable dose in the cab of an exclusive-use truck is 2 mrem /hr. The dose rate at 3 feet from the surf ace of a cask containing spent fuel is 10 mrem /hr. Assuming a crew member spends 9 hrs. per day in the trnck cab and 1/2 hr. per day inspecting the shipment, the done is calculated per trip as: (trip /yr) (day / trip) [(9 hrs / day) (2 mrem /hr)+(0.5 hr/ day) (10 mrem /hr)] For rail shipment, it is assumed that the maximum individual 14 would be a person in the yard where the train stops for rest. Assuming this person was three feet from the cask for the full duration of the stop, the maximum individual dose would be calculated as: (10 mrem /hr) (stop duration) The results of the calculations are presented in Table 5.7-7. O 5.7-39
Am:nd2 nt XIV M y 1982 5.7.1.5 SAFEGUARDS AND SECURITY The principal fuel cycle operations that will support the CRBRP are fabrication of mixed-oxide fuel for the reactor core, fabrication of depleted uranium fuel for the radial blanket, reprocessing of spent fuel, transportation between the facilities and sto age or disposal of radioactive wastes. The safeguards / security measures to be employed at the supporting facilities and during transportation are individually described. The CRBRP must meet NRC requirements specified in the Code of Federal Regulations,10CFR 50, 70 and 73. Each licensee is required to submit written plans and procedures for meeting these requirements to NRC. Upon approval, these become conditions of the specific license. It is assumed that the mixed-oxide fuel for the CRBRP will be fabricated in DOE facilities and the spent fuel will be reprocessed in a DOE facility, subject to the safeguards / security 14 requirements specified in DOE Orders 5630, 5631 and 5632. PuO 2 and f resh mixed-oxide fuel will be transported using DOE's Safe Secure Transport System. The objectives of both NRC and DOE are "to provide high assurance that activities involving special nuclear material are not inimical to the common defense and security and do not constitute an unreasonable risk to the public health and safety." In 10C PR7 3.1 ( a ) , NRC describes, in broad terms, design basis threats for sabotage, theft and diversion. Performance requirements are further explained in 10CFR73.25 and 45.
- Safeguards for the CRBRP itself are described in Section 13.7 of the CRBRP PSAR 5.7-40
Am:ndm:nt XIV Mny 1982 ( ') DOE material control, accounting and physical protection are required by the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974 to provide safeguards and security comparable to that required by NRC. DOE Order 5632.2, paragraph 5 states: " Policy and Objectives: It is the DOE policy to physically protect all special nuclear material against theft. This order is designed to facilitate effective safeguards and security systems through graded, performance-evaluated physical protection requirements for special nuclear mr.terial. The minimum standards have been so designed as to satisfy the policy requirements that the effectiveness of nuclear safeguards and security systems in DOE activities provide comparable effectiveness with that required of licensees by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission". DOE f acility operators, like NRC licensees, are required to maintain updated safeguards and security procedures manuals. These procedures and actual performance are reviewed and () monitored by DOE safeguards and security personnel. threats are useful for the drafting of procedures and for Design basis 14 preliminary assessment of performance. DOE conducts on-going studies of potential adversary motivations, characteristics, and capabilities and supports a substantial program of research on and implementation of safeguards / security techniques and of assessment methodology. Material access and vital areas are located within buildings of substantial construction. Except during processing, fuel containing plutonium is to be stored in vaults or vault-like rooms. The buildings that contain material access and vital areas are located within a protected area that is surrounded by two chain-link fences, surmounted with barbed wire. The entrances for personnel and vehicles to the protected area are under the contral and supervision of security personnel in a 5.7-41
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 hardened security post. A second hardened security post is located within the protected area. Outside the fence and the protected area is an isolation zone, so that activities outside of the fer~e can be observed, and a controlled area that is posted as Government Property. The protected and isolation zone are provided with intrusion detectors, lights, and CCTV or other means to detect intruders. DOE employees will have "0" clearances. Contractor employees will have "L" or "Q" clearances, depending on task assignments and responsibilities. Only authorized personnel are to be permitted to enter the protected area and only those having assignments within material access or vital areas can enter them. Persons, vehicles and packages entering the protected and inner areas are to be searched for contraband and similarly, on leaving, for concealed SNM. Redundant communications are provided between the security posts, 14 security personnel on assignment elsewhera, and with off-site security forces. At the DOE facilities under construction, there will be other DOE or contractor security personnel, as well as local law enforcement agency and state police personnel, nearby. The material control and accounting systems for the pr^ posed mixed-oxide fuel fabrication and reprocessing facilities will exploit the latest advances in remotely controlled, automated processing and near-real-time accounting techniques in the interest of quality control, safety, radiation protection, and l safeguards. Personnel will only have access to the fuels when feeding materials into the process or loading out the products or when small samples are handled for chemical analysis, Special procedures and surveillance will be employed to deter and detect diversion (exit searches provide redundancy). The on-line nondestructive assay instrumentation will provide timely 5.7-42
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 detection of any abrupt. or more protracted, loss of SNM. Items such as containers of PuO 2 or fresh or spent fuel assemblies will have identifying symbols. Seals will be employed where appropriate. Process lines will be shut down and cleaned out for physical inventories periodically, at which time any nuclear material, which may remain as " hold-up" in the equipment, will be confirmed by NDA measurements. Fabrication of CRBRP Fuel Two general types of fuel will be employed, driver fuel rods which contain plutonium in mixed-oxide pellets in the center section and depleted uranium-oxide pellets in both end sections and the blanket rods containing only depleted uranium-oxide pellets. The former will be fabricated at DOE facilities on the Hanford, Washington reservation. The latter will be fabricated 14 at commercial facilities. Safeguards concerns pertain only to O the fuel rods and fuel assemblies which contain mixed-oxide (MOX). The DOE supplied plutonium may require conversion to stoichiometric plutonium dioxide (PuO2 ) in an as yet undetermined DOE facility. A candidate facility for PuO conversion is the 2 Purex Reprocessing facility at the 200 East site of the Hanford reservation. The PuO 2 will be nechanically blended with uranium-dioxide (UO 2 )' and processed into pellets. The pellets will be inserted into fuel rods and the rods will be sealed and examined in the Secure Automated Fabrication (SAF) line, which is located within the Fuel and Materials Examination Facility (FMEF). 5.7-43
Am:ndm:nt XIV M;y 1982 The finished MOX fuel rods are to be transported to a third f acility, the High Energy Development Laboratory (Building 308) , where the rods may be examined by NDA. and mechanical operations will be performed to produce fuel assemblies. The contract guard forces at all of the Hanford sites are managed by the Rockwell Hanford contractor. The whole reservation is posted Government Property. Guard posts and patrols communicate with each other and with the security office in the DOE Richland Operations Office, so that reactions to threats will be efficiently coordinated. Significant amounts of SNM are frequently transported between buildings and between the security areas. Such transfers are I4 mede in dedicated vehicles with armed patrol escorts to meet or exceed the security requirements of DOE Order 5632. Since the exact location and design of the conversion process are not determined at this time. the material control and accounting activities can only be described generically. Like the pellet fabrication equipment, which has been designed and is under construction, the chemical conversion stages and calcine oven O . 5.7-44
Amendmant XIV May 1982 will be designed for remote operation and control and equipped ( with instrumentation for unit process material accounting. Whenever operators have access to the materials, they will be accompanied by material control and health physics personnel. The feed and products will be measured by weight, and samples will be analyzed for SNM concentration. Feed, product, scrap and waste will also be measured by non-destructive analysic (NDA) . Probably the process area will be treated as one material balance area, with an item control storage vault for items not being processed. The equipment will be shut down and cleaned out periodically for physical inventory. Items (feed, product, scrap) will be counted and verified by NDA as frequently as may be desired. The on line unit process accountancy data and bulk / chemical analysis data will be continuously fed to a computer and analyzed for abrupt and () protracted losses. For an annual throughput of 1500 kg or less of plutonium, the daily throughput would be about 5 kg. 14 An often quoted study I14) of 1975, based on achievable measurement accuracies and frequent draindowns, rather than the use of on-line NDA, suggested that the limit of error of the material unaccounted for (LEMUF) should be approximately: LEMUF
% of throuchput kilograms l
l l 1 week 1.5% 0.5 kg 1 month 0.5 0.7 kg 6 months 0.3 2.25 kg 1 year 0.2 3 kg l 5.7-45 l l - _ -. - - - _ _ _ . _ __ - . _ .
Am:ndz:nt XIV May 1982 Many simulated studies of the DYMAC system, and experience at a somewhat similar instrumented process at Los Alamos, suggest that the shorter time sensitivities for loss or diversion may be rather more sensitive than this. The fabrication of CRBRP Mixed Oxide (MOX) fuel is planned for the Secure Automated Fabrication (SAF) line which will be installed in the Fuels and Materials Examination Facility. Welded fuel pins from the SAF line will then be assembled into fuel assemblies in Building 308 at DOE's Hanford Reservation. The SAF process line will be fully automated from the blending of powders through the sintering and examination of pellets, and equipped with sensors so that material balances can be drawn cbout individual processes and for the whole material balance area every day. Whenever operators have access to the niaterials, they will be accompanied by material control and health physics personnel. 14 It is planned to analyze the PuO containers received from the 2 conversion facility using a calorimeter and a gamma-ray neutron instrument. Finished rods will be scanned, using active interrogation, to measure the plutonium content and the location and quality of the MOX pel]ets. Scrap and waste containers will be measured by NDA. Samples of the PuO intermediate 2 f**d' products, pellets and recoverable scrap will also be measured by weight and analysis of samples. The equipment will be shut down and cleaned out for physical inventory periodically. At that time, the plutonium which remains trapped in the pipes and vessels will be analyzed by NDA survey instruments. The previously referenced study (14) predicted sensitivities to loss or diversion for a MOX fuel fabrication facility which are very 5.7-46
Amandm:nt XIV M2y 1982 () similar to those given previously for a conversion facility. Again, simulation studies and experience with DYMAC at a similar process area at Los Alamos suggest that the short and intermediate time (1 day to 1 month) sensitivity of the system being installed at the SAF line should be somewhat superior to this. Actual measurement data and material balance calculations for an operating MOX fuel fabrication facility indicate that the LEMUF for one year of operation was 0.2% or less of the annual ' throughput.(15) This suggests the capability to detect diversion of 3 kg of plutonium in one year. The SAF line will incorporate provisions for safeguards and accountability of SNM throughout the fabrication process. The following features will be included: 14 One Material Balance Area (MBA) will be established on the 70-ft. level of FMEP containing the SAF line. The SAF Line MBA shall generate data that details the quantity of SNM received into the MBA, shipped from the MBA or remaining in the MBA. All SNM entering and leaving the MBA shall be measured by both the shipper and receiver, unless the SNM is in a container sealed with a Tamper Indicating Device (TID). SNM will be carefully characterized before it enters the SAF Line MBA. SNM will travel through the processing operations using item identification and weight as the primary accountability measurements. In instances where weight and item identification do not sufficiently identify the SNM (i.e., scrap and waste), nondestructive examination of the material will be required. O v 5.7-47
Am:nda nt XIV Mny 1982 Unit Process Accountability areas (UPAAs) will be established around each processing step within the SAF Line MBA. Generally, these will coincide with boundaries established for the purpose of criticality control. All SNM entering and leaving UPAAs will be measured. When SNM leaving a UPAA enters another UPAA through a common point, only a single measurement is required. Data on all SNM movement within the SAF Line MBA will be available such that a material balance can be drawn around each UPAA within 24 hours. IIADDDortation of Fresh MOX Fuel Under contract with Project Management Corporation fo; the CRBRP, DOE maintains ownership of the fuel for the initial core and first four reloads, and is responsible for delivery of the fuel 14 to the plant. Since October li'6, DOE has required that all shipments of more than two kilograms of plutonium or uranium-233, or five kilograms of uranium-235 in high-enriched uranium, should be made in Safe Secure Transport vehicles with armed escorts and monitored by the DOE radio-communication system. The vehicles are similar to those being used for secure transport of nuclear weapons, and provide a level of assurance in excess of that associated with commercial shipment (10CFR 73.25 .37). The CRBRP fresh fuel shipments will use the DOE system, which includes the following security measures:
- 1. The fresh fuel will be carried in a special penetration-resistant vehicle. The vehicle includes active and passive barriers to protect the cargo, crew compartment armor, and means to immobilize the vehicle.
O 5.7-48
, Amsndm*nt XIV M y 1982 s 2. The cargo vehicle itself contains two reliable and trustworthy armed couriers (both drivers) and will be accompanied by a minimum of one escort vehicle carrying three additional armed couriers (all drivers).
- 3. Couriers are carefully selected for reliability, trustworthiness and physical fitness, and are specially trained, equipped, and armed.
- 4. Shipments are under the direct control of a central dispatcher. A system for redundant, all-weather communication between shipments anywhere in the continental United States and the dispatcher is in operation. It provides for 2-way communications, and for emergency signaling under duress. Communication is by means of an g
! array of widely-spaced transmitter-receiver stations connected by land lines to the central dispatcher, with
' ( automatic switching and acknowledgement. Both escort and cargo vehicles can communicate with the dispatcher, and routine reports are submitted at frequent intervals.
- 5. Specific standing arrangements are in effect with state police and certain other local law-enforcement agencies to provide timely response in emergencies. Studies have been made to determine expected response times at various locations; operations have been geared to realistic response-time estimates. Liaison is maintained with other Federal agencies to facilitate further support in extreme emergencies.
1 5.7-49
- - - -i
Amendment XIV May 1982 O Spent _Euel_ Transportation Irradiated (spent) fuel removed from CRBRP represents a small incremental risk over other fuel cycle operations. The spent fuel is hot, both radiologically and thermally, and therefore requires special equipment for even the simplest handling operations. The material is highly unattractive as a target for diversion, since chemical and mechanical operations requiring expensive complex facilities and equipment are required to reduce it to a usable form. Spent fuel assemblies would be transported and protected in large casks weighing many tons. Irradiated fuel assemblies would be contained in a removable canister inserted in the cask. The fuel casks will be designed to be transported on a 100-ton capacity railroad flatcar. The cask / car combination will be designed in accordance with DOT and NRC regulations, which include provision for crash protection and passive cooling capability. Specific elements which will serve to protect the spent CRBRP fuel while in transit in the cask include multiple g heavy steel shells, a thick, dense gamma (radiation) shield, a liquid jacket and sacrificial impact absorbers. These protection elements, while designed to enable the irradiated fuel to withstand crash, also provide substantial protection against sabotage. Even though the CRBRP casks would be very massive and difficult l targets for sabotage, the threat of sabotage still exists. The diversion of CRBRP spent fuel for conversion of its plutonium to weapons-grade material is not considered a likely scenario since complex, chemical and mechanical equipment and facilities would i be required for this conversion. l Casks designed to carry LWR spent fuel have been shown through experiment to provide significant protection from credible, intentional destcuctive acts. Experiments have shown that these casks do limit consequences of intentional acts to levels
.507-5@
Am:nd2snt XIV May 1982 O considerably less than those that had been estimated using conservative engineering judgment and to levels that are less than the consequences of the explosive-blast associated with the intentional act, itself. It is likely that the CRBRP spent fuel casks will be even more massive and difficult to penetrate than LWR casks. In any case, since the spent fuel will be owned and shipped by the Department of Energy, the CRBRP spent fuel shipments will be subject to physical protection requirements equivalent to those of the NRC found in 10CFR73.37. The purpose of these requirements is to minimize the chances of a successful, intentional destructive act. Radioactive _ Wastes 14 g Because of the low concentration of plutonium and uranium in (M
\- radioactive wastes, wastes are not considered attractive for diversion purposes. However, there are certain inherent safeguards features within radioactive waste handling and management procedures.
High level radioactive waste (HLW) will be stored within the physical security bounds of the reprocessing plant prior to shipment. Due to the relatively high radioactivity and thermal generation associated with HLW, transport to a repository will be accomplished in a similar fashion to spent fuel. At the repository, the physical security of the site as well as the remote location of the wastes deep underground should ef5ectively deter diversion. Similarly, transuranic and low level wastes will be packaged in DOT approved shipping containers and transported from points of origin to disposal facilities, where they will be handled within exisiting physical security systems. O 5.7-51
Am:ndm:nt XIV M;y 1982 Chemical ReproGE11D9 The safeguards provisions of the reprocessing facility are expected to be similar to those for the model facility in WASH-1535 or those of the Demonstration Reprocessing Plant (DRP) described below. The safeguards system for the DRP will provide both physical protection and nuclear material control and accounting capabilities to satisfy Federal (NRC and DOE) regulatory requirements. In addition to traditional safeguards capabilities, the system will provide for the protection and control of classified matter and information, and the DRP plant and property (i.e., Government property). The system includes mechanisms and provisions for deterrence, detection, delay, communications, assessment, accounting, control, and response as required to meet the above regulations plus anticipated future requirements. The DRP physical protection system includes 14 security zones, facility architectural and design features, personnel and vehicle access control, intrusion detection and assessment, automated alarm reporting, surveillance, communications, and computer security. Physical security zones include an isolation zone, a protected zone, a hardened area, no access areas, material access areas, vital areas and limited access areas. The isolation zone is an open area surrounding the protected zone except where support facilities for personnel / vehicle / rail egress and ingress control are provided. It will ensure that only authorized entry is made to the protected zone and will detect unauthorized entry attempts. This zone will be bounded by two chain link fences and will be clear of all objects that could conceal or shield an individual. O 5.7-52
Am:ndacnt XIV May 1982 () The isolation zone will be equipped with intrusion detection equipment and closed-circuit television (CCTV) to allow rapid reviewing and assessment of this zone. This zone also has a vehicle barrier, exterior to the outer of the two zone fences, designed to prevent forced entry with automobiles or light trucks. The protected zone is the area totally enclosed by the isolation zone that contains the Process Building (the hardened Process Building shell included), the open area between the Process Building and the isolation zone boundary fence and any other support structures within the area surrounded by the isolation zone. The protected zone is further subdivided by the hardened area. The hardened area is the portion of the Process Building enclosed within a tornado missile barrier. This includes the hardened 14 I () shell of the main Process Building and the hardened control centers. Normal and routine entry is restricted through a hardened guard station, at the hardened shell perimeter. The facility architectural and design features assure that significant quantities of SNM are physically separated from all personnel during normal operations, and access control to the security areas is provided. The natural phenomena barrier that i encloses most of the Process Building is a major barrier of the
- safeguards system. The limited number of entrances to this hardened area controls access to the Process Building.
l The entry-control system will allow surveillance, monitoring and control of personnel, vehicles and materials to and from the l O 5.7-53 l
Am:ndacnt XIV May 1982 controlled zone, the protected zone, the Process Building, and the hardened areas. Vehicle inspection portals exist at entries to the protected zone to allow search of vehicles prior to entry and upon exit. Personnel access portals exist at entry and exit ways of security areas. A defense-in-depth concept for physical security depends on the use of electronic devices to detect intruders at each level of defense. Alarms given by the system are both audible and visual and all are raceived at the safeguards control center and the secondary alarm station. The intrusion detection system consists of exterior and interior intrusion detectors and CCTV cameras, secure signal transmission, alarm assessment and display equipment and alarm and CCTV recording equipment. This system will be used to detect unauthorized entry into the controlled zone, isolation zone, and protected zone. Interior alarms will annunciate in the continuously-manned safeguards control center 14 and at the secondary alarm station. To ensure immediate reporting and assessment of possible attempts at intrusion, the intrusion detection sensors and key-card access control system will report through a computer-initiated automatic-alarm switching system. This system includes the computer, intrusion detection devices, key-card alarms, response action instructions and outline maps with closed-circuit television (CCTV) surveillance and alarm assessment system display. Security surveillance of activities and processes involving special nuclear materials and/or impacting on security of these O 5.7-54
r j Amendment XIV 1 May 1982 j ] () processes is a fully integrated safeguards system. of surveillance used in the DRP will include: Primary forms Guard force (fixed, vehicular and foot patrols) Management and supervisory observation J 4 Closed-circuit television (CCTV) surveillance, monitored ! and managed at the safeguards control center (SCC) and the secondary alarm station (SAS). I Full-time surveillance is employed for security barrier fencelines, the isolation zone cleared areas and entry / exit-ways through primary barriers. [ The communications network for the DRP physical protection system i will allow rapid and continuous communication among on-site i () security force personnel and between on-site and off-site response forces. Off-site communications needs are met using 14 l telephones for routine communications and a radio link for l emergency communications. Similarly, a radio communication system consisting of base stations, mobile radios and hand- ] carried portable transceivers will meet on-site communication needs under most conditions. since the efficiency and effectiveness of the entry control and intrusion detection systems depend on automatic data processing, l computer security will have a high priority in the overall safeguards system. Access to the computer facilities (the SCC or SAS) requires a key-card reader and digital code operated locking system. Safeguards computer transmission lines will be under constant line supervision and all panel boxes, connectors, etc., will be affixed with tamper-indicating devices or switches. 5.7-55
Am:ndm0nt XIV May 1982 In addition to physical security, the DRP Safeguards System includes material control and accounting capabilities. Both passive and active material control features are included. Passive material control is accomplished by placing barriers or impediments between SNM and an inside adversary. All significant quantities of SNM are processed and stored in remotely operated cells which limit direct personnel access during routine operation. Active material control is accomplished by monitoring cell penetrations from sensitive process equipment to occupied areas for the presence of nuclear materials. The DRP material accounting system will be based on a series of Material Balance Areas (MBA) . The MBA is an identifiable physical area around which accurate SNM balances can be performed. The material balance areas will consist of a small pool to store spent fuel assemblies, the chemical separation 14 equipment area, storage vessels for the uranium and plutonium nitrate products of the extraction-purification stages, the chemical processing equipment used to convert plutonium nitrate to plutonium oxide, product storage vault and the analytical laboratory. All of the process equipment will be contained within massive shielding, operated under remote control, and with provision for remote repair and maintenance. Material control is achieved primarily by this containment. Where spent fuel, products or samples are handled, guards and/or materials control personnel will provide continuous surveillance. In addition, personnel and packages entering or leaving the operations areas will be subject to search for contraband and nuclear materials. 9 5.7-56
- - . - - =-__ . - - _ - ._- .- - . . - .
i Amend 2snt XIV May 1982 () Material accounting will be on a near-real-time basis. Spent i fuel assemblies will be accounted for as discrete, numbered items. After disassembly and dissolution of the pellets, an accurate measurement will be made of the volume of solution, the concentration of uranium and plutonium in the solution, and the isotopic compositions of both. For process control and accounting, the quantities of uranium and plutonium in the process vessels and intermediate buffer vessels will be i continuously monitored. Intermediate nitrate products, oxide products and all waste streams will be measured. Spent fuel assemblies are received and accounted for on an item , identity basis. The plutonium content is booked at the values calculated by reactor operations until assemblies are dissolved ! and the actual U and Pu amounts are determined on the basis of solution volume and U and Pu concentration. PuO2 products are measured by bulk and by concentration when the product containers
! are filled. The plutonium in product containers can also be measured reasonably accurately by NDA. 14 l The chemical reprocessing and conversion processes will ! incorporate precise bulk / analytical measurements at the input, transfer and product output points. Combinations of NDA. process instrumentation. flow indicators and chemical analysis of samples f
from between process stages will provide the information for near-real-time accounting on a unit-process basis. The U and Pu content of wastes will be measured in various ways, e.g., NDA of hulls, bulk / sample analysis of hot liquid wastes, alpha counting I for discharged reagents, etc. These measures will provide for , timely detection of loss or diversion. Based on their reprocessing plant experience and knowledge of l traditional material accounting and measurements, McSweeney. ! et al I14) estimated in 1975 that the LEMUF could be expected to be about 1.4 percent of the throughput for 1 week, 0.8 percent ; for 1 month. 0.75 percent for 6 months and 0.7 percent for 1 year. 5.7-57
Am:ndacnt XIV May 1982 Since then there have been several developments which should improve the sensitivity, and which would be employed at the DRP. lh One is to improve the measurement of the volume of solution in the major liquid accountability vessels by design of the vessels themselves and by the use of modern instrumentation to measure bubbler pressures and to analyze this data with on-line computers. Such systems have been installed and used in the United States and Japan. The systematic error in such measurements should be 0.1 percent or less. The most difficult chemical concentration measurement has been that of the U and Pu concentration of the highly radioactive solution in the input accountability vessel. There have been significant advances in the quality of analysis of such samples for concentration and for the isotopic composition of the U and Pu.(16) Experience with near-real-time accounting techniques at the Tokai Reprocessing Plant in Japan and in " cold runs" at the AGNS, Barnwell, S.C. facility give confidence that the combination of improved input-output measurements with unit-process monitoring, real-time computer data analysis, and process simulation should substantially improve on the sensitivity for detection of shorter 4 or longer term loses. The LEMUF on 900 kg of Pu would be about 7 kg of plutonium for 6 mor.ths, using the McSweeney estimate. The improved measurement capabilities, along with improved data analysis methods, suggest that the short term and longer term diversion sensitivities should be substantially better than the 1975 estimates. Ellis IIII concluded that 5-day balances should have a limit of error (LE) of 2 percent. Over a period of a year, the random errors of individual measurements cancel out and the important factors are the systematic errors involved in calibrations of the accountability vessels and the accuracy of the standards used for sample analysis. It is anticipated that annual LEMUF would be substantially smaller than the McSweeney estimate. O 5.7-58
AmandmSnt XIV Mny 1982 () It should be noted that it would be very difficult for any domestic adversary to divert any plutonium from the remotely operated, remotely maintained equipment or the storage areas in this facility. The near-real-time accounting system may have importance for international safeguards. For domestic purposes, the measuring and accounting system is more important for efficient operations. It serves to provide assurance that the physical isolation and protection systems continue to function effectively. 1 The 6-month or annual inventory balances and error limits referred to assume the shutdown and cleanout of the entire system at 6 month or 1 year intervals. At such a time, all material that it is possible to remove is transferred to vessels where it can be accurately measured. Some of the nuclear material will remain on the surface of pipes and tanks and in crevices. This 14
" hold-up" could be of the order of 0.1 percent of throughput.
Safequards Costa The incremental cost of safeguarding the facilities in the fuel cycle, apportioned to reflect the part of the facility operations dedicated to the CRBRP fuel cycle, are shown in Table 5.7-8. Costs are included for safeguarding facilities for fuel fabrication, fuel reprocessing, the CRBRP plant, and transportation of special nuclear materials (SNM) among the facilities. Both initial investment and annual operating costs are given in constant FY 1982 dollars. It is evident from the totals in Table 5.7-8 that the costs of safeguarding SNM in the CRBRP fuel cycle are a small portion of the total facility costs. O 5.7-59
Am:ndm;nt XIV Msy 1982 Costs are given separately for physical security of the facilities, the materials control and accounting (MC&A) lh provisions, and the guard forces. Physical security costs include such things as perimeter and entry controls, video surveillance and internal security systems. MC&A costs are those incremental costs of upgrading normal process control and monitoring instrumentation for safeguards application, non-secure software and communications systems, and the maintenance thereof. The guard force costs include salaries, benefits, overhead and equipment. The assumptions and bases for these costs are described below for each facility. Eucl_Eabrication The CRBRP fuel pins are planned to be fabricated at the Secure Automated Fabrication (SAF) line, located within the Fuels and 14 Materials Examination Facility (FMEF) at DOE's Hanford Reservation. The resulting fuel pins will be transported a short distance on the Hanford site to the 308 Building where they are formed into finr1 fuel assemblies. The safeguards provisions at these facilities are described above. The SAF line is an addition to the FMEF. Only the incremental costs for securing the SAF line are attributable to the CRBRP fuel cycle. The SAF line will share the FMEF perimeter security system, guard force center, display consoles, guard forces, etc. O 5.7-60 i
.- -. _ - . -. ~ . - - _ - - ._ - _ . . .
Amanda nt XIV May 1982 () The initial costs of installing the SAF physical security system include: S0.5M - entry control portals, hand geometry controls, key card controlled doors, Isap displays, TV monitors, alarm processors, TV switchers, video recording equipment, electrically locked doors, sensors and I closed circuit TV cameras. S0.4M - installation of the above equipment Q,2B - software development
$1.lM The annual cost of operating the SAF physical security system
- is estimated at 15 percent of the hardware costs for repair
! and maintenance, plus one additional guard per shift over that required for FMEF. The guard force operates on a 5 () shift operation. Therefore, the additional guard per shift ; is expected to cost $250,000 per year. The annual cost for repair and maintenance is estimated to total $165,000. The initial investment for the SAF MC&A system is estimated as: S0.5M - computer
$1.0M - software development SD,EM - upgraded measurement capability for safeguards purposes
$2.0M l
O l l 5.7-61
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 The annual cost of operating the SAF MC&A system assumes one h shift operation, except the sintering furnace will continuously operate.
$150K - repair and maintenance at 15 percent $150K - computer software improvement $200K - 2 supervisors $480K - 8 technicians 110RE - analytical services $1080K As the CRBRP fuel cycle utilizes about 65 percent of SAF's operational schedule, only that portion of the above costs are included in Table 5.7-8.
The 308 Building is located wit'..in the 300 area at DOE's Hanford reservation. Based on discussions with the Hanford Engineering and Development Laboratory staff that operate the 308 Building, the physical security system costs for the 300 area are: a) 14 initial investment - $7.5 million, b) annual repair and maintenance expense at 15 percent of the hardware cost - $1.1 million, and c) annual guard force expense - $3.2 million. The 300 area is manned by a staff of 70 guards. Support of the CRBRP fuel cycle requires about 20% of the 300 area activities, and only that portion of the security costs are . included in Table 5.7-8. The 20% figure is based on-the 308 l Building being about 1/3 of the major facilities in the 300 area l requiring physical security (in addition to the 324 and 325 Buildings) and that CRBRP fuel cycle support requires about 65% of the fuel assembly capacity of Building 308. l The 308 Building MC&A system accounts for discrete, nunibe red l items only. No liquid or powder process steps are involved and no volume, density or concentration measurements are 5.7-62
Am:ndm:nt XIV M;y 1982 required. As such, no costs are estimated for upgraded ( measurement capability. The initial investment for the 308 Building MC&A system is estimated at $0.5 million for MC&A equipment. The annual cost of operating the 308 Building MC&A system is estimated as follows:
$75K - repair and maintenance at 15 percent of hardware
$100K - 1 MC&A supervisor 11EQE - 3 MC&A technicians
$355K Support of the CRBRP fuel cycle requires about 65 percent of the 308 Building fuel assembly capacity, and only that portion of the MC&A costs are included in' Table 5.7-8.
() .The total fuel fabrication safeguards system costs in Table 5.7-8 are'a summation of the appropriate portions of the costs for the 14 SAF and 308 Building. Reproggsging , The safeguards provisions for the reprocessing plant where CRBRP fuel ?s eventually processed will be similar to those descirbed f earlier for the DRP. Only very preliminary design information is available for the DRP. Detailed estimates of the DRP costs, including the safeguards provisions, have not been made. The following estimates of the costs of the DRP safeguards provisions are the best now available. l The initial cost of the DRP physical security system is expected to cost about $35 million. Maintenance and repair of this system is expected to cost approximately $1.5 million annually. The () guard force is expected to consist of about 75 personnel at an annual cost of about $3.5 million. l 5.7-63
Am:ndacnt XIV ' May 1982 The DRP MC&A system is estimated to cost $15 million initially. Operation and maintenance of this system is estimated to cost $5 million annually. Support of the CRBRP fuel cycle will require about 8 percent of the DRP 150 tonne annual capacity. Thus, 8' percent of the above costs are included in Table 5.7-8. Elant The CRBRP safeguards provisions are described in PSAR Section 13.7. The following is a breakdown of the physical security system costs. Initial Maintenance Investme,nt and_ Operating-Electronic Security System $ 1.80 M $ 90 K (includes CCTV, alarms, 14 computers, access control electronics) Gate House (less access 0.42 M 8K , control electronics) and - Central Alarm Station ' Fencing and Related Items 0.19 M 4K Such As Sewer Pipe Grating and Derailers Electrical (wiring, conduit, 1.33 M 66 K uninterruptible power supply,. batteries) Communications 0.12 M 6 K
$ 3.86 M $174 K 5.7-64
~
Amand2:nt XIV i May 1982 Accountability of fissile and fertile material is inherent in the ( design of the CRBRP refueling system for reasons other than security. Af ter inspection at receipt, the assemblies are not I visually identified again until shipment of the irradiated assemblies. The assemblies are mechanically identified prior to insertion into the core and subsequent to removal f rom the core as part of the refueling controls. All movements of fuel within the plant are monitored and/or recorded on the refueling system
- computer for inventory purposes and to insure proper configuration changes. No incremental cost is assumed for safeguards accountability at the plant.
The CRBRP security force consists of: 1 - Unit Chief 1 - Operations Captain 1 - Administration Captain 14 4 f 1 - Training Officer
\_/-
5 - Shift Supervisors 5 - Alarm System Monitors 55 - Public Safety Officers _1 - Clerk-Typists 72 Personnel i The initial investment of hiring, training and equipping this force is estimated to cost $47,000. The bulk of the security { force will be onsite when the fuel arrives, approximately 9 months prior to fuel loading. The cost of guards during the year prior to criticality is estimated at $1.1 million. From the year of criticality onward, the guard force is estimated to cost about S2.1 million annually. i, i 5.7-65
Am:ndm3nt XIV May 1982 IIanaDDLtation The number of shipments per year for the different materials in the CRBRP fuel cycle are given on Table 5.7-7. Special safeguards measures are provided for the sLApment of fresh fuel, Pu0 spent fuel and spent blanket assemblies. The other 2' materials transported within the CRBRP fuel cycle do not contain sufficient quantities of SNM to warrant special safeguards measures. Transportation of new fuel and Pu0 is planned using DOE's Safe 2 Secure Transport (SST) system. As this system will have suf ficient capacity and communications capability to accommodate CRBRP transportation requirements, no initial investment costs are anticipated. Operating costs for SST shipments are estimated to cost $18,000 per 2500 mile shipment, round trip. Transportation of spent fuel and spent blanket assemblies require g two escorts and appropriate communications devices. The incremental cost per escort for these provisions is estimated to be $50,000 per year. The safeguards cost of transportation within the CRBRP fuel cycle is summarized below: Annual Material Shipments /_XI2 Cost / Shipment . Cost _ Pu0 14 18,000 252,000 2 Fresh Fuel 14 18,000 252,000 Spent Fuel 14 N/A 100,000 Spent Blankets 12 N/A 100,000
$704,000 l
5.7-66 1
Amendmsnt XIV M:y 1982 () CEDRP Fuel Cycle - Socioeconomic Impacts Fuel fabrication and fuel reprocessing are two key elements of the fuel cycle for the CRBRP. Since both activities involve utilization of facilities separate from the CRBRP, a generalized assessment of their potential socioeconomic impact is appropriate. Both of these facilities are intended to support the DOE Liquid Metal Fast Breeder Program by demonstrating those technologies and to serve the CRBRP during its operation. The Secure Automated Fabrication (SAF) facility will be built as part of the Fuels and Materials Examination Facility (FMEF) which is currently under construction on DOE's Hanford Reservation near l Richland, Washington. Construction of the SAF facility will take about 20 months and have a peak employment of absut 250 persons. Employment at full operation will be about 100. Currently, employment at the Hanford Reservation is about 10,000, and the () population of the metropolitan Richland area is about 125,000. Given the small magnitude of the project and its work force and the relatively large population of the Richland area, there are no adverse socioeconomic impacts expected from construction or operation of the facility. The number of construction workers moving into the area, if any, would be a small fraction of the peak work force and would not be expected to cause a strain on services in such an urbanized area. The Demonstration Reprocessing Plant (DRP) would reprocess light water reactor fuel in addition to serving the breeder program by demonstrating reprocessing technology and by reprocessing CRBRP fuel. The location for the DRP has not been selected although the likelihood is great that it will be a federally owned site. The Oak Ridge and Hanford Reservations are both under consideration. Construction of the facility is currently I 5.7-67
Am:ndm:nt XIV Mny 1982 scheduled to begin in late 1987 and be completed by 1996. The h peak construction force is projected to be about 3,700 and the full operations work force about 750. A significant proportion of the work force would be expected to move into the area and create the potential for a temporary strain on community services and facilities. A projection of the magnitude of any influx cannot be made until a site is selected. However, over a decade of surveys of TVA nuclear plant construction forces in rural areas indicate that between 20 percent and 40 percent of the work could be expected to inmigrate. The likelihood for adverse impacts is less likely if the facility is built in a relatively urbanized area. For example, if the DRP were built on the Oak Ridge Reservation, significant impacts would not be expected because of the availability of local labor and the capacity of an urbanized area's services and facilities to absorb additional temporary population. Since the CRBRP construction force would be decreasing as the DRP construction force is increasing, the potential for cumulative impacts should not be great. 14 Based on TVA's experience, a higher proportion of the operations work force would move into the plant area, compared to that for the construction force. However, the actual number of inmoving workers and dependents would still be relatively small. Also, the construction force should be decreasing while the operations force is increasing. Thus, any increases in the capacity of local services and facilities to accommodate construction movers would be avai'.able to accommodate operations movers. After a site is selected, a more detailed analysis of potential construction and operations impacts will be conducted as part of the facility's Environmental Impact Statement. O 5.7-68
i Amendmant XIV May 1982 l l 5.7.2 POWER PLANT OPERATIONAL NOISE AND IMPACT The CRBRP will contain a large number of sound sources, most of which will be well enclosed in thick concrete structures and will, thus, pose no noise problems. There are, however, several external sources of noise whose effect on the surrounding area is described in this section. Estimated ambient noise level, predicted CRBRP noise levels and impact assessment are discussed in subsequent subsections. 5.7.2.1 ESTIMATED AMBIENT NOISE LEVEL 6 The area on and around the plant site has an ambient noise level characteristic of a sparsely populated rural area. The only consistent scurce of non-natural noise is traffic on Interstate 40 which is ubcut 1-1/4 miles from the center of the CRBRP Site at its closest approach. At the nearest dwelling to the CRBRP () Site center, trucks passing ot. the interstate highway can be heard, but not cars. Based on measurements made in other similar rural areas, the average A-weighted ambient noise level is estimated to be 40-45 dBA. Traffic on the interstate is believed to be a major contributor to the ambient noise level. 5.7-69
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 5.7.2.2 PREDICTED NOISE LEVELS The major sources of noise from the plant site will be the mechanical draft cooling towers, the turbine generator building and the main power output transformer. Arrangement of main plant structures is shown in Figure 2.1-4, and the location of these structures on the Site is shown in Figure 2.1-3. Cooling tower sound levels were determined from published references (also see Section 5.1.8.4). The transformer sound level estimates were based on the National Electrical Manufacturers Association (NEMA) transformer ratings. The sound levels from the turbine-generator building were based on estimates of the internal machinery noise level corrected for the transmission loss of the metal panel walls. The radiated noise levels were determined by assuming that the 6 total sound power emitted by the plant, suitably corrected for directivity (geometry, location and orientation), is radiated hemispherically from the center of the plant site. The sound levels in the surrounding area were calculated by summing the contribution from each of the sources at each point of interest. Corrections were made for the shielding effect of the plant on the cooling tower noise and of the turbine-generator building on the transformer noise. A correction for the molecular absorption of sound in air also has been included.III The magnitude of this correction was determined by assuming a sound spectrum for the cooling tower noise. (2) Because most of the area surrounding the plant site is and will remain heavily wooded, a correction for the ground attenuation was estimated and included in the calculated sound O 5.7-70
Am:ndm:nt XIV M y 1982 l (} levels. ( 3) A significant change in the ground attenuation is anticipated with a seasonal change from summer to winter because of the loss of foliage from the woods. The nearest dwellings to the CRBRP Site are located approximately 3,100 feet south-southwest of the plant site and approximately 3,200 feet west-southwest of the plant site. Both dwellings are at an elevation of about 800 feet MSL, one on each side of Poplar Springs Creek. The predicted sound level, due to normal plant operation alone, at both of these locations is 42 dBA in the summer and 45 dBA in the winter. At radial distances greater than several thousand feet, contours of equal sound level are almost circular. At a radial contour 6 one mile from the plant site center the predicted summer noise level from the plant is 37 dBA; the corresponding predicted winter level from the plant is 41 dBA. Ambient levels may be () higher than these values particularly for locations nearer Interstate 40. The one-mile contour and the two nearest dwellings are shown in Figure 5.7-3. 5.7.2.3 IMPACT OF OPERATIONAL NOISE The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development I4) has provided outdoor noise exposure guidelines for non-aircraft noise. Three categories of external noise exposure are defined. The categories and their respective noise limits are listed in Table 5.7-9. Since the noise from the power plant is essentially constant, the
" acceptable" category corresponds to sound levels below 65 dBA, C\
V 5.7-71 1 _ _ _ _ _ _ __. .__ - .- .
Am:nda nt XIV May 1982 the "normally unacceptable" category levels between 65 and 75 dBA and the " unacceptable" category corresponds to levels above 75 dBA. Based on the predicted levels and contours described in Section 5.7.2.2, the population distribution from Table 2.2-2P and the peak resident and transient population f rom Table 2.2-9 and j4 Figure 2.2-7F, there will be no exposure of the permanent population or of the transient population including nearby recreation areas to noise levels above 65 dBA. At many locations, particularly a recreation area at Caney Creek, the ambient noise from the interstate highway will exceed the noise produced by the plant. The State of Tennessee and Roane County do not have any 6 regulations or zoning restrictions related to noise that are applicable to the CRBRP Site. The City of Oak Ridge has a zoning lll ordinance (5) which specifies that sound shall not exceed the decibel levels given in Table 5.7-10 when adjacent to the uses listed. The ordinance does not indicate whether the sound level limits are linear or A-weighted sound levels. The specified levels are assumed to be A-weighted values since the A-weighting simulates the response of the human ear and is thus used in most such ordinances. 5.7-72
Amendment XIV May 1982 To the north, the CRBRP Site property line adjoins the Clinch ( River Consolidated Industrial Park. The sound level contour shown in Figure 5.7-3 shows that the sound level at this property line will be significantly less than the specified limit in Table 5.7-10. The remainder of the area adjoining the Site is rural in 6 character and separated from the Site by the Clinch River. The Oak Ridge ordinance does not specifically address this type of area. However, based on the predicted noise levels, the impact of the noise produced by the plant on the surrounding area will be negligible. l l l l l l l O 5.7-73
TABLE 5.7-1 CRBRP -
SUMMARY
OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS FOR FUEL CYCLE fuel _ fabrication Mixed Oxide Uranium Dioxide *** Waste NatuIal_Besource_Use LCDIc_fuell fBlanketL _ EepIDcessing**** Hanagement TranSPQILALion Total Land lacxcal Temporarily Committed -- 0.07+ 10.0 1.3 11.37 Undisturbed Area -- 0.05+ 9.0 -- Disturbed Area -- 0.01 1.0 9.05 1.01 Permanently Committed -- -- -- 2.3 -- 2.3 MateK_1ga11on5Lday1 Discharged to air -- -- 4.2x10 6 2.7x10 2 -- 4.2x10 6 Discharged to water bodies -- 1.3x10 4 1.3x10 4 2 g Discharged to ground 7.5x10 -- -- 2.2x10 3 -- 2.95x10 3 Y Total Water 7.5x10 2 1.3x10 4 4.2x10 6 $ 2.47x10 3 -- 4.2x10 6 Eoss11_ fuel Electrical Energy (MW-hr/yr) 9.0x10 3 ** 4.2x10 2 5.Sx10 2 9.9x10 3 Equivalent Coal (MT/yr) 3.6x10 3 ** 1.6x10 2 1.3x10 3 2.0x10 2 -- 5.26x10 3 Efilunnta Chemicals Ganes* (MT/yr) SO, 133 5.8 0.4 6x10-2 1.2 140 NO x 35.2 1.5 -2 3.9 9.1x10 15.4 56.1 flydrocarbons 0.36 1.5x10-2 -- 5.1x10-3 1.6 1.98 g CO 0.86 3.8x10-2 co rn 0.13 2.7x10-2 9.4 Particulates 10.5 NK 35.2 -- -- 6.5x10-2 0.6 35.9 r- -- 1.7x10-3* -- -- -- 1.7x10-3 e G O
c O 1 TABLE 5.7-1 (Continued) fuel _fabI1 Cat 1QD Mixed Oxide Uranium Dioxide *** Waste Effluents Ifore_fuell (Dianketi EeRInctasing**** fianagement TransacItation Total Liquids (MT/yr) H SO 2 4 1.0x10 ~1 -- -- -- -- 1.0x10~1 HNO ~1 3 1.0x10 7.7 + -- -- -- 7.8
+
NH 3 2.8 -- -- -- 2.8 i P- __ 1,4+ __ __ __ 1,4 M 1.0x10-2
- l 4 1.0x10-2 PO 4
3~ (after degrading) 1.0x10~3 -- -- -- -- 1.0x10-3 BadiologiCAl (Curies /yr) AL1boEne m I
- 14 J Pu-236 2.0x10~I --
1.36x10~8 -- -- 3.36x10~9 I i m Pu-238 3.4x10-6 -- 8.45x10-5 __' -- 8.8x10-5 Pu-239 2.2x10-6 -- 2.14x10-5 -- -- 2.34x10-5 Pu-240 2.2x10-6 -- 2.20x10-5 -- -- 2.42x10-5 Pu-241 3.0x10~4 -- 2.55x10~3 -- -- 2.85x10~3 ! Pu-242 3.0x10"I -- 4.70x10-8 -- -- 5.0x10-8 j U-232 -- -- 6.22x10-II -- -- 6.22x10-11 U-234 5.8x10~11 -- 1.62x10~I -- -- 1.68x10-9 U-235 2.5x10-12 3.2x10~11 7.84x10-11 -- -- 1.13x10-10 J Cm-242 --- -- 5.42x10~4 -- -- 5.42x10-4 Cm-244 7.16x10-7 7.16x10-7 i s i u rt 1 1 4
TABLE 5.7-1 (Continued) fuel _ fab 11 cation Mixed Oxide Uranium Dioxide *** Waste Effluents ICore_fuell. fBlaDhttl _ EePISEessiD9**** llaDagCment TIaDSpoItallon TQia1 Eadiological (Curies /yr) hksboine U-236 -- -- 1.58x10-10 -- -- 1.58x10-10 U-238 5.4x10-Il 2.5x10-9 7.36x10-9 -- -- 9.9x10-9 Th-228 -- -- 1.20x10-12 -- -- 1.20x10-12 Th-231 2.5x10-12 3.2x10-11 7.84x10-12 -- -- 4.23x10-11 Th-234 5.4x10-II 2.5x10-9 2.36x10-10 -- -- 2.79x10-9 Am-241 -- -- 2.06x10-5 -- -- 2.06x10-5 Np-237 -- -- 2.08x10-10 -- -- 2.08x10-10 g Pa-234 5.4x10-11 2.5x10-9 7.36x10-10 4 3.29x10-9 m H-3 -- -- 5.51x10 3 6.8x10-6 -- 5.51x10 3 Kr-85 3 4.75x10 5.5x10 1 4.80x10 3 C-14 -- -- 1.44x10 1 -- -- 1.44x10 1 I-129 -- -- 3.26x10-4 -- -- 3.26x10-4 I-131 -- -- 3.61x10-2 -- -- 3.61x10-2 Ru-103 -- -- 1.84x10-3 -- -- 1.84x10-3 Ru-106 -- -- 7.09x10-3 -- -- 7.09x10-3 Cs-134 -- -- 5.60x10-5 -- -- 5.60x10-5 Cs-137 -- -- 1.60x10-4 -- -- 1.60x10-4 g Rn-220 3.0x10-4 3.0x10-4 '# H Rn-222 -- -- 8.2x10-3 8.2x10-3 $l N ,3 Particulate Fission -- -- 6.16x10-4 1.1x10-3 & Products 1.72x10-3 O O O
s O O TABLE 5.7-1 (Continued) Puel_.fabI1CalloD Mixed Oxide Uranium Dioxide *** Waste Effluenta 1Coxe_fuell iBlanketi ResInceasing**** Management TIansportation Total - Badiological (Curies /yr) i Liquida U-Total -- 6.7x10-3+ -- -- -- 6.7x10~3 , Th-234 -- 3.3x10~3+ -- -- -- 3.3x10-3 Pa-234 -- 3.3x10~3+ -- -- -- 3.3x10-3 P Solida (ci/yr) 4 Other than high level b4 Alpha 1.0x10 5 -- 7.0x10 5 -- -- 8.0x1C 5 Beta-Gamma 34. -- 40 -- -- 74 6 6 High Level -- -- 3.8x10 -- -- 3.8x10 14
-Thermal Generation (Btu /yr) 8 10 10 8.50x10 7 7.72x10 10 Not 2.2x10 1.6x10 5.9x10 Available
- Based upon combustion of equivalent coal for power generation
** Total for FMEP operation
***Non-radiological estimates from NASH-1248,' Table E-1 (divided by 4)
****Non-radiological estimates from WASH-1535, Vol. II, Section 4.4 (1500 MT/yr divided by 100, or 3 days of plant operation) .
+ 44 ASH 1248, TABLE E-1 (divided by 3), increased to include conversion of UF 6 to UO2 to be used in core fuel fabrication, h
x PJ J rr 1
Table 5.7-2 DRP PROCESS CAPABILITY Throughput per 24 hour day Spent Fuel Fuel Head-Reactor fuel, Solvent Mixed-oxide U Element / ton available, receiving, end, extraction, conversion, conversion
% tons /yr elements kg kg kg kg FFTP U 72 3 (30 total U 360 Pu 28 31.7 by 1991) 24 500 Pu 140 250 CRBRP U 83 U 345 core Pu 17 17 4.7 24 500 Pu 155 240 250
~J CRBRP U 97.5 U 490 h m blanket Pu 2.5 10 6.8 24 500 Pu 10 40 460 U 99 14 BWR U 495 Pu 1 5.3 Unlimited 24 500 Pu 5 20 480 U 99 U 495 PWR Pu 1 2.2 Unlimited 10 500 Pu 5 20 480 LDP U 78 U 437 core Pu 22 7.8 18 10 500 Pu 63 252 248 LDP U 97 0 485 blanket Pu 3 5.5 12 10 500 Pu 15 60 440 E N O O O
O O O TABLE 5.7-3 Atmospheric Releases from Reprocessing CRBRP Spent Fuel Model Reprocessing DRP flant --- -_---_ Input Confinement Release Badionuclide ICilyIL* Confinement Release __factoI _ ICityIl __ factor ___ iCityIl H-3 5.51x10 3 1 5.51x10 3 1 C-14 1.44x10 1** 10 2 1 5.51x10 31 Kr-85 4.75x10 4 10 2 1.44x10~2 1 1.44x10 3 Sr-90 4.75x10 10 4.75x10 3.70x10 5 5xj0 9 7.4x10-5 9 I-129 1 10 5x}0 7.4x10-5
- 3. 26 x10~1 3.26x10-5 10 3.26x10-4 I-131 3.61x10 10 4 3.61x10-3 10 3 Ru-103 1.84x10 6 10 9 3.61x10-2 Ru-106 6 1.84x10~3 10 9 1.84x10~3 7.09x10 10 9 7.09x10 ~3 10 9 U-232 3.11x10-2 5x10 8 7.09x10-311 P U-234 6.22x10~Il 5x10 8 8.12x10~I 5x10 0 1.62x10 -9 5x10 8 6.22x10~9 4 U-235 3.92x10-2 5x10 8 1.62x10~
h U-236 7.84x10 -11 5x10 8 7.84x10~11 W 7.91x10-2 5x10 8 -10 1.58x10 ~9 5x10 8 U-238 3.68 5x10 8 1.58x10-10 Pu-236 3.07 7.36x10 9 5x10 8 7.36x10~99 14 2x10 9 2x10 9 Pu-238 1.69x10 54 2x10 9 1.53x10~5 8.45x10- 2x10 9 1.53x10~5 Pu-239 4.27x10 2x10 9 8.45x10-Pu-240 4.40x10 4 2.14x10-5 2x10 9 2.14x10-5 2x10 9 2.20x10 -5 2x10 9 Pu-241 5.10x10 6 2x10 9 2.20x10-5 Pu-242 9.40x10 1 2.55x10~38 2x10 9 2.55x10~3 2x10 9 2x10 9 Cs-134 2.80x10 5 5x10 9 4.70x10 5 4.70x10~9 Cs-137 5.60x10 4 5x10 9 5.60x10-54 7.99x105 5x10 9 5x10 9 Th-228 5.98x10~3 5x10 9 1.60x10 12 1.60x10~12 Th-231 1.20x10- 5x10 9 3.92x10-2 5x10 9 7.84x10-12 5x10 9 1.20x10 12 Th-234 3.68 5x10 9 10 7.84x10 10 7.36x10 5 5x10 9 Am-241 1.03x105 5x10 9 7.36x10 Np-237 1.04 5x10 9 2.06x10-2.08x10-10 5x10 9 2.06x10-5 Pa-234 3.68 5x10 9 2.08x10-10 5x10 9 7.36x10-10 5x10 9 cm-242 2.71x10 6 5x10 9 7.36x10-10 Cm-244 5.42x10-4 5x10 9 4 3.58x103 5x10 9 7.16x10-7 5x10 9 5.42x10 7 7.16x10- g 150 days after discharge; fission products calculated with RIBD code; actinides calculated with ORIGEN code.
** 200 ppm N in fuel. $.'
rr
Table 5.7-4 Eadioactive_ Wastes _from_ toe _CBBBP_Euel_ Cycle Encility Anngal Generation Waste /Eorm_ Containers Volumelm_111_of_ Containers Eey_ Constituents Disposition Fuel Reprocessing Plant Low-Level concrete / drums 25/120 Fission & Activatign Products, 10. C1/m Shallow land burial Misc. TRU concrete / drums 10/50 Fission Products & Repository
>1gnCg/gCi/m}RU, 10 -10 Metal Scrap metal / cylinders 14/102 Fuel Material, Fission & actigation3 products, 4x10 Ci/m Repository High-Level glass / cylinders 3.3/6 Fission Produgts, 3 TRU, 1.5 x 10 Ci/m Repository y Kr-85 metal matrix / cylinders 0.01/0.035 g Kr in getal gatrix Repository 3.4x10 C1/m I-129 concrete / drums 0.01/0.05 Barium2 I datg Repository 1.4x10 C1/m Core Fuel Fabrication Plant 14 TRU solid / drums 130/145 U, Pu, Store at 64Ci/m}RU Hanford Blanket Fuel Fabrication Plant LLW CaF2 / bulk 11 MT Uranium Onsite disposal CRBR Plant 0.01 uCi/g LLW solid-concrete / drums 67/319 Fission, activation Shallow land proguets 3 burial
<10 Ci/m
- Volume stated is prior to compaction, g
6 O O O
. . . . . _ - .~ ___ - -. . - - - - - -- . - . .- ~.
1 l Table 5.7-5 cot lPAPISCNS_DE_ QUANTITIES _DE_ WASTES _ Waste _Yolume_per_ Year _Is31 _ 1000 MWe LWR
- 1000 MWe LWR
- i Eucl_ Cycle _ Operation Waste _ Type CBBRP __No_Becycle__ __U_Becycle__
UF6 Conversion (dry) CaF2 Chem Waste -- 92 95 4 (wet) CaF2 Sludge, Chem -- 41 35 Wastes Enrichment Low-Level Misc. -- 28 30 } Ln Fuel Fabrication CaF , Misc. 2 11 (MT) 29 29 74 I l' m TRU 130 -- --
~ ; Reactor Low-Level 67 620 620 Spent Fuel --
35 -- i Spent Fuel Storage Low-Level --
<3 <1 Fuel Reprocessing Low-Level Misc. 25 --
7 High-Level 3.3 -- 8 . Misc. TRU and Scrap 24 -- 44 Plutonium -- -- 6 i l Kr-85 Cylinders 0.01 -- -- 4 j I-129 Cylinders 0.01 -- -- l
- NUREG-0116, Table 3.3 j
bo 00 ' h3 J rt 4 1
Am:ndm:nt XIV May 1982 TABLE 5.7-6 Comparison of Annual High-Level Waste Constituents (Ci) Hurlide Half-life CRBRP 1DQD Mwe LWRIII H-3 12.26Y 5.33x10 2 2.3x10 3 Sr-90 28Y 3.65x10 5 2.7x10 6 3 Ru-10 40D 1.25x10 5 7.18x10 4 Ru-106 1.0Y 5.28x10 6 9.6x10 6 I-129 1.72x107Y 3.26x10 -1 1.31 I-131 8.05D 3.29x10~7 6.97x10 -7 Cs-134 2.19Y 2.32x10 5 6.2x10 6 Cs-137 30Y 7.88x10 5 3.7x10 6 Ce-144 285D 3.95x10 6 1.6x10 7 Th-228 1.91Y 4.83x10-3 1.18x10 ~1 U-234 2.48x10 5Y 4.06x10-3 2.66x10 1 U-235 7.13x10 8Y 1.96x10~4 5.99x10-1 7 U-236 2.39x10 Y 3.96x10~4 1.10x10 1 14 U-238 9 1 4.51x10 Y 1.84x10-2 1.0lx10 6 Np-237 2.2x10 Y 1.04 1.19x10 1 Pu-236 285Y 1.53x10-2 9.63 Pu-238 89Y 8.41x10 2 1.0x10 5 Pu-239 2.44x10 4 Y 2.14x10 2 1.1x10 4 Pu-240 6.58x10 3 Y 2.20x10 2 1.7x10 4 Pu-241 13Y 2.47x10 4 3.5x10 6 Pu-242 3.79x10 5 Y 4.70x10~1 4.83x10 1 Am-241 458Y 1.04x10 5 8.8x10 3 Cm-242 163D 1.09x10 6 2.5x10 5 Cm-244 17.6Y 3.5x10 3 8.2x10 4 (1) " Environmental Survey of the Reprocessing and Waste Management Portions of the LWR Fuel Cycle," NUREG-Oll6, Appendix A; 10% of H-3, 100% of others, multiplied by 35 MTHM/ annual LWR charge; 1 year after discharge. This evaluation assumes that all of the LWR plutonium is disposed of in the waste. 5.7-82
l Amandaant XIV 1 May 1982 4 Table 5.7-7 Transportation Radiological Impact . a Fuel Cycle Shipment / Distance Pop. Dose Max. Individual Dose
- _ Element __ yr Isilesl_ fPersDD-Real (Rem)
New Fuel 14 2500 0.449 1.40 New Blanket 12 2500 0.0065 0.013 Plant Radwaste 8 2500 0.430 0.878 Spent Fuel 14 2500 0.489 0.160 Spent Blanket 12 2500 0.432 0.160 Irradiated Control, RRS 4.5 2500 <0.001 0.004 PuO 2 14 3000 0.536 1.64 Reproc. Radwaste HLW 3 2500 0.0817 0.360 TRU & Metal 24 2500 1.296 2.640 l Scrap LLW 2 2500 0.109 0.220 Fuel Fabricator Radwaste j TRU 5 2500 0.270 0.550 i I
*To transportation workers O
l 5.7-83 i
TABLE 5.7-8 CEBEE_Euel_ Cycle _SecuIlty_Conta_By_Elant_ Type (S in millions) 1122 CRDEE_Elant _ _Eut1_EmbI1 Gat 1Dn_Elant _ RgpIDClaSing Elant Capital annual _DemInting Capital annual _Opeinting Capital Annual _ Operating Physical Security System 3.86 0.17 2.2 0.3 2.8 0.12 Material Control and Accounting - - 1.6 0.9 1.2 0.4 ui ' 'y Security Force Q,01 2,1 __ 023 ._ Q.28 a 2 3.91 2.27 3.8 2.0 4.0 0.8 14 x N N O O O
Am:ndm:nt XIV Mny 1982 () HUD'S SITE ACCEPTABILITY STANDARD (Ref. 4) Day-night average Special approvals and sound level (in decibels) requirements Acceptable Not exceeding 65 dB(1) None Normally Unacceptable Above 65 dB but not exceed- Special Approvals (2) ing 75 dB Environmental Review (3) 14 Attenuation (4) Unacceptable Above 75 dB Special Approvals (2) Environmental Review (3) Attenuation (5) Notes III Acceptable threshold may be shifted to 70 dB in special circumstances pursuant to 51.105(a). (2) See 51.104(b) for requirements
- ((")
_) (3) See 51.104(b) for requirements (4) 5 dB additional attenuation required for sites above 65 dB but not exceeding 70 dB and 10 dB additional attenuation required for sites above 70dB but not exceeding 75db (See Section 51.104(a)). (5) Attenuation measures to be submitted to the Assistant i Secretary for CPO for approval on a case-by-case basis. l i l 1 i O l : i 5.7-85 i
Amend:ntnt XIV May 1992 TABLE 5.7-10 il4 CITY OF OAK RIDGE NOISE LIMITS (5) Spilnd Level, dB Adjacent Uses Where Measured 50 All Residential Districts Common Lot Line 55 Neighborhood Business Common Lot Line District 60 General Business District Common Lot Line 65 Industrial District Common Lot Line 75 Major Street Lot Line at Street 60 Secondary Residential At Street Lot Street Line O O 5.7-86
Amendatnt XIV MAy, 1982 FICURE 5.7- 1 k CRBRP EQUlllRRIUM FUIL CYCLE PLU10N1UM AND URANIUH MASS f LOW (MT/ year, average) 11.04 My dept U 10.98 MtU FUEL /BLAKKET CRBRP __ FABRICATION ___ I2 0.89 Mi Pu __- l I l , 1.000 Pu
- it loss assumed i 10.604T U 1.?7 l'1 TF i
I i t l 0.99 MT Pu PLUTON!W REPROCESSING . g. j055 STORAGE assumed i 0.10 MT/yr 10.55 MT U r 0.27 MT 1 ' Fission Products WASTE STORAGE 3.7- 87 l .-. . - . - _ . _ . - _ - . . _ . - . . . _ . , . _ _ - . - _ , _ _ _ - ,
AMENDMENT XIV MAY 1982
=8!
$08 I$
ge9 --to 2 E
- o. "h 4
" 6 38
*E <
bN a a a w
. v w a
-~ + --*<_% < - g ggO c
g c' z-> .$ 53
$5 >
s: E5
=
353 m es - != me a a c C U p ,= st- - <* 7
- h. 3 m= gug go I 5". Eg agg ik u 3 <
m' a l db 16 dl I
- r. I g ~- _5> * -
gp CC - 3C [ )= 3 93 ~ Es + p i LLf a -g-ik m _ l l h il h-9 I > E m 5 3 J . C g e2 3; I W f w wC 2 m-bed 3=- f E E 9E !*O-2 ~ p UE CE 022 3-* ,3 I + j a$ + "* r --+ -* : k 5 ji ic_[ 0
- O -*
- 0) -* -* { ;{ @
e-5 E
- 5 is v
?It ce s I
l-* 2.j ' I$' ((f ji E
!- O W
l r* * : :
= = ={ . O gg Ig 8
l ,.,,__. .. Jj __ O e f+ 1I lI gl A 2 - f+ 8I I I II 2 W g l ,- {
;e<
- ll g1 _
g zE vs w.
/
+ 3I Ie lf i E- -:
0 0 3 2 :: sce E{! *Is i J E6 5* Il g i ei
=
I E' 5i W O l I ii lI h$ g h 5 ) gl lI ll C< w -g 5 LA.
<r l l. I I Il I 1 I is l i i i
T Yl j g ii 4 i
~ - *r
. .) l - .
aE SslX me LA > *f r *j Z g
} e ,-
!$ SQ 0:37 313 A33a o .s, Ege 5$ 5$ N E Ch5 h q' - ***
>z el *hc
=- 7
- a: :- -
- n. e: :
~$6
.gm.
> $44$ *
"$$gV -
e g 0 e' 2 i* E
/=-
l i --* ;g_ $ CC w w 5 551Kwe OA J,
-e 5_ I 831 W 3 e - 313A33u &
g---.-_._',_ 1 1 O 3 e u., 5.7-88 0
AMENDMENT XIV MAY 1982 (3
's,j 37dBA SUMMER 41 d B A WINTER N
NNW e @u[ b f$*. * .. NNE
"/
2P'L lsji$1&h . ~
.... ..*b.t N..I'{.'$,y' n,. i- ,
g - p A fg sl,n,,.
"* m n m% iii .; . '
"c
.f } h ,
- 1, .
- W 3-o }&*
4'-. {gg&,.
. y 7. ttyyggq
.g4g$jAifPC, ;. ,{p g. gi-Y .;.4
.m e? .
- o. .
,UEf' h g. y~}'-{.]
ph. m % ., ,; nutno k .o .- O #N - .$t ,05:'- ), NO'$r
. 5@1' N ' e.gf s. et ;
- uwem
- a _ ... ,,. 3q .
,. ,e ,
ta .~,m. ...< ,.. . , sm or ms l l l eO
\ %/
l Figure 5.7-1 One-Mile CRBRP Sound Level Contour and Nearest Dwellings 5.7-89
AMENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 5.8 RESOURCES COMMITTED The commitment of resources ascribed to the construction of the CRBRP was discussed in Section 4.3. This section is concerned with the commitment of resources during the expected life of the plant. Commitments of the various types of resources are not all of equal consequence. During operation of the plant, resources are utilized in amounts that, relative to their general availability, will not constitute an irreversible or irretrievable commitment. 5.8.1 COMMITMENT OF LAND RESOURCES Approximately 135 acres of primarily forested land area (on-site plus off-site) have been committed f or pe rmanent plant f acilities 13 and the transmission corridor for the CRBRP and its related f acilities. This commitment, however, does not represent a measurable f raction of the productive forest recources of the region. The commitment of 135 acres is only 0.27 percent of the total acreage within a five-mile radius of the plant. The Site has little agricultural potential due to the poor suitability of the soil and has been designated as an area for industrial development as discussed in Section 2.7. Should it be desirable at the end of the f acility's expected life, the land can be returned to a condition suitable for future industrial development. Decommissioning and dismantling of the f acility are discussed in Section 5.9. No further alteration or destruction of wildlife habitats should occur during plant operation. 5.8.2 COMMITMENT OF WATER RESOURCES One of the major resources committed during plant operation will be water f rom the Clinch River. Flow rate of the river varies 5.8-1
AMENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 (~) (,/ from an average low flow of 4339 cfs in the spring to an average Eigh flow of 6,772 cfs in the winter.
~
For maximum power 10 13 operation, the anticipated average water makeup requirement is 13.4 cfs. An average of 5.1 cfs will be returned to the river as 9 blowdown and approximately 8.3 cfs will be consumed during plant operation. The consumptive use of 8.3 cfs is only 0.15% of the annual average Clinch River flow rate of about 5,380 cfs. The 10 amount of water lost to the atmosphere through evaporation is not i actually an irretrievable loss, however, as the water eventually will be returned to the earth as precipitation. Considering aquatic life as a resource, the loss of fish, zooplankton, benthos, macrophytes and the like will be a commitment of resources directly attributable to operation of the CRBRP. Discharges to the Clinch River will be continuously monitored to prevent introduction of deleterious effects to the
- aquatic life by excessive temperaturn chemicals or turbulence. 9
() A preconstruction survey conducted on the Clinch River will establish a reference framework for assessing the degree to which this resource is committed. 5.8.3 COMMITMENT OF FUEL RESOURCES { Initial fuel assembly loading of the Clinch River Breeder Reactor j will consist of approximately 5.2 Metric Tons (MT) of uranium and ' plutonium metal in a 36-inch high core. The fuel consists of o g sintered mixed-oxide pellets of PuO2 and UO2 encapsulated in the
- sealed stainless steel tubing (rods). Plutonium enrichment is 33.2 weight percent. In later cycles the plutonium enrichment will be approximately 33 weight percent. Each of the 156 fuel 9 subassemblies in the reactor core contains 217 fuel rods. The reactor core contains 1.7 MT of plutonium metal, 2.5 MT of 1
, uranium metal and 20.7 MT of stainless steel in the fuel. j 5.8-2
AMEND. XIV May 1982 The isotopic composition of the feed plutonium metal in the core is 0.1 percent Pu-238, 86.0 percent Pu-23 9,11.7 percent Pu-240, lll 2.0 percent Pu-241 and 0.2 percent Pu-242. The isotopic split is cimilar to FFTP-grade plutonium. An additional 25.2 MT of depleted uranium metal is committed in lI4 the inner radial and axial blanketc. Inner and radial blankets, consisting of 208 assemblies, each containing 51 rods, contain I4 21.0 MT of depleted uranium metal and 26.8 MT of stainless steel. Each of the two axial blankets, which are an integral part of the fuel assemblies, contains 2.1 MT of depleted uranium metal. 9 An estimated 2427 fuel assemblies and 2106 blanket assemblies 14 will be committed during the 30-year life of the plant. Ope :ated on the once-through fuel cycle, the total requirement of the plant could be as high as 27 MT of plutonium metal, 332 MT of 14 uranium and 595 MT of stainless steel over 30 years. However, it is expected that the burned fuel will be recycled to the plant lh cfter reprocessing and refabrication so that the actual heavy metal commitment to the plant from virgin ore (natural uranfun) will be only a fraction of the aforementioned values. ' If one assumes recycle with CRBRP operating by itself, rekuiring one full core load in the reactor and an additional reload core in reprocessing and fabrication, then the commitment ft'om resources is only on the order of 3.5 MT of plutonium plus 58.0 MT of uranium. O 5.8-3 a
AMEND. XIV May 1982 o Uranium burnup and an assumed one percent heavy metal loss of O each batch through the reprocessing-refabrication cycle raises / the plant lifetime total heavy metal commitment to 72.2 MT of g lj4
, uranium. The 3.5 MT plutonium commitment, which is required for I
initial startup, does not increase since the plutonium burnup is more than made up by the reactor breeding. An additional net of 3.2 MT of plutonium, in excess of that originally committed, will 9 14 be produced over the life of the plant. 1 At the time of decommissioning, 2.1 MT of plutonium and 27.6 MT l14 of uranium can be recovered from the core in addition to the 4.6 MT of bred plutonium and 30.4 MT of uranium already removed, 9 l14 leaving a total irreversible consumption of depleted uranium reserves of 14.2'MT and a net gain of 3.2 MT of bred plutonium. ll4 All of the stainless steel in the burned fuel and in the blanket assemblies (nominally 595 MT over the life of the plant) must be l14 considered as permanently consumed due to radioactive contamination which precludes its reuse. S .,8 . 4 IRRETRIEV3BLE COMMITMENT OF OTHER RESOURCES Irretrievable commitments of resources include those resources consumed during plant operation. Operation of the CRBRP will involve the direct use of substantial quantities of consumable j supplies including: (1) chemicals for treatment of water for the cooling and sanitary systems; (2) oils and lubricants; (3) decontamination and cleansing agents; (4) minor quantities of sodium; and (5) other consumable items such as paper supplies, i spare parts, etc. The amount consumed during plant operation is only a fraction of the supply available and therefore would not i constitute a major commitment. 5.8-4
Amendo Y Dec. 1981 5.9 DFCOMMISSIONING AND DISMANTLING The Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant (CRBRP) is being designed for a 30 year operating life, thereby placing the plant's final operation at about the year 2020, assuming no premature termination. At that time, 9 a detailed plan to decommission will be prepared for approval by the appropriate licensing agency with criteria comparable to Regulatory Guide 1.86, " Termination of Operating Licenses for Nuclear Reactors". A number of alternative approaches will be evalutaed in terminating the operating license of the plant; the approach chosen will not affect use of the remaining portions of the Site in any more adverse manner than continued operation of the plant would have. Length of operating history, after some initial activation, will not significantly affect the approach chosen. The final condition will provide for protection of the public safety and will be environmentally suitable. A wide choice of experience in decommissioning reactors is available from the AEC civilian power progrr and civilian reactors.( These experi-ences range from removal of fuel and minor decontamination to total re-moval, including some subgrade structures. None of the approaches to date have presented safety or environmental problems of substantative difference than those which have occurred during normal operation of a plant. The land committed to the CRBRP plant buildings, inside the security fence, occupies 8.6 acres as seen on Figure 2.1-4. The sludge lagoon 9 equalization basin, sewage treatment plant and river water pump house occupy an additional 2.7 acres outside the security fence. Depending upon the chosen plan, the termination of the plant could commit up to 11.3 acres of the Site. It is noteworthy that the less extensive l10 approaches to termination do not irretrievably commit the Site; that is, should a decision be reached at some date after termination that justi-fication exists to reduce the land commitment, the cost of recover versus the initial decommissioning cost would be negligible. If the decision 5.9-1
Amand. XIV May 1982 8.0 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS OF PLANT CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION The information presented in this section and Appendix C represents the results of socioeconomic studies by the Project that span a number of years. The Project's initial assessment of socioeconomic impacts of the CRBRP Project was refined and revised for Amendment V of this document. The present amendment updates the Amendment V assess-ments and complements the analysis with results from a series of comparative case studies. This section contains a summary of qualitative and quantitative assess-ments of demographic and socioeconomic effects of the project at the peak of plant construction in 1987 on a study area comprised of portions of 14 Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Roane Counties. Appendix C extends this assessment to include effects during plant operation and compares these construction and operation effects with those resulting under a higher work force influx assumption. Results reported here follow from an 10 assumption of normal levels of competition for area labor (26 percent inmover rate), while those reported in the appendix also include those based upon higher levels of competition (40 percent inmover rate). 8.1 ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL CONDITIONS OF SITE AREA Relevant social aspects of existing geographic, demographic, and economic conditions of the area surrounding the CRBRP Site are described in the following subsections. Where feasible, past trends and future projections - are discussed to provide a background for the evaluation of the effects of plant construction and operation. Major emphasis is placed on the study area where most of the impact is anticipated. It should be recog-nized however, that this project is of national importance and therefore has additional broader effects. O G 8.1-1
Amend. X Dec. 1981 8.1.1 SOCI AL GEOGRAPlilC CONDITIONS OF AREA Conditions relating to the spatial relationships between counties, munici-palities and the Site, including distance, direction, terrain, road types, traffic and commuting patterns between these places, are discussed here. 8.1.1.1 SPATIAL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN PROJECT WORK SITES, STUDY AREA COUNTIES AND MUNICIPALITIES The study area includes portions of Anderson, Knox, Loudon, and Roane Counties, the West Knox County Area (including the newly incorporated city of Farragut), and seven municipalities within the four counties as shown in Figure 8.1-1 and Table 8.1-1. The city of Farragut is not assessed separately like the other seven municipalities in the study area because it does not provide public services for its residents except for road maintenance. Because the public services utilized by Farragut residents that could be affected are provided by Knox County, it was therefore assessed as a part of the West Knox County Area. Spatial 0 relationships between the municipalities are diagramatically illustrated in Figure 8.1-2. This diagram indicates the roads most likely to be used by project employees in commuting between (1) the Site and the place of residence and (2) the place of residence and other municipalities for needed goods and services not provided near their residences. Approxi-mate road mileages between the Site and municipalities are indicated in Table 8.1-2. The CRBRP Site is located within the city limits of Oak Ridge; however, at least two-thirds of the resident population of Oak Ridge is located beyond the 10-mile radius of the Site and the nearest area in which residential development could occur is approximately 5 miles from the plant site. Knoxville is approximately 33 road miles to the east-northeast of the Site. However, a four-lane limited access highway, Interstate 40 (1-40), runs from Knoxville to within six road miles l 8.1-2
I Amend. XIV 8.2.2.1 DIRECT EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME 1 One of the main secondary benefits from any project the size of the CRBRP Project is the effect it will have in terms of economic expansion. I More specifically, how many new jobs it will create and, consequently, how much it will add to local income. (The estimated number of persons required for the construction and operntion phases of the CRBRP Project are presented in Table 8.2-1. ) Estimated income, based on 1981 dollar values, is shown in Table 8.2-2. The total income which can be expected to be generated by the construc-tion force alone is $352,100,000 with an additional $51,200,000 and
$92,700,000 for the operations and project office (including contractor support) groups, respectively, through.1997. The single largest amount 14 of annual income, $119,200,000, will occur during the peak year of con-struction activity. The combined total income for all groups over the 10 14-year period amounts to $496,000,000. 'O Considering the long-term benefits, the salaries of the operational force can be extended over the 30-year life of the plant. For example, in t
addition to the initial 14-year period outlined in Table 8.2-2, the permanent employees can expect to receive another $117,300,000 between 1997 and 2020. This results in a total of $613,300,000 received from 14 wages and salaries during construction and operation of the plant. The above figures are useful in comparing relative contributions of individual segments of the work force. 8.2.2.2 INDUCED EMPLOYMENT AND INCOME There are a variety of effects that cannot be directly attributed to the increased employment or income created by a new nuclear facility. This is evidenced by the many recent attempts to measure indirect or
" induced" impact with the aid of economic and employment multipliers.
O 8.2-3 4 1 n -
.,-e, ,n - - .
Amend. X Dec. 1981 The Appalachian Regional Commission has derived the following employ-ment multipliers for the study area: Anderson County,1.75; Roane County, 2.08; Knox County, 2.59; and Loudon County,1.93 (ratio of total employment to basic employment). These are fairly consistent with the more general findings of the Chamber of Commerce of the United States which found that 68 additional people were employed in non-manufacturing jobs for every 100 new factory workers in a town (an employment multiplier of 1.68).2 Such estimates should therefore provide some ir dication of the influence of the CRBRP Project on the local economy. Adjusting these multipliers (c' employment growth and applying them to the expected schedule of relocatad direct and relatively permanent 10 employment for CRBRP Project Operations and Project Office results in the increases of jobs in other employment sectors summarized in Table 8.2-3. (See Section 8.3.2.1 for a discussion of relocation.) Using the 1979 average retail business salary for the Knoxville Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area of $7,536, an estimate of $8,356 (1981 dollars) for the average annual salary per each induced employee can be used. (The additional annual incomes displayed in Table 8.2-4 will be generated by the CRBRP Project over and above the direct salaries paid to project employees . Total income for the 14-year period is $6,910,000.) Between 1995 and 2018 the indirect employment induced by CRBRP plant operations employment will result in additional income of $14,414,000 in the four-county area. Adding the total indirect and direct income generated by the CRBRP Project results in total payroll benefits to the area of $634,624,500. G 8.2-4
O O O i TABLE 8.2-1
- NEW EMPLOYMENT: SCHEDULE OF DIRECT EMPLOYMENT FOR THE CRBRP PROJECT BY TYPE OF EMPLOYEE
- i 1
Type of Construction Phase (year a f ter start)** Operation Phase (year after start up)++
- Employee 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Minuals 86 693 2,551 3,835 2,924 883 55 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 i
Non-Manuals 211 388 546 685 655 398 81 0 0 0 0 .0- 0 0 Subcontractors 304 210 190 163 244 178 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
, CRBRP Project 267+ 274 256 240 240 223 201 141 109 81 54 44 25 0 y Office Contractor Support 189 190 188 181 172 169 148 87 0 0 0 0 0 0 Personnel Operations Personnel 0 6 13 71 140 222 282 255 247 246 246 246 246 246 All types of 971 1,761 3,744 5,175 4,375 2,073 790 483 356 327 300 290 271 246 Employees
- Reported numbers are yearly averages.
! ** Site preparation assumed to commence in 1983. l14 l +237 project office staff and 142 contractor support personnel were already living in the project area as of February 1981.
++ Plant operation expected to begin in 1990. af 27 Il4
- o. l14 8-
~n <ll I
TABLE 8.2-2 INCOME: SCHEDULE OF DIRECT EMPLOWENT INCOME FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION PHASES OF THE CRBRP PROJECT BY TYPE OF EMPLOYEE (Million Dollars)* Construction Phase (year af ter start)** _ Operation Phase (year af ter start up) Construc-tion Phase 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Manuals + 1.9 15.3 56.4 84.9 64.7 19.6 1.2 244.0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 , Non Manuals
- 5.5 10.2 14.3 18.0 17.2 10.4 2.1 77.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Subcontractors 7.0 4.9 4.4 3.8 5.7 4.1 .5 30.4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CRBRP Project" 6.5 6.7 6.3 5.9 5.9 5.4 5.9 42.6 3.5 2.7 2.0 1.3 1.1 .6 0 Office Contractor Support" 5.3 5.3 6.3 5.1 .4.9 4.8 4.5 36.2 2.7 0 0 0 0 0 0 Personnel Operations Personnel" 0 .1 .3 1.5 2.9 4.6 5.9 15.3 5.3 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 5.1 All Types of 26.2 42.5 88.0 119.2 101.3 48.9 20.1 446.2 11.5 7.8 7.1 6.4 .2 5.7 5.1 Employment
- Rounded to nearest $100,000, based on constant 1981 income numbers.
** Site preparation assumed to commence in 1983, assumed plant start up in 1990. 14 + Letter, Dunham, J. P. , Superintendent of Construction, Stone & k'ebster Engineering Corporation to Chidlaw, R. A., Assistant Director for Construction, Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant Project fE Office, June 1981. *@
HLetter, Copeland, Raymond L. , Acting Assistant Director for Public Safety, Clinch River Breeder G ." Reactor Plant Project )ffice to DeVeny, George, TVA, April 24, 1981. $x The yearly income will remain constant at about 5.1 million throughout the remaining 30 year life y of the plant from the seventh year after start up. O O O
Amend. X Dec. 1981 7 ty TABLE 8.2-5 SELECTED REVENUES RESULTING FROM PEAK POPULATION INFLUX DURING CONSTRUCTION * (hundreds of dollars) Project Related Project Related Location General Fund Revenues ** School Fund Revenues *** Totals Clinton 11,300 18,800 30,100 03k Ridge 80,800 101,800 182,600 ;
't L: noir City 14,000 20,900 34,900 i Kingston 22,100 NA 22,100 Rockwood 9,800 NA 9,800 l
Hstriman 5,600 29,800 35,400 l 10 derson County 43,700 72,900 116,600 Knox County 68,600 272,800 341,400 Loudon County 11,900 44,800 56,700 Roane County 26,800 101,700 128,500 Note: All figures are in 1981 dollars.
- Twenty-five percent mover rate during estimated peak year of construction.
** Includes property tax, sales tax, beer and beverage tax, fines, fees, and charges.
*** Includes property tax, sales tax, and State foundation and equalization funds.
NA = Not applicable.
/S V
8.2-11
Amend. XIV May 1982 8.3 ANTICIPATED ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COSTS If the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant is to be an asset to the area and the nation as a whole, the benefits derived from the construction cnd operation must ultimately exceed the costs. These costs include not only the capital investment for equipment, material and labor, but also the inherent social costs related to any new industrial development of this type. There has been increasing realization, for example, that industrial growth can bring rising social-economic costs in terms of overcrowded housing, schools and highways, as well as noise, air and water pollution. Although these variables are much more difficult to measure than dollar values assigned to the economics of construction and operation, they must be considered in any complete impact evaluation. 8.3.1 INTERNAL COSTS 10 The CRBRP will be an asset to the nation. Even though the direct bene-fits derived from the CRBRP may not, by themselves, be of such value in the short run as to offset the cost of construction and operation, the development of a viable breeder industry will justify the overall costs and make the development of a new industry possible with great benefits for the future. Internal cost figures for the CRBRP will ultimately reflect the cost of solving the problems of achieving reliable electrical generation with LMFBR technology along with the environmental considerations of assuring clean and safe power generation.1 Project cost estimates are presented in Table 8.3-1 which shows a plant investment of $2,503,200,000. In addition, the $818,100,000 for develop- 14 m;nt costs and the positive net balance of operating revenue and operating costs of $124,800,000 bring the total program costs to $3,196,500,000. , 14 0 8.3-1 1
Amend. XIV 8.3.2 EXTERNAL COSTS External costs are of two basic kinds. Those resulting from the activi-ties which occur during the temporary construction phase of the project are typically costs of sh 'rt-term duration, while those associated with the more or less permanent operations phase are usually costs of long-term duration. These two kinds of external costs are assessed in the following subsections. A more detailed assessment is reported in Appendix C to this document. 8.3.2.1 COSTS OF SHORT-TERM DURATION Direct and indirect employment associated with the CRBRP Project will result in approximately 5,500 employees to fill the positions that are scheduled and estimated for the peak of construction activity in.1987. 14 The employment of many of these employees will have impacts upon the economic and social systems existing within the area. 10 O b Impacts of primary concern are those associated with the movement of employees into the area. These impacts include changes to the current relationship between the supply and demand for facilities and services provided by private enterprise and local government such as housing and schools . These and other kinds of effects of the CRBRP Project upon the existing social-economic conditions within the area are discussed in subsequent subsections. Not all workers associated with the CRBRP Project will relocate to a new residence within the area. It is estimated that approximately 25 percent of the peak work force requirements for manuals, non-manuals, and subcontractors, and 50 percent for project office, contractor support, and operations personnel (over and above the number of workers already in the area as of February 1981) will be filled by workers who relocate from outside the area to a new residence within the area. This estimate - 8.3-2
Amend. X Dec. 1981 of the rate of inmovers is based on the assumption that normal levels of competition for area labor will exist. The effects of this and a higher estimate are compared in Appendix C to the Environmental Report. Applying these proportions to the employment scheduled for the peak of construction activity results in a total of about 1,300 CRBRP employees who will relocate to a new residence inside the area. To estimate the size of the population influx resulting during the peak employment period, it was projected that 70 percent of the employees moving into the area would bring their families and that, on average, there would be about 3.2 people per family and about .7 school age children per family (Table 8.3-2). These factors are based upon the results of surveys conducted by TVA.2-7 The use of these factors results in the estimation that a total of about 3,200 men, women, and children will relocate to new residences within the area by the peak of construction activity. Because workers are not expected to be relocating in the area to fill indirect employment jobs resulting from direct perma-nent employment, no new population associated with indirect employment is anticipated. 10 This new population will relocate in specific counties and municipalities of the area as a result of existing social and economic conditions, and ir.dividual and group preferences. The principal determinants of place of relocation are proximity to work, the type of housing available, and the costs to purchase or rent housing accommodations. Based upon an analysis of the distance to and direction from the Site, housing availa-bility described in Section 8.1.3.1 and indications of housing choice in 2-7 , the distribution of project population the results of the TVA surveys summarized in Table 8.3-3 was estimated. Table 8.3-3 provides a breakdown of the new project-related population by area and community associated with the direct employment peak. Knox County is expected to receive the largest number of new people (1,450), O 8.3-3
Amend. XIV May 1982 While the school enrollments reculting from the CRBRP Project contribute to the crowding in some systems and grades, these new students alone do not create unfavorable conditions. A more reflective analysis is reported in Appendix C. 8.3.2.1.3 TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS Table 8.3-6 shows the projected increases in traffic volume generated by the day shift on the principal highway segments in the area (see Figure 8.3-1). These volumes are based on the peak construction employment. Since an estimated 80 percent of the construction work force will work day shift, the day shift commuters are anticipated to contribute the major CRBRP related traffic loads to the surrounding highway network. The following assumptions were used as a basis to evaluate the traffic (D situation: U l. No sponsored van and bus program.
- 2. Commuter vehicle occupancy = 2.0.
- 3. No truck deliveries to construction site during day shift commuting hours.
- 4. The CRBRP construction work shift hours will be staggered such that the CRBRP commu'er traffic will not coincide with the existing (non-CRBRP related) peak hour traffic on the significantly impacted I
highway segments.
- 5. Prior to significant construction employment buildup, the following intersections will be upgraded to sufficiently accommodate the projected traffic:
- a. State Route 95 and State Route 58.
- b. State Route 58 and Bear Creek Road (CRBRP Access Road).
- c. State Route 95 and Bear Creek Road (CRBRP Access Road).
- 6. Annual increase in non-CRBRP related traffic volumes = 2 percent. 10
- 7. Peak year of construction = 1987.
l13 14 O V i 8.3-6 l l I t . . _ - - .
AMENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 Table 8.3-7 provides a perspective as to the day shift commuter traffic impacts on the five key State highway segments (see Figure 8.3-1) anti-cipated to be significantly impacted by the CRBRP commuter traffic. The table is based on the " level of service" concept of traffic analysis.8 Existing traffic volumes are based on traffic count data provided by TDOT.9 From an evaluation of the table, the following general conclusions can be made as to the effect of the CRBRP commuter traffic on these highway segments :
- 1. The projected traffic volumes do not exceed the calculated capacities (level E) during the hours which the CRBRP traffic contributes to the existing traffic volumes for any of the five highway segments.
- 2. The service levels during the hour which the commuter traffic contributes will decrease (worsen) by one service level with the exception that the level of service on State Route 58 between the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant and the intersection with State Route 95 will decrease by two levels.
- 3. With the exception of highway segment 3, State Route 58 between the Oak Ridge Gaseous Diffusion Plant and the Intersection of State Route 95, all segments will operate at low levels of service (D or worse) for about two consecutive hours during the peak commuting hours. The reason for the two hour duration of congested traffic flow is that the CRBRP related commuter traffic will immediately precede or follow the existing peak hour traffic, and therefore, extend the duration of time of low levels of service on highway segments in the project area. 10 Level of service D represents a condition in which tolerable operating speeds can be maintained, though this may be considerably affected by fluctuations in traffic volume which may in turn cause substantial drops 13 in operating speeds. Level of service E represents a condition of lower operating speeds than in level D with traffic volumes at or near the capacity of the hight.ay. Refer to pages 80-81 of the Highway Capacity Manual (reference 8) for complete definitions of levels of service.
O 8.3-7
. _ _ =_ -- - _ _ - - _ - - - .
~ _ _ . - - _ - _ . .
Amend. X Dec. 1981 l q Need for health and recreation facilities and services associated with the b project-related population is not expected to reach a level which would adversely affect the existing quality of health and recreation service in the area. This general conclusion also applies to the quality of public safety in the area. Some fire protection problems could arise, however, if mobile home sites are located in areas not having adequate water , distribution systems. A problem commonly experienced during the construction phase of such projects is traffic congestion. In the case of the CRBRP, a substantial increase in load can be anticipated on SR58 and 95 in the project area. State highway segments in the project area will be congested for about two consecutive hours during peak commuting hours during the peak of construction .
; O i
f i 8.3-12 i
TABLE 8.3-1 car 1Ure ruwr acT c rimTe - av;2 arr In Milliemus of 1974 Dollars Escalats.3 at 8% Orguunkt 74 75 76 767 77 78 79 to 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 OS 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 1ern pintt armntJrr for.5 re Irrittpfr .1 3.3 11.6 4.5 41.8 30.7 22.1 19.5 29.1 48.2 60.8 46.4 , 21.9 8.3 3ee.3
.w f1?Jattn#7 1.4 3.5 14.3 8.6 1.6 .2 .4 30.o
( -em etim .3 .6 1.6 1.2 1.5 2.1 2.6 4.0 17.1 32.1 45.9 64.2 59.4 32.7 10.1 1.6 (2.8) 274.2 iM 1:GMs1Jutu 4.9 6.4 0.0 2.2 9.6 8.6 13.7 9.0 9.8 10.0 5.5 4.7 5.1 4.4 4.0 3.0 3.0 3.6 115.5 AC!?ctt412uPC 4.3 7.7 10.0 3.6 13.0 11.9 12.3 11.9 10.3 6.4 2.1 1.9 2.3 2.6 2.7 2.2 1.0 .7 1e r - RSCA!ATim 1.4 5.1 1.9 18.7 20.1 24.7 26.2 39.6 63.9 103.2 112.1 105.6 124.4 117.6 75.3 31.5 14.5 (7.9) a?3
- tarIUru 9.3 18.8 35.8 12.8 84.7 72.5 74.3 68.7 92.0 1%.0 203.0 205.8 182.4 204.1 184.1 113.2 45.6 20.4 (10.7) 1.753.t IwJt' IU13 fin #T .6 2.0 2.2 .2 1.2 1.5 3.8 15.5 9.3 1.7 .2 .4 3e.6 oncTsucrim .1 .2 .8 .5 1.1 .9 1.3 2.0 0.4 15.8 22.6 31.6 29.2 16.1 5.0 .8 (1.48 115.0 N'. F2CIP422tItu 2.8 2.4 1.1 .4 3.0 2.6 3.7 2.6 2.2 1.4 .4 .4 .5 .5 ' .6 -.5 .2 .1 25.4 r.TRATim .2 .3 .1 1.6 2.1 2.5 2.0 3.7 6.4 25.3 30.6 34.1 $0.7 53.6 33.0 11.5 2.4 (3.9) 257.1 Estrings 2.8 2.6 2.1 .7 7.4 7.4 7.5 7.5 8.7 13.6 49.6 56.1 58.9 83.0 83.8 49.6 16.8 3.3 (5.1) 456.1 Ithtr ur;T 1Urm. 12.1 21.4 37.9 13.5 92.1 79.9 81.8 76.2 101.5 149.6 252.6 261.9 241.3 287.1 267.9 162.0 62.4 23.7 (16.0) 2. 2trt.7 pu2. rPD (INITIM.) .1 .1 .2 .1 .3 1.0 1.4 2.1 13.2 12.7 3.3 3.1 37.6 53
- AIAT1m .1 .3 1.0 1.6 3.1 20.8 22.7 6.7 6.8 63.1 Gl1r1E t4KIEnt MATm1M, 1.0 5.7 3. 30.0 r!Nir INVIUDUfr 1UrA1. 12.1 21.4 38.0 13.5 92.4 80.0 81.8 76.2 101.5 150.2 254.6 264.9 247.5 326.8 306 6 172.8 72.3 23.7 (16.03 2,320.4 trvistnarr 14 oItei DChi&2ttsc 13.0 26.5 32.1 8.8 37.3 29.9 28.4 32.5 24.6 19.1 10.7 4.0 2.1 .5 .1 .1 270.6 b FIssNu3t&ItNEIixtpfr .4 15.1 20.5 7.7 29.5 28.6 30.7 33.4 22.4 3.7 1.5 .5 194.0 b rrunrT crna 4.4 3.5 5.1 1.5 4.9 3.6 3.2 4.0 4.2 5.4 5.2 5.0 4.5 4.9 4.3 4.1 2.9 70.7 cicNATIm 3.6 9.6 3.3 20.3 24.1 31.0 43.2 37.5 24.8 17.9 12.5 9.3 8.8 0.1 8.5 6.6 269.1 oest214ttstr 1erAI. 17.8 48.7 67.3 21.3 92.0 86.2 93.3 113.2 88.7 53.0 35.3 22.8 15.3 14.2 12.5 12.7 9.5 Sn4.4 OtTJtATING
- 6 tuJtB UTim 2.0 1.4 1.O .8 4 .4 6.3 ott2t. 6 in1Nrt2Wu .1 1.1 3.4 4.2 4.8 5.9 9.7 11.8 ' 11.4 11.3 11.1 1161 R6.1 Tw3. FMI (pr2tml .3 .5 5.9 6.7 12.4 12.8 0.0 4.9 2.4 53.9 CX:h19. tim .1 2.1 6.4 18.1 23.0 60.0 61.1 58.6 53.2 49.3 45.0 47.9 405.2 sutriorE .1 .1 3.5 10.3 28.2 34.5 59.1 85.6 79.8 70.5 63.8 57.n So. , 541.8 ItEVE20E (5.7) (10.5) (23.01 (31.4) (X.2) (16.39t151.11 1scNATIO8 (14.23 (51.11 (70.5) (106.7)1135.9)(149.78 1528.19 ort;nATDC 1UrAI. .1 .1 3.5 10.3 28.2 34.5 59'.1 65.7 10.2 (23.0) (74.2)(115.1)(127.01 (127.7) i FSCAIATION 1Ur2 5.2 15.0 5.3 40.7 46.3 58.2 72.2 80.0 95.4 147.5 156.8 154.2 211.1 220.1 146.5 97.3 63.8 (4.33 (17.31 (57.4) 890.931102.23.3N.3 3
11n711'r 1UIM. 29.9 70.1 105.3 34.9 184.4 166.2 175.1 189.4 190.2 203.3 290.0 2n7.7 2%.9 351.3 347.3 220.0 140.9 89.4 (L8) (23.0) (74.3)(115.Illl27.cf.997.l[ g
!=uram r,c- 1. m 1. . 1.1. 1.188 1.283 1. m 1.497 1.616 1. m 1.885 2.0 x 2.i,, 2.375 2.565 2. m 2.,,2 3. m 3.48, 3. m 4. . 4. m 4. m 5. m *2 LD .a CD fM
.>~<e N
O O O
s s )
- J TABl.E 8.3-1 ('mContinued) 04NEP 'FJmt. Fuerr (DST ESTImit - (Derm 73Cr M2tBeeG "
In faillirms of 1974 tb11ers Facalated at St OwtnsuW 74 75 % MT 77 78 79 es 01 82 e3 84 95 06 37 es 99 90 91 92 93 94 95 1 tut, Pf#rr (WWESTM2rr ras
. i 891 T10tUtMWF 1.4 2.1 1.4 .5 .2 5.6 N: IUftfMNr .2 .3 .2 .1 .8 03r:11U;rlos 2.0 5.1 6.0 8.0 7.5 3.7 1.0 .1 P.4 let ENFINEI!t!NG .6 2.1 1.2 .9 .5 .3 .3 .2 .2 .1 5.4 as nonern2 e2 .9 1.1 .6 .5 .3 .1 .1 .1 .1 1.0 ESCNATIot 1.1 4.3 6.4 9.6 10.2 13.5 14.0 8.0 2.6 1.0 70.7 sts Ur4 2.6 9.1 12.6 17.7 17.6 22.1 21.9 12.0 3.9 1.2 ,
120.7 ODP E0tm992rr .2 .3 .2 .1 .8 Q M m octrue 1.0 2.5 2.9 39 3.7 1.8 .5 .1 15.4 As p2ritaTJtIsc .3 .2 .1 .1 .7 PlOIATIGE .2 .4 1.5 3.4 4.3 6.4 6.7 3.6 1.0 .2 27.8
- surlomt. .5 .3 3.0 6.2 7.3 10.3 10.4 5.4 1.5 .3 45.7 Pthrr GRt 10mt. 3.1 9.9
- 15.6 23.9 24,9 32.4 32.3 17.4 5.4 1.5 184 4
.Co FU:L FAB (INI71AIJ .1 .2 .3 1.9 1.9 1.1 .4 5.9 w
e I2 ntATIO8 .1 .1 .5 3.1 3.5 2.3 .9 10.5 g ! Z sr7 tim. Nucirm mnnis 4 ftMer INVEStfurt 1Uf4 3.1 9.9 15.8 24.2 25.7 37.4 37.7 20.8 6.7 1.5 1#2.8 , itMmw2tr 7el Dilii41 RIM 3 2.9 1.0 .4 .2 .I 4.5 IE3rAK3t & EDEt/T991rr .1 .1 .1 .3 Pfniter of710t .6 .2 .2 2 .2 .2 .1 .2 .1 2.8 FSCMATI0le 2.6 1.1 .8 .5 .4 4 .3 .4 .3 6.e (Mirr992rr 1Umt. 6.2 2.4 1.5 .9 .7 .6 4 .6 .4 II.? Ci m TING W l'TOrrRE .1 .1 .1 .3 QYIt. 6 mtstriseNt3 .3 1 .4 IU t. FAD (Ett1NM 1.9 .6 .1 .2 .2 .t 2.2 ISCMATIG4 1.4 .8 .2 .2 .2 .1 2.9 Irlot% IEWD M E3tNAT10tt wt CPEPATING 10!E 1.4 .8 .2 .2 .2 .1 I' 3.9 5.8 8.9 24.5 4.8 2.2 .6 .2 .2 .1 II' 8 ESGRATION 1UIE 13.6 15.4 23.4 14.3 .1 Psnmcr 1UIE F 9.3 12.3 17.3 25.1 26.4 30.0 30.1 21.4 7.1 2.9 .8 .2 .2 .2 .1 199.4 g E!ORAT100 FNMRS 1.000 1.000 1.116 1.lse 1.203 1.3e6 1.497 1.616 1.746 1.885 2.0 36 2.119 2.375 2.565 2.770 2.992 3.231 3.489 3.M9" 4.070 4.396 4.742 5.121 d in wa
. w .ct N
CD >< ro %
*C
~
TABLE 8.3-1 (Continued) ca, wm swr crm :=Tima - tue ora run a2rrruncr In M1111orus of 1974 tullare Escalatal at 84 Osgosuin! 74 75 76 767 77 78 79 80 81 e2 83 84 'f5 rthrr 86 87 88 09 90 n 92 93 94 95 m If.35 _IWES'D FNr IN TW1rtt7rt .1 3.3 11.5 4. 5 - 41.8 30.7 22.1 19.5 29.1 49.6 62.9 47.8 s 22.4 8.5 353.9 14 f7.UtrM2rr 1.4 3.7 14.5 8.8 1.7 .2 .4 M.4 Oictw arrim .3 .5 1. 6 1.2 1.5 2.1 2.6 4.0 19.1 37.2 51.9 72.2 66.9 36.4 11.1 1.7 M7.6 pt Dr.nsTPrs (2.8) 4.9 6.4 8.0 2.2 9.6 4 13.7 7.0 10.4 12.1 6.7 5.6 5.6 4.7 4.3 3.2 3.2 3.7 121.9 M nrpeInnC 4.3 7.7 10.8 3.6 13.0 1. 12.3 11.9 11.2 7.5 2.7 2.4 2.5 2.7 2.8 2.3 1.1 .7 111.- EECMATim 1.4 5.1 1.9 18.7 20.1 24.7 26.2 40.7 68.2 109.6 121.7 115.0 137.9 131.6 83.3 34.1 15.5 (7.9) 949
- CF1 urn. 9.3 18.8 35.8 12.8 84.7 72.5 74.3 68.7 95.4 145.1 215.6 223.5 200.0 226.2 206.0 125.2 49.5 21.6 (10.7) 1.874.3 DP EWIIM2'r .6 2.0 2.2 .2 1.2 1.5 4.0 15.8 9.5 1.8 .2 .4 39,,
GNr!PUCTIm .1 .2 .8 .5 1.1 .9 1. 3 2.0 9.4 18.3 25.5 35.5 32.9 17.9 5.5 .9 (1.4) g53,e M tmntIRJ80 2.8 2.4 1.1 .4 3.0 2.6 3.7 2.6 2.5 1.5 .5 .5 .5 .5 .6 .5 .2 .1 26.1 ESOIATim .2 .3 .1 1.6 2.1 2.5 2.8 3.9 6.8 26.9 34.0 38.4 57.1 60.3 36.5 12.6 2.6 (3.2) gee,, car 1034 2.0 2.6 2.1 .7 7.4 7.4 7.5 7.5 9.2 14.4 52.6 62.3 66.2 13.3 94.2 55.0 18.3 3.5 (5.3) Sne,s rthrt orf 77mt. 12.1 21.4 37.9 13.5 92.1 79.9 81.8 3 76.2 104.6 159.5 268.:2 285.8 266.2 319.5 300.2 180.2 67.8 25.2 (16 o) y,33,3 g Fu:1. FN5 (INITINJ .1 .1 .2 .1 .3 1.1 1.5 2.4 15.1 14.5 4.4 3.5 u,g L tsmtATim .1 .3 1.1 1.7 3.6 23.9 26.2 9.0 7.7 73.6 ui . strc!M, partrNt m7ERIA!. 1.0 5.7 3.3 10.0 8' Intr IrrXSnnrr WDE 12.1 21.4 38.0 13.6 12.4 80.0 81.8 76.2 104.6 160.1 270.4 299.1 273.2 364.2 344.3 193.6 79.0 25.2 (16.0) 2.503.2 tm2ItMwr T liiLWIRDC 13.0 26.5 32.1 8.8 37.3 29.9 28.4 32.6 27.5 20.1 11.1 5.0 2.2 .5 .1 .1 275.2 scrMot 6 tot 2IEM2rr .4 15.1 20.5 7.7 29.5 28.5 30.7 33.4 22.5 3.8 1.6 .5 3,4.3 170m.'r OFTim 4.4 3.5 5.1 1.5 4.9 3.6 3.2 4.0 4.8 5.6 5.4 5.2 4.7 5.1 4.4 4.3 3.0 #2.7 ISCMATIN 3.6 9.6 3.1 20.3 24.1 31.0 43.2 40.1 25.9 18.7 13.0 9.7 9.2 8.4 8.9 6.9 275.9 IMII39T2rr wmt. 17.8 48.7 67.3 21.3 92.0 86.2 93.3 113.2 94.9 55.4 36.8 23.7 16.5 14.8 12.9 13.3 9.9
- sie.1 GTimTDC NE'N OFFIG 2.1 1.5 1.1 .8 .7 .4 6.6 QTR. 6 mDrn2WG .1 1.1 3.4 4.2 4.8 5.9 9.7 11.8 11.4 11.3 11.3 11.1 M.1 fu't. F78 (IE1M8 .3 .5 5.9 8.1 4.9 6.7 12.4 13.1 2.4 54.3
.1 2.1 6.4 18.1 23.0 40.8 62.1 59.2 53.3 49.5 45.2 47.6 407.4 CN .1 .1 3.5 10.3 28.2 34.5 59.1 87.0 80.6 76.7 64.0 57.2 59.1 554.4 IWNi".
. (5.7) (18.5)(23.0) (31.43 (36.23 (36.3) (151.3)
EAtAT!m OET.fRTING WIE (14.2) (51.11(70.51(106.7)(135.9)(149.7) (128.1Q , $
.1 .1 3.5 10.3 28.2 34.5 59.1 67.1 :
13mtATim W mt. 5.2 15.0 5.3 40.7 46.3 58.2 72.2 11.0 (22.8) (74.1)(114.9)(126.9) (1243)e3 84.7 101.2 156.4 170.4 169.6 2 34. 5 244.6 160.8 102.1 66.0 (3.7)(17.2) (57.2) (10.7)(102.1) 1.462.3 so .CL E7n?rrT mmt. 29.9 70.1 105.3 34.9 184.4 166.2 175.1 189.4 199.5 215.6 107.3 312.8 29 3.3 389.3 385.4 241.4 140.0 92.3 (5.e)(22.0 (74.1)(114.9)(1263) 3,1*6.5,$ x EDstATIce r7ctors 1.000 1.000 1.166 1.180 1.283 1.386 1.497 1.616 1.746 1.845 2.04 2.199 2.375 2.565 2.74 2.992 3.231 3.439 3.769 4.070 4.396 4.742 5.121 O O O
O O O 57' ASMITH (FROM TRUE NORTH) view 110 0 N ATURAL DRAFT """[ LINE OF SIGHT COOLING TC%ER [ soo oRNL j n- = _ - D '""L'." ' '1 '" ' ' "' *yo%n,n w i e 300
~
, ,, l.,il...l...l...l.. l.,,1,,,l,,,I, ,,1 l g 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 ,4000 12,000 14poo 16poo is,ooo 20,000 i
DISTANCE (FT.) e C A R N B R P S j 10 8' ASMITH (FRoM TRUE NORTH) VIEW E LINE of SIGHT eNi , /_ _ _ 2 700 - 3 C R' INTERSTATE 40 500 - i,iI, i , I i,,Ii,,l, ,, l,,,!, ,,I,,,1 2000 4#00 6,000 8,000 igooo 12,000 14,000 is,ooo i Figt re 10.1-11 GROUND PROFILES AND DEPICTION OF CRBRP VISIBILITY FOR THE NATURAL DRAFT TOWER
9G- .. Ttemned i ai 523. Ba. Scott, E. M., unpublished manuscript, Tennessee Valley Authority, 1980, 15 pp. ', , 8b. Telecon Hokanson, K., Dr., U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, with Wagner, D. J. , Energy Impact Associates, 20 October 1980. 8c. Fletcher, J. W. , Assessment of Adult and Larval Fish Populations of the Lower Clinch River Below Melton Hill Dam, M.S. Thesis, Tennessee 9 Technological University, December 1977, 90 pp. Bd. Woosley, L. H. , Jr. , Taylor, M. P. , Toole, T. W. and Wells, S. R. , Status of the Nonradiological Water Quality and Nonfisheries Bio-logical Communities in the Clinch River Prior to Construction of 4 the Clinch River Breeder Reactor Plant, 1975-1978, Tennessee Valley Authority, Chattanooga, Tennessee and Muscle Shoals, Alabama, February 1979, 143 pp and appendices.
- 9. Curry, L. L., A Survey of Environmental Requirements for the Midge (Diptera: Tendipedidae), In: Biological Problems in Water Pollution, Transactions of Third Seminar, Tarzwell, C. M., ed., USDHEW, PHS, Robert A. Taft Sanitary Engineer Center, Cincinnati, Ohio,1962, pp 127-141. ,
- 10. Walshe, B. M., Oxygen Requirements ,$nd Thermal Resistance of Chiromid Larvae from Flowing and 3 f.(1,yater, Journal of Experimental Biology, Vol 25, 1948, pp 35-4e
- 11. Langford, T. E., The Distfro L."g ,ny, dance and Life Histories of Stoneflies (Plecoptera) ant. Wayf.'c+,JEphemeroptera) in a British River, Warmed by Cooling-Water From"a Power Station, Hydrobiologia, Vol 38, 19/1, pp 339-376.
.i 13.0-28
MIENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982
5.2 REFERENCES
- 1. S. E. Thompson, et al., " Concentration Factors of Chemical Elements in Edible Aquatic Organisms," UCRL-50564, Rev. 1, 19722
- 2. ICRP Publication 2, Pergamon Press, New York, 1959.
e
- 3. D. E. Reichle, et al., " Turnover and Concentration of Radionuclides in Food Chains," Nuclear Safety 11, No. 1 (1970).
- 4. Persoc 1 Communications, S. V. Kaye, Oak Ridge National Labot _ory , 197 2.
- 5. ICRP.?ublication 9, Pergamon Press, New York, 1966. 13
- 6. Basic Radiation Protection Criteria, NCRP Report No. 3 9, fN 1971.
d
- 7. The Effect on Population of Exposure to Low-Levels of Ionizing Radiation, National Academy of Sciences / National Research Council, Washington,1972.
- 8. " Report of the Task Group on Ref erence Man," ICRP Publication 23, Pergamon Press, New York,197 5.
]
- 9. R. J. Engelmann, "The Calculation of Precipitation Scavenging," Meteoroloay and Atomic Energy, UJAEC, 1968.
1
, 13.0-31
AMENDMENT XIV MAY 1982
- 10. NUREG 017 0, "FES, Transportation of Radioactive Materials by Air and Other Modes", December 1977.
- 11. Dunning, D. E., Jr. et al., " Estimates of Internal Dose Equivalent to 22 Target Organs for Radionuclides Occurring in Routine Releases from Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities."
Vol. III, ORNL/NUREG/TM-190/V3, October 1981.
- 12. G. G. Killough and R. McKay, "A Methodology for Calculating Radiation Doses from Radioactivity Released to the Envi ronment ," ORNL-4 992, March 1976. l14
- 13. Reg. Guide 1.109, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Rev. 1, October 1977.
- 14. " Situation Assessment and Planning Assumptions", Division of Forestry, Fisheries, and Wildlife, TVA, Dec. 1978.
- 15. " Estimated Commercial Fish and Mussel Harvest from The h Tennessee Valley", Fisheries and Aquatic Ecology Branch.
TVA, 1980,
- 16. " Observations of Recreation Use of TVA Reservoirs.1974",
Division of Reservoir Properties, Recreation Resources Branch, TVA, Nov . 197 5.
- 17. Unpublished Information from files of TVA Water Quality B ranch, 197 8.
O 13.0-31a
AMEND. IX OCT. 1981
- 5. Slade, D. H., ed., Meteorology and Atomic Energy 1968, U.S. Atomic O- Energy Commission, Division of Technical Information, Springfield, Virginia, July 1968, p 392.
- 6. Aarkrog, A.. On the Direct Contamination of Rye, Barley, Wheat and Oats with 85-Sr, 134-Cs, 54 Mn and 141-Ce, Radiation Botany, Vol 9, 1969, pp 357-366.
- 7. Dix, G. P. and Dobry, T. J., Critical Parameters in Plutonium Safety Evaluations, Health Physics, Vol 22, June 1972, pp 569-574.
- 8. Gilmour, J. T. and Miller, M. S., Fate of a Mercuric Mercurous Chloride Fungicide Added to Turfarass, Journal of Environmental Quality, Vol 2, No. 1, 1973, pp 145-148.
- 9. National Academy of Sciences - National Academy of Engineering, National Research Council, Highway Research Board, Effects of Deicing Salts on Water Quality and Biota, Literature Review and Recommended Research, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Report No. 91, 1970.
- 10. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National. Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations, Code of Federal Regulations, Title 40, Part 141, December 1975, amended July 1976, November 1979, and August 1980.
10a. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, National Secondary Drinking Water O Regulations, Code of Federal Regulations, T'itle 40, Part 143, July 1979.
- 11. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Quality Criteria for Water, Washington, D. C., July 1976, 256 pp.
g lla. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Water Quality Criteria Documents, Availability,' Federal Register, Vol. 45, 28 November 1980, pp. 79318-79379. 11b. Tennessee Department of Public Health, Rules, Chapter 1200-4-3, General Water Quality Criteria for the Definition and Control of Pollution in the Waters of Tennessee, August 1980.
- 12. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Groundwater Pollution in Arizona, California, Nevada and Utah, Water Pollution Control Research Series 16060ERU, December 1971, p 161.
- 13. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Major Uses of Lana and Water in the United States, Agricultural Economic Report No. 13, July 1962.
13.0-33
AMENDMENT XIII 5.5 P EFER EN C ES
- 1. Tcnnectee Dcpertrent of PublicAeration Enginecting Section, Extended Health, Wastewater Facilities Systems, Chapter 5 in l 9 Section 5 of the Derign Criteria Includinc Laws, R <.a td311o n r. , and Policies for Water and Wastewater Systems, Nashvillc, Tennessee, 1977, pp 5-1 through 5-8. 9
- 2. Tennersee Department of Public Health, Wastewater Facilities Engineering Section, Desian of Supplementary (Tertiary)
Treatrent Systems, Chapt er 6 in Section 5 of the Desian Criteria Includino Laws, Reaulations, and Policies for Water and Wastewater Systems, Nashville, Tennessee, 1977, pp 6-1 9 through C-9. c
- 3. (Deleted) 9
- 4. (Deleted)
- 5. Telecon, Van Vleck, L. D. , b'ESD to Knox County Air Pollution Control Department, 31 May 197 4.
- 6. Tennessee Department of Public Health, Division of Air Pollution Control, Regulations: Chapter 1200-3-14, " Control of Sulfur Dioxi6e Emissions"
- 7. Tennessee Dept. of Public Health, Division of Air Pollution Control, Regula ti ons : Chapter 1200-3-6, "Non Process Emissicn Standards"
- 8. Tennessee Dept. of Public Health, Division of A.r Pollution Control, Regulations: Chapter 1200-3-18.03 " Volatile Organic Compounds - Standards for New Sources".
13
5.6 REFERENCES
- 1. IEEE Committee Report, Transmission Syster Radio Influence, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and System, Vol PAS-84, August 1965, pp 714-724.
- 2. Hartley, J. W., Smith, R. T. and Dobson, H. I., Tennessee Yallev Authoritv's Radio Interference Experiences on 500-kV Transrission Lines, IEEE Transactions on Power Apparatus and Sys t em s , Vol PAS-87 April 196 8, pp 903-911.
- 3. Frydman, M., Levy, A., and Miller, S. E., Oxidant Measurenents in the Vicinity of Energized 765-kV Lines, presented at 1972 IEEE PES Summer Meeting, San Francisco, California, July 1972.
O 13.0-34
Am:ndaOnt XIV May 1982 REFERENCES ( ) S.7
- 1. ,Landard Values of Atmospheric Absorption as a Function of EEmpfInture and Humidity for Use in Evaluating Aircraft Flyover Noise, ARP 86b, Society of Automotive Engineers. New York, N.Y., 1964.
- 2. Capans, G. and Bradley, W. E., Agnustical Impact of Cooling TowcIs, Journal Acoustical Society of America, Vol. 55, 536 (A), 1974.
- 3. Pas, S. P., Prediction of Excess Attenuation Spectrum for Natural _Gtound cover, Report WR 72-3, Wylie Laboratories, Huntsville, Alabama, February 1972.
- 4. U.S., Department of Housing and Urban Development, 24CFR51 Environmental Criteria and Standards, Subpart B-Noise 14 Abatement and Control, Revised as of April 1, 1981.
- 5. Zone Ordinance, City of Oak Ridge, Tennessee, Section 6-504 Noise, June 17, 1959 with may 29, 1975 amendments.
- 6. FMEP Environmental Assessment, Supplement for Secure Automated Fabrication (SAF), October 1981.
\ 7. Environmental Assessment for the Fuels and Materials
{s/ Examination Facility, DOE /EA-0116, July 1980.
- 8. ORNL/CFRP-81/4. " Conceptual Design Report, Hot Experimental Facility", June 1981. Volume 1. 14
- 9. NUREG-Oll6, " Environmental Survey of the Reprocessing &
Waste Management Portions of the LWR Fuel Cycle", October 1976. ( 10. DOE /EIS-0026, " Final Environmental Impact Statement. Waste Isolation Pilot Plant", Vol. I, Table 4-2, October 1980.
- 11. SAND-81-1957, " Krypton-85 Disposal Program Conceptual Design l Phase: Final Report", November 1981.
- 12. WASH-1535, Volume II, " Proposed Final Environmental Statement, Liquid Metal Past Breeder Reactor Program",
December 1974.
- 13. ERDA-1535, Volume I, Section III D, " Final Environmental Statement, Liquid Metal Past Breeder Reactor Program",
December 1975. t
'd l
l 13.0-34a l I
Amendment XIV Mny 1982 '
- 14. McSweeney, T. I. et. al., " Improved Material Accounting for Plutonium Processing Facilities and a U-235-HTGR Feed Fabrication Facility", BNWL-2098, 1975.
- 15. Beets, C., et. al., " Thoughts and Experiences of Belgium with International Safeguards", paper presented at the ANS Winter Meeting, November 30, 1981.
- 16. Perrin, R. E., "New Measurement Capabilities of Mass Spectrometry in the Nuclear Fuel Cycle", Jour. INMM, VIII, 14 Proceedings Issue, pp. 601-619, 1979.
- 17. Ellis, J. H., " Development and Testing of a Near-Real-Time Accounting System for the Barnwell Reprocessing Facility",
Jour. INMM, X, Proceedings Issue, p. 402, 1981. O O 13.0-34b
AMENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 TABLE OF CONTENTS APPENDICES Page 14.1 Appendix to Section 2.5 14.1-1 14.2 Appendix to Section 2.6 (INCORPORATED INTO REVISED SECTION 2.6) 14.3 Appendix to Section 2.7 14.3-1 14.4 Appendix to Sections 5.2 and 5.3 (INCORPORATED INTO REVISED SECTION 5.2) 14.4-1 13 14.5 Appendix to Section 10.1 14.5-1 14.6 Appendix A to Section 10.3 14.6-1 14.7 Appendix B to Section 10.3 14.7-1 14.8 References 14.8-1 O f 1 I O 14.0-1
l I O I I ( O 14.1 APPENDIX TO SrCTION 2.5 1 0 14.1-1
AMENDMENT XIII APRIL 1982 O' V During the years of plant operation the stabilized population is expected to have a similar distribution. It is estimated that about 45 percent of the population will reside in Knox County (basically the West Knox County Area), about 25 percent will live in Roane County, about 20 percent in Anderson County, with the remaining 10 percent in Loudon County. Project-related population in the area rises and falls rapidly during the seven years of the construction phase (refer to Table 1-1). A similar pattern is repeated by the population resulting from the project under migration condition B (Table 1-2). However, the project-related population rises to a higher peak of about 5,040 persons by the fourth year after the start of site preparation. This estimate was derived by 10 utilizing the same assumptions used to estimate the influx for migration condition A (i.e. , 70 percent of the movers bringing families, an average family size of 3.2, and .7 school age children per family). Thus, during 13 the peak year, there is estimated to be about 1,390 movers with family, p 600 movers without family, 980 school age children, and 680 non-school V age children. Under migration condition B, Knox County will receive a population influx of 2,270 persons followed by Roane County (1,260 people), Anderson County (1,010 people), and Loudon County (500 people). Oak Ridge and the Kingston area are the two areas in the study area that will receive the largest population influx with 760 people each. No other community in the project area is expected to receive more than 500 I people. The project-related population influx at no time contributes significantly to the total population of the study area. The greatest project-related increment (5,040) is only about 3 percent of the estimated 1980 study area population, suggesting that project effects at the area level are likely to be slight. At the county level, the project-related population in Anderson, Knox, and Loudon Counties is expected to be less than 2 percent with the population influx in Roane County expected to be 10 about 2.5 percent. C-3
TABLE 1-1 AREA POPULATION RESULTING FROM CRBRP DIRECT EMPLOYMENT FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A Typical Year Of** Place Construction Phase (Year After Start),_ _ _ _ Plant Operation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Anderson County 30 50 130 160 160 80 30 20 Oak Ridge 80 150 390 480 470 230 80 50 Knox County 230 440 1180 1450 1400 700 230 140 Loudon County 50 100 260 320 310 160 50 30 Roane County 130 240 660 800 780 390 130 80 Four County Area 520 980 2620 3210 3120 1560 520 320 ? u
+ Site preparation projected to begin in 1983. 14 ++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. Area population resulting from CRBRP direct employment for 14 cigration Condition A is the same for all years af ter the first year of plant operation. *0utside of Oak Ridge.
IE se g 3 ." Rx O O O
. _ . - . - . - - - . - . . . - . . . _ . - - . - . . . - - - . = _ . - - . . - - . _ . - . . . - - , . .
O O O t TABLE 1-2 < AREA POPULATION RESULTING FROM CRBRP DIRECT
- EMPL0nfENT FOR MIGRATION CONDITION B tt Typical Year of Place _
Construction Phase (Year After Start), Plant Operation 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Anderson County 40 60 210 250 240 120 30 20 ' Oak Ridge 120 230 620 760 730 350 90 50 n Knox County 350 680 1850 2270 2180 1040 270 140
, d. 10 Loudon County 80 150 410 500 480 230 60 30 Roane County 190 380 1030 1260 1210 580 150 80 Four County Area 780 1520 4120 5040 4840 2320 600 320 1
+ Site preparation projected to begin in.1983.
l14
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. Area population resulting from CRBRP direct employment for migration Condition B is the same for all years after the first year of plant operation. l14
*0utside of Oak Ridge.
i w ,
. G ."
Ex t
- 2 l
Am:nd. X Dec. 1901 2.0 FACILITIES AND SERVICES REQUIRED BY CRBRP PROJECT-RELATED POPULATION In this section some of the needs for private and public sector facilities and services associated with project demographics are discussed. Emphasis is given to those needs for which the public sector is responsible. Selected for inclusion in this analysis are needs for water and wastewater treatment, educational, health care and public safety facilities and/or services . In addition, housing needs in the area are reported. These housing needs include forecasts of conventional houses, mobile home sites and apartment and rooms needed by the project-related population. The needs for facilities and services expected to be satisfied by local govern-ments include teachers and classrooms, hospital beds, policemen and firemen, and water and wastewater treatment facilities. Projected needs for physicians and dentists are also reported. In Section 3.0 the projected costs of these necessary increments to community facilities and/or services are discussed. 10 2.1 HOUSING REQUIREMENTS 0 Forecasted housing requirements for the CRBRP project-related population for migration conditions A and B are reported in this section (condition A represents a 26% inmover rate while condition B represents a 40% inmover rate). Housing requirements resulting from direct employment for each housing type are presented in Tables 2.1-1, 2.1-2, 2.1-3, and 2.1-4 for migration condition A, and in Tables 2.1-5, 2.1-6, 2.1-7, and 2.1-8 for migration condition B. For condition A, requirements for conventional houses (Table 2.1-1 peaks at about 600 by the fourth year after the start of site preparation. The greatest part (43%) of this estimated demand by the peak year is expected to occur in West Kaox County. Mobile home site requirements (Table 2.1-2) peak at about 350 by the fourth year of construction. The greatest part O C-6
._ . . . -. . .- .... .~ -. . - _ . . . - - , - - - - - . - - ~ - - - . - _ . .. . . . - . . , - - . - - . -- - - . . .
6 i I > i TAB 12 2.1-1 i CRBRP PROJECT RELATED CtMULATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONVENTIONAL HOUSES FOR MICRATION CONDITION A Typical Year of** Construction Phase (year af ter start), Plant Operation Place 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Anderson County
- 4 7 18 24 22 10 3 4 j ,
' 112 109 55 18 9 Oak Ridge 18 34 91 Knox County 46 89 238 294 283 143 50 26 10 < w Loudon County 11 21 54 65 63 31 10 6 Roane County , 20 36 96 118 114 57 18 15 Four County Area 99 187 497 613 591 296 99 60
- Site preparation projected to begin in 1983. lj4
** Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRe project-related require.ents for conventional houses for .igration condition A ll4 are the sa.e for all years after the first year of plant operation.
j *0utside of Oak Ridge. 2 A v v 7F w. i 5* CD N >< k
TABIZ 2.1-2 CRBRP PROJECT REIATED CIPfUIATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR MOBIII HOME SITES FOR MICRATION CONDITION A Typical Year of" Construction Phase (year after start), Plant Operation Place 1 2 * '4 5 6 7 1 Anderson County
- 4 8 23 27 27 14 4 2 0 0 10 Oak Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 I
g Knox County 20 40 103 127 122 61 20 12 Loudon County 8 15 42 51 50 24 8 5 Roane County 26 47 126 157 150 76 26 17 Four County Area 58 110 294 362 349 175 58 36
' Site preparation projected to begin in 1983. lj4
" Plant operation projected to begin in1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for mobile home sites for migration condition A are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation. ll4
*Outside of Oak Ridge.
mnF m. a5 CD N >< O O O
k' t I I i TABIZ 2.1-3 j CRBRP PROJECT RELATED CUMUIATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR APARTMENTS AND ROOMS FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A } Typical Year of**
! Constr ction Phase (year after start), Plant Operation .
i 1 Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Anderson County
- 2 4 11 14 12 6 3 2 4
Oak Ridge 13 24 64 78 76 39 13 8 10 Knox County 24 46 119 149 144 73 21 13 < g -
- s Loudon County 2 3 8 9 9 5 3 2 t H j Roane County 7 13 36 45 43 20 7 4
) Tour County Area 48 90 238 295 284 143 47 29 i
- Site preparation projected to begin in 1983.
11 4 l " Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for apartments and rooms for migration condition A are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation.
]4
*0utside of Oak Ridge.
O* , w .$
.a CD
.f i
N >< m l
TABIZ 2.1-4 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED CLtfUTATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL HOUSING TYPES FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A Typical Year of" Construction Phase (year after start), _ Plant Operation
" lace 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Anderson County
- 10 20 52 65 61 30 to 6 Dak Ridge 31 58 155 190 185 93 31 19 Enos County 90 173 460 570 549 277 90 55 O
h N Loudon County 21 39 104 125 122 60 21 13 10 Roane County 53 97 258 320 307 154 51 31 Four County Area 205 387 1,029 1.270 1,224 614 203 125
- Site preparation projected to begin in 1983.
lj4
" Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for all housing types for migration condition A j4 are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation.
*Outside of Oak Ridge, hN w=
m .ch CD N >< w 4 O O O
. -. .. - . _ - - _ . - .-.. -- . .- - .~ ..- . - _ .- . ._.
l., 5 t i TABLE 2.1-5 l i CRBRP PROJECT REIATED C18fUIATIVE REQUIRfJIENTS FOR CONVENTIONAL HOUSES FOR ff!GRATION CONDITION 8 i Typical Year of** i Construction Phase (year after start), Plant Operation i Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 l Anderson County
- 6 11 29 36 34 16 4 4 j n Oak Ridge 27 52 145 176 169 El 21 9 I
I U Inou County 71 137 375 463 440 209 56 26- 10 Loudon County 15 31 84 102 98 46 12 6 l Roane County 28 54 149 182 178 85 22 15 Four County Area 147 285 782 959 919 437 115 60 4 l
' Site preparation projected to begin in 1983.
l14
** Plant operation projected to begin in 1990, CRBRP project-related require =ents for conventional houses for migration condition 8 '
) are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation. l]4 ! *Outside of Oak Ridge. I i i 1 l 0 w n, 4 to .1 ' CO i N >< 4 M 1 < 5
*ABIZ a 2.1-6 CRBRP PROJECT REIATED CUMULATIVE RIQUIREMENTS FOR MOBI!I HOME SITES FOR MICRATION COhTITION B Typical Year of**
Construction Phase (year after start), Plant Operation Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I Anderson County
- 7 14 37 44 43 20 5 2 n Oak Ridge 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I 0
$ Knox County 31 59 162 199 190 90 22 12 10 Loudon County 12 24 65 81 77 37 8 5 Roane County 37 72 198 243 233 111 2 17 Four Couuty Area 87 169 462 567 543 258 61 36
' Site preparation projected to begin in 1983.
lj4 Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRsRP project-related requirements for mobile ho.e sites for ieration condition s are the so.e for all years after the first year of plant operation. lj4
*0utside of Oak Ridge.
we N m" .5 CD N >< w.e T O O O
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ , _ _ _ . i._ _ . . . _ _ . ._ - . . _ . _ . . . . _ _ _ _ . . . . . _ . . _ . . . . _ . _ _ _ ._ __ . . . _ . . . _ .. .. ,i . I i s TABLE 2.1-7 CRBRP PROJECT REIATED CUMULATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR APARTMENTS AND ROOMS FOR MICRATION CONDITION B Typical Year of** Construction Phase (year after start), . Plant Operatioa , Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 l Anderson County
- 3 6 16 19 18 9 2 2
) Oak Ridge 19 36 101 123 119 56 15 8 } Knox County 35 69 190 234 224 107 27 13 g i h Loudon County 3 5 13 16 15 8 2 2 I i Roana County 11 22 58 72 69 32 10 4 i i Four County Area 71 138 378 464 445 212 56 29 I 1 i
' Site preparation projected to begin in 1983.
l14
" Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRsRP project-related requirements for apart ente and roo.. for asa ration condition a . are the sa e for all years after the first year of plant operation. l14 T
$ *0utside of Oak Ridge. 4 l { i d w.:s l w CL i 4
~ .x..
4
TABLE 2.1-8 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED C12fLIATIVE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL HOUSING TYPES FOR MICRATION CONDITION 8 Typical Year of" Construction Phase (year af ter start), Plant Operation Place 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 1 Anderson County
- 15 31 81 99 95 45 11 6 Cak Ridge 46 89 245 299 288 137 36 19 0
h e Knox County 136 265 727 896 854 4c7 107 55 10 Loudon County 31 59 162 199 191 91 23 13 Roane County 77 148 407 497 479 227 61 31 Tour County Area 305 592 1,622 1,990 1,907 907 238 125
' Site preparation projected to begin in 1983.
l)4
" Plant operation projected to begin in1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for all housing types for migration conditior 8 4 are the esse for all years af ter the first year of plant operation. *0utside of Oak Ridge.
d w .N e .CL CD O O O
Amend. XIV May 1982 of 90 students, less than 1 percent of the school system capacity. During the peak year of plant construction, only the Knox County School System is expected to have enrollments exceeding capacities by a noticeable level, 3 and even in this case it would be only about 4 percent (550 students). l14 Table 2.2-8 shows the projected school system excess capacities including the project-related students for migration condition B. During the peak year of construction, caly the Knox County School System could experience enrollment levels noticeably exceeding system wide capacity. The over-enrollment for this system could be about 6 percent of the school system capacity (930- students). Other school systems that would have enrollments 10'l14 , exceeding capacities during the peak year of construction would be the liarriman and Loudon County systems. Ilarriman would experience over-enrollment by about 5 percent with the Loudon County School System l14 overenrollment only about 3 percent of the projected school system capacity l14 for the school year coinciding with the peak year of plant construction. D O 3 I l i i O C-19 i
-- . .-. . . - .~ ~ - - , . _ . - -
Amend. X Dec. 1981 O TABLE 2.2-1 CLMULATIVE SCHOOL ENROLLMENTS FROM CRBRP PROJECT EMPLOYMENT FOR MICRATION CONDITION A* System YEAR 1 YEA 8 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 Anderson ' K 0 0 0 l 1 1 0 1-6 2 3 7 8 8 4 2 7-12 1 2 6 6 6 3 1 K-12 3 5 13 15 15 6 3 Clinton K 0 1 2 2 2 1 0 1-6 3 4 11 13 13 7 3 7-12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K-12 3 5 13 15 15 6 3 03k Ridge K 1 4 1 5 5 2 1 1-6 6 12 33 43 39 19 6 7-12 7 14 38 52 46 23 7 K-12 14 27 75 100 90 39 14 Riars K 1 3 6 7 3 1 1-6 to 18 49 65 3 30 10 7-12 9 16 45 58 54 27 9 K-12 20 37 100 130 120 52 20 liarriman K 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1-6 1 3 11 13 13 6 1 7-12 3 5 13 15 15 8 10 3 K-12 5 9 25 30 30 13 5 Knox K 3 6 14 16 16 ~7 3 1-6 19 33 90 108 108 54 18 7-12 20 35 97 116 116 58 19 K-12 41 74 201 '240 240 104 39 Kno=ville K 0 0 2 1 2 1 0 1-6 2 4 11 13 13 7 2 7-12 3 5 13 15 15 8 3 K-12 5 '9 25 30 30 11 5 Loudon K 1 1 3 4 4 2 1 1-6 3 6 17 20 20 10 3 7-12 2 5 13 16 16 8 2 K-12 6 12 33 40 40 .18 6 Lerair City K 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1-6 1 2 6 7 7 3 1 7-12 2 4 to 12 .12 5 2 K-12 3 6 17 20 10 8 3
- Area school enrollments from CRBRP project employment for migration condition A 11clude school age children of both construction and operation workers.
l 9 C-20 1
Amend. X Dec. 1981 TABLE 2.2-2 CIAfUIATIVE SCHOOL ENROLIJ1ENTS RESULTING FROM CRBRP PROJEC1' EM/LOYMENT FOR HICRATION CONDITION 8* System YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3 YEAR 4 YEAR 5 YEAR 6 YEAR 7 Anderson K 0 1 2 2 2 1 0 1-6 2 4 11 13 12 5 2 7-12 2 3 8 to 10 5 1 K-12 4 8 21 25 24 11 3 Clinton K 2 4 4 5 5 2 0 16 8 14 17 20 19 9 3 7-12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 K-12 10 18 21 25 24 11 3 Cak Ridge K 1 3 8 9 8 4 1 1-6 9 17 49 64 7 12 59 28 8 11 21 58 77 69 32 9 K-12 21 41 115 150 136 64 18 Roane K 3 7 10 13 11 5 1 1-6 15 28 78 97 91 42 10 7-12 11 21 69 90 82 38 9 K-12 29 56 157 200 184 85 20 Harriman K 0 0 3 3 3 2 0 1 1-6 4 7 18 22 21 10 2 7-12 4 ! 21 25 24 10 12 3 K-12 8 42 50 48 24 5 Knox OK 1-6 7-12 K-12 24 25 53 4 48 51 107 8 24 140 149 313 29 171 180 380 28 168 177 373 15 81 85 181 3 22 23 48 Knoxville K 0 4 1 4 4 2 0 K6 4 7 19 23 22 10 2 7- 1.' 4 7 19 23 22 9 3 K-12 8 15 42 50 48 21 5 Losson K 1 2 5 6 5 2 1 1-6 5 10 27 32 ' 31 16 3 7-12 4 7 21 25 24 13 3 K-12 10 19 53 63 60 31 7
!anoir City K 1 1 2 2 1 0 0 16 2 4 11 13 13 6 1 1-12 3 6 18 22 21 10 2 K-12 6 11 31 37 35 16 3 tArea school enrollments from CR8RP project employment for mi 8 ration condition B include school age children of both construction and operation workers.
i O U { C-21 k
Amend. XIV May 1982 TABLE 2.2-3 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR Sg1100L TEAClERS FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A Peak Year of Plant Construction Typical Year of Plant Operation System Students Teachers Students Teachers Anderson K 1
- 0 0 1-6 8
- 1
- 7-12 6
- 1
- K-12 15
- 2
- Clinton K 2
- 0 0 1-6 13
- 2
- K-6 15
- 2
- Cak Ridge K 5
- 1 0 1-6 43 1 4
- 7-12 52 1 5
- K-12 100 2 to O Roane K 7
- 1
- l-6 65 2 6
- 7-12 58 2 5
- K-12 130 4 12
- Harriman K 2
- 0 0 1-6 13
- 2
- 10 7-12 15
- 1
- K-12 30
- 3
- Knom K 16 1 1
- 1-6 108 4 10
- 7-12 116 3 24
- K-12 240 8 22
- Knoxville K 2
- 0 0 1-6 13
- 1
- 7-12 15
- 2
- K-12 30
- 3
- Loudon K 4
- 0
- 1-6 20 1 2
- 7-12 16
- 2
- K-12 40 1 4
- Lenoir City K 1
- 0 0 1-6 7
- 1 *.
7-12 12
- 1
- K-12 20
- 2
- Total K-12 620 15 60 0
- Tennessee pupil per-teacher standards are 25 for K 30 for 1-6, and 35 for 7-12.
** Peak year of plant construction expected to occur in 1987. l14
- Plant operation expected to began in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements l]4 for students and teachers for magration condition A are the same for all years af ter the first year of plant operation.
*Less than one-half.
C-22
l l Amend. XIV ' May 1982 O TABLE 2.2-4 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR S$HOOL TEACHERS FOR tt!CRATION CONDITION 8 Peak Year of Plant Cons .ruction" Typical Year of Plant Operation System Students feachers Students Teachers Anderson K 2
- 0 0 1-6 13
- 1
- 7-12 10
- 1
- K-12 25
- 2
- 1 Clinton K 3
- 0 0 1-6 22 1 2
- K-6 25 1 2
- Cak Ridge K 9
- 1
- 1-6 64 2 4
- 7-12 77 2 5
- K-12 150 4 10
- Roane K 13
- 1 *
, 1-6 97 3 6
- 7-12 90 2 5
- K-12 200 5 12
- Marriman E 3
- 0 0 i
O 1-6 7-12 K-12 22 25 50 1 1 2 2 1 3
- g Knox K 27 1 1
- 1-6 171 6 10
- 7-12 182 5 11
- K-12 380 12 22
- i Knoxville K 2
- 0 0 1-6 22 1 1 *
'7-12 25 1 2
- K-12 50 2 3
- Loudon K 5
- 0 0 1-6 33 1 2
- 7-12 27 1 2
- K-12 65 2 6
- Lenoir City i
K 2
- O 0 l
1-6 12
- 1
- 7-12 21 1 1
- K-12 35 1 2
- i i Total l K-12 980 29 60 0
,
- Tennessee pupi1*per-teacher standards are 25 for K, 30 for 1-6, and 35 for 7-12.
" Peak year of plant construction expected to occur in 1987.
l14 Plant operation expected to besta an 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for students and teachers for amaratton condition 8 are the same for all years l]4 af ter the t hrst year ci plant operatton.
*Less than one-half.
C-23
Amend. XIV May 1982 TAB 12 2.2-5 O CRBRP PROJECT RE!ATED REQUIREMENTS FOR SCHKL CLASSROOMS FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A Peak Year of Plant Construction" Typical Year of Plant Operation"
- System Students Classrooms Students Classrooms Anderson K 1
- 0 0 1-6 8
- 1
- 7-12 6
- 1
- K-12 15
- 2
- Clinton K 2
- 0 0 1-6 13
- 2
- K-6 15
- 2
- Oak Ridge K 5
- 1
- l-6 43 1 4
- 7-12 52 1 5
- K-12 100 2 10
- Roane K 7
- 1
- l-6 65 2 6
- 7-12 58 2 5
- K-12 130 4 12
- Harriman K 2
- O 0 1-6 13
- 2
- 10 7-12 15
- 1
- K-12 30
- 3
- Knom K 16 1 1
- 1-6 108 4 10
- 7-12 116 3 11
- K-12 240 8 22
- Knoxville K 2
- 0 0 1-6 13
- 1
- 7-12 15
- 2
- K-12 30
- 3
- Loudon K 4
- 0 0 1-6 20 1 2
- 7-12 16
- 2
- K-12 40 1 4
- Lenoir City K 1
- 0 0 1-6 7
- 1 7-12 12
- 1 K-12 20
- 2
- Total K-12 620 15 60 0
' Tennessee pupil-per-teacher standards are 25 for K, 30 for 1-6, and 35 for 7-12. " Peak year of plant construction espected to occur in 1987, ll4
"* Plant operation expected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for students and teachers for migration condition A are the same for all years ll4 after the first year of plant operation.
*Less than one-half.
C-24
Amend. XIV May 1982 ) TABLE 2.2-6 '
/
CRBRP PROJECT RT. LATED REQUIREMENTS FOR SCH @ L CLASSROOMS FOR MICRATION CONDITION B Peak Year of Plant Construction ** Typical Year of Plant Operation
- System' Students Classrooms Students Classrooms Anderson K 2
- 0 0 l 1-6 13
- 1 * '
7-12 10 * -1 .* ; K-12 25
- 2
- I Clinton K 3
- 0 0 1-6 22 1 2
- K-6 25 1 2
- Oak Ridge K 9 .* 1
- 1-6 64 2 4
- 7-12 77 2 5 *-
K-12 150 4 10
- Roane K 13
- 1
- 1-6 97 3 6
- 7-12 90 2 5
- K-12 200 5 12
- Harriman K 3
- 0
- 1-6 22 1 2
- 7-12 25
- V K-12 50 1
2 1 3
- g Knox K 27 1 1
- 1-6 171 6 10
- 7-12 182 5 11
- K-12 380 12 22
- Knoxville K 4
- 0 0 1-6 23 1 1
- 7-12 23 1 2
- K-12 50 2 3
- Loudon K 5
- 0
- l-6 33 1 2
- 7-12 27 1 2
- K-12 65 2 4
- Lenoir City K 2
- 0 0 1-6 12
- 1
- 7-12 21 1 1
- K-12 35 1 2
- Total K-12 1 980 29 60 0
' Tennessee pupil-per-teacher standards are 25 for K, 30 for 1-4, and 35 for 7-12.
** Peak year of plant construction espected to occur in 1987, l14 Plant operation espected to begin in 1990, CHRP project-related requirements for students and teachers for migration condition 8 are the same for all years l]4 af ter the first year of plant operation.
*Less than one-half.
C-25
TABLE 2.2-7 PRESENT A.'D PROJECTED SCHOOL SYSTEM CAPACITIES ENROLLMENT, AND EXCESS CAPACITIES 1981 Peak Year of Plant Construction
- System Capacity Enrollment Excess Capacity Enrollment Excess Anderson 9,278 8,032 1,246 9,278 8,558 720 Clinton 1,065 905 160 1,065 877 1 88
$ Oak Ridge 6,200 5,042 1,158 6,200 6,000 200 Roane 7,139 6,652 487 7,230 6.060 1,170 10 Harriman 2,265 2,204 61 2,265 2,327 -62 Knox 15,113 15,203
-90 15,300 15,850 -550 Knoxville. 37,800 25,931 11,869 NA NA NA Loudon 3,806 3,756 50 3,806 3,842 -36 Lenoir. City 2,057 1,934 73 2,057 2,000 57 s
N r Peak year of plant construction expected to occur in 1987. lj4 Only the north,J.3rthwest, and southwest sectors of the Knox School System. ' ', acg7 Qm NA - Not available . _.E E-Source: TVA phone survey of school system superintendents, September 1981. "' E!
~
O . O O
_ Amend. XIV May 1982 TABLE 2.2-8 PROJECTED SCHOOL SYSTEM EXCESS CAPACITIES AND INCREMENTAL CRBRP PROJECT ENROLLMENT FOR PEAK YEAR OF PLANT CONSTRUCTION (MIGRATION CONDITION B)* Without Project With Project System Excess capacity Project Enrollment Excess Capacity Anderson 720 25 695 Clinton 188 25 163 Oak Ridge 200 150 50 Roane 1.170 200 970 Harriman? -62 50 -112 Knox -550 380
-930 14 London -36 65 -101 Lenoir City 57 35 22
/
- Peak ' year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987. l
*The Knoxville City System is not included in this table because they were unable to provide projections for 1987 because of the uncertainty of Knoxville's annexation proposals. The K-12 project enrollment is 50 for this system.
l '. i ', 1 C) C-27 I
- - . - . - .--.-.-.-- -~ , , . - _ - _ . - . . . - . _ . . . . _ . . . - , _ . - - - - . . - . . . . . - . . . - . - . . . , - . , -
Amend. X Dec. 1981 2.3 IIEALTH CARE REQUIREMENTS The project-related population increases for the four counties surrounding the project area during the peak year of construction of the CRBRP for migration condition A are estimated to be: Anderson - 640, Knox - 1,450, Loudon - 320, and Roane County - 800. Tables 2.3-1, 2.3-3, and 2.3-5 indicate the number of hospital beds, physicians and dentists that would be necessary to accommodate the project-related population that moves into the project area for both the peak year of construction and a typical year of plant operation based on standards considered desirable by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services of four beds and one physician for each 1,000 persons and one dentist for each 4,000 8 persons. Only 13 beds, 2 physicians, and I dentist would be needed to accommodate the project-related workers that move into the project area for the peak year of construction. No additional health care requirements would be needed during the years of plant operation except for the use of 1 bed. The project-related population increases for the four counties surrounding the project area during the peak year of construction of the CRBRP for migration condition B are estimated to be: Anderson - 1,010, Knox - 2,270, Loudon - 500, and Roane. County - 1,260. Using the same standards listed above, the number of hospital beds, physicians, and dentists that would be necessary to accommodate the project-related population that moves into the project area for the peak year of construction would be only 20 beds, 5 physicians, and 1 dentist for the entire four county area (Tables 2.3-2, 2.3-4, and 2.3-6) . There would not be any shortages in hospital beds l or noticeable decline in the quality of primary care physicians or dental l services as a result of the peak year project-related population for either migration condition A or B because of the low occupancy rates for hos-pital bed use and the high number of physicians and dentists currently l practicing within the four county aret. Descriptions of existing health t l l l 1 O l C-28 l
1 i
- l I
i Amend. X Dec. 1981 ; i care facilities and services, including data on occupancy rates and i j practicing physicians and dentists, within the four-county area are I
; presented in sections 2.2.1.5 and 8.1.3.4 and Tables 2.2-12 and 8.1-18.
10 I d j t i n a i I I k 1 I F C-29
TABLE 2.3-1 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR HOSPITAL BEDS FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A Peak Year of Plant Construction Typical Year of Plant Operation ** Place _ Population Beds Population Beds Anderson County
- 160 1 20 **
Oak Ridge 480 2 50 ** Knox County 1,450 6 140 1 Loudon County 320 1 30 ** 10 Roane County 800 3 80 **
?
El Area 3,210 13 320 1
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987.
l14
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for hospital beds l14 for migration condition A are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge.
**Less than one-half.
IN se g G." Ex
- 2 O O O
O O O TABLE 2.3-2 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR HOSPITAL BEDS FOR MIGRATION CONDITION B Peak Year of Plant Construction
- Typical Year of Plant Operation" Place Population Beds Population Beds Anderson County
- 250 1 20 **
Oak Ridge 760 3 50 ** Knox County 2,270 9 140 1 Loudon County 500 2 30 ** Roane County 1,260 5 80 ** 7 $ Area 5,040 20 320 1
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987.
l14
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for hospital beds l14 for migration condition B are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation. *0utside of Oak Ridge. **Less than one-half.
IE
*2 3 ."
%x
- 2
TABLE 2.3-3 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR PHYSICIAFS FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A Peak Year of Plant Construction Typical Year of Plant Operation" Place Population Physicians Population Physicians Anderson County
- 160 ** 20 **
Oak Ridge 480 ** 50 ** Knox County 1,450 1 140 ** Loudon County 320 ** 30 ** Roane County 800 1 80 ** O Area 3,210 2 320 ** 10
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987.
l14
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for hospital beds l14 for migration condition A are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation.
*Outside of Oak Ridge.
**Less than one-half.
IE
- 2l 3."
8x
- 2 O O O
O O O TABLE 2.3-4 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR PHYSICIANS FOR MIGRATION C0hTITION B Peak Year of Plant Construction + Typical Year of Plant Operation" Place Population Physicians Population Physicians Anderson County
- 250 ** 20 **
Oak Ridge 760 1 50 ** Knox County 2,270 2 140 ** Loudon County 500 1 30 ** Roane County 1,260 1 80 ** 10 d Area 5,040 5 320 **
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987. l14
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for hospital beds l14 for migration condition B are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge.
**Less than one-half.
NN
*2 3 ."
Ex
- 2
TABLE 2.3-5 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR DENTISTS FOR MIGRATION CONI)ITION A Peak Year of Plant Construction
- Typical Year of Plant Operation" Place Population Dentists Population Dentists Anderson County
- 160 ** 20 **
Oak Ridge 480 ** 50 ** Knox County 1,450 ** 140 ** Loudon County 320 ** 30 ** Roane County 800 ** 80 ** $ Area 3,210 1 320 ** 10
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987.
h4
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for hospital beds lj 4 for migration condition A are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge.
**Less than one-half.
$N
*a G."
8x O O O
O O O 4 TABLE 2.3-6 1 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR DENTISTS FOR MIGRATION CONDITION B Peak Year of Plant Construction
- Typical Year of Plant Operation Place Population Dentists Population Dentists Anderson County
- 250 ** 20 **
Oak Ridge 760 ** 50 ** I Knox County 2,270 1 140 ** Locdon County 500 ** 30 ** 10 Roane County 1,260 ** 80 h d Area 5,040 1 320 0 I
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987. l14
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for hospital beds l14 for migration condition B are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge.
**Less than one-half.
i I Ek wg G ." Ex
- 2
Amend. X Dec. 1981 2.4 PUBLIC SAFETY Public safety needs are concerned with possible expansion of law enforce-ment and fire protection services to maintain existing levels of those services during the peak population influx. Given the incremental nature and moderate size of the population influx in relation to the area's population, there should be no need for expansion of those services. As 10 indicated in Table 2.4-1, the current ratios of law ' enforcement officers per 1,000 residents for the area jurisdictions would experience insignifi-cant changes if any as a result of either population influx scenario. Thus, the current levels of service would be maintained. No expansion of fire protection services should be necessary to maintain existing levels of services either as a result of the small project-related peak year population increase distributed throughout the study area where it is estimated that the population exceeds 200,000 people. l O O C-36
O O O TABLE 2.5-1 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER SUPPLY FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A , Peak Year of Plant Construction +- Typical Year of Plant Operation ++ Water Water Place Population (1,000 gpd) Population (1,000 gpd) Anderson County
- Urban 80 10.7 10 1.4 Rural 80 7.4 10 0.9 .
Oak Ridge Urban 480 63.8 50 - 6.7 i
$ Roane County 10 Urban 400 53.2 40 5.3 i Rural 400 37.0 40 3.7 Knox County Urban 160 21.3 15 2.0 Rural 1,290 119.5 125 11.5 Loudon County Urban 160 21.3 15 2.0 Rural 160 14.8 15 2.0 Area 3,210 349.0 320 35.5
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987, *N 14 4 e
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for water supply 14 _. E for migration condition A are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation. $*
*0utside of Oak Ridge "5<
1
TABLE 2.5-2 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR WATER SUPPLY FOR MIGRATION CONDITION B Peak Year of Plant Construction + Typical Year of Plant Operation ++ Water Water Place Population (1,000 gpd) Population (1,000 gpd) Anderson County
- Urban 125 16.6 10 1.4 Rural 125 11.6 10 0.9 Oak Ridge Urban 760 101.0 50 6.7
?
$ Roane County 10 Urban 630 84.2 40 5.3 Rural 630 58.3 40 3.7 Knox County Urban 250 33.3 15 2.0 Rural 2,020 187.0 125 11.5 Loudon County Urban 250 33.2 15 2.0 Rural 250 23.1 15 2.0 Area 5,040 548.3 320 35.5
+ Peak year of plant construction prc ~ected to occur in 1987
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for water supply l14 34 for migration condition B are the same for all years af ter the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge gg
%c g 3 ."
h
- 2 O O O
l TABLE 2.6-1 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR WASTEWATER DISPOSAL FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A 1 Peak Year of Plant Construction + Typical Year of Plant Operation ++ Wastewater Wastewater Place Population (1,000 gpd) - Population (1,000 gpd) I 8
- Anderson County
- 160 16.0 20 P
) 2.0 Oak Ridge .480 48.0 50 5.0 Roane County 800 80.0 80 8.0 4" Knox County 1,450 145.0
- un 140 14.0 10 Loudon County 320 32.0 30 3.0 Area 3,210 321.0 320 32.0
+ Peak yect of plant construction projected to occur in 1987 l
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements l14 for wastewater disposal for migration condition A are the same for all years gj4 ;
after the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge 1
- l wg
;f' co N >C
. . - . ~ '
TABLE 2.6-2 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR WASTEWATER DISPOSAL FOR MIGRATION CONDITION B Peak Year of Plant Construction + Typical Year of Plant Operation ++ Wastewater Wastewater Place Population (1,000 gpd) Population (1,000 gpd) Anderson County
- 250 25.0 20 2.0 Oak Ridge 760 76.0 50 5.0 Roane County 1,260 126.0 80 8.0 10
? Knox County 2,270 227.0 140 14.0 Loudon County 500 50.0 30 3.0 Area 5,040 504.0 320 32.0
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987.
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements {14 for wastewater disposal for migration condition B are the same for all years jl4 after the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge
?E
*8 Rx 2
O O O
, O O O l TABLE 2.6-3
- CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL FOR MIGRATION CONDITION A i
i i Peak Year of Plant Construction + Typical Year of Plant Operation ++ Solid Waste Solid Waste Place Population (100 lbs/ day) Population (100 lbs/ day Anderson County
- 160 6.4 20 0.8 Oak Ridge 480 19.2 50 2.0 Roane County 800 32.0 80 3.2
? Knox County 1,450 57.6 140 5.6 10 Loudon County 320 12.8 30 1.2 j Area 3,210 128.0 320 12.8 i
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987. l14
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements for solid waste disposal for migration condition A are the same for all years gj4
- after the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge i
i dN 1 xg Gs ." Ex
- 2
TABLE 2.6-4 CRBRP PROJECT RELATED REQUIREMENTS FOR SOLID WASTE DISP 0 ..L FOR MIGRATION CONDITION B Peak Year of Plant Construction + Typical Year of Plant Operation ++ Solid Waste Solid Waste Place Population (100 lbs/ day) Population (100 lbs/ day Anderson County
- 250 10.0 20 0.8 Oak Ridge 760 30.4 50 2.0 Roane County 1,260 50.4 80 3.2 10
? Knox County 2,270 90.8 140 5.6 Loudon County 500 20.0 30 1.2 Area 5,040 201.6 320 12.8
+ Peak year of plant construction projected to occur in 1987. ll4
++ Plant operation projected to begin in 1990. CRBRP project-related requirements jl4 for solid waste disposal for migration condition B are the same for all years after the first year of plant operation.
*0utside of Oak Ridge IN
*a G ."
Rx G e e O
% N G
TARI.E 2.7-1 CRBRP COMMUTT.R TRAITIC IMPACTS ON KEY IIIClyY SEGMENTS FOR MIGRATION CONDITIONS A AND R Projected Irvet ef y Projected Level of Projected Level of Service for Hour y Existing Isvel of Service for liour Service for Hour With CRRRP Cn-mater Existina Service int Hour With CRBRP Comeuter With CRRRP Commuter Traffic Centributes Peak Hour W ith CRBRP Conneuter Traffir Contributes Traffic Contributes thring a Typical Year Highway Segment, Level of Service Traffic Contributes for Migration Condition A for M'aration Condition B of Plant operat, ion (1994). I. State Route 58 betwen I-40 and D C D D E Rear Creek Road (CRBRP Access Road)
- 2. State Route 58 Between Bear Creek D R D D E Road (CRBRP Access Road) and ORGDP
- 3. State Route 58 Between ORCDP and D B C C D Intersection State Route 95 m F e 4. State Route 95 from Intersection E C D D
$ State Route 58 to Beginning of 4-I.ane in Oak Ridge
- 5. State Route 95 Between I-40 and E D E E F Bear Creek Road (CRBRP Access Road)
I'eak year of ronstruction expected to occur in 1987, Plant operation expected to begin in 1990. l14
,g, Based on Tennessee Department of Transportation haurly traffic counts for 1978-1981.
Projected service levels are the same with or withaut the CRRRP traf fic. Operation workforce is expected to cummute to and from the plant 10 during the existina peak hour. Note: Assumptions used in evaluating the t raf fic situation include.
- 1. No sponsored van and bus program. .
- 2. Commuter vehicle occupancy = 2.0 for migration conditions A and B and 1.5 for CRDRP operation workforce cosumters.
- 3. No truck deliveries to construction site during shif t comanuting hours. k
- s
- 4. CRBRP construction work shif t hours will be staggered such that CRRRP coammting t raf fic will not coincide with the existina non-CRRRP -d CL related peak hour traffic. $*
ro x
- 5. Intersections SR95 and SR58, SR58 and Bear Creek Road, and SR95 and Bear Creek Road to be upgraded prior to significant constructinn y employment buildup.
- 6. Annual increase in non-CRBRP related traffic volumes = 2 percent
- 7. Operation workforce day shift equals 200 employees.
I ! R. Peak year of construction = 1987. l 10 13h4 l l t
Am nd. X Dec. 1981 3.0 ANALYSIS OF EXPENDITURES AND REVENUES 3.1 OVERVIEW O Project-related revenues to local governments can be derived from five basic sources:
- 1. Financial assistance payments by DOE pursuant to the Atomic Energy Community Act of 1955, as amended (42 U.S.C. Sec. 2301, et seq.)
- 2. In lieu of tax payments by TVA pursuant to the Tennessee Valley Authority Act of 1933 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 831, g seq.)
at such time as TVA may pay for and take permanent custody of the CRBRP and thereafter own and operate it as part of its power system. Such a transfer from DOE to TVA is not anticipated before 1995 at the earliest.
- 3. Sales or use taxes on materials, supplies and equipment acquired for use in constructing the plant, but which do not become a component of the plant itself or of the related distribution system;
- 4. Federai school impact aid from P.L. 81-874. Appropriations for FY 1982 are currently under Congressional review, and the future of such payments is in question;
- 5. Direct and indirect taxes on or resulting from additional wages and salaries, business activities and private property values attributable to employment and expenditures related to construction and operation of the plasit.
O C-30 i l 1
0
*se is e e
5 0 a i f spf b#p # !:!'~/, !
?e J:P e iff
? $
e qcg b e/ 0 a: elu j5el'f".' t
%@#f no p*
r;O pp$g $ A e.]e l s
/t'8 S
s?eb 4 e tj $? sp[e e b e Aos eeb A c g .9 f ee4'sg o 0 Oh s e e ctpe %; et s OA A o b eu
~ of $c"y e e&
e N s e r# ,* ?spe, A g os m' O
$ t a e 4e ep.sc .e E ,e f b' y
q'o s og2' t .-
~s//,-
v N D4 k e r
06' G s
f Of ph
,y *;?g M
h .$ G
*$s' $
e$ q 'N 7
- s , - - " _ -
)
. O l AENDMENT XlV REVlS10NS RESULTING FROM ADDITIONAL OR UPDATED INFORMATION AND MINOR CORRECTIONS f I Sections 3.2 Updated to include minor changes to the heterogeneous core configuration description 3.8 Updated to include minor changes to the heterogeneous core configuration description 4.1 Provides reference inadvertently deleted 5.7 Provides detalled discussion of the CRBRP fuel cycle including: CRBRP fuel fabrication, CRBRP fuel reprocessing, radioactive wastes from the CRBRP f uel cycle, doses from CRBRP fuel cycle, and safeguards and security of the CRBRP fuel cycle. Sections 8.1, 8.2, 8.3 Appendix C Updated to incorporate current plant cost estimate and construction schedule. 3 AXIV-1
. . . . . . _ . . , - - _ . . , - - . , , - - - _ - . ,}}