ML20054H697
| ML20054H697 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Dresden, 05000000 |
| Issue date: | 01/31/1981 |
| From: | MURRAY & TRETTEL, INC. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20054H689 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8206240338 | |
| Download: ML20054H697 (51) | |
Text
1/81 Rev. 4 Quality Assurance Program for Meteorological Monitoring Programs Prepared by MURRAY AND TRETTEL, INCORPORATED Northfield, IL 60093 26 July 1976 8206240338 820616 Controlled Distribut' ion No.
9 PDR ADOCK 05000010 F
PDR L
J Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
i 1/81 Rev. 4 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Page Foreword................................................
1 Introduction............................................
2 1
Organization............................................
3 2
Quality Assurance Program...............................
6 3
Design Control..........................................
7 4
Procurement Document Control............................
8 5
Instructions, Procedures, and Drawings..................
8 6
Document Control........................................
9 7
Control of Purchased Material, Equipment, and Services..
10 8
Inspections.............................................
10 9
Test Control............................................
11 10 Control of Measuring and Testing Equipment..............
12 11 Handling, Storage, and Shipping.........................
13 12 Nonconforming Materials, Parts, or Components...........
14 13 Corrective Action.......................................
14 14 Quality Assurance Records...............................
14 15 Audits..................................................
15 L
_I Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
l 9/80 Rev. 3 Foreword This is Murray and Trettel's Quality Assurance Program which describes the requirements that must be implemented in connection with the Commonwealth Edison Company meteorological monitoring programs.
The report is divided into fifteen (15) sections conforming in format to fifteen (15) criteria specified in " Quality Articles for Meteorological Monitoring", July 1980, Revision 1.
The contents of this report are to be considered as Murray and Trettel policy and, as such, are to be followed by all employees to the extent of their involvement in the monitoring program.
Wb YohnR.Murray,B.S.,J.6.
Certified Consulting Meteorologist President 22 July 1976 1
~
L J
_fbrantA_m_0m__@MM@EnazitinaMacr@lesiete ____ __
_ _ _ _. _ ____ j
-2 9/80 Rev. 3 Introduction This report has been prepared to delineate the requirements governing the Murray and Trettel Quality Assurance Program for meteorological monitoring programs.
Implementation of the monitoring program with detailed procedures provides the degree of quality assurance commensurate with the requirements of applicable codes and requirements of agencies which govern the installation and operation of ineteorological monitoring equipment, and the handling, reduction and processing of data. The scope of this report covers the total Quality Assurance Program for the life of the monitoring program.
l 7
L J
11 hAnrrnv and Trettel Inc Certified Consof tinn Meteorofoo'GRG 1/81 Rev. 4 1.
Organization Murray and Trettel, Incorporated is responsible for the assurance of quality in all phases of the acquisition, reduction, and analysis of meteorological monitoring data. Murray and Trettel executes this responsibility in accordance with the program described herein and assigns areas of ultimate responsibility to specific individuals.
Lines of authority and responsibility for the Quality Assurance Program are documented in the form of an organization chart. Key quality assurance positions including those provioing technical support or audit responsibility are described. The organization chart for the meteorological monitoring program is shown in Figure 1.
Solid lines represent responsibility for implementing the procedures and instructions.
Dashed lines represent audit responsibility for verifying compliance with the procedures and instructions.
l.A. The specific responsibilities for the Quality Assurance Program are described in the following paragraphs.
l.A.1 Executive Vice President The Executive Vice President of Murray and Trettel has the overall responsibility for the Quality Assurance (QA) of the meteorological monitoring programs. The oevelopment of quality assurance policy for environmental studies, the scheduling of audits, and the training of auditors are under his jurisdiction.
L J
Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1/81 Rev. 4 1.A.2.
Quality Assurance Officer Authority and responsibility to conduct periodic audits is assigned by the Executive Vice President to the Quality Assurance Officer. This position reports directly to the Executive Vice President in all matters involving quality assurance, and is independent of the normal operation of the meteorological monitoring programs except for matters involving quality assurance.
The Quality Assurance Officer is responsible for conducting audits and inspections, detecting deficiencies in the procedures, and recommending improvements in the procedures if deficiencies are discovered.
l.A.3.
Vice President, Environmental Applications The Vice President, Environmental Applications is responsible for all environmental projects, including the meteorological monitoring programs. The Vice President, Environmental Applications is also responsible for the training of personnel involved in the program, and for approving all procedures and manuals used in the program, l.A.4 Project Manager The Project Manager has the overall direct responsibility for the monitoring program. This position is responsible for providing technical assistance, assigning time tables, setting priorities and tl.e day-to-day decisions required by the project.
Also among this position's L
J Murray and Trettet Inc. certified consulting Meteorologists
)
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1/81 Rev. 4 responsibilities are (1) the preparation of procedures to assure data validity; (2) coordination of data review and remote systems checks to identify possible malfunctions; and (3) the notification of approp.iate field personnel when field equipment testing is required.
s 1.A.5.
Environmental Meteorologist The Environmental Meteorologist is responsible for the day-to-day operation of the project, and for providing technical assistance and training to the technicians.
The duties also include inspection of the data for reasonableness, review of the results of computer validation checks to identify problem areas, inspection of charts and records of project documents for completeness, final editing of the data record and preparation of monthly, semi-annual and other miscellaneous related reports.
l.A.6 Data Processing Staff The Data Processing Staff maintains project records, reviews strip charts, reduces data and performs other tasks related to the day-to-day operation of the program.
1.A.7 Field Operations Staff (Field Staff)
The Field Staff maintains the field equipment, performs in-situ / instrument calibrations, provides documentation of the performance of each system, maintains a spare parts inventory, performs tests of instruments and trouble shooting checks in equipment, and repairs and maintains service instrumentation in proper calibration.
IL J
Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
____n
___ 1/81 Rev. 4 1.B. Quality Assurance personnel have the authority and organizational freedom to identify and evaluate problems, require and implement approved corrective actions, and control further activities where appropriate action may be required.
1.C. The Quality Assurance Officer acts independently of the person or group directly responsible for performing the activities of the meteorological program.
2.
Quality Assurance Program 2.A. The Quality Assurance Program at Murray and Trettel is approved by management and assures effective implementation of program procedures.
These procedures or instructions assure the monitoring program is conducted in compliance with the appropriate codes and program specifications. In general, the Quality Assurance Program verifies (through audits) that activities have been correctly performed.
2.B. All personnel performing activities with the Quality Assurance program, including personnel performing inspection and testing functions, are trained in the appropriate procedures. Training includes, but is not limited to, review of the QA and Procedures Manuals and all relevant forms. Training is provided to all new personnel, and to all personnel when new procedures are incorporated into the program, and is the responsibility of the Executive Vice President. Training records for personnel trained in Quality functions (including inspecting, testing, and auditing) are maintained by the Project Manager.
L J
Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
._. 1/81 l
Rev. 4 2.C. Periodic reviews of the status and adequacy of the monitoring and Quality Assurance programs are provided through a series of unscheduled inspections and semi-annual audits conoucted by the QA personnel.
2.D. A controlled distribution list is set up and recipients of controlled documents (including the Quality Assurance Manual, procedures, and instructions) will receive any alterations or revisions.
2.E. The QA program complies with all applicable sections of 10 CFR 50.
2.F. The president of Murray and Trettel, Inc. is responsible for signing off Certificates of Conformance.
3.
Design Control 3.A. Detailed specifications, drawings, procedures, and appropriate instructions will be reviewed in order to assure the correct translation of the design bases for systems and components and to assure appropriate quality standards are specified and included in design documents.
3.B. Design reviews are performed for independent verification or check of the adequacy of design.
3.C. Design changes will be reviewed to assure that changes have been subjected to design control measures commensurate with those applied to the original design.
Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists 1/81 Rev. 4 4.
Procurement Document Control 4.A. Procurement documents for material, equipment, and/or services are reviewed by QA personnel in order to assure their compliance with applicable QA standards.
4.B. Major subcontractors of Murray and Trettel, Inc. submit for review and acceptance a Quality Assurance program consistent with the requirements of Murray and Trettel, Inc.'s QA program. The applicable QA requirements of the subcontractor are determined by Murray and Trettel, Inc.
5.
Instructions, Procedures and Drawings A set of procedures for meteorological monitoring programs has been prepared for use by all personnel involved with the program (Meteorological Monitoring Program:
Equipment Servicing and Data Recovery Procedures.
A controlled document No. 1084.), and all work is accomplished in accordance with this document. These procedures contain instructions, specificat, ions,
{
and check lists containing appropriate acceptance criteria covering all phases of the monitoring program from the sensing of the meteorological data to its final verification, analysis and storage.
l The procedures manual is maintained by the Project Manager. All persons having registered copies of the manual receive revisions as they are approved and implemented.
All revisions to the procedures manual are approved before being implemented by Murray and Trettel personnel.
L J
Murrayand Trette!Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
.g.
1/81 Rev. 4 6.
Document Control A document control system is used to assure that documents such as procedures, specifications, maintenance forms and data handling forms are reviewed for accuracy and approved by authorized personnel.
Such documents are distributed to and used by the personnel responsible for their use.
Changes to these documents are handled similarly and are reviewed and approved by the same personnel that performed the original review and approval.
A master controlled distribution list is used to designate the recipients of the documents.
Each document recipient is responsible for insuring that only the latest authorized procedures are in use and obsolete documents are marked " VOID" or destroyed.
The Project Manager is responsible for instituting the document control system for the project and the Environmental Meteorologist is responsible for assuring the necessary files, logs, and procedures are instituted and maintained in a neat and proper manner. The Environmental Meteorologist is also responsible for assuring that those documents that are to be sent to the client are prepared and transmitted in a timely manner.
Documents pertaining to the maintenance, calibration, and performance of equipment are retained in a central filing system at Murray and Trettel.
L J
Murray and TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1/81 Rev. 4 7.
Control of Purchased Material. Equipment, and Services In order to assure that purchased material, equipment, and services conform j
to procurement documents, the.following measures are followed.
7.A. Materials, equipment, and services are obtained from established, reputabic suppliers.
7.8. Upon receipt, all purchased materials, equipment, and services are reviewed for conformity to the procurement documents which are then initialed and rnaintained in the project file.
7.C. Assemblies are installed and tested when placed in service.
Documentation is provided on non-routine maintenance forms which are retained in the project file.
7.0. The effectiveness of Quality Control by Murray and Trettei, Inc. cr by its
~
subcontractors who perform a significant portion of the actual servi _ces, may i
be assessed by Edison or Edison's designee at intervals appropriate to the importance, complexity, and quantity of the activities being performed.
t
.'N_
8.
Inspection
{
8.A. Inspections are carried out at all stages of the data acquisition, proces-sing, and reporting to assure conformance with' d6cumented instructions, procedures, and drawings. Equipment inspections are performed b', qualified s.
I field operations personnel. Quality Assurance inspect. ions are performed by.
individuals other than those who perform the activities being inspected.
L J
~
i Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulti;ng Melecrologists
-ll-1/81 Reva 4 The Field Operations Manager is responsible for the training of field personnel and the Executive Vice President is responsible for the training of QA personnel.
Documentation of the training is kept by the Project Manager.
8.B. Inspection, by Edison or by others directed by Edison, of any activities or facilities utilized in the performance of services done by Murray and Trettel, Inc. (or their subcontractors) for Edison nay be carried out periodically.
i 8.C. Inspection results will be retained by the Project Manager.
9.
Test Control 9.A. A testing program has been established to assure that the meteorological sensors, signal conditioners, and recorders are performing in the required manner. Calibrations are conducted at specified intervals by qualified personnel in accordance with written test procedures (cf. " Meteorological Monitoring Program: Equipment Servicing and Data Recovery Procedures")
which incorporate the requirements, acceptance criteria, and limits contained in the specifications.
In addition, calibration of the equipment is performed whenever it has been repaired or whenever the quality assurance checks, made on the data, indicate that the system may not be performing up
~
to specifications.
The test equipment used by Murray and Trettel field personnel is calibrated at routine intervals.
Electronic test equipment is calibrated and certified by the manufacturer and thermometers are calibrated in house by qualified N
tect L
J Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified C<msulting Meteorologists
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - 1/81 Rev. 4 To assure that all of the required tests and calibrations are performed, specific forms have been developed for each site.
These forms serve to remind the technician of the required tests, to assure that adequate and calibrated test instrumentation is used, to assure that the test is performed under appropriate environmental conditions, to document the results of the tests, and to indicate any problems encountered in the procedure. The acceptable tolerances for each test are provided on the form to assure all calibrations are within acceptable limits. The calibrated systems-are affixed with a sticke~r indicating the date of calibration, the initials of the technician who performed the work, and the date of the forthcoming calibration.
9.B. All test results will be retained and evaluated.
- 10. Control of Measuring and Testing Equipment 10.A. The electronic instruments and thermometers used to calibrate the meteorological systems are themselves calibrated at routine intervals. This l
l assures that these items are maintained within acceptable limits of accuracy. Assignment of equipment is recorded in the project inventory.
Electronic testing instrumentation is calibrated once each year by the manufacturer in such a manner that the results can be traced to the National l
Bureau of Standards. These results are certified by the manufacturer and a calibration label is affixed to the instrument. The label states the date of the calibration and date the next calibration is due.
l L
J l
Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
_ 1/81 Rev. 4 Thermometers are calibrated at Murray and Trettel by trained personnel. A water bath and a precision thermometer, whose calibration is traceable to the National Bureau of Standards, are used in the calibration procedure. A multi-point calibration is performed quarterly (i.e. within 110 days of the previous calibration) on each thermometer and the results are documented.
New thermometers are calibrated before use in the field.
10.B. The status of inspection and tests performed on items furnished as part of the program is indicated by means of labels affixed to the items. All instrumentation csed in the calibration of the meteorological system have calibration labels indicating when they were last calibrated, and the date their next calibration is due. Calibration logs are maintained in the i
project file.
Each time the system is calibrated, a calibration label is affixed to the system by the field service personnel. This label indicates the date of the calibration, the personnel who performed the calibration, and the date the next calibration is due.
11.
Handling, Storage, and Shipping l
l Equipment is stored in a climate controlled area. When being transported, equipment is boxed when appropriate and carried by the technicians in Murray and Trettel vehicles. When equipment is being shipped for repair, padded envelopes and cushioned boxes are used as appropriate.
l l
l L
J l
Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
-e%-
1/81 Rev. 4 12.
Nonconforming Materials, Parts, or Components All materials, parts, and components which do not conform to requirements are so labelled and segregated to prevent their inadvertent use or installation. The nonconforming parts are then repaired or destroyed.
13.
Corrective Action A series of on-site visits, checks, and a weekly review of the strip charts provide several means of detecting problems at an early stage.
Procedures have been developed to identify promptly any problems in the data base.
When defective equipment is identified as the problem source, field service personnel are notified and a site visit is scheduled to correct the problem.
It is not possible to eliminate all data loss from the meteorological systems, but it is possible to minimize the loss through quick detection of the problem. The cause of each problem and the corrective action taken to prevent continuing recurrences are identified and documented in the routine course of the project. When applicable,'
l recommendations of modifications to instrumentation or procedures are made to appropriate levels of management and to Edison in order to eliminate or minimize the loss of data.
l l
l
- 14. Quality Assurance Records
\\
Records are maintained to furnish evidence of activities affecting the quality of the data collected by the monitoring programs. All records of site visits, routine maintenance, exceptional maintenance, data review, ports are retained as part of the quality assurance program.
an o
Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists 1/81 Rev. 4 The timely submission of the reports required by the program specification is assured by the routine inspection and processing of the data within one month of the date collected.
All quality assurance records are identifiable and retrievable.
Notification will be given to CEC 0 prior to disposing of these records and disposal will not be allowed until permission from CECO is obtained. All quality assurance records are retained in accordance with contract requirements and are maintained in accordance with applicable codes and ANSI standards regarding record retention (ANSI N45.2.9).
Submittal of appropriate Quality Assurance records are also required of major subcontractors. These records are retained as part of the QA files.
- 15. Audits 15.A. Audits are ccnducted twice each year by the Quality Assurance Officer.
The audits verify the implementation and effectiveness of the monitoring program. Audits cover maintenance and calibration of tower acquisition systems, data handling, and data reduction.
Procedures and inspections of records are included in the audit. Audits of major subcontractors are also performed by Murray and Trettel personnel.
15.B. Audits are performed by trained and certified Murray and Trettel personnel who art not directly involved in the day-to-day operation and management of the project.
In order to be certified as a Murray and Trettel aucitor, an Edison-approved auditor training class must be L
J Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. 1/81 Rev 4 successfully completed and documented. The Executive Vice President is responsible for the performance of all auditors.
The audits are performed using checklists or an agenda approved by the Executive Vice President.
15.C. A report is written after each audit and consists of the following:
a Summary Sheet, Checklists or agenda containing objective evidence, and any additional pertinent details recorded on additional sheets necessary.
This report is submitted to the Executive Vice President for review.
After review, it is signed and is retained as a part of the quality assurance documentation. Audit results are reviewed by management having responsibility for the area being audited.
15.D. A follow-up review, including a re-audit, of deficient areas or adverse conditions and on corrective action commitments is carried out to assure effective implementation.
Deficiencies in the execution or implementation of corrective action are brought to the attention of the person responsible for their rectification.
Continued deficiencies or failure to implement corrective action are reported, in writing, to appropriate executives within Murray and Trettel.
L J
[
Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
_ 9, Rev. 3 President j
Vice President Executive Vice President Environmental Applications Project Manager Quality Assurance Officer Environmental Meteorologist I
I Field Operations Staff Data Processing Staff l
Senior Met Tech.
1 Electronics Tech.
Met Tech.
Instrument Tech.
Computer Analysis Group Figure 1: Murray and Trettel, Incorporated Meteorological Monitoring Programs Organization
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX D ODCS Class C-Model
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX D ODCS C-MODEL The C-model consists of a series of short calculation programs based on the Gaussian straight line plume model, the model enables the ODCS operator to make refined estimates of offsite dose through the manual entry capability. Inhalation and ingestion (via the milk pathway) doses may be determined using field measurements in addition to the whole body dose due to noble gases.
As a predictive tool, forecasted meteorology may be input into any of the programs and the projected offsite consequences determined.
At Zion, lake breeze conditions of fumigation and trapping are calculated. This program utilizes the forecasted parameters of both the lake breeze marker (l= trapping, 2= fumigation) and the forecasted inland penetration of the convergence zone.
These programs have been documented as a part of the Environmental Emergency Procedures (ED series), whose Table of Contents is enclosed.
The right-hand column indicates the model to which the procedure applies.
February 1982 Revision 3 GSEP Environmental Director Emergency Plan Implementing Procedure TABLE OF CONTENTS Number Title Model ED-1 Duties and Responsibilities of the GSEP (Rev. 6, Sep. '81)
Environmental Director
$4830A E D-2 ODCS - B Model Data Validation and Data (Rev. 1, Aug. '81)
Display / Edit Techniques 04901A ED-3 Demand Polling of Meteorological Data.
B,C (Rev. 1, Aug. '81) 94902A ED-4 Merging of SYFA Data Files into the IBM Computer (Rev. 1, Aug. ' 81) and Extraction of IBM Files into Work Files.
84907A ED-5 Determination of 1 Rem and 5 Rem Evacuation C
(Rev. O, Sep. '81)
Ranges and Calculation of Off-site Whole Body
$4920A Radiation Dose from a Short Term (
8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />)
Release of Noble Gases or Radioactivity in Containment.
ED-6 Calculation of Whole Body Radiation Dose C
(Rev. 6, Sep. '81) f rom an Unplanned, Long Term (__ 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br />)
- 4941A Release of Noble Gases.
ED-7 ODCS B-Model Dose Calculation Program.
B (Rev, 1, Sep. '81) 94952A ED-8 Worst Case Thyroid Dose Calculations from C
(Rev. 6, Sep. '81)
Inhalation of Radioiodine.
95096A ED-9 Calculation of Thyroid Radiation Dose Via C
(Rev. 7, Sep ' 81)
Inhalation Resulting 45099A from Unplanned Releases of Radioiodine to the Atmosphere or Activity of Radioiodine in containment.
ED-10 Calculation of Noble Gas Release Rate from C
(Rev. 5, Oct. ' 81)
Field Measurements of Radiation Exposure 85116A Rate.
ED-ll Estimating Ground Contamination Levels C
(Rev. 7, Aug. '81)
(uCi/m2) and Accumulated Whole Body Dose 95756A (mrem) from Gamma Rsdiation Measurements
~
February 1982 Revision 3 GSEP Environmental Director TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Number Title Model ED-12 Estimating Thyroid Dose from Gamma Dose Rate C
(Rev. 3, Aug. '81)
Measurements Taken One Meter Above the Ground.
- 5755A ED-13 Estimating Thyroid Dose from Measurements of C
(Rev. 5, Aug. '81)
I-131 in Pasture Grass.
80934A ED-14 Estimating Thyroid Dose from Measurements of C
(Rev. 4, Aug. '81)
I-131 in Milk.
40127A ED-15 Off-site Dose Calculation System B
(Rev. 2, Jun. ' 81)
Calculation of Radiation Dose 40755A Resulting f rom Unplanned Releases of Radioactivity to the Aquatic Environment.
ED-16 Quick Estimate of Off-site Dose from C
(Rev. 1, Jul. '81)
Unplanned Release: Liquid and Gaseous, ib758A ED-17 Illinois Emergency Services and Disaster (Rev. 2, Jan. '81)
Agency 00768A NUCLEAR ACCIDENT REPORTING SYSTEM FORM ED-18 Determination of Evacuation Range from C
(Rev. 3, Jul. '81)
Radioactivity in Containment with Assumed 45753A Meteorology.
ED-19 Determination of Plume Deposition Rate, C
(Rev. 1, Aug. '81)
Dose Rates and Potential Doses from Releases 45759A Radioactive Iodinen and Particulates.
ED-20 Illinois Department of Nuclear Safety (Rev. O, Sep. '80)
Environmental Assessment Form 60751A ED-21 Identifying Radiological Laboratories (Rev. 1, Jan. '81) and their Capabilities
- 6177A ED-22 Determination of Thyroid Dose and Classifying (Rev. 1, Oct. ' 81) an Emergency Condition from Measured Airborne 45287A I-131 Concentrations.
ED-23 Operation of the Environmental Affairs (Rev. 3, Jan. ' 81)
(1700 E) Meteorological Computer Terminal 96173A
February 1982 Revision 3 GSEP Environmental Director TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued)
Number Title Model ED-24 Determining the Recommended Offsite (Rev. O, Feb. ' 81)
Protective Action Response Option
- 2097A ED-25 Computer Codes for Access to the ODCS Program (Rev. O, Jun. '81)
- 3420A ED-26 Zion Station Lake Breeze Dose Calculation C
(Rev. O, Oct. '81)
Programs for Inhalation Pathway based on
$5760A Containment Activity or Actual Release Rates.
ED-27 Zion Station - Listing Forecasted Meteorology on B,C (Rev. O, Oct. '81)
SYFA Equipment 45751A ED-28 Interim Emergency Offsite Facility IBM (Rev. O, Oct. ' 81) 3767 Terminal Installation.
95952A f
ED-29 Printing SYFA Files in the TSC or CCC.
(Rev. O, Oct. '81) 85754A
- 6205A '
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX E ODCS Tracking Model 2
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX E ODCS TRACKING MODEL The tracking algorithem is an adjunct to the current ODCS, improving the ability to characterize flow regimes, especially under lake breeze conditions.
Its objective is to accurately follow an emission (puff) throughout its lifetime within the 10 mile emergency planning zone (EPZ).
The model, as described herein specifically addresses Zion Station and its coastal regime although the model is available for use at all stations.
Description The tracking model methodology was developed by the Commonwealth Edison (Attachment El is an explanation of the tracking algorithm). The objective of the plume tracking model is to accurately follow an emission (puff) throughout its lifetime within the 10 mile EPZ.
If a convergence zone, created by a lake breeze, exists within the 10 mile EPZ, the plume track will be followed within an EPZ subarea which has a convergence zone as one of its boundaries.
The model uses meteorological data from multiple surf ace towers as well as forecasted meteorology in its analysis of plume location. The forecasted meteorology consists of an approximated location of a convergence zone created during lake breeze conditions.
The model calculates the location of the centroid of each emission (puff). The location of the centroid of a particular puff at time, tl, is determined by algebraically calculating the cumulative effect of the wind speeds and directions, obtained from the nearest two met towers, upon its previous position calculated at time, t0.
The calculations are performed at one minute intervals in order to assess the influence of the towers' meteorological data as accurately as possible.
The tracking algorithm necessitates the implementation of supplemental towers to provide additional monitoring points for both wind speed and direction. Towers along with the requisite telemetry to i
l transmit the data to a computer running the dose calculations will be erected at selected sites (Attachment E2 lists the siting criteria which will be followed if suitable land is available). These towers will monitor wind speed, wind direction, dew point temperature and ambient air temperature. A single level tower suffices since delta T will not be necessary for the determination of either the plume location or the convergence zone.
February 1982 Revision 3 The tracking model will require the determination of the existence of a lake breeze convergence zone. A set of criteria to determine the existence and location of a convergence zone from the data gathered from the meteorological tower network has been developed (Attachment E3 describes the criteria which will be followed in the determination of a convergence zone. Also it lists the references used in the development of the criteria). Additionally, an independent forecast of both the existence and location of a convergence zone will be provided by the meteorological consultants.
The tracking model calculations would be supplemented by field team observations. These observations would verify the algorithm's calculations in most situations. However, there are two situations in which the field measurements would be the primary source of information concerning plume location. In light and variable wind conditions, the tracking nodel would not be able to accurately determine plume location.
Also, the tracking model would produce less than optimum results at the convergence zone because it cannot accurately model flow at a discontinuity. Therefore, the field teams would become the primary source of information in those instances where ambient conditions cause the algorithm to lose accuracy.
The tracking model is an adjunct to a dose calcula? ion algorithm since it cannot calculate doses. There are currently three dose assessment programs used: the A-Program which is run on the process computers; the B-Program which is run on the corporate computer by Corporate Comand Center (CCC) personnel and is historical in outlook; and the C-Program which is run in a real time mode on the corporate computer by EOF, TSC and CCC personnel. The tracking algorithm will be incorporated within the C-Program since this dose assessment program is computationally the fastest of the available codes (Attachment E4 describes the integration of the tracking model with the C-Program). The calculations of the C-Program are based upon a centerline (or straight line) dose assessment algorithm which will produce a " worst case" study.
The concentrations are based upon field team measurements, and the dose calculation algorithm can provide projected doses.
February 1982 Revision 3 Justification A tracking model enhancement to the current dose assessment programs is being recommended as the response to the NRC's requirements upon nuclear stations having coastal sites for the following reasons:
First, this approach satisfies the NRC's concern that a system be able to track accurately plume trajectory in a non-uniform wind field as it considers lake breeze effects. The algorithm is sufficiently fast - data from the tower network can be obtained and an analysis performed within 10 clock minutes - to provide a "real time" response.
Second, both the modeling and the coding of the tracking model can be performed within the company. This allows company personnel to prototype the criteria which have been developed for both the tracking algorithm and the determination of the convergence zone.
Thus, as historical information is compared with computational results, the algorithms can be altered to improve their performance and accuracy.
Third, the tracking model enhances the present system in that it provides an improved method in field team direction. Presently, the movement of field measurement teams is controlled by EOF personnel. They use site specific maps and available meteorology in order to guide field personnel. The tracking model will provide a much improved method in guidance since it can more precisely track plume movement over time given meteorology obtained from the proposed tower network.
Fourth, the tracking model would employ the same computer equipment that is presently required to run the current dose assessment programs (B and C-models). This fact is important for two reasons: First, station personnel are familiar with the existing l
equipment since they continue to undergo training for execution of the current programs. Thus, the new programming would not necessitate additional training of personnel upon new hardware.
Second, less confusion during actual operation of the ODCS would be realized since fewer pieces of computer hardware would be involved in its functioning.
Fif th, the output of the tracking model is easily understood. The algorithm will pictorially display either the plume movement with time or the location of discrete puffs at a particular time.
Neither of these displays will be encumbered by a listing of doses. Since the frequency of the reports' use is not high, it is important to create reports which are not elaborate and which can be understood by everyone involved with GSEP.
l m
m
February 1982 Revision 3 ATTACHMENT El Plume Tacking Algorithm The objective of the plume tracking model is to follow accurately an emission throughout its lifetime in the 10 mile EPZ.
If a convergence zone, created by a lake breeze, exists within the 10 mile EPZ, the plume track will be followed within an EPZ subarea which has the convergence zone as one of its boundaries.
The model uses meteorological data f rom multiple surf ace towers as well as forecasted meteorology in its analysis of plume location. The forecasted meteorology consists of an approximated location of a convergence zone created during lake breeze conditions.
The model calculates the location of the centroid of each emission (puff). The location is determined by algebraically calculating the cumulative effect of the wind speeds and directions, obtained at all towers within the Zion network, upon the centroid of a particular puff.
The calculations are to be performed at one minute intervals in order to assess the influence of the towers' meteorological data as accurately as possible.
The algorithm is detailed on the following pages:
5 r A R,T I
F' Fan. EMH Twe. (N) Ig LAK.4 Staats L7.cas toes eu.aus.3 Al w,
W 4=lto+ q u) g ggo stora. e wiuo owenepou ]
T PW w saine manepo.a 5
"O To 4f %Ibo e
toww g too igo W")190 L@(w)= 90 Mu' Aue,tm useo av w C A a.T *ea $ u c o o m. h W W Vf %
MO he(u)3450 EnJD(w) kl l NEiCT "1' w K ?
k No At
l l
l At
[pon. saw wurs (2) ouniw. Pu=** *e rue"l I
Iro=. sm r =(w) iw t.Au s=sete i CAbr. OtMW OP Pur'F oM sam ((,cm.,ru)- xmer),*2. +
%.ma ym (vrucc-w.ued)= =1.)
, e v-= a.rrun m
M41.5 mi cuer 4o STOstG Ot%Ta 6 D(u) u) etes M
Port,. 7soo ca assegp psogy3 Nj" Awo wa. com (.w)
CA lt--
Foa. W r mMaucssu NO E" DI+
Dhh l F o it. w tas uTen.
l Tu m, lupuasus
- 0MPuPF M
k N%ET TWE I k
A4
A3 A4 tm.,. ~ ~ mu cm, i
X'*CDS(Wd)4 W u)#GQ
~ cAtr New X' = ccm (wo(m))* wsC%)*
Y'= siw (wo[w))ws(w)* co t.oc.a.T io u o p (g., pg,))g, g xF0FP5 xPUFF + X '
Y'* S'M ("DC"))* "5('^)*
~
YPuFP = YPu PF W '
( DI~ D("IIIDT ' O XPUFF = KPuPF + K' Y PUPF = Y PvFF 4 Y '
(NEKT TWR '#
g No cuccx.To see ir ruFr raer cwommaeuce w (C4) gy YES XPuPF=C1 P S* M P C 7 c.t.
7 uo k
lNEXT LAtME ? I NO MffE-PUFF Loc.aTtou eau. ?
(STAmr J
MO SToP )
I
February 1982 Revision 3 ATTACHMENT E2 Supplemental Tower Siting Considerations Supplemental towers are proposed to augment the present Zion meteorologica1' data gathering system. These towers will be used both in the determination of a convergence zone as a result of a lake breeze and in the development of the non-uniform wind field, plume tracking model.
The following plan concerning the number and position of supplemental towers will be followed if available land to meet the criteria can be secured and if results of tests run to determine tower interaction with existing structures are negative (see the last paragraph).
Three additional towers are proposed at Zion Station. This number is based both upon GSEP evacuation and sheltering policies and upon convergence zone determination. The first two sites are to be positioned at 2 and 5 miles inland from Zion Station. These distances, coinciding with the State's sheltering and evacuation zone criteria of 2, 5 and 10 miles will position towers at the zone boundaries. This positioning should improve the determination of meteorology in these critical areas.
The third tower, located ata site approximately 15 miles inland, will be a control tower in the determination of the existence and location of a convergence zone.
It is assumed that this tower will be in the unmodified air mass during the majority of occurances of a lake breeze and subsequent development of a convergence zone.
Using a prototype of the tracking model, it was empirically established that the relative positioning of the towers (line-of-site, random or planning scattering over the EPZ, etc.) did not materially effect the results of the tracking algorithm. Therefore, it is proposed that the towers be positioned along a relatively straight line, due west of the station. This positioning should aid the determination of the location of a convergence zone since it is assumed that a convergence zone would parallel the lake, and a comparison of the towers' meteorology would indicate passage of the front at inland distances due west of the station (see: Attachment E3).
t l
It is proposed that two towers be located along the Zion west transmission right-of-way and the Gurnee north transmission right-of-way. This proposal is based both upon the siting criteria (2 and 5 mile distances due west of the station) and the available real estate. Possible locations along these right-of-ways are indicted on the accompanying map.
i Assessment of the 10 meter tower interaction with the transmission lines presently existing on the proposed right-of-ways is in progress.
i This investigation will be concerned with potential problems related to the proposed siting: electrical interference between the transmission system and the data gathering equipment; accessibility of both transmission and meteorological towers for maintenance and repair; and electrical effects of secondary tower siting in close proximity to the EHV transmission.
f =- ~ m -
.,Q,,
r er s-s/
p
_f T200DoQrh%
J i
L 9cnocc 1
a f-Q i 45 Ol0dDD00F-WMd 9@.juDD000'qe:.:.
DD000F
.A.n a r:-
i>>
~?*Nri 1
M
-4 N. I,i g ; j., i j,r
.W ts p
JT b- - a
's 2, o I o!
a m;
~
~0000 a
,s, p 4<- 1..}
. L g,t s
hu.u-es
- C
- ) g
,p-4 s
e.,
gn a r_j 3
t ~a./, *,.
- rr W
a S,,{
< *fwise,m, q
_f
~
^#
w..
- %r N w._
ww.
n__gac3a5*~ew%% p,gs,r nrme,rP/us!
m ge t'
z
}L.
g fLmuw w w K y,
$h
. b.* anot :1 Gaaa a
. 7 C
O
]
o z
,o.w' l
C
3 C:3 c=) c:>ir I./.;;.c, c:2
- j
...... ~ -/- g g
N=.-
jfp I',
G '.
g' bC Q
i
~
~
CC C
o
[ -aca % 8 aod$
- ]T g,[, E N f [. r8 -
4 7 4., P
,l E
-]
o (j;
o f
' ~ ' ' ' ',
f" c
h 5I" 5$RA s
L jC
"' O O@B55g RHHP
......; r, si, !li{
M m,
M qA m& sf8a
'p.
t j c..]
awood8
~
r dh l2." ",
g9
=~
aymeE r *f T
4, m @ ~Mh QODN88c.C A'\\b p
o
- g. g. ;
f5 <h.ff e
fugi:p44wa 4 :
cm@gj=g q
i
-(,
w v.s,n ae. m- =
w r, yy 9_ yg m<
.t.n:. bray aMn n
a n :~a x t
.s i u m~e m
.m{g.sl.4 y A.$~,Y!ly
? y m s... m., ;
v:<
w a
4,a ;h,,.
7,i 4
l fQ
~ 8-
?
A a
2p$
~
'hg $$
& ro.
. A s
b
-~
a 3.
.. w'j N
=-
u,.
,C4i
, nylh
!L:.m a
amw
- q ;.
.,.,. '7
, u,-
-s p
t,
f r
'85-~',-f-m ~P,, c w
"N t g $
7I,
.g !o'n *[tr!A, @ b Q6! -
CY.
5 o.
e E
a..
!. i.
I M. $-e A
W"4 -
l 3
d Ay*ov i W'i &s >.
&p
.1. l qt
,P w
? " 5. p& a m,d,2.cc!* 2,o y
"' _C N'.~
g&
jg /
E,E %E,c:i 2%, }(. "
eX*gg y j
,p h2
m
.y&;
AEE-.I
- em:=
Ii..
f *-
w n;gt 5
- l. g,3.,gl,"~';}Jp
.?l$
- 3.g 1s
- olu unw41e ie
[.__
t e 476 ; utis-nx
- ) *, ~~D j
"1
>~
/ s n4e'.y!,
- a. m"n 5
l s,
ep g
j(i.:Ug iE E
}g[g m
Ir
! !,i 8 pM ! $s.
=(
a.
g t
!]'T, i
A 4
- :$ o
{
"b1.-44t:i 1bgdh I
i
. _ s. s l
Y f
m..n, ~;
e I
- i'
~
^
3
February 1982 Revision 3 ATTACHMENT E3 Criteria for the Determination of A Convergence Zone The formation and inland penetration of a convergence zone developed as a result of a lake breeze is a function of the temperature difference between land and water, wind speed of the unmodified air mass and the overall synoptic weather pattern. Favorable conditions for the creation of the lake breeze along the shoreline adjoining Zion Station typically occur during the period April through October.
The convergence zone's life cycle begins in the morning as a lake breeze pushes inland. As the land-water temperature differential increases, inland penetration accelerates. The convergence zone begins to recede as evening approaches, and the phenomenon dissipates before nig htf all. The convergence zone is characterized by a shif t in wind direction, a lowering, or leveling, of the ambient air temperature and measurable changes in the dew point temperature. These three characteristics will be employed in the determination of a convergence zone as described in the following paragraphs.
Three supplemental towers, each 10 meters in height and monitoring wind speed, wind direction, ambient temperature and dew point will be used in addition to the existing Zion Station met tower. When the station's 35' level indicates that the wind direction is within the range of 30-170 degrees (This range is consistent with the meteorological forecast range for lake breeze conditions. See the last paragraph for a discussion of lake breeze forecast.), it is assumed that lake breeze conditions may exist, and a determination of convergence zone is j
continued. Next, meteorological data are examined at the control tower which is to be located 15 miles inland and is assumed to be characteristic of unmodified air.
Results from previous studies indicate that over 60% of all lake breezes travel no farther than 10 miles inland; l
thus the existence of a convergence zone beyond 15 miles inland is statistically infrequent.
l If the wind direction as measured at the control tower lies within the lake breeze range (30-170 degrees, and/+or-22.5 degrees (1 sector) f rom the measurement obtained from the Zion tower), both the dew point and the temperature at the control tower are examined to determine whether there is either an easterly flow or a true lake breeze penetration (see the second to the last paragraph).
l l
February 1982 Revision 3 The control tower wind speed is tested when its direction indicates 171 - 29 degrees, a non-lake breeze flow in direct opposition to the measurements at Zion Station. If the wind speed is less than or equal to 6 m/sec. the lake breeze cell is expected to develop and move inland.
Research has shown that lake breeze formation is unlikely when the speed of the unmodified air is greater than or equal to 7 m/sec.
When the speed criteria is satisfied and the control tower indicates a wind direction opposed to the lake breeze, data from the 5 mile supplemental tower is examined. Wind direction is examined first.
If it meets the lake breeze criteria, both dew point and ambient temperature are examined to verify the existence or passage of the convergence zone.
If the algorithm postulates the passage of the convergence zone at 5 miles, the location of the zone is conservatively placed at 10 miles.
If the supplemental tower at 5 miles indicates flow similar to the control tower and opposed to the tower adjoining the station, the supplemental tower at 2 miles is interrogated. Similar to the logic flow at the 5 mile tower, wind direction is tested first at the 2 mile tower.
If the flow indicates lake breeze flow, both dew point and temperature are examined to verify the existence or passage of the convergence zone.
If the algorithm postulates the passage of the convergence zone at 2 miles, the location of the zone is conservatively placed at 5 miles.
If the criteria are met neither at the control, 5 or 2 mile towers, the convergence zone then lies between the shoreline and 2 miles. For conservatism, the convergence zone will be set to 2 miles in the model.
Temperature and dew point criteria indicating lake breeze flow at any supplemental tower are as follows: dew point as measured at the supplemental tower must be +or - 10% of the dew point temperature measured at the tower adjoining the station and the air temperature measured at the supplemental tower must be +or - 2 degrees centrigrade of the Zion tower measurement.
A forecasted location of the convergence zone will be added to the existing Zion forecast. The forecasted value will be the initial value used in the tracking model to determine plume location. A paper prepared by the meteorological consultant accompanys this report; it outlines the methodology of convergence zone forecasting (Appendix F).
\\l3 m.4 AVGS ws, wo,09, T ttoPJ McT W WER.
es f No LML EffECT
-% ' 3o' e4mre ocses gy,,,
w 6 00*
IinIWr N0N-lMG
?y lsesRE rNace=F5 I
IS-NH Av&S, ts5 lu4 DP,T l$ %
\\ fewEL /
23 FLOW S6ME As I
'g6 SC)
AT &lON 7
a J 7670 CH6tg bo, T-
?
CE47sR.4 4, i
Y 15 Flow ad onManed W9g>-380' nwarw wi_'
Y
".6,350' h g, y
w
($
L. B. FotMetic Q W5 1, bml$g Y _NCT La M't, g
Clauca:. " Tits FeR y
ACGTIONAL SO9Poti d
_c 85 cyg,y, gang
' DP t.t Cp
' CEsittCa4 Mg r V
STOP g
SCT coNV.
7 ME TO 10 M1
,1 15 cav. tous e
d (Es Tr0 4 2r p% 74%~7c p
Ner. CHGCx
?
TR5 Y
comu. Emx crim4 pet Ger CDN4
'to w w to Mt.
STOP
A 16 A A nS.
W5 iaD. 09,7 6
TRS is FLowse6 M wb5 >' t70 Y t'oN 0
C64Ett. @sT g }g 7 LR 81EMh v
15 fcow nr TR5 Ace vez U
WD 31'o
.9 ceroufloni e d TD suc IF 6
5 W
fH47 $1 1so J Lnts GEccac
,f360
_is m esc.
1 i
k bOM. hhh DP,. DP,t, lor, V CE t"A MET SCT CDN V. Zone.
7 T D 0 M t.
45 gy, gg o
1 v :T,2 z c m s not 5
g (AGT. Chsect
?
TR 2.
el CoWV.10Alf j
CIL4%%4 MET ser (sv. towc w to ut.
l l
~
e s5 uno MG ins, suo, DP, 7 hM
/
7c.1
/
ss Flew. WE M WD 3 00 7'
>~
2
( 3o'
'cWcA OP,1 7
c.c ivecia V
U is Flow AT Ter I se-r coNv.
w h 7, 7 80*
Y 44 OPPc'in fs o d lone WT Stof gg e/
TD % ION 2 MIL 65 e-
/I$
(bMV.ECM6 (DPg DP,1,8
- CitnetiA m.,
37,p y
I set cou v. qws:
! TO E M8LES l lS Cbsiv. h0NC l
7 e T t
- C 4s NcT R 2
E 2
Mf tR2 say p
couv. Sous To
- 3. m i tr 5 Ccky.4cNE I
I
$h set
- CONV.
4CNE-T> 5 mi.
t ser t
i e.
f February 1982 Revision 3 N
ATTACHMENT E3a Reference Elements of Meteorology Albert Miller & Jack C. Thompson 1970, Charles E. Merrill Publishing Co., Columbus, Ohio pp. 148-151-
-s
" Detailed Mesometeorological Studies of Air Pollution s.
Dispersion in the Chicago Lake Breeze" s
Walter A. Lyons & Lars E. Olsson
-s Monthly Weather Review, vol. 101, no. 5, May 1973 pp. 387-403 3 s'
.L 4
" Characteristics of True Lake Breezes Along the Eastern Shore of Lake Michigan" Edward Ryzmar & James S. Tauma Atmospheric Environment, vol. 15, no. 7, 1981 pp. 1201-1205 s
"Mesoscale Air Pollution Transport in the Chicago Lake Breeze" Walter A. Lyons & Lars E. Olsson Journal of the Air Pollution Control Association, vol. 22, no.1, Nov.1972 s
4 l
pp. 876-881 t
l l
1 l
1
February 1982 Revision 3 ATTACHMENT E4 Use of the Forecasted Convergence Zone and Plume Tracking Model within the C-Program This addendum summarizes the use of both the forecasted convergence zone and the tracking model within the C-Program.
It assumes that the tracking model has been incorporated into the C-Program, computationally the fastest code available to Company personnel. Also, it is assumed that certain modifications, which will be highlighted in the text, have been made to the C-Program.
Initial dose projections at Zion Station under lake breeze conditions will be made using ED-26 of the C-Program. This program requires both meteorology and effluent data as input. The model also requires that a forecasted inland distance of the convergence zone be provided. Forecasted convergence zone data are required by the er.hanced model. Meteorological data can consist of -ither forecasted or actual values. The forecasted data provide projected results concerning effluent releases; the actual data will provide real time documentation of the release. The effluent data may take the form of either containment activity information or actual release rate data.
The model also requires that a forecasted, inland distance of the convergence zone be provided. This parameter, added as part of the C-program enhancements, will prevent the algorithm f rom calculating doses beyond the convergence zone. Thus, ED-26 computes worst case dose estimates (modified, Gaussian straight line model) to the lesser of the forecasted convergence zone or the 10 mile limit. This outer limit is in effect for both trapping and fumigation conditions.
i Section III.4 of this report describes the rationale used in the determination of the worst case dose estimates.
It should be noted that under emergency conditions, all vent stack releases are treated as ground level for conservatism, thus being trapped under the thermal internal boundary layer. Actual 1978-1979 meteorological data indicate the height of the internal boundary layer to be above the Zion release point 95% of the time, further supporting the ground level, plume trapping approach.
I A trackirsg model is employed to more accurately determine plume location. This enhancement uses both meteorological information and the forecasted convergence zone in its processing.
In addition to the existing Zion meteorological tower, supplemental towers are required by I
the tracking algorithm. The towers will be used to refine the forecasted location of the convergence zone and to define the associated turning of the plume. The distances have been so chosen in order to provide I
accurate meteorology at two of the three evacuation distances of GSEP.
l
February 1982 Revision 3 Field teams will be dispatched to those pre-defined locations on the EG-2 (ref.19) onsite maps which are in close proximity to the plume track. Dose rate readings taken at these sampling locations are used to verify the doses projected with ED-26.
Release rates and either a projected or an actual release period are then entered into ED-26 in order to obtain a better estimate of actual dose. Field teams are necessary at the convergence zone where dose rate readings will indicate plume movement up or down the coast along the convergence zone. During light and variable wind conditions, field teams are necessary to verify the plume location since the tracking algorithm fails to give accurate results in such conditions.
As realtime data from Zion become available, the tracking model may be fine-tuned to reflect the actual lake breeze conditions.
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX F Lake Breeze Forecast Consideration
LAKE BREEZE FORECAST C0hSIDERATION Murray and Trettel, Incorporated (M/T)
Introduction The wind is air ir; motion. Air moves in response to forces acting upon it.
The dominant forces that affect the wind near the earth's surface are (1) the horizontal deflecting force (HDF) that is caused by the earth's rotation; (2) the pressure gradient force (PGF); and, (3) friction.
Both the wind speed and direction in the' general circulation and in the wind flow around high and low pressure systems are governed by these forces.
The HDF and friction forces vary slowly and over small ranges compared to the PGF. The PGF varies over a wide range and can change rapidly as weather systems develop, move and decay. At times the PGF can be weak, such as in the middle of a stagnant or slowly moving high pressure area during the sumer.
When this happens, other weak forces that otherwise are overcome or masked, can exert a noticeable influence on the wind.
This is the case with the lake i
breeze.
In the absence of stronger forces a lake breeze can develop in response to a temperature differential that can exist at a land / water interface.
The lake breeze is enhanced when the PGF is weak, the general wind flow is light and the land is substantially warmer than the water.
It is inhibited when the PGF is strong or misaligned relative to the shoreline, or the temperature differential is too weak.
Thus, lake breeze conditions are optimum in the Chicago area during daylight hours in the late spring and summer when favorable conditions often exist.
L J
Murrayand TrettelInc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
The lake breeze goes through a life cycle that begins around mid-morning along the shore.
It strengthens and moves inland before retreating and/or collapsing later in the day. The lake breeze phenomenon can occur on a daily basis under described weather conditions.
The lake breeze can have dramatic economic effects. As an example, consider air conditioning loads in Chicago's loop in suasnertime.
In the absence of the lake breeze, temperatures can climb into the nineties driving the demand for electricity to record highs. Witn the lake breeze, temperatures in the loop can be kept in or near the seventies and the air conditioning load is correspondingly lower.
Knowledge of lake breeze dynamics has obvious value to the load dispatcher at CECO who must plan ahead to assure adequate generation while also scheduling outages for maintenance and/or repair during peak demand periods.
Murray and Trettel, Incorporated (M/T) has provided specialized lake breeze forecasts to the load dispatchers of CEC 0 for more than 25 years. The experience that has been accumulated and the expertise that has followed from it have been translated into certain (proprietary) predictive weights, values and related prognostic techniques. Forecast methods continue to be refined as more data become available and as interest in and concern for the lake breeze and its effects continues to grow in importance.
Forecast Methodology Those meteorological factors considered important in lake breeze predictions can be divided into primary and secondary groups, and are listed below.
L J
Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
Primary -
Pressure gradient strength and orientation Land / water temperature contrast Surface wind speed and direction Secondary -
Sky cover Haze, smoke, fog Diurnal temperature variation The predicted occurrence of a lake breeze is already being provided to CECO in the Zion forecast. This forecast is routinely transmitted, computer-to-computer. Each hour of the forecast is given a code ("0", "1" or "2")
indicating:
(1) no lake effect; (2) lake effect with plume trapping; and, (3) lake effect with fumigation.
A new factor will be added to this forecast:
the predicted inland distance of the lake breeze front. This will be entered in coded form. The codes and their interpretation are as follows.
Coae Meaning 0
No lake breeze 1
Convergence zone (CZ) less than/ equal to 2 miles 2
2 less than CZ less than/ equal to 5 miles 3
5 (miles) less than CZ L
J Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
Refinements will continue to be made both in forecast technique and its verification as aaditional micro-scale weather measurements are made. At present, there are plans to measure wind speed, direction and humidity at two sites. One site is to be located approximately two (2) miles inland and the other will be five (5) miles inland. Measurements will be telemetered in real-time over telephone lines using Microtels in response to demand polls.
Sample Analysis Two examples follow.
Example One: July 8, 1981 - a case of no lake breeze.
Example Two:
July 10, 1981 - a lake breeze case. The synoptic patterns are shown in the Surface Weather Maps. They show, graphically, the surface pressure gradients (the solid lines are isobars).
Differences in the pressure gradient orientation and strength between the two cases is evident, as is the general surface wind flow, sky cover, etc.
Hourly surface observations are also incorporated. These observations were from O' Hare Airport (ORD), DuPage County Airport (DPA), Midway Airport (MDW) and Meigs Field (CGX). Tabulations are temperature / dew point (T), wind direction / speed (W) and sky cover (5). Units are standard.
The progress of the lake breeze front (convergence zone) is evident in the data for July 10.
It formed at the lakeshore and moved inland between 0900 and 1000 CDT (CGX).
It passed MDW by 1200 CDT and ORD by 1600 CDT.
By 2l00 CDT it reached DPA where it apparently dissipated. The average speed of the front was 3 mph (statute), since MDW is approximately 8 miles inland, ORD is 12 and DPA is 30 miles.
L J
Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
CGX - MDW: 8 miles /2 hr = 4 mph LK - ORD:
12 miles /6 hr = 2 mph LK - DPA: 30 miles /ll hr = 3 mph Avg. = 3 mph Summary The ability to predict effectively, lake breeze and the resultant convergence zone, is highly dependent on an ability to evaluate the impact of a given air / water temperature difference working within an existing pressure gradient force. The intensity of the convergence zone is related to these factors.
They also control the inland penetration of the convergence zone. An effective forecast requires a realistic determination of the dynamics of the temperature differential and gradient flow.
In its 35 years' experience in dealing with this phenomenon M/T has developed the necessary dynamic values and weights needed to make this type of prediction with optimum success.
L J
Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
a i
?
p Whe-D*e4 e.
946. e40gpg _
ge g,
p N g4 m.
.m
/
Y p
f
.hj t,
7.,
l g.
- s.,
s n
k g
i >-
e g,'
'f( " g*
5
.. $h.
t I. 6. 6. l M,.
b [ ;.. W.5 0
_f,.
,m~
g.,yc,e,ch. py_.. e 3
Ih d'j.~Y' d..
.a
- r.,
h 4 9.'y-Q -}t}. 4 a:q N, M Y EY, *
- f I E
. is
. s, s..
~ %%.
w
'r
,5 f fE
'(I
$7 s:
Ma'
.S \\A t
1 g
t l p,I
.1 Ma, N a.?,$,,pF;,"ps, L
- e
't g
et--
.Y
. h. V',.h ( jk a, f o_
.vgx f5 : k.,
. !A h [,'I)L w k }%~ [A [h
>.%a~[ M 'g a,[
d g
=-
I f
n v,r. s.y.E..e%, j.y{.
i
~ew/54 -
4 y~
i
- 4 -e A4'.
l\\}gsIT.* %..% !F+
- g., p
( ' % ;g.;,
- ,E.g; c -e 4
~
t s
.$.4a g.
%~
L e 4. 7%x: e em,Eh N'-
' d%.~ N D@ree n %eu2 D id % x
~\\
I k
Y g,,-
m I
x-p,.
a%7 i
'((,i~f*s's' xW/'bg \\"*26u K. p' %..
. ~
d:
~bW f f, lit?-
e s
D j6m jf=
d Vpe '"63]
' W g~, f.,$.g* % $
a.
" k' s
$E,.
g f
c f;
zf
,-f2g ;
g?~a W.
~
~
e a =
% 3.. x, w-N a%
@p ;<
s a
y
' g
~
f
. k r.~
4~~.
ew gg
- G g
-g,,
M
.J A-t -
th f /
- er, u
Ik
,a y
1,,,.
>n.m., " ] = y'4
. gf eu u
,Wik
,Ts'.
I*
L
.J RJ.'
Uh C G;
+i b.,
~~%
u e
s
~~~
' '5f h
b 4.
.,f
.~ET)
- yp.
h, -
M y
t' N *f,*...,$.f. m%Wef 4#Wg l l2 '
g i
/
f c
A'/f' l ' 'a_
3) m m,
.v.
~
m
?
l
,4 lwn
~
q^l%* ~
n re i "~
J'D
'e 1,'7 ;31 ; Q 1
- %.1 g '! ' - f a /
v -i + ;Q s y e/'e5 E'
Y
- 1; E ', /
-e q.. pg / A ~e;i p s; ',.sq,f b.
~.
Jx,.
r.' ; a c
v.
m a--o i.w e ;..
l y v,h 7
~.
-l l
U
$ ='
N, g ' f=
C f
f
- y 3 u
x af ~/
- a. /
f e
.m a
., ~ * ^
1
^
Y) n
-.y y_
.9 w
N...___
E
MURRAY AND TRETTEL WORK SHEET Date: July 8, 1981 ORD DPA MDW CGX 00 T
W S
T W
S T
W 5
T W
5 01 79 73 2107 CLR MSG 1905 CLR 79 71 2006 CLR 02 78 73 MSG CLR MSG MSG CLR 77 --
2106 CLR 03 78 73 2108 CLR MSG 2006 CLR 76 71-2106 CLR 04 78 72 2207 CLR MSG MSG CLR 75 --
2106 CLR 05 77 72 2107 CLR MSG 2006 CLR 75 71 2107 CLR 06 79 73 2207 CLR MSG 2106 CLR 77 71 2206 CLR 79 2210 CLR 07 82 74 2108 CLk MSG 2006 SCTRD 81 74 2008 CLR 80 2210 CLR 08 83 74 2306 CLR MSG 2108 SCTRD 82 73 2208 CLR bl 2212 CLR 09 85 75 2312 BRKN MSG 2212 OVCST 83 73 2312 BRKN 82 2310 BRKN 10 87 76 2411 BRKN MSG 2510 BRKN 83 73 MSG MSG 83 2415 BRKN 11 90 75 2410 BRKN MSG 2310 BRKN 85 72 2415 BRKN 84 2415 SCTRD/BRKN 12 91 75 2214 BRKN MSG 2410 SCTRD 90 74 2207 BRKN 84 2612 SCTRD 13 92 2112 SCTRD MSG 89 --
2210 SCTRD 87 2315 BRKN 14 91 73 MSG BRKN MSG 90 --
MSG MSG MSG 15 93 73 2314 BRKN 91 2315 BRKN 92 71 2216 BRKN 88 2515 BRKN 16 93 73 2114 BRKN 92 2415 BRKN 90 71 2414 BRKN 88 2515 BRKN 17 91 73 2114 BRKN 92 2310 BRKN 90 71 2413 BRKN 91 2515 BRKN 18 90 73 2114 BRKN 90 2615 BRKN 88 70 2412 BRKN 91 2515 BRKN 19 87 71 MSG BRKN 88 2412 SCTRD 86 70 2410 SCTRD 91 2415 BRKN 20 84 71 2210 SCTRD 86 2408 CLR 84 70 2411 SCTRD 88 2615 SCTRD 21 82 73 2206 CLR 85 2306 CLR-82 72 2407 CLR 87 2615 SCTRD 22 81 72 2106 CLR 83 2106 CLR 81 72 2205 CLR 86 2612 CLR 23 81 72 2206 CLR 82 2206 CLR 80 72 2206 CLR 86 2612 CLR 24 80 72 2205 CLR 82 2307 CLR 79 73 2406 CLR l
l l
l i
I l
L J
Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists i
9 l
e
'4 s.
g
\\
I. h[*} j> (r'f.
~
\\,
n,gd l
,,..,g jptt
\\
94 i -
\\
4b -cd.L-
+
s
,4 1 ~
r
., "f f., S,.3 g>
'.hl, % ? O r O * ~' 'l., ( h. 3.;...
,.. Q h
' e',. A1_, a g:. n m,#., _.;4. --4
,P.y= +',sh~d %; a D.na.
J,,g y; Ly m e
a)
.., a 9
a,
~
sI
,4 i,; 4 Rh-~ A d,.',.cg.*%y;Jy, ' 4
.;~
L w.
a
.A ps.: q a' f. fi e _ ~ i i p)-
g;!
,/
at-
/
\\
v.r 5-r n E! ' ~
- p.,o,)sAcgu. Op_.V.. @'
' a.
.t,,,g g
a 9.s'r 3
s nw ons g
f,-
'M-h=e d' s,, c Pd Vd} \\d i -
~
hk h,r ?.
$t l.
I
?
4 u 4 B.S. g h g s;, g n x w.a ; y w +,tw a-1 m,; /
-..i d.M" w/.*14.-R12, $.
=o a
sr k i' p
~4 8*
M ;m g;
s g
O y.;.e o
D.
. t x E s 1 g 3 [y t
8 f 3r,;
y2
, e K c a-
./
.gh Lt 3 N'
t
..aff'- 'LK. EW h. * ' i-r X.
f.
' J :f *'fy'
. k
$k u n k. i n h k, V a:
We L>
..+Mn
- m. -J a, m.
t m-c
,e ui 2.-,
N' I
L' t;,, d'"b I
o.
b
.I y
h f
k
,f.x
%,j-I g
v n-p q
!(4
- s. d I *,
- 6. k g 8 '.4. U i '
'E :
lr.
A a[
r vg y(
N '#.-
u
- 5. N A [~ %,kif Q4
[
. g <-
n "g.
/mW H.
{~,
t e )'
i
.e
'~
I-I, ->'
c lh
'.r g
0-,
',3 Eh
/
!, < ' ie I
/
f i ! g,,,/**~ ' '
Iiie?. ' y ' a1 j
/
,L
,w
. nS
,hd = ~.,lW M ! {L
' j' _,.. / ',
L,'
n:w l
{':,
.)
'P D
J; l-SY
/
n 'G.
i L.
. ?.
,a
+
i t.n fl gf o' Y';
Q
,j, g
m, q' r m.rt wa e& Y + -
z
' en
^~
. *Q e% _ r.i.
f.
.3
~.
- N.
- .,,.,.
'g
.x
.j
.>ft 2-g' W;
~
}. -- M.
l
- 3
~.
, ~~.
p.
X#,, N
- 'dN/
[e ms u.
i ti E
x<
'x#_._-.
s x
1 x
~ -.
ta,
MURRAY AND TRETTEL WORK SHEET Date: July 10, 1981 ORD DPA MDW CGX 00 I
W 5
T W
5 T
W 5
T W
5 01 60 54 2303 CLR 64 CALM CLR 64 54 3201 CLR 02 58 54 3304 CLR 62 CALM CLR 63 54 3003 CLR 03 59 55 2602 CLR 61 0704 CLR 62 55 2801 CLR 04 56 54 CALM CLR 61 CALM CLR 61 56 2801 CLR 05 57 54 CALM-SCTRD 59 CALM CLR 61 53 CALM CLR 06 64 60 2803 SCTRD 58 CALM CLR 67 57 CALM SCTRD 70 2805 SCTRD 07 75 60 CALM CLR 66 CALM CLR 68 56 3005 CLR 72 CALM SCTRD 08 80 60 2803 CLR 74 3104 CLR 75 52 3208 CLR 74 3104 CLR 09 82 60 3303 CLR 80 2703 CLR 79 54 0701 CLR 78 CALM CLR 10 84 58 CALM CLR 83 3406 CLR 82 53 0302 CLR 80 0905 CLR 11 85 58 0903 SCTRD 84 2004 CLR 83 MSG 2002 CLR 80 0906 CLR 12 88 58 2104 CLR 86 CALM CLR 84 52 1007 CLR 81 0908 CLR 13 88 57 2203 CLR 87 2805 CLR 83 52 1003 CLR 80 1210 CLR 14 91 58 0403 CLR 88 2304 CLR 85 53 1607 CLR 79 1410 CLR 15 91 58 CALM CLR 88 2405 CLR 85 54 0806 CLR 79 1210 CLR 16 89 57 0609 CLR MSG MSG MSG 85 52 0808 CLR 78 1308 CLR 17 87 $6 1208 CLR 88 MSG CLR 82 50 0807 CLR
'9 1208 CLR 18 83 54 1108 CLR 88 3505 CLR 81 50 0708 CLR 79 1408 CLR 19 80 52 1208 CLR 86 3104 CLR 78 50 0708 CLR 79 1307 CLR 20 75 53 1008 CLR 84 3404 CLR 77 50 0806 CLR 79 1307 CLR 21 74 53 1506 CLR 76 1304 CLR 75 52 CALM CLR 79 CALM CLR 22 67 54 1406 CLR 75 1304 CLR 75 53 CALM CLR 79 1305 CLR 23 65 55 1803 SCTRD 71 CALM CLR 74 53 CALM CLR 79 1305 CLR 24 63 56 1904 BRKN 69 CALM CLR 72 55 CALM CLR
"__" indicates the passage of lake breeze convergence zone l
l l
l l
L J
Murray and Trettel Inc. Certified Consulting Meteorologists
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX G References l
I l
l l
l
February 1982 Revision 3 APPENDIX G l
References 1.
I. Vanderhoven et al. "Recent Analytical and Experimental Efforts on Single Source Effluent Dispersion to Distances of 100 km",
IAWA/SM-181/8, circa 1973.
2.
AIF/NESP-007b " Gas tracer Study of Roof Vent Effluent Diffusion at Millstone Nuclear Power Station", Atomic Industrial Forum, October 1975.
3.
NUREG-0373 " Dispersion in the Wake of a Model Industrial Complex",
February 1978.
4.
CONF-770901 " Proceedings of a Workshop on the Evaluation of Models Used for the Environmental Assessment of Radionuclide Release", Oak Ridge National Laboratory, April 1978.
5.
ORNL-5382 "The Evaluation of Models Used for the Assessment of Radionuclide Releases to the Environment, Progress Report for the Period April 1976 through December 1977", Oak Ridge National Laboratory, June 1978.
6.
ORNL/TM-6663 "The Evaluation of Selective Predictive Models and Parameters for the Environmental Transport and Dosimetry of Radionuclides", Oak Ridge National Laboratory, July 1979.
7.
NUREG/CR-0798 " Evaluation of Emperical Atmospheric Diffusion Data",
October 1979.
8.
NUREG/CR-0936 " Recommendations for Meteorological Measurement Programs and Atmospheric Diffusion Prediction Methods for Use at Coastal Nuclear Reactor Sites", October 1979.
9.
ORNL-5528 "The Uncertainty Associated with Selected Environmental l
Transport Models", Oak Ridge National Laboratory, November 1979.
10.
NUREG/CR-1286 " Rancho Seco Building Wake Effects on Atmospheric Diffusion: Simulation in a Meteorological Wind Tunnel", February 1980.
11.
NUREG-0654 " Criteria for Preparation and Evaluation of Radiological Emergency Response Plans and Preparedness in Support of Nuclear Power Plants", November 1980.
12.
Reg. Guide 1.23 " Meteorological Programs in Support of Nuclear Power Plants", Revision 1, September 1981.
13.
Zion Confirmatory Order, February 29, 1980, Dockets Nos. 50-295 and 50-304.
I 1
February 1982 Revision 3 14.
Commonwealth Edison Offsite Dose Calculation Manual.
15.
TID-24190 " Meteorology and Atomic Energy" July 1968.
16.
Reg. Guide 1.109 " Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating compliance with 10CFR Part 50, Appendix I", Revision 1, October 1977.
17.
NUREG 75/087 " Standard Review Plan of Safety Analysis Report for Nuclear Power Station LWR Addition", September 1975.
18.
GSEP Environmental Director Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures.
19.
GSEP Environmental Emergency Plan Implementing Procedures.
t I