ML20058L625

Forwards Tabulation Listing Data Required for NEPA Review of Gaseous & Liquid Effluent Analysis,Per 720328 & 29 Meeting

ML20058L625
Person / Time
Site:	Monticello
Issue date:	04/05/1972
From:	Ward E NORTHERN STATES POWER CO.
To:	Boyd R US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
References
NUDOCS 9105300353
Download: ML20058L625 (14)

Text

.

'RFh4+r~ FiS Cy.

NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY April 5, 1972 50dN w .n Mr Pcger S Boyd fU

/y

g7 d,%

\

\

Assistant Director .g for Boiling Water Reactors

• f;D N .

O i

Division of Reactor Licensing g

,.( 'j Atomic Energy Cornission Washington, DC 20545 9

1. p[1+

/

Dear Mr Boyd:

Co g MONTICELLO NUCLEAR EERATING PLANT E-5979 EPA Review - Gaseous and Liquid Effluent Analysis Your letter of March 7 requested certain basic datt required for a source ter: calculation for a gaseous and liquid effluent analysis being performed for the Monticello plant as a part of the NEPA review.

We discussed this information with your representatives and personnel from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory during a visit here on March 28 and 29.

To confir; the information conveyed at the recent meeting, we are enclosing 45 copies of a tabulation listing the data together with the source reference. As you requested, the date is submitted for (1) the facility as presently designed, and (2) any projected design' changes.

Yours very truly, ,

i c- -

[ -k. - g E C Ward, Director Engineering Vice Presidential Staff g \ S' I tQ

r. ,

p gga ts .

APR101972 '; 1 L}

nC 7 *"i .iY>

y;;.. CC -!

9 10CED W /'

f N/

% K' ,

053 h h 63 130$

. /

le~rufatery File Cy.

. g.. . . . .

4.O?

[\,op-;

MONTICELLO NUCLEAR GENERATING PLANT j{, egy

-c ,. , e V Answer to Questions Forearded with 3/7/72  ?

Le t ter f rom Roger S . Boy d D, i:

g .

[. cS kl

1. Operating power (Met) at which impact is to be analyzed. Y f/

(p. 1-1.1, FS AR) \

• (1) 1970 Met

• (2) same as (3) (no projected design changes)

2. Wei gh t of U loaded (first loading and equilibrium cycle) .

(1) first loading 236,074 lbs.

r (1) equilibrium cycle 204,074 lbs.

(2) same as (1) (no proj ected design changes)

3. Isotopic ratio in fresh fuel (first loading and equilibrium cycle).

(1) first loading 2.25 wt. % (p . 1-6.6, FSAR)

(1) equilibrium cycle 2.55 wt. %

(2) same as (1) (no projected design changes)

4. Expected off gas rate af ter 30 minutes delay.

(1) 25,000 uCi/sec (p.11-21 Menticello Environmental Report)

(2) 1,300 uC1/sec (Based on answers to DRL Questions of (for proj ected 50 hour5.787037e-4 days <br />0.0139 hours <br />8.267196e-5 weeks <br />1.9025e-5 months <br /> June 3,1971 in report dated Octcher, hold-up system, based 1971 and submitted as Request for Change on 25,000 pCi/sec at No. 2, Docket No. 50-263) 30 min) .

5. Escape rate coef ficients used (or reference).

31 (1) 700 uCi/see for 1 to the primary coolant based en offgas rate of 100,000 uCi/sec af ter 30 minute holdup.

(2) same as (1)

6. Mass of primary coolant in system (1b.).

(1) a. in reactor: c. in condensate return system: )

340,700 lbs water 755,000 lbs water 10,600 lbs steam

b. in recirculating system: d. total:

46,697 lbs water 1,142,397 lbs water (2) same as (1)

• (1) The facility as designed.

• (2) The f acility with indicated projected design changes or revised operational procedures.

t

[

i +

A 2 f

7. Steam-conditions at turbine. l t

r (1) temperature 540*F (Fig. 1-3-33, FSAR)

{

pressure 965 psia  ;

flow rate 6,770,092 lb/hr . t (2) same as (1) (no projected design changes) l

8. Normal recirculation flow rate (lb/hr).

(1) 57.6 x 10 6lb/hr total core flow (Fig . 1- 3-2B , FS AR)

(2) same as (1) (no projected design changes)' {

i

9. Normal clean-up system flow rate (Ib/hr) . j l

(1) 80,000 lb/hr total of two loops (Fig. 1-3-2B, FS AR)  ;

(2) same as (1)  ;

What type of resins are used?

(1) Not available  ;

(2) Solka floc BW 100 & Powdex j combined precoat/demineralizer What decontamination f actors are expected for each principal nuclide?

(1) Not available f f

(2) Preliminary measurements at Monticello based on a limited sample i run have shown the following;  !

i D.F.  !

particulate (gross crud activity) 76-99 i gross filtrate activity 43 I gross (1131) 149-483 I Cation CuG4 11_41 J Anion Cu G4 27_ 32 j 1131 85-90

10. What is the expected performance of the expanded gaseous radwaste system j from the main condenser air ejector?

6 I

(1) nonexistent in design basis system (2) design basis for the modified offgas system is to provide 50 hour5.787037e-4 days <br />0.0139 hours <br />8.267196e-5 weeks <br />1.9025e-5 months <br /> l holdup (minimum) to offgases from the main condenser air ejector. i Estimated gaseous release rates will be reduced to 0.012 C1/sce f based on air ejector discharge rate of 0.27 Ci/sec at 30 min. i delay with a condenser inleakage rate of 28 scfm.  :

(p. 8 Gaseous Radwaste System Modifica- f tion Report, Revision C, October 13, 1971) j 3-  !

3 ,

i Give the design air in-leakage.

i (1) 28 scfm maximum (p. 5 Answers to DRL Questions of June 3, 1971 on Monticello off-gas modification)

(2) The design maximum air in-leakage is 28 scfm, however the present i system experience is about 7 scfm. The expected long term average value is about 20 scfm. The anticipated nusber of shutdowns per l

year is 6 with 3 of these expected to be of long enough duration to necessitate complete breaking of the condenser vacuum. For l restarting from no vacuum conditions it is expected that the vacuum  ;

pump will operate for an average of 2 hours2.314815e-5 days <br />5.555556e-4 hours <br />3.306878e-6 weeks <br />7.61e-7 months <br /> and a maximum of 4 i r

hours.

l Is the condenser ejector one stage or two stage?

(1) The condenser ejectors are two one-half capacity two stage steam jet air ejector units with inter- and after-condensers.  ;

(p . 11-3.1, FS AR) j (2) same as (1) (no projected design change) i Where is it discharged? l (1) to the air ejector subsystem which consists of a 30 minute  !

i holdup line, high efficiency filters, dilution f ans and the ,

plant main s tack. The inter-condenser condensate returns to [

the condenser and the af ter-condenser condensate goes into y the liquid rad waste system. t (p. 9-3. 2, FSAR)

(2) to the recombiner subsystem of the modified offgas system via an eductor nozzle on the air-ejector after-condenser.

(p. 9 Gaseous Radwaste System t Modification Report, Revision C) [

How many condenser shells? [

[

(1) The main condenser consists of two shells operated as a single t pass dual-pressure, dearerating type with divided water boxes.  ;

(p. 11-3.1, FS AR) l t

(2) same as (1) (no projected design changes) l

11. What is the expected leak rate of primary coolant to the dry well?

(1b/hr)  !

i (1) Estimated background drainage to equipment drain sump f rom j dry well is 1250 lb/hr liquid. t (p. 4-3.10, FSAR) l (2) same as (1) (no projected design changes) i

, - c,.. - , __ . _ . ,_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

o I 4

l How frequently is the dry well purged?

(1) & (2) It is expected that it will be required to completelv l purge this system about 2 times per year. In addition j it will be necessary to partially purge the system about i' 3 times every. 2 weeks with approximately 100,000 cubic feet of nitrogen to control oxygen build-up and it will  !

be necessary to bleed the system pressure down from about .

15 psia to atmospheric pressure about 1 time per week. The  !

entire, system volume is approximately 240,000 cubic feet. '

What treatment is given to this purge?

f (1) The purge gas goes through the standby gas treatment system  !

which consists of a demister, a particulate filter, a charcoal filter and a second particulate filter.

(Fig. 5-3-1 FSAR)  ;

(2) same as (1) (no projected design changes) I

12. What is the expected leak rate of primary coolant to the reactor l building?  !

r (1) Design basis is zero, however 250 lb/hr assumed for radiation  !

dose calculation in Answers to DRL Questions on Gaseous Radwaste l System Modification Report, Revision C.  ;

(p. 33 Answers to DRL Questions on i Gaseous Radwaste System Modification j Report, Revision C, October 1971) {

i (2) Experience to date at Monticello with a several month period of (

zero liquid rad waste release is that the plant make up water  !

rate is about 350 to 500 gallons per day. This water is being Icst from the plant through a combination of evaporative losses,  !

additive 'to the solid waste solidificatbn system and possible steam leaks in the turbine building. About 50 percent of the loss is assumed to go up the stack with the air ejector off gas. Based j en this indirect analysis it is expected that evaporative losses

' to the reactor building will be about 56 lbs/ hour. All liquid leaks are reclaimed through the various drain sumps.

' f What is the ventilation air flow through the reactor building? (CFM) [

f (1) 0.9-1. 8 x 10 5 cfm (1 to 3 fans)  !

i (2) s ame as (1) - j t

Where is it discharged?

f l

-(1) to the reactor building roof vent. '3 l

(p. 9-3. 5, FS AR) l (2) same as (1) s i

1 i

i I

5 C

I Is the air filtered or otherwise treated before discharge?  !

(1) not filtered, but monitored to alarm such that dose will not  !

exceed 5'l; of 500 mrem /yr at off-site location and set to isolate reactor building vent and automatically direct all flow through the standby gas treatment system based on not exceeding 2 mrem / [

hour off-site.

(p . 9-3. 5, FSAR) f (2) same as (1)

13. khat is the expected leak rate of steam to the turbine building?

(Cni)

(1) design basis is zero, operator corrective action would be taken if the leak rate were > 10,000 lb/hr.  ;

(p. 9-3. 6, FSAR)

(2) The expected steam leak rate is 10 lb/hr based on the indirect  ;

water balance analysis presented in the above answer to Question 12.

k'h at is the ventilation air flow through the turbine building? (CRI)  :

f (1) Upper turbine building flow is variable; j 100,000 cfm in summer  !

O cfm in winter (Fig. 10-3-1, FS AR) f f

Lower turbine building; j 64,000 cfm  ;

i (2) Same as (1) except experience dictates an annual average for i the upper turbine level of 59,000 cfm.

k~here is it discharged?

l i

(1) Lower turbine building vents to the reactor building and upper )

turbine building vents to the turbine building roof vent.  ;

I (2) same as (1)  ;

i 14 Describe the treatment of the exhaust stream from the turbine seal }

glands.

I

a. k' hat is the origin of the steam used in the gland seals? (i.e.,

is it primary steam, condensate, or demineralized water from a separate source, etc?)

(1) primary steam (p . 9-3. 3, FS AR) .

(2) same as (1) (no projected design changes) {

i

b. How is the effluent stream from the gland seals treated and l disposed of?  ;

1 I

i l

. . i  :

i (1) 1.75 minute hold-up, mixed with air ejector of fgases and j dilution air at the base of the stack.

(p. 9-3. 3, FS AR)

(2) same as (1) (no projected design, changes) ,

15. Provide average gallons / day and VCi/cc for the following categories of- l liquid waste. Use currently observed dat a in the industry where dif-ferent from the SAR or Environmental Report (indicate which is used) . [

l

a. High-level wastes (for example, " clean" or low conductivity  !

waste and equipment drains); i (1) Flow: 21,000 gal / day (low river flow) .

14,000 gal / day (normal river flow)

Activity: < 3 x 10- 3 pCi/cc (design value in waste collector tank) .

2 x 10-5 pCi/cc (effluent f rom vaste collector demin- j eralizer at low river flow) l 3 x 10-5 pCi/cc (effluent from vaste collector demin-eralizer at normal river flow) l (Figs . 9-2-1, 9-2-2, FS AR) l 1

(2) Flow: 20,000 gal / day (categories a, b, e and d combined) i Activity: 10- pCi/cc (in vaste collector tank operated on continuous recycle through filter) g t

(Under present operating procedures wastes in categories a, b, l c and d are combined and not treated separately) . {

1.(1) Nu=ber and Capacity of collector tanks; (p. 9-2. 7, FSAR) l s

No. Name Capacity (gals.) ,

I Waste Surge Tank 35,000 E Waste Sample Tanks 10,000 each j

5 2

1 Condensate Backwash Receiving Tank 8,500 t 1 Waste Collector Tank 10,000 [

2 Condensate Phase Separator Tanks 12,000 each 2 Clean-Up Phase [

Separator Tanks 3,000 each .l 2 Condensate Storage Tanks 220,000 each i

1 Waste Sludge Tank 7,500 (2) same as (1) plus the following (p. 9-2.7, FSAR) {

l No. Name Capreity (gals.) i 1 Floor Drain Collector Tank 10,000 {

1 Floor Drain Sample Tank 10,000 l l l i

l i

+

1 f

L

. _ . . - _ . ,, . . - _ . . - - _ . - - . . _ . --_,m- .e- ..m_. , - _ , . , , -.ww -, _ ,_ ,

- _ - - . - - = .

7 i I

l

2. Fraction of water to be recycled or f actors controlling l decision. )

(1) Recycle 100% to condensate storage tanks af ter, treatment. j (p. 9-2.1, FSAR) ,

(2) same as (1)  ;

3. Treatment s teps--include number, capacity and process D.F. I for each principal nuclide for each step. >

(1) Process through waste collector filter and deep bed demineralizer to vaste sample tank, measure and transfer to condensate storage tank if activity <10-3 pCi/cc. If activity >10-3 uCi/cc recycle through filters. ,

(p . 9-2.1, FS AR)  ;

The design basis decontamination factors were extracted from )

Fig. 9-2.2 by calculating the ratio of the inlet stream activity ,

to the effluent stream activity for all filters. The resulting decontamination factors are presented below;  ;

Was te collector filter 6.7 total activity f Was te demineralizer 100 total activity i

Floor drain filter 5.7 total activity l 1

Laundry drain filter 1 total activity t (2) Preliminary measurements have been performed at the Monticello i plant based on a very limited sample run. Decontamination f actors for the waste collector filter using solka floc with resin overlay were measu' red at the plant as follows:

D.F.  !

particulate Co60 698 f I

Co66 1062 CuEh 32 f Cation Cu64 0 Anion 1133 82 ,

Mo99 3.6 i i

I Decontamination f actors for the deep bed demineralizer were  ;

measured at the plant as follows: (This test was made with j very clean water to-begin with as the waste collector tank  :

is operated on continuous recycle)  ;

i D.F.  !

particulate Co6C t0 (essentially no activity l CoES 1.3 to measure)  !

Cus4 13.5 (

Cation Cu6 " 2.1 i Anion 1133 1.2 l I

m. - . . _ _ . _ . . . _. _ . . _ . . . . _ _

. 8 Capacity of each step: (

Waste collector filter - 110 gpm s Deep bed demineralizer - 110 gpm Floor drain filter - 50 gpm Laundry drain filter - 25 gpm -

Modified operating procedure is such that all category a, b, e and d wastes are currently processed through the waste collector filter and deep bed demineralizer to the waste sample tanks. If measured activity is <10-3 pCi/ce, they are passed to the con- '

densate storage tanks for system recycle. If measured activity in the waste sample tanks is >10-3 pCi/cc the liquid is recycled back through the waste collector filter and deep bed demineralizer.  ;

4. Decay time from primary loop to discharge.

(1) minimum 24 hours2.777778e-4 days <br />0.00667 hours <br />3.968254e-5 weeks <br />9.132e-6 months <br />. ,

(2) 100% recycle, if release occurs it will be from tank of lowest activity prior to refueling and average decay time is conservatively ;

estimated to be 6 months such that concentration in discharge canal will not exceed 10 7 pCi/cc.

5. How is waste concentrate handled? (filter cake, demineralizer  ;

resin, evaporator bottoms) i (1) Druc=ed, sealed and shipped to an approved AEC burial site.

(p. 9-4.1, FSAR)  :

(2) Solidified by mixing with cement, drummed in 55 gallon drums and shipped to AEC approved off site disposal area.  !

Give total tolume or weight and curies per day or year.

(1) normal river flow (Fig. 9-2-2, FSAR)

Flow (55 gal Activity (Ci/ year) ;

Item drums / yea r) Normal Maximum t

1. clean-up system sludge 26.2 2410, 2620.

2. condenrate system sludge 107. 107. 139. !

l l

3. waste collector, floor drain and fuel pool sludges 97. 359. 388.

4. waste demineralizer spent resins 42. 4.2 601.

l

[

l ,

f

9 i

(1) low river flow (Fig. 9-2-1, FSAR) i Flow (55 gal Activity (C1/ year) !

Item drums /vear) Normal Maximum -

r

1. clean-up system sludge 26.2 2418. 2541. ,

2. condensate system sludge 107. 107. 139.  !

3. waste cellector, floor ,

drain and fuel pool sludges 116. 232. 418.  ;

4. waste demineralizer spent resins 64. 6.4 1376.  ;

f (2) Total solid wastes shipped for categories a, b, c and d for ,

first 12 months operation scaled up t o 1 year 0 80% load '

Flow: 32,851 f t3/ year i

Activity: 53.0 Ci/ year (6 month operating reports for January, 1971 to J une, 1971 and July , 1971 to December, 1971, from Menticello plant)

Estimated breakdown for categories a, b, e and d are:  !

Category a: 70% of total  :

Category b: 10% of total Category c: 10% of total l Category d: 10% of total l

b. " Dirty" wastes (f or example, floor drain wastes, high-conductivity wastes , andlaboratory wastes) .  !

(1) Flow: 7,200 gal / day (low river flow) (Fig. 9-2-1, FSAR)  ;

8,200 gal / day (normal river flow) (Fig. 9-2-2, FS AR) l Activity. t 4 x 10 -5 pCi/cc (normal activity level in floor

1. "I" ' ' # "" )

-6 6 x 10 pCi/cc (effluent from floor collector .

I' ~ ** *A" 'I '

-6 7 x 10 pCi/cc (effluent from floor collector i filter - normal river flow) l (Figs. 9-2.2 6 9-2.1, FSAR) [

(2) combined with category a, see previous answer. j

1. Number and capacity of collector tanks. I Capacity (gals.)  !

(1) No. N ame 1 Floor Drain Collector Tank 10,000 [

1 Floor . Drain Sample Tank 10,000 t

I (p . 9-2. 7, FS AR)

,' .'" . 10 f (2) combined with category a, see previous answer  ;

2. Fraction of water to be recycled or factors controlling decision. ,

t

. 2 (1) variable recycle. See next item.

(2) (S ame answer as 15.a.2.)

3. Treatment steps--include numbers, capacity and process D.F. for each principal nuclide.

(1) Normal river flow: process through the floor drain filter j to the floor drain sample tank, measure activity and release such that concentration in discharge canal will not exceed  !

10-7 pCi/ cc.

(Fig. 9-2-1, FSAR)

Low river flow: the filtrate from the floor drain filter is routed to the waste collector tank.

(Fig. 9-2-2, FSAR)

Decontamination f actors and capacity - see answer to I

15. a. 3. (1) .  ;

(2) Same answer as 15.a.3. (2) ,

4. Decay time from primary loop to discharge.  !

l (1) same answer as 15.a.4. (1) {

i (2) same answer as 15.a.4. (2) ,  ;

5. How is waste concentrate handled? (filter cake, demineralizer  !

resin, evaporator bottoms)

(1) Same answer as 15.a.5. (1) i

! (2) Same answer as 15.a.5. (2)

Give total volume or weight and curies per day or year.

(1) same answer as 15.a.5.(1) l (2) same answer as 15.a.5. (2)  ;

c. Chemical wastes (1) Flow: 500 gal / day (Fig. 9-2-2, FSAR)  :

Activity: 8 x 10-3 uCi/cc (Table 9-2.2. , FSAR) f (2) Flow: 300 gal / day i Activity: 10-5 p Ci/ cc 6

l l

5

~ ' ~

11

1. Number and capacity of collector tanks. (Fig. 9-2-1, FSAR)

(1) & (2) 1 Chemi 21 Waste tank @ 4,000 gals.

2. Fraction of water to be recycled or f actots controlling de cis ion.

(1) Same answer as 15. a.1. (1)

(2) 100% solidification or recycle, no release.

3. Treatment steps--include number capacity and process D.F.

for each principal nuclide.

(1) same answer as 15.a.3. (1)

Decontamination f actors:

not available Capacity - 25 gpm.

(2) complete solidification by using as moisture additive to cement for solid waste disposal or recycle.

4. Decay time from primary loop to discharge.

(1) same answer as 15.a.4. (1)

(2) s ame answe r as 15. a. 4. (2)

5. How is waste concentrate handled? (filter cake, demineralizer resin, evaporator bottoms).

(1) drummed and shipped to AEC approved of fsite disposal area.

(2) same as (1)

Give total volume or weight and curies per day or year.

(1) same answer as 15.a.5.(1)

(2) s ame answ er as 15. a. 5. ( 2)

d. Laundry, decontamination, and wash-down vastes.

1. Number and capacity of collector tanks.

(1) & (2) Laundry Drain Tanks @ 1000 gals.

(p. 9-2. 7, FS AR)

2. Fraction of water to be recycled or f actors controlling decision.

(1) 0% recycle (Figs . 9-2-1, 9-2-2, FS AR)

J

-+,---a.u-,-,, ,r-.-, ,,,r- ----,v-------,~----e

- . . . - - . _ _ - - -- - _~

12 (2) same answer as 15.a.2. (2) (these vastes are combined with those of category a, b and c and are not treated separately)

3. Treatment steps--include number, capacity, and process D.F. ]

for principal nuclide for each step. .

l i

(1) process through laundry drain filter monitor and release i such that activity in discharge canal will not exceed i 10-7 pCi/cc.

(Figs . 9-2-1, 9-2-2 FSAR)  ;

(2) same answer as 15.a.3.(2) j

4. Decay time from primary loop to discharge.

i (1) same answer as 15.a. L (1)

(2) same answer as 15.a.4. (2)

5. How is waste concentrate handled? (filter cake, demineralizer resin, evaporator (bottoms).

(1) same answer as 15.a.5. (1) j (2) same answer as 15.a.5.(2)

Give total volume or weight and curies per day or year.

(1) same answer as 15.a.5.(1) [

(2) same answer as 15.a. 5. (2)

16. For the. condensate demineralizers provide the flow rate Ib/hr, type of resin used, expected backwash and regeneration frequency, and expected D.F. for each principal nuclide.  !

(1) a. flow rate 6,770,000 lb/hr (Fig. 1-3-3B, FS AR)

b. type of resin used: Powdex  :

l

c. expected backwash end regeneration f requency:  !

backwash every 10 to 20 days, no regeneration {

d. expected D.F. for each principal nuclide. ,

not available (2) same as (1) i

17. Dilution flow rate for liquid effluents, normal gpm and total gallons [

per year. [

4 i

(1) a, normal open cycle & helper 280,000gpm j closed cycle 16,000gpm  ;

(p. 9-2. 3, FSAR) [

(p. 9-2.4, FSAR) j.

i i

+

h k

[

- .. .c.' ..

~'

13

b. 1.5 x 1011 per year based on 100% normal cycle or helper tower operation l i

(2) a. same as (1)

b. 1.3 x 1011 gallons per year based on 85% of normal cycle operation.

Additional Information  :

X Values  !

Q

a. stack release (Off-gas Modification Report i 4.37 x 10-8 sec/m3 October 1971  !

Page 24 ff)  !

b. ground level release t 2.6 x 10-6 sec/m3 .

i I

L I.

1 i

i t

s I

e f

I e

f r

h I

.-- . . _ , -