ML20070Q688

Evaluation of Procedures Proposed by PG&E in Emergency Plans to Consider Meteorological Conditions in Diablo Canyon Plant Coastal Environ

ML20070Q688
Person / Time
Site:	Diablo Canyon, 05000000
Issue date:	10/08/1982
From:	Van Der Hoven COMMERCE, DEPT. OF, NATIONAL OCEANIC & ATMOSPHERIC
To:	Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Shared Package
ML19302F581	List: ML20070Q680 ML20070Q688
References
CON-NRC-03-81-099, CON-NRC-3-81-99 NUDOCS 8301270060
Download: ML20070Q688 (3)

Text

-

m . _ ._ .. _

l i

Evaluation of the Procedures I Proposed by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company in their Emergency Plans to Consider Meteorological Conditions in the Diablo Canyon Plant Coastal Environment by Isaac Van der Hoven National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Air Resources Laboratories

• i October 8, 1982 i

D l , .

e I

/4 l

l

. ,lh 0 y "

,F

1 . .

1 -

I. The review which follobs is in response to Task Order No.1 of Inter-l ager.cy Agreement .*lo. P.C-03-81-099 whi'ch requires an evaluation of the ,

procedures proposed by the Pacific Gas and Electric Company in their  ;

e erger.cy plans to consider 1

eteorological conditions in the coastal

! envirorment at the Diablo Canyon Units 1 and 2 nuclear reactor site.

II. The docunents reviewed which were submitted under NRC Dockut No. 50-275 and 50-323 are as folloss:

i

} 1. Upgraded . Meteorological Program for Errergency Preparedness, February 17, 1981. .

2. thi/Q Calculations for Exclusion Area Determination, (no

date given).

, III. The reviews of the documents listed are as follows:

1. " Upgraded Meteorological Program for Emergency Preparedness"

]

j The document lists a number of site specific factors affecting plume con-l centration estimates at the Diabloe Canyon site, one of which is "an extensive

series of tracer tests conducted at the plant site". The report entitled-

" Diffusion Studies at the Diablo Canyon Site" by H.E. Cramer and F.A. Record of the GCA Corp., prepared for.the utility in June 1970, is part of the Final Safety Analysis Report, Appendix 2.33, pages 2.3B-1 to 2.38-51 of Docket Number 50-275 and 50-323. Based on my analysis of the concentration data found in Ap?endix 2.33, I would agree that "the net effect of the site specific influ-ence is to enhance dispersion along highly channeled flow trajectories roughly i paralleling the coast." In the attached table, I have taken the data from the 16 tracer tests with winds from the NW and calculated the ratio.of the computed versus measured relative maximum concentration. Measured sigma theta values were used to classify the Pasquill diffusion category which specifies the value .

4 of sigma-y and sigma-z as a function of distance.- It was also assumed that the

easured maximum concentrations were along the plume centerline. In a number j of cases the actual peak concentration may not have been sampled because the -

plume centerline may have been over the water. Nevertheless, with an average i cc:puted versus measured ratio of 18, I would assume that on the whole, com-puted concentration values using the straight, centerline Gaussian model would be greater than the maximum measured values. This is not surprising because -

of the added turbulence created by the rough terrain.

j

2. " Chi /Q Calculations for Exclusion Area Determination" In order to compare the minimum acceptable concentration ' level of each i radionuclide with computed centerline concentrations, the report outlines the -

steps necessary to obtain the relative concentration (Chi /Q) from measured meteorological data. Then, to compute the centerline concentration (Chi), the instructions are to multiply the Chi /Q value by the source term, Q. The question, then is, how is the source term determined 7 Is the source term pre-determined depending on the type of accident or is there a radiological monitoring network

.1 *

.,w t .,m. , _ _ . +r. . . _ _ _ .,...- p4 . _ _ , . , _ _ - , ,.r.___,r,e-.. ._r., - ._-_ _f,

?

that can define the pluxe centerline location and concentration? Determining the Q value from the Gaussian codel requires a measurement of wind speed, stability, and ccc. centration plus a knowledge of where the monitored concen-trati:n reasurement was made with regard to its "y" distance from the center-line of the plure. The latter will not be known if one does not have a measured concentration isopleth pattern.

IV. Conclusions regarding the docum.ents as listed and numbered above are as folloss:

1. The meteorological program described in the document is acceptable from an emergency planning standpoint.

2. I do not believe that the methodology described in the docu-ment adequately determines the value of the source term, Q.

If- Q is not known, then Chi cannot be determined from Chi /Q and it follows that the exclusion area cannot then be determined.

~0v -e k,. lu /&

Isaac Van der Hoven Air Resources Laboratories, NOAA October 8,1982 4

4 9

9 e

8

. ,.... ...- w. . ... .- - .

. * .. . I es .

• f::

2:

. H

r .2 C ' ' E O

9 A

Os *i-

% O P:<

?"..n O

B

%N-c3, c: e.: c -. ::D c, . . . c O c- n (q r-1 r-t to o tn 2 ..

C .:.:g e-( cJ r-t Cu (O c5 r-i 03 O! t- < -

O r.. *i2 P C:' *

• 5 , X

• O n

zy O *

• O

• 3 g . C'*

• ')

. *s .e . n es es s s. s .s s e .*-~s s n .e s .*- s m t,1 CI 'I 13 LN in 10 -O 2 4 .:t # .::f" .

.':t . 4 .:t .::0- in <:: .

' G.-'J I 8 I i 1 3 1 8 8 8 1 1. I I I I I:3 d =* g v v* v v v v v v v v v v v v  %, v ;l5; .

C'1 ,"

.E -

O Cu to O CJ O of CO CJ CO CO (q . CJ CO . .:t c0

>: C - * - - - - . - - * - * * * - CA.; I:J cs c to r-i r-f to r-1 in r-i OJ r-f CO G! to el 0; to (O 5-zw . p,

. . c2

._. ec Cl 1 .. <

02l - .

&:. c, -

C , - .> .

t( m E . .

1 L .r. I .r 3 W. .' m '

L c r- A M A A M  ?. M N M M A N N A O p.

Oh' C 3

(.:';

C .

o- c ,

E-4 ! ~ .

c;

.r(

o Tr.:j A. . .

a- .

b)8

z, l- E al

.c!

c.

H in a

O Ch CD (D o .:::- 10 CO .:P O tw (D @ O

=:::

og 4.l

4. '

O E

H co -i -a c2 e-i r-i e- r-i cu Cu on -i Co Cu Gl :I we CI c; C

= s.

(

t C

r, p,

eg c O

. C.J.

O

. O.

c3 r-i

. CO.

e-I ' CO of in CJ

. CO . t.

1-

.::t

'r-: .g '

- es c,e3 o Ch o CO Ci -

fo rq cq .:t rq Cu Cu (9 cq e-I c 08 -96 U .

i l I .

. . . . .s

5 . l??' : , . . -i

., %~; $  ; . .-

N.-:a - M ~. .-;. .l _ . ~. . '  % ,% y. : : .. u .

- QQr

-- C O. O O O O O O O O O O O O. O O O c O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O O

@,E CO O .::P CO CO O (O CO CO to CO o CO CO CO . O l . c- r-t CD -t r-t ri to r-f cf r-f r-i r-t H r-! s-i rf . :t o

" E

• A'. O

. . r!

l Ek'-G n. ,. - , . .- - . - , . , n .. n n n - .- .

C  ! c- to o o o to in in to to in LG to to to t.o  :

g's

.P c, : v v O

t t a v v v v v I 1 I I. I

-- v v v v v v v I 3 i I  : t C-c- g . .

a,

. . :' CO to rq en O .t CO e-4 O to O! .::t in E g cl

. . . . CJ. . -t. . . .::t. . . . . . .

y; lEi .:t in DJ 'tw .::t .:t r-t e-f r-l Ch Cu fo LS rf CD t% e-w w- o

. p-v

. o I .

Q 0 4;:: sq i-t . CJ .:7 Cs O e-I GI 13 O tw CO O of e in

. E-4):..o . .

r-i r-t r-i -I r-i e-I H Cu (u Cu .Cu

. ,d

^