ML20079N401
| ML20079N401 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Mcguire, McGuire  |
| Issue date: | 11/11/1991 |
| From: | Bryant J, Evans L DUKE POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| References | |
| RTR-NUREG-1437 AR, S, WM, NUDOCS 9111110211 | |
| Download: ML20079N401 (97) | |
Text
<
kCN MN .
Os be rt Ab I MIXED WASTE CHARACTERIZATION AND PROCESSING Julius W. Bryant and Larry D. Evans Nuclear Production Department Duke Power company Charlotte, N.C. 28242 ABSTRACT Waste that is both radioactive and hazardous is regulated by both the NRC and the EPA. Since there are few treatment, storage, or disposal facilities licensed by both these agencies, mixed waste generated at Duke Power Company facilities is stored at the generation site. Processing methods for eliminating this inventory of stored mixed waste are being developed using the limited options available to facilities not possessing a hazardous waste treatment permit. In order to ensure that the above storage and processing is in compliance with EPA requirements, periodic characterization of these mixed wastes is necessary. This paper describes Duke Power Company's mixed waste characterization and processing programs and outlines the results
- achieved to date.
INTRODUCTION Mixed waste is low-level radioactive vaste (LLW), as defined in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA), that also contains constituents that are either a listed hazardous waste or exhibit hazardous characteristics as described in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation 40CFR Part 261. Prior to 1985, mixed waste was generally disposed of just like LLW with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission having regulatory authority. However, during formulation of the LLRWPAA, questions arose as to which agency, the EPA or the NRC, should have regulatory authority over mixed waste. Congress directed these two agencies to administrative 1y resolve the problem. As a result, the F.RC and the EPA issued a joint guidance document that stated the NRC had jurisdiction over the radionuclide portion of the mixed waste while the EPA had authority over the hazardous constituents. With the issuance of the NRC-EPA joint guidance document, a mixed waste treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) was required to conform to both NRC and EPA regulations.
EPA regulations require that a mixed waste TSDF obtain an EPA
- permit and that they characterize their mixed waste to ensure that it can be treated, stored, or disposed of in compliance with the storage permit and EPA regulations. Due to the projected high costs associated with TSDF permits, Duke Power Company has implemented mixed waste characterization and processing programs whose goal is to eliminate any need to maintain these permits by eliminating mixed waste inventories.
9111110011 911111 PDR N'7EQ 1437 C PDR t
- _ - . - --. . - . . . . -_ _.. . - _.. - - - ._ - - .~ - -
The general strategy of the mixed waste processing program is to reduce the concentration of listed hazardous constituents in a ~
mixed waste prior to submitting a delisting petition and to eliminate the hazardous characteristics of a mixed waste (ignitability, toxicity, reactivity, or corrosivity). Testing has begun on the limited processing options available to facilities not possessing an EPA treatment permit. Since these options are not fully developed, Duke Power has obtained hazardous waste storage permits and continues to accumulate mixed wastes at its generation sites.
The characterization program ensures that the storage of mixed waste is done in compliance with the respective facility's storage permit and EPA regulations. In addition, this program provides information necessary to the proper development of the company's mixed waste processing programs.
DISCUSSION Characterization Procram The mixed waste characterization program began with the formation of mixed waste working groups at the Catawba, McGuire, and Oconee Nuclear Stations. These three sites produce all the mixed wastes generated by Duke Power Company. Each working group was comprised of chemistry, radiation protection, and environmental personnel from the stations and the corporate office. The mixed waste working groups were assigned the responsibility for identifying all mixed waste generated at their respective facility and for implementing a characterization program that fulfilled the requirements of 40CFR Part 265.
Each working group's initial action was to identify all LLW generated at their station. Next, each LLW stream was placed into one of the following general classifications:
- LLW known to be mixed waste because it contains or has contacted a listed hazardous solvent
- LLW which could be mixed waste because it has the potential to exhibit hazardous characteristics
- LLW which is not and should never become mixed waste because there is not a reasonable potential that it will become hazardous ,
2
. .. - - - . - . - . - - ~, .-- . _ - - .- ..-. .
A Waste Analysis Plan (WAP) was then developed which outlined the
. procedures necessary to ensure that each known or potential mixed waste was characterized as per the requirements of 40CFR Part 265. This WAP provides the following information for each of these vaste streamst
- the parameters for which the vaste will be analyzed
- the rationale for the selection of these parameters
- the sampling methods which will be used to ensure a representative sample of the waste is collected
- the test methods which will be used to analyze for the selected parameters
- the frequency with which the analysis of the waste will be repeated
- the test acceptance criteria After development of the WAP, the known or potential mixed wastes were characterized. The initial characterization results for these known or potential mixed waste streams are shown in Table I and II respectively. Table III lists the LLW which ja not and should never become mixed waste.
Ipble 1 Initial characterization results for LLW known to be mixed waste because they contain or have contacted a listed hazardous solvent ,
Waste Stream Parameter (See No.te.1) Rgggli ,
dry cleaner filters, freon 200 - 2200 ppm paper portion ignitability non-ignitable toxicity noxic, up to 2.0 ppm Cd and 16.0 ppm Pb 1
dry cleaner filters, freon 120 - 350,000 ppm ignitability non-ignitable toxicity non-toxic 3
Table I (continued).
Waste Stream Parameter ERIMit dry cleaner bottoms freon 58,000 - 330,000 ppm ignitability non-ignitable toxicity toxic, up to 5.9 ppm Pb scintillation- See Note 2 cocktail acetone based- See Note 2 cleaning! solutions l
vaste oil / solvent See Note 2 '
mixtures tool decon unit filters See Note 3 ,
tool decon unit bottoms Sea Note 3 Notes: 1) Waste streams were analyzed for-both the concentration of the applicable listed constituent and the parameters-which caused that constituent'to be listem.
2)-Note that analysis of most of the Table I wastes was not necessary since their characteristics were already known. Analysis was performed only on the freon related wastes because-a knewledge of'the actual concentration of the listed constituent in these wastes.was kIportant for process development..
In addition, therW wns sufficient doubt as to whether the freon vaste actually exhibited the i characteristics that caused its hazardous
- constituent to-be EP1 listed.-
- 3) Tool decon unit freon waste analysis has yet to be performed. ,
4 re - 3 y--
w-yw -r4r,, w w., %.p,y =y,-h g , yy g 9 _g- - g h a c g.-g-twwkw --
r r emp-
f l
Table II l
- l Initial characterization results for LLW
- Which could be mixed waste because thav have the !
gatential for exhibitina hazardous characteristics Potential '
Waste Stream Characteristics Result paint solids ignitability non-ignitable
. chromate analysis toxicity toxic, up to wasta 240 ppm Cr reactor coolant _ pump toxicity toxic, up to decon solution 3560 ppa Cr [
sludge lance toxicity non-toxic !
filters / sludge-chloride analysis toxicity toxic,_up.to waste 780 ppm Hg liquid radweste filter toxicity non-toxic
, (laundry system)-
liquid radwaste filter- toxicity _ non-toxic (floor drain system) ;
laundry liquids toxicity non-toxic corrosivity .non-corrosive PH=7.2 floor drain liquids toxicity - - non-toxic' corrosivity non-corrosive-PH=6.9 -
wet-blast-decon toxicity . toxic, up to >
unit-grit / filters 28 ppm cd and i 30 ppm Pb7
, lead batteries / See Note 1 '
shielding-Notes: 1) Lead batteries and shielding are decontaminated.
Consequently, no analysis has been performed on this wasta, l'
t r
ft---yv+c*"mem-v& -wwM
Table III LLW which is not and should never kgcome mixed waste because there is not a reasonable cotential that it will become hazardous primary system filters / resins process equipment tools unused non-solvent commercial products HVAC filters / carbon dry cell batteries oil / greases empty scintillation vials
- eupty solvent containers
- absorbents containing solvents **
equipment and sump sludges
- Per EPA regulations, empty solvent containers are not subject to regulation as a hazardous waste.
- At the time of the working group's initial classification, non-soaked absorbents were '
classified as non-hazardous. However, because of a recently issued EPA regulation, solvent containing ,
absorbents are now classified as hazardous. The characterization of these absorbents has yet to be performed.
After completion of the above initial characterizations, process development began for the LLW determined to be mixed waste. These processes are described in the Processing Program section of this paper. Periodic analysis continues on '= LLW listed in Tables I and II at the frequency specified in ; WAP.
Processino Procram The initial characterization of LLW generated at Duke Power facilities identified the mixed wasta currently being generated at Duke Power facilities. Next, development began on methods to process this mixed waste using the limited techniques available to facilities not possessing an EPA treatment permit. The goalHof this process program is to eliminate the need to maintain any EPA related storage permits by eliminating mixed waste inventories. ,
l 6
e- .. . .. .
Two general strategies are beir.g employed to achieve this goalt Strategy #1 a involves the submittal of delisting petitions for mixed waste streams that contain or have contacted a listed hazardous solvent. Prior to petition submittal, the concentration of the hazardous solvent in the mixed waste will be reduced as low as possible. -
Strategy #2 - is applicable to a mixed waste that exhibits a hazardous characteristic (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity). Thet>
vastes will be treated in-container to sliminate their hazardous characteristics.
Table l'.' lists the mixed wastes that are currently being ger/ ,d at Duke Power facilities, as identified by the cb - .cerization progrra. In addition, their hazardous properties .
a .. the general proces ing strategies to be applied to these mixed wastes are provicad.
Table IV General Process Strateav For Mixed Waste Streams Currently Beina Generated At Duke Power Facilities Mixed Waste Stream Harardous Properties Stratenv dry cleaner filters, listed waste (freon), #1 and #2 paper portion toxic (Cd,Pb) See Note 1 dry cleaner filters, listed waste (fraon) #1
$ carbon portion dry cleaner bottoms listed waste (freon), #1 and #2 toxic (Pb) scintillation ignitable, #2, see cocktail See Note 2 Note 3 acetone based listed waste (acetone) #2, see cleaning solutions Note 4
, waste oil / solvent listed waste (solvents) #1, see mixtures Note 5 tool decon unit listed waste (freon), #1 filters See Note 6 7
l Table IV (continued)
Mixed Waste Stream Eazardous.Procarties Stratenv tool decon unit l i s t e d 'r; 9 3 t e (freof #1 bottoms See Note 6 chromate analysis toxic (Cr) #2 waste reactor coolant pump toxic (Cr) #2 solution chloride analysis toxic (Hg) #2 waste wet blast decon unit toxic (cd) #2 grit / filters Notes: 1) Strategy #1 - reduce concentration of the listed hazardous constituent and then submit a delisting petition.
Strategy #2 - render non-hazardous by eliminating hazardouc characteristics. -
- 2) The initial characterization of LLW classified scintillation cocktail as a listed mixed waste since it contains c. listed hazardous solvent. However, based upon an EPA regulation, the cocktail is _
classified only as characteristic mixed waste (ignitability) since it is not used in a solvent application.
- 3) cocktail waste containing no gamma-emitting radioactive isotopes was sent to an off site facility for disposal. The remaining cocktail waste was processed using Strategy #2.
- 4) The acetone based cleaning solution is a listed hazardous waste only because it is ignitable. Based upon an EPA regulation, wastes containing a solvent which is listed solely due to ignitability need only be rendered non-ignitable within 90 days -
of generation to be declared non-hazardous. Neither removal of the listed solvent from the waste nor a delisting petition is required.
8
Table IV (continued)
- 5) An alternative option being pursued for mixed waste comprised of oil and listed hazardous solvents is approval from the applicable regulatory agencies for a one time burn of current inventories. Afterwards, an oil and solvent segregation program should prevent the generation of additional amounts of this mixed waste.
- 6) The tool decon unit waste characterization has not been completed.
Application of Str:tegy #1 to the applicable wastes required an investigation into effective methods for reducing the listed solvent concentrations of these wastes. At this time, no testing has been performed on methods for reducing the listed solvent concentration of the waste oil / solvent mixtures. For the freon related wastes, two methods have been tested - distillction and drying using the heal cycle of the dry cleaners. Neither of these two methods of reclaiming freon require a hazardous waste
. treatment permit. Strategy #2 is being enployed to eliminate the hazardous characteristics associated Lith any of the identified mixed wastes. Generally, these wastes are being solidified with a
- gypsum based sclidification agent. Again, a treatment permit is not required as long as the solidifications are performed in the original waste container within 90 days of the waste generation date.
At this time, the only full scale application of the above process strategies has been on the scintillation cocktail and the reactor coolant pump decon solution. Full scale processing of the remaining mixed wastes was delayed pending the results of bench scale processing of these wastes. The mixed waste processing results achieved thus far are shown in Table V. Testing is in orogress for the identified mixed waste streams f r which no esults are shown.
Table V Current Duke Pover Mixed Waste Processina Results l Process Pre-crocessed Post-orocessed
- Mire,1 Waste Descriotion Prone rties Properties dry cleaner dried 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br /> 0 2200 ppm freon, 1200 ppm freon, l
- filters, 120 degrees F, 2 ppm Cd and < 0.2 Cd and paper then solidified 16 ppm Pb < 0.3 Pb, See Notes 1 thru 5 i
- 9
' ~
Table V (continued)
Process Pre-crocessed Post-nrocessgd -
Mixed Waste Descriotion Procerties Procerties dry cleaner dried 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> 0 350,000 ppm 18,000 ppm filters, 120 degrees F freon freon, See carbon Note 4 dry cleaner distilled, then 330,000 ppm 110 ppm freon, bottoms solidified freon, 5.9 < 0.3 Pb, See ppm Pb Notes 2,4,5 scintillation solidified ignitable non-ignitable, cocktail See Notes 4 and 5 chromate solidified 240 ppm Cr 1.01 ppm Cr, analysis See Notes 2, waste 4, and 5 rx coolant solidified 3560 ppm Cr 4.97 ppm Cr, pump decon See notes 2,4, -
solution and 5
. chloride solidified 780 ppm Hg 0.023 ppm Hg, cnalysis See Notes 2,4, vaste and 5 wet blast solidified 2.3 ppm Cd, 0.23 ppm Cd, grit / filters See Note 4 See Notes 2,4, 5, and 6 Notes: 1) Freon analysis of dried or distilled dry cleaner wastes was performed prior to any solidification of these wastes.
- 2) All post-processed toxic metal results are below the
. allowed maximum Consequently, these processed wastes are non-toxic.
- 3) No significant additional reduction was achieved in the dry cleaner filter paper freon concentration by drying the paper longer than 4 hours4.62963e-5 days <br />0.00111 hours <br />6.613757e-6 weeks <br />1.522e-6 months <br />. .
10
Ighle V (continued) 4)_The scintillation cocktail and the coolant pump decon solution results were obtained from full scale :
processing. All other post-processed results were ,
obtained from bench scale process testing. .
- 5) The solidification of the reactor coolant pump decon solution was done using cement. All other waste solidifications were_ performed using a gypsum based-solidification agent.
- 6) This wet blast' filters / grit processing was performed on a waste batch that contained only 2.3 ppm Cd. The .
processing of batches containing-Pb and higher levels of Cd is in progress.
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSION The Duke Power characterization program has identified all mixed waste currently being generated at Duke Power facilities.-This program provides for the-periodic characterization of these wastes and ensures that they continue to be stored-and processed in sccordance with the requirements of 40CFR Part 265. >
The ' Duke Power processi_ng program has eliminated two of the identified- mixed- wastes from the companies hazardests. waste storage permits.- scintillation cocktail and~ reactor coolant pump decon solution. The processing of the remaining mixed waste is in-progress and the preliminary results are satisfactory. Based upon these.results, there is a reasonable possibility'that all Duke Power mixed wasteLinventories and-hazardous waste storage permits can be eliminated.
REFERENCES
- 1. Low Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act, January 1986.
- 2. Ramource conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, October 1976.
- 3. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, " Guidance on the Definition and' Identification of Commarcial Mixed Low-Lavel Radioactive and Hazardous Waste and Answers to Anticipated Questions", January 8, 1987.
- 4. Code of Federal Reculations, Title 40, Parts 260 thru 262, and Parts 264 thru 270, 11
7.
.. 5. Environmental Protection Agency, " Treatment of Hazardous Waste Without a Permit", Federal Register, Vol 51, No. 56, ,
pg 10168, March 24, 1986.
4 4
4 12 1
- 1. :
I AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS This request for information is designed to obtain the utility overview of its power plant's impacts on aquatic resources. It is n21 intended to require new surveys, data collection, or extensive new analyses of existing data.
Responses ein be based on existing information, for example, by sumarization of information contained in monitoring reports, publications, or unpublished files. The questions should be answered separately for each site operated by the utility.
Documents that may be useful in addressing the following questions are o Annual Aquatic Monitoring Report submitted to .he responsible state Agency o Final Envircnmental Statement o Annual Non-Radiological Monitoring Report as required by Environmental Protection Plan nf Technical Specifications, Appendix B o Section 316 (a) and (b) Demonstration Report submitted to Environmental Protection Agency Based on our pilot study, the Aquatic Resource questions should take approximately 40 man-hours to answer,
- 1. Post-licensing modifications and/or changes in operations of intake and/or discharge systems m., Sn't :lt:r:0 the effects of the power '
plant on aquatic resources, or may have been made specifically to mitigate impacts that were not anticipated in the design of the plant.
Describe any such modifications and/or operational changes to the condenser cooling water intake and discharge systems since the issuance of the Operating License.
- 2. Sumarize and describe (or provide documentation of) any known impacts on aquatu. resources (e.g., fish kills, violations of discharge permit NUMARC Page 1
4 I
i AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS (cont.)
conditions) or National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) .'
enforcement actions that have occurred since issuance of the Operating ,
License. How have these been resolved or changed over time? (The response to this question should indicate whether impacts are ~ joing or were the result of start-up problems that were subsequently resolved. ' .
- 3. Changes to the NPDES permit during operation of the ~ indicate whether water quality parameters were determined . . mt impacts (and were dropped from monitoring requ' > . 4 subsequently raised as a water quality issue. <.+ r s .
of changes (and when they occurred) to the NFDES pr- . t .-
since issuance of the Operating License.
- 4. An examination of trends in the effects on aquatic re e i monitoring can indicate whether impacts haue increate s. 9: , c.
remained relatively stable during :pe 4 tion. Dese, th Ax . :: .
(or provide documentation of) results ,,f monitoring # m, ,
and equatic biota (e.g., related to NPDES permits, Environmt. 's -
Technical Specifications, site-specific monitoring required by federal or state agencies). What trend' are apparent over time?
- 5. Summarize types and numbers (or provide documentation) of organisms entrained and impinged by the condenser cooling water system since issuance of the Operating License. Describe any seasonal patterns associated with entrainmar.t and impingement. How has entrainment and impingement changed over time?
- 6. Aquatic habitat enhancement or restoration efforts (e.g., anadromous fish runs) during operation may have enhanced the biological communities in the vicinity of the plant. Alternatively, degradation of habitat or water quality may have resulted in loss of biological resources near the site. Describe any ci.ango to aquatic habitats (both enhancement and degradation) in the vicinity of the power plant since the issuance of NUMARC Page 2
AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS (cont.)
the Operating License including those that may have resulted in different plant impacts than those initially predicted.
- 7. Plant operations may have had positive, negativt., or no impact on the use of aquatic resources by others. Harvest by commercial or recreational fishermen may be constrained by plant operation.
Alternatively commercial harvesting may b1 relatively large compared with fish lesses caused by the plant. Describe (or provide documentation for) other nearby uses of waters affected by cooling water systems (e.g., swiming, boating, annual harvest by comercial and recreational fisheries) and how these impacts have changed since issuance of the Operating License.
B. Describe other sources of impacts on aquatic resources (e.g., industrial discharges, other power plants, agricultural runoff) that couid contribute to cumulative impacts. What are the relative contributions by percent of these sources, including the contributions due to the power plant, to overall water quality degradation and losses of aquatic biota?
- 9. Provide a copy of your Section 316(a) and (b) Demonstration Report required by the Clean Waste Act. What Section 316(a) and (b) determinations have been made by the regulatory authorities?
NUMARC Page 3 L
.. .- .-. . . .. - - . - . - . , _ . . . . ~ . _ -
,. 4' l
f DUKE POWER COMPANY McGUIRE NUCLEAR STATION SOCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONNAIRE p
4 e
n 4
'i.
e S
t
-l-
[c
} .- .
4
~,- a i
. : T. .-) i, t
July 3, 1990 Cl ILic. . .vW 45 4TAl. ^.
Pon t tidCTION I JUL 5 1994
', MEMORANDUM
' '"I'M M130S/DMSiON USE
.J Ah/41inNT TO JRi TO: Tami Carpenter Design Engineering EC09-H FRON: Gail Addis
SUBJECT:
NUMARC Socioe-e c " Impact Questionnaire
- 1. Estimates of numbe -
workers on site for most recent year:
Average permanent wo- -
i --
QA CMD PSD NPD = D00 Does not include K-Mac (approximately 95) or Globe (approximately 150)
- 2. Average permanent workers in five-year increments since plant received Operating License:
TOTAL NPD _CMD/SMS* M PSD 1980 = .953* s621 250 82 -
1985 = 1118* %786 250 82 -
1990 = 1509 $1000 375. 82 52
- CMD was basically SMS as far as plant maintenance support in '80 and '85.
- 3. Three cases, a typical planned outage, an ISI ottrage and the largest
-single outage.
A.
- Typical Planned Outage - 2E0C5 l.
Length: 76 daya Start Date: 7/5/89 Finish Date: 9/19/89 Cost: $20,234,000 l
l Total Additional Workforce (Peak): 1055 I
(
l> ..
Principal Task Workforce:
Refueling 15 .
NC Pump Maintenance 20 -
-Modifications = 150 S/G Sludge Lance) . .
S/G Sludge Les Shot Peen) 160 -
S/G F0SAR) p S/G Plug Removal)
Routine Maintenance 710 Total Occupational Dose Received: 514 Rem Principal Task Dose:
Refueling 26 Rea NC Pump Maintenance 17 Rem Modifications 65 Rem S/G Sludge Lance 17 Ree S/G Cold Leg Shot Peen 66 Rem S/G FOSAR 22 Rem S/G Plug Removal 24 Rem Routine Maintenance. 277 Ren
- All figures are actuals B. *ISI Outage - IEOC7 Length: 80 days Start Date: 8/91 Finish Date: 11/91 -
Cost: $22,000,000 *
( .
Total Additional Workforce (Peak): 1025 Principal Task Workforce:
Refueling 15 -
NC Pump Maintenance 20' Modifications 150
-S/G ECT-100%) ,
S/G Sleeving) 110 ISI Hydro Testing 30
- -Routing Maintenance 700 Total Occupational Dose Received
- 518
.y Principal Task Dose:
Refueling 30 NC Pump Maintenance 20 Modifications 40
, S/G ECT 1001) :
S/G Sleeving) 130
-ISI Hydro Testing 20 Routing Maintenance 278 :
- All figures are estimates
.. l l
l
-_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ a
i- .
C. .
- Largest' Single Outage - 1E006
, . Length - 132 days: Start Date: 1/8/90 Finish Date: 5/20/90 Cost: $25,000,000 (estimate all invoices not yet received)
Total Additional Workforce (Peak): 1025
- Principal Task Workforce: -l
- Refueling 15 NCP Maintenance 20 Modifications- 145 S/G Sludge Lance)
S/G Shot Peen)
S/G Sleeving) 135 S/G Tube Pull)
S/G Plug Removal)
Routine Maintenance 710 Total Occupational Dose Received: 487R Principal Task Dose:
Refueling 28 NCP meintenance 20 Modifications 16
-S/G Sludge Lance 13 S/G Shot Peen 33
< S/G Sleeving 40 S/G Tube Pull 37
, S/G.Plus Removal 16
~ Routine Maintenance 284
.. *All figures are actual except cost Please call if'you have questions, cc: T. L. McConnell
- J. W. Boyle j W. R. Kelley s.g 1.
e w-uww wwwery- -
- r-t* y"w- v=-ty --v e'y- -y y e* w--v r ir y ery y' -:-wp--=w=> 9 pr7y w,r y p eppap %g -s----y-mv@cip9
u a-.3 - , wu A-u- w-.m .tw.~4-- .
u,. a, s.:w 4 ..1._,,_.su ,+.. .m_ c - . <a,s..A ._m,- .o w.m..a:m .. _ .
(4 1
e i
4 DUKE-POWER COMPANY CATAWBA NUCLEAR STATION L
'OCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONNAIRE ,
a 4
9 k
e S
e e
9 9
e 4
,1-- - .. -,1- < w... . . < . , . , ..-,.. e
. .., , _ ,,. x .es,. ,.c.y,m.._4,.m.,,,, y.e-.y.., y,,-gy%,_. ,f,g,,,,_rgyw w m- w-. , ..,ny,,,,,,. 975-
4
+ 1. To understand the importance of the plant and the degree of its socioeconomic impacts on the local region, estimate the I number of permanent workers on-site for the most recent year ;
for which data are available.
As of 7/1/90: 1157 NPD 7 Permanent Vendors -
Total
- 2. To understand the importance of the plant to the local region, and how that has changed over time, estimate the average number of-permanent workers on site, in five-year increments starting with the issuance of the plant's operating License. If possible, provide this information for each unit at a plant site.
Data For Both Units:
1/1/89 - 1,248 1/1/88 - 1,242
-- 3/1/87 - 1,099 3/1/86 - 1,075 3/1/85 - 1.052 Total: 5,716 - 5 = 1,143 Average
- 3. To understand the potential impact-of-continued operation for an additional 20 years beyond the original licensing term, please provide for the following three cases:
l A) A Typical Planned outaget l 1. Estimate of additional workers involved for entire
, outage:
! 60 I&E
! 588 Nechanical l,38 NP YS6 Total
- 2. Length of Outage: 62 Days-Planned 74 Days Actual
( '
l7 3. Months & Year In which Work occurred:
November 1988 to February 1989
- 4. Cost Accounting information not available.
- 5. Occupational Donos Received-By Permanent And Temporary Workers During Each Principal Task:
Total Occupational Dose 313.124 Per Ram (See attached sheet for breakdown on exposure) b
B. An ISI outage: .'
- l. Estimate outages-of additional workers involved for entire 76 I&E -
670 Mechanical
- 143 HP BB9 Total
- 2. Length of Outage: 75 Days Planned
- 3. Months & Year In Which Work occurred:
We have not had an III outage to date.
- 4. Cost Cost Estimates not available.
- 5. Estimate-occupational Doses Regeived By Permanent And Temporary Workers During Each Principal Task:
We have not had an 15I outage to date.
L C. The Largest single outage (In Terms of the Number of Workers Involved) That Has occurred To Datet
- 1. Estimate of additional workers involved for entire outage (do not have breakdown for each principal '
task) Additional workers involved approximately 900. ~
- 2. Length of outage: Planned 68 days
- 3. Months & Year In Which Work occurred:
outage started June 1990 - Not completed (scheduled
-to finish August 1990)
- 4. costs outage Not Completed
- 5. Estimate occupational Doses Received By Permanent And Temporary Workers During Each Principal Task:
Estimated Occupational Dose 278.55 Per Ram (See attached for Estimated Exposure) 4 e
a
3A TUNCTION DOSE (REM)
'. 360 ECT & U-Bend Stress Relief (URSR) 54.910 Platform and Plapen Set Up/ Clean Up 15.645 Notele Dam Installation /Ramoval 15.535 Tube Plugging 14.540 Code Eddy Current Testing (ECT) 13.450 Manway/ Diaphragm Removal and Installation 9.480 Tube Dampening 4.930 Bowl Washdown and Initial HP Survey 2.760 FOSAR 1.4LO TOTAL 132.410 EUNCTION go,JE (REM)
Valve Repair 35.380 MOVATS 8.750 Limitorque operator PM .1.975 TOTAL 45.500 TUNCTION DOSE (REN)
Reactor Head Removal /Ausambly 13.200 ISI of piping welde/ hangers 11.420 Snubber inspction/ testing 8.935 General Health Physics Surveillance (RB) 7.950 SRW7 dose for outage tasks 7.910 Inspect / Replace 214 pipe clamps 7.320 General operations surveillance (RB) 7.050 General Decontamination (RB) 6.775 socket weld tube fittings 5.665 Miscellaneous PN/PT 5.605 Hanging valve / component labels 4.425 Refuel cavity Decontamination 3.490 RB/ Annulus General Entry 2.915-Miscellaneous Instrument Calibration 2.880 Replace s/G anubbers 2.735 Relocate LNV014 2.595 Inspect /Retube KC KX's 1A/18 2.455 ECT NV Letdown HX 2.145 TOTAL 105.470 i Miscellaneous Work 29.494
3C
_SIGNIFICANT Joss -
ACTIYIT/ _,ES"IMATED EXPOSURE LPerson - Rem) .
steam Generator Eddy Current Testing /
Tube Plugging 65.0 Steam Generator Notrie Dam Installation 15.0 sludge Lancs 4 steam Generatorn 7.0 FOSAR 4 Steam Generators 3.0 Reactor Head Removal / Replacement 15.0 Reactor Coolant Pump "2A", seal Inspection /Replacament 4.0 ECT of NS Heat _Exchangers 1.5 Miscellaneous Hunger Support 4.0 snubber Inspection and Testing d.0 Ice Basket weighing and Replenishment 1.5 .
Socket Wald Tube Fittings 3.5 Incore Thermocouples/Mid Loop operations 1.5 Pump Work 2.0 Valve Repair 37.710 Fuel Mandling Operation 1.9 MOVATS_(approximately 45 valves) 13.0 Rotorque Inspections 1.248 Limitorque-P.M.e 2.780 E. Q. Activities 2.0 Loose Parte System calibration 1.2 QA Inservios Inspections 10.0 l
Type C Leak Rate Testing 2.0 SUBTOTAL FOR SIGNIFICANT JOBS: 202.838 person - rem .
,=
3g ACTIVITIES EAVING ESTIMATED REPOSURES F,1 PERSON - RBI Genera: outaos Work
.. (Not Associated with a spec.fic significant Job or NEM/VN)
ACTIVITY JSTIMATED EXPORURE (Person - Rem)
Tcmporary shielding 2.5 Upper containment General Entry 1.0 H5usekeeping in Upper Containment 1.065 Upper Containment Canal Decon 5.0
-Lower ccntainment General Entry 1.5 General Decon in Lower Centainment 6.0 General R. P. Surveillance in Lower containment 6.0 operations Surveillance and Red Tags 6.7 Miscellaneous Work on SRWP's 15.0 Miscellaneous Instrumentation Calibration 4.0 I Miscellaneous PN's and pts 4.5 subtotal for General Outage Work: 53."'65 person - rem NSM's/VN's _
ACTIVITY CN 20330 Modify control circuitry wiring on MOV's 2.0 CN 20566 Replace inside containment 35 isolation valves
- 5.0 CN 20582 Provide data for MOV testing 2.0 CN-20594 Delete HVAC Duet in Annulus 1.0
-subtotal for NEM's/VNas_ M person - rem 2
! Miscellaneous Work 12.455
I.
i
- 4_
l W
DUKE POWER COMPANY SOCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONNAIRE
. CASE STUDY PLANTS - TAXEE ,
S 4
e o
b W
6
~
SOCIDECONOMIC QUESTIONS FOR CASE STUDY SITES (cont.)
- 8. Taxes These questions are asked to validate information obtained from local e government sources or to obtain information if local governments fail to
. provide it.
- 1. What types of local taxes must be paid on the plant and property?
aA wie ~ pre Yo
- 2. To what jurisdictions are these taxes paid?
bet Sc leht.$
- 3. What types of state tares must be paid on the plant and property?
mmt
- 4. For each tax type, please estimate the total amount the utility paid to each relevant state and local jurisdiction in 1980, 1985 and 1989 (or the most recent year for which data are available),
s e e- s. la da b
- 5. Have major plant modifications or refurbishment affected the plant's taxable assessed value?
vo
- 6. Would an extended outage for major plant modifications or refurbishment result in a temporary cessation or reduction of tax payments to state and/or local governments?
wu
- 7. Would tax payments cease in the event of plant decommissioning?
/e 5 C. Public Services p/n This question is asked to validate information obtained from local government sources or to obtain information if local governments fail to provide it.
- 1) Please estimate the total annual plant expenditure for each fee-paid pubile service (e.g., water, sewer, etc.) in five
. year intervals -ince plant operations began.
NtMARC Page 2 1
a._mim.3at &J M.6, Jt-AA.b a -*-2-+O M 4 4- A-MJ.24 3.-J-,_4BL4,'ia M. Mr A 4.Mp 4 h ad 4as-.Jta-m.a.5 Ja- iWL Ea-e3+4.4-*.4--.4#m.4-4.a.s4_ .4,J6.aa.Ld.5.4.ad4m.-4--ee4 d-. ,43 4no.4 --* 6e4.45 A.>.%4Md4mA4a.m.'4-AJ-*n=Aai. h ,m e . a A
$ ' O w m g -
.g. p- a 44.'704.170 6M 5 segu en USA -) F >.
b . M a m, 2 3- - . . -
~
0 -
- 0 .-bM h l . _ l 2 _ l l
LSZ# R2 0% de 1/ A iid F &tr_l iLy j[
n p- - .
a .j i! s r V2b0A.--j\
hh$b40 l$* ?_NJ,ULL 1,l . - .INUYSb b I .' (ala p 4 i i i .
<:: s! ti 1
i a -
) > l
' 1 3
$ h 4
-__. _. . _y.
$ ll i 0 !I !,; j4 ,ll ! .
Il ll 4 l.
j5
) i g .
7 kC. lDnvn (Un n $ft%41% e Wfo/4GM l VM O ! Kooo$; ~ ?
l ll
! ,! l
' 8 8 i i. e,i i i i ,,i1ll l }
i ,
9 ! h N I ! l;I ll ll l l
--i 9
10 l
4 i
I h;j -
!! !! ! t- i: 29
. ao ! ll J, j <! 6 i '30 ai -> i ! I i t
I ! i , si i
32 h l {t , i i ! ,
n 3 . \ Ab f !
l l ',3 3 3 ! I. I ! l
- _ , . ____.i 3
-35( 0 Vy;]N , [. l ! '
N! ! I j ' 7' '
!! g[3!
,, m 1___..__._ A__
n p' y
9.
'3" p.--. . _
3
- p. .
.- -- . - . . ----n-s y
,7 35 )
p; ,- .-
39 ._..,--_-.._.;,,
} ._. . . _._ .t. . _.- ._ _ _ - _ . . . .- _ _ , . . . . .
n at
- ! p ; ,
l t x r n
=
l '! d~ l N h
A DUKE POWER COMPANY OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION SOCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONNAIRE O
e 1
0
'W 9
h- Ju.-09-350 12:27 A CM ' CO.ME Nl.c.Em ra!L RCCM - 70' 8 28 0 : c3 s
- 1. To understand the taportance of the plant and the degree of ita. i socioeconomic impacts on the local region, estiaste the runnbar of .
permement workers on site for the most recent year for which data ,
are available.
As of June 26, 1990, the Oconee Nuclear Statfor; "0N5" has approximately 2300 permanent workers on site. The following is a listing by ONS departments / full tima vendors ot' permanent onsite workers:
Departasent Total Workers Nuclear Production 1,022 Construction and Maintenance 899 Quality Assurance 80 Production Support 52 Transmission 8 Des l.gn Engineering 7 Corporate Communications 7 Clebe Security 119 Wometeo Vending 94 Babcock and Wilcox 1 Human Resources 1 -
Operating 5 -
Procurement Services and Materials- 5 2,300 '
- 2. To understand the laportance of the p1 mat to the local region, and how that has changed over time, geliants the average inseber
-of permanent workers on sita, in five year incrementa-starting with the h - = of the plant's operating license. If possible, provide this information for each melt at a plant's site.
Operation of Ocones Units 1, 2 and .I were authorized by the
, . United States Atomic Energy Commission by issuance of operating
-licenses DPR-38,47, and.55 on February 6, 1973, October 6, 1973, and-July 19, 1974, respectively Relative to all three units,-
the estimated permanent workforce on site in five-year increments are as follows:
Month / Year Total holow September 1974 310 September 1979 625 September 1984 350 .
. -(Effective mid-1985, Duke Power's Construction Department became permanently located on site. At this time this departmenc's- ;
permanent work force was apprerimately 300. Therefore, the entire ONS site's workforce was appror.imately 1200 permanent employees),
September.1989 2000
-, - , -, .- - , , , - . -e , - y, ,.--*t------e- -w e e v- w
- - Ju 1550 12 2*T M0ri ~ CCONEE NuCLEt,R th A:01 70 G37:5 c7 n . c.2
. 3. To understand the potential impact of continued operation for an j additional 20 years boycod the original licensina ters, please provide for the followins three cc,est (a) a typical planned outases (b) an ISI outages (c) the largest single outase (in terms of the number of workers involved) that has occursed to date. An estimate of additional workers involved (for the entire outage and for each principle taak), length of outage, months and year in which work occured, and coat. Also, entiesy occupational doses received by permanent and temporary workars durfag each principle task.
(a) Typical planned outage The normal length for a typical planned outage is approximately 45 days. Outages occur at the end of a cycle length. Some power manuevering may be used to avoid summer / winter power peaks. The following is a listing of additional workers / support involved in the outage Workars/ Support Total building 20 Performatice Support 3 Electrical (TSM's) 10 Equipment Operator (not Polst Crana) 4 Valve Limitorque 15 Hanger 5 Heat Exchangers 20
. Material Handling (RB Move) 8
. Insulation 30 Material Handling 10 Polar Crane Operator 6 Reactor Coolant Pumps la General Support 15 Snubber 5 Staal Work (Flagman) 6 Tool / doom Worker 15 Valves 44 Warehouse / Materials-Support 8 Welding /1S1 30 TOTAL WORKF.RS 272 4
l LL-09-1950 12:27 FROM OCONEE %C EAR t%!L RCCr1 TO 6373&;07 o,05
]
The following is a list of typical planned outage dose by tasks , i IAAh1 Eltti OISG Work 39 -
Valve Work 22 Head Work 19 Decon Work 15
-Insula. ion 13 Inspecting /Ganeral Entry 10 Miscellaneous 10 I&E Work 9 RCP and Motor Work 9 ISI Activities 9 RBCUS S NSMS 7 Stage / Remove Equipment 7 RP Surveys 6
- Scaffoldinr; 6 Defuel/ Refuel Activities 4 Shielding 4 Mittellaneous Pusp Work 4 Performance Testing 2 Tendon Work i Turbine Building Activities 1 Snubber Work 1 Paint Basement Floor .2 ,
TOTAL DOSE 206.2 ,
(b) ISI-Outage: The estimated length of an ISI outage is-approximately 55 days. Such an outage would occur at the and of a cycle length. Some power manuevering may be used to avoid summer /vinter power peaks. The following is a list of the additional workers / support involved in an ISI Outage:
Additional Wochere/ Support Total Building 20 Performance Support 3
-Electrical (TSM's) 10 Equipment Operator (Not polar Crane) 4 Valve Limitorque 15 Hanger 5
. Rest Exchangers 20 '
Material Handling (RB Move) 8 Insulation 30 Material Handling 10 l Polar Crane Operator 6 Reactor Coolant Pumps 18
' General Support 15 .'
Snubber 5 Steel Work (Flasmen) 6 Tool / Room Workers 15 Valves 44 Warehouse / Materials Support 8 Welding /ISI Support _.19, TOTAL WORKERS 272
. ' Jut-09-1MO 12: *a -- GCM OCONEE Nt.; CLEAR MAIL RCCM TO 6373e107 p.06
.4
.- The following is the estimated Dose received during an ISI outage
.- by task Tasks 2 m0 OTSG Work 50 Valve Work 25 Head Work 20 Decon Work 15 Insulation 15 Inspecting / General Entry 10 Miscellaneous 10 I&E Work 10 RCP and Motor Work 10 ISI Activities 49 RBCUS 10 ,
NSMS 10 Stage / Remove Equipment 10 RP Surveys 8 Scoffolding 3 Defuel/ refuel Activities 4 Shielding 4 Hiscellaneous Pump Work 4 Forformance Testing 3
, Tendon Work 2 Turbine Building Activities
. (1) Snubber Work 1
- (2) Paint Basement Floor _
1 TOTAL DOSE 276 (c) Largest Single Outassi. The largest Oconee outage to date by additional workers involved is not readily available however it should not differ significantly from a typical ISI Outage.
-Further. we have no accounting records documenting the work
-incurred cost, nor are our accounting records established to provide a breakdown.
l l
' '3UL-09-1990. 12:28 FROM OCCNEE NUCLEAR MA!L ROOM TO 63738137 p.a?
l AA!b aMrumarr AND EKFENDItutas -
. 1. To~ understand the importance of the plant to local ecusemities,
- and how that has changed over time, provide estimates of total
- plant expenditures, by local commutity, for equipment, materials. '
and services used in notaal operations for the most escent year data are available.
1989 Materials and Supplies / Equipment = $21.010,000 1989 Services (Outside-Contract) = $27,884,000 (Services are detemined to be outside Contract Costs. All cost.is OColEE ONLY)
- 2. To understand the possible affect of the plant on the local accoomy, the svarese ==1=ry paid to plant employees, ocagared to average salaries for comparable jobs., if they exist in the local areas (e.g. Engineers, Secretaries, Custodial Personnel.
Electronics Technicians, Maintenance Journeyman, Food Service Reployees.)
Classificatio_n Duke Power. Aver 3ge ,L_ocal Area Averame Storekeeper 12.00 hr. 8.00 hr.
Stockhandler 10.50 hr. 8.00 hr. .
Maintenance Mech 16.50 hr. 11.00 hr. .
Secretary 460.00 wk. 290.00 wk.
Word Processing 460.00 wk 304.00 wk. -
Computer.0perator 460.00 wa. 429.00 wk Accounting Clerk 460.00 wk. 323.00 wk.
Personnel Clerk 460.00 wk. 394.00 wk Nurse 700.00 wk 476.00 wk.
I&E Technician 660.00 wk. 451.00 wk.
Janitorial 8.00 hr. (vender) 7.00 hr.
Planner 850.00 wk. 418.00 wk.
(The aforementioned Duke Power averages are based on the average pay for experienced workers in these classifications.)
- 3. To understand the possible affect of the plant en the local economy, what programs has the utility sponsored in the area to improve employment #nunities such as hiring policies, job training programs, or industrial recruitment?
In addition to supporting the employment programs listed in Duke Power Company's Affirmative Action Program, the fellowing is a list of the specific programs / activities used by various .
departments at Ocense in attracting and retaining qualified -
employees i (a) Centralized Employment Application Process - Applicants can
- apply at one central point at the Oconee Nuclear Station to bc.
L considered for mest all site / department employment opportunites rather than apply to each department.
1
' AL.-09-1990 12109 F8;M 04D4EE NUCLEM Ml;. E:cM TO G2728;c? c.cs
. (b) Cor, duct C4reer Day t.resentation to high schools in an effort
,- tot saucate studants about Duke Pwar Company, to inform o students of the types of employment onportunities within D2ke Power Company and the Ocones Nuclear Station, and to inform
- students of what skills / qualifications are needed to be considered for the various opnertunities.
i (c) Conducting Career Day presentations at irn year Technical Schools, including predominately minority attended schools.
(d) Serve. as company representatives on advisory councils organised in various high schools.
(
- 4. To understand the importance of the plant to specific
, jurisdiction near the plaat, what is the current distribution, by
- ciy and county or sip code of residence of permaneet workers on site? -
~
Please see the attached printout.
L e
9
RA _
e m
.. . . q
= .p . : +. . . m .
- w .a b se: :r ,c. u. : . . . .e.
s.e
~
~
CITY / COUNTY' DISTRIBUTION ~ ;j;
'i - - OCONEE NUCLEAR KTAUTON'Pf* .
/b .
(INCLUES WOE, GA, PSD, NPD, DE, CMD-I,03RG,TRANI) .. ;
"~' *' l
} ^ -
EXCLUDES PART-TIME 'AMD TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES ..
J 5,t.3 iMTWixf % v.0.y TR
~
-J T t' . # * . - ' -
. "teniDM !J
~1 1 +: n
- 5. - -
CITY ZIP NUMBER OF ~ '
^ -: -
- 3 7
MAME' ' CCDE EMPLOYEES
.g m_
--_ '-eem n
o ABBEVILLE 29629 2 ,.- .
.:.y n s- M
(" a 2 m
i f-e 29996 2 -
J . p fJALEXIS -- "!
L d
L a 2 j,
% ' t. . . .-:.
57 .. F
,- ANDERSON - 29625 ,
=
- - 29622 4 #^ *
~
nh 5 /: ~ . "
29624 13 -
e- . 29625 18 .
4 29825 1
~ 0
.s < .
t c .
m 93
~
~~~ - - **' -
7WBdIM *fs w 39519 __
1
~
s.-~ . - - , ,
.. .- . . 'S tb
-3 29627 21 DELTON _
.n
- 21 <>
4 29792 f Ti3LACKIBURG --
- 1 MT8 pt. Tp0HdC.T *)RM 7 i ,
, . . - ~.
.BOKTIC 20058 1 e' : >> . . . .
,g; . -
n 1 ;_;-->= ,,43.s. ,
~
a s pec .=,c
- e. 3 5,A , . .-i;.- metyws. u . -
2
- 8 p)g. , e 973 ;;
- . <~ , y < 27 - - 7, e 1 c
~? -~ ' e 7N.i
- 2 g5,myy, . .: ,
c
.BREVARD . M712 2 s r, .
b
~ '
- g ,;~ g . . . 2 - -
- - ~~ ~ ' 'T w
.38 t)
- .*f, . .%' ~
A
/02/1999 93:58 PM o.
1 V
, . . , - ..,y
, ;1 - . St; .
m i
C
. .. . p m
N CITY / COUNT 1r DIKTRIBUTION OCOMEE NUCLEAR KTATION 7 f: (INCLUES WOE, GA, PID, NPD, BE, CMD-X,0IRG,TRANI) F EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES n
,g ., .. .;... < g 3
CITY ZIP NUMBER OF
$NAME- CODE EMPLOYEEI
' BUFFALO 29321 1 . ...
pc% . - - -
a 1 .-
4 ,
~ .
~,
4 p.-
DCAW OBELLO- 29322 1 -
e.
- 1 'I
- v. v. .M.
CARFEIVILLE 30521 2 r; w 2 ,,
CASHIERg 2g717 6 d a 6 CENTRAL 29630 136
..._____.m__.
L 'e
.b f
~2 l
T
~
e.p es V_.
U P.
il 8
Y m
til i
e CHESNEE 29323 3 E
- 3 [
I CLEMSON 29631 43 "
l 29633 9 $
i l 07/02/1990 03:58 PM CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION fl OCONEE NUCLEAR STATIDH i!
i (INCLUES WDE. QA, PSD, NPD, DE, CHD-S,05RG,TRANS)
EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES
{' '
t
! CITY ZIP NUMBER OF l'
' ('
} NAME CODE EMPLOYEES J w m g h em h amb-- DD w 52 l . . . . .. . - . ,. ,
\ c , u,, n,, ,n,,- .
t
[
,F
-CLOYER 29710 2 '
- .=
+L. SktQ a
-.aer a- e .. .e
- 2 p
,, p- - -
. . 4.- .. y ;p c, D
.- ..,y . . . .
.e.
.,w&W . Se .:s * *
~' '
,,o, nW th -
~
'at W '
.s. t.
ISC,)%'phhil.. : P :, .
p,
- . , ia =
- .COWPEMI,. 29330 2 m
^-
t -' - . -
m 2
- C p
m CULLOWHEE 28723 1 I'
- q. ------
. # 1 f
F n
'y... -
u
. .- c %d d- '
, . .:. a . . . ,: . . s . .r .
- DOMcLDS 29638 4 .
~
-s fI 7,
- 4
DUNCAN 29334 2 "
s>
7/02/1990 03:58 PN
CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION OCONEE NUCLEAR STGTION (INCLUES WGE, GA, PSD, MPD, DE,.CMD-2;OSRG,TRANK) "
[,t; . , ,', , .
EXCLUDES PART-TIME A,.ND TEMPORARY k lts:, . y.t .v .
.% :' c ..
e.- . EMPt.0YEES g .j -
yy, y ,
- ' 1
- ga . . .n . , ,
. . ..' c
~
f ZIP NUMBER DF
'~
-? 'j;
.lCITV' Ndmar$H W *4'T.M W.-7 CODE EMPLOYEE! F.F. '4 C 'd.00'E ' - -
'AIC i . " l
.==- -
r, p pttn./2 n .f .-;- .,~
m 2 M- a. E I h..
- n
'E. FLAT ROCK pmw:+ e. .....> .
28726 1 l'2
. m.
= .
- 6. . 1 o
o kfg' AGLEY +: * - 29649 196 ' ' ' -
Y 29641 3 El 29642 19 -
f, Lv. a. - - -
e m 120 m v.
y p. 1.. .
. .~ 4.t . d.2/i ;"c.-
EgggTANOLLEE 1.h-sa" 39538 5 f, nm :..
n 5
. r n
[ S t W ,% W ,'a *,h w '. '> . - ; F.: : $t y
% FCIR PLAY 29643 11 -
m37- . e. - . '.* e 11
- %. il
+
Fb1RPLAh 29643 2 not:.- .. . - .
m 2 i3 FOREST CITY 20043 2
~
m u **
2 -s Q. - tne.
FORT HILL 29755 1 ;G
-R e 1 GAFFMEY 29340 13 14
, .j - - -
- 13 l
L- _ - . . . . ..
x .
J
GREENVILLE ,. .- 29495 3 .. . . - .
29607 1
'? 29649 5 - -
2 G O'- a-s, . n.x. .e.
29611 te -
29655 4 4
.: u ;i',' X :- M y E /,f, ,- -
- mLTr.,
e
. hfMOWWJ. = ---
- # 23 ,e,
+
..c :.
- u. . y;
>y -
>7/02/1999 03:58 PM 3 s- . ..
r
,~ : g
.n -
- - .
- .n . , . Rh 9 Q v) .3 ~
- 4 ~. w. . .
p1 , w - w .m . - . v a,~ .
~a"', . .
. ' " ~ :~ R
- CITY / COUNTY' DISTRIBUTION * - *i V
%s ,e e c OCDNEE NUCLEAR STATION- '
(INCLUES WOE, GA, PIS, MPD, BE, CMD-S,0KRG,TRANS)
EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES A kn . .
~
p m
E CITY ZIP NUMBER OF '
7,
,5NAME -
CODE EMPLOYEES
_ . p lG 29646 1 2,
$..REENWOOD -
y a 1 a
o i E;REER 29659 1 29651 5 ..
. .t "
p ..
21652 1 gryp;ay;w;; . -
.- .c : .- . ..-..c *
).jc.a2 M v-/ G ,3j f . :
.~ .
Vii . 39643 6 g,s HARTWELL
. .. e 6 n
HODGES 29653 1 29654 11 HONEA PATH - --------- E d
,-~ . i.
I INNAN. 29349 i F a
^
b M2wo.V.v; . ..
. -t.. , y_ .- m 1 -
r
. . : T
.o
gyh;A . , . -
29655 12 -
' ' "e ' 4 Th k -
U
. .p ,,~ g. .y a i2 _
4 - -- 24. t , _ ;._ ,, ,g, . , - , ,,
>3 v,
U hy.ecchihremt: . t s. - - - - .- q h. KNOXVILLE 37921 1 g
-__ _ _ _ q
- A 1 m 8.A FRANCE 29654 2 k r,,
y hw . :. .. .- n es.c a v -
. mru g a:- p f/02/199063:58PM - -
4 t U
.'. j CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION
- y. OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION e (INCLUES WOE, QA, PSD, NPD, DE, CMD-K,OIRC TRANS)
I' EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES P'.~. - CITY ZIP NUMBER OF $ iMAME - - CODE EMPLOYEES y p
. o
~n a 2 O-
- LAKE UYLIE 29710 2 ,
t, e
- 2 LMCASTER 29720 1
6 ' lilliif',.l;>! - I
- GF a<< * ,
J n,, o2 itF nE3 l ,, a . s
$s. tm . e '-
, eL ,c t. a
_. w - N _ O. - I - - T - U- _ B-I - _ R- _
- T _
S r> _ I a_ - Dc_ Yr e T. _ - N . U - Os Ce__
/w_
Y Tsn- __
. In_
C
. 1 1 1 _1 i 1 1 _ 1 2 2
- 5 __ 5 0_G 0__ 1 . a n
- w
- w _
- 0 3 7 5 2 1 7 _ 6 5 5 6 0 6 5 3 5 6 3 1 6 5 _ 9 0 9 9 9 9 0 _ 2 3 2 2 2 3 N2 M _ P _ 0 _ 5 _ - 3 _ 0 A 0 .S A Y G T 7 - N I T N T N 9 - E N R N I E I 1 - R O E A N I T / U V B H N R R 2 - - A A I Y A A A 0 - - L L L L M M M /
/
!Ii!l !ij, ,, ' i
. - e CITY ZIP NUMBER DF NME cosE EMPLOYEEX 1 u \
. _ _ _ _e-.s:y.-:+y. < , p sto,w +.4s . n; '- * :' :^:- ^
-~..
5.e 4 tD
' i
_,%%'y;;. A+ s -g:.? : .
- - - o'J 8 t
MAYO' 29368 . k ...,c.;g;';;;;tyn . ,.
?- -
b E
- 6.
- j'Nir;; 4Q.'i .- . g 9
MOORE 29349 1 $ fa . 2 .- m i h m, y" - a .. I' I MOORESBORD 28114 1 n,. . .% -= - -: . - E p, g ,
# 1 E'
. .. ,, c, MORGANTON 28655 1
# 1 m A
. i' -- u MOUNTAIN REIT 29664 10
., , , . s .
- . .. gg
~ '
g
, - w - . . . . , . s . [
} j 07/02/1990 03:50 PH l t 4 . i w F t . g t
'S
! CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION l GCONEE NUCLEAR STATION - l (INCLUES WOE, QA, PSD, NPD, DE, CMD-S,OIRC,TRANS) - EXCLUDES FART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES E l y CITY ZIP NUMBER OF 3
- NAME CODE EMPLOYEES i _______ =--_ - - -- -
o m
'"""""""muus NEWRY 29665 i m i O
NE'JTON 20650 2
- 2 NINETY SIX 29666 1 .
- 1 ij 14 O
NORRIS 29667 4
}
- 4
.l PELZER 29669 4 g
- 4 PENDELTON 29670 _ _
i w w w e me - -r,r- - wir-u -es- m e- -- -- w-i-m p -- ---'----m -- r
Er4DLET0il 29370 31 o 31 9 ICKENS 29671 91 b, 9i y 5 IEDNONT 29473 7 g
# 7 7, E
cICHLAND 29675 1
-._--- ---_- y n
3 02/1VVO 03:SD PM R v M m b r-m M CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION g OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION - (INCLUES WDE, QA, PSD, NPD, DE, CMD-S,05RG,TRANS) '- EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES
- 1TY ZIP NUMBER OF a 4AME CODE EMPLOYEES
- i (OBBINSVILLE 2b771 1 m 1 m
<0CK 11ILL 29730 12 }j 5 m 29732 -
- 17 ROSMAN 28772 1 .
. -------_- G
- 1 ROYSTON 30662 2
~- - . . . . . , ,
7; ,. .s . O g , J * - - * ' ' f. 2 . 5 3ALEM 29676 72 x ' y
- 72 .
&.*25% ' 4^ s . .
j.r. -- - y gf2ENECA 29670 519 29679 41 ,', NGj L. 4. _ _ _ - - _ r; Er - .
- 560 ;,
IEDTRD : '* 28673 1 -
' , , 99 g g I F B - y @ ?.it .
~:
h,.g3IhP30NVILLE 29681 2 f.:q . ; ' ' i" . . . n 2 ll. ,U.klX' MILE 29602 96 kg_ g. ,r; .. _ _ = _ _
?
r b
- 96 "'
- eSIX-MILES 29602 1 h.
r a i si 31.:- - - .is . [:3 ,"SPARTANBURG 29301 4 29303 2 _. FK' :n ~ , : . '. ' 29365 1 - y . . . 97/C2/1999 03:58 PM .
- a. -
n. t4 c', CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION (INCLUES WOE, QA, PSD, NPD, DE, CMD--S,0IRG s TRAleS) . EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES EJ CITY ZIP NUMBER OF
.NAME CODE EMPLOYEES
i Jut-0*v-1990 *.145 F~ 0M 000 HEE %C.E *-4 Mh. R;OM TO G2 !G;07 c.;; 4 e 4 Y O I N O
, I < l l l 1 I I '
I t i 1 1 I i l i i i i i 9 2 u u n n u n :n 4 h m e-un : n n 2 .i I ., J 5 5
'yc g.
}n m. ._+j 4.j -l}
- g'r.y } y g g 3 . . .
.s s ,s _, = _
k' k I.;; . $* I,' 'N.
$ O It n s. n :. 2 Ag,11.g.
. . . h. ca e4 .A4.
<w.
c x
- m. .
b.. , ""a
- a. .E '. a* ;.
l., .
~
. 5.. . .
~
. 4.. . . .
CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION DCONEE NUCLEAR STATION (INCLUES WOE, GA, PSD, NPD, DE, CMD-2,USRG.TRANS) , EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES 1! CITY ZIP NUMBER DF ,, NAME CODE EMPLOYEES 7, ! - - - - - - - - - - ------ _= --_ --- _--- .
. 3 .i ; ;
i WALHAll.A 29691 157 '- [ r _ _ __ e
- 157 [
e ! UALLALLA 29691 , 1 I_ ! r.. ;
"~
- 1 .
I t utbRE Sil0ALS 29672 2 j, [ i!
- 2 [
] i WATERLOG 29384 1 ;
__ _ . *,: }
, g t' i
~!
WAXHAW 29173 2 .. g
* '2 WEST PELZER 29669 2 -,
t
- 2 [
WEST UNION 29696 1 *; 29696 67 ,; !
- 68 '; :
l 29693 WESTMINISTER 1
?l o.
j 1 WESTMIMSTER 29639 1 f v - -,i- 3, ~--
- y .w. ,, c. ,, - ,, y - --- **rr,.' -y.,,,y +,,- -- ,-..w,. - - , . - -y.#, #., ..-,,yy,w-- e y+v, .-- ur,,y,c-.-m,,_,y ., '
29^93 134 2946 __
# 137
$'i.
b!LLIAMrfdNi 29497 14 -
;gi -
a 14 g,,. . . .. 3 WOOBRUFF 29388 1 to .
- 97/C2/1999 03:58 PN l
r-RR. CITY / COUNTY DIKTRIBUTION h O*- OC00E:E MUCLEAR STATION (INCLUE3 00E, GA, PSD, MPD, BE, CMD-3,03RG,TRANI)
'~
EXCLUDEI PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEEK th l CITY ZIP MUMBER OF F?W4ME'~ CODE EMPLOYEEI M* w 1 W YORK 29745 4
,30. c.i
= 4
- p. .
RZIRCONNA - 28790 2 m 2 gy_. .
^4 Q*! ~ -ski aoss P
' Us 2: *<e . . . > ,
~..,.a .
c-
% I LITILITY U kC e ou ee Cnrwnon4 f ) . SITE Ae[ruir e b 640 who '
Ocmne< d,notM u b C1li 'Iu 3 irc.WO ENOLOSURES D be fruire hurJear IrMen Vl(da) OmendTrAen be fr . re- khr]rce S W lnn _ E lb(M Prof;ch Skal nC 5mninnen s t ent + (nkerkninnee& 1 O hO tdho bh r l# n P b ben 3l A E/h 6/D Yi#9 Itso O ni b bn e r cli A n c.l tb o o r+ Y4 h uh /Jor) ne SL.b,, 3 (e h berheded ie n
% Lu.s ona ar- nna -
Pen ce - k, onm < n - n 1 O Oconee L% elm e $4 mem Emi,consescJ
%,nnneu d e p oi+ 199 \- \ 8% Uc[ 1 I \
O Oca ner_ A melene 54c m m Gru6 rome n4sl S u m eno,. defcb i971 - li7 k 00l
- I S kke (Jorenan Surn r%r 3 U (M c- l B) Lt.c. D o c <no n h m morg Vo{w e il Gir 90 0 W, M " n a') Tuas Tat AQuem r Qut ss 3us Got; o. e e t p 3 ce y ~/ N/ ^ 3 4
'~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - . - - - _ - . _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
m---,--- - t t h l
p i r Duke power Company Responses to Waste Management Questions A. Spent fuel questions:
- 1. Which of the fo11ovin61.1r.,yent techniques for at-reactor storspo are you using and how?
A. Re-racking of spent fuel, h---Centtel M reposittentwsy C. Above ground dry storage, D. Longer fuel burnup. E. Other -(please identify). Essponset Oconeet A. C, and D. Each of Oconee's two spent fuel pools has been raracked twice the current total capacity of the pools is 2129 assemblies. A dry above ground spent fuel storage facility which utilizes the NUROMS 24p syetes has recently been completed, a04 loading of the first canister / module is espected for late July. Righer discharge fuel burnup has occurred over time as a result of economic trends and fuel technology improvements. Equilibrium fuel burnups were espected to be around 47,000 MWD /ME! when the Oconee unito began operation in the early 1970'st currently, discharge burnups are espected to be about 45,000 MWD /MTU. jjeGuiret A and D._ As the result of a single raracking of each of McGuire's two pools, prisent total capacity is 2,719 asunblies. Discharge burnups were espected to be approximately 33,000 MWD /MTU in
'the years befors plant startup: currently,-discharge burnups.are aspected te be about 40,000 MWD /MTU.
catawbat E. The initial c.spacity of the two Catawba spent fuel pools totals 2840 fuel assemblies, which provides adequate storage until about 2008.
- 2. Do you plen on continuing the use of chose current techniques for at-reactor storage of spent fuel during the remaining time of your operat-ing license or do you expect to change or modify them in some way?
Responses-General cossent: Significantly higher burmups are not presently anticipated for any of Duke's stations. Oconee Oconee's ISFSI license allows addition of enough NUHOMS modules to provid. storage until the expiration of the current operating license. 2013.
I i ,
- 5. Do you anticipate the need to acquire additional land for the storage of spent-fuel for the operating lifetime of the plant, including a 20-year period of license renewalf If to, how much land? When would this acquisition occur? Vberet (if answer is "yes", 3-4 sentences)
Response
Deonna No. HeCuire No. Catsuba No.
- 6. Do you anticipate any additional construction activity on-site, or immediately adjacent to the power plant site, associated with the continued at-reactor storage of spent fuel for the operating lifetime of the plant, including a 20-year period of license renewa17 (yes/no)
Response
Oconee: Yes. McGuire Yes, if above ground dry storage is chosen for storage expansion. Ca tawb_a : Yes, if above ground dry storage is chosen for storage expansion.
- 7. If you answered yes to question 6 briefly describe this construction activity (e.g., expansion of fuel storage pool, building above ground dry storage facilities)
Response
Oconeet Up to the end of current licensed life: activity will involve additiota of horirontal storage modules. St O wrse, periodic evaluations will be made to ensure that continued use of the existing dry storage system represents our best alternative.) Should additional dry storage be required, expansion of the aristing facility or construction of another on-site facility would be considered. McGuire: See response to question 6. l Catswba See response to question 6.
WASTE MANAGEMENT QUE3TIONS (cont.) continued at reactor storage of spent fuel for the operating lifetime of the plant, including a W year period of license renewal? (yes/no)
- 7. If you answered yes to question 6, briefly describe this construction activity (e.g., expansion of fuel storage pool, building above ground dry storage facilities)
B. Low-level radioactive waste management questions:
- 1. Under the current scheme for LLRW disposal (i.e. LLRW Policy Amendments Act of 1985 and regional compacts) is there currently or will sufficient capacity for wastes generated during the license rer.ewal period be available to your plant (s)? If so, what is the basis for this conclusion? net,jf htc5EMT PL4dJ T6A 60uTM E4sTOep MF Fmuro,
$ If for any reason your plant (s) is/are denied access to a licensed disposal site for a short period of time, what plans do you have for continued LLRW disposal? ggg 41TW%ENT 'l.
dnt, Ippo 164 kirACA4 AeNr 1.wnc 'pe utt4TED 'but t% l%8 "I
- 3. In a couple of pages, please describe the specific methods of LLRW management currently utilized by your plant. What percentage of your current LLRW (by volume) is managed by:
See ervAcmear3L A. Waste compaction? B. Wast's segregation (through special controls or segregation at radiation check point)? C. Decontamination of wastes? D. Sorting of waste prior to shipment? E. Other(pleaseidentify) l . NUMARC Page 3
l WASTE MANAGEMENT QUESTIONS (cont.) p To provide information on future low level waste streams which may effect workforce levels, exposure, and waste compact planning, do you anticipate any major plant modifications or refurbishment that are likely to generate unusual volumes of low level radioactive waste prior to, or during, the relicensing period for the plant? If so, please describe these activities. Also, what types of modifications do you anticipate to be necessary to achieve license renewal operation through a 20 year license renewal tern? 6u Amtucar I. C. Mixed low level radioactive waste question: a.
- 1. If your plant generates mixed LLRW, how is it currently being stored and what plans do you have for managing this waste during the license renewal period?
SeE SnAcp\mr3IL NUMARC Page 5
A77 AcH MEkri l L . b.,bmu it'44 l POWER REACTOR VOLUME REDUCTION BY MARY L. BIRCH l RUSSELL M. PROPST MICHAEL S. TERRELL DAVID L. VAUGHT ! NUCLEAR PRODUCTION DEPARTMENT DUKE POWER COMPAN*l CHARI4TTE, NC FOR
~ ,
PROFESSIONAL ENRICHMENT PROGRAM HEALTH PHYSICS SOCIETY NATIONAL MEETING ANAHEIM, CA JUNE 24, 1990 _. / w J . M-- ,
, . . , . . - , ...,,--.--,2%..,,,,,-- .,..--v-,- . ,-m, c-,+.-.~., ..,-ic ., -~.w.* -.e,-,w,,,-,y ..,,g'.,,. ,tv- - 1-.
There is a large selection of process methods available and the choices must reflect consideration of the following factors; waste stream characteristjes, site specific environmental limitations, compatibility with interfacing systems, materials handling and storage requirements, transportation limitations, state and federal regulations, burial site requirements, permanent versus transportable systems, future requirements, personnel exposure, and economics. Generally, radwaste volume reduction technologies reduce volumes by removing the non-radioactive components of the waste streams the volume reduction processes alter only the non-radiological material content while the total radioactivity present remains the same.
.This paper-discusses the vaste types and generation rates, the waste processing typically used by PWRs and BWRs, volume reduction, and the economics of waste disposal. The waste streams which power reactors process are gases, liquids and solids.
The basic function of the radwaste systems are to:
- 1. Minimize the release of gaseous radwaste to the environs through delay and filtering.
- 2. Minimize the release of liquid radwaste to the environs by purifying or re<' aiming plant waste waters and
- 3. Minimize the impact s. shallow land disposal by producing a solid waste product which is in compliance with federal criteria.
GASES During operation, nuclear power reactors generate radioactive fission products, a portion of which will be released to the coolant when there are cladding defects. Because gases are not completely soluble withia the coolant, they are available for release from process systems and ventilation pathways. Process system effluents contain radioactive materials as a result of stripping or venting gases from process streams. Ventilation pathways contain radioactive materials as a result of radioactive process fluid leakage into buildings and their ventilation systems. The sources of gaseous effluents in PWRs and BWRs are different and are listed below: BWR
- 1) main condenser evacuation system
- 2) turbine gland seal system
- 3) mechanical vacuum pump exhaust
4 % l
-4 -
beds must be replaced when they are no longer effective for removing radioactive material from the liquid. The filters and ion exchange beds are solid by-products and, therefore, become part of the solid waste streams discussed below. Filtration is defined as the separation of suspended, undissolved, particulate solids from a fluid mixture by passage of most of the fluid through a septum or membrane that retains : the so2 ids on or within itself. A filter's performance is i maarated by its ability to remove and hold solid stream - c0ncaminants, by the amounts of solid, liquid, and gaseous wastes it generatest by its ease of operations by its maintenance requirements; and by the radiation exposures it causes during operation and maintenance. Filters used in nuclear power plants are changed most often on the basis of pressure drop across the filter, or because the radioactive dose rate of the filter reaches a predetermined upper limit. The degree of filtration required chemical compatibility of the filter medium with the slurry being processed; the weight, volume, and particle-size , distribution of the solids to be removed; and the suspended , solids concentration, volume flow rate, temperature, and pressure of the stream to be processed are among the factors that should be considered in the selection of a filter. In LWR nuclear poder plants, the liquid streams have various amounts of dissolved plus suspended solids and varying amounts of radioactivity associated with them, depending upon their source within the plant. Corrosion products in the coolant stream become activated in the internals of the reactor cores relatively significant fractions (about one-fourth) of the activated corrosion products tend to be present as suspended solidst fission products to be present dominantly as soluble forms. Traditionally, BWRs have, for the most part, used pressure-pre-coat filters, while PWRs have largely used disposable-cartridge filters. However, newer types such as nonpre-cost, back-flushable filters are seeing greater. application in both types of plants. Disposable cartridge filters contain from o = to several replaceable elements that are discarded when they L .ome contaminated or loaded to the extent that either the radioactive dose rate or the dif ferential pressure across the filter reaches'a preset value. In nuclear power plant applications, multiple elements are often mounted in a single removable supporting structure and, to minimize radiation : exposure,--the entire assembly is discarded at changeout. Disposable elements used in nuclear power plants typically have filter media of woven fabric, wound fiber (string), or pleated paper, supported on a rigid inner core of perforated tainless steel. Cotton, nylon, and epoxy-impregnated paper a among the materials commonly used in fabrication of disposable cartridges for nuclear power plants. Disposable cartridge filters perform well in removing suspended solids from the process streoms of nuclear power plants. Difficulty of remote changeout is probably
?
l
- - ..:-.-- . . _ = - - - - - - - - - - . . . - - - -
4 t impurities must be solidified by mixing with cement or by mixing with a liquid plastic and, therefore, become part of the solid waste streams discussed below. It is a unit operation that has wide application in the nuclear industry for reducing wasta volumes and the amount of radioactive nuclides in liquid effluents. Evaporation can be used on solutions or s.turries having vastly different compositions and concentrations; however, it is most effectively used or. liquid radioactive wastes having high concentrations of impurities. An evaporator is a device designed to transfer heat to a liquid that boils and to separate the vapor thus formed from the 11guld. A radioactive waste evaporator system consists basically of the following building blocks: a heating element; a flash chambers one or more deentrainment devices to separate or disengage liquid droplets from the vaport a condenser to cool and convert the vapor back to liquid; and pumps as required to feed the system, to circulate the contents where forced circulation is employed, and to discharge the concentrated liquid (bottoms). Liquid radioactive wastes in a BWR plant are normally segregated into four types as follows: 1) High-purity waste is a liquid of low electrical conductivity but has the potential of containing some particulate solids and dissolved oils. Major sources of high-purity waste are equipment drains from the dry well and the reactor, turbine, and radioactive waste buildings; ultrasoric resin cleaner wash; resin backwash and transfer water; filter backwash; phase separator decant liquid; and condensed radioactive evaporator overheads. 2) Low-purity waste is liquid of moderate to high conductivity and has the potential for high suspended and/or dissolved solida content. Sources of low-purity waste include floor drains from the dry well and reactor, turbine, and radioactive waste buildings; uncollected valve and pump seal leakoffs; and water resulting from dewatering of slurry wastes.
- 3) Chemical waste is liquid of a high conductivity and high suspended and dissolved solids content. The primary source of this waste is the regenerant solution from deep-bed ion exchange columns. 4) Detergent waste is liquid with a high suspended solido and organic chemicals content. Major sources of detergent waste are on-site laundry, personnel shower, and detergent-type decontamination vastea 9 well as laboratory wash water.
Liquid radioactive wastes in a PWR plant may be segregated into four types as follows: 1) Miscellaneous waste is composed of liquid having varicus qualities from a variety of sources which may not be readily amenable to processing and reuse as reactor coolant make-up water. The main sources of miscellaneous vaste are floor drains; outdoor controlled-areas wastes; sampling station radioactive vastes; aerated systems and equipment drains; and primary system ion-exchange and filter wastes. 2) Secondary l system waste is liquid of low electrical conductivity from the secondary system. Primary sources of such vaste are most.y steam generator blow-down and turbine building drains. 3) chexacal 1 i
Structural stability can be provided by the vaste form itself, processing the wasto to a stable form, or placing the waste in a disposal container (also called a High Integrity Container or HlC) or structure that provides stability after disposal. A Process Control Program (PCP) is a systematic procedure tor providing reasonable assurance that the solidified product will have no detectable free liquid. It consists of two parts. The first part is a set of bounding values for system and waste parasoters within which satisfactory solidification can be expected to occur with a high degree of confidencu. The second part of the PCP is a systematic procedura using appropriate controls and instrumentation, properly documented, to demor that the solidification system has operated within the sped boundaries. The complexity of radwaste treatment systems is increased when each vaste stream requires different processing. Typical radvaste treatment systems are shown in Figures 2, 3, and 4 for PWRs and BWRs with two different reactor cleanup systems. Some of the waste ;cocessing techniquee previously discussed are also volume reduction techniques. Duke Power Company has chosen volume reduction techniques based on our studies of each vaste source. Several volume reduction techniques are applied to each waste stream. The Volume Reduction (VR) techniques used for each waste type are listed in the Table. The techniques can be summarized as follows: A) Source Control is exerted by a carefully designed system of administrative controls, administrative procedures and practices, and operating procedures to limit the waste beinc generated. The program is extensive and complex, since it requires awareness and procedure adherence by up to 2500 people working on a given reaccor site. The system of controls is outlined in two papers presented by Duke Power personnel at the Waste Management '85 Meeting held in l Tucson, Arizona; the papers describe " Liquid Waste i Minimization Efforts" and " Solid Waste Minimization Efforts" I at Duke Power Coupany. The papers are attached. Each station and contractor employee must be aware of his responsibility for minimizing the generation of waste. The program includes employee training programs, supervisor accountability, vasta source control at each generating point or location, vaste segregation, manual sorting, leak detection surveillance, leak isolation and repair, and routing of each waste to the proper waste system collection vessel. One example of source volume control is in the issuance of warehouse supplies. Packing materials such as crates or l l i
.- _ - .-. ~ -
D) Large compactors are used for compressing paper, plastic, and similar materials into metal boxes for shipment and disposal. This process follows the sorting and segregation processes in the source control proceef described above. DAW volume reduction of 50 percent at oconee produced the disposal volumes for this waste type as listed in the Table. Labor costs were reduced by a factor of five by eliminating the time-consuming use of 55-gallon drums. Further volume reduction can be achieved by supercompaction. It is not cost effective to install this equipment at each reactor site so a service facility is used to provide supercompaction. In 1988, this facility accepted approximately J00,000 ft3 of waste for supercompaction and shipped 150,000 ft3 after processing. E) Combustible vaates are generally large volumes with low bulk densities, and with talatively low specific activities. They are chemically rwither inert nor stable, and are susceptible to organic decompcaition, oxidation, and degradation by the effact of elements. These combustible wastes can be processed by incineration. Incineration converts combustible wastes into radioactive ashes and residues that are nonflammable, chemically inert, and much more homogeneous than the intital waste. Since ashes ace dispersable in the air, immobilization or encapsulation is normally required for their safe transportation and disposal. The principal objectives in the design of an incineration system for processing of radioactive wastes ares complete c:nbustion of the waste; appropriate off-gas cleaning; and radiological protection. The radioactive waste incinerator must be radiologically safe and positively contain radioactivity within the incineration system. An incineration system for processing of radioactive wastes consists basically of: waste feed preparation and loading facilities; a combustion chamber (s); an off-gas treatment system including induced draft fan (s) and a stack; ash unloading equipment) and necessary instrumentation and controls. Ash transfer and/or immobilization equipment normally interfaces with the ash unloading equipment. F) Evaporators are used to process pure reactor liquids such that both the concentrate and water can be reused in the reactor systems. Tritium and boric acid discharges from the station are reduced as a result of such reuse. G) Equipment and floor drainage liquids are processed for radioactivity removal and released from the station using filtration and ion exchange resin. This technology has
4 such as contaminated trash, settling basin solids, fuel racks, and insulation. The establishment of BRC levels for these type materials will eliminate approximately 20 percent of the waste we are currently disposing of with no additional risk to public health 2nd safety. The other phase of our plan will use vendor supplied process equf.pment to reduce radvaste volumes. .offsite vendor decontamination facilities are used for large items or unusual waste volumes generated by modifications to existing equipment. Offsite super compaction and incineration facilities reduce the volume of waste to be buried while concentrating the radioactivity. Vandor supplied incitaration and decontamination i facilities cor ce used most cost effectively as regional
'facilition whero wastes from many generators are processed.
Since 1982, radwaste volumes hav6 been drastically reduced by the use of ion exchange resin for liquid waste processing, improved tool and equipnent decontamination technology and improved compaction. An increase of dedicated perscnnel assigned to radwaste management functions, and more effective administrative co?trols which make each worker responsible for the waste that he generates. Tne volume.s of waste generated as a result of th6se efforts decreased from the 36,046 cubic feet per year per unit to 5,194 cubic feet per year per unit at Oconee. To date, Duke Power has invested $820 million in radwaste processing facilities at three sites fer seven reactors. operating and maintenance costs, inciuding che cost of disposal, are $11.4 million per year. Dirposal costs are about 10% of the OLM costs. A point of diminishing returns will soon be reached whereby further r expenditures to reduce the volume of waste gent. rated will no - longer be economical. Duke Power and othLr utilities are already reducing the volume of
~tation vastes 96-98%. This reduction i: 'ne result of a three io four-fold reducticn of waste sources cor>ined with an overall process volume reduction of 30-40. Further volume reduction, will rhise the cost,of electricity to our customers.
N 1
~ - - - - _ _ - _ _ - _ _ _ - _ - _ - - _ _
E. . Volume of Low- vel Sol d Radioactive Weste sm - G - i j E ' 4
$am
'"l umeofLowgvel}ogRadioactiveWaste g
#g
<___k#lll #
J
e
- e. t Equipment Drains I i
eeep Sed Sample Equip. Tank Weste Drain Demm. Tank # I Condensate Storage p;it, ..............., g j ._, { Spent Resin Tank
} ; ($RT) n Deep I Floo'
$1udge Bed Drains i Tank emin I FIII
, ; $1udges I t ,. .l. . ,
Floor SRT ;
$ludge Drain l Evap. ;l Tank Tank
..... 4 j
Fuel Pool &
- ter
{ Condensate
~~~
\ / =
. Chemical Rosms L-............., - Waste
'r 4
[ q Laundry Coadeasai* Sludge P"**e Tank g.3,,,, Chemical W astes 7 Reactor Cleanup a Resins Hopper Makeup . Water Reetter pn . N/ ,, seperator W aste Solidification Process Liquids
-.....-- Trash Resins (Solids)
Compactor Figure 3 Simplified BWR Radwaste System: Powdered Resin and Reactor Cleanup Systems (
4 % 1aSLt 1
.atutie swa v0 lim eeDLCfIou Ptt imIi l l CUBIC hcutlCl l t APPttcaakt l l l Fftt l fitt l l va tien ! M S l Ve lePeovt Est j l ttPt IPeacttstaloisposALI (1artt$ l Unto i fle n i M s l l . l l l .
I lie.ct.e c ient
- 74,Dool 200 Is ctor oreirese l len tacherw. I- Eve retten toevetel I l l lte.ctor c ient l Purificatim l l 1 I l l Puu,s t t kee. ] Fittretion ] l l l l le.e.iire mt., I seewie foirati i i l l I i oreir ee l I I l 1 l 1 Purification j l 1 l l ; , l :
is.cernery ca.ienti Eso,oon l 150 lsemptingtrot I source enantetry [ eene taint l l l l lCesensate oestr r iianej Centr.t l l 1 l l l tir.e a frenefer 1 non tacaenes l l 1 l l l seistiene l Purificetten l l 1 1 I lo.ir.retiaesaa.en I riteretten I I i l l l l incineestion l l l . : : i l l Itawimment and l sao. cool aso les , vei , ine l s.,c.cn.ieiryi sene estet l l tie.coreinee. I i i oreinee. I cente.t i I l l l lctantrv t.eter I sen taenense I i i I i Itwery wier i turification i I ' I I l l l #sitratten -1 1
; , : l l l lotte one seiventel 25.000 l le c ar e. ,ott I s a centret I me. taist l l 1 I i oreinee. I a.iisiviation l l l l l lrereuneotte v l treemretion i l 1 l I Itemarinte l l l l l l l seivete l l l l l : .
Itrue activity I s.oco I so Iste snia. I ar iveie l mene taist l
-Inetwtete l l l purific.tian e m ir. I o t. t w in tien I l l l l Isenitorywaies.iime I sec an,tiniten I i i l i Isettiirg beein s tiJe l frein. cation i I l l : l leer t er==elsa e.=cer c tent =l n.=tw c.aient i vi se c tete i m.= cais l l l teuipment erul Fio.P l Ptrific tion Resine l (alghAedletion)l I l loreir s=enary=lt % torein ; ! l 1 Ic ient- 1 .r==a e.eir. 1 l 1 1 l lritter currisere 1 l I l . . ; ; ; l leere.e. I 12. coo I soo ltate, s==.te I seuru centret i ur= talet i I l l lv.two, e. . ei,ine l o nt instian l l 1 ! I 1:=utation,twinau i ne i 1 1 1 l 1 l see ois ui I l 1 l l l l se w = tion I i
; ; l l : ;
l leep.r,et.ta, I 30,o00 I s,tso ler.twun eteentre I sour centret l men. Esist l ltiesite l l It nee a t.v an te I pre wtin I i [ l l I lcereurs, vie. ci tne, I c tr. cevci i i 1 1 I I offin wate I ser s , ire i I l i I I I I t==rire and l l lt i I I l 1 ory etentre i I I l l l 1 cas.stian l l 1 1 I l l incir.retion on l l l l 1 l l' swerc-e.ction i 1 l : l : . l l lw.d.et.atic j t.cooI a gesene we sues.t. I s. ,.. contret I men. toet l l
}etsino l l lcreta i saatitution or i I
. l l l lsacistpioinesvetas. l tet i 1 l l 1 1 I o.c.nte.in tion l l l l l l ta l l l 1 l 1 I incer retion on l l l 1 l l l se ne ction l l I foi.i i.tsr. coo t 4.su n Mos i
. i LIQUID RADWASTE NINIMlZATION EFFORTS AT DUKE P0wtR COMPAN#
R. M. Propst and B. L. Norris Nuclear Production Department Duke Power Company Charlotte, North Caroline 28242 ABSTRACT West liquid redweste processing systems are designed for "everage" oeste processing rates. Unfortunately, weste is not generated at this everage rete but et varied rates which can overload the cepecity of the systems. When the weste systems are overloeded, tLt operation of the entire power plant con be adversely ef f ected. Duke Poeor has established a liquid redweste minfolgation program designed to detresse loads on nonrecyclable weste stresa process systems and to provide sufficient process cepecity to handle the peak input rates in each weste stroom. Elements of the program inclutet vaste source segregation, rectemation, eliminetton, chemical control, leek detection, and the volume reduction of process system byproducts. Esemples are given for each eliminating of these program high-selles, elements. A verlety of techniques era used in reducing or high-redlosctivity, and high-voluwe sources of weste which can overleed ssste systems and/or produce high volumes of byproducts for disposal. The esemples Ilivstrate that a combinetton of operating, engineering, and edelnistrative tools are used to achieve the slaislastion program objectives. INTRODUCTION redlological, and cheelcel properties and that Duke Power operates seven nuclear this complexity is frequently compousesd when reactors. They are located at Oconee, veste stroene become aimed and then are McGuire, and Catenbe Nuclear Stettons. All introduced into process equipment. are Presserlaed Water Reactors IPWRes). The central program philosophy las Durlag the first years of operation et Oconoe, the loads on the llquld waste systems were Minlaise the input of redlea found to be higher then enticipates. Reactor activity and dissolved solids trips, Steen Generator tube repelt outages, to nonrecyclable f==ntal systems. and simultaneous unit outages produced weste Segregate end control veste volumes et high generation retss. These peak strooms as close to the source rates esteeded liquid weste system capacity as practiccl. Provide and resulted int sufficient process capacl1y to
- a. .hendte peak loads from eats seste backlogst segregated weste streen.
, b. Insbility to receive additional vastel Specific progree objectives are based on
- c. outage delays in draining components for asintenancel vaste source characteristics and on the design limitettons of process equipment. The
- d. reactor startrup delays in ellowing objectives apply to both station design and reactor coolant feed and bleed, operation. They include:
The costs in lost generating cepecity, unit 1. Segregation of Sources eveliability, and diversion of plant personnel 2., Reclametlen of Reactor Coolant to unusual plant operating conditions 3. Cheelcel Control of Sources demonstrated first-hand the importance of 4 Volues Reduction of Byproducts veste sources control and weste system 5 Ellnination of sources l efficiency.
- 6. Lean Cetection l As e result of this experience, and with A verlety of methods are used in the knowledge that McGuire and Catawba alght attempting to meet these objectives.
l emperience s amfler operating dif ficu ttles, e Appilcations of these methods are shown in the program ses established to achieve netter examples described below. One exemple is meste control. The program la based on the presented for each of the six objectives. evolustion of weste volumes and properties es These examples -- and station operating a function of plant design, operating events, emperience -- Illustrate that soutpoent and station maintenance activities. The modificetton is only one of several leportant characteristics of each weste source are program elements. Ecuelly important eres evolusted against the capabilities of radweste 18 Improved operating practices, 2) station process cooptients. The program recognizes administrative contro s. and 3) ongoing weste n 9het waste sources can have complex physical, program evaluation.
and reactor coolant systems. Reactor trip recovery, reactor power change, reactor shutdoen, and fuel pool mainteneste drainage represent peak load challenges to liquid process systems. Annual volumes generated by McGuire are es follows: d a 33" List Galtena Cghlg Metern 1982 2.2 Million 8,300
$ 1983 3.3 Million 12.500 3,g, 1984 4.2 Million 15,900
$ These totals do not reflect poet loads. On u
.2' one occasion, 750,000 gallone (2,800 cubic
, C3 3 131 meters) ens processed in one month.
[] Grott 19 eta /Gavia)
- without recycle treelemation) system cepecity to reelels the poet volumes of f coolant-grade liquids, the only r ecourse is to a :
divert these nouids to the nonrecycietie g DJ. s weste system. The peek load deoend on the
\
. he ,, pn recycle system is then superleposed on the g* __ _ q@ _
peak load design base of the vaste system. As J F M A M J J 5 0 N litustrated in the introduction, operating A D experience has demonstrated that such PONTH concurrent peak loads do occur -- especially et multi-unit sites with shared liquid weste systems. To address this problem, recycle systems Fig. 3. Radioectivity in Ventilation have been upgraded. Westinghouse evaporators Condensate were subelttes to test programe. The goal vos
~
to achieve 15 gpo (3.4 cubic meters per hoer), Condensste volumes during Jentury and 150,000 Bellon (370 cuble meters) per week February (Fig. 2) litustrate the usefulness of process cepecity, and evellebility greater then 905. Deficiencies in the vent system, the system in dealing with plant upsets. In ges stripper, distillete end concentrate loops late December, 1983, stese generator feedvetor valve enternal leekege devotoped. Auxillery were found and corrected. Process sonitors Building condensato production is normally and automatic controls have been added to convert each evaporator from menuel batch very low during the months of November through processing to automatic continuous operation. March, sich that the volumes In January and Other recycle system modifications allow February show the 9eodester steen leek in the continuous use of recycle deelnerallvers prJor Reactor building. Med no other events to oveporator feud. Radioactive cobalt and occurred, the entire volume would have been discharged without processing. coelum concentrations are reduced to 100 tlose lower then roector coolant concentrations so as to esintain everage evaporator and boric in old January, however, a small reactor coolant steen leek developed. The radioactive acid tank con' ct dose below 0.2 Red /hr (2 mGy/hr). Th meste evaporator has been concentration gradually rose to the point that converted it recycle service es a peak load condensate could not be released because the end backup component. This alnielses the feedwater steen mes contem!neted by the probability of coolant liquid diversion to the reactor coolant leek. Fig. 2 shows the easte system. volumes unich required processing until the unit ses shut down fpr refueling and repelrs. Process rates for a peak week at McGuire show the system cepetility as modifled. Both Based on these emperiences, the evaporators more used during thle peek week: Ventilation Unit Condensate System has been judged a valuable esset and la scheduled for . Feed Volume - 282.000 gallone modification to further leprove its usefulness. Fig. I shows, in dotied lines, (1070 cubic meters) Process Rate - 28 gpa the addition of features to allow diversion of (6.4 cuble meters per hour) either Auxillery or Reactor Building Concentrates Recialmed - 23,000 gallons condensate drains to the proces system prior (87 cubic meters) to entry into the Condensate Drain Tank. The Olstillete boron - 5 ppm modification will reduce cross-contamination . (Kg B per million Kg Solution) of sources to the tank during unusual Distillete Gross Gamme - Less then operating conditions. limit of detection REACTOR COOLANT RECLAMATION High evaporator distillate quality has Reactor coolent grade fleulds are been achieved without using the system's high-volume liquid sources. Included are polishing lon enchange components. Recycle system peak iceds have not required diversion bleed IlQuid from chemical shim (boron to the weste ayatene et McGuire one Catewee. concentration) changes in the reactor cooient Duke has recently provided its modifleetion system and tarinage from the spent fuel pool pecaege to a neighboring utility. l
__ ___ - ~~ r
. i Components locates la shleided arose eccessible only ey one . to - three ton hatch Installation et Catsobe.
plugs are one sessple. Components in rooms shich are kept locked gun to high refletion $UWMARY fleide are another enseple. Determining the location of an enternal leek requires Duke Power has establishes programs to eccessing these erees one et a time until the reduce inputs to easte systems which produce source Is found. The enfort is plant wffluents one which produce the highest volumes of byprossets requiring disposal. dese-intensive, laborelatensive, and Program oljectives one enemples of each flee-consuming. Incluses la en effort to provide faster response 1. Source Segregation of Ventilation to ecute leakage events, e leek estector vos Conceneste. developed. The setectors are press-fitted into floor drains one connectee to siera penet 2. cables by plug connectors. The setectors use Reactor Coolent Recycle by Evaporator e float and alcrossitch actuator to provice one Recycle System Upgrese. alara shen input to en Indivlevel floor drain 3. reaches rates greater than 0.1 gettons per Source Chemical Control by Cheelcel minute (0.02 cubic meters per hour). Approval and Evaporator Food Treatment. Detector essemblies are disposeble end 4 can be changed out in 15 secones. The Source eliminetlen of Deconteelnetton detector sees not Interfere with flow lato the Chemicals by Equipment Upgrace. floor drein. Avellable flow eres into the 5. Process Byproduct Volume /Cest floor drain excewds the area of the grating replaced by the detector. Resuction by peste System Filter Upgrees. Detector location le identitled on sech 6. Source Leek Detection by Development local eterm panel. The central eiers ponel elrects the eperator to the appropriato local and Installation of Floor Crain panel. Operating experience has demonstrate 6 Detectors. the ability to Identify emoct location of The application of esslaistrative Auxillery Bulld!ng leaks within 5 minutes. Detector laspection and replecoment are controls, refined operating practices, and schedu!ee as other maintenance needs require equipment modifications has yloided progress entry to doch room. The system is la tovere the segregation and process cepecity operetton et McGuire end is schedules for for station easte streams. Each program objective has contributed to reduce liquid weste byproducts, cost, and Inventory bactiog. TABLE I FILTER PER'ORMANCE DATA estetNAt UncpAbr Operating Mode: Single Certridge 2 Perellel Service Life 2000 gel (7.6 M3) 60,000 Gallons (230 N3) Filter Area: 1.2 ft.2 gg,; y2) 16 x 2ft2 (3.0 M2 3 Flums 17 gps /f t.2 (1? Kg/s M2) 0.6gpe/ft.2 (0.4 Kg/s M ) Exhausted Contact Doses 5 R/hr (50 mGy/hr) Design Base 0.4 Actual R/hr (4 nGy/hr)
. a l
t 30L1D WASTE NINIMlZATION AT DUKE POWER COMPANY H. J. Demeron Duke Power Company General Office
+
Charlotte, N. C. 2F242 ABSTRACT As more nuclear stettons come ca line, Duke is faced with the fact of lacreasing solid weste volumes and lacreasing burial site rates. In en attempt to reduce these volumes, stutles were conducted to quantify and quellfy " solid weste". As each component weste type was identified, e volume reduction scheme was developed to andress specific veste forms. The schemes uses include administrative controls, equipment purchese and building ep41tlestion, and requests for regulatory emosptions. INTRODUCTION After sin years of operation, Oconee's rete of lacrease noe slowes dove to enout 255
" Solid
- redloactive weste con generel!y por year. Annual alscellaneous veste volumes be broken down into three categories - 1) had Increased to 2000 cutic meters (7t,000 weste products free liquid processing (eg., cubic feet) In 1982. (Fig. 21.
filters, deelnerellaere, solldified evaporator concentrates), 2) elecellaneous westa (eg., DAW, conteelneted tools and components), or 3) unusual sources. This paper details Duke Power's ettempts to alnlaise the volume of alscellaneous weste and unusual source weste 3.000 , to be buried at low level disposal sites.
~'
BACKGROUND Ouke Power Company emperience et Ocones and McCulre has shown that low level weste . *' volumes increase rapidly in early plant life. The rate of increase levels off after about O 2.n00 - \ d \ five to eight years. For esemple, the McGuire E
\ .
miscellaneous weste volume has increases en M ""
\
average of 1755 per year for its first four y years. (Fig. 13 kg k N 1.0n0 ' N N -
\ 5 \ \
\ \ \ -
400 - H13C WASTE ' T
'\
k k I \ \ \
~
B0m wAsn - 0 h N t s D N h
\
t
\
1
\
g b " - - "
\ 1979 198n 1981 le42 1983 11M YEARS 200 -
e g\ x Fig. 2 ONS Weste Volumes With this number and 7 nuclear units.
'00 -
-- NN Duke =es f acing a possible 4667 cubic meters
\ N 0 65.000 cuale feet) or 667 cubic meters
\ \ \
\
(23,500 cunic feet) per unit a n n t. a t buriel volume. O 1981 1982 1983 This volume was viewee with concern for 1984 several reasons. The first ses a history of TEAR turiel sits cost Inflation evereging 405 per year. (Fig. 3) Another was the location of Fig. I NN5 Weste Volumes NcGuire Nuclear Stetton outslee the state of South Carottne with no guerenteen buriel
. s l
6 cod e til t r a s h barrels within the RCA. Red decontemination equipment and any reewared and yellow terrels are for contaminated or modifications. potentially conteminated DAW. Blue and white barrels are fo* clean tresn. The "cleen* The first stop in the decon upgrade was trash is monitored prior to leaving the to identify which decontamination options were Aemillery Building to lasure it is ovellebte to Duke. The possibilities non-contesinated. The accepteble redletion includes limits are backgroved readings. This trash is egeln monitored prior to leaving the alte es 1. Upgrade the liquid weste system such senttery waste. Levole must not onceed 0.5 that aggressive decon chemicals nitre $levert/hr f.05 mrom/hrt. This practice could be used in the existing tanks. Is estimated to save Duke approulmetely 1416 2. Switch to alternate technologies cubic meters (50,000 cubic feet) of buriel whlen could include electropolishing, space per year. . send blasting, liquid ebrasive blasting, freon high pressure spray, This program is not e " sorting" program or freon ultrasonic. es conveniently defined. Duke Power does not check *potentially" contaminated meterfel The upgrade of the liquid system was (le., red and yellow barrels) and remove any eliminated since that would cost more than the clean trash. Duke chooses not to sort $270,000 ovellable. contaminated DAW for two reasons. The first is the reguietory uncertainty as to onet is or At this point Duke decided to undertake 'a is not a recloactive.* Since Duke has not two part study. The first objective was to applied for a ade minimis* ruling on this quellfy and quantify emoctly onet weste form as such cutoff level can be set. *non-compacted weste* was et Duke's stations. The other reason is economic - In order to be The er.cond study objsettve was to actually cost effective et least 105 of the field test each possible decen technology to
- contaminated
- material must be found to be get some realistic numbers of their
" cleana . Due to the success of its effectiveness, problems. manpower administrative controls, Duke does not believe requirements, ate. This study vos set up to this number is achievable under current bring different vendors into the stetten to conditions. provide decontamination services durlag outsjes. Vendors were selected such that each Another espect of administrative controls identitled technology was actually tried at e is to make fedfvfeumle responsible for certeln Duke station. This study was continued for types of meterial taken into the RCA. For four outages at Oconee and McGuire.
eremple, all tools are signed out by a specific Individual. This individual is held in order to evaluate each technology a accountable for that tool. This method log was developed to record decon date. Insures tools are returned after use and not information eyeliable included: thrown into the trash. Respirators are hocdied the same way. These controls meno 1. Decon process (ie., electropolisher, trash sorting to recover reuseable items freon ultrasonic. etc.) unnecessary. 2. Noterial type (ie., motel, tool, coole, etc.) TOOL DECON 3. Decon tire Another major contributor to the solid 4 Inittel contaminetton/radletion level waste burial volume is a non-compacted" S. Residual contaminetton/reclation level material. This group includes tools. eeulpment, motel, wood, cable, etc. These This study revealed the following shout materials contelbute escut 1,250 cubic meters the types of meterial that needed to be (44.300 cunic fast) per year to radweste deconned
-volumes. ,
- 1. 901 covered with olis or grease
-In 1981-1982, the dates for the original 2. 755 peinted study, the only decontamination eethods 3. 601 metal evellable vers hand wiping or water baths. 4 235 electrlCal or pneumetlC l
' Water baths used small ultrasonics or larger 5, 125 miscellaneous eoterial thoses, turbulators. 3ue to liquid redweste system slings, extension cords, etc.) design, no cleaning chemicals could be used with the water baths. Tl.In type of decon The average radiation levels on this proved to be ineffective on all flued material ranged from .5 to 90 micro contaminetton and on high levels of loose contaminetton. Any tools or equipment that Steverts/kr 1.05 to 9 mrem /hr) and the everage contaelnation level ranged from 2,000'to could not be placed in water (eg., 10,000 dpm/100 square centleeters. electronics) or were too large for the tents could not be deconned. This data was invaluable in developing equipment selection criterie. The first Review of published reports, especially requirement was for a method to remove oils - some EPRI work, and Industry emperience lead only hand alping or freon technologies could Duke to conclude that with properly selected eccomplish this. The second recutrement was decon equipment this volume could at least be for a method to decontaminate electrical cut In half. By assuming a reculred three equipment - only freon technologies could year payback, each station could spend accomplish thit. A third requirement was that approximately 1270,000 on new any new equipment had to be simple one
kCN M6M L. ko s b ru b% MIXED WASTE CHARACTERIZATION AND PROCESSING Julius W. Bryant and Larry D. Evans Nuclear Production Department Duke Power Company Charlotte, N.C. 28242 ABSTRACT Waste that is both radioactive and hazardous is regulated by both
.the NRC and the EPA. Since there are few treatment, storage, or disposal facilities licensed by both these agencies, mixed waste generated at Duke Power Company facilities is stored at the aaneration site. Processing methods for eliminating this Inventory of stored mixed waste are being developed using the limited options ava;1able to facilities not possessing a hazardous waste treatment permit. In order to ensure that the above storage and processing is in compliance with EPA requirements, periodic characterization of these mixed wastes is necessary. This paper describes Duke Power Company's mixed waste characterization and processing programs and outlines the results achieved to date.
INTRODUCTION Mixed waste is low-level radioactive vaste (LLW), as defined in the Low-Level Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act of 1985 (LLRWPAA), that also contains constituents that are either a listed hazardous vaste or exhibit hazardous characteristics as described in Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation 40CFR Part 261. Prior to 1985, mixed waste was generally disposed of just like LLW with the Nuclear Regulatory Commission having regulatory authority. However, during formulation of the LLRWPAA, questions arose as to which agency, the EPA or the NRC, should have regulatory authority over mixed waste. Congress directed these two agencies to administratively resolve the problem. As a result, the NRC and the EPA issued a joint guidance document that stated the NRC had-jurisdiction over the radionuclide portion of the mixed waste while the EPA had authority over the hazardous constituents. With the issuance of the NRC-EPA joint guidance document, a mixed waste treatment, storage, and disposal facility (TSDF) was required to conform to both NRC and EPA regulations. EPA regulations require that a mixed waste TSDF obtain an EPA permit and that they characterize their mixed waste to ensure that it can be treated, stored, or disposed of in compliance with the storage permit _and EPA regulations. Due to the projected high costs associated with TSDF permits, Duke Power Company has implem2nted mixed waste characterization and processing programs whose goal is to eliminate any need to maintain these permits by eliminating mixed waste inventories.
.- - . ~- - - - ~ . - - - - - . . .. . - -.. .
A.Wasta Analysis Plan (WAP) was then developed which outlined the procedures necessary to ensure that each known or potential mixed waste was characterized as per the requirements of 40CFR Part 265. This WAP provides the following information for each of these waste streams:
- the parameters for which the vaste will be analyzed
- the rationale for the selection of these parameters
- the sampling methods which will be used to ensure a representative sample of the waste is collected
- the test methods which will be used to analyze for the selected parameters
- the frequency with which the analysis of the waste will be repeated
- the test acceptance criteria After development of the WAP, the known or potential mixed wastes were characterized.-The initial characterization results for these known or potential mixed waste streams are shown in Table I and II respectively. Table III lists the LLW which is not and should never become mixed waste.
Table I Initial characterization results for LLW known to be mixed waste because they contain or have contacted a listed-hazardous solvent , Waste Stream Parameter (Set Note 1) Result dry cleaner filters, freon 200 - 2200 ppm paper portion ignitability non-ignitable toxicity toxic, up to 2.0 ppm Cd and 16.0 ppm Pb dry cleaner filters, freon 120 - 350,000 ppm carbon portion ignitability non-ignitable t-toxicity non-toxic l l l 3 l
..g. . _ . -- . .
Table II Initial characterization results for LLW which could be mixed waste because they have the notential for exhibitina hazardous characteristics Potential Waste Stream Characteristics Result paint solids ignittbility non-ignitable 4 chromate analysis toxicity toxic, up to wasta 240 ppm Cr reactor coolant pump toxicity toxic, up to decon solution 3560 ppm Cr sludge lance toxicity non-toxic filters / sludge chloride analysis toxicity toxic, up to waste 780 ppm Hg 1 . liquid radwaste filter toxicity non-toxic (laundry system) liquid radwaste filter toxicity non-toxic (floor drain system) laundry liquids toxicity non-toxic corrosivity non-corrosive PH=7.2 floor drain liquids toxicity non-toxic 1 corrosivity non-corrosive
- PH=6.9 wat blast decon toxicity toxic, up to unit grit / filters 28_ ppm Cd and 30 ppm Pb lead batteries / See Note 1 shielding Notes: 1)' Lead batteries and shielding are decontaminated.
,onsequently, no analysis has been performed on chis wasta.
5
i , Two general strategies are_being employed to achieve this goal: Strategy #1 - involves the submittal of delisting petitions for mixed waste streams that contain or have contacted a listed ,tazardous solvent. Prior to petition rubmittal, the concentration of the hazardous solvent in the mixed waste will be reduced as low as possible. Strategy #2 - is applicable to a mixed waste that exhibits a hazardous characteristic (ignitability, corrosivity, reactivity, or toxicity). These wastes will be treated in-container to eliminate their hazardous characteristics. Table IV lists the mixed wastes that are currently being generated at Duke Power facilities, as identified-by the characterization program. In addition, their hazardous properties and the general processing strategies to be applied to these mixed wastes are provided. Table IV taneral Process Strateav For Mixed Waste Streams Currentiv Beina Generated At-Duke Power Facilities Mixed Waste Stream Hazerdous Procerties' Strategy dry cleaner filters, listed waste (freon), #1 and #2
.paper. portion toxic (Cd,Pb) See Note 1 dry cleaner filters, listed waste (freon) #1 carbon portion dry cleaner bottoms listed waste (freon), #1 and #2 toxic (Pb) ignitable, #2, See scintillation cocktail See Note 2 -Note 3 acetone based listed waste (acetone) #2, See cleaning solutions Not- 4 L
waste oil / solvent listed waste (solvents) #1, see ! mixtures Note 5 tool decon unit listed waste (freon), #1 i filters See Note 6 7
e IAble IV (continued)
- 5) An alternative option being pursued for mixed waste comprised of oil and listed hazardous solvents is approval from the applicable regulatory agencies for a one time burn of current inventories. Afterwards, an oll and solvent segregation program should prevent the generation of additional amounts of this mixed waste.
- 6) The tool decon unit waste characterization has not been completed.
Application of Strategy #1 to the applicable wastes required an investigation into effective matheds for reducing the listed solvent concentrations of these wastes. At this time, no testing has been performed on methods for reducing the listed solvent concentration of the waste oil / solvent mixtures. For the freon relata4 wastes, two methods have baan tested - distillation and drying using the heat cycle of the dry cleaners. Neither of these t s two methods of reclaiming freon require a hazardous waste 4 treatrent permit. Strategy #2 is peing employed to eliminate tho hazardous characteristics associated with any of the identified mixed wastes. Generally, these vastes are being solidified with a gypsum based solidification agent. Again, a treatment permit is not required as long as the solidifications are performed in the original waste container within 90 days of the waste generation date. At this time, the only full scale application of the above process strategies has been on the scintillation cocktail and the reactor coolant pump decon solution. Full scale processing of the remaining mixed wastes was delayed pending the results of bench scale processing of these wastes. The mixed waste processing results achieved thus far are shown in Table V. Testing is in progress for the identified mixec waste streams for which no results are shown. Table V Current Dute Power Mixed Waste Processina Results Process Pre-crocessed Post-orocessed Mixed Waste Descriotion Proce rties Pronerties dry cleaner dried 4 hours 9 2200 ppm freon, 1200 ppm freon, filters, 120 degrees F, 2 ppm Cd and < 0.2 Cd and paper then solidified 16 ppm Pb < 0.3 Pb, See Notes 1 thru 5 l 9
=
n
.._= ,c .
Table V fcontinued) 4)'The scintillation cocktail and the coolant pump decon solution results were obtained from full scals processing-. All other post-processed results were obtained-from bench scale process testing.
.5) The-solidification of the reactor coolant pump decon solution-was done using coment. All other waste solidifications were performed using a gypsum based solidification agent.
- 6) This wetIblast filters / grit processing was performed on a waste batch-that contained only 2.3 ppa Cd. The .
. processing of batches containing Pb and higher levels of Cd-is in progress.
SUMMARY
AND CONCLUSION
- The Duke Power : characterization. program has identified all mixed
-waste currently being generated at Duke Power facilities. This
-program provides for the periodic characterization of these wastes and ensures that they continue to be stored.and processed Jin.accordance_with the requirements of 40CFR Part 265.
The- Duke Pcwor -processing program has eliminated two of the identified mixed wastesufrom the companies hazardous waste storage : permits .- - scintillation cocktail and ~ reactor coolant - pump decon solution. The-processing of the remaining mixed waste is in _progressLand the preliminary;results:are satisfactory. Based upon these:results,-there is a reasonable possibility-that.all Duke Power mixed waste 1 inventories.and hazardous waste. storage permits can be eliminated. REFERENCES 1.- Low Lsval' Radioactive Waste Policy Amendments Act, January 1986. 2.. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976, October 1976. 3.- Environmental-Protection Agency and U.S.. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,'" Guidance on-the Definition and Identification of Commercial Mixed Low-Level Radioactive and-Hazardous Waste and Answers to Anticipated Questions", January 8,
- 1987.
- 4. Code of Federal Reculations, Title 40, Parts 260 thru 262, and Parts-264 thru 270.
l l 11 i i
AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS This request for information is designed to obtain the utility overview of its power plant's impacts on aquatic resources. It is D21 intended to require new surveys, data collection, or extensive new analyses of existing data. Responses can be based on existing information, for example, by sumarization of information contained in monitoring reports, pubitcations, or unpublished files. The questions should be answered separately for cach site operated by I the utility. Documents that may be useful in ac' dressing the following questions are: o Annual Aquatic Monitoring Report submitted to the responsible State Agency o Final Environmental Statement o Annual Non-Radiological Monitoring Report as required by Environmental Protection Plan of Technical Specifications, Appendix B o section 316 (a) and (b) Demonstration Report submitted to Environmental Protection Agency Based on our pilot study, the Aquatic Resource questions should take approximately 40 man-hours to answer.
- 1. Post-licensing modifications and/or changes in operations of intake -
and/or discharge systems may have altered the effects of the power plant on aquatic resources, or may have been made specifically to mitigate impacts that were not anticipated in the design of the plant. Describe any such modifications and/or operational changes to the condenser tooling water intake and discharge systems since the issuance of the Operating License.
- 2. Summarize and describe (or provide documentation of) any known impacts on aquatic resources (e.g., fish kills, violations of discharge permit NUMARC Page 1 l
l
AQUATIC RESOURCE QUESTIONS (cont.) the Operating License including those that may have resulted in cifferent plant impacts than those initially predicted.
- 7. Plant operations may have had positive, negative, or no impact on the use of aquatic resources by others. Harvest by commercial or recreational fishermen may be constrained by plant operation.
Alternatively commercial harvesting may be relatively large compared with fish losses caused by the plant. Describe (or provide documentation for) other nearby uses of waters affected by cooling water systems (e.g., swimming, boating, annual harvess by commercial and recreational fisheries) and how these impacts have changed since issuance of the Operating License.
- 8. Describe other sources of impacts on aquatic resources (e.g., industrial discharges, other power plants, agricultural runoff) that could contribute to cumulative impacts. What are the relative contributions by percent of these sources, including the contributions due to the power plant, to overtil water quality degradation and losses of aquatic blota?
- 9. Provide a copy of your Section 316(a) and (b) Demenstration Report required by the Clean Waste Act. What Section 316(a) and (b) determinations have been made by the regulatory authorities?
HUMARC Page 3
i . . .
~,- a
. : T. Q ? g, July 3, 1990 C4 AllE. .vN oIsrAs.
^
Pon t 6dCTION I JUL 51M4 MEMORANDUM "" \1 t; PAD $fDIVISION USE
..' hC.it.i[N1 10 fu itLL NO.
TO: Tami Carpenter -- - Design Engineering .. EC09-H FR0h: Gail Addis
SUBJECT:
NUMARC Socioeconomic lapact Questionnaire
- 1. Estimates of number of permanent workers on site for most recent year Average permanent workers = 1509 QA = 82 CMD = 375 PSD = 52 NPD = 1000 Does not include K-Mac (approximately 95) or Globe (approximately 150)
- 2. Average permanent workers in five-year increments since plant received Operating License:
TOTAL NPD CMD/SMS* Q PSD 1980 = 953* s621 250 82 - 3 1985 = 1118* $786 250 82 - 1990 = 1509 $1000 375 32 52
*CMD was basically SMS as far as plant maintenance support in '80 and '85,
- 3. Three cases, a typical planned outage, an ISI outage and the largest
. single outage, A.
- Typical Planned Outage - 2E0C5 Length: 76 days Start Date: 7/5/89 Finish Date: 9/19/89 Cost: 320,134,000 Total Additional Workforce (Peak): 1055 w - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _
r C.
- Largest Single Outage - 1EOC6 Length - 132 days Start Date: 1/8/90 Finish Date: 5/20/90 Cost $25,000,000 (estimate all invoices not yet received)
Total Additional Workforce (Peak): 1025 Principal Task Workforce: Refueling 15 NCP Maintenance 20 Modifications 145 ' S/G-Sludge Lance) S/G Shot Peen} S/G Sleeving} 135 S/G Tube Pull) S/G Plug Removal) Routine Maintenance 710 Total Occupational Dose Received: 487R Principal Task Dose: Refueling 28 NCP maintenance- 20 Modifications 16 S/G Sludge Lance 13 S/G Shot Peen 33 S/G Sleeving - 40 S/G Tube Pull 37 S/G Plus Removal 16 Routine Maintenance 284
*All' figures are actual except cost.
- Please call'if you have questions, cc: T. L. McConnell J. W. Boyle W. R. Kelley
- ,,-w-e, , n -
- 1. To understand the importance of the plant and the degree of its socioeconomic impacts on the local region, estimate the number of permanent workers on-site for the most recent year for which data are available.
1 As of 7/1/90: 1157 NPD Permanent Vendors .. Total
- 2. To understand the importance of the plant to the local region, and how that has changed over time, totimate the average number of permanent workers on site, in five-year increments starting with the issuance of the plant's operating License. If possible, provide this information for each unit at a plant site.
Data For Both Units: 1/1/89 - 1,248 1/1/88 - 1,242 3/1/87 - 1,099 3/1/86 - 1,075 3/1/85 - 1.052 Total: 5,716 - 5 = 1,143 Average
- 3. To understand the potential impact of continued operation for an additional 20 years beyond the origiaal licensing term, please provide for the following three cases:
A) A Typical Planned Cutage:
- 1. Estimate of additional workers involved for entire outage:
60 I&E 588 Nechanical L38 57 V86 Total
- 2. Length of Outage 62 Days Planned 74 Days. Actual
- 3. Months & Year In Which Work occurred:
November 1988 to February 1989
- 4. Cost: Accounting information not available.
- 5. occupational Doses Received By Permanent And Temporary Workers During Each Principal Task:
Total occupational Dose 313.124 Per Ram (see attached sheet for breakdown on exposure)
1
.A FUNCTION DOSE (REM) 360 ECT & U-Bend Stress Relief (UBSR) 54.910 Platform and Playpen Set Up/ Clean Up 15.645 Nossle Dam Installation /Ramoval 15.535 Tube Plugging- 14.540 code Fidy current Testing (ECT) 13.450 Manway/ Diaphragm Removal and Installation 9.480 Tube Dampening 4.930 Bowl Washdown and Initial HP Survey 2.760 F05AR 1.410 TOTAL 132.630 TUNCTICW DOSE (REM)
Valve Repair 35.380 MOVATS 8.750 Limitorque operator PM _1 975 TOTAL 45.500 TUNCTION DOSE (REN)_ Reactor Head Removal / Assembly 13.200 15I of piping welde/ hangers 11.420 snubber inspection / testing 8.935 General Health Physics surveillance (RB) 7.950 SRWP dose for outage tasks 7.910 Inspect / Replace 214 pipe clamps 7.320 General Operations surveillance (RB) 7.050 Ge , oral Decontamination (RB) 6.775 Socket weld tube fittings 5.665 Miscellaneous PM/PT 5.605 Hanging valve / component labels 4.425 Refuel cavity Decontamination 3.490 RS/ Annulus General Entry 2.915 Miscellaneous Instrument Calibration 2.880 Replace s/G Snubbers 2.735 Relocate 1NVold 2.595 Inspect /Retube KC HX's 1A/1B 2.455
- ECT NV Letdown EX 2.145 TOTAL 101.470 Miscellaneous Work 29.494
3C ACTIVITIES BAVING ESTIMATED EEPOSURES > .1 PERSCE - RBI Genera l, Outace Work (Not Associated with a specnfic significant Job or NAM /VN) ACTIVITY ESTIMATED EXPO 8URE (Person - Ram) Temporary shielding 2.5 Upper containment General Entry 1.0 H3usekeeping in Upper Containment 1.065 Upper Containment Canal Decon 5.0 Lower containment General Entry 1.5 General Decon in Lower Containment 6.0 General R. P. Surveillance in Lower containment 6.0 operations surveillance and Red Tags 6.7 Miccellaneous Work on SRWP's 15.0 Miccellaneous Instrumentation Calibration 4.0 Miscellaneous PM's and pts 4.5 Subtotal for General Cutage Workt 53.265 person - rem NsM's/VN's ACTIVITY ESTIMATED EXPOSURE (Person - Rem) CN 20330 Modify control circuitry wiring on McV's 2.0 CN 20566 Replace inside containment 35 isolation valves 5.0 CN 20582 Provide data for MOV testing 2.0 CN 20594 Delete MVAC Duct in Annulus 1.0 Subtotal for NSM's/VNst M person - rem Miscellaneous Work 12.455
SOCIDECONOMIC-QUESTIONS FOR CASE STUDY SITES-(cont.)
; 8. Taxes These questions are asked to validate information obtained from local government sources or to obtain infonnation if local governments fail to provide.it.-
- 1. What types of local taxes must be paid on the plant and property?- >
ad M" frt b
- 2. To what jurisdictions are these taxes paid?
b e e - sc h.edu.Lt
- 3. What-types of state taxes must be paid on the plant and property?
. st.mL
- 4. - For each tax type, please estimate the total amount the utility paid to each relevant state and -local jurisdiction in 1980, 1985 and 1989 (or
-the most recent year for which data are available),
see s..la b b 5.- Have major plant modifications or refurbishment affected the plant's taxable assessed value? nr.x
- 6. - Would an extended outage for major plant modifications or refurbishment result in a temporary cessation or reduction of tax-payments to state and/or local governments?
W
- 7. Would tax payments cease in the event of plant decommissioning?
v , E C. Public Services -
'#/N This question is asked to validate information obtained from local government-sources or to obtain information if local governments fail
.to provide-it.
- 1) Please estimate the total annual plant expenditure for each fea-paid public service (e.g., water, sewer, etc.) in five year intervals since plant operations began.
( l l- ' Page 2 HUMARC 1
.k-. ..m,. - + . , . ,-r _ . , - --
, - , r x - ~ ,
e 4 t l ' Om DUKE POWER COMPANY OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION SOCIOECONOMIC QUESTIONNAIRE um M
.' I a-09-:iin :2:27 :::M ;c }EE .uc En m :w :::e 5:- 3; - :.s
- 3. To meerstand the potential impact of continued operation for an additional 20 years beyond the original licensina term, please provide for the following three cases (a) a typical pi e outages (b)_an ISI outage (c) the largest single outage (in tares of the mmber of workers involved) that has occured to date. An estimate of additional workere involved (for the entire outate and for each principle tank). length of outage, months and year in which work occured, and cost. Also, estiaste occupational doses ruosived by permanent ar:d temporary workara during each principle task.
(a) Typical planned outage The normal length for a typical planned outage is approximately 45 days. Outages occur at the end of a cycle length. Some power manuevering may be used to avoid summer / winter power peaks. The following is a listing of additional workers / support involved in the outage: Workars/Suppor[ Total Building 20 Performance Support 3 Electrical (TSM's) 10 Equipment Operator (not Polse Crana) 4 Valve Limitorque 15 Hanger 5 Heat Exchangers 20 Haterial Handling (RB Move) 8 Insulation 30 Material Har.dling 10 Polar Crane Operator 6 Reactor Coolant Pumps 18 General Support 15 Snubber 5 Steel Work (Flagman) 6 Tool / Room Worker 15 Valves 44 Warehouse / Materials Support S Welding /ISI 30 TCffAL VORKERS 272 A l l l 1
. 'Ju -cs-;550 1225 G;M 000 NEE NLC EAA MA!L :i;;M ; 62723:07 :.06 The following is the estimated Dose received during an ISI Outage by taak Tasks Dose OTSG Work 50 Valve Work 25 Head Work 20 Decen Work 15 Insulation 15 Inspecting / General Entry 10 Miscellaneous 10 ILE Work 10 RCP and Motor Work 10 ISI Activities 49 RBCUS 10 ,
NSMS- 10 Stage / Remove Equipment 10 RP Surveys 8 Scaffolding 3 Defuel/ refuel Activities 4 Shielding 4 Miscellaneous Pump Work 4 Performance Testing 3 Tendon Work 2 Turbine Building Activities (1) Snubber Work 1 (2) Paint Basement Floor 1 TOTAL DOSE 276 (c) Largest Single Outage 3e largest Oconee Outage to date by additional workers involved is not readily available: however, it shou *' not differ significantly from a typical ISI outage. Further. we have no accounting records documenting the work incurred cost, nor are our accounting records established to provide a breakdown. t w
JA-05-;950 13:!5 :: n 0;; HEE %C El4 %' ROOM TO 52 25;27 :.06 (b) Conduct Career Day presentation to high schools in an effort tot educata students about Duke Power Company, to inform students of the types of employment opportunities within Duke Power Company and the Oconee Nuclear Station, and to inform students of what skills / qualifications are needed to be . considered for the various opportunities. (c) Conducting Career Day presentations at two-year Technical Schools, including predominately minority attended schools. (d) Serve as company representatives on advisory councils organised in various high schools.
- 4. To understand the importance of the plant to specific jurisdiction near the plant, what is the current distribution, by city and county or sip code of residence of permanant workers on site?-
Please see the attached printout. t ;
'903 TIC - 20018 i
. - ----------- . s
-s'h.w...yr; h.ji,. n v; g .f.'sg: y-
- -~
1 < g. ,, ..
-. .c..
. ; r
@F ?' 30514 1-
' W O %Ab.%*1 $ -
'AVdri4E.
, g, .y yq;; , - - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ - --
- i. . , . .g .q.., .
$.t i: w 1 .,.
p,vit.%,w w A:w . >4 . F '- .2 ? sty r; iBREVARD 20712 2
.i ..
n.. p . ;.,. :;s. . , 2 - <-.. -
+
. ' ~ ':e.
b i. ? A9 e '
. t, J.. :s -
. 2 2/02/1996 93:58 PM c.
'., */ ' e *, *
' o 2., . ' * , ;, y..
. . 4.*g. '
(t m
, , III
' r. , 's k<
i est CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION l b' - OCONEE NUCLEAR STATION - 7 (INCLUES WOE, GA, PSD, NPD, BE, CMD-5,0SRG TRANS) F EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES m p , , . . .;.,..<. p 3 , CITY ZIP NUMBER OF
!NAME' CDDE EMPLOYEES -
d
' BUFFALO 29329 1 pr.:L ,. _--------
# 1 ,.,
29322 1 .*
- ' .* P_' !
I"CAWOBELLO: --- --_-_-
- 1 l'.;
, ,I
.s .- fl.e CARMESVILLE 30521 2 . fJ i
- 2 i.
'COSHIERI 29717 6 ..
r; m & CENTRAL 29630 136 a --
0 84 e
', d*(
- Thb ag 4 $ ' h4 b er w w ab -*4
.- ,, h is ,.,
s'
- t. - ,4 *h r
]
- ^-
.I- 4
} ^(
6- .
.: ,; :;, 3 ,
'.t g
~
~
k.a } '.. 2:
- N N NJN -l. ege N f
J , t O a a a a 4 M.' s,'
==
n n
.,.. n c. n b
1 .' '. ,
=
., ., f 4
1 . . C #
. .d< , , y
- \
{' y N. gi [$.4
. 3.
t 4 1' rj S i u b Im: IX zu / W- A L .
.I
GREENVILLE 29495 3
- 2V607 1
' ' 20667 5 :
*2.s 9,. ,'?.7 27611 19 ..
29615 4 F N lktd~L$@l . . _
.*; .t ;; . *: ;~ :,; ni . .;.g; . 2, ,
es a 23 T. \ .e . 1< .. a e, r 1- \ T/02/1999 03:50 Pt1 .. n 1 - i'
. . f,
- 1. ..
- 25 l
- 1 -
Mkn is :.s . 4 . w: .. . , . .... .. ,. , tj 1 3 . . - . . < - . et'. ,, : t.
^.. ..
CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION ' l 7" ^'
- OCOMEE NUCLEAR STATION * . l (INCLUES WOE, QA, PIE, NPD, DE, CMD-2,OJRG,TRANI) I, EXCLUDES PART-TIME AHb TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES g l-
!a . .
,s f
l FTl l E LCITY ZIP NUMBER OF -'
~
r CODE EMPLOYEES 1-lNAME _ _ _ _ _ l CREENWOOD 27646 1 '[ 9 le = 1 l 29659 1 (; CREER
.. 27651 5 ~
l 27652 1 g r y >x. .;;;,.7:- _
?...- .- _..... $d%'Oh? Fajs' .
fJ 9[g. 39643 6 }' l HARTWELL - - _
. ** , g 73 HODGEg 29653 1 1.
- 1 l
HONEA PATH 29654 if
4__.____ i ! L AUREr4S 29360 1
.l t s l G-iLAVONIA 30553 5 b.
g
- 5 .'.
LIBERT( 29657 Of ,, m 01 2 t N lLYMAN 29365 1 s$ i' l m i O2 l MANNING 29102 1 ., j _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ s. l
- 1 1
1 lMARIETTA 29661 2 { w 2 i iMARTIN 30557 iO ,,, j __________ 4 4 l',.' h/O2/I7'/O O.4 50 l'ti n i g. CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTIGN - - - - - nt n rs . .ce r a r-
i l' - f7/02/1990 03:53 PM . . F. o l [ .T -
- l. $
! C11Y/ COUNTY DISTRIBUTION l OCONEE NOCLEAR STATION ., i (INCLUES WOE, QA, PID, NPD, DE, Ct1D-S,0SRG,TPANS) g l 8-i EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEHFORARY EMPLOYEES l n l o3 ! CITY ZIP NUMBER OF i NAME CODE EMPLOYEES <> A \M ! NEWRY 29645 1 i- ) __- N f M l i HEWTON 20650 2 j _ . . - - ______ - = 2 HINETY SIX 29666 1 .
- 1 'I NORRIS 29667 4 [Iri a
m 4 n PELZER 29649 4 m w 4 PENDELTOM 2967G - 1 _ _ , , m..- .,_.- ,-r . - - - _ . _ . . - _ _ . - ._ -__ _ .,w -- ,_ --. _ __~~_.,.,___-.----,..---___e_ _ . _ , . - - _ , . . . . --w,, -e-,,-_,. . - _ - . ,i-,,- - _ ww..-,_ - .
o 2 '.
'SALEN 2967S 72
('. V4, .
- n. w 72 ,
W '4?oy&t',te . .
.p -
. , . . e.s.
'43E8ECA
- 1. . .
29678 519' .'. 29679 41 4,. ib.5, .. - _ _ re ' y,_. .. . n $60 ;, Ifd81ErstIEES$FRD : b 2ee73 1 -
* *4 .
W:+A.:K. - .. s t. Wyi? -s.4. % . ~
~
f3I8F30NVILLE 29681 2 ,, _- --- _ .. r
._ R . 's.1 '- s' * , y y ',*
KIX'CILE 29682 96 ew... 1, _ :. .; .. ___ __
. m 96 eSIX-MILES 29682 1 /
m 1 =
'* 4*
(* i
.t .d .
KPARTAMBURG 2930l 4 29393 2 .. h h~ .. %:- 29345 1 w.,. -e . 17/02/1999 93:58 PM , l
~
i. I
** \
.c. .
e, .
'I CITY / COUNTY DIKTRIBUTION OCONEE NUCLEAR KTATION (INCLUEX WOE, GA, PID, NPD, DE, CMD-X,OIRG,TRANS) ?
EXCLUDES PART-TIME AND TEff0RARY E3FLOYEES I* 1 1 CITY ZIP NUMBER OF 80AMC CSDE EMPLOYEEK
I. CITY / COUNTY DISTRIBUTION o DCOMEE MUCLEAR STATION (INCLUES WOE. GA, PSt, NPO, DE, CMD-I.HSRG.TRANS) ,y EXCLUDES PART-11ME AND TEMPORARY EMitOYEEI ; CITY ZIP. NUMBER DF NAME CODE EMPLOYEEK 7
- 3 ,,
WALHAllA 29691 . SSt ; a 157 WALLAL LA 29691 , 1 i e. t* -
- l ,
.t WtbRE SIM)ALS :29692 2 ;,,
- 2 ,
WATERLOO 29384 1 .
- i WAXHAM 29173 2 ,.
m 2 WEST FCL7ER 29669 2
= __
- 2 WEST LM11DN 29646 1 T.
29696 67 .: r. m 68 . WEITHINISTER 29693 1 ,,
. t WESTMINSTER 29630 ,
1
yee e um O
. - - _ - _ . - _ - - - - - - . - - - _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ . _ - - . _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ - _ - - _ _ - _ _ _ a}}