ML20081D908

Suppl 3 to Environ Rept - OL Stage

ML20081D908
Person / Time
Site:	Marble Hill
Issue date:	10/31/1983
From:	PSI ENERGY, INC. A/K/A PUBLIC SERVICE CO. OF INDIANA
To:
Shared Package
ML20081D893	List: ML20081D891 ML20081D908
References
ENVR-831031, NUDOCS 8311010386
Download: ML20081D908 (103)

Text

. - .

MH 1&2 ER-OL INSTRUCTION SHEET O

To update your copy of the Marble Hill Nuclear Generating Station - Units 1 and 2 Environmental Report - Operating License Stage, please remove the indicated pages and replace them with the attached Supplement 3 pages.

i l REMOVE INSERT VOLUME 1 Contents Page il Contents Page ii Page 2.0-i Page 2.0-i Pages 2.0-v and 2.0-va Pages 2.0-v and 2.0-va Page-2.0-xvi Page 2.0-xvi Page 2.1-2 Pages 2.1-2 and 2.1-2a Page 2.1-4 Pages 2.1-4 and 2.1-4a p Page 2.1-5 Page 2.1-5

%)

Following Page 2.1-8a Page 2.1-8b (do not remove)

Pages 2.1-21 through 2.1-23 'Pages 2.1-21 through 2.1-23 Following Page 2.1-24 Pages 2.1-24a and 2.1-24b (do not remove)

Page 2.1-50 Page 2.1-50 Following Figure 2.1-1 Figure 2.1-1A (do'not remove)

Figure 2.2-76 Figure 2.2-76 VOLUME 2 Contents Page ii ' Contents'Page-ii Pages 4.1-2 through'4.1-4 Pages 4.1-2 through 4.1-4 Page 5.2-3 Page-5.2-3 Page .6.1-15 Page 6.1-15 A]

\.

8311010396 831028 PDR ADOCK 05000546 A PDR 1

MH 1&2 ER-OL INSTRUCTION SHEET (Cont'd)

REMOVE INSERT VOLUME 2 (cont'd)

Pages 7.0-i and 7.0-ii Pages 7.0-i and 7.0-1i Page 7.1-6 Pages 7.1-6, 7.1-6a, and 7.1-6b Following Page 7.1-19 Pages 7.1-20 through (do not remove) 7.1-25 Pages 8.1-2 through 8.1-4 Pages 8.1-2 through 8.1-4 Pages 8.1-6, 8.1-6a, and Pages 8.1-6, 8.1-6a, and 8.1-7 8.1-7 Page 8.2-1 Page 8.2-1 Page 11.0-2 Page 11.0-2 l

Page 11.0-4 Page 11.0-4 Page 13.0-2 Pages 13.0-2 and 13.0-2a Page 13.0-24 Page 13.0-24 Page Q240.2-1 Pages Q240.2-1 through 0240.2-9 Page Q291.11-3 Page Q291.11-3 Pages 0291.11-13 and Pages Q291.11-13 and 0291.11-14 Q291.11-14 Page Q310.4-1 Page Q310.4-1 Page Q310.6-1 Page Q310.6-1 Page 0451.1-2 Page Q451.1-2 Following Page S2-2 of Supplement 3 tab Supplement 2 followed by Supplement 3 (do not remove) text, tables, and figure O ,.

I Y .. _ _.

l I

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() CONTENTS (Cont'd) VOLUME

Chapter 13.0 - References 2 Supplement 1 - NRC Ouestions and Responses 2 Supplement 2 - Voluntary Revisions 2 Supplement 3 - NRC Ouestions and Responses and Voluntary Revisions 2 3 3

1 l.

O i

I i

t

[

t l

l Lo SUPPLEMENT-3 ii OCTOBER 1983 l- -.. . -, -- . . - . .

I MH 1&2 ER-OL

() CHAPTER 2.0 - THE SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES TABLE OF CONTENTS, PAGE 2.1 GEOGRAPHY AND DEMOGRAPHY 2.1-1 2.1.1 Site Location and Description 2.1-1 2.1.1.1 Specification of Location 2.1-1 2.1.1.2 Site Area 2.1-1 2.1.1.3 Boundaries for Establishing Effluent Release Limits 2.1-2 2.1.2 Population Distribution 2.1-2 2.1.2.1 Population within 10 Miles 2.1-2 2.1.2.2 Population between 10 and 50 Miles 2.1-4 2.1.2.3 Transient Population 2.1-4a l3 2.1.3 Uses of Adjacent Lands and Waters 2.1-6 2.1.3.1 Land Use 2.1-6 2.1.3.2 Water Use 2.1-7 2.1.3.2.1 Surface Water 2.1-7 2.1.3.2.2 Groundwater 2.1-8 2.2 ECOLOGY 2.2-1 2.2.1 Aquatic Ecology 2.2-1 fN x-)

2.2.1.1 Chemical Parameters 2.2.1.2 Physical Measurements 2.2-1 2.2-3 2.2.1.3 Biological Parameters 2.2-4 2.2.1.3.1 Bacteria 2.2-4 2.2.1.3.1.1 Total Ccliforms 2.2-4 2.2.1.3.1.2 Fecal Coliforms 2.2-4 2.2.1.3.1.3 Fecal Streptococcus 2.2-5 2.2.1.3.1.4 FC/FS Ratios 2.2-6 2.2.1.3.2 Phytoplankton 2.2-6 2.2.1.3.2.1 Community Composition 2.2-6 2.2.1.3.2.2 Density and Biovolume Variation 2.2-7 2.2.1.3.2.3 Seasonal Variation 2.2-8 2.2.1.3,2.4 Ohio River Station Comparisons 2.2-8 2.2.1.3.2.5 Little Saluda Creek 2.2-9 2.2.1.3.2.6 Conclusions 2.2-9 2.2.1.3.3 Zooplankton 2.2-10 2.2.1.3.3.1 Community Composition at Ohio River Stations 2.2-10 2.2.1.3.3.2 Density Trends at Ohio River Stations 2.2-12 2.2.1.3.3.3 Little Saluda Creek 2.2-12 2.2.1.3.3.4 Conclusions 2.2-13

• 2.2.1.3.4 Periphyton 2.2-13 2.2.1.3.4.1 Density at Ohio River Stations 2.2-13 2.2.1.3.4.2 Density at Little Saluda Creek Station 2.2-14 2.2.1.3.4.3 Community Composition at Ohio River Stations 2.2-14 O

SUPPLEMENT 3 2.0-i OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() CHAPTER 2.0 - THE SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES LIST OF TABLES NUMBER TITLE PAGE 2.1-A Soil Types on the Marble Hill Site Classified as Prime Farmland 2.1-8b 3 2.1-1 Current and Projected Population within 5 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-9 1

2.1-2 Current and Projected Population within 10 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-15 I

2.1-3 Cities within 50 Miles of the Marble Hill Site 2.1-21 2.1-4 Age Distribution within 10 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-24 2.1-4A Current Population in Indiana within 12 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-24a 2.1-4B Current Population in Kentucky within 3 12 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-24b 2.1-5 Current and Projected Population within 50 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-25 l 2.1-6 Age Distribution within 50 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-31 2.1-7 1978 Agricultural Statistics for

Surrounding Indiana Counties 2.1-32 2.1-8 1978 Agricultural Statistics for l Neighboring Kentucky Counties 2.1-33

2.1-9 1978 Market Value of Agriculture

Products Sold 2.1-34 4

2.1-10 1980 Livestock and Livestock Products for

- Indiana .

2.1-35 2.1-11 1980 Livestock and Livestock Products

! for Kentucky 2.1-36 l 2.1-12 1980 Crop Statistics for Indiana 2.1-37 2.1-13 1980 Crop Statistics for Kentucky 2.1-38'

] 2.1-14 Major Crops for Human Consumption:

Statistics for Counties within 50 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-39 2.1-14A Major Crops for Animal-Feed: Statistics for Counties within 50 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 .

2.1-40b 2.1-15 Estimated Beef Production within 50 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-41 2.1-16 Estimated Pork Production within

50 Miles of Marble Hill'1&2 2.1-43 2.1-17 Estimated Milk Production within

-50 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-45 2.1-18 Schools within Approximately 10 Miles of Marble Hill'1&2 2.1-47 SUPPLEMENT 3 2.0-v' OCTOBER:1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() LIST OF TABLES (Cont'd)

NUMBER TITLE PAGE 2.1-18A Other Institutions within Approximately 10 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-47a 2.1-19 Industry within 10 Miles of .

Marble Hill 1 & 2 2.1-48 2.1-20 Nearest Site Boundary, Residence, '

Garden, Milk Cow, Milk Goat, Meat-Animal, Garden Tobacco, Cabbage, and Peach 3 Orchard within 5 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 2.1-50 2.1-21 Waterway Traffic Recorded at McAlpine Lock and Dam During 1980 2.1-51 2.1-22 Barge Traffic on the Ohio River at McA_ pine Dam 2.1-52 O

I l

l O 2.0-va SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983 l l

MH 1&2 ER-OL

(} CHAPTER 2.0 - THE SITE AND ENVIRONMENTAL INTERFACES LIST OF FIGURES i

NUMBER TITLE 2.1-1 Layout of Plant Facilities, Exclusion Area, Restricted Area, Property Line and Site Boundary Line 2.1-1A Prime Farmland Soils on the Marble Hill Site l3 2.1-2 Communities and Transportation Routes within 10 Miles of the Site 2.2-1 Dissolved Oxygen Concentrations Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-2 pH Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-3 Alkalinity Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-4 Specific Conductance Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-5 Total Dissolved Solids Concentrations Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-6 Total Suspended Solids Concentrations Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-7 Biochemical Oxygen Demand Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-8 Chemical Oxygen Demand Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 O 2.2-9 Total Organic Carbon Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-10 Total Phosphorus Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-11 Orthophosphate Values Near the Marble Hill. Site for 1977-1981 2.2-12 Nitrate Nitrogen Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-13 Ammonia Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-14 Organic Nitrogen Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-15 Silica Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-16 Calcium Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 j 2.2-17 Magnesium Values Near the Marble Hill Site for.1977-1981 2.2-18 Sodium Values Near-the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-19 Sulfate Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-20 Chloride Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 2.2-21 Hexane-Soluble Materials Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981

. 2.2-22 Phenol Values Near the Marble Hill Site for 1977-1981 l 2.2-23 Water Temperature Values Near the Marble Hill' Site l {)N s_ for 1977-1981 l

l SUPPLEMENT 3 2.0-xvi OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL lh upland area with the exception of two deep wells, intake and discharge structures, and cooling tower makeup and blowdown pipelines, which are located in the floodplain of the Ohio River.

ER-OL Table 2.1-A shows the soil types found on the Marble Hill site that are classified by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service as

" prime farmland." ER-OL Figure 2.1-1A shows the distribution of these soil types on the Marble Hill site. As can be seen, virtually all permanent station structures and facilities are located on land classified as prime farmland. As already stated, 3 these permanent facilities will occupy approximately 170 acres during the life of the station. Planimeter measurements of the soil type information provided by the Soil Conservation Service (Howell 1983) indicate that the total area of prime farmland on the site is approximately 324 acres.

There are no industrial, institutional, commercial, recreational, or residential structures on the site. The development of the site for uses other than power generation is not contemplated by the Public Service Company of Indiana, Inc. (PSI).

The Marble Hill / Bower Road, a two-lane paved county road, borders the site to the south and is the primary access road to the site.

A private rail spur owned and controlled by PSI extends from the southwest corner of the site to the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad, located 9.5 miles west of the site (see ER-OL Figure 2.1-2).

O 2.1.1.3 Boundaries for Establishina Effluent Release Limits The restricted area boundary, which is identical with the site boundary, is used for establishing effluent release limits and enables the applicant to fulfill its obligations with regard to the requirements of 10 CFR 20. Access to this area is controlled by posted "No Trespassing" signs.

ER-OL Figure 2.1-1 shows the boundary line of the site for Marble Hill 1&2. The shortest distance from the nearest vent stack (point of effluent release) to the site boundary in any direction is 2330 feet in the east-northeast direction.

2.1.2 Population Distribution 2.1. 2.1 Population Within 10 Miles The population within 5 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 (see ER-OL Table 2.1-1) is based on field house counts conducted in August 1981. The population between 5 and 10 miles (see ER-OL Table 2.1-2) is based on house counts derived from aerial phctographs taken in December 1981. The numbers of persons per household used to estimate the population within 10 miles of the site are as follows (U.S. Department of Commerce 1981a, Tables 1 and 2; lll U.S. Department of Commerce 1981b, Tables 1 and 2):

SUPPLEMENT 3 2.1-2 OCTOBER 1983

I l

MH 1&2 ER-OL Jefferson County, Indiana Hanover Township 2.3 Madison Township 2.6 Republican Township 2.9 Saluda Township 2.7 Clark County, Indiana Bethlehem Township 2.0 Oregon Township 2.8 Owen Township 2.0 Washington Township 2.6 i

O 1

)

l SUPPLEMENT 3 ~  !

2.1-2a- OCTOBER 1983 ,

1

l MH 1&2 ER-OL 1

( ER-OL Figure 2.3-56 shows the area within 10 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 divided into dh ectional sectors and distance radii.

The 1980 estimated population within 12 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 is shown for Indiana and Kentucky in ER-OL Tables 2.1-4A and 2.1- 3 4B, respectively.

2.1.2.2 Population Between 10 and 50 Miles The 1980 estimated population between 10 and 50 miles of the station and the projected population to 2030 are shown in ER-OL Table 2.1-5. The total 1980 population within 50 miles was 1,437,053, which is projected to reach 2,368,899 by 2030.

The population denuity within 50 miles of the station was 183 persons per square mile in 1980; it is expected to increase to 3'2 per square mile by 2030. The area between 25 and 40 miles from the station was the most densely populated, with a total population of 939,602 and a density of 306 persons per square mile in 1980.

The sectors with the largest population in 1980 were the southwest and the south-southwest, with populations of 340,158 and 592,113, respectively. The high population is due to Louisville, Kentucky, and Clarksville, Jeffersonville, and New Albany, Indiana. The east-southeast sector had the smallest p)s

( population, 14,214 persons.

The 1980 population for cities within 50 miles of the site is shown in ER-OL Table 2.1-3. Louisville, Kentucky (298,451 in '

1980) is the only Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) within 50 miles of the site.

The age distribution of the population within 50 miles of the site for 1980 and projected for 2010 is shown in ER-OL Table 2.1-6. It is based on U.S. age distribution as determined by the U.S. Bureau of the Census (U.S. Department of Commerce 1977, Table 11). The percentages indicate that between 1980 and 2010 there will be a decrease of 4.4% in the number of children age 0 to 19, and an increase of 4.4% in the 20 and over category. The U.S. projected age distribution was used because the significance test as described in Appendix D of hRC Regulatory Guide 4.2 showed no significant difference in the age distribution between the counties around the station (Jefferson County, Indiana, and Trimble County, Kentucky) and the United States as a whole.

Thus, it is assumed that in 2010 the area within a 50-mile radius of the site will have a projected age distribution similar to the U.S. projected age distribution.

ER-OL Figure 2.3-55 shows the area within 50 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 divided into directional sectors and distance radii.

O SUPPLEMENT 3 2.1-4 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL 2.1.2.3 Transient Population Madison State Hospital, Clifty Falls State Park, the city of I Madison, Hanover College, traffic on the Ohio River, and the l construction of Marble Hill 1&2 and the Trimble County Generating Station account for the majority of the transient population in O

O SUPPLEMENT 3 2.1-4a OCTOBER 1983

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

MH 1&2 ER-OL llh the site area. Madison State Hospital currently has a 502-bed capacity and a staff of approximately 550 (Williams 1982).

Clifty Falls State Park had approximately 200,000 visitors during 1900, and the annual number of visits is expected to continue at about the same level (Skinner 1981). The park's peak daily attendance, which occurs during July, is estimated to be between 2500 and 3000 persons. The city of Madison annually attracts approximately 200,000 visitors to its year-round cultural, historical, and recreational events. The number of visitors peaks around July 4, when an estimated 75,000 to 100,000 people attend the Madison regatta (Renschler 1981). Approximately half the enrollment at Hanover College lives outside the area during the summer months and returns for the fall semester. The college enrollment was 997 in 1981, with a staff of 77 (Hanover College 1981). During the construction period from 1982 through 1988, the work force at Marble Hill 1&2 is estimated to average approximately 4,500, which includes construction workers, PSI employees, and architect-engineer personnel. The peak annual 3 work force, including about 1,600 PSI personnel, vill be approximately 7,800 and will occur in early 1984. At the end of construction, the Nuclear Division staff will be composed of an estimated 973 employees, including both plant operations and Nuclear Division technical support personnel.

The best estimate of transient population on the Ohio River is the number of barges and boats passing through McAlpine Dam, lo-lll cated approximately 37 miles downstream of the Marble Hill site.

In 1980, traffic through McAlpine Dam included 40,795 barges, 5,246 tows, 515 noncommercial (mostly recreational) boats, and 15 passenger vessels (U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 1981a).

Approximately 2 miles southeast of Marble Hill 1&2 on the Kentucky side of the Ohio River, Louisville Gas and Electric Company (LG&E) is constructing a two-unit, 990 MW fossil-fueled plant, the Trimble County Generating Station. Development of the station will result in a transient population of 660 people during peak construction, and 160 people during operation.

Construction of Unit 1 is scheduled to end in 1985, and of Unit 2 in 1989 (Sommers 1981). The majority of the constructior. work force (660 people out of 695) is commuting from the Louisville area to Trimble County, Kentucky. Approximately 35 construction workers and their families are expected to relocate to Trimble County. Only 160 of the 350 operating personnel are cxpected to commute from existing residences. The remaining 190 people are expected to relocate to the site vicinity (USEPA 1978, p. 3-67).

Indianapolis Power and Light is constructing Patriot Generating Station approximately 40 miles northeast of the Marble Hill site.

The first of the three 650 MW units is scheduled to be on-line in October 1990. A peak construction work force of 950 and 154 permanent operating personnel are planned for Unit 1 (Berlier 1982). Because of the distance of this station from Marble Hill llh 1&2, it is not expected to significantly affect transient population in the site area.

SUPPLEMENT 3 2.1-5 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL TABLE 2.1-A SOIL TYPES ON THE MARBLE HILL SITE CLASSIFIED AS PRIME FARMLAND MAP SYMBOL SOIL NAME AvA Avonburg silt loam, O to 2 percent slopes (where drained)

CnB2 Cincinnati silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded EkA Elkinsville silt loam, O to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded EkB Elkinsville silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, rarely flooded Hu Huntington silt loam, occasionally flooded 3

RoA Rossmoyne silt loam, O to 2 percent slopes

) rob 2 Rossmoyne silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded rya Ryker silt loam, O to 2 percent slopes RyB2 Ryker silt loam, 2 to _6 percent clopes , eroded Source: Howell (1983).

Note: The distribution of these soil types on the site is shown on ER-OL Figure 2.1-1A O

SUPPLEMENT 3 2.1-8b OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL U/ TABLE 2.1-3 CITIES WITHIN 50 MILES OF THE MARBLE HILL SITE (Unincorporated areas with less than 1000 people not included) 3 PROJECTED DISTANCE AND 1980 2030 DI:tECTION CITY"

~

STATE POPULATIOND POPULATIONC FROM SITE (an rrales)

Bedford KY 835 1,627 7.0 E Hanover IN 4,054 f.596 7.8 N Milton KY 718 1,403 9.2 NNE Madison IN 12,472 16.142 10.7 NNE LaGrange KY 2,971 7,310 14.0 SSE Brooksburg IN 132 223 14.1 NE Campbellsboro KY 714 1,479 14.2 ESE Prestonville KY 205 348 14.6 ENE Carrollton KY 3,967 7,303 15.4 ENE Charlestown IN 5.596 7,596 15.8 SW Smithfield KY 137 278 18.1 SE Crestwood KY 531 1,503 18.6 S Scottsburg IN 5.068 7,277 18.7 WNW New Castle KY 832 1,557 18.9 SE Orchard Grass Hills KY 1,047 2.964 19.4 SSW Prospect KY 1s 981 3,183 19.6 SSW Dupont IN 392 530 20.1 N Pewwe Valley KY 982 2,780 20.3 S Worthv111e KY 272 50) 20.4 E Utica IN 501 617 20.7 SSW Green Sprina KY 634 1,019 21.1 SSW Eminence KY 2,263 4.593 21.5 SE Austin IN 4,857 6,814 21.8 WNW Sellersburg IN 3,211 4,910 22.0 SW Fincastle NY 804 1,292 22.0 SSW Manor Creek KY 241 387 22.1 SSW h4 Brownsboro Farm KY 790 1,269 22.2 SSW (j Hollow Creek Creekside KY 1,023 1,644 22.3 SSW KY 419 673 22.5 SSW Goose Creek KY 394 633 22.5 SSW Hickory Hill KY 171 275 22.6 SSW Plantation . KY 969 1,557 22.6 SSW Hills & Dales KY 151 243 22.7 SSW Veevay IN 1,343 1,761 22.8 ENE

- Ghent KY 439 208 22.9 ENE Langdon Place KY 308 495 - 22.9 SSW Northfield . KY . 906- 1,456 23.2 SSW Barbourmeade KY 1.038 1,668 23.3 SSW Meadow Vale KY 1,008 1,619 23.3 SSW Rolling Hills KY 1,067 1,714 23.3 SSW Westwood KY 826 1,327 23.3 SSW nriarwood KY 374 601 23.4 SSW Meadowbrook Fara KY 683 1,097 23.4 SSW Anchorage KY 1,726 2.773 23.5 SSW Keeneland KY 432 694 23.5 SSW Old Brownsboro Pl. EY 358 575 23.5 SSW Claiview Hills KY 433 696 23.6 SSW Thornhill KY 367 590 23.6 SSW' Banereft KY 725 1,165 23.7 SSW Whipps M111 gate KY 227 365 23.8 SSW Glenview Manor NY 212 341 23.8 SSW-Moorland KY 513 824 23.9 SSW-Crossgate KY 262 421- 24.2 S5W Devondale KY 1,466 2.355' 24.5 SSW Craymor KY 1,194 1.918 25.5 SSW Cak Park (U) !N 5.871 8,589 24.5 SSW Robinswood KY 273 439 24.8 SSW Riverwood KY 435 699 24.9 SSW Winding Falls KY 454 729 24.9 SSW Indian Hills Chero. KY 585 940 25.1-SSW Pleasureville ' . KY _ 837 . 1,483 25.2 St Bellemeade KY . 918^ 1,475 '25.4 SSW Middletown KY ' 414 665 25.4 SSW Wildwood NY 309 496 25.4 SSW Wandy Hills NY 2,214- 3,557 25.4 SSW Woodlawn Park KY 1,052 1,690 25.4 SSW Lyndon KY 1,553 _ 2,495 25.5 SSW Woodland Hills' KY 839 1,348 25.5 SSW Indian Hills KY . 787 1,264 25.6 SSW

'Little York IN 150 -188

- b/

(Q ! Blue Ridge Manor Douglass Hills KY 561- 901 25.6 W':W 25.7 SSW KY 4,384 7,043 25.8 SSW SUPPLEMENT:3 2.1-21 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL t

b) s,s TABLE 2.1-3 (Cont'd)

PROJECTED- DISTANCE AND 1980 2030 DIRECTION a

CITY ~--- STATE POPULATIONb PCPULATIONC FROM SITr 3 (in miles)

Mary Hill Estates FY 225 361 25.8 SSW Rolling F2 elds KY 731 1,174 25.8 SSW Norwood KY 254 408 25.9 SSW beechwood villaoc KY 1,462 .,349 26.0 SSW Cherrywood Villaae KY 362. 582 26.1 SSW Brownsboro KY - 410 659 26.2 SSW Druid Hills KY 838 1,346 26.2 SSW Kichlswn KY 485 779 26.2 SSW Be11ewood KY 307 493 26.4 SSW Jeffersonville IN 21,220 33,045 26.4 SW Mockingbird Valley KY 205 329 26.6 SSW St. Mathews KY 13,354 21,455 26.6 SSW rairmeade KY - 272 437 26.7 SSW Simpsonv111e KY 642 1,391 26.7 5 Norbourne Estates KY 446 717 26.9 SSW Springlee KY 49s 800 27.1 SSW Clarksville IN 45,164' 22,185 27.1 SW Broad Fields' KY 295 474 27.3 SSW .

Sanders KY 332 611 27.3 E Plymouth Villace KY 231 371 27.3 SSW Hurstbourne Acres FY 396 ' 620 27.5 SSW St. Regis Park .KY 1,735  ?,787 27.5 $$w Vernon IN 329 540 27.8 NNW Cambridge KY 193 310 27.9 SSW rorest Hills KY 502 807- 27.9 SSW Lincolnshire KY 139 223 27.9 SSW Jeffersontown KY 15,795- 25,376 28.2 SSW

[' Pkadowview Estates KY 212 341 28.2 SSW t

Gratz KY 124 248 28.3 ESE Lockport KY 84 150 28.4 ESE Houston Acres KY 608 977 28.5 SSW New Providence IN .384 469 28.6 WSW Crothersville IN 1,747 2e441 ~ 28.7 WNw Seneca Cardens KY 748 1,202 28.8 SSW New Albany IN - 37,103 45,425 29.0 SW Kingsley KY 464 745 29.1 SSW Strathmoor Cardens JKY 292 469 29.1 SSW North Vernon IN 5.768 8.160 29.2 SSW Strathmoor Manor .KY 368 591 29.3 SSW Strathmoor village KY 466' 749 29.3 SSW Wellinoton KY 653 _ 1,049 29.3 SSW Shelbyville NY 5,308 10,925 29.5 SSE Sparta KY. 192 373 29.6 E-Buechel (U) KY 6,912 11,105 30.5 SSW west Buechal KY 1,205 -

1,931' 30.5 SSW' Louisville- KY 298,451 479,494 30.9 SSW

. Parkway Villace KY 754- 1,211 31. 3 SSw -

Audubon Park KY 1,571 2.524- 31.4 SSW New Pekin IN 1,125 1,617 31.4 WSW-Warsaw KY 1,328 2,596 31.9 ENE  !

Lynnview KY . 1,157 1,859 '32.4 SSw Owenton KY 1,341 2,680 33.1 E klanterey KY 186. 383 33.2 ESE Greenville IN - 537 976 33.2 WSW-Pen Run No. . KY 75 120 33.5 S$w.

VeYsailles' ~ IN 1,560~ 3,514 3 3. 8 NNE -

Shively. KY . 16.839 27,022 34.6 SW Okolona (U) KY ' 20,039 32,195 34.7 SSW-Georaetown . IN . 1,494- 2,668' 34.9 SW-Salem IN i 5,290 :7,287 i 35.2 w Dillsboro- . . IN 1,038 1,537 ' 35. 3 NE Minor Lane Heights . KY 1,882' 3,024 36.3 SSW South Park View KY 248 398 36.3 SSW Patriot "1N. 265 '403s .36.9 ENE-Seymour IN. '15,050 - 21,090 37.0 NW-osaood . !N 1,554 - 2,148 37.2 NNE.

Pleasure Ridoe Park (U) . KY .: 27,332 43,912 38.1 SW

. Mount Washington- KY 3,997 10,684. .38.3 $

Palmyra IN ~ 692 1,187 "38.4 WSW-Lancsville - IN 570 .963 38.5 SW.-

fo~'s Hollyv111a KY^ . 476 - 765 38.8 SSW

(~ . -). .Brownstown- .. IN 2,704' 3,779 . 39.3 WNw v

' SUPPLEMENT 3

-2.1- 2 2 - (OCTOBER 1983 ,

, y j , - k 6 "

• MH 1&2 ER-OL O

v TABLE 2.1-3 (Cont'd)

PROJECTED DISTANCE AND 1980 2030 nIPECTION

-CITYa STATE POPULATIOND POPULATIONe 3 (in miles)

Taylorville KY 801 1,167 39.5 S Jonesville IN 213 276 39.6 NW Rising Sun IN 2,478 3,607 39.8 NE Crandall IN 176 320 39.9 WSW Milan IN 1,556 2,348 39.9 NNE Moores Hill IN 566 918 40.1 NNE Westport IN 1,450 2,078 40.2 N Valley Station (U) KY 24,474 39,320 40.7 SSW Fredericksburg IN 233 346 41.4 WSW E11:abethtown IN 603 942 41.9 NNW Napoleon IN 246 335 41.9 N rrankfort KY 25,973 52,421 42.1 SW Milhousen IN 214 273 42.1 N Aurora IN 3,816 4,703 42.6 NE Medora IN 853 1,134 42.8 WNW tlizabeth IN 178 263 43.6 SW campbellsburg IN 695 886 44.1 W New Middletown IN 115 -171 44.3 SW Shepherdsv111e KY 4,454 11,244 44.5 SSW Livonia IN 120 162 45.0 W Corydon IN 2,724 4,115 45.3 SW Hardinsburg IN 298 443 45.7 WSW Dry Ridge KY 1,250 2,720- 46.0 E Saltillo IN 134 171 46.0 W Tairfield KY 169 358 46.4 S Lawrenceburg IN 4,403 5,615 46.5 NE Crittenden KY $97 1,299 46.8 ENE Stamping Ground KY 562 1,136 47.1 ESE Greendale IN 3,795 4,839 47.2 NE

/ )\

i b

Williamstown Sunman KY' IN 2,502 924 5,444 1,396 47.4 E 47.6 NNE Bloomfield KY 954 1,495 47.9 S Corinth KY 258 561 48.0 E Hartsville IN 379 621 48.0 NNW Walton KY 1,651 3,811' 48.3 ENE Milltown IU 1,006 1,566 48.4 WSW Columbus IN 30,292 40,493 48.8 NNW Newpoint IN 296 341- 49.2 N Lawrenceburg KY 5,167 11,868 49.3 SE Batesville IN 4,152 5,528 49.4 NNE Unless otherwise indicated, all cities represent incorporated areas. Cities followed by (U) represent unincorporated areas with a population of 1000 or'more.

b Population of incorporated areas as reported by U.S. Department of Commerce (1981a, Tables 1 and 2) and U.S. Department of Comunerce (1981b, Tables 1 and - 3 2). Population of unincorporated areas as contained in the files of the U.S. Bureau cf the Census, Chicago office.

Population as projected by'Sargent & !. undy DEMOG Program.

l

. . SUPPLEMENT.3 2.1-23 OCTOBER 1983-- .

m

\

TABLE 2.1-4A CURRENT POPULATION IN INDIANA WITIIIN 12 MILES OF MARBLE IIILL 1&2 ESTIMATED 1980 POPULATION BY ANNULAR SECTORS DISTANCE RANGE FROM SITE (MILES)

SECTOR' 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 11-12 TOTAL N 3 10 19 27 60 5 30 986 931 422 1,296 1,753 5.542 NNE 14 - - - - - - - - 1,248 3,879 4,647 9,788 19 19 NE - - - - - - - - - - -

g ENE - - - -

PJ H

- E _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

g l

M ESE .- - - - - - - - - - - - -

M b  %

D8 gg _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

SSE .- -

8 8 102 - - - - - - -

118 S 14 14 8 22 20 18 - - - - - -

96 SSW 5 14 28 16 20 27 49 72 96 40 125 90 582 SW 5 4 18 52 ~ 57 60 65 209 149 194 311 276 1,400 WSW -

25 10 29 63 478 122 62 126 213 155 172 1,455 W -

16 18 41 76 42 45 113 81 241 197 190 1,060

@y WNW -

24 59 51 108 76 89 99 153 128 245 271 1,303 Oh NW -

24 41 59 138 178 122 106 167 154 195 182 1,366 we jg NNW -

.G 8 67 46 83 168 1,141 1,588 333 260 261 3,963 M

e2 TOTAL 41 217 372 690 967 690 2,788 3,291 2,973 6,663 7,861 26,692

=e ao WW W

a

O O O TABLE 2.1-4B CURRENT POPULATION .T.N KENTUCKY WITHIN 12 MILES OF MARBLE IIILL 1&2 ESTIMATED 1980 POPULATION BY ANNULAR SECTORS DISTANCE RANGE FROM SITE (MILES)

SECTOR 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-6 6-7 7-8 8-9 9-10 10-11 11-12 TOTAL N - - - -

5 37 32 45 12 8 - -

139 NNE - -

8 70 55 55 82 248 426 575 27 - 1,546 NE -

36 10 18 23 25 80 232 180 120 165 81 970 ENE -

18 31 42 42 31 106 101 183 89 76 146 865  %

" lu

. E -

3 26 29 70 68 534 701 135 107 30 48 1,751 g

ESE - -

24 20 52 68 112 75 60 91 48 55 605 w

.M

" SE - -

60 11 42 39 55 96 131 125 165 250 974 M tf. y SSE - - - -

10 26 110 138 105 122 447 474 1,432 h S - - - - -- 3 164 168 115 136 474 344 1,404 SSW - - - - - - -

45 301 9 120 359 834 SW - - - - - - - - - - - - -

wsw . _ _ _ _ - - - - - . . .

y _ _ .- - - - - - - - - - -

O rn ^

Qh WNW - - - -

gg N, . . . . - - - - . . . . -

MM p 3l . NNW - - - - - - - - - - - - -

H 5C '

es-co WW TOTAL . 57 159 190 299 352 1,275 1,849 1,648 1,382 1,552 1,757 10,520 W

.r

O O J TABLE 2.1-20 NEAREST SITE BOUNDARY, RESIDENCE, MILE COW, MILK GOAT, MEAT ANIMAL, GARDEN, TOBACCO, CABBAGE, AND PEACH ORCIIARD WITHIN 5 MILES OF MARBLE HILL 1&2 NEAREST SITE HEAREST NEAREST NEAREST NEAREST MEAT NEAREST NEAREST NEAREST NEAREST DOUNDARY RESIDENCE MILK COW MILK GOAT ANIMALa GARDENb TOBACCO CABBACE PEACH ORCHARD DIRFCTION (feet) (miles) (alles) (miles) (miles) (miles) (milesj (miles) (miles) 13 4305 1.0 -- --

4.1 1.0 3.1 -- --

NNE 3405 3.2 3.6 --

3.6 1.6 1.6 -- --

NE' 2790 1.3 -- --

3.2 1.3 1.3 --

5.0 ENE 2330 1.1 -- --

1.3 1.1 1.1 -- --

g E 2435 2.3 4.0 --

2.9 2.1 2.1 -- --

, ESE 3085 2.3 -- -- --

2.5 2.5 -- --

p' N

t. SE 3530 2.4 -- --

4.0 2.4 2.4 2.9 4.8 Ut M O SSE 2695 2.3 -- --

3.8 0.6 0.6 -- --

f S 2530 0.6 -- * --

3.0 0.8 0.8 0.7 --

O SSW 2770 1.5 2.5 --

1.8 1.6 1.8 -- --

SW 3670 0.8 -- --

2.5 0.8 2.5 -- --

WSW 4330 1.5 -- --

3.6 1.5 1.5 -- --

W 4005 0.9 3.6 --

2.5 1.0 1.0 -- --

WNW 3700 1.3 -- --

2.5 1.3 1.3 1.3 --

NW 4460 1.0

. h $. 1.3 4.8 --

2.7 1.0 -- --

NNW 5645 1.1 - -- --

1.1 1.5 --

1.5 Mr

'MM N ;E M

H2

[d yy Sources Field survey conducted in the summer of 1983.

Notes Hyphens, "- *, indicate none within 5 miles.

• Beef, cattle, or pigs.

bOnly gardens greater than 50 square meters in area and that produce broad-leaf vegetation are included.

W

CnB2 ' -

Hu RyB2 EkA l

o EkB So0F o 500* 1000*

rya EkA

^

\

i

)

l Rril2 i

3 RyB2 OHIO RIVER RyB2 L 2 RyB2 RyB2 I RoA l cnB2 -

7 rob 2

) rob 2 7,

-- i DC - - (h f p

,RyB2 RoA RyB2

%Y % Ti '\ r cnB2 cnB2 i enB2 M ARBLE HILL NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - UNITS 1 & 2 NOTE: A key to the symbols used to identify ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT - C5PERATING LICENSE STAGE these soil types is shown in ER-OL - FIGURE 2.1-1 A Table 2.1-A PRIME FARMLAND SOILS ON THE MARBLE HILL SITE OSOURCE: Howell (1983)

SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983

O FUNGAL AND BACTERIAL

' DISEASES

/

IAN ...., ji[Ud6Sl"EEE'hiNERii

'~~

I " "

~

m om .j,NDU,C Dj 0E /

$E -

3 5i S$

~<

w v h

[6TEENIi..

INSECTS!!

d cc Alii"' -

GENERAL Q DECLINE

~

,OTHER INSECTS MAN-INDUCD" WMM"'- 1 GENERAL DECLINE 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 SAMPLING PERIOD M ARBLE HILL NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - UNITS 1 & 2 ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT - OPERATING LICENSE STAGE FIGURE 2.2-76 MAJOR IDENTIFIED VEGETATION STRESS FACTORS OVER THE 5-YEAR MONITORING PERIOD O

SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL O courtxrs <ce t a) vo'osz l l Chapter 13.0 - References 2 l

Supplement 1 - NRC Ouestions and Responses 2 Supplement 2 - Voluntary Revisions 2 Supplement 3 - NRC Questions and Responses and '

Voluntary Revisions 2 3 l

1 i

i

O

.i 6

i i

O SUPPLEMENT 3

, ii' OCTOBER 1983

., , , , ~ , - . .

7 . . . - . . ,

. - - . , . . - , + , - , , . , , - r,- ~,- --,e, .,.+w,,- .,.-r , ..-r-- ,- .. , ... - -

MH 1&2 ER-OL Construction of an Emergency Operations Facility / Joint Public .

sgf Information Center began in the summer of 1983. This building .

will be located west of the site proper, off Marble Hill Road near the 199-foot meteorological tower. The building site is an 3 18.6-acre plot in a grassy field. Permanent facilities will eventually occupy approximately 7 acres. The construction of the building is expected to have a negligible effect on the surrounding environment.

Certain plant structures have been relocated on the revised site layout, but no additional land was required.for these relocations. In addition, the number of settling ponds required for the erosion control plan has been reduced to one.

An average of approximately 4,500 workers will be employed on the site during station construction; the peak force will number 3 about 7,800. These numbers include employees of the construction contractors, PSI, and the architect-engineer. The detailed annual schedule of the construction period work force is shown in ER-OL Table 4.1-1. Most construction workers are expected to commute from their homes rather than relocate to the local area. .

4.1.1.2 Archaeoloov The effects of site preparation and station construction on archaeological resources are discussed in ER-OL Subsection 2.6.2.

() 4.1.1.3 Terrestrial Ecology Analyses of terrestrial ecology data collected during 1974-1975 were presented in ER-CP Section 2.7. Additional data collected from 1976 through 1981 are presented in ER-OL Section 2.2. The studies conducted during the construction of Marble Hill 1&2 have indicated no significant offsite impacts that may be attributed to site preparation or station construction.

4.1.2 Effect on Water Use The predicted effects of construction activities on water use i were described in ER-CP Subsection 4.1.3. Changes from that analysis are described in the following subsections.

l' I

4.1.2.1 Site Development i One settling pond has been constructed on the Marble Hill site to minimize sediment transport into Little Saluda Creek. This settling pond receives drainage from the batch plant area and that part of the site (approximately 64 acres) where the main buildings and cooling towers are located. ER-CP Subsection 4.1.3 stated that sanitary wastes would not be discharged into drainageways that flow into Little Saluda Creek. It was planned at that time to discharge the treated effluent from the sanitary waste treatment plant directly to the Ohio River. Because of

() changes in the construction schedule, however, the sanitary waste SUPPLEMENT 3 4.1-2 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL treatment system was completed and put into operation before the

() blowdown pipelines to the Ohio River were completed.

1980, Public Service Indiana received a modification to NPDES On June 2, permit IN0045691 allowing effluent from the sanitary waste treatment plant to be discharged to the settling pond and overflow from the settling pond to continue to be discharged to Little Saluda Creek until the blowdown pipelines to the Ohio River are operational. Because of the good quality and relatively small volume of the effluent from the sanitary waste treatment plant, the eventual discharge of this effluent to Little Saluda Creek is expected to have no effect on the creek.

Other areas, such as construction laydown areas, have been covered with crushed stone and the side slopes seeded with grasses to prevent erosion. The areas that have been stabilized with grasses will be allowed to revert to natural vegetation.

Culvert discharge areas have been riprapped. Construction activities on the floodplain of the Ohio River will not change the flood-handling capability of the floodplain.

4.1.2.2 Water Qualitv and Acuatic Ecoloav Analyses of water quality and aquatic ecology data collected during 1974-1975 were presented in ER-CP Section 2.7. Additional data collected from 1977 through 1981 are presented in ER-OL Section 2.2. The studies conducted during the construction of Marble Hill 1&2 have indicated no significant offsite impacts that may be attributed to site preparation or station C'i construction. During 1979, siltation attributable to runoff from portions of the construction site significantly reduced benthic populations in parts of Little Saluda Creek. Since this runoff was reduced, however, the creek seems to be recovering its former benthic populations (see ER-OL Subsection 2.2.1.3.5).

4.1.3 Construction Noise The results of noise surveys conducted around the site during the construction of Marble Hill 1&2 are presented in ER-OL Section 2.7. Based on these surveys it was concluded that construction noise has not had a major impact in the site area.

4.1.4 Summary of Construction Impacts Approximately 440 acres of land on the site have been or will be disturbed during the construction of Marble Hill 1&2. The majority of this land formerly was farmed. Construction activities at Marble Hill 1&2 do not appear to have adversely affected terrestrial ecology in the-vicinity of the site.

Environmental studies have not indicated any permanent adverse impact on aquatic organisms in the Ohio River or Little Saluda Creek. A permanent settling pond has been constructed to help reduce runoff and siltation. Irreversible and irretrievable commitments of resources due to construction are discussed in Q(- Section 4.3 of the-ER-OL and the ER-CP.

SUPPLEMENT 3 4.1-3 OCTOBER 1983 9 -v - - .- +ye e

MH 1&2 ER-OL TABLE 4.1-1 ESTIMATED SCHEDULE OF WORKERS ON THE MARBLE HILL SITE DURING STATION CONSTRUCTION ANNUAL AVERAGE NUMBERS v0NSTRUCTION WORKERS PSI YEAR MANUAL NON-MANUAL EMPLOYEES a TOTAL 1982 1850 580 850 3280 1983 3500 1300 1100 5900 j.

1984 4000 1200 1500 6700 3

1985 3800 1100 1500 6400 1986 2400 800 1500 4700 1987 1000 400 1200 2600 1988 500 200 1000 1700 PEAK NUMBERS CONSTRUCTION WORKERS PSI YEAR MANUAL NON-MANUAL EMPLOYEESa TOTAL 1982 2300 800 850 3950 4

1983 4500 1700 1400 7600 1984 4500 1700 1600 7800 1985 4300 1400 1600 7300 1986 3000 1200 1600 5800 3

1987 1500 600 1300 3400 1988 1000 300 1200 2500 Note: Values were derived from construction contractor and Public Service Indiana estimates.

" Includes architect-engineer site engineering staff.

i O

SUPPLEMENT 3

, 4.1-4 OCTOBER 1983

i MH 1&2 ER-OL

() Because milk cows and milk goats concentrate iodine in their milk and the human thyroid also concentrates iodine, the air-grass-I cow-milk pathway can be used to evaluate the thyroid dose from

the deposition of halogens.

f Additional exposure pathways include direct exposure from contaminated vegetation, soil, and exposed surfaces, and exposure 1 from ingestion of contaminated vegetables and meats.

1 The gaseous effluent concentrations were calculated for each I

22.50 sector within 50 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 based on 2 years

! of recent meteorological data (November 1978 through October 1979 and July 1981 through June 1982) collected at the site.

, Resultant skin, thyroid, inhalation, and whole-body dose rates I

were calculated for the predicted population in each sector for the year 2030 and for the hypothetical individual exposed l continuously to the gaseous effluents at the site boundhry where minimum effluent dilution has occurred. The ingestion dose to

! such a " maximum-exposure" individual consuming food produced at identified locations of maximum dose was also calculeted. The resultant exposure rates are conservative estimates, since j occupancy factors and the shielding afforded by structures such 1 as houses were ignored. .

1 5.2.1.2.2 Acuatic Pathways

The aquatic pathways of radiation exposure to persons are the j same as those described for biota other than persons in ER-OL

! Subsection 5.2.1.1.2. The two important exposure pathways for i persons are the following:

1

a. internal exposure from ingestion of water or l contaminated food chain components; and

b. external exposure from the surface of contaminated j water or sediment.

1 As discussed in ER-OL Subsection 2.1.3.2.1, the downstream

! potable water intake on the Ohio River closest to Marble Hill 1&2

is Louisville Water Company's B. E. Payne Water Treatment 3

l Facility at river. mile 594.5, approximately 25 miles away. There

, is no known permanent use of Ohio River water for irrigation 4

within 50 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 (Ball 1982; Brumit 1982)'.

! The Ohio River is used for boating and fishing. While some I

commercial fishing is done in the site vicinity, this activity i

has declined in recent years due to its reduced profitability, as

noted in ER-CP Section 2.7.

I 1 The small amount of radiation escaping from the river's surface would result in insignificant exposure to individuals fishing or boating in the vicinity of the discharge. Activities such as j swimming or water-skiing would be expected to result in slightly higher, although still insignificant, radiation doses.

! SUPPLEMENT 3

! 5.2-3 OCTOBER 1983

. __ _ _ _ _ . . . - - - _m_ _ _ . . . _ . , . , . . . _ _ _ _ , , , _ _ . ........,_-.r._,_ _

s' a+-sak.s a a  % f6---a - .,s---, -----m n\g-. Aa s. s_ a - a,A.--

l MH 1&2 ER-OL i I

() 6.1.3 Air Onsite Meteorolocical Measurements Program

) 6.1.3.1 The preoperational meteorological monitoring program at the Marble Hill site includes three periods of data collection. The a

first monitoring period began in January 1974, with the operation i of meteorological data collection systems at two tower sites.

Meteorological monitoring at these sites was suspended in January j 1976. Data from 1974 were presented in ER-CP Section 2.6.

Monitoring was resumed at both tower sites in May 1978 and j continued through the end of April 1980. From this 2-year data

! collection period, the continuous year of data from the beginning

! of November 1978 through the end-of October 1979 was selected i because it had the highest rate of data recovery. Monitoring was 4

again resumed, this time at a single tower site, in June 1981, and was continued through June 1983. 3 From these monitoring periods, ER-OL Section 2.3 evaluates the 2 years of meteorological data of November 1978 through October 1979 and July 1981 through June 1982. ER-OL Table 6.1-3 lists the monthly

! data recovery percentages for each meteorological parameter for ,

both years of data.

During all three periods of preoperational meteorological monitoring, data were collected at a 199-foot instrumented tower located approximately 6750 feet west-southwest of the midpoint

, between Units 1 and 2, at a grade elevation of about 790 feet i s above mean sea level (MSL). This tower is situated on a

-relatively level, open field, thereby ensuring good instrument

!- exposure in all directions. Wind speed, wind direction, and ambient temperature are measured at both the 33- and 199-foot levels on this tower. Before May 1979, signal outputs from the two temperature sensors were also sent to a delta-temperature circuit. This circuit subtracted the output signals from the_two

sensors to produce a temperature difference measurement. After j May 1979, a temperature difference measurement system employing sensors independent of those used for temperature measurement was used. These sensors are also located at the 33- and 199-foot levels. A dew-point temperature sensor is mounted at the 199-i

foot tower level. A tipping bucket precipitation gauge, located near the base of the tower, is used to measure only liquid water

, equivalent precipitation amounts at ground level. No direct j measurements of snowfall or freezing precipitation are made.

^

.l .

4 During the January 1974.through January 1976 and May 1978 through.

April 1979 monitoring periods, data were also collected at a 33-foot instrumented tower located in the floodplain of~the Ohio

River at an approximate elevation of 440 feet above MSL. This

tower stood approximately 2500 feet northeast of the midpoint of Units 1 and 2. The 33-foot tower system provided meteorological i

data to define flow characteristics in the floodplain. Wind j speed, wind direction,-ambient temperature and dew-point

'i temperature were all measured at the 33-foot' level of the tower.

Data have_not been collected at this site during'the monitoring .

l l

SUPPLEMENT 3 6.1-15 OCTOBER 1983 l

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

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() CHAPTER 7.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ACCIDENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE 7.1 STATION ACCIDENTS INVOLVING RADIOACTIVITY 7.1-1 7.1.1 Changes from ER-CP Descriptions of Accident Classes 3 through 8 7.1-1 7.1.2 Consequences of Airborne Releases from Class i 9 Accidents 7.1-2

, 7.1.3 Consequences of Liquid Pathway Releases from l a Postulated Core Melt Accident 7.1-6 3 1

7.2 TRANSPORATION ACCIDENTS INVOLVING RADIOACTIVITY 7.2-1 7.3 OTHER ACCIDENTS 7.3-1 7.3.1 Chemical Explosions or Fires 7.3-1 7.3.2 Auxiliary Boiler Failures 7.3-3 7.3.3 Leakage or Rupture of Vessels Containing Toxic Materials 7.3-3 7.3.4 Summary 7.3-4 O

1 e

O SUPPLEMENT 3 7.0-i OCTOBER 1983 t . .

MH 1&2 ER-OL CHAPTER 7.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ACCIDENTS LIST OF TABLES i I

NUMBER TITLE PAGE 7.1-1 Radionuclide Properties 7.1-7 7.1-2 Initial Concentration of Radionuclides in Primary Coolant and Equilibrium Concentration in Steam 7.1-8 7.1-3 Activity Release Per Unit for Class 3.0 Accidents 7.1-9 7.1-4 Activity Release Per Unit for Class 5.0 Accidents 7.1-10 7.1-5 Activity Release Per Unit for Class 6.0 Accidents 7.1-11 7.1-6 Activity Release Per Unit for Class 7.0 Accidents 7.1-l' 7.1-7 Activity Release Per Unit for Class 8.0 Accidents 7.1-13 7.1-8 Summary of Calculated Plant Accident Offsite Doses 7.1-15 7.1-9 Summary of Atmospheric Releases in Hypothetical Accident Sequences in a PWR (Rebaselined) 7.1-17 7.1-10 Activity of Radionuclides in a Marble Hill 1&2 Reactor Core at 3425 MWth 7.1-18 7.1-11 Geologic Parameters Used in the Groundwater Analysis 7.1-20 7.1-12 Postaccident Fadionuclide Concentrations in Water 7.1-21 7.1-13 Ohio River Use Factors for the Area within 3 50 Miles Downstream of Marble Hill 1&2 7.1-22 7.1-14 Constants for Liquid Pathways Dose Calculation 7.1-23 7.1-15 Event PWR-7 Doses from Table 6.2.16 of NUREG-0440 7.1-24 7.3-1 Liquid and Gaseous Chemicals Stored at the Marble Hill Site 7.3-5 r

I SUPPLEMENT 3 7.0-11 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL 1

predicted to result from even the most severe reactor accident during an 80-year period following the accident.

As noted earlier, various measures could be taken during and after a postulated Class 9 event to mitigate the adverse health impacts on the surrounding population. Unlike the radiation exposure health impacts discussed previously, the societal impacts of measures taken to avoid adverse health effects can be quantified in terms of economic costs, as shown in ER-OL Figure 7.1-5. The factors contributing to these estimated costs include evacuation costs, the value of milk and crops that are unfit for consumption because of radioactive contamination, the cost of decontamination, and the indirect costs of the loss of use of property that must be interdicted until decontamination is economically feasible. As can be seen in ER-OL Figure 7.1-5, at the extreme end of the accident spectrum these costs of avoiding health effects can exceed several tens of billions of dollars, but the probability that such an event would occur is less than 1 in 100,000,000 per year of reactor operation.

7 . 1 . .' Consecuences of Licuid Pathway Releases from a Postulated Core Melt Accident Calculations were performed to determine an upper bound for the potential radiological consequences of a hypothetical release of radionuclides to the groundwater underlying the Marble Hill site s following a postulated core melt accident. These upper bound m) results were then compared with the concentration limits given in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20 (10 CFR 20),

and with the generic results reported in NUREG-0440, the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Liquid Pathway Generic Study (USNRC 1978). The upper bound results obtained for Marble Hill 1&2 are similar to or less than the 10 CFR 20 concentrations and 3 the NUREG-0440 results. A more realistic assessment would be expected to give lower results, but because of the radiological insignificance of the results reported here, further studies would be unwarranted.

The principal source term assumption used in this assessment was that the entire inventory of reactor core fission products is released from the core, goes into solution within the containment, and is resident in the containment sump.

Contamination of the groundwater then occurs if the containment building basemat is breached and radionuclides in the sump water percolate into the geologic strata beneath the station. This material is then transported with the groundwater to nearby wells and to the Ohio River.

The water well nearest to Marble Hill 1&2 is located on the site, near the river pumphouse. Water from this well is used by the station and is not available to the general public. In the event of an accident that could produce groundwater contamination, SUPPLEMENT 3 7.1-6 OCTOBER 1983

-- . . _ . = _. = - - _ -

4

, MH i&2 ER-OL t

i water from this well could be monitored and, if necessary, O interdicted to prevent station personnel exposure.

To determine the concentration of radionuclides that would eventually make their way into the Ohio River, it was assumed that the entire containment sump water inventory of 553,000

! gallons migrates into the Brassfield and Saluda formations beneath the station. Using conservative, simplifying assumptions, the minimum travel time from the point of release to

, the exposed bluff line of the formation was calculated to be 320

years. Subsequent travel through the bluff coalluvium and the Ohio River alluvium takes approximately 40 days. Upon reaching the river, mixing of the ground and river waters occurs that reduces the decayed radionuclide concentrations by a factor of

! 110,000. This dilution factor is based on the 7-day, 10-year low-flow condition for the Ohio River, 14,200 cfs. The-permeabilities and gradients used in the analysis are shown in ER-OL Table 7.1-11.

l Because of the length of time required for radionuclides to j migrate from the release point to the Ohio River, only three

! isotopes could present significant radiological hazards to people

] using contaminated river water: Sr-90, I-129, and Cs-137.

! Initial sump, decayed, and river water concentrations for these radionuclides are shown in ER-OL Table-7.1-12. The radioactivity

of all other isotopes in the sump water would decay to insignificant levels during the 320-year travel time.

An estimate of the radiological impact that these three nuclides 3 would have on the population living within 50 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 can be made by assuming that the current Ohio River -

3 usage is representative of what might be expected.following an -

i accident release. For this analysis five potential exposure pathways were examined: drinking water ingestion, fish ingestion, shoreline recreation, swimming, and boating. ' Current' Ohio River

, usage factors for these modes of exposure are given in ER-OL Table 7.1-13 for the population living within 50 miles downriver from Marble Hill 1&2.

I Population doses for the five exposure pathways were calculated i using-the. methodology of Soldat et al. (1974). Here, instead of-j using the time-dependent release model described in the Liquid

, Pathway Generic Study (LPGS) (USNRC 1978), it was conservatively assumed that all three radionuclides are released to the Ohio t River after the minimum travel time of 320 years and that the  !

j release rate to the river is constant for an average exposure i time of.50 years. Parameters used in the pathways dose i

calculations are summarized in ER-OL Table 7.1-14; estimated j population doses are given in ER-OL' Table 7.1-15.

i

. Population doses-calculated in the LPGS are reproduced in ER-OL j  : Table 7.1-16. These doses are for a postulated core melt

- accident that occurs at a land-based nuclear plant'(LBP) located l

1 SUPPLEMENT 3 7.1-6a OCTOBER 1983 I i

i

. . . _ ,_-,u,__-,,..___._.-___,_____._,,,,__,_.,_,

..___,__,_,.____--.-.._._m. . . _ .._.- ,--

MH 1&2 ER-OL

(~}

v on a small-river site. While it is not possible to make meaningful comparisons of the. individual pathways doses calculated in the LPGS with those determined for Marble Hill because of differences in radionuclide release, transport, and consumption assumptions, it can be seen that the total population doses estimated for Marble Hill 1&2 are factors of two to three lower than those calculated in the LPGS. Thus, it can be 3 l concluded that the radiological consequences from a core melt l accident at Marble Hill 1&2 would be no worse than those i predicted in the LPGS. In addition, since the time required for radionuclides to reach the Ohio River is so great at Marble Hill, interdictive engineering measures could be implemented that would effectively preclude any contamination of the river waters.

There would also be time to prevent contamination of any offsite wells that could be affected.

l l

l O

O SUPPLEMENT 3 7.1-6b OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL 1

TABLE 7.1-11 GEOLOGIC PARAMETERS USED IN TriE GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS GEOLOGIC HYDRAULIC

FORMATION PERMEABILITY POROSITY GRADIENTd Osgood 0 to 200 ft/yr a 0.03% C i

0.01 ft/ft Brassfield 0 to 1 ft/yr a 0. 01 %c 0.01 ft/ft Saluda 0 to 200 ft/yr a 0. 02 %c 0.01 ft/ft Coalluvium - 300 ft/ dayU 20% b 1.19 ft/ft Alluvium 1,093 ft/ dayb 25% D 1.50 ft/ mile 3

O aDerived from direc t interpretation of water pressure testing conduc ted below the shale marker bed on the Marble Hill site, i

b Derived from in situ measurements performed on the Marble Hill site.

c Derived from geophysical logging performed within selected borings drilled at loc ations around the Marble Hill site.

d Derived from the variation in potentiometric water surface t

levels recorded within piezometers bounding the Marble Hill site.

s i

1 O 2.1-20 SUPPLEMENT 3 oCrOSER 1983 4

i

.-, , , - - - , --- - - , , - e n , , , , - . - . , . , - - . - - -

O O O TABLE 7.1-12 POSTACCIDENT RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN WATER HALF LIFE INVENTORYa LEACH WATER CONCENTRATION (Ci/ liter) _ 10 CFR 20 NUCLIDE (YEAR) (Ci) FRACTION b SUMPc DECAYED d RIVER O DRINKING E LIMITS 9 1.54-04 1.40-09 2.80-10 3x 1 -10 Sr-90 2.86+01 6.84+06 0.11 3.59-01 I-129 1.57+07 3.33+00 1.00 1.59-06 1.59-06 1.45-11 1.16-11 6x 10 -11 l Cs-137 3.02+01 9.71+06 1.00 4.64+00 2.98-03 2.71-08 2.44-08 2x 10-8 l

Note: 2.86+01 = 2.f6 x 161 *

• aInitial core activity at shutdown.

I M b Fraction of activity that leaches from core debris into sump water (USHRC 1978, Table y y A-8 of NUREG-0440). o e

C Leached activity diluted in sump water volume of 553,000 gallons, d Sump water' activity decayed for 320 years while traveling with grounnaater.

" Mixing of ground and Ohio River waters produces an additional factor of 110,000 dilution.

I fIncludes theLeffects of routine treatment of drinking water as given in NUREG-0440 (USNRC Oy 1978). In the treatment process the concentrations of strontium, iodine, and cesium are i em reduced by: factors of 0.2, 0.8, and 9.0, respectively (Table C-1 of NUREG-0440).

, 05 yy 9 From Title 10 of the Code of ' Federal Regulations, Part 20, Appendix B, Table II, g column 2. ,

ww w

1 l

l MH 1&2 ER-OL O

\.)

TABLE 7.1-13 OHIO RIVEh__USE FACTORS FOR THE AREA

, WITHIN 50 MILES DOWNSTREAM OF MARBLE HILL 1&2 PATHWAY USE FACTOR Drinking Water a 937,710 liter / day Edible Game Fish b 9,376 lb/ year Shoreline Recreationc 5,271 user-hr/ day Swimming c 1,054 user-hr/ day Boating e 843 user-hr/ day i

1 3

0 4

"For an assumed consumption of 2 liters per day by the 441,320 residential users supplied by the Louisville Water Company and the 27,535 users supplied by the Indiana Cities Water Company.

, b rish harvest data were calculated by using the pounds per acre results of creel surveys for the Cannelton Pool and McAlpine Tailwaters within 50 miles downstream of Marble '

Hill and by assuming an average of'three pool creel censuses as an appropriate harvest statistic for the portion of the McAlpine Pool within the . 50 mile reach.

j cEstimates -for shoreline recreation, swimming, and boating.

are based on the total water surface area of '10,541 acres -

l for the McAlpine Tailwaters and the McAlpine and Cannelton pools within 50 miles and average use factors from-

! NUREG-0440 (USNRC 1978), i.e., 0.50 user-hr/ acre-day for

! shoreline recreation, 0.1 user-hr/ acre-day for swimming and

0.08 user-hr/ acre-day for boating.

( SUPPLEMENT 3 i 7.1-22 OCTOBER 1983 i l

i r

Y

. . _ . _ _ _ . . _ . _ _ _._ .___=_. _ _ _ . . . . . _ . _ . . _._

O O O TABLE 7.1-14 CONSTANTS FO,R_ LIQUID PATilWAYS DOSE CALCULATION SIIORELINE SWIMMING BOATING INGESTION DOSE FACTORS (mrem /pci) FISil NUCLIDE BONE BODY TilYROID GI LLI BIOACCUM([mremfhr1/([

[pCi[m 1) mrem),/hrI/(((pCi/L]

[pCi/L] mrem),/hr]/

Sr-90 7.58-03 1.86-03 0.0 2.19-04 3.0+01 0.0 5.4-10 5.4-10 I-129 2.49-06 6.01-06 6.18-03 3.07-07 1.5+01 7.0-12 2.3-09 2.3-09 Cs-137 7.97-05 7.14-05 0.0 2.11-06 2.0+03 4.2-09 1.0-06 1.0-06  %

m M H M M W m Notes:. Ingestion and bioaccumulation factors for Sr-90 and Cs-137 are from Table E-11 of 8$ Regulatory Guide 1.109, Rev. 1 (USNRC 1977). Shoreline, swimming, boating, and yy I-129 parameters are - from BNWL-1754 (Soldat et al. 1974).

to t4

$E 7.58-03 = 7.58 x 10-3 30 mm 4.J

MH 1&2 ER-OL

,_ TABLE 7.1-15

(\~') LIQUID PATHWAYS 50-YEAR EXPOSURE DOSES POPULATION DOSE (man-rem)

PATHWAY BONE BODY THYROID GI-LLI Drinking Water 9.5+04 5.3+04 1.7+03 2.7+03 Fish Ingestion 9.9+05 8.4+05 2.9+02 2.6+04 Shoreline 2.4+06 2.4+06 2.4+06 2.4+06 Swimming 5.2+02 5.2+02 5.2+02 5.2+02 Bo ating 2.0+02 2.0+02 2.0+02 2.2+02 Total 3.5+06 3.3+06 2.4+06 2.4+06

[D

<J 3

Note: 9.5+04 = 9.5 x 104

(~) SUPPLEMENT 3

'ud 7.1-24 OCTOBER 1983 l

i MH l&2 ER-OL TABLE 7.1-16 EVENT PWR-7 DOSES FROM TABLE 6.2.16 OF NUREG-0440 POPULATION DOSE (man-rem)

PATHWAY BONE BODY THYROID GI-LLI Drinking Water 2.0+06 5.9+05 4.5+01 1.6v05 to to to 4.1+06 1.1+06 1.1+06 Fish Ingestion 9.1+05 4.4+05 4.5+00 4.7+04 to to to 1.6+06 6.1+05 1.9+05 Shoreline 4.6+06 4.6+06 4.6+06 4.C+06 to to to to 5.5+06 5.5+06 5.5+06 5.5+06 Swimming 3.3+02 3.3+02 3.3+02 3.3+02 to to to to 3.4+02 3.4+02 3.4+02 3.4+02 Total 7.8+06 6.0+06 4.6+06 4.8+06 O t 1.1+07 t

7.2+06 to 5.5+06 to 6.8+06 3 Notes: 2.0+06 = 2.0 x 106 Doses are the prompt source consequence range for an LBP at a small-river site.

SUPPLEMENT-3 7.1-25 OCTOBER 1983 I

MH 1&2 ER-OL

{} 8.1.2 Other Primarv Benefits Marble Hill 1&2 will have no primary benefits other than the generation of electrical energy.

8.1.3 Other Social and Economic Benefits 8.1.3.1 Tax Revenues Durino Ooeration Using certain basic assumptions, such as an annual increase in 3 tax levies by the township and a decrease in assessed valuations for Marble Hill 1&2 over its life, it is estimated that approximately S400 million in property taxes will be paid through 2018. Stated in 1986 dollars, using a 13% discount rate, such 3 property tax payments over the life of the station would be approximately $60 million. i The estimated annual property tax breakdown for Marble Hill 1&2 for 1986 through 1992 (non-present value), along with the estimated taxes paid on Marble Hill 1&2 within each taxing body, are presented in ER-OL Table 8.1-3.

Income taxes paid over the life of both units are estimated to be

$548.4 million for federal income taxes (not reduced by 3 investment tax credits below) and $96.2 million for state income taxes. These estimates are based upon the estimated ratio of taxes paid to operating revenue for the years 1978 through 1982, adjusted for the phasecut of the gross income tax, and applied to l3 the present value of operating revenues contributed by Units 1 and 2 as of 198f, utilizing a discount rate of 13%.

l3 The Tax Reduction Act of 1975 allows investment tax credit (ITC) on construction projects that will take 2 or more years to complete. The ITC may be claimed on the progress payments in advance of the year the property is placed in service. The estimated ITC generated at Marble Hill 1&2 by year is listed below. These credits have been and will be utilized to offset federal tax liabilities at some point during the life of Marble Hill 1&2, assuming that Public Service Indiana's federal liability is great enough to allow their utilization. The estimated credits to be generated are as follows:

Year Thousand of Dollars 1976 5 1,084 lo77 5 5,025 1978 5 14,765 1979 $ 26,944 1980 5 29,944 19El 5 29,813 '

1982 5 33,976 19u3 5 32,800 3 1934 5 31,700 SUPPLEMENT 3  !

8.1-2 OCTOBER 1983

{

i

= _ - . . _ _ _ - - - _ - _ .

MH 1&2 ER-OL 1

1985 $ 35,200 O 1986 1987 5

5 35,600 12,800 3 1988 5 16,700 TOTAL 5 306,351

, 8.1.3.2 Emplovment, Payrolls, and Other Expenditures At the end of construction, the Nuclear Division staff located on i the Marble Hill site will be composed of an estimated 973 i employees, including 467 plant operations personnel and 506 3

! Nuclear Division technical support personnel. The estimated Nuclear Division staff annual payroll for the first year of r

operation of both units (1988) is approximately $39.7 million in 1988 dollars. In addition to the Nuclear Division staff, it is l3 estimated that 160 security personnel will be employed on the site in 1988, and that their annual payroll will total $4,123,200 3 in 1988 dollars. The expected operational staffing for each year from 1983 through 1988 is shown in ER-OL Table 8.1-3A. The local impact generated by the Nucledr Division staff in terms of induced employment is given in ER-OL Table 8.1-4. This table does not include any impact from security force personnel, because the security force is expected to be drawn primarily from the existing local population.

From the experience of Public Service Indiana with a 2500 MW

() coal-fired generating station in southwestern Indiana, annual local expenditures can be expected to average approximately

$7 million to 58 million (1986 dollars).

, Since the procurement of materials and services is based on a competitive bid system, it is difficult to accurately predict 3

which suppliers will provide the needs of the station.

Therefore, the local expenditures estimated above are contingent

! upon the following assumptions:

, a. Approximately 20% of all expenditures are made locally, and " local" is defined as within the state i of Indiana.

l b. Expenditures for fuel and employee salaries are not

included.

v s

4 l SUPPLEMENT 3 8.1-3 OCTOBER 1983 t

h

MH 1&2 ER-OL . l

\

i

()_ TABLE 8.1-1 BENEFITS FROM THE MARBLE HILL NUCLEAR 4

GENERATING STATION - UNITS 1& 2 l DIRECT BENEFITS QUANTIFICATION l Expected. average annual 12,868 generation in kilowatt-hours (millions) 4 Capacity in killowatts (millions) 2.26 Proportional distribution of 1

electrical energy (Expected annual delivery in million kilowatt-hours):

, Industrial 4,568 i Residential 3,693 Commercial 2,638 Other 1,969 Revenues from delivered benefits:

() (1986 dollars)

Electrical energy generated $ 11,250.503 (millions)

INDIRECT BENEFITS QUALIFICATION Taxes (local, state, and federal)a Property Tax $ 60,300,000

, State Income Tax 96,180,000 3 Federal Income Tax 548,395,000 b I

k "

All numbers represent expenditures over the life of tae plant stated in terms of 1986 dollars, discounted at 13%.

.l3 i

() D Not reduced by investment credit.

SUPPLEMENT 3 8.1-4 OCTOBER 1983

.. . . , , . _ _ ._ , - .m. _ , , . , _ . , , , , . _ , , . . g #., , .,_.,~_,._n.,.. . . . . _ , - , . . . _ . , . . . , ,

O O O l

TABLE 8.1-3 l

ESTIMATED MARBLE IIILL STATION ANNUAL PROPERTY TAXES ESTIMATED PROPERTY TAXES TAXING UNIT (in thousands) 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 Saluda Township State Forestry $ 12 $ 14 $ 19 $ 36 S 35 $ 46 $ 44 State Fair 7 8 10 20 19 24 23 Total State Tax $ 19 $ 22 $ 29 $ 56 S 54 S 70 $ 67 County General $ 420 $ 467 517 557 631 693 739 $

" County Welfare 77 86 95 103 115 127 136

. County Health 34 38 42 45 52 57 60 $

y' rumulative Bridge 120 134 148 159 180 198 212 h) m slection and Registration: 34 38 42 45 52 57 60 m Mental Health 34 38 42 45 52 57 60 y o

Total County Tax $ 719 $ 801 S 886 $ 954 S1082 $1189 $1267 M i Township Tax $ 8 $ 9 $ 10 $ 12 $ 13 $ 14 S 15 Township Poor 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 Library 81 89 98 111 119 131 146 Library Bond 5 6 7 7 8 8 9 l School General 968 1063 1169 1321 1420 1565 1750 l Debt Service 941 1031 1136 1284 1380 1520 1700 Cumulative Building 302 330 364 412 442 487 545 Og Transportation 202 '221, 244 275 296 326 365 l

8 *o N f Om Total Township, School, EE. Library Tax $2509 $2749 $3030 $3424 $3681 $4054 $4533 Total Saluda Township

[g Tax S3247 $3572 $3945 $4434 $4817 $5313 $5867 m

WW W

l l

i j MH 1&2 ER-OL '

i I

TABLE 8.1-3A EXPECTED OPERATIONAL STAFFING FROM 1983 THROUGH 1988 j MONTH / YEAR

PERSONNEL 12/83 6/84 6/85 6/86 6/87 6/88 Operations 259 387 458 492 505 467 i

j Techni .:a1 Support 744 733 708 662 578 506

,i 3

Security 40 40 55 160 160 160.

! TOTAL 1043 1160 1221 1314 1243 1133 I

s

+

l O s

1 j

1 i

i 1

i r

l i

i 4

i 4

1 O

SUPPLEMENT 3 8.1-6a OCTOBER 1983

i i

l l

MH 1&2 ER-OL TABLE 8.1-4 NON-MANUFACTURING EMPLOYMENT CHANGES TO SERVE 973 NEW INDUSTRIAL WORKERS AND THEIR FAMILIES Wholesale and Retail Trade 204 j Construction 29 Professional and Related Services 165 Transportation, Communication and Other 3

Public Utilities 107 Business and Personal Services 49 Finance, Insurance & Real Estate 58 Industry, not reported 49 Total, All Non-Manufacuturing Business 661

O I

I a=*

f e

U.S. Chamber of Commerce (1973, p. 5).

j Source: ,

SUPPLEMENT 3 8.1-7 OCTOBER 1983 l

MH 1&2 ER-OL

(} 8.2 COSTS The presented costs are based on commercial operation of Unit 1 in 1986 and Unit 2 in 1988.

8.2.1 Internal Costs The current facility construction cost for Marble Hill 1&2 is estimated to be 55,134,000,000. The 1986 future worth of the 960 3 acres purchased for the site is $3,535,072. The 98.1 miles of transmission right-of-way to be acquired has an estimated 1986 future worth of 59,765,500. The land acquired for substations has an estimated 1986 future worth of $1,255,237. Thus, the total 1986 future worth of the land acquired for Marble Hill 1&2 and associated transmission lines and substations is $14,555,809.

The 1986 present worth, using a 13.0% discount rate, of a 30-year plant life fuel supply for the two-unit station is estimated to 3 be 51,601,000,000. This value includes an estimated $126,000,000 30-year present worth cost for spent fuel disposal.

The 1986 present worth, using a 13.0% discount rate, for 30-year plant life operation and maintenance costs is estimated to be 3 5951,805,000. This estimate includes all labor and material costs.

Marble Hill 1&2 will require the construction of new transmission Os lines that will have a 1986 future worth of $54,831,000. The 3 substations constructed will have a 1986 future worth of 547,804,000.

The real estate and personal property taxes for Marble Hill 1&2 are estimated to be approximately 5400 million, as discussed in 3 ER-OL Subsection 8.1.3.1. Expressed as 1986 present worth, using a 13.0% discount rate, real estate and personal property taxes 3

are estimated to be 560.3 million over the station's life.

Income taxes to be paid over the life of the station are estimated to have a 1986 present worth of 5644.6 million, 3 including 5548.4 million in federal income taxes before ITC, and 596.2 million in state income taxes (see ER-OL Subsection 8.1.3.1).

A discussion of decommissioning costs appears in Section 5.8 of this report.

O SUPPLEMENT 3 8.2-1 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL TABLE 11.0-1

{

SUMMARY

COST-BENEFIT ANALYSIS FOR MARBLE HILL 1&2

PRESENT MARBLE NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONDITIONS AND HILL SITE WITH TWO MECHANICAL CHARACTERISTICS ENVIRONMENT DRAFT COOLING TOWERS Energy produced 12,868 million kWh/ year (see ER-OL Section 8.1).

Total anticipated 55.134 billion a (see l3 capital investment ER-OL Section 8.2).

+ Operating costs $951.8 milliona (see l3 ER-OL Section 8.2).

i 2

Fuel costs $1.601 billion a over l3 30-year period (see ER-OL Section 8.2).

Economy of the Resource-based Annual permanent employ-Marble Hill site economy especially ee payroll for 973 em-region oriented toward ployees: 539.7 3

. agriculture millionb (see ER-OL Section 8.1).

( Local property. taxes on sta-tion over 30-year period:

560.3 milliona (see ER-OL l3 Section 8.1).

Income taxes (state and federal) over 30-year i

period: 5644.6 million a l3 1

(see ER-OL Section 8.1).

r eonomy of the Extremely diverse Total-revenue produced i Public Service economy, indus- over 30-year period Company of trialized in popu- under present rate Indiana ser- lation centers and schedules: $11,250.503 vich area primarily agricul- miliona (see ER-OL tural in nonmetro- Section 8.1).

politan areas.

Physical and Lands: The pre- Approximately 960 acres i chemical sent land use in have been acquired for the area is pri- use by the proposed sta-arily agricul- tion (see ER-OL Sec-tural with corn, tion 2.2). The actual soybeans, and to- station structures bacco being the (including roads, park-principal crops. ing, and areas covered

(-))

(_ with crushed stone)

' SUPPLEMENT 3 11.0-2, OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL 1

{} TABLE 11.0-1 (Cont'd)

PRESENT MARBLE NUCLEAR POWER STATION CONDITIONS AND HILL SITE WITH TWO MECHANICAL CHARACTERISTICS ENVIRONMENT DRAFT COOLING TOWERS

, objective requirements

.i of 10 CFR 50, Appendix I (see ER-OL Section 5.2).

Temperature of the Thermal discharge to the Ohio River at Lou- river is expected to be

! isville, Kentucky, negligible. The maximum ranges from 320 to temperature increase to l 870 F (see ER-OL the river-is in compliance ,'

1 Section 2.4). with thermal mixing zone regulations. Under aver-i age blowdown and river

! conditions and 68.8%

i capacity factor, the maxi-

mum area of the 30 F tem- l3 perature rise isotherm 4 is 0.009 acre (see ER-OL Section 5.1). l3 f Chemical and phy- Chemical discharge into

sical parameters the Ohio River de to i measured indicate station operation is not a degree of pollu- considered significant.

tion in the Ohio Chemicals that could

! River; however, appear in cooling tower values are usually blowdown include the within the range breakdown products of of water quality sulfuric acid, sodium

standards for the hypochlorite, and sodium state of Indiana hydroxide (see ER-OL Sec-(see ER-OL Sec- tion 3.6).

j tion 2.2).

No groundwater contamina-tion is expected during normal operation of the j station, since there will be no radionuclides re-

} leased into any ground-water supply and no on-

! site interface between liquid materials and soil.

No contamination of

, domestic water wells in' the Marble Hill. site vicinity is expected

during normal station operation (see ER-OL SUPPLEMENT 3 11.0-4 OCTOBER 1983 I

i l

I

! MH 1&2 ER-OL' '

i 1

() Fritsche, L., 1981, Continental Telephone, Madison, Indiana, Telephone conversation of October 8 with G. A. Sinders, Engineer, l Public Service Company of Indiana, Inc., New Washington,. Indiana.

F l Fuller, C., 1981, Indiana Department of Public Instruction, Telephone conversation of November 23 with S. A. Hallaron, Cultural Resource Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

Grady, C., 1982, Division of Water Resources, Indianapolis, j Indiana, Telephon'e conversation of July 14 with S. A. Hallaron, Cultural Resource Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

Hanover College, Administrative Office, Hanover, Indiana, 1981, Telephone conversation of October 14 with S. A. Hallaron, Cultural Resource Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

Howell, D., 1983, District Conservationist, U.S. Department of i~ Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Madison, Indiana, map and table sent on June 30 to S. A. Hallaron, Cultural Resource 3 1

Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

! Indiana Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, 1981, " Indiana Crop and Livestock Statistics: Annual Crop and Livestock Summary, 1980," No. A B1-1, U.S. Department of Agriculture and Purdue

! University, West Lafayette, Indiana.

! Indiana State Chamber of Commerce, 1981, " Indiana Industrial

{ Directory," Twinsburg, Ohio.

1 j Indiana State Highway Commission, 1978, " Indiana Traffic Map,"

l Division of Planning, Indianapolis, Indiana.

) Jester, A., 1982, Indiana Department of Transportation, Division j of Planning, Indianapolis, Indiana! Telephone conversation of 4

July 13 with S. A. Hallaron, Cultural Resource Analyst, Sargent &

{ Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

i Kentucky Crop and Livestock Reporting Service,-1981, " Kentucky j Agricultural Statistics: 1980-1981," U.S. Department of

Agriculture and Kentucky Department of Agriculture, Louisville, Kentucky.

1

Kentucky Department of Commerce, 1981, " Directory of ~

Manufacturers," Frankfort, Kentucky.

Kentucky Department of Transportation, 1979, " Kentucky Traffic

Flow Map," Office of Transportation Planning, Frankfort, i

Kentucky.

I Lemm, M., 1983, Clifty Convalescent. Center, Madison, Indiana, telephone conversation of March 18 with S. A. Hallaron, Cultural Resource Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

O SUPPLEMENT 3 ,

4 '13.0-2 OCTOBER 1983 l 4

i

-- . - , -,,,,,..._-n_, _ , - - - . , , - - . _ . _ . , _ . - , _ . _ _ _ ,. ,.-n . , , . , ,___ - _ ,.-,, ,_. _

i i MH 1&2 ER-OL i

i Lester, M., 1983, The Children's House, Madison, Indiana, telephone conversation of March 21 with S. A. Hallaron, Cultural

. Resource Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

(

i I

i i ,

1

)

1 ,

i, 4

)

i O

i i

i

• i j

i i

i i

A l l 2 -

i i

O i

SUPPLEMENT 3 13.0-2a OCTOBER ~l983 l

-e n-. - -- - - * ,,.,-,r- , nn- -o,--, ,,w ,,wr- -a,+, w -,,-r- ,,w,,,,m- ,,_,-------m---v,-,e.,,,en a.g-r,,.,,,-.n.-,-, r,,v--~,.e.v;,, ,,,

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() CHAPTER 7.0 SECTION 7.1 CONAES, 1979, " Energy in Transition 1985-2010," Final Report of the Committee on Nuclear and Alternative Energy Systems (CONAES),

i National Research Council.

Martin, M. J., Ed., 1976, " Nuclear Decay Data for Selected 1

Radionuclides," ORNL-5114.

Ritchie, L.T., Johnson, J.D., and Blond, R.M., 1982, "CRAC2 -

Calculation of Reactor Accident Consequences, Version 2,"

Sand 81-944 (NUREG/CR-2326).

Soldat, J. K., Robinson, M. N., and Baker, D. A., 1974, "Models and Computer Codes for Evaluating Environmental Radiation Doses,.7 3 BNWL-1745, February.

U.S. Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, 1974, " Cancer Rates and Rises," (NIH)76-691.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1975, " Reactor Safety Study -

An Assessment of Accident Risk in U.S. Commercial Nuclear Power Plants," WASH-1400 (NUREG-75/014).

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1976, Regulatory Guide 1.109.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1977, Regulatory Guide 1.109,

" Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of a Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I," Revision 1, October. 3 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1978, " Liquid Pathway Generic Study," NUREG-0440, February.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1982, " Final Environmental Statement Related to Operation of Byron Station, Units 1&2,"

NUREG-0848.

1 i

a

+

O i

SUPPLEMENT 3 13.0-24 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL QUESTION 240.2

{

Calculate the radiological consequences of a liquid pathway release f rom a postulated core melt accident. The analysis should assume, unless otherwise justified, that there has been a penetration of the reactor basemat by the molten core mass, and that a substantial portion of radioactively contaminated sump water was released to the ground. Doses should be compared to those calculated for the Liquid Pathway Generic Study (NUREG-0440, 1978) land-based river site. Provide a summary of your analysis procedures and the values of parameters used (such as permeabilities, gradients, populations af fected , water use) .

3

RESPONSE

Calculations were performed to determine an upper bound for the potential radiological consequences of a hypothetical release of radionuclides to the groundwater underlying the Marble Hill site following a postulated core melt accident. These upper bound results were then compared with the concentration limits given in Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20 (10 CFR 20), and with the generic results reported in NUREG-0440, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Liquid Pathway Generic Study (USNRC 1978). The upper bound results obtained for Marble Hill 1&2 O- are similar to or less than the 10 CFR 20 concentrations and the NUREG-0440 results. A more realistic assessment would be expected to give lower results, but because of the radiological insignificance of the results reported here, further studies would be unwarranted. 3 The principal source term assumption used in this assessment was that the entire inventory of reactor core fission products is released from the core, goes into solution within the containment, and is resident in the containment sump. Contamination of the groundwater then occurs if the containment building basemat is breached and radionuclides in the sump water percolate into the geologic strata beneath the station. This material is then transported with the groundwater to nearby wells and to the Ohio River.

The water well nearest to Marble Hill 1&2 is located on the site, near the river pumphouse. Water from this well is used by the station and is not available to the general public. In the event of an accident that could produce groundwater contamination, water from this well could be l monitored and, if necessary, interdicted to prevent station i personnel exposure.

() SUPPLEMENT 3 0240.2-1 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() To determine the concentration of radionuclides that would eventually make their way into the Ohio River, it was assumed that the entire containment sump water inventory of 553,000 gallons migrates into the Brassfield and Saluda formations beneath the station. Using conservative, simplifying assumptions, the minimum travel time from the i point of release to the exposed bluf f line of the formation was calculated to be 320 years. Subsequent travel through the bluff coalluvium and the Ohio River alluvium takes approximately 40 days. Upon reaching the river, mixing of the ground and river waters occurs that reduces the decayed radionuclide concentrations by a factor of 110,000. This dilution factor is based on the 7-day , 10-year low-flow condition for the Ohio River, 14,200 cfs. The permeabilities and gradients used in the analysis are shown in Table 0240.2-1.

Because of the length of time required for radionuclides to migrate from the release point to the Ohio River, only three isotopes could present signiYicant radiological hazards to people using contaminated river water: Sr-90, I-129, and Cs-137. Initial sump, decayed, and river water concentrations for these radionuclides are shown in Table 0240.2-2. The radioactivity of all other isotopes in the sump water would decay to insignificant levels during the 3 320-year travel time.

O An estimate of the radiological impact that these three nuclides would have on the population living within 50 miles of Marble Hill 1&2 can be made by assuming that the current Ohio River usage is representative of what might be expected following an accident release. For this analysis five potential exposure pathways were examined: drinking water ingestion, fish ingestion, shoreline recreation, swimming, and boating. Current Ohio River usage factors for these modes of exposure are given in Table Q240.2-3 for the population living within 50 miles downriver from Marble Hill 1&2.

Population doses for the five exposure pathways were calculated using the methodology of Soldat et al. (1974).

Here, instead of using the time-dependent release model described in the Liquid Pathway Generic Study (LPGS). (USNRC 1978), it was conservatively assumed that all three radionuclides are released to the Ohio River af ter the minimum travel time of 320 years and that the release rate to the river is constant for an average exposure time of 50 years. Parameters used in the pathways dose calculations are summari=ed in Table 0240.2-4, estimated population doses are given in Table 0240.2-5.

(')-

SUPPLEMENT 3 0240.2-2 OCTOBER 1983

1 J

J I MH l&2 ER-OL

() Population doses calculated in the LPGS are reproduced in Table Q240.2-6. These doses are for a postulated core melt accident that occurs at a land-based nuclear plant (LBP) located on a small river site. While it is not possible to make meaningful comparisons of the individual pathways doses calculated in the LPGS with those determined for Marble Hill because of differences in radionuclide release, transport,

! and consumption assumptions, it can be seen that the total population doses estimated for Marble Hill 1&2 are factors of two to three lower than those calculated in the LPGS.

Thus, it can be concluded that the radiological consequences from a core melt accident at Marble Hill 1&2 would be no worse than those predicted in the LPGS. In addition, since the time requried for radionuclides to reach the Ohio River is so great at Marble Hill, interdictive engineering measures could be implemented that would effectively 3 preclude any contamination of the river waters. There would also be time to prevent contamination of any of fsite wells that could be affected.

This response has been incorporated in a new subsection of the ER-OL, Subsection 7.1.3 1

REFERENCES

() Soldat, J. K., Robinson, M. N., and Baker, D. A., 1974, "Models and Computer Codes for Evaluating Environmental Radiation Doses," BNWL-1745, February.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1977, Regulatory Guide 1.109, " Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix I," Revision 1, October.

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1978, " Liquid Pathway Generic Study," NUREG-0440, February.

1 O SUPPLEMENT 3 0240.2-3 OCTOBER 1983 l

MH 1&2 ER-OL O raatt 0240-2.1 GEOLOGIC PARAMETERS USED IN THE GROUNDWATER ANALYSIS GEOLOGIC HYDRAULIC FORMATION PERMEABILITY POROSITY GRADIENTd Osgood 0 to 200 ft/yr a 0. 0 3 %c 0.01 ft/ft Brassfield 0 to 1 ft/yr a 0. 01 %c 0.01 ft/ft Saluda 0 to 200 ft/yr a 0.02%C 0.01 ft/ft Co alluvium 300 ft/ dayD 20t b 1.19 ft/ft Alluvium 1,093 ft/ dayb 25% D 1.50 ft/ mile O

aDerived from direc t interpretation of water pressure testing conduc ted below the shale marker bed on the Marble Hill site.

b Derived from in situ measurements performed on the Marble  !

Hill site. {

I cDerived from geophysical logging performed within selected borings drilled at loc ations around the Marble Hill site.

d Derived from the variation in potentiometric water surface levels recorded within piezometers bounding the Marble Hill site.

b SUPPLEMENT 3 0240.2-4 OCTOBER 1983

O O O TABLE O243.2-2 POSTACCIDENT RADIONUCLIDE CONCENTRATIONS IN WATER IIALP LIFE INVENTORYa LEACII WATER CONCENTRATION (Ci/ liter) 10 CFR 20 NUCLIDE (YEAR) (Ci) FRACTION b SUMPc DECAYED d RIVER" DRINKING I LIMITS 9 Sr-90 2.86+01 6.84+06 0.11 3.59-01 1.54-04 1.40-09 2.80-10 3x 10-10 I-129' l.57+07 3.33+00 1.00 1.59-06 1.59-06 1.45-11 1.16-11 6 x 10-11 Cs-137 3.02+01 9.71+06 1.00 4.64+00 2.98-03 2.71-08 2.44-08 2x 10-8

$ Note: 2.86+01 = 2.86 x 101 [

• w f a Initial core activity at shutdown.

N m

w 5 b Fraction of activity that leaches from core debris into sump water (USNRC 1978, Table b A-8 of NUREG-0440). "

cLeached activity diluted in sump water volume of 553,000 gallons.

d Sump water activity decayed for 320 years while traveling with groundwater.

" Mixing of ground and Ohio River water produces an additional factor of 110,000 d i lia t ion .

fIncludes the effects of routine treatment of drinking water as given in NUREG-0440 (USNRC

~

.$$ 1978). In the trectment process the conc;..crations of strontium, iodine, and cesium are

@@ reduced by factors of 0.2, 0.8, and 9.0, respectively (Table C-1 of NUREG-0440).

me

$$ 9 F rom Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 20, Appendix B,, Table II, gE column 2.  ;

ww w

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() TABLE Q240.2-3 OHIO RIVER USE FACTORS FOR THE AREA WITHIN 50 MILES DOWNSTREAM OF MARBLE HILL 1 & 2 PATHWAY USE FACTOR Drinking Water a 937,710 liter / day Edible Game Fishb 9,376 lb/ year Shoreline RecreatiorC 5,271 user-hr/ day Swimming c 1 ,054 user-hr/ day Boating e 843 user-hr/ day For an assumed censumption of 2 liters per day by the 441,320 residential users supplied by the Louisville Water Company and the 27,535 usern supplied by the Indiana Cities Water Company.

b Fish harvest data were calculated by using the pounds per acre recults of creel surveys for the Cannelton Pool and McAlpine Tailwaters within 50 miles downstream of Marble Hill and by assuming an average of three pool creel censuses as an appropriate harvest statistic for the portion of the McAlpine Pool within the 50 mile reach.

cEstimates for shoreline recreation, swimming, and boating are based on the total water surface area of 10,541 acres for the McAlpine Tailwaters and the McAlpine and Cannelton pools within 50 miles and average . use factors from NUREG-0440 (USNRC 1978), i.e., 0.50 user-hr/ acre-day for shoreline recreation, 0.1 user-hr/ acre-day for swimming and l

0.08 user-hr/ acre-day for boating.

l l

SUPPLEMENT 3 i 0240.2-6 OCTOBER 1983

. , - - ~,,

~. ,

. _ - _ . _ . . _ . _ _ _ - _ _ - - _ .-__m._ . __. __. . . _ - _ . _ . _-

O O O TABLE O240.2-4  ;

CONSTANTS FOR LIQUID PATilWAYS DOSE CALCULATION L

SilORELINE SWIMMING HOATING

-INGESTION DOSE FACTORS (mrem /pCi) FISil NUCLIDE BONE BODY TilYROID GI LLI ([mremfhr1/([

BIOACCUM [pCi/m 1) mrem (pCi/L1) /hrI/([mren/hr1/

(pCi/L1)

Sr-90 7.58-03 1.86-03 0.0 2.19-04 3.0+01 0.0 5.4-10 5.4-10 I-129 2.49-06 6.01-06 6.18-03 3.07-07 1.5+01 7.0-12 2.3-09 2.1-09 Cs-137 7.97-05 7.14-05 0.0 2.11-06 2.0+03 4.2-09 1.0-06 1.0-06  !!

u H C

" E a

e 4

4 r

d O tn Q@ Notes: Ingestion and bioaccumulation factors for Sr-90 and Cs-137 are from Table E-Il of

, Qp Regulatory Guide 1.109; Rev. 1 (USNRC 1977). Shoreline, swimming, boatinq, and to m .I-129 parameters are from BNWL-1754 (Soldat et al. 1974). -

. :o M

-7.58-03 = 7.58 x 10-3 mm.

m

-. _ -- . _ = . . - - . .

1 MH 1&2 ER-OL l

() TABLE Q240.2-5 LIQUID PATHWAYS 50-YEAR EXPOSURE DOSES l POPULATION DOSE (man-rem) l PATHWAY BONE BODY THYROID GI-LLI Drinking Water 9.5+04 5.3+04 1.7+03 2.7+03 Fish Ingestion 9.9+05 8.4+05 2.9+02 2.6+04 Shoreline 2.4+06 2.4+06 2.4+06 2.4+06 j Swimming 5.2+02 5.2+02 5.2+02 5.2+02 Boating 2.0+02 2.0+02 2.0+02 2.2+02 Total 3.5+06 J.3+06 2.4+06 2.4+06 t

) 3 No te: 9.5+04 = 9.5 x 109 SUPPLEMENT 3 0240.2-8 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL TABLE Q240.2-6 EVENT PWR-7 DOSES FROM TABLE 6.2.16 OF NUREG-0440 POPULATION DOSE (man-rem)

PATHWAY BONE BODY THYROID GI-LLI l

Drinking Water 2.0436 5.9+05 4.5+01 1.6+05 to to to 4.1+06 1.1+06 1.1+06 Fish Ingestion 9.1+05 4.4+05 4.5+00 4.7+04 to to to 1.6+06 6.1+05 1.9+05 Shoreline 4.6+06 4.6+06 4.6+06 4.6+06 to to to to 5.5+06 5.5+06 5.5+06 5.5+06 Swimming 3.3+02 3.3+02 3.3+02 3.3+02 to to to to 3.4+02 3.4+02 3.4+02 3.4+02 Total 7.8+06 6.0+06 4.6+06

() to 1.1+07 to 7.2+06 to 5.5+06 4.8+06 to 6.8+06 3

Notes: 2.0+06 = 2.0 x 106 Doses are the prompt source consequence range for an LBP at a small-river site.

O SUPPLEMENT 3 Q240.2-9 OCTOBER 1983

/m O A.

V a

gd; I V

TABLE O291e11-1 (Cont'd)

ER-OL ER-Cp FES-CF (NI'WFC4M19FJ___ _ FNV!RtelMFNI Al; 1ESTIfemV SECTlaws ).9 (C ms 'd)

Rush Substat ten will not be builti The new Rush Substet ton will require however, Gwynneville Subatet toe, whit h 100 acres of eartcoltural landa en will regwire 16 acree of maricultural other substatione will be butit.

Iand, and ta tsabethtown Substation, which will regelre 10 acree of agricut-teral land, wt11 be butit.

SECT 14HI 4.1 ITEM Dt%Ct!b5ED: Slft PREPARAlltNI

• ?*

Q y

Construction activities will ettleate-ty disturb 440 acres of the atte. In-Cometraction aca tuttles will lat-tielly distweb 170 acres of the ette, Construction artivities will intatally disturb about 250 me rca of g

g ciedtag 85 acres of hardwood forest. tecludtas less than 20 acres of the et te (see submers ton 4.1.1).

hardwood forest. P CPt

• tJ W New borrow area will disturb la acree Not Jiscwesed.

H ad j acent to the ette. M l

w y",

Emergency Operatione Factitty Buildtaa Ilot diocessed. O will be bellt of f of the ette. p Average of shoot 4,MM const ruct ten Average of I,100 cometract ion worke,'

weakers and peak work force of shout and peak work force of 2,200. 3 7,800 One sett ttes pond for runof f. Several settttes pande for runof f. One setillas pond f or runof f .

Seattery waste trearment syetes dia- Sanitary waste treatment system will charsee to Little Saluda Creek via the etecharge to chte 5tver at all times.

settline pond der tag stetten constrw-t tom.

Om **'k '*rce schedule en Cometract ten work force schedule on gg C""'""c' Tabte '*".

4. 5-I Table 4.1-1.

dM OM tD td MM N 3:

M Moret Blanko la the FES-Cp and Environnestel Teet tenay columne todIceto ettber ebat the tree was not dire ==e.d er that taparts w re no dif f ent e ra.

.O d . hose predtered to the ER-CF.

CD W 8A

v) (v) Iv)

TABLE O291 ell-1 (Cont'd)

ER-OL FR-CF FFS-rF (mt'atG-on97) , _f NVIR&a4t N1 AI.1F4TiptmY SFrTION 7. t (rone 'J)

Frobability distributtosi f or att iga- loot presented in f.e-cr.

Rion coste f rom a Clane 9 ere tJent on Flavre 7.1-3.

Sr.CTline 7.2 iTf2: DISCUSSED: TRANhPORTAtl0N ArCIDFNTS INVOLVING RADIDACTf VITY fransportation occidents involving font discussed in the IR4P.

radioactivity involve the stoks deo-cribed to sussiary Table S-4 of O C'" S - 3 m

M

@ H W EECTION 7.1 (DR-CP 5ee t ton 7.2)

• N ITEM DISCU55Eur OTHER ACCIDfMT5 H

H M l Liquid and gaseous chemical stored at Liquid themicale stored at tlee  %

g. a the et at ion on Table 7. )-l. stat ion on Table 7.2-1. l W O td BBCTton 8.3 ITEM DISCUSSEDs BFNLFITS Direct and indirect benefits f rom Direct benefits f rom Marble Mill Marble Rail Station tabulated on Station tabulated on Table 8.I-1.

Table 4. 5-1.

Revenues f ree kltowett-hours menerated Revenure f ree h ilowatt-hners senera-on Table 8. t-2 tetet $31,250 elitiese ted on Table 8.1-1s total $1.t 77 in 19M6 dollare, ot tilon in 1945 dettare Life-of-plant property tames at 1986 Li fe-of-pl ant property tanee at 1981 Om "'"***********6' a g $60.3 ottlion "SM 177 250'**"'**"."'**dto6-l3 dT O 'O CD t1 MM

%Z uotes slanks to the FES-CF and Enytrennental Teettmany columns indicate ettber that the ites was not discussed or that topor t s were no dif f ereet f r..

M those predteted in the ER4F.

HZ e8 co WW.

t 6

~) .

0 TABLE O291 ell-1 (Cont'd)-

EA-OL F.R_-CP FES-t PJNUR.F.G-009 7L _ _ INVIRONMENTAL f rSilmsfV SECT 1018 8.8 (Cent 'd)

I f aceae tance eeer life of the stat ten f arene tesee peer life of the station i estimated to be $568.4 ellliest federal eettuated to be lion.0 militea

( and Set.1 elllten state, federal and $123.0 million state.

1 i

I toduced empicyment of appresiastely Indored employment of appresimetely 1 ~ 66 rs: perse. net se the este se 9n assa rst per-nel en the este s.106 3 (detalte on Tables 8.1-3A and 8.3-4). (detalle en Table 8.5-4).

totteated annual payroll for first Val ae met stees an FR-CP.

year of operet ten of both unite to abewt $)9.7 million for FSI employees and

-r._$4.1 million for secority g; oW

,,e,..,

i ITEM DISCUSSEpt COSTS P i H gp I *' M I H facility construction eest la future Facility ecmatreet taa rest to f uture l

P worth 1986 dellare eetteared to be worth 1989 detiers estimated to be M

' ~

l $ 5.134,000,000 $ 1,164.213,000. y W l

l. A Piant life 06M cast e in 1986 present Flaat life OEM roots le 1983 poweent 3 O i

worth dellers eetleated to be worth dellare est seated to be U

$951,805,000 $260,157,926.

1986 future worth of pleet ette land IM) feture worth of plant ette land to $3,335,072. to $2,056,473, 1994 fetere worth of tranenteelee Itse 1903 future worth of trementselee right-of-way le $9,765,500. right-of-way to $7,3 44,740, 1986 feture verth of land required for Not presented in ER-CP.

eubstat tens le $1.255,2 37, meet estate and property taxes Aamust real estate and property tases OC est i,,,, ,, i,, ,3 ,t i i see , i,.. e.,,,ted to se at least $2 .iiiien ,e, H9 pre.e.t .erth, eeer the info ef the ye,ar 3 Om . tat t . i s3 , for e.ch.e,th, resent eait, and eeer $it thelrr,230 life of tu t4 - the .eatis..

MM N lE M met e t smho n the us-Ce end a.e ree e. tai te.ti-y colo.n. s.dicate either that the sie. .ee .et diec sed er that impa, t . .ere n., d i f f e,, e f ,,,.

H *4 these pr dietoe le the fa-Cr.

@d co WW

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

~

l MH 1&2 ER-OL i

I ys )

[^\ OUESTION 310.4 The operating staff for Marble Hill is estimated to be 432 employees (Section 8.1.3.2). Does this figure include security forces and other contractor employees who would regularly be employed at the Marble Hill site? If not, the Applicant should provide data on such employment and its contribution to payroll. Is the dollar figure for annual payroll (S29.6 million) expressed in current dollars or constant dollars? If the latter, which year is used for reference?

RESPONSE

The estimate of 432 (now estimated to be 467) employees !3 given in ER-OL Subsection 8.1.3.2 does not include security forces and other contractor employees who would regularly be employed at the site. It is estimated that in 1988, the first year in which the full complement of operating staff is on site, 160 security personnel will be employed on site and their contribution to the payrcll will be S4,123,200 in 3 current 1988 dollars. The estimate of $29.6 million (now estimated to be S39.7 million) for the annual payroll, not including the security personnel payroll, is also expressed in current 1988 dollars. At this time there is no estimate (s) of other contractor personnel to be regularly employed at the site.

This response has been incorporated in Supplement 3 to ER-OL l3 Subsection 8.1.3.2.

/~

(_); SUPPLEMENT 3 0310.4-1 OCTOBER 1983 l

l

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() OUESTION 310 .6 The applicant should provide a table showing the midyear numbers of operating phase workers at the site. These data should reflect utility employees and contractor personnel (e.g., security guards) who would normally be found on the site, but should exclude intermittent or occasional employees, such as those employed in fuel loading. The applicant should provide these data for a period beginning in 1983 and ending when the complement of operating staff is on site.

RESPONSE

Operational staffing is estimated as follows:

PERSONNEL 12/83 6/84 6/85 6/86 6/87 6/88 Operations 259 387 458 492 505 467 Technical Support 744 733' 708 662 578 506 3 Security 40 40 55 160 160 160

() TOTAL 1043 1160 1221 1314 1243 1133 This response has been incorporated in ER-OL Subsection 8.1.3.2.

p)

( SUPPLEMENT 3 0310.6-1 OCTOBER 1983

! MH 1& 2 ER-OL

() d. The following exhaust air will be released during normal plant operation:

4 Unit 1 stack - 178,637 cfm 3

Unit 2 stack - 170,032 cfm

e. The inside dimensions of both stacks are 13.3 ft by 5.0 ft at the point of exit.

f. The shape of both stacks is rectangular.

g. The ventilation stacks will exhaust air emissions to the outdoors continuously.

h. The containment purge is divided into three systems:

! (1) miniflow purge, (2) normal purge , and (3) post-LOCA purge. These systems serve the containment (1) prior l3 l to startup of the normal purge, (2) during planned reactor shutdown, and (3) during post-LOCA operating conditions, respectively. The airflow rates arc as follows:

Miniflow Purge System - 3,000 cfm l Normal Purge System - 43,900 cfm

! Post-LOCA Purge System - 400 cfm

() Purge flows are mixed with the normal exhaust air flows given in part d. for release.

i 1

e i D\

z~ / - SUPPLEMENT 3 0451.1-2 OCTOBER 1983 i

l.

. . - , - - .e~. , - - . , .w -

e. er , -- 9 --

g

MH 1&2 ER-OL SUPPLEMENT 3 NEC REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND 1

VOLUNTARY REVISIONS This section contains U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission requests for additional information based on B. J.

, Youngblood's letters of September 28, 1983, and September 29, 1983, followed by the response to each question. In some cases the response includes a reference to the applicable updated sections of the text of the ER-OL. Pages Q.0-iv and

- Q.0-v of this section present a Table of Contents listing the subject of each question and response.

In addition, Supplement 3 includes voluntary revisions to the following portions of the ER-OL:

Subsection 2.1.2.1 Population Within 12 Miles of Marble Hill 1&2 Subsection 2.1.2.3 Construction Workforce Tables 2.1-4A and Population Within 12 Miles of

{s/} 2.1-4B Marble Hill 1&2 Table 2.1-20 Nearest Site Boundary, Residence, Milk Cow, Milk Goat, Meat Animal, Garden, Tobacco, Cabbage, and Peach Orchard Subsection 4.1.1.1. Construction Workforce Table 4.1-1 Construction Workforce Subsection 5.2.1.2.2 Name of Nearest Downstream Potable Water Intake Subsection 6.1.3.1 Dates of Onsite Meteorological Monitoring Subsection 7.1.3 Consequences of Liquid Pathway Releases from a Postulated Core Melt Accident SUPPLEMENT 3 0.0-i OCTOBER 1983

i s,

MH 1&2 ER-OL SUPPLEME,NT 3 fs VOLUNTARY REVISIONS (Cont'd) l Subsection 8.1.3.1 Tax Revenues During Operation Subsection 8.1.3.2 Operational Staffing and Payrolls Subsection 8.2.1 Internal Costs Table 8.1-1 Indirect Benefits from Marble Hill 1&2 I Table 8.1-3 Estimated Annual Property

Taxes Table 8.1-3A Operational Staffing Table 8.1-4 Induced Employment Changes Table 11.0-1 Total Anticipated Capital ,

Investment /Cperating Costs /

Fuel Costs / Tax?s/ Operational Staffing and Payroll /

Correction of Typographic

() Error Concerning Thermal Discharge Plume Q240.2 Postulated Core Melt Accident - Liquid Pathway

]

Release i 0291.11 Construction Workforce/

Taxes / Operational.Staffiny and Payroll / Induced Employment Changes / Facility Construction Cost / Operating Costs Q310.4 Security Force and Contractor Employees 0310.6 Numbers of-Operating Phase Workers

] 0451.1 Gaseous Effluent Release:

Parameters a

SUPPLEMENT 3 1

O' O.0-ii OCTOBER 1983

-, , - s--r_m, ,- , e -

n - -

e -

g-v- *- v

, - . . . . .~ . . .-~.. -.... ...-- _. --. - - . .. . .=. _-.-. . _ ~ . - . - ..-~.~...-.~ - . -

i MH 1&2 ER-OL f

4 l SUPPLEMENT 3 i

VOLUNTARY REVISIONS (Cont'd) lO 6

., i i These revisions, along with related changes to the i i tables of contents, have been incorporated into the l I, report as changeout pages or entirely new pages.  !

i i

4 l

1 1

}

t

)

I 4

i

{

i ,

I i

4 1

O.

1 2 .

1 ,

1  :

i 1 i~

l i

I I

+

(

1 I 2 SUPPLEMENT 3 0.0-iii OCTOBER'1983 k

4 4 owe- +a r-ewv.---,-+ -.-- +- meem e- g-- e-upmm e.- -.wt ..-,wwm-p4.e , w g g .s --.3-@ + +f myt-W g .g9gg g-um--ymmer d y v g gy gg$9 gryg y- p- g pium,rMy tv grg g qqy M-M -gy.g yyy,Mgqq 9 y rg gg=e yg g p.yg ve-ys p p ' Qeg

MH 162 ER-OL

() TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR SUPPLEMENT 3 OUESTIONS TOPICS 290.9 Prime Farmland 290.10 Construction of Emergency Operations Facility 290.11 Drift From Essential Service Water Cooling Towers 290.12 Request for Map of Cover Types 290.13 Labeling of ER-OL Figure 2.2-76 290.14 Request for Survey of l

Endangered and Rare Plants j 291.16 Request for Fishery Creel Survey Report

< 291.17 Freshwater Sponge Occurrence and Biofouling 291.18 Freshwater Mussel Occurence and Status 311.6 Toxic Chemical Shipment on the Ohio River 320.1 Production. Cost Analysis .

320.2 Fuel, Operation, and Maintenance Costs 450.2 Region Considered in Accident Analysis 451.3 Use of Site-Specific Evacuation Parameters in Accident Analysis 451.4 Medical Treatment Assumed in Accident Analysis SUPPLEMENT 3 i Q.0-iv OCTOBER 1983  !

l

t MH 1&2 ER-OL QUESTIONS TOPICS l 451.5 Societal Consequences of Accidents 451.6 Additional Accident Consequence Information i

451.7 Population Clusters Around the Marble Hill Site 451.8 Heading of ER-OL Table 2.1-3 i

451.9 Use of Site-Specific Evacuation Parameters in Accident Analysis l

470.7 Request for Input Parameters Used in Radiological Assessment l

j t

O

.i a

i s

e

]

i i

O SUPPLEMENT 3 0.0-v' OCTOBER 1983 i

, . _ -.4 .. - ~, . , . - . . . . .%, , . , _.. 4.-.. .v,- . . - , , ,

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() QUESTION 290.9 Provide a map similar to ER-CP Figure 2.2-7A showing soil type classified as " prime farmland" by the U . S. Soil

! Conservation Service. Indicate the number of hectares (acres) of prime farmland that will be occupied by (1) permanent site facilities and (2) the total number of hectares (acres) of prime f armland onsite.

RESPONSE

Table Q290.9-1 shows the soil types found on the Marble Hill site that are classified by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service as " prime farmland". Figure 0290.9-1 shows the distribution of these soil types on the Marble Hill site.

As can be seen, virtually all permanent station structures

- and facilities are located on land classified as prime t farmland. As noted in ER-OL Section 5.7, these permanent facilitics will occupy approximately 68.8 hectares (170 acres) during the life of the station. Planimeter measurements of the soil type information provided by the Soil Conservation Service indicate that the total area of prime f armland on the site is approximately 131.1 hectares (324 acres).

() This response has been incorporated in ER-OL Subsection 2.1.1.2.

REFERENCE Howell, David, 1983, District Conservationist, U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Madison, Indiana, map and table sent on June 30 to S. A.

Hallaron, Cultural Resource Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

I I

SUPPLEMENT 3 O- 0290.9-1 OCTOBER 1983 l

MH 1&2 ER-OL TABLE O290.9-1 SOIL TYPES ON THE MARBLE HILL SITE CLASSIFIED AS PRIME FARMLAND MAP SYMBOL SOIL NAME L

AvA Avonburg silt loam, O to 2 percent slopes (where drained)

CnB2 Cincinnati silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes , eroded EkA Elkinsville silt loam, O to 2 percent slopes, rarely flooded -

EkB Elkinsville silt loam, 2 to 8 percent slopes, rarely '

flooded Hu Huntington silt loam, occasionally flooded RoA Rossmoyne silt loam,O to 2 percent slopes rob 2 Rossmoyne silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded rya Ryker silt loam, O to 2 percent slopes RyB2 Ryker silt loam, 2 to 6 percent slopes, eroded Source: Howell (1983).

t I

i l

l t

0 SUPPLEMENT 3 0290.9 OCTOBER 1983 i

~ e o--- , -ew--y , ~ r -,,,,-e q ww &

! CnB2' '

Hu RyB2 EkA o

EkB 500' O 500' 1000' i rya i EkA i

['

R] d!fR il 2

RyB2 ( .O q OHIO RIVER

% RyB2 ,

2 1

, I ~ RoA I CnB2 - /

, rob 2

) ..

) rob 2 l_

? ,"r

,pygg j/

RoA RyB2 g %r y g,g CnB2 7-CnB2 CnB2 l

1 i

MARBLE HILL NUCLEAR GENERATING STATION - UNITS 1 & 2

! ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT OPERATING LICENSE STAGE SOURCE: Howell (1983) i FIGURE Q290.9-1

! PRIME FARMLAND S0ILS l

, ON THE MARBLE HILL SITE

O l SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983 l l

J s

I

MH 1&2 ER-OL QUESTION 290.10

[ER-OL Subsection 4.1.1.1] States that construction of Emergency Facility Building will be located of fsite.

Provide the number of hectares (acres) that will be utilized for this facility.

RESPONSE

The Marble Hill Emergency Operations Facility / Joint Public Information Center will be located on a 7.5-hectare (18.6-acre) site. Permanent facilities will eventually occupy approxiraately 2.8 hectares (7 acres).

This response has been incorporated in ER-OL Subsection 4.1.1.1.

O SUPPLEMENT 3 0290.10-1 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL

. QUESTION 290.11 Has the predicted drif t that will result from the Essential Service Water Cooling Towers been added to the predicted drift f rom the cooling tower to determine the maximum drift discussed in Section 5.l'4.3?

. If not, what would be the change in location and amount of drift?

RESPONSE

Drift from the essential service water cooling towers was not included in the drift computations discussed in ER-OL Subsection 5.1.4.3. The discussion there , the data in ER-OL Tablec 5.1-6 through 5.1-9, and ER-OL Figure 5.1-2 all refer to drift from the circulating water cooling towers only.

Although there are two essential service water cooling towers, only one can be operated at any one time. Based on the maximum essential service water flow of 52,000 gpm per tower, a drift rate of 0.02%, and an average total dissolved solids content of 600 mg/ liter, the drift solids emission rate for one-tower operation will be 0.05 lb/ min, or 0.39 g/sec. This is approximately 3.6% of the drif t emission rate from the circulating water cooling towers.

s No detailed modeling analysis has been performed to define the drift deposition field for the essential service water cooling towers. However, the deposition pattern and magnitude can be inferred from the results for the circulating water towers and the relative emission rates.

The maximum deposition rate for solids from the essential service water cooling towers will be approximately 25 kg/ hectare-yr based on the parameters given in the-preceding paragraph. This maximum deposition will occur on the Marble Hill site, at a location immediately northeast of the essential service water cooling towers and approximately 200 meters east of the Unit 1 circulating water cooling tower. Deposition from the circulating water cooling towers at this point will be 150 kg/ hectare-yr, so the essential service water towers will produce a 16.7% increase in deposition.

The point of maximum deposition from the circulating water towers is on the Marble Hill site immediately north of the Unit 1 cooling tower, where the deposition is predicted to average 724 kg/ hectare-yr. At this point, the essential service water cooling towers will increase deposition by approximately 5 kg/ hectare-yr, or 0.7%.

() 0290.11-1 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL O)

\- It should be noted that the maximum essential service water flow of 52,000 gpm is not expected to occur except during an accident. During normal operation the flow is expected to be considerably less, resulting in lower rates of drift solids emission and deposition. However, the maximum possible flow was used in this analysis for conservatism.

In summary, assuming the maximum essential service water flow, the essential service water cooling towers will contribute additional drift deposition equal to 3.6% of that from the circulating water cooling towers. This deposition will produce minor changes in the computed deposition pattern near the towers, but will not cause significant changes in the magnitude or location of the maximum drif t deposition. Changes in of fsite drif t deposition from the values presented in ER-OL Table 5 . 1-6 and Figure 5.1-2 will be insignificant.

n) i s_

0290.11-2 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983 i

4

._ -- . .. - = .. .. .

I MH 1&2 ER-OL b

d QUESTION 290.12

[ER-OL Subsection 2.2.2] States that Figure 6.1-2 identifies cover types. However, Figure 6.1-2 shows flight lines for aerial photographs but does not show cover type. Provide a figure showing cover type.

RESPONSE

ER-OL Figure 6.1-2 is not intended to show cover types, but the study area within which cover types were identified.

ER-OL Figures 2.2-73 and 2.2-74 show the cover types identified in the immediate vicinity of the Marble Hill site before and after construction, respectively. The cover types identified in the entire study area are shown on the

foldout maps found at the back of the Normandeau Associates, Inc. (formerly Texas Instruments), Annual Reports that were provided to the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in response to Question 291.2 (see ER-OL Supplement 1).

O -

b .- ,

c ..

.s - '< >e'

.,y

~,

< , , ~

-~.-

, ,~ r . , .,

N

'? .?'.

o * ... ( ,'

, ~A y*

.- - w x %r ,

~;

• .1,,

c r 7,f.

,p

.f e 7 n

.lA, . r-

l'z s e )'d ,

it ,

it; h rf

>.: f:V 3-

.. '  !. ,, p - .; i

~

SUPPLEMENT 3 Pr 0290.12-1 OCTOBER M983 PC

,.r- - su. </

~ O '. {

l ~ . fl)

+. ) f~ n .,. t^

+

g ,

' r. '

J  ?

g ,.  ?-

.-e> M,'

._ ._ __.- .- .- - . - . . . .- . . . . .. - _ . _.. . = - . __ ... -

4 t

B MH 1&2 ER-OL i

f i QUESTION 290.13  !

l' Provide the numerical values for the x axis (of ER-OL Figure 2. 2-76] .

i l RESPONSE 4

l The x axis of ER-OL . Figure 2.2-76 was already labeled. The 4 y axis has been labeled " Relative Importance of Stress j Causal Agents." Relative importance increases along the y axis.

1 1

4 1

4 I

i a

i i

! ~

! 1 5 s l .

, . . . -.. ..' r

[

- a j s . / e

, o <

= / . y/

4 h-4 r

prA -w ft-- #

, , , , , )

y , / o l, '

.e Y, , f ,

,A,.' ,

,, a s -

.~ ,

Y ' ~'

Q- . , , .

? ,; ,.

t' ,?, -

.,c  ?

, - (. -

e )

, , , ., I l

, j ' ,~ ~ ~ c ne

- t p- s..- *

< g' f ^'

l, - f' ' ' '"T ' n ,

, aY .4 , .

a

~

lis h ', '

,f_ y '#*

, / ', S'JPfLEMENT ~ 3 jf.f,'[40290.13-1 N'  ?-

, , OCTOBER =1983 .i

,4 /, , ~ i . 4; '

-* c r ' ~ a._

, . .  !

/; ,. _,, ,

/- .lb y y J

~

r. r - 7;

/ ., ,. M. p -

> f .. '(l ~

L 7 ,,

g. o

(.

MH 1&2 ER-OL O QUESTION 290.14 Informed that personnel from Indiana State Heritage Program will survey the site for endangered and rare plants. Would like a copy of their report when available.

RESPONSE

Public Service Indiana has been informed by the Indiana State Heritage Program that the survey for endangered and rare plants has not yet been conducted. If the survey is conducted, Public Service Indiana will provide a copy of their report to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission when available.

O o

L)

. SUPPLEMENT 3 0290.14-1 OCTOBER 1983

1 .

MH 1&2 ER-OL

- () OUESTION 291.16 l

Section 2.2.1.3.6.4 of ER-OL Supplement 1 sites a i recreational fishery creel survey by Jackson (1982) of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources. Provide

! a copy of this report.

1

. RESPONSE The pages of the Jackson (1982) report that are referenced

! in ER-OL Subsection 2.2.1.3.6.4 were provided to the U. S.

l Nuclear Regulatory Commission on July 12, 1983.

i d

i 1

i (:)

I 1

i 5

I t

'i l

i t

1 c O SUPPLEMENT 3  :

Q291.16-1 OCTOBER 1983  !

i i

I

l l

MH 1&2 ER-OL

QUESTION 291.17 l l

During the environmental site visit, NRC staff was informed of the potential for biofouling of power plant structures by freshwater sponges. The ER-OL stage includes no information

! on sponges. Provide the following:

(a) A discussion of species occurrence and abundance of freshwater sponges in the Ohio River in the vicinity of Marble Hill.

(b) A discussion of sponge biofouling problems and

control by other Ohio River power plants and industries.

(c) The potential for biofouling problems and a

, statement of control methods to be used at Marble Hill NGS.

RESPONSE

(a) Although the applicant has conducted aquatic ecological monitoring in the vicinity of the Marble Hill site during 1974-1975 and each year since 1977,

() no freshwater sponges have been identified. _The applicant has been unable to locate any source of information on the occurrence of freshwater sponges in the Ohio River. Drs. Frederick W. Harrison (1983) and Ruth E. Williams (1983), two noted authorities on freshwater-sponges, indicated in telephone conversa-tions that they are not aware of any published information pertaining to the distribution of these organisms in the Ohio River.-

Lacking specific information on freshwater sponge occurrence, a literature review was conducted to determine what species may be present in the Ohio

River in the vicinity of the Marble Hill site.

According to Harrison (1974), approximately. 33 species of freshwater sponges are known from North America (see Table Q291.17-1). Based on the general-ecological requirements and distribution information for these species presented by Harrison (1974) and/or.

Penny and Racek (1968), it appears that 12 of these species could occur in the Ohio River near the Marble' Hill site. These species are indicated in Table 0291.17-1, along with pertinent comments on their.

distribution and ecology.

SUPPLEMENT 3 0291.17-l' OCTOBER 1983 k

I -- . -

l MH l&2 ER-OL (b) Contacts with Louisville Water Company (drinking water intakes at River Mile 594.5 and 600.5), Indiana-Kentucky Power Corporation (Clifty Creek Power Plant at River Mile 560.0), and Public Service Indiana's Gallagher Station (at River Mile 610.0) established that none of these facilities have experienced problems with freshwater sponge biofouling. The applicant is not aware of any power plants or industries on the Ohio River that have experienced l

freshwater sponge biofouling or employ any control methods specifically for these organisms.

(c) The potential for freshwater sponges to foul the Marble Hill 1&2 cooling water system is primarily dependent on two factors: (1) the existence of a species in the Ohio River capable of fouling the cooling water system; and (2) the existence of environmental conditions within the cooling water system conducive to sponge growth and reproduction.

As indicated in the response to part (a), information on the distribution of freshwater sponges is quite limited, but there apparently are 12 species that could be present in the Ohio River in the vicinity of Marble Hill 1&2. However, some of these species may O not find conditions within a power plant cooling system conducive to growth and reproduction. For example, Harrison (1974) describes Anheteromeyenia argyrosperma and Heteromeyenia tubisperma as being light-positive forms. Since the inside of cooling water pipes and condensers are normally dark, presumably A. argyrosperum and H. tubisperma will not be found in this environment. Of the remaining 10 possible species, only 1 has been documented as being present in an operating power plant cooling system.

This species is Trochospongilla leidLi, which was-found at the Browns Ferry Plant oE~the Tennessee River in an 18-in. emergency equipment cooling water supply header in .the form of a 1/8-in. toll /4-in. thick mat on the inside pipe wall (Rodgers and Johnson 1983) .

In this case, control was achieved by chlorination.

At this time. a comprehensive biofouling treatment program is being formulated for the Marble Hill 1&2 ultimate heat sink and makeup water. As described ' in the response to Question 291.3 (see ER-OL' Supplement 1), treatment practices being considered include routine. inspection and maintenance, as well as ^

chlorination. It' is expected ~ that these methods will 1

() Q291.17-2 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL O

(/ prevent biofouling by any freshwater sponges that might otherwise be present in the cooling system.

REFERENCES

1. Harrison, F.W., 1983, Chairman, Department of Biology, Western Carolina University, Cullowhee, North Carolina, telephone conversation of October 13, 1983, with J. A. Wilson, Ecologist, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

2. Harrison, F. W., 1974, " Sponges (Porifera:

Spongillidae)" IN: C. W. Hart, Jr. and S. L. H.

Fuller, Eds., Pollution Ecology of Freshwater Invertebrates, Academic Press, N.Y., pp. 29-66.

3. Penny, J. T. and A. A. Racek, 1968, Comprehensive Revision of a Worldwide Collection of Freshwater Sponges (Porifera: Spongillidae), U.S. National Museum Bulletin 272, pp. 1-184.

4. Rodgers, E. B. and J. T. Johnson, 1983, "The Control by Chlorination of Freshwater Sponge Fouling Found in the Vicinity of a Nuclear Power Plant," Symposium on

/~N Condenser Macrofouling Control Technologies - The

\J State-of-the-Art, June 1-3, 1983, Hyannis, Massachusetts.

5. Williams, R. E., 1983, Professor of Biology, University of Wisconsin at Milwaukee, telephone conversation of October 13, 1983, with J. A. Wilson, Ecologist, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

SUPPLEMENT 3 0291.17-3 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL h %d TABLE O291e17-1 FRESHWATER SPONGES OF NORTH AMERICA MAY BE PRESENT IN OH10 RTVEP SPECIES' YES No C M EN*

Anneteromeyenia argyrosperma XL Usually found in open areas exposed to some sunlight (Harrison 1974).

A bicere g X Reported only from Douglas Lake, Michigaa (Harrison 1974).

A rictovensis X Reported from Nova Scotia (Harrison 1974) armi apparently restricted to Eastern Canada ranging south to about New York (Penny and Racek 1969).

A. ryderi X Always absent from polluted waters (Harrison 1974).

Corvomeyenia carolinensie X Reported only from Adams Pond, Columbia. S. Carolina (Harrison 1974).

E everetti X A light positive form found only in waters containing less than 4 ag/l Ca and 3 mg/l My (Harrison 1974).

Desilia palmeri A Apprently restricted to Central America (Penny med Racek 1968).

D a radiospiculata X Ranging from Canadian border south to Mexico (Pennv and Racek 1%81.

g ia3 fluviatilis 1 Cosmopolitan prefers cold-warm temperature regions (Penny and Racek 1968).

E millaii X Known only from Florida (Penny and Racek 1968).

E. muelleri X Widely distributed in northern hemisphere (Penny and Ratek 1%8).

E robusta X Reported from eastern and western United States and Mexico (Penny and Racek 1968).

E subtilis X Reported only from Florida (Harrison 1974).

Eunapius fragilis X Cosmopolitan distribution (Penny and Racek 1968).

E mackay1 X Pestricted to soft acidic waters (Harrison 1974).

Heteromeyenia baileyt X O F timan habitat is pollution free (Harrison 1974).

E letztenta X Found only in Northeastern United States (Penny and Racek 1968).

E longistylis - --

No information available as to distributio or ecology in order to make judgement as wnether this specie 3 may et may not be present in Ohio River.

E tentasperma X Found ccly in Northeastern United States (Penny and Racek 1968).

E tubisperma Xb Relatively light-positive (Harrison 1974).

4 Radiospongilla einerea X May not occur in United States - record believed based on incorrect identification (Harrison 1974).

m. cerebellata X Collected only from Texas (Harrison 1974).

{crateriformis I Reported from various locations in United States

+ tolerant of turbid waters (Harrison 1974).

Spongil b spinosa X Favors acidic conditions (Harrison 1974).

E cenota X- Reported only from Yucatan, Mexico (Penny and Racek 1968).

E heterosclerifa .X Little information available. Reported only frce Oneida Lake, New York (Harrison 1974).

S fohansen! X Little information available. Reported only from Canada (Harrison 1974).

E lacustris X Cosmoplitan, tolerates wide range of environmental conditions (Harrison 1974).

s. sponginosa X Reported only from South Carolina (Harrison 1974).

{ wagners X optimal habitat is slightly brackish to strongly brackish water (Harrison 1974).

Trochospongilla horrida X wide although discontinuous distribution (Penny and Racek 1968). Tolerates high turbidity (Harrison

'1974).

E leidyi X Tolerates high turbidity. Known to attach to inside of

. iron pipes (Harrison 1974).

T pennsylvanica X Apparently widely distributed. Tolerant of silting (Harrison 1974).

aspecies list from Harrison (1974).

l , bunlikely to occur in power plant cooling f acilities (see cessent) .

i  %

L i

! SUPPLEMENT 3-l Q291e17-4 OCTOBER 1933 1

l MH 1&2 ER-OL

() QUESTION 291.18 Provide the following inforntation related to freshwater mussels:

(a) The location of the nearest mussel beds to the Marble Hill site; including upstream and downstream areas of the Ohio River and its tributaries.

(b) The presence of any endangered or threatened mussel species in the site vicinity and within the nearest mussel beds.

(c) The location of the nearest recreational and commercial mussel harvesting in relation to the Marble Hill site; the annual harvests in weight by species.

I

RESPONSE

(a) The most recent published information on the location of mussel beds in the vicinity of the Marble Hill site comes from a survey conducted by Dr. John C. Williams

("% from July 1, 1967, to June 30, 1968 (Williams 1969,

\ Table 14). According to this report, the nearest upstream mussel bed to Marble Hill 1&2 was located at River Mile 566.3 to 567.3 on the Kentucky side of the Ohio River. The nearest downstream bed was located at River Mile 570.8 to 571.3 on the Indiana side. The Marble Hill site is located at approximately River Mile 570.

Dr. Williams recently completed a new survey of mussel beds in the Ohio River, but the results have not been published. However, according to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Siemsen 1983), one of the sponsors of Williams' recent work, the new survey indicates that the nearest upstream mussel bed is at River Mile 549 to 555. The nearest downstream beds are below.

McAlpine Dam, which is at approximately River Mile 607. However, the applicant- recently has collected a few mussels'in approximately the same upstream and downstream locations as the ' nearest beds indicated ~ in Williams' earlier survey.

(b) Information on the mussel species found in particular i beds ~is-not available from either of Williams' SUPPLEMENT 3

[v') 0291.18-1 OCTOBER 1983-

MH 1&2 ER-OL

() survey s. The applicant has tentatively identified one species among the mussels obtained in its upstream and downstream collections: Proptera alata. This species does not appear on the latest federal or state endangered or threatened species lists (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1982; Indiana Department of Natural Resources 1978).

(c) Available information on recreational and commercial mussel harvests in the vicinity of the Marble Hill site was given in the response to Question 470.3 (see ER-OL Supplement 1).

REFERENCES

1. Indiana Department of Natural Resources, 1978, "Non-game and Endangered Species Conservation - A Preliminary Report," Division of Fish and Wildlife Resources, unpaginated.

2. Siemsen, T. S., 1983, Environmental Specialist, U.S.

Army Corps of Engineers, Louisville, Kentucky, telephone conversation of October 12, 1983, with J. A.

Wilson, ecologist, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

() 3. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 1982, " Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants," Reprinted from 40 CFR 17.11 and 17.12, 13 pp.

4. Williams, J. C., 1969, Mussel Fishery Investigations of the Tennessee, Ohio and Green Rivers, Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife Resources, Frankfort, 118 pp.

i i

O

\l SUPPLEMENT 3 0291.18-2 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL QUESTION 311.6 As a result of our recent environmental site visit and subsequent tour of the McAlpine Dam near Louisville, Kentucky, it has come to our attention that toxic materials, such as chlorine and ammonia, are being transported by barge on the Ohio River past the Marble Hill site. Consequently, we will need additional information (e.g. the type, quantity, frequency of shipments, etc.) pertaining to the bulk shipment of these materials on the river (mile 570) near the site. Provide an analysis of the potential impact on the operation of the plant in the event of an accidental release of any hazardous materials exceeding Regulatory Guide 1.78 criteria.

RESPONSE

Marble Hill station is designed, as referenced in Section 6.4 of the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR), to safely shut down in the event of an accidental release of chlorine on the Ohio River. According to the U.S. Coast Guard, which controls shipments of ammonia on the Ohio River, no ammonia gas is shipped upstream or downstream past River Mile 570, the location of the Marble Hill site (Stephenson 1983).

! Available information on the type and quantity of shipments l

of other chemicals on the Ohio River is given in FSAR Table

2. 2-4 B. There is no known source of data on the frequency or exact type of chemical shipments on the Ohio River.

REFERENCE i

Stephensen, David, 1983, Chief, U.S. Coast Guard, Louisville, Kentucky, telephone conversation of September 1 with S. A. Hallaron, Cultural Resource Analyst, Sargent & Lundy, Chicago, Illinois.

) SUPPLEMENT 3 Q311.6-1 OCTOBER 1983 l

l l

l l

i MH l&2 ER-OL

(

I QUESTION 320.1 Provide the following:

A production cost analysis which shows the dif ference in system production costs associated with the availability vs.

unavailability of the proposed nuclear addition. Note, the resulting cost dif ferential should be limited solely to the variable or incremental costs associated with generating electricity from the proposed nuclear addition and the sources of replacement energy. If, in your analysis, other f actors influence the cost dif ferential, explain in detail,

a. The analysis should provide results on an annual basis covering the period from initial operation of the first unit through five full years of operation of the last unit.

b. Where more than one utility shares ownership in the proposed nuclear addition or where the proposed facility is centrally dispatched as part of an interconnected pool, the results of the analysis may be aggregated for all participating systems.

c. The analysis should assume electrical energy requirements grow at (1) the system's latest of ficial Ch/ forecasted growth rate, and (2) zero growth f rom the latest actual annual energy requirement.

d. The analysis should assume two capacity f actors for the nuclear facility (1) 50 percent average annual capacity f actor and (2) applicant's currently anticipated average annual capacity factor.

e. For each year (and for each growth rate scenario) the following results should be clearly stated: (1) system present worth production costs with the proposed nuclear addition available as scheduled; (2) system present worth production costs without the proposed nuclear addition available; (3) the capacity factor assumed for the nuclear addition; and (4) the average fuel cost and variable O&M cost for the nuclear addition. The base year for all costs should be identified.

RESPONSE

The production costs in 1983 dollars with and without Marble  ;

Hill Units 1 and 2 are provided in Tables 0320.1-1 and

() 0320.1-1 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983 1

1

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

1 i

i

{ MH 1&2 ER-OL' r

. Q320.1-2 for the forecast load growth (reflecting an average

. energy growth rate of 2.6% per year) and the no load growth

scenarios. The bases for these estimated costs (i.e.,

2 estimated fuel cost and operating and maintenance cost) are

. given in each table.

i i

4 4

I J.

t 3

i O

e 1

4 a

i i

l I

i i

t 4

r u

. SUPPLEMENT 3 1

-O Q320.1-2 OCTOBER 1983 i

4 I

i

. - . , - _ - ..,,2-.._.- . . _ . , _ _ . _ , , , , , , _,

, _ _.,- ,.. ,_.,_ ,,__ _,. _ ......._.,, _, _ ,g m . , , . , . - , , . ,...:,.,..,,,,

O O O TABLE 0320.1-1 o

PRODUCTION COST ANALYSIS ASSUMING LOAD GROWTH CONFORMING TO APPLICANT'S LOAD FORECAST OF JULY 1983 SYSTEM PRODUCTION COSTS ASSUMED MAXIMUM CAPACITY ASSUMED MAXIMUM CAPACITY (thousands of 1983 dollars) FACTOR OF 50% FACTOR OF 65%

ASSUMED MAXIMUM ASSUMED MAXIMUM PLANT AVERAGE VARIABLE PLANT AVERAGE VARIABLE

, WITHOUT CAPACITY FACTOR CAPACITY FACTOR CAPACITY FUEL COST 0&M COST CAPACITY FUEL COST O&M COST YEAR MARBLE HILL OF 50% OF 65% FACTOR ($/MWh) ($/MWh) FACTOR ($/MWh) ($/MWh) 1986 338,018.2 336,898.2 335,936.1 42 1.3.90 1.24 70 13.90 1.24 1987 334,550.9 325,865.7 315,340.6 51 14.00 1.29 74 14.00 1.29 1988 351.137.7 317,643.4 302,785.5 47 14.34 1.37 65 14.42 1.37 g 1989 349,180.9 300,135.2 282,635.7 51 14.66 1.45 67 14.69 1.45 h 1990 338,306.9 287,200.9 271,122.8 48 14.67 1.55 62 14,68 1.55 7

• 1991 341,252.7 289,554.4 '274,210.6 48 16.67 1.65 62 16.68 1.65 1 1992 339,808.4 284,809.1 268,363.7 49 17.36 1.76 63 17.36 1.76 y

'1993 331,813.1 275,334.4 258,560.3 49 17.98 1.87 63 17.98 1.87 O Notes: System production costs are discounted at 13.5%

Average fuel costs and variable O&M costs are expressed in nominal dollars.

Production cost simulation represents 90% of each Marble Hill unit. 10% of each unit will be used to serve Wabash* Valley Power Association load on the Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) systm gg Based on our interpretation of Question 320.1, no off-system sales by the applicant other than the 12/1/86 through 9/30/87 Marble Hill unit power sale to NIPSCO are assumed in these simulations.

o e 'o o'

M The production cost model used in this analysis requires specification of the unit's annual maintenance

o

@h requirements and forced outage rates rather than capacity factors. As a result, the annual plant capacity ez factors may deviate from the assumed maximum capacity factors of 65% and 50%.

ww 4

O O O TABLE Q320.1-2 PRODUCTION COST ANALYSIS ASSUMING ZERO GROWTII FROM ACTUAL 1982 liOURLY LOAD DATA SYSTEM PRODUCTION COSTS ASSUMED MAXIMUM CAPACITY ASSUMED MAXIMUM CAPACITY (thousands of 1983 dollars) FACTOR OF 50% FACTOR OF 65%

4 ASSUMED MAXIMUM ASSUMED MAXIMUM PLANT AVERAGE VARIABLE PLANT AVERAGE VARIABLE WITHOUT CAPACITY FACTOR CAPACITY FACTOR CAPACITY FUEL COST O&M COST CAPACITY FUEL COST O&M COST YEAR MARBLE HILL OF 50% OF 65% FACTOR ($/MWh) ($/MWh) FACTOR _($/MWh) ($/MWh) 1986 307,861.4 306,887.2 305,848.6 42 13.90 1.24 70 13.90 1.24 1987 305,625.6 288,592.2 278,558.2 50 14.02 1.29 74 14.01 1.29 1988 305,791.0 276,125.4 262,406.9 44 14.32 1.37 61 14.40 1.37 1989 296,623.6 254,505.2 238,978.6 48 14.67 1.45 62 14.70 1.45 @

O 223,693.8 1.55 w 1990 282,924.2 239,023.5 45 14.69 58 14.69 1.55 e w e 1991 278,237.6 235,310.6 221,253.7 45 16.72 1.65 58 16.73 1.65 N f

Y 1992 269,758.7 224,647.6 209,566.2 47 17.40 1.76 61 17.41 1.76 $

A 8 1993 255,319.8 210,645.2 195,532.1 47 18.02 1.87 61 18.04 1.87 @

Notes: System production costs are discounted at 13.5%.

Average fuel costs and variable O&M_ costs are expressed in nominal dollars.

Production cost simulation represents 90% of each Marble Hill unit. 10% of each unit will be used to 8$

R *o serve Wabash Valley Power Association load on the Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) system.

@y Based on our interpretation of Question 320.1, no off-system sales by the applicant other than the 12/1/86 to to through 9/30/87 Marble Hill unit power sale to NIPSCO are assumed in these simulations.

gg

$ The p.:Juction cost model used in this analysis requires specification of the unit's annual maintenance W8 requirements and forced outage rates rather than capacity factors. As a result, the annual plant capacity Ow factors may deviate from the assumed maximum capacity factors of 65% and 50%.

1

MH l&2 ER-OL QUESTION 320.2.

Provide 30 and 40 yr. present worth fuel and O&M costs (for the Nuclear Unit (s)). Provide values for all variables assumed in calculating these costs (Escalation, Discount Rate, etc.).

RESPONSE

The 30-yr and 40-yr present worth fuel costs are estimated to be $1,601,000,000 and $1,745,000,000, respectively.

These fuel costs numbers are for Marble Hill Units 1 and 2 combined, present worth to December 1986. The following is a list of all variables assumed in calculating these fuel Costs.

1. Westinghouse Optimized Fuel Design is used for all batches.

2. 65% capacity factor is used for all cycles.

3. First-in, first-out inventory accounting is used throughout.

4. Allowance for Funds Used During Construction

_ (AFUDC) rates are compounded semiannually on April 1 and October 1 at 12%. All historical AFUDC rates are used appropriately.

5. Lease charges are assumed to be at the same rate as AFUDC.

6. Prices and escalation:

Uranium: Union Oil prices are escalated through 1995 using the contract formula with Data Resources, Inc. (DRI) projected indices through 1995, and at 7% annually thereaf ter. Union Carbide prices are escalated to 1988 and 1989 using 90-day commercial paper rates projected by DRI plus one-half percent as required by the contract. ,

Conversion: Price escalation with the current contract formula using projected DRI indices through 1995, and 6% annually thereaf ter.

Fabrication: Price escalation with the current contract formula using projected DRI indices

() 0320'.2-1 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983

i MH-l&2 ER-OL J

through 1995, and 6% annually thereaf ter.

Enrichment: Price escalation at 6% annually.

DRI indices and rates referenced above were taken from their 1983 third quarter forecast.

7. Spent fuel disposal costs are assumed to be 1 mill /kWh (in 1985 dollars) escalated at 3%

annually, thereaf ter.

8. Union Oil standby payments:

AFUDC is calculated through 12-31-90 on all standby payments. The total standby payment cost (payments plus AFUDC) is then written of f over 6 years (1991-1996) at 12%. Standby payments were assumed to be made through 7-1-89.

9. Plant thermal efficiency is 0.3313 (1130MWe divided by 3411MWt) .

10. In-pile carrying cost rate is 20.70%.

11. Present worth interest rate is 13.0% (used for levelized cost calculation).

(~ }

The 30-yr and 40-yr present worth operation and Maintenance (O&M) costs are estimated to be $951,805,000 and

$1,028,909,000 respectively. These OEM costs are for Marble 4 Hill Units 1 and 2 combined, present worth to December -

1986. The following is a list of all variables assumed in calculating these O&M costs.

1. Escalation rates are as follows:

1983-through 1985 -

5.0%

1986 through 1987 -

6.0%

1988 through 1992 -

6.5%

1993 through 2000 -

6.0%

2001 -

5.5%-

2. Discount rate is 13.0%

4 4

() Q320.2-2 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL OUESTION 450.2 Site-specific applications of either the CRAC or CRAC2 codes generally require input of site-specific population data out to 500 miles from the site to assure that both early and latent accident consequences are adequately considered. It is stated in item b on page 7.1-3 of the ER-OL that site-specific population distribution for the year 2030 within only the 50-mile region and a non-site-specific uniform population density of 78 persons per square mile outside the 50-mile region were used in your analysis. Please provide justification for your assumption regarding the population distribution for the region beyond 50 miles.

RESPONSE

Population data for the region between 50 and 500 miles from Marble Hill 1&2 are not readily available, and a number of simplifying assumptions would have to be made in order to generate such data. Because this region comprises such a large part of the continental United States, it was considered that using an average population density would not represent a significant inaccuracy. The average number used for the Marble Hill analysis (78 persons per square mile) is given in the CRAC2 User's Guide as the average O- population density of the United States.

4 4

l l

O 0450.2-1 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER-1983

1 i

MH 1&2 ER-OL QUESTION 451.3 Please provide justification for not using site-specific estimates of the delay time before evacuation and ef fective evacuation speed consistent with the data developed for the site emergency planning in the consequence analysis in Section 7.1.2 (rather than your use of generic data).

Please also provide the latest evacuation time estimates (including supporting analysis) for the site. ,

RESPONSE

Site-specific estimates of the delay time before evacuation and effective evacuation speed have not yet been developed. When these estimates are available, they will be factored into the consequence analysis presented in ER-OL Subsection 7.1.2. It is expected that the revised analysis incorporating the site-specific estimates will be submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the first quarter of 1984. The latest site-specific evacuation time estimates (including supporting analysis) will also be submitted at that time.

O 1

)

() 0451.3-1 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983

i MH 1&2 ER-OL QUESTION 451.4 1 In Section 7.1.2 it is not stated whether any type of '

medical treatment was assumed in developing Figure 7.1-3 for early fatalities. If any type of medical treatment was assumed, please discuss the assumptions therefor, including the availability of such medical treatment to all persens requiring the treatment subsequent to acute radiological exposure resulting from severe accidents in a Marble Hill reactor.

RESPONSE

'In the CRAC2 code that was used to calculate accident consequences for ER-OL Subsection 7.1.2, the availability of

" supportive" medical treatment is assumed unless the input to the code is modified to reflect some other type of medical treatment. The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission's

" Reactor Safety Study" (USNRC 1975, Appendix VI, p. F-1) defines supportive medical treatment as follows:

The term " supportive treatment" indicates such procedures as reverse isolation (measures to protect the patient from pathogenic bacteria and viruses, such as the use of sterile garments and masks by entering personnel, sterilization of all objects in the

() patient 's room, use of portable or permanent laminar-air-flow systems, etc.), large doses of antibiotics, and transfusions of whole-blood packed cells or platelets. This type of treatment can be provided by most large urban and some rural acute medical and surgical hospitals, particularly those with facilities for kidney transplants.

The default value for supportive medical treatment that is provided in the CRAC2 User's Guide was used in the ER-OL analysis.

REFERENCE U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 1975, " Reactor Safety Study - An Assessment of Accident Risk in U.S.

Commercial Nuclear Power Plants," WASH-1400 (NUREG-75/014). -

SUPPLEMENT 3 0451.4-1 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL w

QUESTION 451.5 Except for the estimate of the societal risk (defined as the average value of the consequence times the probability) of early fatality, risks of other types of societal consequences presented in Section 7.1.2 'are not provided.

Please provide these estimates (they are ordinarily available in the same CRAC or CRAC2 runs that generate the CCDFs).

RESPONSE

The risks of other types of societal consequences were not generated in the CRAC2 run made for ER-OL Subsection 7.1.2. A new computer run will be required to generate these data. In order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, the applicant will generate these data when site-specific evacuation parameters are factored into the analysis as discussed in the responses to ER-OL Questions 451.3 and 451.9. It is expected that the risk data will be submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the first quarter of 1984.

CE) i

( SUPPLEMENT 3 0451.5-1 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL QUESTION 451.6 While you have tried to follow the staf f's approach to the analyses of severe accidents and the structure of presentation of the results of such analyses in several DES / FESS pursuant to the Statement of Interim Policy (Federal Register, June 13, 1980), the information regarding the following items are absent in Section 7.1.1 of ER-OL:

a. Person-rems and cancer fatalities CCDFs and risks within 50 mile region;

b. Risks to an individual of early and latent cancer fatalities as functions of distance from the site;

c. Distribution of number of persons expcsed above 25 rems to whole-body, 300 rems to thyroid and 200 rems to total bone marrow from early exposure;

d. Societal impacts of liquid pathway contamination; and

e. Economic cost of damage to the plant.

RESPONSE

Except for item d., a new computer run will be required to generate the requested data. In order to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort, the applicant will generate these data when site-specific evacuation parameters are factored into the accident consequence analysis as discussed in the responses to ER-OL Questions 451.3 and 451.9. It is expected that the requested data will be submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the first quarter of 1984.

The data requested in item d. have been provided in the revised response to ER-OL Question 240.2 (see ER-OL Supplement 1).

i i

4 l

( Q451.6-1 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983 l

l l

l _ _ . _ . -_. . , , .

MH 1&2 ER-OL b

V OUESTION 451.7 During the helicopter tour of the site within 10 miles it was noticed that there are more population clusters than are listed in the ER-OL Table 2.1-3 within the tour region. The PSI staff pointed out that some of these clusters are listed in pp 2.1-3 of the text. NRC staff pointed out a i conspicuous omission, however; namely: The community of New Washington which is at about 6 miles from the site.

RESPONSE

As noted in the revised subtitle and footnotes to ER-OL Table 2.1-3, this table is not intended to show all population clusters within 50 miles of Marble Hill 1&2. It shows only incorporated areas and unincorporated areas with a population of 1000 or more. Unincorporated areas of less than 1000 people are not included because of the great number of such areas within 50 miles and because the U.S.

Bureau of the Census does not maintain population statistics for all such areas.

As stated on page 2.1-3 of the ER-OL, the list of small population clusters on that page includes only areas within 5 miles of the station. Because New Washington is 6 miles N- away, it is not included on this page. New Washington is not included in ER-OL Table 2.1-3 because it is an unincorporated area with a population of less than 1000 people.

The population breakdown shown in ER-OL Tables 2.1-1, 2.1-2, and 2.1-5, and used in estimating radiological doses for the ER-OL and Final Safety Analysis Report, includes all incorporated and unincorporated areas within 50 miles.

.1

( 0451.7-1 SUPPLEMENT 3 OCTOBER 1983

l MH 1&2 ER-OL ,

l QUESTION 451.8 The heading of the Table 2.1-3 is misleading and should be appropriately modified. This table should also include the communities that currently are excluded.

RESPONSE

The subtitle and footnotes to ER-OL Table 2.1-3 have been modified to clarify that only incorporated areas and unincorporated areas with a population of 1000 or more are included. As noted in the response to Question 451.7, it is not feasible to include smaller unincorporated areas in this table because of the great number of such areas within 50 miles and because the U.S. Bureau of the Census does not maintain population statistics for all such areas.

1 0

, ,) SUPPLEMENT 3 0451.8-1 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL i

QUESTION 451.9 During discussion with the PSI consultant for ER-OL i

Section 7.1 analysis on severe accidents, it was learned that site-specific evacuation parameters were not factored in to the analysis. Instead, some generic assumptions were used. The analysis should be amended to include site-

, specific information.

l Either provide this intormat.on, or provide justification why you consider such information unnecessary in support of

! your Environmental Report.

RESPONSE

l As stated in the response to ER-OL Question 451.3, site-specific evacuation parameters will be f actored into the accident consequence analysis when those parameters are

available. It is expected that the revised analysis incorporating the site-specific parameters will be submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatorf Commission in the first quarter of 1984.

O 7

i

SUPPLEMENT 3 l 0451.9-1 OCTOBER 1983

MH 1&2 ER-OL QUESTION 470.7 Provide a listing of the input parameters that were used in Sargent & Lundy's radiological assessment computer runs to estimate the doses from exposure to gaseous and liquid effluents from Marble Hill (see previous question 470.2 and response). In addition, provide a brief description of the format for input parameters (e.g. excerpts from the Users Manual for the computer code).

RESPONSE

j The requested information has been provided to the U. S .

Nuclear Regulatory Commission. This information includes proprietary documents and has been submitted pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790 (b)(1).

i e

f I

1 l

l SUPPLEMENT 3 )

Q470.7-1 OCTOBER 1983 i

' ~

m J