ML20090H165
| ML20090H165 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vogtle  |
| Issue date: | 07/31/1984 |
| From: | GEORGIA POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20090H157 | List: |
| References | |
| ENVR-840731, NUDOCS 8407260153 | |
| Download: ML20090H165 (45) | |
Text
m h
VEGP-OLSER-2 2.4 : HYDROLOGY Since.the submission of the VEGP Construction Permit Stage
- I i Environmental Report (CPSER) and the publication of the Nuclear
' \\~/
Regulatory Commission's Final Environmental Statement (FES),
~
additional flow and water quality data for the Savannah River and groundwater have become available.
The following is a
~brief description of these additional studies and factors which have' changed since tha CPSER and FES.
~ :q) 2.4.1 ' SURFACE WATER ENVIRONS Sincelthe completion of the FES, an additional upstream reservoir, Richard B. Russell, located be-tween Clarke Hill and Hartwell reservoirs has been scheduled for completion in 1984.
The construction _of this reservoir is not expected to change the low or average flow characteristics at the VEGP site.
LBased on-data from the United States Geologic Survey gaging stationLat Augusta, Georgik (approximately 50 river miles upstream from the VLGP site), the annual average flow of the Savannah' River.is 10,300 ft'/s.
Due to upstream flow control
~'
~ Corp of Engireer dams, the minimum flow,-guaranteed
~ /~T by the U.S.
..(_)
to preserve navigability, is 5,80C ft'/s with 6,300 ft'/s achieved 70 percent.of the time.
.There are four facility structures in the flood plain associated with VEGP:
the intake structure with canal; the barge unloading facility; the site runoff flume; and site
. discharge pipe.
These facilities have been permitted by_the CorpsiofLEngineers pursuant to section 10 of the River and Harbors Act and section 404'of the Clean Water Act.
As part of that process-(33 CFR 320.4 (1)), the Corps of Engineers
~
considered Executive order 11988 relative to flood plain management and the effect that these facilities would have on upstream and downstream users.
~
Detailed information on surface water is'found in section 2.4 of!the Final Safety Analysis Rep' ort (FSAR).
Section 2.5 of the CPSER and section 2.5 of the FES contain further information on surface water.
-Additional surface water qvality studies have been performed by
_jg,)L
- Georgia Power Company, the U.S. Geological Survey, and others.
y%
Results of-these studies have been analyzed:and compared with information utilized to prepare the FES.
These studies show no significant change in the characteristics of the surface water (quality at the VEGP site from that used in the preparation of the~FES.
Georgia Power Company has conducted specific studies
'8407260153 840720 PDR ADOCK 05000424 2.4-1
- C PDR 7
r VEGP-OLSER-2 regarding silt loading in the Savannah River in the vicinity of the intake structure.
This information has been utilized in the design of the VEGP intake structure.
2.4.2 GROUNDWATER Details of the regional and site groundwater characteristics are discussed in FSAR subsection 2.4.12.
Readers are referred to that document for descriptions of aquifer characteristics, hydraulic properties, stratigraphic features which control groundwater migration, and details of past and projected future use of the ground water resource.
In the paragraphs which follow, the groundwater aquifers at the VEGP are briefly described with emphasis placed on the potential for contamination to migrate offsite and affect groundwater quality in adjacent areas.
2.4.2.1 Cretaceous and Tertiary Groundwater Systems The Cretaceous groundwater system is represented in the VEGP 4
area by the Tuscaloosa Formation.
This unit is approximately lh 700 ft thick near the VEGP and appears to be of equal or greater thickness in South Carolina.
It consists primarily of crossbedded sands and gravels with subordinate beds of silt, clay, and kaolin.
It is a highly transmissive aquifer system.
Recharge to the Cretaceous aquifer is primarily from infiltration of rainfall where the formation is exposed several miles north of V'GP.
In the same general area, the Teritiary groundwater system is also exposed and off-laps the Cretaceous system.
In this area, the Cretaceous and Tertiary systems are in hydraulic contact and the groundwater is under water table conditions.
After the water infiltrates the sediments, it migrates downdip in a south-by-southeast direction.
Downdip lh' from the recharge area, groundwater in the Cretaceous sediments becomes confined beneath the relatively impermeable clays and silts of the Huber and Ellenton Formations (Paleocene).
At VEGP the Huber and Ellenton Formations are permeable and, permit hydraulic contact between the Cretaceous aquifer and overlying Tertiary aquifer.
As will be seen, these aquifers are both confined by the stratigraphically higher Blue Bluff member of the Lisbo.. Formation.
At the VEGP site, the Teritiary groundwater system ic represented by two members of the Lisbon Formation.
The lower member consists of fluvial sands and sandy clays for which formal stratigraphic nomenclatures has not yet been established.
2.4-2 Amend. 4 7/84
VEGP-OLSER-2 These sediments are moderately permeable, as shown by field permeability tests for the river facilities and by the
'S operation of the VEGP potable water supply well, which is I
completed in the upper 25 ft of this member.
Total thickness at the site is approximately 100 ft.
The sources of cooling system hakeup water for the nuclear service cooling water system at VEGP are wells producing from these Cretaceous /
Tertiary aquifers.
(
l The second member of the Lisbon Formation at the site is the Blue Bluff marl member, which consists of semiconsolidated glauconitic marl with subordinate lenses of dense, well-indurated, well-cemented limestone.
The marl layer overlies the unnamed sands member and is approximately 70 ft thick.
The permeability of the marl layer is extremely low, and it is classified as an aquiclude.
It effectively confines the underlying unnamed sands to produce artesian conditions at the site.
To summarize, the Teritiary aquifer system overlies and offlaps 4
the Cretaceous system in its outcrop areas north of VEGP.
Groundwater is under water table conditions in both aquifers in this area.
At the VEGP site the two systems are separated stratigraphically (but not hydraulically) by the Huber and Ellencon Formations.
The two systems are confined beneath the Blue Bluff marl member of the Lisbon Formation.
These conditions prevail to an unidentified point to the southeast between VEGP and Girard.
2.4.2.2 Tertiary and Quaternary Water Table Aquifers The marl aquielude is overlain at VEGP and throughout much of the 25-mile study area by the Barnwell Group (late Eocene) which, in turn, is everlain by the Hawthorne Formation (early Miocene).
Both formations are extensively exposed since erosion has removed much of the Hawthorne unit.
Pleistocene alluvial and terrace deposits are also present as are Holocene flood plain deposits parallel to the Savannah River.
In the general vicinity of VEGP, the basal unit of the Barnwell Group is the Utley limestone member of the Clinchfield Formation.
This is a fossiliferous and cavernous limestone unit which is capable of transmitting groundwater.
- However, the unit rarely exceeds a few tens of feet in thickness, and it is of limited areal extent.
The remaining sedimentary units overlying the marl and the Utley limestone consist of unconsolidated clays, silts, and sands which contain groundwater under water table conditions.
Laboratory and field permeability testing was performed on the materials overlying
)
x 2.4-3 Amend. 4 7/84
r t
7 1
VEGP-OLSER-2 the marl aquiclude at VEGP during early site investigations.
The field tests indicated permeability values of 200 to 250 ft/ year and laboratory tests indicated values of 10 to 20,000 ft/ year.
Recharge to the water table aquifer is almost exclusively by infiltration of direct precipitation.
Lateral recharge from adjacent areas is insignificant because the plant area is situated on an interfluvial high, i.e.,
it is isolated by drainage channels which have cut down to or near the marl lh aquiclude and act as interceptor drains to. potential recharge sources moving laterally toward the interfluve.
The isolation of the water table aquifer at the site effectively prevents offsite migration of groundwater contaminants through the aquifer.
This very important point is discussed in a later section on potential for contaminant transport.
2.4.2.3 Effectiveness of the Marl Aquiclude At the explorary hole 42 at VEGP, a series of observation' wells located at various depths and designated 42A, B,C, D,
and E 4
provide a measure of the effectiveness of the marl as an aquiclude.
Head differential between two wells (42A and 428) which are located just above and just below the marl is more
~
than 50 ft.
This difference is consistent throughout the areas covered tf observation wells.
Exploratory hole number 42 was abandoned during plant construction.
This and all other holes not completed as observation wells and open to the confined aquifer were sealed with grout.
The marked difference in water levels indicates a large contrast in permeability between the aquifers and the marl.
To bring about such a marked difference in piezometric levels, the barrier must be extens2ve and without significant through-going openings such as fractures or solution cavities.
The continuity of the marl is verified over a large area by numerous exploratory holes drilled through it.
None of the borings encountered highly fractured zones nor was there evidence of leaching and removal of calcareous material.
To further verify the effectiveness of the marl as an aquiclude, permeability tests wre conducted.
These are diccussed in detail in the VEGP FSAR paragraph 2.4.12.2.4.
The results show that the permeability of the marl is offectively zero.
It is concluded that the marl may be considered an effective barrier to groundwater movement.
Any fluids that may infiltrate the overlying sands would be confined to the water table aquifer system.
O 2.4-4 Amend. 4 7/84
i
-w qj VEGP-OLSER-2 2.4.2.4 Potential for Contamination of Aquifers
^x As previous sections have discussed, the water table aquifer is hydraulically separated from the underlying confined Tertiary and Cretaceous aquifers.
Because the permeability of the marl aquiclude is essentially zero, there is eff.ectively no possibility for contaminants to migrate downwards from the water table aquifer to these deeper aquifers.
One possible
'gm means for contaminants to reach the confined aquifers would 1
theoretically be for the contaminants to migrate through the water table aquifer to a stream which would discharge to the Savannah river.
The Savannah River is in hydraulic contact with the deep aquifers; however, as described previously, the deep aquifers discharge to the river because their~ hydraulic heads are substantially higher in elevation than the river.
Any contaminants still remaining after migrating to the river could not, therefore, enter the deeper aquifers.
Lateral migration of contaminants in the water table aquifer could not affect this aquifer offsite because the site is hydraulically isolated, as previously discussed.
Any lateral 4
transport would be intercepted by incised drainages and discharged to the river.
An analysis of a core melt is presented in Appendix 7A.
This is assumed to be the worst case accident scenario from the standpoint of contaminating groundwater.
An analysis of the critical tank rupture is presented in VEGP FSAR section 15.7.3.
This analysis considers a release from the recycle holdup tank located at elevation 119 ft in the auxiliary building.
The analysis takes no credit whatsoever for the presence of the auxiliary building and assumes that the contaminants are instantly transferred to the water table aquifer.
Other possible accident scenarios include surface spills and pipe breaks.
All such scenarios are enveloped by the analysis for the recycle holdup tank because releases from this cource' have been assumed to instantly enter'the water table aquifer, whereas rurface spills would have to percolate downwards through the unsaturated zone before reaching the water table.
Within the nearby vicinity of the VEGP, water discharges from the Tuscaloosa Formation to the Savannah River.
Piezometric maps published from various sources shows a groundwater sink along the Savannah River.
All these maps indicate that groundwater in the Tuscaloosa Formation does not cross from South Carolina into Georgia or from Georgia into South Carolina (Reference 1).
2.4-5 Amend. 4 7/84
n VEGP-OLSER-2 2.4.2.5 Migration of Aquifer Contamination A comprehensive groundwater monitoring program has been implemented at the VEGP.
This program was designed to monitor groundwater levels and movement in both the confined and unconfined aquifers for the life of the plant, and to monitor levela of groundwater accumulating in the compacted backfill inside the power block excavation throughout the construction.
The original program consisted of 9 observation wells set in g
the confined aquifer, 16 observation wells set in the unconfined aquifer, and 11 observation wells set in the backfill.
Some of the backfill wells were located at sites of structures and were later abandoned.
Those not abandoned will be maintained for the permanent monitoring program.
VEGP FSAR table 2.4.12-7, sheet 1, summarizes water levels measured 4
during site exploration.
ESAR table 2.4.12-7, sheet 2, summarized piezometric levels that have been recorded since the monitoring program was initiated.
As discussed above, the only possible aquifer which could be contaminated is the water table aquifer, and then only in the immediate vicinity of the site because it is hydraulically isolated.
The onsite monitoring wells could be used to determine the presence and possible migration of contaminants.
If an accident occurred, the analyses mentioned above show that there would be adequate time, on the order of years, to verify that contaminants in the water table aquifer would not migrate to other aquifers.
Should the monitoring of a spill provide data to suggest that contaminants might, in fact, migrate offsite, then adequate time would be available to develop plans for the mitigation of contaminant migration.
Such mitigation is well within present technological capabilities.
O O
O 2.4-6 Amend. 4 7/84
m_-.-__..._--
(-
7-1:--
1-4 1
(1 VEGP-OLSER j-l 1
REFERENCE i
l-1.
Final Environmental Impact Statement, L-Reactor Operator l
Savannah River Plant, DOE /EIS - 0108, May 1984.
4 i
i 4-1 i
j i.
I i
i ie i'
t t'
j' i
i I
a
}
i'
+
i I;
l-I; 1
l' l
3-
!i l
a f
i t
l i
i 2.4-7 Amend. 4 7/84 i
,e
(
/
\\ )
N_.]
QJ O
w.)
AJ TABLE 5.2-1 (SHEET 1 OF 2)
DIFFUSION AND DEPOSITION ESTIMATES FOR ALL RECEPTOR LOCATIONS Release Point: Plant Vent / Wake-Split Season: Annual Computer Run ID: VX-3 Distance Distance Distance to Nea r-to Nea r-to Near-est Hilk Depleted est Meat Depleted est Hilk Depleted Cow (*I X/Q X/Q D/Q Animag X/Q X/Q D/Q Coat X/Q X/Q.
D/Q 3
fu188 is/m31 ts/m3 1
_{m 4 1
( m l(*I is/m 1 i s/m *)
(m 41 Direction im1 (s/m 1 is/m 1 fa i l 2.5E-08 2.2E-08 8.2E-11 2.5E-08 2.2E-08 8.2E-11 2.5E-08 2.2E-08 8.2E-11 N
NNE 2.6E-08 2.3E-08 9.0E-11 E.6E-00 2.3E-08 9.0E-11 2.6E-08 2.3E-08 9.0E-11 NE 3.5E-08 3.2E-08 1.1E-10 3.5E-08 3.2E-08 1.1E-10 3.5E-08 3.2E-08 1.1E-10 ENE 2.9E-08 2.6E-08 1.3E-10 2.9E-08 2.6E-08 1.3E-10 2.9E-08 2.6E-08 1.3E-10 E
2.2E-08 2.0E-08 1.6E-10 2.2E-08 2.0E-08 1.6E-10 2.2E-08 2.0E-08 1.6E-10 2.2E-08 1.9E-08 1.4E-10 1 ESE 2.2E-08 1.9E-08 1.4E-10 2.2E-08 1.9E-08 1.4E-10 SE 7403 2.4E-08 2.2E-08 1.2E-10 6920 2.6E-08 2.3E-08 1.4E-10 2.3E-08 2.0E-08 1.1E-10 O,
SSE 1.3E-08 1.2E-08 6.4E-11 1.3E-08 1.2E-08 6.4E-11 1.3E-08 1.2E-08 6.4E-11 S
2.0E-08 1.8E-08 8.1E-11 2.0E-08 1.8E-08 8.1E-11 2.0E-08 1.8E-08 8.1E-11 C)
M SSW 1.8E-08 1.6E-08 9.1E-11 7803 1.9E-08 1.7E-08 1.0E-10 1.8E-08 1.6E-08 9.1E-11 y
f SW 3.6E-08 3.2E-08 1.4E-10 4889 5.6E-08 5.1E-08 3.0E-10 3.6E-08 3.2E-08 1.4E-10 w
WSW 2.8E-08 2.5E-08 1.2E-10 77?4 3.0E-08 2.7E-08 1.3E-10 2.8E-08 2.5E-08 1.2E-10 W
2.5E-08 2.3E-08 1.1E-10 2.5E-08 2.3E-08 1.1E-10 2.5E-08 2.3E-08 1.1E-10 WNW 2.4E-08 2.2E-08 8.7E-11 2.4E-08 2.2E-08 8.8E-11 2.4E-08 2.2E-08 8.7E-11 NW 2.8E-08 2.6E-08 8.1E-11 61/6 3.6E-08 3.4E-08 1.2E-10 2.8E-08 2.6E-08 8.1E-11 NNW 2.6E-08 2.4E-08 7.6E-11 2.6E-08 2.4E-08 7.6E-11 2.6E-08 2.4E-08 7.6E-11 OOO 3DD 4
l G Q. Q.
j l
t-M W 2
4 i
NNN co co m bbb
(
,e
, ~.
j.
/
\\a Q,
%s w/
t
/
/
/
v v
TABLE 5.2-1 (SIIEET 2 OF 2)
Distance Distance to Nea r-to Nea r-Nea rest est Resi-Depleted est Veg.
Depleted Site Depleted dence X/Q X/Q D/Q Ca rde.)
X/Q X/Q 0/Q Bounda ry X/Q X/Q D/Q Direction i a p'3 Is/m 1 is/m31
( m -3 1 i m p*l fs/m31 is/m3) f m41 (ml Is/m31 is/m 3)
I m -2 )
3 N
2.5E-08 2.2E-08 8.2E-11 2.5E-nB 2.2E-08 8.2E-11 1344 1.4E-07 1.2E-07 1.3E-09 NNE 2.6E-08 2.3E-08 9.0E-11 2.6E-08 2.3E-08 9.0E-11 1097 1.9E-07 1.7E-07 1.8E-09 NE 3.5E-08 3.2E-08 1.1E-10 3.5E-0E 3.2E-08 1.1E-10 1097 2.0E-07 1.8E-07 2.3E-09 ENE 2.9E-08 2.6E-08 1.3E-10 2.9E-08 2.6E-08 1.3E-10 1097 1.8E-07 1.7E-07 2.8E-09 E
2.2E-08 2.0E-08 1.6E-10 2.2E-08 2.0E-08 1.6E-10 1369 1.2E-07 1.1E-07 2.7E-09 ESE 2.2E-08 1.9E-08 1.4E-10 2.2E-08 1.9E-08 1.4E-10 1817 9.4E-08 8.4E-08 1.6E-09 SE 5310 3.4E-08 3.0E-08 2.2E-10 5310 3.4E-08 3.0E-08 2.2E-10 1866 8.3E-08 7.4E-08 1.2E-09 SSE 1.3E-08 1.2E-08 6.4E-11 1.3E-08 1.2E-08 6.4E-11 1773 4.8E-08 4.4E-08 7.0E-10 4
1 M
S 7240 1.9E-08 1.7E-08 9.4E-11 2.0E-08 1.8E-08 8.1E-11 1692 6.8E-08 6.1E-08 9.2E-10 c)e SSW 7562 1.9E-08 1.7E-08 1.0E-10 1.8E-08 1.6E-08 9.1E-11 1680 7.7E-08 7.0E-08 1.1E-09 f
SW 4506 6.2E-08 5.6E-08 3.3E-10 4828 5.7E-08 5.2E-08 3.1E-10 1462 1.7E-07 1.6E-07 1.2E-09 4[
M WSW 1931 1.2E-07 1.1E-07 1.1E-09 2253 1.0E-07 9.5E-08 9.2E-10 1462 1.5E-07 1.4E-07 1.8E-09 pc a
W 2414 7.8E-08 7.1E-08 7.3E-10 2897 6.8E-08 6.1E-03 5.8E-10 1462 1.2E-07 1.1E-07 1.5E-09 Ln -
WNW 3058 6.3E-08 5.9E-08 4.2t-10 5471 3.6E-08 3.3E-08 1.6E-10 1649 1.0E-07 9.4E-08 1.0E-09 NW 3379 6.5E-08 6.0E-08 3.4E-10 3862 5.8E-08 5.3E-08 2.7E-10 2240 8.5E-08 7.8E-08 6.1E-10 Nr:W 2.6E-08 2.4E-08 7.6E-11 2.6E-08 2.4E-d8 7.6E-11 1840 9.4E-08 8.5E-08 7.7E-10 h$h ooo 333
.A. P D.
A to H a.
Receptor distance greater than 8000 m is indicated by (-); dif rusion va lues given a re for 8000 m; data collected in 2
spring of 1983.
WN m m co AAA
-s c
7-7.
,3 w/
~_
l TABLE 5.2-2 (SHEET 1 OF 2)
DIFFUSION AND DEPOSTION ESTIMATES FOR ALL RECEPTOR LOCATIONS Release Point: Assumed Grouad Release Season: Annual Computer Run ID:
VX-4 in Building Wake Distance Distance Distance to Near-to Hea r-to Nea r-est Milk Depleted est Heat Depleted est Milk Depleted X/
X/Q D/Q D/Q Animal X/Q X/g1 (m 4 1 O/Q Goat *I is/mg1 X/g)
X/g)
Cow
( m )I (s/m3)
(m4 )
is/m (m4 1
( m p*l (s/m3]
8 Direction i m 1 *3 is/m ts/m N
1.1E-07 8.2E-08 2.4E-10 1.1E-07 8.2E-08 2.4E-10 1.1E-07 8.2E-08 2.4E-10 NNE 1.1E-07 8.4E-08 2.4E-10 1.1E-07 8.4E-08 2.4E-10 1.1E-07 8.4E-08 2.4E-10 NE 1.4E-07 1.0E-07 2.8E-10 1.4E-07 1.0E-07 2.8E-10 1.4E-07 1.0E-07 2.8E-10 ENE 1.2[-07 9.2E-08 2.8E-10 1.OE-07 9.2E-08 2.8E-10 1.2E-07 9.2E-08 2.8E-10 1
E 1.1E-07 8.2E-08 3.0E-10 1.1E-07 8.2E-08 3.0E-10 1.1E-07 8.2E-08 3.0E-10 ESE 1.1E-07 8.3E-08 2.8E-10 1.1E-07 8.3E-08 2.8E-10 1.1E-07 8.3E-08 2.8E-10 4
SE 7403 1.2E-07 8.7E-08 2.6E-10 6920 1.3E-07 9.8E-08 2.9E-10 1.1E-07 7.8E-08 2.4E-10
$~
SSE 8.2E-08 6.1E-08 1.5E-10 8.2E-08 6.1E-08 1.5E-10 8.2E-08 6.1E-08 1.5E-10 8O S
1.2E-07 8.6E-08 1.9E-10 7242 1.2E-07 8.6E-07 1.9E-10 1.2E-08 8.6E-08 1.9E-10 E
h SSW 1.0E-07 7.7E-08 2.0E-10 7803 1.2E-07 8.6E-d8 2.2E-10 1.0E-07 7.7E-08 2.0E-10 4
8 SW 1.4E-07 1.0E-07 2.9E-10 4989 2.6E-07 2.0E-07 6.5E-10 1.4E-07 1.0E-07 2.9E-10 Ln WSW 1.1E-07 8.OE-08 2.5E-10 7724 1.1E-07 8.4E-07 2.6E-10 1.1E-07 8.0E-08 2.5E-10 W
1.2E-07 9.1E-08 2.5E-10 1.1E-07 9.1E-08 2.5E-10 1.2E-07 9.1E-08 2.5E-10 WNW 1.0E-07 7.6E-08 2.1E-10 1.1E-07 7.6E-08 2.1E-10 1.0E-07 7.6E-08 2.1E-10 NW 1.1E-07 8.4E-08 2.2E-10 6276 1.6E-07 1.2E-07 3.3E-10 1.1E-07 8.4E-08 2.2E-10 NNW 1.1E-07 8.1E-08 2.2E-10 1.1E-07 8.1E-08 2.2E-10 1.1E-07 8.1E-08 2.2E-10 mm DD
.C* On 4 PJ
\\\\
co co AA
p)
,3
,, s i
J f
)
G)
G L.//
G
%J
(
)
i e
i w)
_,J TABLE 5.2-2 (SilEET 2 OF 2)
Distance Distance to Nea r-to Nea r-Nea re s t est Resi-Depleted est Veg.
Depleted Site Depleted dence X/g X/g1 D/Q Ga rden X/Q X/g1 D/Q Bounda ry X/g)
X/Q D/Q I
(s/m 1 (s/m tm 4 1
( m p*3 Ls/m31 Di rect ion
( m l *3 im 1 (m)
(s/m is/m31 (m 41 ts/m N
1.1E-07 8.2E-08 2.4E-10 1.1E-07 8.2E-08 2.4E-10 1344 1.4E-06 1.2E-06 5.4E-09 NNE 1.1E-07 8.4E-08 2.4E-10 1.IE-01 3.4E-08 2.4E-10 1097 1.9E-06 1.7E-06 7.7E-09 NE 1.4E-07 1.0E-07 2.8E-10 1.4E-07 1.0E-07 2.8i-10 1097 2.2E-06 2.0E-06 8.8E-09 ENE 1.2E-07 9.2E-08 2.8E-10 1.2E-07 9.2E-08 2.8E-10 1097 2.0E-06 1.8E-06 8.8E-09 E
1.1E-07 8.2E-08 3.0E-10 1.1E-07 8.2E-08 3.0E-10 1369 1.3E.06 1.2E-06 6.8E-09 ESE 1.1E-07 8.3E-07 2.8E-10 1.1E-07 8.3E-08 2.8E-10 1817 8.8E-06 7.6E-07 3.8E-09 SE 5310 1.9E-07 1.5E-07 4.8E-10 5310 1.9E-07 1.5E-07 4.8E-10 1866 8.0E-07 6.9E-07 3.0E-08 SEE 8.2E-08 6.1E-08 1.5E-10 8.2E-08 6.1E-08 1.5E-10 1773 6.6E-07 5.8E-07 2.1E-09
<0 1
M S
7240 1.3E-07 1.0E-01 2.1E-10 1.2E-07 8.6E-08 1.9E-10 1692 9.9E-07 8.6E-07 2.9E-09
()
SSW 7562 1.1E-07 8.4E-08 2.2E-10 1.0E-07 7.7E-08 2.0E-10 1680 9.1E-07 7.9E-07 3.1E-09 4 [>
t<
sw 4506 3.0E-07 2.4E-07 7.7E-10 4828 2.8E-07 2.1E-07 6.7E-10 1462 1.5E-06 1.3E-06 5.7E-09 01 M
WSW 1931 8.1E-07 7.0E-07 2.9E-09 2253 6.7E-07 5.5E-07 2.2E-09 1462 1.2E-06 1.1E-06 5.0E-09
]3 W
2414 6.6E-07 5.5E-07 2.0E-10 2897 5.1E-07 4.1E-07 1.5E-09 1462 1.3E-06 1.2E-06 4.9E-07 WNW 3701 3.9E-07 3.3E-07 1.2E-09 5471 1.07-07 1.3E-07 4.1E-09 1649 9.6E-07 8.4E-07 3.4E-09 NW 3701 3.8E-01 3.5E-07 1.0E-09 3862 3.1E-07 2.6E-07 8.1E-10 2240 6.9E-07 5.9E-G/
2.0E-09 NNW 1.1E-07 8.1E-08 2.2E-10 1.1E-07 8.1E-08 2.2E-10 1804 9.2E-07 8.0E-07 2.9E-09 a.
Receptor distance greater than 8000 m is indicated by (-); dirrusion values given are for 8000 m; date collected in spring of 4
y{1983.
OO DD Q. Q.
bW
%3 M
\\\\
cn cn bb e
)
VEGP-OLSER-S TABLE 5.2-3 l1 CONCENTRATIONS OF GASEOUS (DEPOSITED) EFFLUENTS g)
AT THE NEAREST RESIDENCE'
- tv On Ground In Vegetation 2
Isotope (pCi/m )
(pCi/m2)
H-3 0
1.60E-01
(-,)
CR-51 4.93E-03 3.95E-10 MN-54 5.01E+01 7.12E-07 FE-55 2.32E-01 1.06E-09 FE-59 2.45EOO 1.60E-07 CO-58 3.92E+01 1.90E-06 CO-60 4.45E+02 1.20E-06 SR-89 6.43E-01 3.94E-08 SR-90 8.81E00 1.23E-08 4
ZK-95 4.75E-04 2.40E-11 CE-141 2.35E-04 1.77E-11 CE-144 1.23E+02 2.01E-11 CS-134 1.12E-02 7.53E-07 CS-136 1.77E+05 9.45E-10 CS-137 1.60E-04 2.24E-04
()
BA-140 1.14E+02 1.34E-11
\\_/
I-131 1.70E+01 3.71E-05 I-133 0
3.75E-10 C-14 0
2.08E-02 r's
]
m
(
)
m,'
\\
^
a.
Nearest residence - 1931 m WSW from the center of the VEGP.
Amend. 1 2/84 Amend. 4 7/84
C Cl U/
U
(
V V
TABLE 5.2-6 (SIIEET 1 OF 7)
ESTIMATED ANNUAL DOSES TO AN INDIVIDUA GASEOUSANDPARTICULATEEFFLUENTSa{ORM Caseous Dose Rate IDI Gamma Dose Beta Dose Total Body Skin Dose Rate in Air Rate in Air Dose Rate Rate Location Pa t hway i m rad /vea rl f arad/ yea rl f mrem / yea rl f orem/ yea rl Nearest Site Boundary Plume 2.24E-02
- 1. 94E-02 1.41E-02 3.34E-02 (0.68 mile NE)
Nearest Residence Plume 1.20E-02 2.21E-02 7.63E-03 1.82E-02 (1.2 mile WSW)
Nearest Vegtable Garden Plume 1.01E-02 1.83E-02 6.35E-03 1.53E-02 (1.4 mile WSW)
Nea rest Heat Anima l Plume 5.35E-03 9.91E-03 3.362-03 8.21E-03 4
(3.10 mile SW) y Nea re st Hi l k Cow and Gaa t Plume 2.31E-03 4.27E-03 1.46E-03 3.54E-03 (4.60 mile SE)
O Radiciodines and Particulates Dose Rate (area / year)"I O
t*
Total 01 Q
Location hthway Body Cl T rac t Bone Liver kidney Thy ro id Lung Skin hea rest Site Boundary Ground 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.83E-01 b
(0.68 mile NE)
Deposition Inhalation Adult 2.70E-02 2.51E-02 2.09E-03 2.78E-02 3.22E-02 5.78E-02 2.77E-02 2.78E-02 Teen 2.65E-02 2.54E-02 2.93E-03 2.90E-02 2.68E-02 6.62E-02 2.81E-02 2.790-02 Chilo 2.30E-02 2.24E-02 3.96E-03 2.59E-02 2.38E-02 6.97E-02 2.51E-02 2.50E-02 Infant 1.31E-02 1.29E-02 2.42E-03 1.56E-02 1.38E-02 5.64E-02 1.54E-02 1.55E-02 Total Dose go Recep_lorH3 Adielt 2.69E-01 2.67E-01 2.44E-01 2.70L-01 2.74E-01 3.00E-01 2.700-01 3.11E-01 Teen 2.69E-01 2.67E-01 2.45E-01 2.71E-01 2.69E-01 3.08E-01 2.70E-01 3.11E-01 yy Child 2.65E-01 2.64E-01 2.46E-01 2.68E-01 2.66E-01 3.12E-01 2.67E-01 3.08E-01 gg infant 2.55E-01 2.55E-01 2.44E-01 2.58E-01
?.56E-01 2.98E-01 2.57E-01 2.99E-01 OO DD 44
\\\\
co ao AA
(v)
(V
'(
p (em p)
/
f,,
i f
i I
v v
v Ns v
TABLE 5.2-6 (SHEET 2 OF 7)
Dose Rate (ares / year)
Total Location Pathway Body Gl T rac t Bone Liver kidney Thyroid Eung Skin Nearest Site Ground 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.42E-01 2.83E-01 2
Boundary (0.68 Mile NE)
Venetables Adult 1.43E-01 3.94E-02 1.62E-01 1.98E-01 9.18E-02 1.53E-02 1.98E-02 3.59E-02 Teen 1.36E-01 5.04E-02 2.66E-01 3.04E-01 1.35E-01 1.45E-01 2.53E-02 4.65E-02 Child 1.51E-01 8.80E-02 6.36E-01 5.25E-01 2.30E-01 2.37E-01 5.07E-02 8.50E-02 Neat Adult 1.72E-02 7.95E-03 2.78E-02 2.29E-02 1.27E-02 2.51E-02 9.50E-03 7.57E-03 Teen 9.54E-03 5.5SE-03 2.33E-02 1.73E-02 9.48E-03 1.81E-02 6.93E-03 5.36E-03 Child 1.08E-02 8.54E-03 4.35E-01 2.42E-02 1.36E-02 2.76E-02 1.03E-02 8.41E-03 4
Cow Milk g
(21 Adult 9.59E-02 1.64E-02 1.11E-01 1.40E-01 5.84E-02 5.04E-01 2.75E-02 1.35E-02 C1 Teen 9.75E-02 2.33E-02 2.01E-01 2.41E-01 9.89E-02 7.96E-01 4.86E-02 1.96E-02 93 Child 9.59E-02 3.99E-02 4.86E-01 4.22E-01 1.68E-01 1.57E00 8.16E-02 3.70E-02 8
infant 1.23E-01 6.86E-02 8.09E-01 8.20E-01 2.79E-01 3.80E00 1.47E-01 6.58E-02
[3 inhalation Da Adult 2.70E-02 2.51E-02 2.09E-03 2.78E-02 3.22E-02 5.78E-02 2.77E-02 2.78E-02 8
Teen 2.65E-02 2.54E-02 2.93E-03 2.90E-02 2.68E-02 6.62E-02 2.81E-02 2.79E-02 LA
' Child 2.30E-02 2.24E-02 3.96E-03 2.59E-02 2.3SE-02 6.97E-02 2.51E-02 2.50E-02 Infant 1.31E-02 1.29E-02 2.42E-03 1.56E-02 1.38E-02 5.64E-02 1.54E-02 1.55E-02 Total Dose to hecep t o rio Adult 5.25E-01 3.31E-01 5.45E-01 6.300-01 4.37E-01 9.82E-01 3.27E-01 3.68E-01 Teen 5.12E-01 3.47E-01 7.35E-01 8.33E-01 5.12E-01 1.27E00 3.51E-01 3.82E-01 Child 5.23E-01 4.010-01 1.80EOO 1.24E00 6.77E-01 2.15E00 4.10E-01 4.38E-01 Infant 3.78E-01 3.240-01 1.0$E00 1.08E00 5.35E-01 4.10E00 4.04E-01 3.64E-01 MB oO DD
.Da O.
$b f M >J N Ns s CD C3
.Cm.D.
m
VEGP-OLSER-5
-r i
M N
NNMM
==wNN
,(N\\
O OOOO OC30 l
r e
e e e e e e e e i
\\'
W WWWW WWWW 1
C O
@@mo samm M.
C. O. M M.
Q C. C. c0
.2 e
W
==@A
- e w @
N NNMM NNNN O
C000 0000 e
e e e e e a e a W
WWWW WWWW c
NcNN cmNC C
C.
C. o. b. b.
C. o. @. c.
\\
.L/
s W
80 e"@c
@ @ @ eo
\\
i N
NNNN ewe
=
C CCCO "OCOC D
e a e e e e a e e C
W WWWW WWWW b
=
C m w r=
McNN 0
N. c. h. e C. C. C. C.
C W
NNNN
\\
ewee v
N NNMM NNNN O
CCCC QCCC e
e a e e e e e e 0
W WWWW WWWW
)
C e
C N *= N wMOD
~
C.
- = ". @. N.
e w C. D.
D 4
40
- *= @ @
@@@C e
N NNNM NNNN C
CCCC COCC e
e o e e e e e e t.
W WWWW WWWW 4
cmW@
@Occ Q
Q
". *. C. M.
". N. C. @.
a
=J EQ
- =**@
@ @ @ c0 M
L 4
9 b
N MMMM NNNN
[a3 C
CCCC CCCC M
E e
e e e e e ea e e
W WWWW WWWW
[
2 L
C
=
cmmM meco
(/)
E C
C.
M. O. M A.
Q***
r
(
g#
w w
N"*
EQ W to e e v
g ss M
I E
W N
NNMM NNNN N.
O O
COCO Coco O
m e
e e a e e ee e d
b W
WWWW WWWW g
o CN--
Neoc Q
]
O.
C. o. d. d.
O. c. @. b.
M O
ED pa@A
@@CC CQ N
NNNM NNNN b
o CCCC 3 Coo e
a e e e e e e 0 t W wwww WWWW
-g>
a NNNN MMcN ed D C
>= 4D C-
- = N. O. e.
- N. C. 4 OO
- =**@
@ @ @ eO L
C CC
(
O
{
l QG M
\\
n y
-C-e n
se o
a
)
C M
-0
- DC C
3 M
.e m
-C-e sa C
C
- 0-6 J
30-6 lDUCC R
k C
- C.
C DGCC a.
o
<-o-
<-u-
\\'Ov) a=n 2
9 e
o-
{m s.* C =
O
.E u
.=
\\
e u-N E U.:
U C
_a
=E Amend. 1 2/84 Amend. 4 7/84
^)
\\
f
/
U i) b V
V[N U
U TABLE 5.2-6 (SHEET 4 OF 7).
Onse Rate (arem/ yea r)
Total tocation Pathway
- Dody, Cl T raci Bone Liver On_ey Thyrold l_ung Skin e
Nea re s t Cround 6.08E-02 6.08E-02 6.08E-02 6.08E-02 6.08E-02 6.08E-02 6.08E-02 7.10E-02 Vegetable Garden (1.4 mile WSW) yedetables Adult 4.0$E-02 1.48E-02 5.15E-02 5.45E-02 2.78E-02 1.53E-02 4.90E-02 1.38E-02 l
Teen 4.10E-02 1.94E-02 8.46E-02 8.32E-02 4.05E-02 1.96E-02 5.27E-02 1.84E-02 Child 5.15E-02 3.57E-02 2.04E-01 1.46E-01 7.13E-02 3.68E-02 8.77E-02 3.50E-02 inhafation 4
AJust 9.27E-03 8.78E-03 1.14E-03 9.50E-03 9.07E-03 9.31E-03
'1.82E-02 8.75E-03 Teen 9.19E-03 8.83E-03 1.60E-03 9.83E-03 9.25E-03 9.52E-03 2.07E-02 8.80E-03 Child 7.95E-03 7.80E-03 2.17T-03 8.79E-03 8.20E-03 8.61E-03 2.16E-02 7.79E-03 infant 4.56E-03 4.48E-03 1.33E-03 5.23E-03 4.73E-03 5.23E-03 1.70E 02 4.48E-03 Total Dose go Receptor Adult 1.11E-01 8.43E-02 1.13E-01 1.25E-01 9.77E-02 8.54E-02 1.28E-01 9.35E-02 M
Teen 1.11E-01 8.90E-02 1.470-01 1.54E-01 1.11E-01 8.99E-02 1.34E-01 9.82f-02 O
l Child 1.20E-01 1.04[-01 2.67E-01 2.16E-01 1.40E-01 1.06E-01 1.70E-01 1.14E-01 g
l Infant 6.54E-02 6.53E-02 6.21E-02 6.60E-0E 6.55E-02 6.61E-02 7.78E-02 7.55E-02 C) t*
U1 MN I
l i
OO DD C. C.
W 4 >J
\\\\
co c2 aa I
l j
(-
(3
(.
(-~
N.
'j TABLE 5.2-6 (SHEET 5 OF 7)
Dose Rate (area / year)
Total Eocation Pathway Body Cl T rac t Bone Liver kidney Thyroid kng Skin Nea rest Hea t Ground 1.80E-02 1.80E-02 1.80E-02 1.80E-02 1.80E-02 1.80E-02 1.80E-02 2.10E-02 Animat (3.1 mile EW) t*til Adult 2.32E-03 1.63E-03 5.57E-03 2.69E-03 1.98E-03 3.0$E-03 1.72E-03 1.60E-03 Teen 1.5-0E-03 1.21E-03 4.70E-03 2.08E-03 1.50E-03 2.25E-03 1.31E-03 1.19E-03 1 4
Child 2.16E-03 1.99E-03 8.80E-03 3.45E-03 2.37E-03 3.57E-03 2.12E-03 1.98E-03 inhalation Adult 4.08E-03 3.89E-03 2.12E-04 4.16E-03 4.01E-03 7.80E-03 3.92E-03 3.88E-03 Teen 4.06E-03 3.91E-03 2.96E-04 4.29E-03 4.08E-03 8.81E-03 3.98E-03 3.90E-03 Child 3.52E-03 3.46E-03 4.00E-04 3.83E-03 3.61E-03 9.12E-03 3.51E-03 3.46E-03 Infant 2.01E-03 1.99E-03 2.45E-04 2.25E-03 2.09E-03 7.18E-03 2.02E-03 1.99E-03 Total Dose to Receptor M
O Adult 2.44E-02 2.35E-02 2.38E-02 2.48E-02 2.39E-02 2.88E-02 2.36E-02 2.65E-02 C
Teen 2.36E-02 2.31E-02 2.29E-02 2.44E-02 2.36E-02 2.90E-02 2.33E-02 2.61E-02 8
Chi 4d 2.37E-02 2.34E-02 2.72E-02 2.53E-02 2.40E-02 3.07E-02 2.36E-02 2.65E-02 h
Infant 2.00E-02 2.00E-02 1.82C-02 2.02E-02 2.01E-02 2.52E-02 2.00E-02 2.30E-02 m
MN U1 3 El oo 3.3 WG 4 BJ
\\\\
co co AA
(-~
(
(
( -
N L/
.-]
s TABLE 5.2-6 (SHEET 6 OF 7)
Dose Rate (aree/ year)
Total tocati2g Pathway Body Cl T rac t Bone Liver kidney Thyroid Luna Skin hea res t Mi l k Ground 7.20E-03 7.20E-03 7.20E-03 7.20E-03 7.20E-03 7.20E-03 7.20E-03 8.40E-03 Cow (4.60 mile SE)
Cow Milk Adult 3.57E-03 1.21E-03 4.96E-03 4.86E-03 2.47E-03 1.73E-03 1.54E-03 1.12E-03 Teen 4.03E-03 1.82E-03 9.07E-03 8.31E-03 4.08E-03 2.74E-02 2.57E-03 1.71E-03 Child 5.17E-03 3.5tE-03 2.20E-02 1.48E-02 7.36E-03 5.43E-02 4.74E-03 3.42E-03 Infant 8.08E-03 6.44E-03 3.89E-02 2.87E-02 1.27E-02 1.29E-01 8.74E-03 6.35E-03 4
tr. natation Adult 1.83E-03 1.75E-e3 9.22E-05 1.86E-03 1.79E-03 3.49E-03 1.76E-03 1.74E-33 Teen 1.81E-03 1.76E-03 1.29E-04 1.92E-03 1.82E-03 3.95E-03 1.78E-03 1.75E-03 Child 1.58E-03 1.55E-03 1.74E-04 1.71E-03 1.62E-03 4.08E-03 1.57E-03 1.55E-03 Infant 9.03E-04 8.91E-04 1.07E-04 1.01E-03 9.32E-04 3.22E-03 9.07E-04 8.90E-04 hf lo3al Dose to Receptor a
- Q Adult 1.26E-02 1.02E-02 1.23E-02 1.3]E-02 1.15E-02 2.80E-02 1.05E-02 1.13E-02 8
feen 1.31E-02 1.08E-02 1.64E-02 1.74[-02 1.31E-02 3.86E-02 1.16E-02 1.18E-02 C3 Child 1.39E-02 1.23E-02 2.93E-02 2.38E-02 1.62E-0?
6.55E-02 1.35E-02 1.34E-02 t'
Infant 1.62E-02 1.45E-02 4.62E-02 3.69E-02 2.08E-02 1.40E-01 1.69E-02 1.56E-02 hlw I
U1 BB oa 33 C. C.
b 4M Ns%N GO bb
,- m j
I i
s s
v TABLE 5.2-6 (SIIEET 7 OP 7) l4 a.
All data i s on a pe r un i t ba s i s.
Doses were calculated using the CASPAR code.'
b.
Evaluated at a location that could be occupied during the ters of plant operation.
Appendix I design objectives - gaseous effluents (noble gases only):
Camma dose in ai r - 10 mrad / yea r per uni t Beta dose in a ir - 20 mrad / yea r per trai t Dose to total bndy o f ind iv e dua l - 5 mrem / yea r pe r un i t Dose to skin of individual - 15 ares / yea r pe r un i t Annex to Appendix 8 Docket RM-50-2.
Design objectives are the same as Appendix 4 except on a per-site basis; therefore calculated doses should be multiplied by 2.
4 c.
Provided for inf:,rmation only; a receptor is assumed present at the location of a potential pa tNay.
T h i s eva l ua t s on i s ba sed on the wo rs t ca se X/Q a t the si te bounda ry, d.
Evaluated at a location where an exposure patNay and Cose receptor actually exist at the time of licens-ing.
Appendix I design objectives - radioiodines and particulates:
M Dose to any o rgan f rom a l l patNays - 15 area / year per unit Q
I Annex to Appendix 5 Docket RM-05-2 design objectives:
oo Dase to any organ f rom all patNays - 15 ares / yea r per si te U3 1-131 releases - 1 Ci/ year per unit ( reference table 11.3. 3-3)
M D3 e.
Total dose due to realistic pathways.
4
!1if t1 C DD C. C.
AN 4 DJ
\\\\
co co AA
.\\
\\
TABLE 5.2-7 j
AmmuaL so-n1La roeuLarrom - zwracaArno poses (man--re )
l1 Pet *mway Total Body C1 T ract Etat LLver Eidaey Tetvroid Lts_ng win Flume 1.29E-01 1.29E-01
'1.290-01 1.29E-01 1.29E-01 1.29E-01 1.34E-01 3.80E-01 Ground 1.87E-01 1.87E-01 1.87E-01 1.87E-01 1.87E-01 1.87E-01 1.87E-01 2.18t-01 Inhetstion 1.63E-01 1.60E-01 5.99E-03 1.67E-01 1.63E-01 2.95E-01 1.61E-01 1.60E-01 ve9etalples 7.96E-05 5.81E-05 1.85E-04 1.04E-04 7.46E-05 2.04E-04 6.30E-05 5.73E-05 4
Cow stilk 1.56E-04 9.67E-05 4.05E-04 2.ME-04 1.51E-04 7.08E-04 1.13E-04 9.44E-05 8 era t 3.19E-04 2.78E-04 1.05E-03 3.57E-04 3.03E-04 3.90E-04 2.85E-04 2.75E-04 Total 4.80E-01 4.76E-01 3.24E-01 4.33E-01 4.79E-01 6.12E-01 4.82E-01 7.58E-01 i
4M O
4 80 t*
to M
Ji 8
o.
D3
.%.L 5
Q DJ NN MM b b e
l l
VEGP-OLSER-5 f
O ed aum 8Y85855
-9 g W" X X X g *""..k 3
...9 i
a u --
m g
i
??8?8??
w
- 1. f k ---.kk_
kkk
.=
i w
g
? ??878??
g jI553555 i
aa
- aaa
?
I e<
t jIU*5EsE J
??878??
i O
e
- 4 a.:.: ;.: a l
N 5
5Y8585E
! !EnsEsE a.:.:.:...: a i
9999599 i
ElsEfffX i
aaAiai; i
r O
l YY8i8EE O
- l. *s
- x
- 3.
- i
-<9
~
t I
YY 5 8 5 E-k
.k
.---.kk t
88
)
--5
- IE"-
l$
3 I
-s31-Eo 3
Amend. 1 2/84 i
Amend. 4 7/94 l
f
b t
r h)
VEOF-OLSER-6 v
TABLE 6.1-1 (SHEET 1 0F 4) l RADIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING PROGRAM l
sample Medium and Location Frequency Analysis Airborne particulates Continual sampler Radioiodine j
O and radiciodine operation with cannister:
sample collection I,-131
}
Indicator stations weekly ll 7 - Simulator Particulate i
building samplers
(
(1.5 miles SE) gross beta v
activity
[
10 - Meteorogogical following tower filter changes (a)
(1.1 miles SSW) composite (by location) for 16 - Hancock gamma isotopic l
Landing Road quarterly f
(1.4 miles NNW)
'~
Nearest community' '
i 35 - Girard
[
(6.6 miles SSE) l2l4 j
Control station 36 - Waynesboro l
(15 miles WSW)
Direct radiation Quarterly 0.ama dose r
t
()j Thermoluminescent dosimeters l
(see table 6.1-2 for locations) l t
1 Amend. 2 4/04 Amend. 4 7/84 I
1
VEOP-OLSER.
TABLE 6.1-1 (SIIEET 3 0F 4)
Samplo Medium and Locatio3 Frequency Ana_1,ysi_n Indicator station 04 - River miles 148.5 to 150.5 Milk Diwookly Gamma isotopic and I-131 98 - W. C. Dixon Dairy 4
(9.0 milon'GE)
Orano Monthly Camma instopic Indicator stations 7 - Simulator building (1.5 miles SE) 15 - llancock Landing Road (1.5 miles tJW)
Control atation 3G - Waynooboro (15 miles WSW)
Flah Annually camma isotopic on edible Control atation portions of componitos of 01 - River miles 153 any commercial to 150 or recreationally important species, Indicator station auch as bream or catfish 05 - Itiver milen 144 to 149.4 Amend. 4 7 / 51 4
~
i
'(l
' VEGP-OLSER-6 1
TABLE 6.1-2
.THERMOLUMINESCENT DOSIMETER LOCATIONS
- (
Distance Direction Station (miles)
(sector) 1: Hancock Landing Road 1.1 N
l (~ -..
2: River bank O.8 NNE
~A 3
River bank' O.7 NE 4 ' River bank O.8 ENE 5 - River bank 1.2 E
6 Plant Wilson 1.1 ESE 7. Simulator building 1.5 SE 8
River road 1.1 SSE
-9
- River Road 1.1 S
10 River Road 1.1 SSW 11 - River Road 1.2 SW 12' River Road 1.1 WSW 13 River Road 1.3 W
c14. River Road-1.8 BRM l4 15 Hancock Landing Road 1.5 NW lY 16 Hancock Landing Road 1.4 NNW
, (/
17 Savannah River Plant --
5.4 N
I4 River Road 18 Savannah River Plant -
'5.0 NNE
.D Area 19 Savannah River Plant -
4.6 NE
' Road A.13 20 Savannah River Plant -
4.8 ENE Road A.13.1 21 Savannah River Plant -
5.3 E
Road A.17
- 22 River bank upstream of 4.2
ESE 1
Buxton Landing SE f
l4 A'
23 River Road-4.7
-s
.4 Chance Road 49 SSE g
2
/
z-1, 25. Chance Road and Highway 23
- ( S c2 S
26 Highway 23, mi.15.5' 4.6 SSW 27 ' Highway 23, mi 17
'J4. G SW 28' Hancock-Landing. Road 5.0, WSW
~^1 29 Claxton-Lively Road l 5'. O >
W
_ i j"S
'30--Ben Hatcher Road 4.7 WNW l,/.
31'. River Road at Allen's
-5.0 s
NW 4
~s Church Fork 32 ' River bank 4.8 NNW 3
33 Nearby residence 3.3 SE h
13 4 Girard Elementary School 6.3 SSE 35 Girard-
- 6. 6-SSE g
- 36 Waynesboro 15:0
.WSW Amend. 3 5/84 s
Arend.~4 7/84 s
s *
.-e,g g
,y_,.&,-,--.,-._--..+,.,.mj_.,--.q_.
.,y..,,,,.g_,,.,wg,,,,wr,.wnn.g,v.,,.,,wmr,,,p,w,n,
'g.-,,m.,
,.,-ew,wmwww
.y-,.,-,s,-
.-,.wgyg-,y
^
VEGP-OLSER-6 6.4 PREOPERATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL RADIOLOGICAL MONITORING DATA
-Radiological monitoring began August 1981 and is conducted as IN
.specified in subsection 6.1.5.
The results of the radiological L
.\\-
monitoring program for the period from August 1981 through December 1982 are summarized in this section.
Although data on both. manmade and naturally occurring radionuclides are presented in:the tables, discussion is limited to manmade radionuclides.
Alliof;the. radiological analyses.of the environmental samples were contracted to the. Center.for Applied Isotope Studies at the University of Georgia in Athens, Georgia.
Thermoluminescent
- dosimeters were analyzed by Hazelton Environmental Sciences of 1Northbrook, Illinois.
Gross beta' activity of airborne particulates and atmospheric radioiodine concentrations are monitored by five continuous air samplers.
The date sampling began, number of samples collected, and estimated. average activities are summarized in table 6.4-1.
. Average gross-beta. activity.at the indicator stations ranged "from 0.019'pci/m' to 0.024.pCi/m'.
The average gross beta activity in the nearest community-(Girard) and at the control
. station (Waynestoro) were 0.031 pCi/m* and 0.025 pCi/m',
(~%
- respectively.
Airborne I-131' activity was below the minimum
- (_,b detectable concentration in all samples analyzed.
A summary of
- specific. radionuclides-found in quarterly composites of air particulate samples is: presented in table 6.4-2.
Cs-137 was the only fission product detected and was present at the minimum detectable concentration in 4.of 30 composite samples from both indicator.and control stations.
Water from the Savannah-River is collected using composite samplers,-two at control stations upstream of the plant site and
- three at indicator stations downstream of-the plant site.
Results.of monthly gamma spectroscopic. analysis and quarterly analysis of composites.for tritium are summarized.in table 6.4-3.
The following-fission products were-detected in river
. ' ("\\ ;
water samples:. Zr-95,-Nb-95, and Cs-134 in one sample out of 39 d_)
collected at indicator' stations; and Cs-137 in 4 of 39 samples collected at indicator stations and 3 of 32 samples collected at
[;
icontrol stations..The average tritium. concentrations at' control
-stations and indicator stations were 487 pCi/l and 1392 pCi/1, E
<respectively.
l4 p.
L(,);
Drinking water samples are collected'from one upstream location
~
-and two downstream locations. -Drinking water samples have been collectedLfrom Cherokee Hill Water Treatment Plant since November 1981 and North Augusta Water Treatment. Plant beginning December 11982.
Results are' summarized in table 6.4-4.
Thirteen 6.4-1 h
Amend. 4 7/84 u.
h VEGP-OLSER-6 water samples have been analyzed from Cherokee Hill Water Treatment Plant.
Gross beta activity averaged 5.3 pCi/1.
Gamma spectroscopic analysis identified.
No gamma emitting l
nuclides were detected.
Tritium conce'ntrations averaged 3490 l
pCi/l in five composite samples.
Only one drinking water sample is reported for the North Augusta Water Treatment Plant.
Gross beta activity was 2.32 pCi/1, and the tritium concentration was 501 pCi/1.
Sediment samples are collected at two locations above the plant h
site and one location below the plant site.
Four sediment samples were collected between September 1981 and December 1982.
A single sample was collected from each of the two upstream control locations, and two samples were collected from the downstream indicator station (table 6.4-5).
Samples from the control stations contained Zr-95, Nb-95, and Cs-134 (one sample) and Cs-137 (both samples).
Samples from the indicator stations contained Nb-95 (one sample) and Cs-137 (both samples).
The Cs-137 concentrations for the indicator and control sections were 98 and 235 pCi/kg, respectively.
The closest operating dairy (prior to March 1984), Dixon Dairy, is located 9.8 miles southeast of the plant site (see response 3 14 to question 470.3).
A summary of I-131 activity and gamma h
spectroscopic analysis of milk samples are presented in table 6.4-6.
I-131 activity was below the minimum detectable concentration in all samples.
Cs-137 was the only fission product detected in milk samples.
Cs-137 was detected in 4 of 33 samples with an average detectable activity of 23 pCi/1.
Grass samples are collected from two locations on the plant site and from one control site.
Results of gamma isotopic analysis of dried grass are summarized in table 6.4-7.
Samples were collected beginning in December 1981.
The following fission products were detected in grass samples:
Nb-95, in 1 sample out of 14 collected at indicator stations; Cs-134, in 1 sample out of 10 collected at the control station; and Cs-137, in all 14 samples collected at indicator stations and 1 of 10 samples collected at the control station.
Fish samples are collected on.the Savannah River above and below the plant site.
Fish tissue was obtained from four species collected during'six surveys.
Cs-137 was found in all fish tissue samples (table 6.4-8).
Concentrations ranged from 110 pCi/kg in catfish to 890 pCi/kg in largemouth bass at the indicator stations, and 116 to 370 pCi/kg at the control station for these same species.
O 6.4-2 Amend. 3 5/84 Amend. 4 7/84
L-0 0
0 0
0 O
i
' TABLE 6.~4-1
SUMMARY
OF. GROSS BETA ACTIVITY IN AIRBORNE DUST AND AIRBORNE-I-131 ACTIVITY it0 3
Date Cross Beta f oCi/m31 1-131 foCl/m 1
?'
. Sampling Number or Number of i
Beaan Samoles Ava t Std (Ranael Samples Ava(83 j
indicator Stations f
.1.tation No.
Location I'
7 Simulator building 11-03-81 58 0.019 1 0.006 (0.003-0.03) 58 0.039
]
(1.5 miles SE) 10 Me teo ro log ica l Tower L O8-31-81 67 0.022 1 0.020 (0.006-0.134) 64 0.039
'(1.1 miles.SSW) 16 Hancock Landing 09-0.9-81 67 0.024 1 0.024 (0.001-0.182) 67 0.038 (1,4 mi NNW)
Nea re s t Commun i ty Station No.
Location 4
h i
O 1
35 Di ra rd 09-28-81 67 0.031 1 0.065 (0.006-0.49) 66 0.038 M
j (6.6 miles SSE)
[
}
Control Station b
ts2 1
Station No.
Location
,o l
1 1
{
J 36 Waynesbo ro 08-31-81 67 0.025 1 0.022 (0.007-0.189) 66 0.040 m
i I
i j.
1 i
l I
k l
1 i
i G
a.
1-131 was less than minimum detectable concentration (MDC) fo r a l l samples.
Therefore, only the average MDC is reported for the
.$ period.
1 A
1-N 00
+
b i
3, -
d' VEGP-OLSER-6 TABLE 6.4-4
SUMMARY
OF GROSS BETA ACTIVITY, TRITIUM CONCENTRATIONS, AND SPECIFIC RADIONUCLIDES DETECTED IN DRINKING WATER SAMPLES Indicator Station "}
Control Station (b)
I (pCi/ liter)
(pCi/ liter)
Analysis Avg + Std (Fract)
Avg + Std (Fract)
Gross Beta 5.3 +
8.8 (13/13) 2.32 (1/1)
Tritium 3490 + 1212 (d) (5/5) 370(d)
(1/1) 4
-Gamma Spectrescopy (c)
(c) 9 i
e 4 o l
l E
I O
I
- i..
Only Cherokee Hill Water Treatment Plant has been sampled at I
a.
I-'
.this time, b.
Samples taken beginning in December 1982.
l c.
Radionuclides not detected in samples.
d.
First quarter 1981 data included in this average was not 4
corrected for decay.
Amend. 4 7/84
~ -.
VEGP-OLSER-6 I:
TABLE 6.4-9
SUMMARY
OF TRITIUM CONCENTRATION AND OTHER RADIONUCLIDES DETECTED IN GROUNDWATER SAMPLES OBTAINED AUGUST 1982 Location Gamma Spectroscopic Tritium (a)
Analysis Radionuclidel4 Station No.
Location (pCi/1)
Concentration (pCi/1) t Makeup Wells 240 + 21 None j-61 Mallard'e Pond 1280 + 40 None 62 Bluff at river mile 150 3810 + 70 None d
J T
2 O
i
'a.
Tritium activity was not corrected for decay.
l4 Amend. 4 7/84 s
... _.,.. _. _. _.. _ _ _ _ _. ~.,.... _ _ _.,, _.... -
()
VEGP-OLSER-7A Table 6.2.1 of the LPGS lists the transmitted fraction for a number of radionuclides, the more important of which are reproduced as follows:
\\
i Nuclide T1/2 (yrs)
T.F.
Ru-106 1
0.33 Cs-137 30 0.31
';he values are based on the following data assumed in the LPGS for the generic river site:'ll' 1500 ft GWTT =
= 224 days = 0.61 year 6.7 ft/ day a (H-3)
=1 (equivalent values of Kd = 0) 1 a (Sr-90)
= 9.2 (equivalent values of K
= 2) 7 d
(
\\/
a (Ru-106) =1 (equivalent values of K
0) d a (Cs-137) = 83 (equivalent values of Kd
0)
The equivalent values of Kd used in the LPGS are quite low in comparison to other estimates for Sr-90 and Cs-137.
In the Sandia liquid pathway study, Kd values of 20 and 200 were used for Sr-90 Cs-137, respectively. ' 12 '
Duke Power Company estimated Kd values of 560 (Cs-137) and 6 (Sr-90) for the fractured bedrock underlying its Catawba Nuclear Station. ' 2 8' Kd values of 5 (Sr-90) and 50 (Cs-137) were estimated to represent the ccrplex groundwater hydrology at the Seabrook Station site.
At Seabrook,. groundwater exists both in bedrock (h
and in surface soils.'
Values of Kd for the granular I
\\~/
materials underlying the San Onofre Nuclear Station were estimated as 31 (Sr-90) and 2204 (Cs-137).'15' Regardless of this evidence for larger values and because no specific Kd estimates were available for the VEGP sites, the values used in the LPGS are adopted for convenience.
(\\ >)
The groundwater transport time at the VEGP site is estimated to be 27.4 years.
On the basis of this and the Kd (or "a") values n
7A-15 Amend. 1 2/84 J
I
VEGP-0LSER-7A used in the LPGS the transmitted fractions for the principal radienuclides are as follows:
Nuclide T
(vr) in (T.F.)
T.F.
T.F.
(VEGP)/T.F. (LPGS)
Ha 12.1
-1.57 0.21 0.22 Sr-90 28
-6.24 0.002 0.002 Ru-106 1
-19.0 0
0 Cs-137 30
-52.5 0
0 l4 the effect of the much longer GWTT at the VEGP site (27.4 years compared to 0. 51 years in the LPGS), even with the relatively
~
s, mall assumed values of k, is very significant.
Virtually no Cs-137 or Ru-106 would be expected to reach the Savannah River.
Only 2/1000 of the released Sr-90 would reach the river (compared to a transmitted fraction of 0.87 in the LPGS).
Tritium is closer to the LPGS results with a transmitted fraction of 0.21 for VEGP compared to 0.97.
1 The source effect on liquid pathway consequences can be summarized as follows:
A.
Pathway doses which are dominated by Cs-137 and/or Ru-106 will be nil in comparison to doses calculated in the LPGS.
B.
Pathways doses which are dominated by Sr-90 will be about 3 orders of magnitude lower than those calculated in the LPGS, assuming equal pathways exposure.
C.
Pathways doses from H will be lower but within the same order of magnitude, assuming equal pathways exposure.
At the levels of population dose calculated in both NUREG-0440 and in the Sandia study '"),
tritium is not a significant contributor.
This is in part due to the smaller core inventory of tritium (two to three orders of magnitude less the curie content than Sr-90, Cs-137, or Ru-106 ) ' 2 7 ' and also in part to the relatively low total body dose factor (1 x 102 man-rem / curie compared to 1.9 x 10' man / rem / curie for Sr-90 and 8 x 10' man-rem / curie for Cs-13 7 ). ' "'
7A.4.6 DRINKING WATER PATHWAY COMPARISON The LPGS generic river system was assumed to supply drinking water to 620,000 people.'">
As shown in table 2.1-44 the current number of people that get their drinking water supply 0
7A-16 Amend. 1 2/84 Amend. 4 7/84 L_
VEGP-OLSER-7A TABLE 7A-3 AVERAGE VALUES OF ENVIRONMENTAL RISKS DUE
. O-TO ACCIDENTS PER REACTOR-YEAR Environmental Risk Average Value Population exposure 121.0 O
(total man-rems)
Acute fatalities 0.00000586 l1 4
Latent cancer fatalities 0.000575 (all organs excluding thyroid)
Cost of protective actions
$5084
<a>
l1 and decontamination
- 0 i
(
o O
l' a.
1980 dollars.
O l
l l
Amend. 1 2/84
[-
00160 Amend. 4 4/84 l
. - -..... - ~ -
-.,. - - - =
')
10-3 Ch V
104 4
x
^'
3 1D-5 N
=
a.
E
\\
4 o
4
(
$ 10 s
5 m.
(x 10'7 8
E 104 (VD 4
10 103 4
5 6
7 8
10 10 10 10 10 TOTAL PERSON REM WHOLE BODY (X)
(
VOGTLE PROBABILITY DISTRIBUTION FOR
- b ELECTRIC GENER ATING PLANT TOTAL POPULATION EXPOSURE Georgia Power UNIT 1 AND UNIT 2 FIGURE 7A-2 Amend. 4 7/84
b
$v N^/
~o H hC 8 dt CH W8 HH w
W "t
)w(
)
8>
nc 8 w
se H>
CM ot D:
K 0t C
88 O
HC H
- t a m
H>
]mN W
l
> cl 4N'/
Wo g
om T
H2>"r O'
No O
~x z
d i
>w m
d EQ C
2z me w
OQ
/V, 02 j
Mb>
m m
- T W
_ n o =r 2 g>
<mC mC
,v-b o
E
- f Cc
/(
O
(
o O
g Q
d o
O O
O.
s v
)
)X Q SEITILATAF ETUCA FO RAEY REP YTILIBABORP O
@v 0
ymaup* 7 L/8P
4 40 1
mf N
O I
TUS BR IE 4
RC
}
TN SA A
r_
7 IC D
3 L
E 0
YA R
TT U
1 IA G
LF I
F
)
I X
J BR
(
S AO R
BF A
OR E
P Y
03 R
O 2
F 0
1 R
T A
NA E
L Y
P G
R N
E I
T P
A2 S
RT E
E I
I N N T
EU GD I
L CN r
A E R I
A T
L 1
T T
A G EI CT 1
0 F OLN 1
VEU R
E C
kh NAC r
=
T e
N w
E o
=
T P
A
=
L.
.a ig r
0 o
0 e
1 m,
G
(
n
-(
1 0
1 5
6 7
8 0
0 0
0 1
1 1
1 y)..
Q
= i" <><u E wo.Z<O Wh><J.. uO x4W> xE >bdm4nOxL
~J c
c
(
9 3
3 4
4
,1
.1 I
i i
4 S
N O
8 I
' 's T
C 0
A 1
0 1
GN ITA 5
G h,]
I A
f T
7 I
9 M
E 0
R
)
1 E
U T
G I
I S
F F
m/
F O
/
F O
80 T
1 S
OC
)X
(
T S
N R
AL A
P 7
L G
0 L N
1 I
O T
D A2 RT 0
EI 8
N N 9
EU 1
GD N
CN fN I A
~
I E R T
L T1 S
T CT 6
O GEI 0
OLN 1
C VEU L
A kh T
O T
re w
5 o
9 P
1 a
ig ro e
G
)
'(
4 0
3 1
s r.
^
30 1
3 4
5 6
7 8
0 0
0'
-0 0
0 1
1 1
1 1
1
_X
$oO Equ>WE b 3i<mocL i
_ m.
s i
cc 9
3 3
4 0$. A qma l
.[
d TABLE.QE290.8-1 (SHEET l'-OF-2)
L j-
. COOLING TOWER DRIFT PARAMETERS FOR VOGTLE'AND FOUR OTHER PLANTS
- j' Plant /..
Type of Cooling' Vogtle/
Susquehenna/
. Beaver Va lley/
Shea ron Harris /
Grand Gul f/
Tower Na tu ra l Dra f t Halura l Dra f t Na tu ra l O ra f t Na tu ra l D ra f t ga tu ra l Dra f t Unit 1 Unit 2 j
Number or cooling towers 2
2 1
1 4
2
' Height of cooling tower 550 ft 540 ft 501 ft 501 ft 520 ft 522 ft I
.Cua ranteed 0.03%
0.02%.
0.05%
0.013%'
O 05%
0.008%
Drift Rate Expected 0.008%
0.002%
0.005%
NA 0.002%
NA Circulating water flow rate 484,600 gpm 478,000 gpm 480,400 gpm 507,400 gpm 482,000 gpm 572,000 gpm I
Concentration in makeup 60 mg/L (avg) 432 mg/ L (*I 204 mg/ E(avg) 203 mg/L 70 mg/ E(avg) 376 mg/ L(avg) l (max)
(avg) h Concentration factor 4 (avg) 3.8 (avg) 1.8 (avg)'
1.8 (avg) 7.7 (avg) 5 (max)(*3 O
e i
Concentrat io.i.n blowdown 240 mg/L(avg) 1640 mg/l (*I 368 mg/t(avg) 365 mg/L 539 mg/E (avg) 1880mg/)d'\\ max)
O (max)
(avg)
{
Evaporation rate 3.0%
2.3%
1.5%
2.0%
1.5%
1.8%
h I
4 i
Plant capacity 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.8 O
M3
< 100p m 45%
20%
NA 35%
NA 45%
Droplet j
j sire I
100-300 pm 50%
70%
NA 65%
NA 55%
distribution,
4 l
{
', > 300 pm 5%
10%
NA 0%
NA 0%
]
f Rate 17 lb/ acre /yr 3 lb/ acre /yr 80 lb/ acre /yr 3 lb/ acre /yr 400 lb/ac re/yr NA
)
14ax onsite Distance from 0.9 miles 0.'6 miles 0.3 miles 0.75 miles 0.3 miles NA l
}
drift CT i
deposition 1
y Wind sector SE NE SE SW SW NA g
deposited in i
3 A.
W t
I (n
t
}
\\
?
00 O
i s
3
A -
-H L}
. (%.i I
.o
)$
lj
~
d 1
i.
[
TABLE QE290. 8-1. (SHEET 2 ' OF 2) l^
' Plant /
j Type of Cooling Vogtle/
Na tu ra l Dra f t Ma tu ra l D ra f t Na tu ra l D ra f t Na tu ra l Dra f t.
Susquehenna/.
Beave r Va l ley /.
Shea ron Ha rri s/
G ra nd ' Gu l f/
1 Tower Na tu ra l D ra f t Unit 1 Unit 2 i
9.9 lb/ acre /y'I' NA 5.02 'Ib/ acre /yrE 4 l
Rate
- 15. lb/ acre /yr. 3 lb/ acre /yr
- MA I
. Max offsite Distance from 1.0 miles 0.6 miles NA 0.9 miles
' NA 0.6 miles
.=
(
i drif t
NA E
deposited in 1
i
}
Humidity 72%
70%
69% *I 73.5%
71%
76%
I b'
l Tempe ra tu re 63.4*F 49'T 50.3'F-49.1*F 60*F 65.5*F g) i 92 J
Wind speed in 6.6 miles /hr(b3 8.7 miles /hr 5.6 88) 6.6tbl 8.7 miles /hr 6.4 miles /hr I
k3 I
Me teo ro l og ica l predominant miles /hr miles /hr C) i j
conditions, direction
{3 j
annual avg l
p3 Frequency of 12%
14.5%
15.6%
10.5%
10.6%
9.0%
dominant wind pd I,
I K)
Dominant E
D E
D E-F D-E Pasquil i
s ta b i l i ty class a.
Design maximum values were used in sa l t d ri f t model l'ng, b.
Average wind speed in the dominant. wind direction is not available, local average wind speed is applied. The actual wind j
speed is expected to be higher.
Ii c.
Wind speed has been adjusted from 33 ft to 150 f t by the following equation: V/V = (Z/Z,)", with Vi = wind speed at a I
given level, 2 = reference haight, and P = 0.45.
3 1
l d.
Although droplet size distribution for Unit 1 cooling tower was not provided in the envi ronmental reports, it is expected to be similar to that for Unit 2.
Based on the data collected onsite between Septembei 5, 1969 to September 5, 1970.
i CL CL j
f.
Based on the data collected onsite between Janua ry 1, 1976 to December 31, 1980.
g.
Deposition rate represents the contribution from both units.
4 i
%J tn i
l
]*
oD CO l
Am J1 3
[)
VEGP-OLSER-Q
.\\_/
Question E290.10 Please specify what types of areas along power line corridors f~']
will be treated with herbicides and why herbicide treatment is
\\/
necessary in these areas.
Give the expected total acreage that might be treated with herbicides and describe the herbicide application procedure.
/7
Response
b Georgia Power Company.uses herbicides to maintain its rights-of-way mainly in inaccessible areas.
Inaccessible areas include l4 mountainous terrain and low lying marsh or swampy areas.
Both 3
mowing and hand cutting are less efficient than aerial spraying in_these areas.
Also, cutting tools are more dangerous to use in difficult terrain.
Georgia Power Company has maintained less than 1 percent of its rights-of-way brush with herbicides over the last 3 years.
For this period, the average number of brush acres maintained has r
been 40,069.
An average of only 299 brush acres were aerially sprayed.
This represents less than 1 percent of the total
' number of brush acres maintained.
Spraying activities of the
- o).
(_
rights-of-way acreages associated with VEGP should not be more-than one percent of the area.
Georgia Power Company aerial spraying is conducted according to the following procedures and specifications:
1..
Only herbicides approved by the Environmental Protection Agency for rights-of-way use are applied.
2.
Application is done by a licensed pesticide applicator.
3.
Herbicide is applied only when wind velocity or other weather-conditions will not be detrimental to the
(,N.
)
quality of work or the surrounding area.
4.
A Georgia Power Company employee familiar with herbicide application and use will continually monitor the application when spraying is done within the system.
.p t
s_/
'J QE290.10-1 Amend. 3 5/84 Amend. 4 7/84
4I
.VEGP-OLSER-Q
~
NUCLEAR REGUL TORY COMMISSION QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES INDEX VOGTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT - UNITS 1 AND 2 OPERATING, LICENSE STAGE ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT l
NRC DOCKET NUMBERS 50-424 AND 50-425 OLSER NRC Question Section/ Subsection Keywords 1-E240.14 7A.4 Groundwater velocity and i
travel time based on effective porosity.
E24b.15 2.4.2 Possible groundwater l
contamination.
10 L.
~
j-I l
I LO t
i LO 1
i O
Q-1 Amend. 4 7/84
f VEGP-OLSER-Q
. Question E240.14 (OLSER 7A.4)
The groundwater velocity and travel time should be based on 7
effactive porosity rather than total porosity.
Revise your
. values _and results accordingly.
There is also an error in the table on page 7A-16. _The half-life for Cs-137 should be 30
- years'rather thaa 3 years as shown.
Response
' Effective porosity, as used in this~ question, is believed to be as described by Todd (Todd, D.
K.,
" Groundwater Hydrology," J.
Wiley.and Sons, second edition, p, 27, 1980); "The term
" effective porosity" ref,ers to the amount of interconnected pore space available for fluid flow and is also (as-is total
. porosity) expressed as a ratio of interstices to total volume.
For_ unconsolidated porous media and for many consolidated rocks, the two;porosites (effective and total) are identical."
Although.they don't refer to " effective porosity," Freeze and Cherry-(Freeze,_R.~ A.
and Cherry, J.
A.,
" Groundwater,"
Prentice-Hall Inc.,'p.
71, 1979) address the concept in t-
' ' -p-determining the " average linear velocity (U), which they state d
as:
-v + Q/nA
- where, 3
.QL = volumetric' flux'(L /T).
n_= porosity.'(ratio), and 2
A = cross-sectional area of the media (L ),
' Freeze and Cherry also describe-an alternative form of the equation suggested by Nelson (Nelson, R.' W.,
"In-place M
Determination of Permeability Distribution for Heterogeneous
(')=
Porous Media Through-Analysis of Energy Dissipation", Society of Petroleum Engineers Journal,.No. 8, 1968);
_v + pfenA where, e is an_ empirical constant dependent on the characteristics of:the porous medium (recognizing that more than just porosity will. affect the velocity).
They go on to point out that laboratory-studies of.relatively uniform sands indicate
. values.of e range 0.98.- 1.18, and that it is commonly assumed Ein tracer and contamination studies-that e = 1.
QE240.14-1 Amend. 4 7/84
- -e m e -e e w ow w+-eon-ww-w----
[
VEGP-OLSER-Q Based on these references, we belicve that total porosity is the best estimate of " effective porosity."
The value for the half-life of Cs-137 found on page 7A-16 has been corrected to 30 years.
O, l
1 l
l l
i O
1 I
)
O1 l
9l l
1 r
l l
QE240.14-2 Amend. 4 7/84
., _ _ -. ~ _.. -.
)
VEGP-OLSER-Q
.(
Question E240.15
. Groundwater is a.very valuable natural resource and the local (s-#,}-
populace has expressed their concern regarding possible 5
contamination of this resource.
The subjbet thus warrants comprehensive censideration in the Environmental Report as well as in the FSAR.
Provide a general discussion in the Environmental Report
~ ("N
' addressing the portential for radioactive contamination of,the i
\\
several aquifers beneath and around the Vogtle site.
Consider several potential scenarios other than the core melt, such as a surface spill and pipe leak.
You could also cross reference the tank spill.that is evaluated as the worst case design accident in the FSAR.
Include a discussion of the possible methods of controlling and/or mitigating contamination of the aquifers.
Response
Subsection 2.4.2 has been amended to include a discussion of the potential for groundwater contamination at the VEGP.
' N)J.
-f
.[%
-QE240.15-1 Amend. 4 7/84
~ ' '
&a.w.,
.,,.-----,m-
.