ML20105B803

TMI-1 Semiannual Effluent Release Rept for Jan Through June 1992

ML20105B803
Person / Time
Site:	Three Mile Island
Issue date:	06/30/1992
From:	GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP.
To:
Shared Package
ML20105B801	List: ML20105B798 ML20105B803
References
NUDOCS 9209210196
Download: ML20105B803 (12)

Text

C311-92-2123 HKUCUTIVE_ SUMHZLJ P

Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit 1 Effluent and Off Bite Dose heport for the Period of January 1, 1992 through June 30, 1992 This report summarizes the radioactive liquid and gaseous releases

'offluents) from Three Mile Island Unit 1 and the calculated maximum hypothetical radiation exposure to the public resulting from these releases.

This report covers the period of operation from January 1, through June 30, 1992.

Radiological releases from the plant are monitored by installed plant radiation monitors which survey the plant stack for gaseous releases and liquid discharges to the Susquehanna River for liquid releases.

These monitors and associated sample analysos provido a means to accurately determine the type and quantities of radioactive materials being released to the environment.

Calculations of the maximum hypothetical dose to an individual and the total population around Three Mile Island due to radioactive releases from the plant are made utilizing environmental conditions existing at tha time of the release.

Dusquehanna River flow data are used c?

calculete the maximum hypothetical doses to an individual a s *-

't.

population downstream of TMI due to liquid releases.

Artuoi c:

"real-time" meteorological data from an onsite tower is ti n d 19 det. ermine the doses resulting from gaseous releases from the plant, na use of real-time motoorological information permits tho determination of both the direction in which the release traveled and the dispersion of radioactive material in the environment.

Utilizing gaseous affluent data and real-time meteorology, the maximum hypothetical dose to any individual and to the total population within l

50 miles of the plant is calculated.

Similarly, Busquehanna River flow and liquid effluent data are used to calculate a maximum hypothetical dose to an individual and a population dose from liquid effluents for i

any shoreline exposure down to the Chesapeake Day.

Exposure to the public from consumption c! water and fish wit.hdrawn from the Susquehanna River dowastroan of the plant is also calculated.

I 1

920921 09 l

PDR

-A PDR R

1

-_.m i

C311-92-2123 i

4 Dose calculations for liquid and gaseous effluents are performed using a mathematical model which is based on the methods defined by the U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The maximuu hypothetical doses are conservative overestimates of the actual off site doses which are likely to occur.

For example, the dose does not take into consideration the removal of radioactive material frcs the river water by precipitation of insoluble salts, absorption i

onto river sediment, biological removal, or removal during processing by water companies prior to distribution and consumption.

l Liquid discharges nade during the reporting period January 1 through June 30, 1992 consisted of 66.8 curies of tritium, and 0.02 curies of other beta and gamma emitters, predominrtely Co-58, Ca-134 and Cs-137.

The quantities of effluants are similar to average semiannual releases from Unit 1 operations.

During the rt. porting period January 1 through June 30, 1992, the maximum l

hypothetical calculated whole body dose to an individual due to liquid effluents from Three Mile Island Unit 1 was about 0.06 millirem.

The maximum hypothetical calculated dose to any organ of an individual was 0.09 millirem to thm liver.

Airborne discharges made during this same time period consisted of 0.08 curies of tritium, 30.5 curies of noble gases, and 0.00006 curies of l

iodines and particulatcL.

These quantities of effluents are also similar to semiannual releases f rom previous Unit 1 operation, since 1985 restart.

I The maximum hypothetical calculated dose to any individucl from noble gases was 0.002 mrom to the skin and 0.0007 mrem to the khole body.

Airborne radiciodine, tritium and particulates are calculated to produce 0.001 mrom to the thyroid of the maximum hypothetical individual.

The total maximum hypothetical whole body dose of 0.06 mrem, received by any individual from effluents from the Three Mile Island Nuclear Station Unit i during the reporting period is 2,400 times lower than the dose the average individual in the Three Mile Island area receives from natural background, including natural radon, during the same time period.

Natural background averages about 50 millirem whole body semiannually in the Three Mile Island area.

In addition, the average equivalent semiannual done to the total body from natural radon is aoout 100 milli em.

The calculated whols body population dose from all plant releases is 0.596 person-rem.

This is 550,000 timeo lower than the dose attributed to natural background radiation for the reporting period.

The doses which could have been raceived by the maximum hypothetical individual are each 2.0 percent or less of the annual limits establisned by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission in Appendix I of 10 CFR 50.

2 i

e n - - m mm-,

---r--,

- mm - m e

,,n.,

,e,

.... u-

. -,. - - -. - - - - - - - - - = - - - - -, - - - - - -

~w

= --

'"'''''""'#"""^""'

C311-92-2123 i

SUPPLEMEkiAL IDFDRMAfl0N FACittiin TN! Ohli 1 (lCEW$Es DPR 50-289

+

1. - REtiUL ATORT LIMITS - - - REFER TO IMI Util 1 TECHalCAL SPEtiflCATIDh5 i

A. flS$1DN AND ACilVATIDN GASES:

l B. 10D l h E S :

1 C. PARI!CULAfES, HALF-LIVES > $ DAYS; i

D. L10UID E8FLUEWiS 2.

max! MUM PERMIS$1BLE CE*CENTRAi!Oh5 - - - 10 Cf R 20, Af f EkDir B T ABLE 11 P& OVIDE THE MPCS USED th DETERM!hlhG AttowABLE RELEASE RATES DR CONCENTRA110NS.

A. FIST 1DN AND ACTiVATIDN GASES:

B. IDD!hES:

C. F ARi1CULATE$, HALF. LIVES > 8 DAYS D. LIQUID EtFLUEWIS:

l 3.

AVER ACE E hERGY FRDVfDE THE AVERAGE EhERGY (E-6AR) of THE RADIDJUCLIDE MIXTURE IN RELEA$ES OF FIS$1DN AND ACTIVAT10N CASES. IF APPLICABLE E-BAR BETA a

3. 06E E-SAR GAMHA

• 5.37E-01 8.43E-01 E-4AR BETA AND GAMM) a 4 MEASUREMENTS ANO APPROXlMATIDh5 0F TOTAL RADIDACTIVlfY PROVibE THE METHODS USED 10 ME ASURE OR APPRoxlMATE THE TOT AL RADIDACTIV!TY

1. EFFLUENTS AND THE METH00S USED TO DETERMihE RADlohUCLIDE COMPOSil!ON:

l A. FIS$10N AND ACilVAllDN CASES: HPGE SPECTPOMFTRY, LIQUID SCINilLLATIDN B. IDDINES:

fiPGE SPECTROMETRY C. PARilCULATES HPCE SPECTROMETRY, CAS FLOW PRDi>0RilDNAL, BETA SPECTRCNEIRY D. LIQUID EFFLUENTS:

HPCI SPECTRCNETRY, Llou!D SClWilLLAT!DN

5. BATCH REllA$[$

PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING lbf DRMAflDN RELAilhG TO BATCH RELEASES OF RADIDACTIVliY MATERIALS IN LIQUID ASEOLS EFFLUENTS.

A. LIDUID (ALL i!MES IN MINUIES)

QUARTER 1 00ARTER 2

1. NUMBER OF BATCH REttASES:

12 13

2. TOTAL ilME PER100 FDR BATCH RELE ASES:

5/05, 5429

3. MAXIMUM TIME PERIOD FOR A BATCH RELEASE:

814.

655.

i

4. AVERAGE IIME PFR100 FOR BATCH RELEASES:

475.

418.

5. MINIMUM ilME PERIOD FOR A BATCH RELEASE:

270.

95.

6. AVERAGE STRE AM FLOW DURikG PER1005 0F RELEASE OF EFFLUENT INTO A FLOWING 5:#EAM: (CFM)

2. 74E +06 2.18t + D6 B. GASEQUS (ALL TIMES th MINUTES)

1. NUMBER OF BATCH RELEASES:

11 14

2. TOTAL TIME *ER100 FOR BATCH RELEASES:

7766 34980.

3. MA*J MUM TIME PERIOD FOR A BATCH RELE ASE:

820.

25800.

l

4. AVERAGE f!ME PEkl00 FOR BATCH RELIA $ES:

706.

0499

5. M I N I MUM f l ME PE R I OL' F OR A S? f CH R E L E ASE :

4 5.

6. ABNDRMAL RELEASES A. LIQUID

1. NUMBER OF RELEASES: -O-

2. TOTAL ACilviff RELEASED: ( CUR IE K)

W/A N/A B. CASE 0JS

1. NUMBER OF RELEASES:

4-

-O-

2. TOT AL ACilVlfY RELEASED: (CURlES)

N/A N/A k

-e m i e-a w-- - - -.mn

,m-,,,_,a

,_,n,-,

r-

.wi,--eemm,rn,---..,-,,,-e

-m-v,,-

n an-e w-m~n

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

,,,-m--r nr-s,-,,

,-e

,n-m - - -.,-

p

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

C311-92-2123 TA8LE i' l

fiflUEh1 AND WAlif DllPOSAL $[N! AWWUAL REPOR1 (1992) f GA5(005 Cf FLUtht$-SOMMAllDN OF ALL RELEA$ts g

t LkIf QUARTER 1 QUARifR 2

($i. TOTAL (RRDR, X A.

Til$ ION AND AtilkAtlDN LAlf$

1. TOTAL RtLEALE Cl 6.49t + D0 2.40t+01 2.50t+01

2. AVG. RittASE RATE v l/sec 8.34t-01 3.05C+00 Fte PER100 e

-4 7

3. PtRCENT Of itch.

$PECIFICAllDN LIMll l

B.

100! hts

- 1.101 AL f oolkt 1-131 C1 4.10E-06

7. 99t -06 2.$0t+01

2. AVG. Ril[ASE RATE

1. DR PERIOD utl/sec 5.27I-07 1.02E-06

3. PtRCENT OF ftCM.

$PIClflCATION LIMIT C.

PARilCULATES

1. PART. WITH kALF-LIVES > 8 DAfs ct

8. 77t-06

2. D4 E-06 2.50E + 01

2. AVG. RELEASE RAll FOR PERIOD utt. nee 1.13E-06 2.60E-07 f

~

3. PERCthi 0F f(CM.

SPECIFICAY!ON LIMIT

4. C#ats ALPHA Rs.c! DAC11 VI T Y Ci

<1.00E-11

<1.00E-11 D.

TRiflVM I

1. Tut /L RCLEASE Cl 2.BSE-03 7.51t-02 2.50E+01

2. AVG REttASE RATE FOR PER100 uCl/sec 3.71t-04 9.55E-03

3. PERCENT OF TECH.

$PECIFICAllDN LlMIT WOffi ALL List THAN VALUE$ (+) ARE IN uCl/ml.

r TICH SPEC. LIMIT $i LI$f ED ON DO$t $UMMARY T ABLE.

r

.~.

C311-92-2123 tACLE it Ef f tVEhi AND WA$1E DISPOSAL $fd! Ah4UAL REPORT (1992) l CASECUS EFFLUEWis CRCUND LEVEL RELEASES

~

i I

l COh f l WUUU$ WEs' BATCH MC0E WJCLIDE$ RELEASED Uhli 00ARTER 1 QUARTER 2 QUARIEP i QUARTER 2 i

1. FIS$10N (.ASE5 2.61E-03f2.90E-03I AR 41 Ci

< 3. 00E-07

< 3.00E 47 i

+

tt ESM Cl

< 5.00E 48

3. 74 E-03 5.15E-04

<5.00E 48 KR 85 Ci

< 8.00E 46

• b.0DE 'S 1.67E 41 6.61E 41 KR 87 Ci

6. 26E 45 3.04E43 8.24E45

<8.00E 48 kR 68 Ci

<1. 00E -07

6. 34 E-4'3 6.21E44

<1. 06E-07 xE 131M Ci

<3.00E-07

<3.00E 47 3.4BE43 1.95E41

• E 133M Cl 2.2 TE-04 3.61E-03 2.08E-03 1.21E41 NE 133 Ci 4.41E400 1.54E-01

4. DE -01 2.2&E+01

• E 135M C1 2.80E-03 6.49E-03

<5. 00E -0 7

<5.00E-07 AE 135 C1 1.46E+00 2.9tE-02 1.02E-02 2 'BE-03 rr 138 Cl

< 3.00E -07

<3.00E47

<3.00E47

<3.00E-07 5.88r+00 l 2.07E41 TOTAL FOR PERICU Ci 6.09E41 P.38E*01

2. 10Dlkt$

! 131 Ci 4.10E46 7.94E-06 4.19E 49 4,90E-08 I 132 Ci

<1.00E-10

< 1. 0( -

<1.00E-08 1.95E-09 1 13t Ci 2.7BE-05

1. 07E -05 6.14E-09 t.80E-08 1 135 Ci

<1,00E-10

<1.00E-10

<1.00E-10

<1.00E-10

'iOTAL FOR PERICO Cl 3.19E-05 1.86E-05 1.03E-08 6.8vE-08

3. PARilCULATES Mk $4 Ci

<1.00E r IY1.00E-12

<1.00E-12 7.71E48 CO 58 Ci ht-06

<1.00E-12

<1.00E-12 8.60E-OS CS 134 Ci

<1.00E-11

<1.00E-11

<1.00E-08 4.38K-07 CS 137 Ci

• 1.00E-11

<1.00E-11

< 1,00E-08 1.44E-06 i

NOTE: ALL LESS THAN VALUES (*) ARE 'N UC1/mt.

a L

d ym.,_r.,p

,%=,..

y.p,'

w

--g, m.,,,,,,s---y..w

--y

,.-r

..,w-

-.3 w,

+-,,vy,,,,4-m~,--wy-e,w+-wec-w-r-'---T~wv,ew

'w--w**wm'-7ntm

-v w w---

ve m-'" ' - *- - "" '

C311-92 2123 TAILE 2A E F F LUEh! AhD WA5f E DitPOSAL %EMI AhWUAL REPORT (1992)

LIQUID EFFLUthf$-$UMWAfl0W OF ALL RELEA$E$

l UWl1 QUARTER 1 QUAR 1ER 2 EST. TOTAL EkR3R, %

'*. F155!D4 M D ACf!VATION SPODUC15

1. TOT AL RE LE ASE (E W.

l m

H 3. CASES, Ath A) l Ci 1.41E 02 5.74E 03 2.50E+01 lJ 3

2. AVG. DILUfED j

l l

CDhC.DURlWG0(Rl00luti/mll 1.23E+0?

4.7?E.10 i 4

4-4 F

4

3. IERCENT OF l

l ALPLICABLE LIMli l

L_...__.._..______.__

___.L._..._,._J

3. TalfluM 2

i l

e ji. total RELEASE Cl 1.77E* 01 l 4.91E+01l 2.50E+01 1

p..

y_

_y

12. AVG. DILUTED CDhC. DURikG PER100 uCi/ml 1.54E 06 4.10E-06

.__m_..___

3. F E RCEht of l

AFPLICABLE limit

...--.L L

C. DIS 50LVED AND EhtRAlkE9 CASES

) Cl -

3.55E 05 l 2.50E+01 l

1. TOT AL RE LE ASE 1.00E 04 3

_3

2. AVG. DILUTED l

l

,. - CokC. DURinG FERioDluti/mi 0. 00E

• 00 2.96E-12l s

3. PERCENT OF AF-PL ICABLE LIMIT

{

l

_1__._.

1 I

D. GROSS AL PHA RADIDACTIV11Y

,l <1.00E 07 j <1.00E-07 { 2.50E+01 {

!1. 101AL FELEASE Ci L-

__-.1 v

'E. VOL. OF LASTE RELEASED (ho DIL.)

LITERS 6.83E+06 5.93E+06 1.00E+01 F. VOL. OF DILUTION WATER IN FERICO LITERS 1.15E*10 1.20E+10 1.00E+01 L

NOTE: Al L LESS THAN VALUES (*) ARE lh uCi/ml.

• % TECH. tFEC. LIMITS: LISTED ON DOSE

SUMMARY

TABLE.

I

C311-9?-21.

f*8'E ?8 j

Ef f LUEh! AhD WA$ff DISPOSAL SEMl AhWUAL REPORT (1992)

L!@J10 EFf LUEh15 CONilWLFJU$ Wit BAICM MTE NUCLIDES RElfALED UNIT 7JARTER 1 QUARTER 2 DUARTER 1 QUARTER 2 CR 51 Ci

<$.ME 07

<5.00E 07 { <5.00E 07 l <5.00E 07 4

Me 54 Ci

<5.00E 07

<5.00t07l 3.14E05l1.52E05

{<1.00E06

<1.00E 06 1.03E 03 6.64E 04

1. E 55 Ci FE 59 C1

<5.00E 07

<$.00E 07 { 2.CBE-Oo<5.00E 07 CO 57 Ci

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07 5.49E 05 9.63E 06

<5.00E 07 l <5.00E 07 CO 58 Ci 1.05E 02 i 1.76E 03 CO 60 Ci

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07 2.10f 04 1.26E 04 ZN 65 Ci

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07 i

SR 89 Ci

<5.00E 08

<5.00E 08

<$.00E 08 1.02E 05

$R 90 Ci 1.43E-05 2.41E r5 l 1.53E 06 l 2.89E 06 i

TR 95 Cl

<$ 00E 07

<5.00E-07

< 5. 00E-07

<$.00E 07 ha 95 Ci

<$.00E 07

<5.00E-07 3.38E 05

<5.00E 07 No 99 C;

<$.00E-07

<5.00E 07

<5.00E-07

<5.00E 07 TC 99M Ci

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07

<5.00E-07 AG 110m Ci

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07 4.31E 05 2.73E 04 58 125 Ci

<5.00E-07

<5.00E-07 7.11E 04 9.32E 05 1 131 Cl

<1.00E 06

<1.00E 06

<1.00E 06

<1.00E-06 C5 134 Cl 2.39E 05 1.02E 04 4.48E-04 6.49E-04 Cs 137 C1 3.18E 04 7.78E 04 l 7.30E-04 1.23E 03

<5.00E-07l<5.Lm.

BA 140 Ci

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07 LA 140 Ci

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07 55.00E 07

<5.00E*07 CE 141 Cl

<5.00E 07

<5.00E 07

<5.00E-07l<5.00E07 TOTAL FOR PERICO l Ci j 3.56E 04 l 9.04E 04 l 1.37E-J2 l. 4.84E 03 f Ci

<1.00E-04f xE 133

• 0E 04

<1.00E 04 3.55E 05 WOTE: ALL LESS THAN VALUES (<> ARE IN t4i/mt.

+-+w-w-e-~-ow w

.--r-

...-.~w~w..

m

---.--,.,-m.--,--e

..w--

,y m,v-.w..,

-n.~.

_..:,..,, +., '.'

--..--wE,,,.--

y

. -. - -, - -.,e

C311 92-2123 TM1-!

I 1/1/92 - 6/20/92 i

TABLE 2A ITTL*;I;;T MID '4ASTI DISPOSAL SEM1R;';t'AL REPORT l

SOLID '4ASTE AND I?JLADIATED TUEL SHIT. TITS r

Solid vaste shipped of f-site for burbl or disposal (not irradiated fuel)

A.

2.

Type of vaste UNIT 6 month EST. TOTAL

%g Epy.og ;

4.

apent resins, Iliter slu:ges.

m' 30 4 DJ evaporator botten._ete.

C1 1!?.Q4 [i

b. Dry cuerressible waste. :entaminated m 3 1 J'4+ / ja]>

eaui;nent, etc.

g, irractateo cc:penents, control c.

i m

rod s, e t c.

Ci p

g Dil for 23

.n M3

d. Other (describe)

I i

Inciner3tjon C1 014 Ci 5"

i i

2. Estimate of major nuclide ccT00sition (bv tvie of Waste) 1.

rsl3/

64.9 4

I c 'i 1 M 24.6

~

4163

{

6. 55 >

te55

}

1. 64 ';

i

0. Co59 l

aU.,

a LSI di PT.?

(. r b l j

15.5 t.el44 3,39,

rebb 4.25

• c.

c.u, 39 en:m

,ga.

Agl10m hi63 gg3 g 9073 Solid 'Jaste 01sposition 2.

' 1-ber o f Shirment s

_,Mede of Transoortation Oestinatien

'ee Att3ched 3.

Irradiated Fuel Ship =ents (Disposition) i

amesr of Sht

ents Mode of Transoortation Oestination N/A L

I

~5

C311-92-2123 9

SHIPMENTS MODE DESTINATION Table A.3.a

• 4 shipments - Tractor - Flatbed - SEG - Oak Ridge, TN.

3 Shipments - Tractor - Closed Van - U.S. Ecology - Richland 3 Shipments - Tractor - Cask (HN-100' Series 3) - Chem. Nuclear - Barnwell 1 Shipment

- Tractor - Flatbed - U.S. Ecology - Richland Table A.3.b

• 4 Shipments - Tractor - Flatbed - SEG - Oak Ridge, TN.

2 Shipments - Tractor - Flatbed - U.S. Ecology - Richland Table A.3.d

• 1 Shipment

- Tractor - Flatbed - SEG - Oak Ridge, TN.

Waste Shipped as Follows:

Table 1.a One Hundred Eighty (180) Steel Drums at 7.5 Ft' each.

• Six (6) Steel Liners at 170 Ft' each.

Two (2) Steel Liners at 170 Ft' each.

Two (2) Steel Liners at 178 Ft' each - solidifieo with cement.

i l

Three (3) High Integrity Containers at 135. 8 Ft' each,

i-l Table 1.h

• Four (4) Steel Boxes 8' x 8' x 20' at 1040 Ft' each.

• Four (4) Steel Boxes at 92 Ft' each.

Three (3) Steel Boxes at 44 Ft' each.

One (1) Steel Box at 98 Ft.

j Table 1.d

• Four (4) Steel Drums at 7.5 Ft' each.

4

• Material sent to off-site waste processor for volume reduction.

C311-924123 ItiT!PMETATIOff OF DOSE

SUMMARY

TABLE The Dose Sumary Table presents the maximum hypothetical doses to an individual and the general population resulting from the release of gaseous and liquid effluents from TMI-1 during the first half reporting period of 1992.

[

A.

Licuid (Individual)

The first two lines present the maximun hypothetical dose to an individual. Presented are the whole body and critical organ doses.

Calculations are performed on the four age groups and eight organs recommended in Regulatory Guido 1.109.

The pathways considered for-TMI are the consumpulon of drinking water and fish and standing on the shoreline influenced by TMI effluents. The la6ter two pathways are considered to be the primary recreational activities associated with the Susquehanna River in the vicinity of THI.

The " receptor" would be that individual who consumes water from the Susquehenna River and fish residing in the plant discharge, while occupying an area of shoreline influenced by the plar.t discharge.

After calculating the doses to all age groups for all eight organs resulting f rom the three pathways described above, the Dose Summary Table presents the maximum whole. body dose and affected age group along with the organ and associated age group that received the largest dose.

For the first half of 1992 the calculated maximum whole body dose received by anyone would have been - 6,24E-2 trem to an adult.

Similarly, the maximum organ dose would have been 8.96E-2 mrem to-the liver of a teen.

D.

Gaseous fIndividual)

There are six major pathways considered in the dose calculations for gaseous offluents.

These are (1) plume,

.( 2 )

inhalation, consumption ol' (3) cow milk, (4) vegetables, ($) meat, and (6) standing on contaminated ground.

Lines 3 and 4 present the maximum plume exposure at or beyond the site boundary.

The notation of " air doso" is interpreted to meat tnat those doses are not to an individual, but are considered to be-the maximum doses that would have occurred at or beyond the site boundary. The Dose Summary Table presents the distance in meters to the location in the af fected-sector (compass point) where the theoretical maximum plume exposures occurred, It ahould be noted that real-time meteorology was used in all dose calculatiens-for-gaseous effluents.

Lines 5 and 6 present the doses which could actually be received by an individual from the noble g a effluents for the first half of 1992. The calculated maximum whole body dose I

received by anyone from noble games would have been 6,76E-4 mrem.

l-Similarly, the maximum dose to the skin would have been 1.75E-3 t

l mrem.

l' i

1 i

r 1

vm rw,<

a-

-a, w-ng~,-v,v

,~.--w,,,,

w,

-,n

-v,w,,,-w,,-m---,v-vw-w,--

e-,--

-,,---m--gw e - m ~rw ~,

--w

~~r--nr--

,----w

~ - + ~ e

t C311-92-2122 The iodine 6 and particulates section described in line 7 represents the maximum exposed organ due to iodine and particulates. The dose presented in this section again reflects the maximum exposed organ for the appropriate age group.

The first half of 1992 lodines and particulates would have resulted in a maximum dose of 1.38E-3 mrem to the thyroid of an inf ant residing 560 meters from the site in the W sector. No other organ of any age group would have received a greater dose.

C.

Licuid and Gaseous (Pooulation)

Lines 8 - 11 present the person-rem doses resulting from the liquid and gaseous ef fluents. These doses are summed over all pathways and the affected populations.

Liquid person-rem is based upon the population encompassed within the region from the TMI outfall extending down to the Chesapeake Bay.

The person-rem for gaseous effluents are based upon the 1980 population and consider the population out to a distance of 50 miles around TMI.

Population doses are summed over all distances and sectors to give an aggregate dose.

Dased upon the calculations performed for the first half of 1992, liquid ef fluents resulted in a whole body popalation dose of 5.91E-1 person-rem. The maximum critical organ population dose to the liver was 6.06E-1 person-rem. Gaseous effluents resulted in a whole body population dose of 4.61E-3 person-rem.

And the maximum critical organ population dose to the thyroid was 7.71E-3 person-rem.

I l

i r

~,i.--

___,,,_--.,_,_,_,_.,,,..c,_s_,

jL C311-92-2123 4

.3 TABLE 1 i

UNIT 1

SUMMARY

OF MAXIMUM INDIVIDUAL DOSES FOR UNIT 2 FFOM j

January 1.

1992 through June 30, 1992 t

.; l

~

Estimated Location

% of Technical i

Applicable Dose Age Dist Dir Applicable Specification f

Effluent O r r.._._

(mrem)

Group (m) (toward)

Limit Limits (mrcel j

l' quarterIV Annual Qup.rle r_1v Annual f

i (1) Liquid Total Body 6.24E-2 Adult

' Receptor 1 4.16E0 2.38E0 1.5 3.0 (2) Liquid Done 8.96E-2 Tecn Receptor 1 1.79E0 9.96E-1 5.0 10.0

(

i,

[

j.

(3) Noble can Air' Dose 1.52E-3 160 WNW 3.04E-2 1.52E-2 5.0 10.0 l

1, (gamma-mrad) b (4) Noble Gas Air Dose 2.64E-3 3000 SSW 2.64E-2 1.32E-2 10.0 20.0 j

(beta-mrad) l '

(5) Noble Cas Total Body 6.76E-4 All 3400 SSW (6) Noble Gac Skin 1.75E-3 All 3400 SSW (7) Iodine f.

Thyroid 1.38E-3 Infant 560 w

1.8tE-2 9.20E-3 7.5 15.0

{

Particulates

)

1

SUMMARY

OF MAXIMUM POPULATION DOSES FOR UNIT I FROM January 1.

1992 through June 30. 1992 1

i Estimated I

Applicable Population Dose l

Effluent Oraan toerson-rem) r

}

I (8) Liquid Total Body 5.91E-1 I

(9) Liquid Liver 6.06E-1 1

(10). Gaseous Total'Becr.

4.61E-3 (11) Gaseous Thyroid 7.71E-3 i

i; i

1-5 i j

i D

1 J

h j.

t C311-92-2123 GPU Nuclear Corporation Nuclear

e9 msec /eo

'.0c0 etown. Pennsyh,ama 17:57 :'9' 717 944-7621 7 ELE ( S4 2386 Wr>ter s D rect D al Num t e' (717) 948-8005 June 11, 1992 C311-92-2076 U. 5. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn:

Document Control Desk Washington, D.C.

2055S

Subject:

Three Mile Island Nuclear Station, Unit 1 (THI-1)

Operating 1.icense No. DPR-50 Docket No. 50-289 GPU Nuclear Response to NRC Questions on Three Mile Island Offsite Dose Calculation Manual NRC letter dated March 19, 1992, provided results of sne NRC review of the Three Mile Island Offsite Dose Calculation Manual (ODCM), Revision 0.

Attached

~

is the GPU Nuclear response to the NRC items contained in the referenced NRC letter.

Since the NRC review, GPU Nuclear has issued Revisions 1 and 2 of the 00CH.

Revision 2 was issued on May 22, 1992; a copy is included for your use.

Sincerely,

[0%

O~

T. G. Bro hton Vice President and Director, THI-l

-DVH/ emf cc:

THI-l Senior Project Manager l

THI Senior Resident inspector l

\\

/

I g

.,,A l

T

\\

,7

), 1.

m, t

GPU Nuclear CotDoration is a suoscan of Genera Puenc UtM es Corcorat on

1 C311-92-2123 C311-92-2076 Page l

~

ATTACHMENT I CATEGORY A NRC Item 1 - Section 1.2.1 should be revised to correct or clarify the methodology to determine liquid effluent monitor setpoints and flow rates.

The present methodology for nonitor RM-L6 can be interpreted to permit each radionuclide to contribute 10% of the 10 CFR 20 limits to offsite concentrations. (3.2)

GPU Nucle.ar_ Response - 00CM Section 1.2.1 has been revised to clarify the methodology for monitoring liquid releases.

NRC Item 2 - Sections 1.2.2 and 1.2.3 should be revised to unambiguously require that all radionuclides are accounted for, not 1-131 only. (3.2).

GPU Nuclear Resoonse - 00CM Section 1.2.2 was revised to state that the inputs for equation 1.1 shall include all radionuclides.

Section 1.2.3 was revised to state that RM-LIO is no longer in service.

CATEGORY B NRC Item 1 - Section 1.1 should identify the analyses used to determine the mixture of radionuclides to which the noble gas effluent monitors are calibrated. (3.4).

GPU Nuclear Resoonse - The correct reference is Section 4.1.

ODCM Section 4.1 has been revised to use Xe-133 equivalent as the basis of the setpoint concentration.

NRC Item 2 - In Sections 4.2 and 5.1.2, the controlling dose rate should be the dose rate to a child instead of an infant. (3.6.2)

GPU Nuclear Resoonse - GPU Nuclear Technical Specifications Request (TSCR)

No. 194, submitted on May 19, 1992, requested a change to Technical Specification 3.22.2.1 to reflect dose rate to a child.

In addition, ODCH Sections 4.2 and 5.1.2 have been revised accordingly.

RC Item 3 -.n Section 2.1, the definitions of FD and FR, respectively, should identify the periods over which the plant dilution flowrate and river flowrate are determined. (3.7)

GPU Nuclear Responig - The definitions of FD and FR have be'en revised to add

...during the period of release...',

C311-92-2123 t

C311-92-2076 Page 2

~

ATTACHMENT I NRC Iter., 4 - Ba cd on Table 4.3, maxiwm X/Q given for the station vent should apparently be 7.17E-7 sec/m' at 2413 m in the NNE.

pfU Nuclear _Resconse - 00CM Section 5.2.1 has been revised to 7.17E-7 for the maximum X/Q.

NRC ltem 5 - Section 2.3 should contain a commitment to include a comprehensive statement of differences from the 7ethodology of Section 2.1 with reported doses if an alternative method is used for a comprehensiva of doses due to liquid effluents. (3.7)

EP_LNaclear Response - ODCM Section 2.3 was rev se a statement on P

the use of SEEDS (Simplified Environmeetal Eff' mt 1 y System) as an alternative dose calculational methodology.

NRC Item 6 - 3ection S 4 should contain a commitment tu lude a comprehensive statement of alfferent.e from the methodology of Section with reported doses if an alternn :c mdod is used for a comprehensive assessment of doses due to gaseous affiuents other than noble gases. (3.8.3)

GPU Nuclear Response - ODCM Section 5.4 was revised to include r statement on the use of SEEDS as an alternative dose calculation methodalen.

NRC Item 7 - Sections 2.2 and 5.3, rei.sectively, for projecting doses due to liquid and gaseous effluents, should include methodology to include a margin, based on operating data, for anticipated operational occurrences.-(3.9)

GPU Nuclear Resconse - 00CH Sections 2.2 and 5.3 have been revised to include a description of methodology tur projecting doses based on operating data.

NRC Item 8 - A Surveillance Requirament 4.22.4.2, requiring doses due to direct radiation to be determined in accordanca Nith the methodology and parameters in tho ODCM, should be added to the technical specifications. (3.11)

GFU Nuclear Response - TSCR No.194, submitted by GPU Nuclear letter C311-92-2066, dated May 19, 1992, revised Surveillance 4.22.4.2.1 to include this requirement.

NRC Item 9 - The required methodology and data to determine the contribution of direct radiation to the dose limits of 40 CFR 190 should be added to the ODCH.

For completeness, the dose contributions due to other nearby uranium fuel cycle sources should also be addossed in the ODCM. (3.11)

GPU Nuclear Resoonig - Thi< 's now addressed in ODCM Section 7.1.

C311-92'2123 C311-92-2076 Page 3 ATTACHMENT I NRC ltem 10 - The Interlaboratory Comparison Program should be described in the 00CM.

Also, to clarify the requirement, it would be advisable to reword the Technical Specification's Surveillance Requirement 4.23.3 to match the 4

Surveillance Requirement of recent revisions of NUREG-0472. (3,13)

GPU Nuclear Response - This is now addressed in ODCM Section 8.3.

CATEGORY C NRC ltem 1 - la Section 1.1, " proportional" and " inversely proportional" should be interchanged in the definition of c. (3.2)

GPU Nuclear Pesponse - The definition of c has been revised to correct this issue.

MRC Item 2 - Sectior 1.1 should include an expression identifying the total concentration to which the officent monitors are calibrated (i.e., c - Ic,).

(3.4)

GPU Nuclear Response - The correct reference is Section 4.1.

00CM Sectier, 4.1 has been revised to use Xe-133 equivalent as the basis of the setpoint concentration.

NRC Item 3 - The 500 mrem /yr; 2000 meestyr, and 15 mrem /yr in the definitions for Equations 4.1.1, 4.12, ara 4,2, respectively, should be identified as dose rates instead of doses. (3.4)

GPU Nuclear Resoonse - ODCM Equations 4.1.1, 4.12, and 4.2 have been revised to identify dose rates.

NRC lteg.,i - Reference to " Controls" and "Section 11..." should be replaced or supplemented with appropriate technical specifications references. (3.4, 3.6.1)

DPU Nuclear Resoonte - This item was previously incorportted in Su?M Revision 1.

ff" Item 5 - Section 1.3 should be more specific about what parts of Section i.1 and 1.2 are used to implement the requirements stated in Section 1.3. (3.5)

GPU Nuclear Resoonse - The item for Section 1.1 is addressed in NRC Item C.1 above. The item for Section 1.2 is addressed in NRC ltem A.I.

C311 92-2123 t

C311-92-2076 Page.4

~

ATTACHMENT I i

NRC Item 6 - The right side of Equation 5.2.2 should contain a summation over dose pathways. (3.8.3)

GPU Ntclear Responsa - A summation sign has been added to equation 5.2.2.

NRC ltem 7 - For consistency with Section 1.2 of the 00CM and Technical Specification 3.2.1.1, the liquid effluent monitors "hown in Figure 1.2 should be labeled RM-L6, RM-LIO, and RM-L12, respectively, instead of RML-6, RML-10, and RML-12. (3.1)

GPU Nuclear Resoonse - This is an editorial comment and was not incorporated.

However, it will be considered in future revisions of the ODCM.

NEC Item 8 - For consistency with Section 4.3 of the ODCM and Technical Specification Table 3.21-2, the gaseous effluent monitors in ODCM Figure 4.1 should be labeled RM-7, RM-9,..., respectively, instead of RMA-7, RMA-9,...

(3.3)

QED Nuclear Resoonse - Figure 4.1 was revised to incorporate this editorial comment.

l a

w

--