ML20127P671
| ML20127P671 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Westinghouse |
| Issue date: | 05/31/1985 |
| From: | NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | |
| References | |
| NUREG-1118, NUDOCS 8505240050 | |
| Download: ML20127P671 (140) | |
Text
- _ - - - - - - - - -- ---- -- - --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - --- _ - _ _
s .
Environmental Assessment ifor renewal:of Special Nuclear Material
! License No. SNM-1107:
Docket No.- 70-1151-Westinghouse Electric. Corporation Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant-f.
s U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
( : Commission
.( Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards l'
. ' May 1985
, p** **%
E s- [ 'j j .,,7 g
\f.tf.l 9
a' bk ADO 00 51 POR
m en n ., , - wy . - -
3 .n J 1
.z 1x " -
, y d s;1 J%'
i ~ l ', ' MUW ,~" 3C b_ D.s , ~'
W,h;g: mDhN9ha mm ,. t ' ~~ & 'q,'
+,
- y- ., MN y L --
, ~
- w y
~
n >
- i < +
g -+ -
l, ' Q .i & .m "
^
{u?fr Q .- d:.lm&eR.g nl u 2 .-- :.s_ f .N,? y+ p.l f ': -
3 L +
' ~
~ > > >g. u -
- e ., ~,
lab -C . , i - ' ' #
En qMX, , f .NMA . '..m% eai 2
~, m , 1 ,. -. ,
y <
. e s =n
,- g v. . >
ge m # ..s , # r". ,= s W*A c,mA sp q - y- ~ w;gmyg , g--f.
s e sc. - a
+
, ML t NMi bi 5 -
JV '~
. w # W '
Nafs. . g ' 6cx .y DA * -
++
es g @,; M - p -.s .#s, 4 '~ ,
9, '- N
~
MUy;m%;
Ti " Mg n-m d A'r ' f ' , <
.. +
ENOTICE '
. . . , s. .. . .
1E .
.9, -
5 @y .D < ' % %
g;g iW .j y >
c :~ . L W. D ~AvailabiliQ . .. - ~,- ,L-of Reference . @ Materials ACited in NRC Publications ' %'! '
W# W W' g,ma 1 Most documents cited in NRC publications will be available from'one'of the following sy sources: < ;A
- _ mm ; , .y .. . . .
.~*
,; , " - ~
F MN' LIUThe NRC Public Document Roomil717 H Stfeet, N.W.- . 1 .-
@ fy' .yashingtoniDC 20555 6 , '
+~e ..a s;',,
- , mm - . . ._ - . ,
%Ngg 7,'VfM gg2s/
M Washington, DC 20013-79827The Supedntendent ' ~' of Documents, '.--
U.S. Government '
+
Y Prin ^~
- y , m
- x ~mt~ / .. ;;. ,
' ;_ , , , w , .. , e. , . , . .. ., . . . ,
, - . E3 7 The National Technical information Service; Springfield,-VA 22161; 2 ;
3 4 . ; c . . . - ~~ u' - ~ y, -v.. , >
. ,. . . . , i. .t >
1 a( d .Jn,_ % ( Althou. gh the listing that follows r.epresents the majority of, documents cited in NRC publications,.
- - - ~
's nt.- is not ,mtended to be exhaust. vive; .
- 49. g% :* . 4:7- e . ,
-?
[MM ,? Referenced documents 'available for' inspection'and copying fN a fd from t$ NRO PAlid Docui _
gFt3 fment RoomLinsu' e' d NRC correspondence and Internal NRC memoranda; NRC Office of Inspection ' . ,; ; J.;i
- M 9 Tand Enforcement bulletini, circulars / finformation.. notices,jinspection endlinvestigation notices; N' T
- QNo W ? Licensee' Event ' Reports [ vendor report's and correspondence; Commission popsrs;'a nd applicant and "
d ""
slicensee d6cuments and, correspondence; ; R, ,e
@.hMcm - e.J - . . ., . n c , . . : s x.. g .. ( , , . .. .
l >
a
- C. , , c~ 1The following documents'in the NUREG series are available for purchase from the NRC/GPO Sales l'
' M ,',.
+E SProgrami formal NRC staff and contractor reports,' NRC-sponsored conference proceedings?andi
- NRC booklets and brochures. Also 'available are Regulatoy Guides, NRC regulations _in the Code of '
_ -f ' ? 2 jdl' . l Federal Regulations, and Nuclear Resulatory Commission issuances.
~~ '
~
y .
-..s . . .. _i , . .,,
.Jn
. - .,w. . . . ,.
Qcl a v-J < Documents available ; from :the National : Technical . Inform 5 tion Service ' . . include NUREG series . ' > ~
Op g i reports and technical reports prepared by'other federal agencies and reports prepared by the Atomic ;
D af ' M h-G. o.b '. ~ ,1 w ~.* . - Energy Commission, forerunner agen,cy to the N,'ucleer Regulatory Commissioni
. }
. J 9 li,
- . ...* =,#
v(('
- e ( , ,
_.t + .3 - .- '#* . t .,,.,_s. Y #
a
,;%> 7 Doc'uments availab"'rle from public and special technical.l'ibraries inc'lu' dtall,'open ' literature items,' ; - ^
C' such ss books 3ournal and' periodical articles, and' transactions. Federal Register notices, federal and ' ~
., hJ
"{4 ,yc g,[
M[j@y. nn e 4 " state legislation, and congressional reports can usually be obtained from these libraries [ j 7
- = -
Y y / Documents'such as theses,' dissertations, foreign reports s'n d translations, a'nd non:NRC conference V. ; ,
$' [ proceedings are available foi purchase from the organization' sponsoring the publication cited._
i pg% ]f .~"
9
- c s .
. . ,o . , .
. A. . ._ , a8 ,, ,a :
- ' Mg y[ Single copies of NRC draft reports are available free lto the extent of supply,'upon written request
- '
~
~
~
~
H
.to[the Division %f; Technical.Information and Document Control,;U.S) Nuclear Regulator [Comi
"'S (DUC @,,
4
( mission, Washington, DC 20555? - < d mn-s- J: - - - . . , . . . . .: _ ,._; .
~ -
3.
s...
n~ .
e
" f gp$ (Copies of. industry codes and standards used in a substantive manner in the' NR,C regulatory process }
.?
J.W v M,,,f, , ,
"are' maintained at the NRC Library, 7920.Norfolki Avenue, BethesdalMaryland, and are available' d sMg s a jthere for' ieference use by the public? Codes and standards are usuall/ copyrighted-and may be' ~
- 0 CMd$ ? : purchased from the' originating organization 'or, if they are American National Standards, from the' f MI[*
J American National Standards Institute,1430 Broadwayi New York, NY 10018. A .
g
.a %. .., ~ : , .
.- .ay g, y a.;
7 .._ 4'
- ?$,, "_ -
1 M9%Nh - .4 ..- }
whpb msyy m
r o _x JW w .
.y.
- a. k *' E.' 4 ,-
M! - 6 7 - a <
hf@,.W,2 ( ik + '
, y m f'$
a Wm a
, , yQ;fQ ,
- , -. =
p [ ), 4-
- N. ;
- .' .: j'
., , f Q, ,h( :r fI' y.w/, e V = < t.,
4
...%. y 4 j'
- 3 't , . , _ : I h" ('
( *
.'v~:s, , . " , , ~ ,1
,j
~
Q 4
..x x c , .
% i .- )
-}
u #D . * ._.
t , <w Q1, -q,.
g"'g- ,
.w a W
i a y-
&. wn 'f>rg yy-f$h , Js-+ o ~ (w m ~
, -l
i NUREG-1118 l
l i
Environmental Assessment for renewal of Special Nuclear Material 4
License No. SNM-1107 Docket No. 70-1151 Westinghouse Electric Corporation -
l- Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards May 1985 f s, I
I
i i
i CONTENTS' 'j l
'l UST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... .... .............................. vii !
LIST OF TABLES ....... ... .... .... .................................... .... lx UST OF A88REVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xi UST OF FACTORS FOR CONVERSION OF ENGUSH TO INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM OF UNITS . . . . xiii 3
- 1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ....... ......................... ........ 1-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1-1 '
1.2.
SUMMARY
OF THE PROPOSED ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . 1-2 t
a 1.3 NEED FOR ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . 2 1.4 THE SCOPING PROCESS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . . . . 1-2
' REFERENCES FOR SECTION 1 . .................. .... .. ....... . . .. . .... . 1-3
- 2. ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING PROPOSED ACTION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . ... . . 2-1 2.1 . THE ALTERNATIVE OF NO UCENSE RENEWAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 t 2.2 - THE ALTERNATIVE OF UCENSE RENEWAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-1 2.2.1 Desenptron of Current Operanons . .. . .. . .. . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 2-1 2.2.1.1 Introduenon ...... . .. .. . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . . . . 2-1 2.2.1.2 Plant faciEnos ................. ......................... 2-1 r 2.2.1.3 Chenucal processes ........ . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-5 2.2.1.4 Mecherucal operations . .. . . . .. . . . . ... . . .. . . .. . . .... . . 2-6 2.2.1.5 Shppmg ..... ... . ................................ 2-6 2.2.2 Weste Confinement and Effluent Control . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . ... . . . ' 2-7 2.2.2.1 n===r-/peraculate enusesons . . . . . . . . . . . ..... . . . . . . . .. .... 2-7 2.2.2.2 Liquid westes ........ . ... .... . . . . .. . . . . .. . . . 2-10 2.2.2.3 Solid weetes . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . .. . ... . .. 2-12
- 2.3 ' DECOMMISSIONING .. ..... . ....... ... ....................... . . . 2 Ii i;
2.4 NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFEGUARDS ................. ....... . . . ... . . . . 2-14
'~
2.5 STAFF EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED ACT'Oni AND ALTERNATIVES . . ... . . . . 2-15 .
REFERENCES FOR SECT 10N 2 .. ............... . ..... . . . . .. . . . . . . .. .. . . 2-15
- 3. THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-1 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION ... . . . . . .............. ........................ 3-1
- 3.2 CUMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGY . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . . . 3-1 3.2.1 Clime Jogy ..... . ..... . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 3-1 L 3.2.2 Winde, Tornados. end Storms .. ... .... . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . 3-2 i
! 3.2.3 Meteorology . ..... .. . .. . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 3-6
< 3.2.4 ' Air Quetty .. .... ....... .. . . . . . .. . . . . .. . . ... .. .. . . 3-6 3.3 DEMOGRAPHY AND SOClOECONOMIC PROFILE . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . 3-6 L 3.4 LAND ... . ... ........ .... .... .... . . .. .. .. . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . . 3-8 -
l'~
j 3.4.1 Site Ares ... . ...... .. . . . . . .. .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . 3-8 3.4.2 Adecent Aree . . . . . ......... .... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-11 3.4.2.1 Manufactunng . . . . . . . . . . 3-13 3.4.2.2 Agriculture . ......... .... . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 3-13 3.4.2.3 Undeveloped nonegncultural land . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . 3-13 3.4.3 Historic Sogneficance ...... ....... . . ...... ... . ...... .... 3-13 3.4.4 Floodploms and Wetlands . . . ...... . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . 3-14 c.
A I,
'h .me bI
- 4
- t. -
i
. ~ > - , , . - - - -- -, , - -- - , ., - -- , ,,
iv 3.5 HYDROLOGY ...... .. .. ........ . .. .. ..... ..... ... . 3-15 3.5.1 Surface Water .. .... . .... ..... . .. .. ... ..... . .... 3-15 3.5.1.1 Congeree River hydrology .... .. . . .. . . ......... ;l-15 3.5.1.2 Congeree River water quality ... ..... . ... .. .... 3-15 3.5.1.3 Local surface water use ............. ... . ... . .... 3-18
- l. 3.5.2 Groundwater . . . . . .... . .. . . . ......... 3-18 3.5.2.1 Groundwater regime . ... . .. ......... ..... .. 3-18 3.5.2.2 Groundwater quality .... ........ .... . ...... . ....... 3-20 3.5.2.3 Groundwater use ... ... ...... .. . . .... ... 3-26 3.6 GEOLOGY .. .. ...... . . .. .... .. ...... ... ...... . . 3-26 3.6.1 Physiography . . ... ........ ... .. . ........... . .. . . . . 3-28 3.6.2 Stratigraphy and Structure ....... ....... ... . .. .. .. ... .. 3-28 3.6.3 Soils ..... .. . .. ... ...... . . . ... . ..... ...... 3-32 3.6.4 Mineral Resources . . .. . .. . .. .. ... .. ..... ... . 3-32 i 3.6.5 Seismicity . .. . .. .. .. . .. ...... ... .. .. ... ... ..... 3-34 3.7 BIOTA ... ..... ... ...... .............. .. .. ....... .... 3-36 3.7.1 Terrestrial . . . . .... . . ........ .... .. ....... . 3-36' 3.7.1.1 Vegetation . . .. . . . ..... ..... ... ...... . 3-36 3.7.1.2 Fauna . ..... . .. ..... . .. .... . . . . . . . . . 3-38 3.7.2 Aquetic . . . .. . .. . .... . ... ....... . .. ... 3-38 3.7.3 Threatened and Endengered Specses . . ...... ... . . . ... . 3-40 3.8 RADIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS (BACKGROUND) ....... . .. . ... . 3-41 3.8.1 Total-txxfy Dose Rates . . . ... ... ... . . .. .... .. . . 3-41
- 3.8.2 Environmental Background . ...... . .. . . ..... ... . . 3-41
! REFERENCES FOR SECTION 3 .... . . . . . .. .. .... . .. ..... . .. 3-42
- 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED LICENSE RENEWAL ... ... . 4-1 4.1 MONITORING PROGRAMS AND MITIGATORY MEASURES ... .. . ....... 4-1 i 4.1.1 Effluent Monitoring Program ... ..... .. .. .. . ..... .... ... 4-1 i 4.1.1.1 Radiological . .......... . .. . .. ... . 4-1
. 4.1.1.2 Nonradiological .. ......... .. .... .. .. .... 4-1 t
4.1.2 Environmental Monitoring Program . . . .. ... ....... . . .. 4-2 4.1.2.1 Radiological . . . . .. .. ... .... ..... . .. 4-2
( 4.1.2.2 Nonradiological .. .. .. .. . .... . .. .......... 4-8 l
4.2 DIRECT EFFECTS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE ... . .... .... . . .. . ... . 4-11 4.2.1 Air Quality ... .. .. . .... . .. ...... . .. . 4-11 l 4.2.1.1 Criteria pollutants . . .. ... ... . ...... ..... .. 4-11 i
i 4.2.1.2 Ammonia and fluondes . .. . ... . .. ........... 4-12 l 4.2.2 Land Use . . . . . . ... ..... ... .. . .. ..... .. 4-13 l 4.2.2.1 Effects of fluoride emisasons . .... . . ........ . .. .. 4-13
! 4.2.2.2 Effects of ammonia emissions .. . ... .. .. .. ... .. 4-15 4.2.3 Water .. . . . . .... ... .. ..... .. .. . .. .. .. 4-16 4.2.3.1 Surface water ... . ... . .. .. . ... . .. 4-16 4.2.3.2 Groundwater contamination ...... ..... . .. . 4-18 4.2.4 Ecology .. .. .. .. .. . . .. ...... 4-19 4.2.4.1 Terrestrial . .. . . . .. .. .. ... .. 4-19 4.2.4.2 Aquatic . .. .. ..... .. ... . . .. .. 4-19 l- 4.2.4.3 Threetoned and endangered speces . . . . ... .... . 4-20 4.2.5 Radiological Impacts .. ... ... ... . .. . .... . 4-21 4.2.5.1 Doses to the maximally exposed individual . .. . . 4-22 4.2.5.2 Doses to the population within 80 km (50 miles) i of the plant site . .. ... . . . .... ..... . ... 4-23 l 4.2.6 Mitigatory Measures . . .. . . . . . . 4-24 t
I i
/
v 4.3 INDIRECT EFFECTS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE ... ... ......... ............ 4-27 4.3.1 Soaoeconome Effects ..... .. ........ ..... .......... .. 4-27 4.3.2 Potoneel Effects of Acculents . . . . . . . . . . . . .... ............. .. 4-27 4.3.2.1 PM accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . ..................... 4-27 4.3.2.2 NoW accidents ............................ .. .. 4-31 4.3.3 Poestdo Conflicts Between the Propoemd Action and the t; _ _;x of Federal, Reponal. State and Local Plans and Patcies ........... ......... .................. ....... 4-33 4.3.4 Effects on Urban Quetty, Historical and Cultural Resources, and Society ................... .. ....... ........... 4-33 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 4 ........ .. .. .. ........ ......... ... . 4-34
.r a
APPENDIX A. METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR CALCULATING RADIATION DOSE COMMITMENTS FROM THE RELEASE OF RADIONUCUDES ............. .... A-1 45 APPEfelX B. NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE EUMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES)
! PEfMT FOR WESTINGHOUSE COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR FUEL FABRICATION PLANT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . B-1 APPEPOlX C. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF WESTINGHOUSE UCENSE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE AN INTEGRATED DRY ROUTE (IDR) LINE ... ....... ... . . C-1 t
I I'
t i
i r
l f
l.
l i.
i l
!k 1
c
\
n- - . - _ - . _ _ - . .- - - . . . _ , -
F LIST OF FIGURES .
~
2.1 L LAn iBustraten of the nuclear fuel cycle, indicating the role of the W__ _.Ja - NFCS . . 2-2 2.2 Detailed site plan of the Westmghouse NFCS . . . .... ........... ........ . 2-3
.2.3 The intenor layout of the Westmghouse NFCS . . . . ..........................2-4 2.4 Process stack discharge locatens frorn the top view of the roof of the Westinghouse NFCS............ ..... .... .............. ..... .. ........... . 2-8 2.5 Building and Equid weste treatment flow sheet for the Westmghmme NFCS . . . . . . . 2-11 2.6 . Projected solid contammeted weste flow shoot for 1600 t/ year of uranium producten cepecsty at the Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . . . . . ................. ....... . 2-14
- 3.1 " An extenor view of the Westinghouse NFCS neer Columbo, South Caroline, loolung 2-i, west from Bluff Road (Route 48) . . ...... . ...... .... ........ .. ....... 3-1 ,
d . 3.2 Regenal locaten of the Westmghouse NFCS near Columba, Scuth Caroline . . . . . . . 3-2
[i 3.3 Specsfic loceton of the Westinghouse NFCS plant site near Columbia, South Caroline . . 3-3 jf 3.4 Site layout of the Westmghouse NFCS near Columbe, South Caroline, showmg the
. pient boundary, admoent properties, dramage, elevations, and present innd une . .. . 3-4
~3.5 Annuel wind roes for the Westinghouse NFCS beoed on site-specific dets coBected -
- Aug.1,1972, through July 31,1973......... ...... . ... ...... .. .. . 3-7 3.6 Average annual wind rose for the Columbe MetropoEtan Airpsrt bened on Notenal Oceanc and Atmosphenc Admmistration data, 1948-1981 . ....... .... . .. 3-8 3.7 Locations of surface water monitoring stations at the Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . . . . . 3-16 3.8 Location of monitoring webs at the Westinghouse plant site . . . . . . . . . . .. ....... 3-19 3.9 Water table elevaten, terrace unit, on Nov. 15,1981, at the Westmghouse pient ait. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ...... ..... ....... ........ ... .... . . . . . . 3-21 3.10 Hydrogeologe map of the Cretarar= aquder system in the southeastem United States, including South CaroEne .. .... ...... .. ... .. ...... ... .. . . . . . . . . 3-2 7 3.11 Regional geology of the Westinghouse NFCS, indmoting features of South Caroline's -
Padmont and Constal Plein. . ... .......... ... . ... ...... ... 3-29 3.12 Generalized stratigraphic chart of time and rock units for South Caroline's Piedmont and Coestal Plain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ..... .... ... ... . ........ 3-30
- - 3.13 A representaten of the =*=urface at the Westmghouse NFCS bened on weg data . . . . . 3-31
, 3.14 GeneraEzed sou mamar= tens of southem Rchland County, South CaroEne . . . . . . . . . . 3-33 3.15 Distributen of earthquakes within 320 km (200 miles) of Columbe, South Caroline, l ._
1754-1983 ..... ..... ..... .. .... . . ................ ... .. 3-35i 4.1 Locatens of onsite ambent air, vegetation, soi, and surface water monstonng statens at the Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . ...... . . .. .. ... . . . . . . . . 4-3 4.2 . Wed completion surtable for (a) water level measuremerr, only and (b) sampling water quatty . . . . . . ..... .. .. . ... . . .. . . . . . . . . 4-26 A.1 Pathways for exposure to men from raisesos of radioactive effluents . . ..... . . . . A-4 l
1 L a o
i
} . _~ _ . _ _ _ __. __ __ . _ _ _ _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _
I ,
n ,
Y b
h_
I.
~
4 LIST OF TABLES 2.1 Measured semannual awbome releases of gross alpha actmty from the
- : Westmghouse NFCS . . . . . . . ..... .. . .. ... .. .... ... . . 2-9 ,
2.2 Idenafication of process gas scrubbers at the Westinghouse NFCS, mcludog their efficiencies. . . . . .. ... . . ... . ... ....... . ..... . 2-9
^
2.3. Fluonde emesson rates from the Westinghouse NFCS at a nommel 700 t/ year of
.. uranium production cepecsty during the penod 1981-1983. . . . . . ... 2-9 2.4 ' Discharge concentrations and total annual ralamaa of radioactmty in Westinghouse NFCS liquid wastes . . . . . . . . ... ... . . . . . . . .. .. .. 2-12 2.5 Annual average nonradiological water quality of Westinghouse NFCS liquid effluent decharge at 700 t/ year of uranium . . . . . . . .. . . 2-13
< 3.1 Climatological data from Columbia Metropolitan Airport . . . . . . .. ... 3-5 l! 3.2 Annual average atmosphonc dispersion factors by distance and direction from the Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . . . .. . . 3-9 i .. .. . .. , ,
9 3.3 Amtment air quality standards for South Caroline ..... .... . . . . 3-11 ,
3.4 incremental 1980 population estimates by sectors within 80 km (50 miles) of
. Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-12 3.5 Congeree River annual (1981) water quality averages upstroom and downstream of 3-17 iie> the NFCS discharge (outfall) . . . ..
3.6 Analyses of groundwater in the near-surface aquifer northeast of the Westinghouse NFCS (We5 W-24) . . . . . . . .... . . . . . ... . . . 3-22 3.7 Analyse of groundwater in the near-surface aquifer southeast of the Westmghouse NFCS (WeH W-7) . ... . ... .. . . .. ... . . .... . . 3-23 3.8 . Special water quality analyses report for monitoring wells at the Westinghouse NFCS, May 27,1984.. . .. . .. .. . .... .. . .. . 3-24
- 3.9 - Specal radiological water quality analysis' report for monitoring webs at the Westinghouse NFCS. April 15.1983... . . .. ... . . . . 3-25
, s.
l[ . 3.10 Earthquake recurrence intervals as a function of Modified Mercaui intensity for 3-36 lj eelected assomic source zones. . . . . .. . . ... .. . . .. . ..
- l. 3.11 Ten percent probability estimates for horizontal accelerations and horizontal velocmes
['
i exceeding a given value as a function of time at Columbes, S.C. . . . . . .. . .. 3-36 3.12 Potential natural vegetation of the Columbee. S.C., aree . . . .... . . .. 3-37
. 3.13 Major fish species that presently occur in South Carolina's Congeree River . . .. . 3-39 -
l' .
3.14 Characteristics of background radiation in the vicorty of the Westinghouse NFCS
. 3-41 i- .(1981-1982) .. ...... .. .. . . . . ...
4-2
~
4.1 A summary of environmental radiologscal monitoring at the Westinghouse NFCS . .. .
4.2 - Radiological monitoring data from onsite air partculate monitors at the Westeghouse NFCS, 1981-1983... ... . .. . . . . . . . . 4-4 4.3 ' Padir*qpcal monitoring data from onsite surface water monitoring stations at the Westmghouse NFCS, 1981-1983. . . .. .. . 4-5 4.4 Radiologmal monitoring data from' analysis of onsite vegetation at the Westinghouse '
NFCS,1981-1983... .... . ... ... ... . . . . . . 4-6 4.5 Radiological monitoring data from analysis of onsite soil at the Westinghouse
'NFCS.1981-1983.. . . . . . . . . . . 4-7 t- .
'X d
h >
X 4.6 Annuel average and mexmsn concentrations of ammorus and fluondes and average and range of pH at onsite surface water sampling stations at NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4- 10 4.7 ' Annual average fluonde concentrations in onsite vegetation at NFCS for the period 1981-1983. ..... ..... ........ . ... ..... .... . .. .... .. .. 4-14 4.8 Fluonde tolerance levels in feed and water for domestic arumals based on clirucal signs and leesons . . .. . . . . .. . .. .. . . .. .. .. .. . . . ... ... . .. 4-14 4.9 Componeon of current NPDES pommt limits and the de#y average discharge (1982) from the NFCS to the Congeree River . . . . . . .. . . ....... . ... ..... .. 4-17 4.10 Estimated maximum annual dose from arbome and liquid effluents to the neerest adult resident . . . .. . . .. .. . . . . . .. ...... ... .... ....... .. . 4-22 4.11' Annual average and daily maximum concentrations of radmactmty in the Congeree River below the NFCS discharge for plant operation at 700 and 1600 t/ year of uranium. 4-24
' 4.12 Estimated maximum indhndual doses from dnnlung Congeree River water downstroom of the NFCS discharge, for operation at both 700 and 1600 t/ year of uranium . . . . . . 4-24 4.13 Dose commitments from arbome discharges to the population within 80 km (50 miles) of the NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ... . ....... 4-25 4.14 A spectrum of acodonts that could occur at the Westinghouse NFCS . . 4-28 4.15 Maximum 50-year dose conntment to the nearest resident from a entcality acesdent . 4-30 4.16 Location and quantities of bulk gas and liquid chemmal storage at the Westinghouse NFCS. . .... . . . . . . . . . .. . . . ... . . ...... ... . 4-32 A.1 Dose conversion factors for extemel exposure pathways. . . . .. ... . . .. A-5 A.2 Dose converson factors for inhalation exposure pathways .. ... .. . ..... A-6
. A.3 Dose conversion factors for ingestion exposure pathways . . .. . . ....... . A-6 A.4 Intake parameters (adult) used in lieu of sit % data . . . . . . . .. . . . . A-7 9
9 i
L' l
l
(
i
(
l l
4 A88REVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ADU ammoruum diurenete AOCR sir quakty control region BOD tuologpcal oxygen demand CaF calcium fluonde CEQ Council on Environmental Quetty cfs cubic feet per second (ft8/s)
DCFB Dry Converoson Fluidized Bed
' U.S. Department of Transportation DOT EA environmental acessement EIA environmental impact appresol EIS environmental unpect statement F- fluonde
' , G.M. geometnc meen PAPP high air poGution potential HEPA hW particulate air HF hydrogen fluonde IDR integrated dry route JTU Jackson twbedity unit LWR light-water-rnoderated nucieer reactor MBAS methylene blue active subetence MMI modfied Mercesi intonerty MPC mexwnum m., S concentration MPN most probable number MSL mean see level NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NFCS Mea ==r Fuel Columbie Site NH3 ammonia NH F ammonium fluonde NRC U.S. Nocieer Regulatory Commission NPDES National Pogutant Discharge Elimination System 1 SC-OHEC South Caroline Dupertment of Health and Environmental Control SCWRC South Caroline Water Resources Commesion I special :=ra==r metenal I SNM TDS total desolved solide t UF, wenium hexafluondo UO wenium dioxide UO2F wanyt fluonde USGS U.S. Geological Survey x/O atmosphenc dispereson factor xi
LIST OF FACTORS FOR CONVERSION OF ENGLISH TO INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM OF UNITS (SI)
The follownng table gives the factors used in this document for the conversion of conventumal English units to the equivalent international System of Units (SI) now being adopted worldwule or conventional metric units. The conversion factors have been obtamed from the ASTM pubhcation
~
Standard for Metric Practice' and are used to four-digit accuracy, since most of the values in this document are not known to any more exactness. After conversion, the Si values have been rounded to reflect an accuracy sufficient for the requirements of this document. Most of the values will be presented in SI units with the equivalent English unit followng withm parentheses.
Conversion of English to SI Units To Convert From To Multiph ?y t
scre hectare (ha) 0.4047 feet (ft) meters (m) 0.3048 3 8 cubic feet (ft ) cubic meters (m ) 0.02832 3
gallon (gel) cubic meters (m ) 0.003785 geson (gel) Eters (L) 3.79 gel / min Eters/s (L/s) 0.06309 inch (in.) centimeters (cm) 2.54 inch (in.) meter (m) 0.0254 mile (statute) kilometer (km) 1.609 2 2 square mile (mile ) equere kilometer (km ) 2.590 pound (ib) kilograms (kg) 0.4536 i *Amencen Society for Testing and Meterials, Standard E-380, Standard for Metric Practice, February
! 1980.
i l
xiii 3
'to . _ _ . . _ _ , _ _
m .. . . _ _ _ . _ _ . _.
p <
- 1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION.
1.1 INTRODUCTION
iThe Westinghouse Electnc Corporation, Nuclear Fuel Dnnsson, Fuel Fabrication Plant near-Columbia,' South Carolina [ Nuclear Fuel Columbia Site (NFCS)], manufactures low-ennched uraruum
~ oxide fuel assemblies (45% 23sU) for use in light-water commercial nuclear reactors, in response to an apphcation by Westinghouse for renewal of Special Nucieer Material (SNM) License No. SNM-
-1107, which covers operations of the Columbia plant, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory CwTim J:-i (NRC), with technical assistance from Ook Ridge National Laboratory, prepared this environmental assessment. The. document was propered pursuant to NRC regulations (10 CFR Pt.- 51) wtuch unplement requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) of 1969 (P.L 91-190).
Part 51 also considers the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulations (40 CFR
. Pts. 1500-1508) for unplementing NEPA. Sections 51.14 and 51.30 of the NRC regulations
- define "onvironmental ====== ment" as follows-
- 1. An environmental ===a== ment is a concise pubhc document, for which the NRC is responsible, that serves to
- bnefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for deterrruning whether to prepare an
' Environmental impact Statement (EIS) or a finding of no segruficant impact,
- facilitate properation of an EIS when one is necessary.
- 2. An environmental assessment shall include brief discussions of the need for the proposal, of alternatives as required by Sect.102(2)(E) of NEPA, and of the environmental impacts of the proposed action' and altematives. It shall also melude a listing of agencies and persons consulted.-
The Westinghouse NFCS has been operating since September 1969. An Environmental Impact
. Appraisal (EIA) of the Westinghouse facility, issued by the NRC in 1977 (NR-FM-013), considered environmental unpocts of operations at 400 metric tons (t) of uraruum per year and projected L impacts of future expension of up' to 1600 t/ year-of uraruum. The 1977 EIA was based on an ,
analysis of the effects of the ammonium diuranate (ADU) production process and an expenmental Dry Convere% Fluidized Bed (DCFB) system for converting uranium hexafluonde (UFe) to urarnum dioxide (UO2)-
Subsequent to th 1977 Iscense renewal, several environmentally related changes were made to the Westinghouse plant and its operations. including the following
- 1. Uranium-contaminated calcium fluonde sludge generated from liquid waste trootment prior to 1981-was fixed with a cement-like bmder and buried offsite at a radioactive waste burial
. facility.
- 2. > An advanced weste treatment system was installed to increase uranium recovery from liquid process wastes. Calcium fluoride sludge generated after the installation of this system was c
allowed to be disposed of offsite without contmumg bcense controls.
-3. An incmerator system was installed for the recovery of uraruum from combustible waste meterials.
,- 1-1 J
a W--- _. __ . _ _ _ _ _ .
1-2
- 4. The producton capacity of the ADU conversion process and the plant throughput were expa ,Jed from 400 to over 700 t/ year of uraruum.
- 5. A new dry conversion process called the Integrated Dry Route (IDR) was installed to replace the DCFB expenmental dry process line. The IDR lines are presently undergoing preoperational
, testing using u'ranium possessed under an Agreement State License.
This environmental assessment considers the impacts of the use of both the ADU and IDR conversion processes, individually or in a worst-case combination of the two, up to a maximum pro' duction capacity of 1600 t/ year of uranium.
1.2
SUMMARY
OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The proposed action is the renewal of the SNM hcense (SNM-1107), which is necessary for Westinghouse to continue an existing fuel fabrication operation at its Columbia facility. Principal operations at Columbia include (1) conversion of UFe to UO 2 powder, (2) pressing the powder into fuel pellets, (3) encapsulation of the pellets into 3.6-m (12-ft) fuel rods, and (4) stacking of the fuel rods into fuel assemblies for subsequent shipment to customers' nuclear reactor sites. The current apohcation for renewal of the SNM license covers operations authorized previously and includes a request for an amendment to the existing license to upgrade the facility by the incorporation of the IDR conversion process. Although Westinghouse was previously authorized to receive and possess mixed oxide plutonium fuel, no operations using such fuel were ever conducted at the NFCS, nor are any planned Therefore, this authorization will not be continued under the renewed license, and the possession of mixed oxide plutonium fuel is not part of the proposed action.
1.3 NEED FOR ACTION The Westinghouse NFCS is one of several industrial facilities dedicated to the fabrication of fuel elements for light-water-moderated nuclear reactors (LWRs). As long as the current demand for nuclear energy continues, the fuel production rate must keep pace. Because Westinghouse is a major supplier of fuel for LWRs, denial of the license renewal for the Columbia plant would necessitate expansion of similar activities at another existing fuel fabrication facility or the construction and operation of a new plant. Although denying the renewal of the SNM license for Westinghouse *s NFCS is an alternative available to the NRC, it would be considerad only if issues ,
of public health and safety cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of the regulatory agencies I involved.
1.4 THE SCOPING PROCESS The environmental impacts of operation of the Westinghouse NFCS have been previously
. assessed by the NRC in an EIA dated April 1977 (NRC 1977 NR-FM-013). In the EIA, the effects of plant operation up to a production capacity of 1600 t/ year of uranium were predicted, based on the use of the ADU process for conversion of UFe to UO2-l Along with its current application to the NRC for license renewal, Westinghouse submitted an j
environmental report (Westinghouse 1983) that includes (1) an updated description of the Columbia plant and the affected environment, (2) a description of environmental monitoring programs and a summary of data from recent years, (3) current information on operations, processes, and e
1 j
r 1-3 effluents /emessions, and (4) plans for future modifications and expansion. In addition, the applicant provided the NRC with responses to staff questions on information contained in the environmental report (Westinghouse 1984).
In conducting its current environmental assessment for license renewal, the staff toured the plant site and surrounding area (December 2,1983, and September 19, 1984) and met with the applicant to discuss data and information provided earlier and to obtain supplementalinformation. In addition, the staff met with the South . Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC-DHEC) on December 2,1983, and obtained information from other sources to assist in its evaluation. Because of the previous documentation (NRC 1977) and the low level of impacts predicted for continued operation of the Westinghouse NFCS (Sect. 4), the staff determined that a formal scop'.ng process was unnecessary.
To assess impacts of the Westinghouse NFCS operation at a production capacity of 1600 t/ year of uranium, the staff concluded that this environmental assessment should address effluent controls, environmental monitoring, and the environmental impacts of normal operation and of accxients. The affected environment at the site and plant operations are described to the extent necessary for this assessment.
REFERENCES FOR SECTION 1 NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1977. Environmental Impact Appraisal of the Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel Columbia Site (NFCS) Commercial Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant, April 1977, NRC, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, Washington, D.C. (NR-FM-013).
Westinghouse. 1983. Update for Environmental Impact Appraisal, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, NFD Plant, Columbia, South Carolina, SNM-1107, Docket No. 70-1151, April.
Westinghouse.1984. Letter from R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to Mark J.
Rhodes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in response to NRC questions concerning the applicant's Update for EnvironmentalImpact Appraisal (Docket No. 70-1151), Feb. 20.
l
- . .. - . ... . _ . . - .- . . ~- .= .. . . . . .
s 1
4
- 2. ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION
!. 2.1 THE ALTERNATIVE OF NO LICENSE RENEWAL
~
- Not granting a keense renewal for the Westinghouse NFCS would result in the cemotion of commercial fuel fabrication at the site. This alternative would be considered only if issues of public health and' safety could not be resolved if bconse renewal is denied, the minor envronmental rnpocts desenbod in Sect. 4 would not occur.
2.2 THE ALTERNATIVE OF LICENSE RENEWAL
^ This alternative, which is the proposed action, would result in the continued operation of the Westmghouse NFCS for a specified number of years. License renewal would allow the use of the IDR production process in addition to the ADU process, which has been the pnmary chemical conversion . process used under the . current bcense The followmg sections desenbe present .
I!. operations,' waste confinement, and effluent control for the ADU and IDR processes and point out
, the differences between them.
2.2.1 Description of Current Operations The followmg. information regarding current operations at the Westinghouse NFCS was l excerpted from Westinghouse (1983). Supplemental data and information were provided during the staff's site visits: see also Westinghouse (1984).
1 2.2.1.1 Introduction The Westinghouse NFCS was constructed in 1969 to operate at a production capacity of
-400 t/ year of urarnum Plans were =Wtly made to expand capacity up to 1600 t/ year of uranium. Instielly, Westinghouse had planned to accomplish this expension by instelling additional ADU process lines.' As an altemative, Westinghouse installed and expenmented with the DCFB dry process, which was ' expected to provide an environmental advantage over the ADU process. ,
Although the DCFB did provide some of the desired advantages, the IDR process was found to l
L " offer an- even greater environmental benefit while yielding a more superior fuel product
' (Westinghouse 1981). Therefore, in 1981 plans for plant expensson were changed in favor of the IDR conversion process. The IDR lines have been constructed and are undergoing preoperational testing.
The Westinghouse NFCS fabricates nuclear fuel assembhos containmg low-enriched (45%.23sU)
UO2 fuel for use in commercial reactors. The role that the NFCS plays in the nuclear fuel cycle is i- illustrated in Fig. 2.1.
As mentioned in Sect.1.2, Westinghouse was previously authorized to possess mixed oxide plutonsum fuel; however, no onsite operations were conducted using the fuel, and none are planned. Under the hconse renewal, no plutonium fuel may be g-:n :::1 at the NFCS. ,
- 2.2.1.2 Plant facilities Major site facilities consist of the main plant buildog: the chemical storage area; the waste
' treatment area, which has four chemical settling ponds; one reserve settling pond; and one sanitary
,, 2-1 l
1~ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
2-2 ES 6117R MINING MILLING
+
1i FLUORINATION ENRICHMENT i.-
2 i ____
ll , , I i
g l ROLE OF THE westinghouse NFCs
-Il CONVERSION To URANIUM oiOxioE l
COLUMBIA. $.C.
II I1 I <,
II
-1l .I lI rAaRicATION li
- I I ll l
lll l A$$EM8LY lL L._________.__________JJ RE ACTOR CORE NUCLE AR POWE R PLANT 4
- ii IN TE RIM $ TOR AGE OF IRR Ao4 ATEo FUE L Fig. 2.1. An illustration of the nuclear fuel cycle, indicating the role of the Westinghouse NFCS.
~~ stabilization pond. A detailed site plan for the NFCS is shown in Fig. 2.2, and the intenor layout of the' main buildog is illustrated in Fig. 2.3. The buildmg, wtuch covers 32,515 2m (350,000 ftay, l, dmded into two functional areas: a chemical manufacturing area and a mecherucal manufactunng area.
In the chemical manufacturing area UFe is converted to UO2 using the ADU process. This is followed by millmg, pressmg,~ sintering, and machmmg of the UO2 to form fuel pesets about 0.6 cm (0.25 in.) in diameter and 1.2 cm (0.5 in.) in length These pegets are loaded and encapsulated into fuel rods approximately 3.7 m (12 ft) long. The rods are then stacked into a fuel assembly hardware fixture frame for eventual use in nuclear reactors.
Also carried out in the chemical manufacturing ares are various recovery operations that support the conversion process in the recycle of material. These recovery operations mclude
g -
f 2-3 ES-6113R ELECTRIC SUBSTATION TANK F ARM BOILER HOUSES CALCIUM FLUORIDE LAGOON NO.2
- CALCIUM FLUORIDE LAGOON NO.1 WATER TANK STORM RUNOFF TO p STORAGE PAD UPPER SUNSET LAKE ] j s OIL HOUSE SANITARY LAGOCN SHIPPING CONTAINER BUTLER BUILOING m [C ' Y STORAGE AREA OITCH NORTH AND SOUTH h "N, 7, -. REFURBISHING BLOG.
PROCESSWASTE LAGOONS FRAME HOUSE- [h 2 EAST LAGOON \ EXPANSION <
UNH STORAGE TANKS COOLING j EQUIPMENT SHE0 TOWERS -
i r- -
~
WASTE TREATMENT 8UILOING j -
2 HF STOR AGE TANK UF6WASHING AND RECERTIFICATION WASTE STORAGE BUILDING
/;/ ~ >
PLANT Q,e* 3, CONTRACTOR CHANGE ROOM 3 CAFE 4 ,{ - ~ ~
p bFFICE g OANIEL CONST.BLOG.
- ADVANCE 0 WASTE 4 TREATMENT BLOG. VISITOR -/
PARKING PARKING IFP BLOG. t DEIONIZED WATER BLOG. 9-HOTOltROOM 0FFICES I
f " OlTCH m HF/UNH MIXING BLOG. N
- PLANT ENTRANCE
/* ,=: ri SCAlt Ife hetTERS Fig. 2.2. Detailed site plan of the Westinghouse NFCS. Source: A. J. Nardi, Westinghouse, letter with enclosure to R. G. Page, NRC, April 16, 1985.
thermal oxidation, dissolution of scrap powders with nitric acid, chemical precipitation, wet mechanical separation, washing, and solvent extraction. Incineration is also conducted to decrease the volume of low-level wastes and to economically recover uranium contained in combustible wastes.
In the mechanical manufacturing area of the plant, additional machining, welding, electroplating, quality control testing, and other miscellaneous operations involved in the production of the assembly's hardware are performed.
a
num
..s.o.a-v e,s.i osvttoresEst RA* "ATER*AL svoaAGE s - -
r
'X*
e A
.a ! ,--
B
,/ ' . %
c .Aro.
[~ b! {
A-
" * '*:"l,'" "*" "ll"ll:', ""
t g l l l
g marran.=a mer:Aa.as .
macums s, son W ioa mar romoen 3 AngA o .
' SiostAGE y
> r-4 -
av ====
oo.
ao" L*
sta=omo
' '=_
- s' comrao6 -~ ~ '
seco=o ,toon
] ,,, ,,,,,. .
aco"
. cutuicAt p--- uscHANICAL M A NUF ACTURING - 1 f-- _h. MANUFACTuntNG g AREA l__l AREA i g }-[n Tg gggap g
*- T ouALITY ASSURANCE RECoWEAT 4 AREA , I g!
U s .co. fossa no ce==oca y E -- lt l g j l M jp'C' i g j[~a'1j f 1JT6!h Aou taas . , , ~ . _ . .
~~~"
4
.. '- l-
. " ' STORAGE ARE4 m ._.
I LT T_ ,) [-llC ] n---
~j[F r{_ r nl_ _li!--" ' aa' a='= '
I...r- .i_
"<22^*'"
h resteLoon CAPETER84 seco.io a a - ' II (( M ne raA ce 3l 6.t.i,! ,, l C. FIRST FLoom of fICE
.3 i -
1 ^ Fig. 2.3. The interior layout of the Westinghouse NFCS. Source: Westinghouse 1983, Fig. 2.5.
r: 2-5 Serutary and industrial waste treatment processes are conducted external to the main facehty. These processes are described in Sect. 2.2.2. 2.2.1.3 Chemical processes Five ADU conversion lines are currently 'available to process five different isotopic ennchments simultaneously. For the ADU (or future IDR process), UFe will be recorved at a maximum enrichment of ' 5% 2ssU in standard 2.5-ton cyhnders and sluppmg packages As needed, a UFe cyhnder is removed from the UFe yhnder c storage ares and connected to one of the conversion lines. The UFe is vaponzed by heating the cyhnder in one of the steem chambers located in the UFe vaponzation ares adecent to the conversion lines. Ammonium diuronate process in the ADU process, the vaponzed UFe is hydrolyzed to uranyl fluonde'(UO22F ) by mixing with water. The UO F22 is subsequently converted to an ADU slurry [(NH4 )2U07 2 + 4NH4 F + 3H20] by addmg ammorwum hydroxide solution. The ADU slurry is dowatered by centnfugation and the -
. ADU is converted to the solid UO2 product by heet and the introduction of hydrogen. The ammone, fluoridos, and steem in the calemer off-gases are scrubbed by a water scrubber and the gases are then passed through a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter assembly before decharge to the atmosphere. The dry UO2powder is conveyed from the calemer through a millmg operation and into storage contamers which are sampled, closed, and identified.
Integrated dry route process The IDR process will utilize dry methods to convert solid UFe to UO 2. The UFe feed meterial, which is vaporized by hosting the cyhnders with hot spray, is reacted with superheated steem to form UO F22 powder and hydrogen fluoride (HF) gas. The UO F22 is further contacted with a countercurrent flow of hydrogen, nitrogen, and superheated steem to strip residual fluoride and to reduce the urarwum powder to UO2 .The UO2 is discharged into check hoppers and is then pneumatically conveyed (or otherwise transported) to the powder processing ares. Process off- , , gases [H2, HF, nitrogen (N2), and steem (H2O)] are removed continuously through off-ges filters that are penodically reversmged to remove urarwum-beenng solids prior to the recovery of
- hydrofluonc acid. Hydrofluoric acid is recovered by condensation of the HF and steem before the i remerung gases are released. The location of the proposed IDR system is shown in Fig. 2.3.
i. Scrap recovery Scrap recovery is accomphshed by batch operations involving a venety of input materials. The preimnery operations concentrate the material and convert it to forms readily processed as U30s powder and uranyl nitrate. Not all materials require processmg through the entire sequence of operations. The basic processmg sequence includes desolution of solid forms in nitric' acid,
~
i conversion to slurry form by precipitating ADU from the solution, dewatering the slurry form by wet macherwcal separation, calcomg the resultmg sludge in regular or controlled-atmosphere fumaces, and packaging and storing the resultmg product. e t b l_______.__
m _ f F
~:-6
. 3 .Before.being released through the HEPA-filtered exhaust system to the atmosphere, off-gases
;fror'n the uranyl' nitrate dissolvers are routed 'through a reflux condenser and a scrubber to remove r
entrained particles and, condensible vapors."The;'eflux condenser is mounted verticagy and is directly above the dissolution tank so that any condensation formed can drain back into the tank.
. An ocmeration process is conducted to menemire the burial of low-level combustible contamneted waste and to'oconomicaNy' recycle product-grade material. A solvent extraction process recovers 4
; and purifies various contammated uranium materials.
Pellet and rod manufacturing processes The product UO2 powder from the chenwcal conversion area is brought to a feed preparation hood in the peNet area where it is mixed with UaOs and UO2 add-back material. The material is transferred by a bucket elevator system to a roll compactor and is precompacted. The material is then granulated and mixed with rinc steerate bmder-lubricant. The granules of uraruum are next fed
- into high-speed peNet pressee 'where the fuel is compacted into a green pellet. The green pellets are loaded'into-molybdenum boats and are sintered in 'an electricaNy heated furnace in a hydrogen atmosphere. This process produces a denser, more compact pellet. To obtain precise dimensions.
aN peNets are processed through a grinding operation and are dimensionally checked. Pendog quahty control release, the pellets are loaded onto trays for interim storage. Upon
- quality control approval, the pellets are loaded into empty fuel rods, a spring is inserted into the plenum section, and end plugs are inserted and girth welded to the rod. Next the rod is pressurized with hehum and seal welded. Finished fuel rods are transferred to quality assurance operations.'
h-
- 2.2.1.4 Mechanical operations >
AN urarnum material that is transferred to the mecharwcal manufacturing area has been' encapsulated and sealed A smaN additional room is proposed for the south end of the faciNty for - L manufacturing posson rods for nuclear fuel assembhos (Fig. 2.2). Various quehty control and quakty assurance operations are performed in the manufacturing. area on sealed rods, mcludog X-ray testing, holium leak testing, gamma scanneg, visual checks, 5' and dwnensional checks. Machwung operations are performed to fabncate variousm' temal parts of the nuclear fuel assembly " skeleton" structure, mcludmg grid straps, bottom norrie, top norrie, and L . guide tubes. Individual rods are loaded into the skeleton assembly. Final weighmg and testing operations are performed on completed assembhos Other mechmmg operations are performed in h fabricating the boron carbide burnable pomon assembhos and silver cadmium control rod "spyder"
~
assembbes . A nickel plating shop is maintamed to assist with braring the inconel grid straps. Zircorwum grid strap fabrication using laser welding techniques has been introduced for certain fuel
, assembhos L ; As a final step, the assembly is given a complete wash in soap and water and a deionized water rinse. The assembhes can either be stored for shipment or shipped unmedetely in approved containers. A substantial quantity of assembhes are stored in the fuel assembly storage area prior i to stupment to the utility, i
2.2.1.5 Shipping i r, . AN shipments o' f nuclear materials and wastes from the Columbe plant are carried out in [ f conformance with NRC, DOT, and state of. South Carolina requirements. Completed fuel assembhos l , c .
o 2-7 are shipped to utility customers in approved containers licensed by the NRC. Low-level waste shipments are appropriately packaged and analyzed for uranium content prior to shipment to the low-level waste burial grounds. 2.2.2 Weste Confinement and Effluent Control The ADU and IDR processes generate gaseous and particulate emissions and liquid and solid wastes. All waste streams are controlled and treated prior to their release to the environment. The following sections (excerpted from Westinghouse 1983 and NRC 1977) discuss the types of effluents from the Westinghouse NFCS and describe methods for their control. The applicant's monitoring of effluent streams and the environment is addressed in Sect. 4.1. 2.2.2.1 Geseous/ particulate emissions Thirty-seven exhaust stacks currently discharge airborne emissions from the main plant facility. An additional release point will vent emissions from the IDR process when it becomes fully operational. The emissions consist primarily of uranium, ammonia (NH3), and fluorides (NH4F and HF). The composition of the uranium mixture will vary depending upon the enrichment of the material being processed; however, in all cases, the bulk of the material will be 23sU (95 wt %), whereas the predominant activity will be 234 U (up to 86% of the total activity). Stack locations and sources of exhaust are shown in Fig. 2.4. All release points are either short stacks or roof vents, rather than elevated stacks.
. Operations involving the use of radioactive materials in unsealed physical forms are limited to low-enrichment (45 wt % 23sU) uranium in the fuel manufacturing facilities or the associated analytical laboratory. The ventilation systems installed in these facilities are designed so that all of
~
the air from zones used to handle or process uranium is treated to remove essentially all the uranium prior to release to the atmosphere. Filtration is the predominant method for removing particulate uranium from discharge air streams. HEPA filters with an efficiency of 99.97% for DO.3p-diameter particles are used to accomplish this. Semiannual gross alpha releases from the NFCS, measured from July 1979 through June 1984, are reported in Table 2.1. During this period, operations at a nominal 700 t/ year of uranium used only ADU production lines. The average emissions were 27 pCi/ week. Process gases from the ADU production lines, which contain ammonia and fluorides, are scrubbed prior to their release to the atmosphere. The scrubbers and their efficiencies are identified in Table 2.2. After scrubbing, the gases are passed through HEPA filters to remove residual particulate uranium. The average and maximum release rates for ammonia measured during normal operation at about 700 t/ year of uranium are 1.8 and 2.3 g/s, resp 3ctively (Westinghouse 1983). The fluoride emissions measured at a nominal 700 t/ year of uranium production capacity for the years 1981-1983 are summarized in Table 2.3. The three-year average emission rate was 81.6 pg/s (Westinghouse 1984). These emissions rates are much lower than previous estimates (Westinghouse 1975) because of efficient fluoride removal by the scrubbers and HEPA filters (Westinghouse 1981).
' In its application to NRC for approval to operate the IDR dry conversion system. Westinghouse (1981) estimated the fluoride emissions to be 2125 pg/s. Uranium emissions were estimated to be 3.5 pg/s. Assuming uranium enrichment to 5% 23s0 (or 2.4 pCi/g), the uranium emissions rate is equivalent to ::5.1 pCi/ week or 265 pCi/ year. No ammonia emissions will result from the IDR process because ammonia is not used in the UFe-UO2 conversion reaction.
+
e ES-6138
-g =
m
\ - THIS SECTION . 0 35 0F ROOF t$
43 FEET A80vE NO. STAfton DESCRsPTION GR0ume 35 COOLING 3200034 TOWER 7- FURNACE EX. UNE 1 80 2 - FURNACE EX. ONE 2 3 - FURNACE EX. UNE 3 4 - FURNACE EX. LlWE 4 5 - FURNACE EX. Umf 5-5 6 - FURNACE Ex. UNE 5 4
- e. T - WET. LA8 EXHAUST C THIS SECTion -- 8 - INC NERATOR EX.
OF ROOF IS 9 - SUPPL EMENTAL INC. EX. 05 FEET ABOVE EROUND , 30 - CONVER$40N 0-A Sv8 TEM EX. I Pt ATING ti- CONvER5 ION aSv5TEu EX. 0 36 ,/ lOO 0 g"XMAuST 12 - SCRAP REC 0vrRv 2 A Sv5 TEM EX. 13 - SCRAP REC 0vERY 2 5 Sv5 TEM EX. a O! 14- A0s tine SCRuseER 3A it OO to O 27 7O' k) --
~"""""**"'"'"**
- "*'NT VENT Sv5 TEM *A
- - mA NT VENT Sv5Tru ss 13 OO '2 50 06 is - CONvrRm0N ENCt0$uRE EX. 40.4 in:S SECTION OF A00F IS 33 FEET As0vt GROUND 19 - CONvER$10N ENCLOSURE EX. No. 3 y ts OO '4 0 23
~ 2e - CONvtRm0N thCLOSURE ex. NO. 2
*'-C"'"'^'"'*'"*-
22 96 ***'""""'*- g g g C00UNG TOWER 23 - CALCINER CONSUST CAS UNE 1 0 24 24 - CALC NER C0meUST GAS UNE 2 17 Oc 20 O 25 O2 25 - CALCINER C0meUST GAS UNE 3 O O
- D3 26 - CALCINER CONSuST CAS LINE 4 29 2e o ea C4 21 - CAtCNER C0meuST GAS uME s 2s - A R C0mPRESSOR ROOu EX.
O .THIS 3 FEETSECTION OF ROOF f3 Asovt cRouMO se - CHEM. LAS EX. NO. 2 28 3 - us. tas EX. O 30 03, 32 - CEvEt0rutNT LAs EE. i 33 - CEvfLOPMENT LA8 EX. 2 34 - OEVELOPMENT LAB EX. 3 35 - SOLVENT EXTRACT 04 AREA EX. 36 - PROPOSEO IOR EX. 37 - CHEMICAL LAB EX. NO. 3 38 - SCRAP REC 0VERv ORv EXMAUST NOTE: TWO STACKS NOT SHOWN ARE NO. 37. CHEMICAL LAB EXHAUST NO.3, AND NO. as. SCRAP RfC0vtRv ORv EXnAcST. Fig. 2.4. Process stock discherge locations from the top view of the roof of the W1 j_: :: NFCS. Source: Westinghouse 1983. Fig. 4.1. 1
= 2-9 Table 2.1. Measured semiennual airborne releases of groes alphe activity from the West' .#.:1-- NFCS Period ending Decharged (pCi) 12-31-79 1008 06-3040 537 12-31-80 659 06-30-91 462 12-31-81 485 06-30-82 502 12-31-82 574 06-30-83 701 12-31-83 756 06-30-84 804 Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 4.1; and S. D. Wyngerden, NRC, personal communca-tion to A. W. Reed, ORNL, Dec. 6,1984. Table 2.2. Identification of process gas scrubbers at the Wee:bf.:1-- NFCS, including their efficiencies Efficency Scrubber Location Type and Chemmal Partculate number (%) (wt %) S-2A.S-28 Plant air High-energy 70-85 (reta, HF) 90 effluent venturi cyclone, 2 S-3 Vessel vent Packed tower,1 90 (NH3, HF) header S-1 Scrap recovery Venturi, 2 90 (NH4F) Calciner reaction ges Calcaners Venturi,10 75-80 (NH3) 90 effluent 75-90 (HF) incinerator effluent incinerator Packed tower,1 90 (Acids) 95 Scrap recovery Scrap recovery Spray tower,1 95 90 (S-1066) Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 4.4. Table 2.3. Fluoride emission rates (pg/s) from the Westinghouse NFCS et a nominel 700 t/yeer of utenium production cepecity during the period 1981-1983 Daily average 1981 1982 1983 Maximum 309 879 766 Annual 69.8 77.7 97.3 Mamum 6.5 4.1 6.5 Source: Westinghouse 1984.
_ __. _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ . . . . _ . _ . . ~ . ( . 2-10 2.2.2.2 Liquid westes Lupad waste strooms at the Westinghouse NFCS include sarutory wastes and process - ; westewaters' Process wastewaters are primanly'contamwisted by ammorwe and fluondes. Both waste streams are treated onente prior to their comtzned decharge into the Congeres River. A 10-cm (4-in.) pipelme releases the plant effluent to the river at a point about 5.6 km (3.5 miles) south of the facility (Fig. 3.3). The pipe submerges into the river, decharging directly into the
' current near the bottom approxwnstely 6 m (20 ft) from shore.
The flow rates from the process and serutary waste streams are about equel and, at the present level of operation (approximately 700 t/ year of uraruum), the combened liquid effluent 3 stroom flows at about 475 m /d (125,00 gel /d). At the expanded 1,600 t/ year of uraruum
- - capacity, it is estimated that the total waste stroom flow rate will be approximately 720 m3/d (190,000 gal /d)(Westinghouse 1983). ~
Weste treatment ~ 4
. Figure 2.5 indicates the. treatment and flow of liquid wastes at the Westinghouse NFCS. Six onsite lagoon storage basens are iHustrated in tho' figure; the locations of these lagoons are shown in Fig. 2.2. The north, south, and west (I and 11) lagoons are used for settimg solids from treated process wastewaters prior to decharge. The sarutary lagoon is used for polishmg serutary wastes after onsite treatment. The oest lagoon provides extra capacity for overflow from other lagoons or for contamment in the event of a spill or emergency. All process waste storage lagoons were !
relined with 36-mil Hypelon liners during 1981-1982. Each legoon is also equipped with French Drain systems bonesth the liners to detect logoon leakage Westinghouse states that no addtional lagoons are planned dunng the next five-year penod; however, three addtional 110-m 3 (30,000-gel) aboveground liquid weste storage tanks are planned.
- Radiological control. Complance with 10 CFR Pt. 20 activity limits regarding the discharge of
[ radoective liquid wastes to an unrestricted area is soeured by a continuous on-ime gemme ray
- spectroscopy system within the main plent's controlled access ares. Querantme tanks and diversion i
tanks are available to increase setthng times end.auow sufficsont filtration if the. liquid activity is E above release limits (30 pCi/mL. which is the 10 CFR Pt. 20 limit for rolesse of 234 U to 1- uwestricted waters). When the liquid has been ==== fully scanned and approved for dischargo, it 3 is sent to the advanced wastewater treatment facchty for uratuum removal extemel to the mein
- plant.' This pokshmg operate. essures that aR recoverable uraruum is removed from the liquid
{ stroom and recycled through scrap recovery. The liquid stroom is then discherged to the chemecal [ waste treatment system. Typical discharge concentratiors and total :.wuel rolesse of resoectivity
. at the NFCS are given in Table 2.4 (Westinghouse 1983).
Nonr:Wx1 control. The aqueous process waste solution, primanly filtrate from the ADU E
- process lines, is circulated through filters before being pumped to tar:ks in the weste treatment
- facility. The main constituents of the process liquid wastes are ammorwum fluonde (NH4 F) and
! urarwum. Through the addition of lime and caustic, the fluonde is converted to insoluble calcium fluoride (CaF 2 ), which is removed by centnfugotion or by setting in a series of holdmg lagoons ! (Sect. 2.2.2.3). Most of the ammone is recovered by distinction and retumed (as ammorwum 5 hydroxide) to the ADU process foHowng pH adjustment with caustic. 7 , After addition of lime and removal of the ammonia in the stnppmg stiH, the CaF2 slurry is discharged to the west lagoon to permet setthng of the sohds. The liquid is decanted from the top i L l'
2-11 E. . 9 sAenf Aav . mEsf e mEst u
*""' LAGOON LAGOON LAGOON ts t i N I N%
4 h h '* akNl TANetranu CONiamutNT pao 4 N SOUfM Laco0N NORTM LAccok UO
..j-
'\ ,,og d' e -,
u
- samet %
..A AEnAT e e -
\ Coqt
_g (
- oescnancE LwE l newt ~
fo comoanEE l 1 CONT mAstE L*' r etf A AfiON - - - nave n c l
-dEPA sauPten ,08
,o
+4--- + NM, sfiLL _
i ; ,8 MAIN East LAco0N
" C O *. PLANT hl u A 3 3l E atuovAL
{ tok 2 4 ( 40u, masfE870 MAGE Cv L.
-nECEnf 93 8 &&hetART 0Aaese esA$ $0stE A GLowo0mm LEGlasO 4ALC019 NALC0ftl NatCO 3E4 NALCo 792 88E
' e*A$ DEeOsse2E R f Luln Aaeo BAcam&5M Sulf unsC ACnD IMy SO.I Caustic Ns0M I PROCE S$ m A$f t SE#vES AleA5f t D#A*4 F04 E AAV FeLu DEVELOPMEest CHEueCALS MATE R u0, GAwAE AT F sE R AND DEwELOPE A 15 USEO ese AUTOMAfDC DEwELOPt4G
#sM, Nos.On A045 WA$fES f ROM Caf ETEmia 440 KlfCMEse 3 Roo8 0aAess f05fonu sEnte e Pn0CE55 mAstE lf 8E ATE DI 4 $Amef amv ORAM esf E A Nn,p Nn,NQ, 5 CLosto C00LissG fonte LooPovEs# ow L amo sLowoomm 08 Sv5fEu h"40M.C.F 3.Ca0M 70 $70AM 5E WE A a40TE - LessE NO S $f RE Aes DELETED GECAv55 OF EPA 10 Ef0muitete GAQuh0 EATER RE0uenEuthfS A40 NOW FLOW 5 70 LehE NO d' te f aE ATE 0 9mCNF6E0 eA5f t wATE* 4ALCO 39 12 DEsOhstE 0 m ATE R #EGENE Raf Kpe NALPaC S248 4ALC0 918 LAS e,a5TES NALCo 7373 M250..me0M seALPAC O340 13 TEST EATER CVLimoEn aECpstysCAfiON 6 CO91 AeposeATE0 easyE W ATE R u0,Poe0ER 14 nASTE $f0AAGE PA0 0 Raise IS Flow r404 CApsossATE atuovAL sv$7Eu P 3008 OmaeN TO STOAu stee#
' Fig. 2.5. Building and liquid weste treatment flow sheet for the Westinghouse NFCS. Source Westinghouse 1983, Fig. 4.2 and Table 4.5.
of the west lagoon on a batch basis to the north and south lagoons where additional settling takes piece. After a 1- to 3-d settling time, the supemate is pumped to the Congeree River, usually together with overflow from the sanitary stabilization pond. Westinghouse discharges the combined liquid effluent in accordence with the requirements set forth by SC-DHEC in a National Polhatant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permet. The permit, wtuch was modified in September 1984, is presented in Appendix B. 2
- , . . .. ~ . . , . . . - - ~ , - . . ~ . . . . _ , .. .. .
.e' ;
h \ 2-12 Table 2.4. Diecharge concentrations and total annual release of s , r - - _ _ _ . . ., in W _ ^ "- --- NFCS liquid westes _
~
j7 At 700 t/ year of uranium E,umsted at 1600 t/ year of uraruum ' Total Total
~
Radiation . Concentration ' reloose - Concentration '*i'*** component - (pCi/mL)
%W
. rate (pCl/mL)
%N rate
.(mci /yeer) - (mci / year)
- Alphe . 0.64 ~ 2.2 6 '97- 1.77 5.96 262 p .
. Beta 0.305 0.9' 45.2 0.823 2.4' 122 MPC = Maximum pen ==H= concentration.
"Rmad on 23*U,10 CFR Pt. 20.
'R==ad on calculated 10 CFR Pt. 20 limits for combmed daughter products.
- 234 Th~
. 231 Th - '
= 33 pCi/mL
* *Pa Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 4.6.
6 All domestic-type wastes, shower water, cafeterie water, and several rmacetoneous streams are routed to the sarutary system. Contarmneted laundry cleerung'is performed outside the NFCS by
. an approved vendor.
Site samtary sewage is treated in an extended aeration package plant and discharged into a biological oxidation / setting-polishmg lagoon.' The lagoon effluer.t is then chlorinated and mixed with ^
. treated liquid process waste at the facility lift station. The average annual nonradiological quehty of the NFCS combned (process plus samtary) liquid effluent is presented in Table 2.5. Westinghouse's t complance with its NPDES perrmt is discussed in Sect. 4.
IDft process F The IDR process produces a lesser volume of liquid wastes than the ADU process because no hquids are involved in the chemical conversion reactions. Hydrofluonc acid is a usable byproduct l (liquid waste) that wiu be generated by the' use of this process. The appbcont presently has no definite plan for the use/ disposal of the acid (Westinghouse 1981). c 2.2.2.3 Solid westes Manufacturing _
, Meterials such as used packagog, worn-out clothing, paper, wood-floor sweepngs, discarded
- tools, etc., are collected and stored prior to deposal, which is made according to two pnmary
, closesfications: . uranium contammated or contaminetson free. The contammated metenal is further
. segregated into combustible and noncombustible classifications. Noncombustible waste is exammed n to determme the feesdxhty of recovery and is then either processed chemically or co5ected in boxes
; for uitwnote disposal at a government-licensed waste deposal site. Combustible items are reduced to sah in a specally designed mcmerator, and the ash is desolved in a mixer-settler desolver system. Soivent extraction wiH recover and purify the uraruum for recycle back to the product i-
-w,
. ~ , . , . . , . . . , - , , . ..~,n, .n. _ , . _ . _ . _ , . . _ . . , . - - .
r t 2-13 Toble 2.5. Annual everage nonrediological water quality of Westinghouse NFCS liquid effluent discharge et 700 t/ year of uranium Conce.itration Quantity p ,,, (mg/L) - Ob/d) pH, units . 8.6 BOOS , 18.9 16.2 Focal coliform, MPN/100 mL 50 Total suspended solids 23.3 20.0 Chemical oxygen demand 89 76.4 Oil and grosse 3.5 3.0 Phenoli pg/L <1 <0.001 Surfactants 0.17 ' O.15 Nitrate 160 137 Sulfate - 3 , 140 120 Sulfide <0.05 g 0.04 Ammone (N) 17.5 15.0 Phosphorus 2.3 2.0 Cyanide <0.02 <0.02 Fluoride 17.4 14.9 Barium 0.10 0.09 fron 5.0 4.3 Manganese 0.04 0.03 Magnoseum 6.1 5.2 , Zinc 2.2 1.9 ' Ahmnum 0.41 0.35 Cobalt <0.01 <0.01 Molybdenurn 0.04 0.03 Sodium 194 166 Boron 0.267 0.23
. Bromide <0.1 <0.09
'B00 = Biological oxygen demand.
MPN = Most probable number. ;-
"Uniess othenwise spoofied Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 4.7.
I material stream. A flow sheet for projected solid contaminated wastes at 1600 t/ year of uranium production capacity is given in Fig. 2.6. i Westeweter treatment solids in previous years, after fixation with a cement-like binder, the calcium fluoride contaminated 4 with uranium was buried at the low-level radioactive waste burial site in Barnwell, South Carolina.
- All calcium fluoride generated prior to 1981, approximately 1.6 - x 10 m3 (575,000 ft'l' of 4
material, was handled in this manner, in 1980, an advanced wastewater treatment system was ,< installed at NFCS to remove additional quantities of uranium. Future calcium fluoride should contain
<30 pCi/g of uranium activity, which is the existing NftC (1981) guideline for material that may be disposed without restriction on burial method. As such, calcium fluoride containing <30 pCi/g will be approved for disposal in a chemical or sanitary landfill.
o
2-14 ES-6128 RATE: - 40 to 60 BALES / DAY COMBUSTIBLE APPROX: 4 BALES / DAY NON-COMBUST!BLE COMBUST-
* + INCINERATOR SCRUBBER W STAC K COUN NG g p p d l NON-COMBUSTIBLE TILTERS SCRUBBER WASH
'h Ir 1r GAfe1A URAN!UM COUNTING RECOVFRT s
ir URANYL NITRATE If CHECK AND SHIPPING - DISCHARGE TO WASTE CONVERSION TREATMENT AREA
.e 'I IP If
. BURIAL- UO RIVER 2
I 5 GMs U-235/FT3 Fig. 2.6. Projected solid contaminated weste flow sheet for 1600 t/ year of uranium production cepecity at the Westinghouse NFCS. Source: Westinghouse 1975, Fig. 3.3-3. 2.3 DECOMMISSIONING All major material licensees are required to submit a general decommissioning plan to be effected at the end of plant life. This plan describes how the facilities and grounds' will be decontaminated so that they can be released for unrestricted use. The plan identifies and dis', asses the major factors that influence the cost of decontaminating the facilities and grounds and provides a cost estimate for these activities. The decommissunng plan and a corporate commitment to
- provide funds for this effort are incorporated as conditions of the license. On May 24,1978, such conditions were incorporated into Westinghouse *s License No. SNM-1107.
2.4 NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFEGUARDS Current safeguards are set forth in 10 CFR Pts. 70 and 73. The regu'ations in Pt. 70 provide
. for material accounting and control requirements with respect to facility organization, material control arrangements, accountability measurements, statistical controls, inventory methods, shipping and receiving procedures, material storage practices, records and reports, and management control.
The' current regulations in 10 CFR Pt. 73 provide requirements for the physical security and protection of fixed sites and for nuclear material in transit. Physical protection requirements .for
'w. ,;)
! l
.)
l l L 2-15 ) SNM of ' low strategic segruficance (includog low-enriched uransum) include provisson for the I estamhment. of controlled access areas, monitoring of these areas . to detect unauthorized penetration, provision of a response capahey for unauthorized penetrations and activities, and establishment of procedures for threats of theft and for actual thefts. The regulations in 10 CFR Pts. 70 and 73, desenbod bnefly above, are apphed in the reviews of mdividual heense apphcations. License conditions then are developed and imposed to translate the regulations into specsfic requirements and limitations that are tailored to fit the particular type of
~plant or facility involved.
-The hcensee has an approved material control and eccounting plan and an approved physical secunty plan that meet the current requirements for the low-onnched uraruum that would be f
7 n ' at the site.'It is concluded, therefore, that the safeguards-related environmental impact of the proposed action is insignificant. L 2.5 STAFF EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES i The staff behoves that the fuel manufacturing operations at the Westinghouse NFCS are performed in a manner that protects both the public and the environment from unusual or adverse unpacts. However, as discussed in the indicated sections, the staff recommends addition of the following requirements.
- 1. The applicant will be required to take onsite grass samples for fluoride analyses at least twice a
- year when the grass is being cut for hay. Onsite soybean crops, when harvested, will also be l
monitored for fluondo in addition, the applicant will be required to analyze appropriate background samples of vegetation for fluoride (Sects. 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.6). I
- 2. The appbcont will be required to expand its onsite groundwater monitoring program to study changes in the contamenant plume Appropriate existing wells (both in the shallow and deeper
[ aquifers) will be sampled at least quarterly and analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, and ammorua concentrations (Sects. 4.2.3.2 and 4.2.6).
- 3. The' apphcant will be required to redrill certain groundwater monitoring wells so that the wells '
can be completed with state-of-the-art designs This requirement mcludes Monitor Well W-3, i which is completed in the Black Mmgo Formation underneath the shallow groundwater
- contammation (Sect. 4.2.6).
~
The environmental impact of continued operation is expected to be insignificant providmg that these i requirements are added to the hcense. l r I REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2 i NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comunesseon). 1977. Environmental Impact Appraisal of the { Westinghouse Nuciser' Fuel Columbne Site (NFCS) Commercial Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant, ! April 1977, NRC, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, Washmgton, D.C. (NR-FM-013). NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commession). 1981. " Uranium Fuel Ucensing Branch Technical Position, Disposal or Onsite Storage of Thorium or Uranium Wastes from Past Operations," Fed. Regist.146,'p. 52061, October 23. l l' .-. ,_ . _ _ , _ . _ __.___. _ _ _ _
2-16 Westinghouse.1975. Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel Cohnba Site Evaluation Report, submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Cuir .,; ;an for renewal of SNM-1107, March 1 (Docket No. 70-1151). Westinghouse.1981. License Amendment App # cation to U> grade Faci #ty (letter from A. T. Sabo, Westinghouse, to R. G. Page, NRC, dated Jan. 9,1981). Docket No. 70-1151. Westinghouse. ^ 1983. Update for Environmental Impact Appraisal, Westinghouse ~ Electric Corporation, NFD Piant, Cohsrba,' South Caroline, SNM-1107, Docket No. 70-1151, April. _. Westinghouse 1984. Letter from R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to Mark J. Rhodes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in response to NRC questions concerning the applicant's Ubdste for EnvironmentalImpact Appraisal (Docket No. 70-1151), February 20.
l l 3. THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION The 469-ha (1158-acre) Westinghouse NFCS is located in Richland County in central South Carolina, approximately 13 km (8 miles) southeast of the Columbia city limits. Coordinates of the site are latitude 33 50'60" and longitude 80*56'45*. An exterior view of the Westinghouse plant is shown in Fig. 3.1, and a regional setting of the site is indicated in Fig. 3.2. Nearby towns, public l facilities, the Congaree River, and transportation links are shown in Fig. 3.3. The site is bounded by South Carolina Route 48 (Bluff Road) to the north, the Vestal Lumber Manufacturing Company property to the east, the Liberty Life insurance Company property to the south, and the Burrel Manning property to the west (Fig. 3.4). The manufacturing plant and associated facilities are centrally located on the site. The l developments, including the fuel fabrication facilities, holding ponds, parking lot, and landscaped grounds, occupy approximately 24 ha (60 acres) or 5% of the total site area. Figure 3.4 shows the plant boundary, adjacent properties, drainages, and elevations of the sits. The plant floor is 142 ft above mean sea level (MSL). Plant site drainage flow follows original drainage pattems to Sunset Lake, Mill Creek, and the Congaree River. The plant site and vicinity are generally flat to the north and east and flat and swampy in other directions. Westinghouse intends to keep most of the unused portion of the site (approximately 444 ha or 1098 acres) in its nate-al state. 3.2 CLIMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGY 3.2.1 Climatology A summary of local climatological features measured at the U.S. Weather Bureau Station at Columbia Metropolitan Airport (DOC 1973), located about 19 km (12 miles) west-northwest of the ORNL-PHOTO 7703-84
,yy
- i
_s . l f s - Fig'. 3.1. An exterior view of the Westinghouse NFCS near Columbia, South Carolina, looking west from Bluff Road (Route 48). 3-1
1 ~ 3-2 E!Hl118
'S f
KENTUCKY .. VIRGINIA ,,
'y
\7
'/ 8, '
_.. . - t' A - 2 " ~ " Q,,o,u. 85 y, SALEM ? vg
^
TENNESSEE 14 40 ,
,,. J' . .
40 f RAltlGH ,,, K N O XVI,LL E , 'g V, ,' 75 NORTH CAROLINA /-
~
26 - CHARLOTTE UN C ATTANOOGA 85 SOUTH AROLINA - Sj
$9 . 20 \ .-;
CO LU M BI A g FLORENCE ., _i ATLANTA ,u c. WESTINGHOUSE { V AUGUSTA l .A O 26 . 1. . x ,w '
. CHAR ESTON GEORGIA
^
85 I , SAVAhdNAH 75 95 Fig. 3.2. ":f:2: location of the WM.d:::: NFCS neer Columble, Soutt. Caroline. site, is given in Table 3.1. Temperature, relative humidity, wind, and the frequency of certain climatologecal events are reported. The weather in the region of the NFCS provides a temperate climate, with high relative . humidity, moderate rainfall, moderate winds, and normal diurnal temperature changes. Winters are mild, with cold waves rarely accompanied by temperatures of -18 C (OT) or below. Freezing temperatures [0T (32T)) or less occur on an average of 77 d per year, generally dunng the months of November through March (NOAA 1978). . 3.2.2, Winds, Tornadoes, and Storms in South Carolina severe tornadoes occur almost every year, most often in the spring. During the interval of 1956 through 1973,172 tornadoes were reported in the state. Data from Richland County show that nine tornadoes were reported from 1950 to 1973 and six tomadoes were reported from 1974 to 1982 (Jane Parvin, National Severe Storms Data Center, Karwas City, Missouri, personal communication with Andrea Reed, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October 18, 1984). Thom (1973) developed an empirical formula to compute the mean recurrence interval for a i
,r ,,, w
,y.p. m ,p-- e. , , , - --- 9.,- --.p- _ _ .
T 3-3 ES-6111
' MeRW@$28%jd*@36
, ponT JACusoN
~
t g~ ~ WESTINGHOUSE NUCLEAR FUEL umAny me_ssRVAfloNs FABRICATION PLANT ma y# pBIF isaTE AND VICINITYD wy ,.
, kl[f is Gb I 4G
.ll,?l /
'4
.j' W unsvaav assenvaren
;3 O cir, h :I' M sva, ace warsa
<f aatwwafown Q swamp
' isf -
I.4go g - - Pa#E .OUm0any g , 4 8,g g, b namacae
., enfaastate sours s . . . _ , .
h statt aca. A.au,,
* ? 9 ?
une e e is e t.e l - I . E.
- m..
- e, ,
* /
WESTINGHOUSE ,S,,
'"'g,*** PLANT SITE b ,, ,
~\/ :s: .
.s i
r.
* ~
e '** ,,,s s [ n ll ... - ...,
, \. / ~
,1 ,.
e ta oya g, y,f I
- s. ... ..-~ ~.
( ..a.- I
/ ,, J . V ~ f]
r.\.jb W ;.n,
) g l
c'*.. - * '
% + * - +,. -
,,,a ,, m ,
ce c -,
~ g*vfCO'NGAREE SWAMP NATIONA'L MONUMENT
/ /
s . ' u l I ? A
\..
N . Fig. 3.3. Specific location of the Westinghouse NFCS neer Columble, South Caroline.
eune To D'Unes#4, gg
\
sas e f
/%& '
9,&, NGHog
,/ FUGL FABRfCA%
0 ,J o'o NT FACitrTIES
~
s
\ y[}' LAWN AWO AREAS)
[ "N* g
,1
- p. Nr"N
,gk ,-,
~"
culisvATEO a)*h'$ .f14 3 /- g,,N f " V*Tod - c.o o y
/d%i5$.%.$ 4 d k .# M~ $; # 5 "
**' "l pto G']~ s" w S
f*' ., U %
< %.. Qcn m S
,o,n bNsey~ -
%o
- pMT
<a u* +84 k, ygl g @ FOREST'
' # ~~a : '. a~ :'"'*"!~% oK*sc ,n c h,; }k ** , .
l?. ' ~ sts e N r . c 4
vet $#'e',',
v '-;
- I l W:'
Yo ? Y 1200
- ner l eq
?
'as see eernas Fig. 3.4. Site layout of the Westinghouse NFCS near Columble, South Caroline, showing the plant boundary, ediacent properties, drainage, elevations, and current lend use. Source Modified 1983. Fig. 6-1,
s-3-5 Table 3.1. Climetological date from Columble Metropoliten Airport
- Temperature (*C)
Annual average 17.5 Mean daily high 24.1 Meen daily low 10.8 Record high 41.7 Record low - 18.9 Degree days 2598 Relative hunddity (%) Annual average 73 Wind Annual average speed (mph) 7.0 Prevailing direction SW Fastest mile Speed (mph) 60 Direction W
Precipitation (in.)
Annual average 46.36 Monthly maximum 16.72 Monthly mwwmum Trace 24-hr maximum 7.66 Snowfall (in.) Annual average 1.9 Monthly maxwnum 16.0 24-hr maximum 15.7 Meen annual (no. of days) Precipitation of 0.1 in. 110 Snow, sleet, hail of 1.0 in. 1 Thunderstorms 53 Heavy fog 27 Temperature of 32*C (907) or higher 65
- Data based on 7 to 30 years of record.
Source: Westinghouse 197E, Table 2.6-1. tornado striking any location by approximating the location with a geometrical point. Based on the mean path area of a tornado, the number of tornadoes per year, and the area over which tornadoes may occur (Richland County), the probability of a tornado striking any' location within Richland County, which includes the site, is less than 1 in 700 years. During the 30-year period of 1941-1970, four or five North Atlantic hurricanes out of a total of 31 penetrated into the central part of South Carolina. There was no severe damage from winds, although flash floods caused damage to farmlands and public utilities in the Columbia region (Purvis
.y .j i
3-6 1964; DOC 1971). The strongest wind recorded in the Columbia region was 97 km/h (60 mph); the speed of the strongest wind expected in a 100-year period is estimated to be 160 km/h (100 mph)(Thom 1968). I
~ 3.2.3 Meteorology Atm :.-?.::ic dispersion High air pollution potential is caused by low mixing heights and light winds'(Holzworth 1971).
Holzworth's data on the frequency of high air pollution potential (HAPP) indicate that, from 1960 to 1965, the Columbe region experienced no HAPP cases of low mixing heights and light winds. Diffusion climatology The annual and' seasonal summarios of the joint wind stability frequency were obtained from onsite meteorological data (August 1,1972, through July 31, 1973) by use of the STAR program (Westinghouse 1972). The data indicate that stable corxhtions exist 47% of the time, neutral conditions occur about 43% of the time, and unstable atmospheric condmons prevail about 10% of the time. The seasonal distribution of the vanous stability classes indicates that the greatest number of hours of unstable conditions (310 h) and slightly stable conditions (412 h) occurs in the spring; in winter, the most hours (1047) of neutral conditions occur; and, in summer, the most hours (984) of stable conditions occur. The annual wind rose for NFCS (August 1,1972, to July 31, 1973) is shown in Fig. 3.5, and the wind rose for the Columbia Metropolitan Airport is shown in Fig. 3.6. Estimates of atmospheric dispersion factors (X/Q) on an annual basis at downwind distances up to 80 km (50 miles) in 16 compass directions at the 15-m (50-ft) level are provided in Table 3.2. These factors were calculated using the Gaussian plume model and diffusion coefficients for Pasquill-type turbulence. Because the NFCS effluent reloese points are generally lower then 2.5 times the height of adjacent solid structures, the release was conservatively assumed to occur at
. ground level, with credit for building wake effects. Using these assumptions, the annuel average ,
X/Q at the noorest residence (1000 m or 3300 ft northeast) is 7.67 'x 10-8 s/m3 and, at the nearest site boundary (550 m or 1800 ft north-ncrthwest), is 1,54 x 10~5s/m3. 3.2.4 Air Quality Richland County lies in the Columbia intrastate Air Quality Control Region (AOCR). Air quality in this AQCR la generally good and does not violate the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (Table 3.3) for total suspended particulates, sulfur dioxide,' carbon monoxide, and nitregen oxides (40 CFR Pt. 81, revised July 1,1983). However, concentrations of ozone in the Columbia area, including Richland and Lexington counties, do not meet the national primary standard (40 CFR Pt. 81, revised July 1,' 1983). 3.3 DEMOGRAPHY AND SOCIOECONOMIC PROFILE The plant site is located in a predominantly forested area of low population density southeast of l the city of Columbia in Richland County, South Carolina. Richland County, which lies close to tie 8
- geographical center 'of South Carolina (Fig. 3.2), covers 2 x 10 m2 (762 miles2 ) and has a i
( i
3-7 ES4129 N NNW g NNE PERCENT 15% NW iz NE' 9 WNW s ENE II W - l a.as - E. WSW ESE SE SW SSW SSE S o-3 4-6 7 -10 18-46 17-21 32f CALM WINO IN KNOTS Fig. 3.5. Annual wind rose for the Westinghouse NFCS based on site-specific data collected Aug.1,1972, through July 31,1973. Source: Westinghouse 1983. Fig. 3-6. population of 269,735 (DOC 1983). Approximately 87.1% of the county's population resides in urban areas. An estimate of the 1980 population within 80 km (50 miles) of the plant is given in Table 3.4 for each of the 160 segments defined by 16 radial (compass) directions and 10 radial distances. The 1980 population in each circular zone (annulus) is represented as totals in Table 3.4. The total population within 80 km (50 miles) of the site is 783,181. During work and school hours (daytime) approximately 2,200 individuals are transient within an 8-km (5-mile) radius of the plant site (Westinghouse 1983). The nearest resident to the plant is located about 1 km (0.6 mile) northeast of the center of the manufacturing building. Total Westinghouse NFCS employment ranges between 800 to 1000 employees (R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse, personal communication with A. W. Reed, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, September 19, 1984) working over three shifts. Plant employment represents 0.9% of 1980 Richland County total employment (116,637) (DOC 1983), which is not a significant fraction of the employment in Richland County, County employment is roughly distributed as follows: 13.1 %
3-8 ES-6127
*s s on. =a. oo T, 3a g Y
.. O o **
*s e, =
,, 8 #
- g. s .. a #
38g$ 9, t, % y. o' *
+ gsa
* "o a 4 SIE o*
0 % '# 4 ,3 c, %(q ; [ vo.g o2 ,o 8.r a.S 59% w oa o.s o. as. a. ,aaj% e.o a.a ao a.o ao oA a 42% go wn 4. , o. S' % o
, 00 op 0* g ,,> O $
- o, ** a ** a P g . o.s .o ** g
@
- o> e c.\ *
- e e
. o.o
+ # d-e,
+ . 0o e e o +
$ * . ,g o.* 8 a s e*
a
=T 44% g/
Fig. 3.8. Average annuel wi.wl rose for the Columble Metropoliten Airport based on National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration date, 1948-1981. Units are mph. Convert to Em/h by muitelymg by 1.61. Source: Westinghouse 1983, Fig. 3.7. manufacturing: 19.5% wholesale and retail trade: 28.0% professional and related services; 31.5% government (Columbia is the state capital); and 4.5% self-employed (DOC 1983). 3.4 LAND The following sections describe characteristics of local land use that are important in the environmental assessment of the NFCS operation and/or expansion. Here, the staff describes the distribution and nature of agriculture, the important historic and prehistoric landmarks, and the distribution of undeveloped nonagricultural land in a study area within 8 km (5 miles) of NFCS. 3.4.1 Site Area The location of the Westinghouse facilities and various land uses on the 469-ha (1158-acre)
)
site are shown in Fig. 3.4. The facilities are centrally located on the sito and lie about 550 m (1800 ft)'from Bluff Road (South Carolina Route 48). The developed area (buildings, parking lots, and associated facilities) occupies about 24 ha (60 acres) or 5% of the site property. Undeveloped areas are occupied primarily by roughly equal areas of cultivated fields and forest. A large grassy field, which lies between the facilities and Bluff Road, and Sunset Lake occupy the remainder of the site. Approximately 20 ha (50 acres) of the grassy field are cut for hay, which is fed to a herd of about 150 dairy cows belonging to the McGregor's Dairy, Hopkins, South Carolina (Westinghouse
Tatdo 3.2. Annuel everage _^- z;tnic diepersion factors (X/Q) by destance and direction from the W:J f r NFCS (s/m 8) Distance (mies) 3 0.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 N 0.693 X 10-' O.212 X 10' O.704 X 10' O.380X 10" 0.247 X 10" 0.178 X 10-* NNE 0.749 X 10' O.228 X 10' O.759 X 10-* 0.410X 10' O.267 X 10' O.193 X 10' NE 0.113 X 10' O.345 X 10" 0.115X to-* 0.626 X 10' O.409 X 10' O.296 X 10' ENE 0.881 X 10' O.270X 10" 0.901 X 10" O.489 X 10" 0.319 X 10' O.231 X 10' E 0.123 X 10' ~O.379 X 10' O.127 X 10-' ' O.692 X 10' ' O.452 X 10' O.327 X 10' Y ESE 0.962 X 10' 0.295 X 10-' O.988 X 10' O.536 X 10-* 0.350X 10' O.253 X 10" SE 0.725 X 10' O.223 X 10' O.745 X 10' O.404X to' O.263 X 10" 0.190X 10" SSE 0.641 X 10' O.197 X 10-* 0.661 X 10' O.359 X 10" 0.234 X 10" 0.169 X 10-* S 0.584 X 10' O.179 X 10' O.602 X 10" 0.327 X 10-* 0.214 X 10" 0.155 X 10' SSW 0.750X 10' O.230X 10' O.771 X 10' O.418X 10' ' O.273X 10' O.197 X 10-' SW O.104 X 10' O.320X 10-' O.107 X 10' O.583X 10' O.381 X 10' O.275 X 10" WSW 0.110X 10' O.337 X 10-* 0.114X 10' O.419 X 10' O.406 X 10' O.294X 10" W 0.126 X 10' O.387 X 10' O.130X 10' O.711 X 10' O.466 X 10' O.339 X 10' WNW 0.102 X 10' O.313 X 10' O.105 X 10-' O.575X 10" 0.377X 10' O.274X 10' NW 0.959 X 10' O.295 X 10' O.989X 10' O.537 X 10' O.350X 10' O.253X 10' NNW 0.785 X 10' O.241 X 10-* 0.808 X 10' O.437 X 10' O.285 X 10' O.206 X 10'
i Tatdo 3.2. (continued) - ' 10.0 20.0 30.0 - 40.0 50.0 N O.671 X 10-' O.271 X 10-' O.161 X 10-' O.112 X 10-' O.845 X 10-* NNE O.729 X 10-' O.296 X 10-' O.177 X 10-' O.123 X 10-' O.932 X 10-* NE 0.113 X 10-* 0.460X 10-' O.276 X 10-' O.192 X 10-' O.145 X 10-' ENE 0.876 X 10-' O.353 X 10-' O.209 X 10-' O.145 X 10-' ' O.109 X 10-' E 0.125 X 10-* 0.515 X 10-' O.311 X 10-' O.217 X 10-' O.165X 10-' - ESE 0.965X 10-' . 0.393 X 10-' O.236 X 10-' O.164X 10-' . 0.124X 10-' y-SE 0.722 X 10-' O.292 X 10-' O.175 X 10-' . 0.121 X 10-' O.915 X 10-' SSE 0.643 X 10-' O.262 X 10-' O.157 X 10-' O.109 X 10-' O.826 X 10-* S 0.590X 10-' 0.241 X 10-' O.145 X 10-' O.101 X 10-' O.766 X 10-* SSW 0.750X to-' O.306 X 10-' O.183 X 10-' O.128 X 10-' O.965 X 10-*
- SW 0.105 X 10-* 0.429X 10-' O.258X 10-' O.180X 10-' O.136 X 10-'
WSW 0.113 X 10-* 0.469 X 10-' O.284 X 10-' O.199 X 10-' O.151 X 10-' W 0.130X 10-* 0.540X 10-' O.327X 10-' O.229X 10-' O.174 X 10-' WNW 0.106X to-* 0.436X 10-' O.263X to-' O.184 X 10-' O.139 X 10-' I NW O.963 X 10-' O.392 X 10-' O.235 X 10-' O.164 X 10-' O.124 X 10-' i NNW O.774 X 10-' O.313 X 10-' O.187X 10-' O.130X 10-' O.977X 10-* Source: NRC 1980. 1 I
l 3-11 Tatdo 3.3. Ambient air quality stonderde for South Caroline Measuring Standerd*:* pm, Interval (pg/m8) Sulfur dioxide 3h 1,300* 24 h 365' Annual 80 Suspended particulates 24 h 250 Annual G.M.d 60 Carbon monoxide 1h 40.000 8h 10.000 Ozone 1h 235' Non-mothene hydrocarbons 3h 160 Gaseous fluorides 12-h av. 3.7 (as HF) 24-h av. 2.9 1-week av. 1.6 1-month av. 0.8 Nitrogen dioxide Annual 100 Lead Calender quarterly 1.6 mean
'Arithmetc average except in the case of suspended particulates.
*At 25"C and 760 mm Hg.
'Not to be exceeded more than once a year.
Geometric mean.
'Not to be exceeded more than one day per year.
Source: " State Air Laws." Environ. Rep. 506,1004, June 29, 1984. 1984). At the time of the staff site vis.t (September 19, 1984), the cultivated lands consisted of soybeans and recently plowed fields. Soybeans, the principal crop, are grown on about 182 ha (450 acres) on the site and are transported to Cameron, South Carolina, where they are prreessed into soya oil and feed meal (Westinghouse 1984). 3.4.2 Adjacent Area The nature, extent. and distribution of local land uses are important in the environmental assessment of NFCS operations and/or expansion. The primary interaction to evaluate is that of NFCS ra@l and chemmal atmospheric effluents with local human and biological populations, and with farming and manufacturing activities. Interactions involving water supplies to these populations and activities are of equal importance and are treated elsewhere (Sects. 3.5 and 3.7) in this assessment. Approximately 5% of the land within 8 km (5 miles) of NFCS is residential, less than 1% (exclusive of NFCS) is industrial, and about 20% is agricultural. Seventy percent of the land is urunhabited forest or swamp forest (Westinghouse 1983). t l l l
a Tehle 3.4. beorenseneel 1980 populeelon esehneene by sectors wishan 30 km (50 neBoel of the Weseinghouse NFCS Miss** Sector 0-1 1-2 2-3 3-4 4-5 5-10 10-20 20-30 30-40 40-50 N 11 87 .19 22 255 11,738 68.207 5.442 4,371 6.300 NNE O O 114- 53 56 3,340 6.962 5.062 9,882 5,413 NE O O 122 448 128 1.062 1.065 1,577 11.977 8.093 ENE O O 160 266 213 2,090 1.549 16.363 9.846 12.856 E 8 46 110 156 224 924 1,719 3,577 44,962 8.387
- ESE O 30 91 141 160 530 913. 1,783 5.273 9,886 SE 0 0 27 34 53 426 1.572 3,355 5,022 13.905 w SSE O O O O 4 281 1,648 22.571 4.587 -13,621 .'.
S O .O 4 0 8 315 1,153 17,759 5,893 " 4.511 SSW O O O O O 674 1,159 4,158 7,410 15,291 ! SW O O O O O 680 2.722 3.727 3,631 8.259 , WSW O O O _O_ O 1.550 1,794 3,383 1,955 39,096 i W O O 0 0 0 2,788 2,918 3,565 13.445 11,580 WNW O O O 8 4 2.46* 6.488 9.862 5.228 8,230 NW O O 8 11 2.386 6.268 95.703 7,194 - 5,239 20,759 l WNW O 76 57 8 47 17.673 111.972 4.010 5.396 3.543 Total 19 239 712 1.147 3,538 5,2803 277,547 113,388 142.646 191.141 , Total. O-50 mies - 783.181
- *Estrnates for 0-5 mies h==re on data given in Westinghouse (1983h es;imetes for 5-50 miles beoed on 1980 U.S. Bureau of Census data.
*lGometers = miles x 1.6.
i
- ~ - -___
. . . - . . . . - .. .- - , . ~ ~ .- ..- . . _. ..~
l 3-13 , 3.4.2.1 Manufacturing ; Except for the Caroline Eastmen plant, wtuch lies 7.6 km (4.75 miles) directly west of NFCS, ;
= .all firms with five or more employees are wittun the 180" sector north of the plant site.'Those ,
facilities with potentially segnWicant atmospheric or aquatic effluent loads with wtuch the NFCS effluents could interact include the Caroline Eastman plant (men-made production fibers), Wallece , j , Concrete Products (menhole production), and Square D Company (industrial motor control l production). L i j 3.4.2.2 Agriculture
- . Agricultural land occupies about 20% of the land area withm an 8-km (5-mile) radius of NFCS, I pnmenly in the northern and aestem portions of the study area. Crops include soybeans, com, hoy, cotton, wheet, and cats. Pecan groves are present to the east.
I Only one dairy farm is operating wettun the study ares: McGregor's Dairy, 7.7 km (4.8 miles) !. . north-northeast of NFCS. According to Westinghouse (1983), this dairy has about 150 milk cows. No other important crop or livestock production appears to occur in the study ares. h W to i the previous NRC review for hcense renewal (NRC 1977), the Power's Dairy coseed operations. It 3
. was located 3.5 km (2.2 miles) northwest of NFCS. The light agricultural production in the eres is an advantage of the Columbee site.
- 3.4.2.3 Undeveloped nonogriculturallend
- The applicant has reported that 70% of the land in the study aree is covered by forest or swamp forest (Westinghouse 1983). Exteneeve forests and swamps lie along the Congeree River west and south of the plant. Water tupelo-sweet gum forests occur in swampe and on wet alluviel l substrates along the Congeree River. A more mesic ook forest dominates the better-drained sites, l >
wheroes the driest sites in the area may be dommeted by loblolly pine and hardwoods (ook specise, I red maple, yellow popier, etc.). Presently, there are no important logging activities in the forests on the site (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.3.1.3). The distribution of vegetation types is discussed in Sect. 2.8.1. , The Congeree River Swamp, an 8,500-he (21,000-acre) forested swamp lying along the t .g Congeree River about 6.5 km (4 miles) southeast of the site (Fig. 3.3), is listed as a natural j 1 landmark (001 1983). This area has been largely undisturbed for 200 years and contains several of .; the largest trees of certain species (Denrus 1967; Westinghouse 1983). It is a rare remnant of previously extenseve southern river floodplam forests.
- _ ' 3.4.3 Historic Signifloence Several known archaeoloycal sites are located within 8 km (5 miles) of the NFCS, although none are located onsite (N. Brock, South Carolina Department of Archives and History, personal communication with R. L Kroodsme, ORNL, January 17, 1985). Undiscovered, undisturbed sites .
, probably do not exist in the expension area at the plant facilities, because the development substrate was disturbed during original construction.
i .Other historical and cultural sites occur wittwn the 8-km radius, although none are recognized by the Netional Register of Historic Pieces (001 1979-1983). According to correspondence from the ; 4 South Caroline Department of Archives and History (Westinghouse 1983), the following historical ; I 4 y-. , ,.e.,.,--, ., .,,.,.,v- ....,-,.,.,,..,.ym-e.,n%.-., %-,....,m.,__ vm,,.,- ,,,. ~,. ,..~ -- -m,.-,,...w.
3-14 sites, listed in the Central Midlands Survey of 1974, are potentiaNy eligible for the National Register but are not presently of high priority for nomination. Au sites are within an 8-km (5-mile) radius of the plant.
- 1. Raiford's MiB Creek (Mill Creek)-18th century The first settlements in the county were made along Mill Creek in the 1740s. Hopewen Ferry, across the Congaree River below the creek's mouth, was used in 1756 and throughout the Revolution. The creek was named for Philip Raiford, who settled on the creek below Adams' Mill Pond. The creek was later' called Hays' Creek for William Hays, who built a mill there in 1748-1750. It was known by 1800 simply as Mid Creek.
- 2. Cabin Branch (John Hopkins, Jr., Plantation House)-1796 This building is off County Road 1159, 0.4 km (0.25 mile) south of intersection with County Road 223, near Congaree Community. The 18th century house had two large front rooms, a center hall, and an open loggia. About 1835, two large rooms were added at the rear, and the loggia was extended into a hall. It is stiu owned by the Hopkins.
- 3. Claytor House-1887 l Located on Highway 37 at Hopkins, this wooden cottage built by Dr. Hubert Claytor has a porch and fish-scale gable and is architecturally distinctive.
- 4. Chappell Cabin Branch (Hicks Plantation House and Garden)-1781 This two-story rectangular frame house with a single-story front porch is located on a dirt road off County Road 37,0.8 km (0.5 mile) south of Hopkins. There have been recent alterations. A garden with original plantings remains, and the house is stiu occupied by the ChappeN family.
- 5. Hopkins Overseers Dwelling-19th century The dwelling is located in the Hopkins Community on County Road 37, 0.4 km (0.25 mile) south of the intersection of County Roads 37 and 55. The center section is a pedimented frame cottage. The Hopkins family cemetery is nearby, 3.4.4 Floodplains and Wetlands Extensive floodplains and wetlands lie along the Congaree River in the vicinity of the site (Figs. 3.3 and 3.4). The elevation of the flood limit, according to U.S. Army Corps of Engineers maps, is 39.6 m (130 ft) above MSL. Slightly more than half of the site lies below this elevation in the bottomlands of the Congaree River, but the plant facdities lie mostly above 41.8 m (137 ft)
(Fig. 3.4).
- Most wetlands in the area consist of bottomland forests and forested swamps. Several ditches drain the cultivated fields in the bottomlands on the site, but these have little significance as natural wetlands. Sunset Lake is a shanow artificial impoundment on min Creek on the site. The upper 85%
of the original lake is now a wooded swamp, whereas the lower part has some open water. A small pond and a canal also lie in the southern half of the site. No construction of facilities is planned in the site's floodplain or wetland areas.
)
< t--
=3-15 J
9 -3.5 HYDROLOGY 3.5.1 Surface Water I , 3.5.1.1 Congeree River' hydrology The closest offsite surface water body to the NFCS is the Congeree River (Fig. 3.7),' which is formed by the confluence of the Broad and Salude rivers 16 km (10 miles) upstream at Columbia, South Carolina.' Tributanes to the river in the plant vicwwty are Gills Creek at Columbia; Mill Creek, aqecent to the Westinghouse site; and Beaver and Cedar creeks near Hopkins. Mill Creek flows
' through an impoundment, Sunset Lakei on the NFCS property before reaching the Congaree River (Figs. 3.4 and 3.7).
. In the NFCS vicinity, the Congeree River, which is a typical South Atlantic Piedmont stream; is
- characterized by sandy bottoms and besches and high levels of suspended solids. The flow of the river is regulated by Lake Murray and Lake Greenwood on the Salude River, and to some extent by power plants along the Broad River (USGS 1981). At the point of the NFCS discharge, the :
Congeree River is approximately ~150 m (500 ft) wide and no more then 3 m-(9 ft) deep (Westinghouse 1983). The ' average flow of the Congeree River at the USGS gegeng station at Columbia was 266 m 8/s (9388 cfs) for the period of 1939 to 1981 (USGS 1981). The 7-d,10-year low flow that could occur would be 45 m 8/s (1590 cfs) (NRC 1977, Sect. 2.5.2.1); the menwnum daily flow
' 8 for the period 1939 to 1981 was 19 m /s (662 cfs). The lowest flows occur during the late summer months.
- Since the beginning of stage and discharge measurements at Columbia in 1892, the highest 4 8 8
. stage of record was 12 m (39.8 ft) with a discharge of 1.0 x 10 m /s (3.6 x 10 cfs) on August 27,1908 (USGS 1981). After impoundment of the Salude River with Lake Greenwood and 8 5 l'ake Murray, the maximum stage of 10 m (33 ft) and discharge of 6500 m /s (2.3 x 10 cfs) -
occurred on April 19,1964 (USGS 1981). The NFCS plant is located approximately 4 m (12 ft) above the maximum stage reached by the 1908 flood waters (Westinghouse 1983,' Sect. 3.5.2.1). According to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' flood-line map, the line separating flood-prone areas from higher land areas is at 39.6 m (130 ft) above MSL in the vicinity of the NFCS: the manufacturing plant is 43 m (140 ft) above MSL (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.5.2.1). Flow from Mill Creek and its associated wnpoundment, Sunset Lake, which is on the NFCS property, enters the Congaree River about 5-km (3 miles) downstream of 'the Westinghouse plant's discharge point. Sunset Lake, an artificial impoundment about 0.4 km (0.25 mile) south of the NFCS plant, is divided by a small dem into upper and lower lakes. The uppellake covers an area of .1.9 'x 10 5m2 (44 acres) and is primarily a swamp because part of the flow from Mill Creek is diverted into a canal (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.5.2.2). The lower part of Sunset Lake covers approximately 3.2 x - 104m2(8 acres) and has an open-water area (see Sect. 3.7.2). The flow from Mill Creek is into upper Sunset Lake and the canal, from upper Sunset Lake through a causeway to lower Sunset Lake, and over a dam at the south end of the lower lake to the Congevee River, 3.5.1.2 Congeree River water quality Water quality data for the Congaree River in the vicinity of the Westinghouse plant were compiled from SC-DHEC data for 1981 (Table 3.5). Discussions with the SC-DHEC staff confirmed
3-16 l ES-6130 y, FORT JANSON1 WESTINGHOUSE NUCLEAR FUEL l
- MluTARY RESERVATION :
FABRICATION PLANT COLuus A (SITE AND VICINITY) g ( ] usuYARY REstRvAft04 O cir, g SUAF ACE WATEn Aafseve70Wm f f C snAMP If 4g
-- - Pate 90v40 ART r *IP g, AA st ROAD
/ w@ turensvArs nouva
@ u s mours O srArs noAo g A.AuS 70 0 9 4 1 uit s G
f ie e is S (" #de**e00sd T' i -io witts uesint Au enou a rrtuent outrAtt 2 - 500 V ARDs uPsTME AM OF t FFtuEN T oUTF ALL 3 - 500 Y ARDS DOWNsTRE Au OF E FFtutNT OUTF ALL arrr 8 WESTINGHOUSE
#% ~
4 - srittwav or su=ssr tAus e,cos." PLANT SITE **,,
@ t S s - -stM'o't C8""saurts au onAiw AT E"'T as Ano'etWE ANTsTINGMOUsE e Aciutirs PROPE RfY s y %
mora sAurtsmo tocATus O Aas aor to scAte ca uAP noeer .hsersAna %* P**,*"oaA., gey
,'i"l"" *""'
N * [ , f, [ . . ..A...,
.g,v;e g q
.::N.,,Q.P. . . .-.
\ ( / %,/^ ('
eue n,ve.
/
- 4' l%
* ' )(
/
c.o S
% [ D [3 e
f# C
% ~
e%%lONGAREE JSWAMP ,F
'% NATIONAL MONUMEN
\ *%, 'b s .. //
m r E , f'~wA ' e' '
~
s -
, .7cl-/ ]Q
~
x> y / y c.
- /.a I x o Fig. 3.7. Locations of surface water monitoring stations at the Westinghouse NFCS. Source:
Westinghouse 1983, Fig. 6.2. i
r: 3-17
' Table 3.5. Congeroe River annual (1981) water quality everages upstroom and downstroom of the NFCS discharge (outfall)*
3 Blossom St. Bridge
- U.S. 601 Bridged (upstream) (downstroom)
Temperature, T 16 16.8 Turbidity, JTU 14 14.1 Conductivity, gmhos 68 70 Dissolved oxygen, mg/L 10.1 8.1 800s, mg/L 3.4 3.9 pH, units 7.1 6.8 Total alkalinity, mg/L 16 17 NH3 + NH ,4 mg/L 0.53 0.095 NO2 + NO 3, mg/L 0.34 0.042 Phosphates, rng/L 0.13 0.32 Total organic carbon, mg/L 4.3 5.1 Cadrruum, pg/L <10 <10 Chromium, pg/L 50 <50 Copper, pg/L <50 <50 tron, pg/L 787 1300 Nickel, pg/L <50 <50 Lead, pg/L 55 <50 Mercury, pg/L 0.2 0.3 Fecal coliform, per 100 mL 249 1490
- Compiled from South Carolina Department of Health and Environmen-
. tal Control Data and reported in Westinghouse 1983, Tables 3.11 and 3.12.
*JTU = Jackson turbidity units.
800 = twological oxygen demand
' Sampling location is 16 km (10 miles) upstroom of Westinghouse outfall.
#Sampling station is 40 km (25 miles) downstroom of Westinghouse outfall.
that these values are typical of present water quality (Russell Sherer, SC-DHEC, personal communication with V, R. Tolbert, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October 15, 1984). Comparison of 'the ups'tream and downstream stations (Table 3.5) shows that, except for concentrations of iron and fecal coliform bacteria, there are no appreciable differences in water quality parameters. Increased fecal coliform counts and phosphate and decreased dissolved oxygen at the downstream station are indicative of agricultural runoff and of sewage discharges to the river from the communities of Columbia, West Columbia, and Cayce. The Congaree River receives discharges directly from Columbia, West Columbia, Cayce, and the Westinghouse plant. Municipal wastewater from Columbia is treated by trickle filtration and activated-sludge processing at a metropolitan area wastewater treatment plant before discharging 8 at an average of 1.2 m 3/s (42 cfs). Peak sewage discharge from the city of Columbia is 2.6 m /s (93 cfs) (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.5.3.2). The combined sewage discharge from Cayce and
3-18 3 West Columbia to the Congaree River is 0.08 m /s (3 cfs). The NFCS currently discharges 0.006 m'/s (0.2 cis) of treated process and sanitary wastes to the river (R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse, personal communication with V.- R. Tolbert, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, September 19, 1984). The only other industrial discharge to the Congaree River in the NFCS 3 vicinity is from Carolina Eastman, which discharges 1.4 m /s (49 cfs) of cooling tower water into the Congaree River upstream of the NFCS via Hale's Branch (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.5.3.2). 3.5.1.3 Local surface water use The' city of Columbia diverts 1.5 m3 /s (54 cis) of water from the Broad River upstroom of Columbia for municipal use (USGS 1981). There are no industrial or municipal users along the Congaree River from the confluence of the Saluda and Broad rivers to the Congaree's confluence with the Wateree River to form the Santee River approximately 97 km (60 miles) downstroom of the NFCS. Water used by the Westinghouse plant is obtained from the Columbia Municipal Water System. Water use by the plant during the period of January to August 1984 was 0.008 m3/s (0.3 cfs) (R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse, personal communication with V. R. Tolbert, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, September 19, 1984). 3.5.2 Groundwater 3.5.2.1 Groundwater regime The aquifer system in the vicinity of the NFCS has two components: (1) a shallow, unconfined aquifer that is capable of producing relatively small quantities of water from individual wells for rural, domestic use; and (2) deeper, confined aquifers that are capable of providing large quantities of water for industrial and municipal supplies (SCWRC 1983). The unconfined aquifer consists of surficial marine terrace deposits of Pliocene-Pleistocene age, wheroes the upper Cretaceous Tuscaloosa formation is the principal confined aquifer at NFCS. The stratigraphy of these and other units is discussed in detail in Sect. 3.6.1. Presently, groundwater in the shallow aquifer is contaminated by waste streams from plant discharge (Davis and Floyd 1982). However, the quality of Tuscaloosa groundwater beneath the contaminated zone is unknown. Groundwater quality is discussed in detail in Sect. 3.5.2.2. The shallow and deep aquifers are separated by a 10-20-m-thick (30-60-ft) equitard identified as the Black Mingo formation by Davis and Floyd (1982). This aquitard appears to be thick enough and sufficiently low in permeability (<10-7 cm/s) to prevent more than insignificant natural hydraulic communication between the surficial and confined aquifers. Several meters of sand are believed to be present in the lowermost (basal) part of the Black Mingo (Davis and Floyd 1982). Although this sand is described by Davis and Floyd as a separate artesian aquifer, it is unclear whether there is a hydraulic boundary between this sand and the uppermost Tuscaloosa aquifer. The two units may behave as a single combined aquifer, it is possible to have hydraulic communication between deep confined aquifers and shallow terrace aquifers through poorly completed or abandoned wells that fully penetrate the confining strata. Davis and Floyd (1982) have identified two NFCS wells (W-1 and W-2, respectively, Fig. 3.8) adjacent to and immediately north of the main plant that penetrate into en artesian aquifer. These are older wells with uncertain completion records. Well W-1 is definitely a Tuscaloosa well. A third well (designated 300-6 by the South Carolina Water Resources
-a _ - - - - , , - , - - . - - - - - - -
r 3-19 4 s \
\ y si ~
li i i
=
\ :n;
- 1
\1 .
I
!!i, j ./ i"f ,.
/ . . .
-ps s ,
?? .f C h '
' ., e -
f j
/,
/> .
I 5 1
\( f l5 / :i ll ' /'
'l /
'll;! I It eg
/ / ! '!! !l I I / l b.j! .
.l ? l
r 3-23 - 1
' ~
f ~ Commenen (SCWRC)] was dnSed in~ 1963 in the vicinity of NFCS. This wet probably also i penetrated the T -.aaa== (Devis and Floyd 1982). If these wegs were property completed and/or f piuoged,.there;should be no hydraunc commuruceoon between shonow and deeper aguders. The '
~
uncerten Au , statue of those wete, however, prevents a denrutive answer to the queston l l' .of adonne hydraune commumeenan between deeper artseien and shesow terrace aquifers. ;
- - Piesometric head data for the Tia==aaa== aguder adde another element of uncertanty in the vicruty of NFCS. Davis and Floyd (1982) state that the pienometnc head in Wets W-1, W-2, and W-3 (another deep weg in the overlying Block Mingo formenon) rises 5 to 6 m (15 to 20 ft) l' above the top of the beesl Black Mingo sand, and that the pienometnc surface for this unit slopes ,
4 to the southeast. It is Ekely, however, that the pezometnc heads in the beoel send of the Black . [ Mingo are strongly inRuonced at NFCS by the underlying Ti-alaa== aguder. According to Devis , [- and Floyd (1982), T.-.aaa== aguders have higher artemen preneures then Black Mlngo aquifers. Canudorable upward vertical leakage probably occurs through thin conRning strata (it is not certain
- that conRning strate no between the Black Mingo and Ti-=aaa== aquifers at NFCS) and through
! Well W-1, which is an operHiolo i .-4_ -. In the Ta==aaa== , -Hydraulic communication between shonow terrace and deeper confining aquifers would be l. immsterial if the pisaametnc heed of the letter were yester then that of the former. A high i poisometric head in the Ti-=laa== would create an upward flow toward the shetow aquifer, thus i preventing the downward flow of contemenents.
. The pienometric surface of the shogow aquifer is weg known. Figure 3.9 is a contour map of '
l~ the pierometric surface (Devis and Floyd 1982). This surface slopes southward through the mein ' i'
- plant ares toward Sunset Lake where it intersects the surface. It is evident from these data that shonow youndweter discharges into Sunset Lake.
!' , 3.5.2.2 Groundweter quelley
-Table 3.6 is an anatyan of water quatty from the surfical aquifer northeast of the plant (up the 1 poundweter padlent at WeH W-24, located near the intersecten of the plant entrance and Bluff Road). As expected, there is no evidence of NFCS contaminents from the Westinghouse facmty. ,
- Ammons and fluoride were below detectable limits, total dissolved solids (TDS) was 50 mg/L, and ,
i the pH (6.01 was ellghtly acidic. 2 in mid-AprH 1980, a fish km occurred in the smed men-medo pond located oneite south of the [ W::rd r facWties (Fig. 3.8). It was determined that the km probably resulted from elevated , concentremons of fluoride and ammonie nitrogen present in the pond, and that these contaminents ' i
~
were being discharged to the ' pond from a nearby opnng located downgredient from the j , Wr_4-m westewater treatment plant. Since the kin, several youndwater quality investigations
- were conducted at NFCS, and two sources of contemnetson were identified
- the concentrated !
weste treatment tanks and the ammonie storage tank ares. In addition, the weste treetment ponds 9 may have been a source of yc; -i__ contamination in previous years (Devis and Floyd 1982).' ; i Table 3.7. presents water quatty data from the surficiel aquifer immediately downgradlent from c the sludge ponds toward Sunset Lake (Wen W-7). This wed generally has the yestest amount of ' [ contamination of aN ' webs monitored at the site. High levels of NFCS source contaminents,49 and I l' 002 mg/L of fluoride and ammonie, respectively, were reported. Furthermore, the TDS was an p order of magnitude yester concentration (642 mg/L) then at the upgradlent well location (Wou l- W-24),~ and the pH (9.4) was strongly alkallne. Apparently, the above analyses were obtened in l l: 1981 or 1982 (Westinghouse 1983). j ! f I . I
1 3-21 b he 3 : \ $i> l I h: E I 5
!'li N 3
[
/ s iEi
;s
. d.
/
bl!![ J l/ f
. \l I j! ,-j ,/
/.s -
I
- , i 1- ,/.
j- ,
" ' i
,f - /e
- i, .u, , , .a -
; .:/ /a;2 - :j ~v !
}/ '
i i
.x/7...!*..i'-Q,i '. >
, 9 ,/ j n %
/r
//
e
' f, [ .
, - . n y /.
sg A / ; o
,( ! ! !i
- / 11 g i:i i j! 7 %
- !.!. .ii. ]
// / .
- I
- ! iji q.
/ / i:
I 5:
==
*.g I
*d 5
/ / B i i~g 4, d ! !
s i . 3-22. I Table 3.8. Analysis of aroundwater in the neer-surface equifer northeast of the Wc-etleh NFCS (Well W-24)* i mg/L, or as indicated i Arsenic <0.005 Barium <0.1 Cadmium <0.005 Chromium <0.01 - Fluoride < 1.0 Lead <0.05 Mercury, pg/L <0.2 Nitrate rwtrogen 0.7 Ammorwa nitrogen <1 Seierwum <0.01 Silver <0.01 Turbidity 1.7 Chloride 2.0 Hydrogen suffide <0.01 s Copper <0.01 fron 0.04 Mangenese 0.018 Sulfate 18 Dissolved solids 50 Zinc O.042 Color 5 pH, units 6.0 Surfactants (MBAS*) 0.47 Nickel <0.01 Conductance, mhos 180
'Well W-24 is located upgradient, neer the intersectum of the plant entrance and Bluff Road.
*MBAS = Methylene blue active substances (detergents).
Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 3.9. 8ecause Westinghouse has not sampled most of the onsite wells on a routine basis, only sporadic results are available. Table 3.8 provides the most recent data (May 1984) for nonradx> logical contaminants (Westinghouse 1984). These data, which are typical of other semping times, indicate that conditions remain much as they were in 1981-82. Furthermore, nearly all shallow wells located downgredient between the sludge ponds and Sunset Lake showed various levels of contamination, ranging from about 5 to nearly 100 mg/L fluoride and 5 to 445 mg/L ; ammonia. Table 3.9 shows the most currently available results (April 1983) for radiological parameters in the onsite groundwater At the time of that sampling, the greatest radioactive contamination was found in Well W-30 (204 pCl/L gross alpha and 320 pCi/L gross beta) and Well W-7 (88 pCi/L gross alpha and 914 pCi/L gross beta). The other wells genwally had much
7 3-23 Table 3.7. Analysis of groundweter in the neer-surface aquefer southeast of the Westinghouse NFCS (Well W-7)* 6
*U "
Parameter , Arsenic <0.005 Barium 0.1 Cadmium <0.005 Chromium <0.01 Fluoride . 49 Lead <0.05 Mercury, pg/L <0.2 Nitrate nitrogen 310 Ammonia nitrogen 602 Seierwum <0.01 Sdver <0.01 Turbidity 1.2 Chloride 20 Hydrogen sulfule <0.01 Copper <0.01 fron 0.04 Manganese <0.005 Sulfate 125 Dissolved solids 642
- Zinc 0.021 Color 25 pH, units 9.4 Surfactants (MBAS*) 0.54 Nickel 0.02 Conductance, mhos 2,950
*Well location is shown on Fig. 3.8.
*MBAS = Methylene blue active substances (detergents).
Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 3.10. lower concentrations of radoectivity. As shown in Tables 3.8 and 3.9, upgradient wells were generally free of contammants (both radeolo0i cal and nonradwavy=l) except when immediately a4acent to the ponds. An analysis of the impacts of this groundwater contamination is presented in Sect. 4.2.3.2. Background groundwater quality in shallow terrace aquifers is described by the SCWRC (1983) in only general terms. According to SCWRC, shallow groundwater may be high in iron, sulfate, or nitrate but is generally soft. Except for the information provided by NFCS for the onsite wells, groundwater quality of nearby privately owned shallow wells is undocumented. Although water quality in the Tuscaloosa aquifer is generally good in Richland and surrounding counties (SCWRC 1983), data for the NFCS vicinity are sparse. Two deep wells (W-1 and W-2 on
3-24 Table 3.8. Special water quality analysis report for monitoring wells at the Westinghouse NFCS, May 27,1984* - l Weg . pH F~ NH 3 Conductivity number (units) (mg/u (mg/Q (mhos) 3 6.6 1.8 1.8 700 4 6.2 2.2 1 100 ' 6 6.2 2.0 1 42 7 9.2 91.0 445 2900 8 7.0 2.3 20 460 9- 5.6 2.3 1 250 ' 10 6.3 11.5 14 410 11 6.0 31.9 5.5 100 12 6.5 2.1 1.5 61 13 6.7 2.2 13 "330 14 5.9 2.2 1 59 15 6.7 6.5 34 600 " 7.0 2.3 16 38 61 17 5.8 2.8 '1 420 18 7.1 26 45 870 19 5.5 1.9 1 120 20 6.2 2.0 115 140 21 5.6 1.4 1 138 22 7.5 23 56 1300 24 5.8 2.0 1 56 , 25 6.4 0.4 1 121 20 6.3 2.4 29 620 ~' - - 27 6.3 2.1 2.5 *390 .
- +
28 6.0 34 4.2 350
- 29 3.9 23 116 1420 30 7.8 22 1.2 . 2100 31 6.7 - 2.3 5.4 190 -
32 8.8 38 109 1600 33 5.2 1.3 -1 180 34 6.0 1.4 ., 2.1 340 ,
' wen locations are shown .on Fig. 3.8 except for -
W-24, which is located upgradient, near the intersection of the plant entrance and Bluff Road (Route 48).
~
Source: Westinghouse 1984. ,'
- s- _
NFCS) were , completed in the Tuscaloosa. Since these are the oldest onsite' wens, they would probably require reconditioning or replacement before reliable Tuscaloosa piezometric or water c /Sity data could be obtained. A third deep well (W-3) was completed in the overlying Block Mongo
^
formation. No Tuscaloosa weils sio known to have been drilled through the contaminated zorw of the shallow aquifer. Water quality data are available from two Tuscaloosa wells located about 8 km (5 milesfsouth of the NFCS on the Richland-Calt.uun county line. These wells were completed in November 1975 . u Y #g,
, . . . , p -.- . - - , - . . , , - - - -
3-25 Table 3.9. Special radiologloel water queNty analysis report for monitoring wolle at the Wu ..g:_ : NFCS, April 15,1983* Wed Gross alphe Gross beta numbw (pci/mu (pcl/mt) 6 0.033 0.020 7 0.088 0.914 8 0.045 0.073 9 0.004 0.010 11 0.041 0.233 12 0.015 0.014 13 0.003 0.011 14 0.000 0.006 15 0.017 0.240 16 0.009 0.063 17 0.000 0.027 18 0.033 0.212 19 0.004 0.006 21 0.000 0.002 22 0.014 0.199 23 0.002 0.004 24 0.000 0.000 26 0.002 0.026 27 0.002 0.003 28 0.002 0.006 29 0.036 0.043 30- 0.204 0.320 32 0.004 0.044
' 33 0.016 0.013
*Weg locations are shown in Fig. 3.8, except for W-24,' which is located upgradient, neer the intersection of the plant entrance and Bluff Road (Route 48).
Source: Westinghouse 1984, and in November 1976 for Tee Pac, Inc., of Sandy Run, South Carolina. These weis (29R-f1 and 29R-f2) (SCWRC 1984) were multr)ly screened in the Tuscaloosa formation. Several chemical analyses were obtamed between November 1975 and December 1976. At that time water quality was good, fluoride was not detectable, TDS ranged between 15 and 30 mg/L, and pH ranged between 5.1 and 6.8. No tests were conducted for ammone (SCWRC 1984).
. Another Tuscaloosa well [Well 29P-v2, owned by Laurington Dairy Farm (SCWRC 1984)] was completed in Rchland County about 6 km (4 miles) north of NFCS. Water samples were drawn from this well shortly after completon (November 1956). Water quehty (TDS 17 mg/L, pH 5.2,
. fluoride not detectable) was smier to that of the Tee Pac wells.
.- __. . . . .___ _ - = - - . .-
.J 3-26 3.5.2.3 Groundwater use The surficial terrace aquifer is primanly used for rural, domestic water supphes (SCWRC 1983). l Wells completed in the terrace aquifer generally produce smau quantities of water [<1 L/s I
~ (<20 gpml] of marginal quahty. Hence, they are seldom developed for munopel or industrial use.
Terrace aquifers are a primary source of water for rural inhabitants who cannot afford to driu and maintain deeper wells. More than 700 privately owned shallow wells lie withm 8 km (5 miles) of NFCS (NRC 1977). Nearly all of these wells are located upgradient to the north and northeast. The closest downgradient wells are in Congaree Swamp National Monument Park, 6 km (4 miles) away, and
- near Zion Pilgrim Church,4.5 km (3 miles) southeast of NFCS. The neerest wells to the south are across the Congaree River near Sandy Run Community, about 8 km f5 miles) from NFCS. None of the downgredient wells is likely to be effected by NFCS contaminated groundwater because of distance and the large intervenmg groundwater discharge area encompassmg Congaree Swamp. '
The Congaree Swamp is, itself,' an unlikely locale for shallow wells because of its general unsuitability for agriculture and human habitation. The Tuscaloosa aquifer is a widely used industrial and municipal groundwater resource (Park l- '1979). Figure 3.10 illustrates regional Tuscaloosa water production by county. The Tuscaloosa in central. South Carolina is described by SCWRC -(1983) as a maior source of high-quality groundwater, with yields. up to 200 L/s (3400 gpm) from mdnndual wens in Richland and surroundog counties. Tuscaloosa wens nearest NFCS are capable of producing 14 to 25 L/s . (225 to 400 gpm). Tee Pac, Inc. [8 km (5 miles) south of NFCS)., uses Tuscaloosa water.for industeel purposes and Laurington Dairy Farm [6 km (4 miles) north of NFCS] uses it for livestock , and irrigation (SCWRC 1984). Long-term pr'oduction from the Tuscaloosa can evidently be sustomed without substantial loss in pierometric head. The Laurington Deiry Farm well has been producmg water since '356 from screened intervals rangmg from 64 to 90 m (210 to 294 ft). The shut-in water level at a nearby
.Tuscaloosa wel was 12 m (39 ft) below ground level in November 1982 (SCWRC.1984).' An observation weH in southem Richland County was dnued in July 1980 and acreened at vanous intervals from 127 to 165 m (425 to 542 ft). The water level in this nonproducmg wel ranged from 6 to 11 m (21 to 37 ft) below ground surface from October 1980 through September 1982. The piezometric head in an observation wel in nearby Sumter County was affected to some degree by nearby pumping wells. This well was screened from 155 to 191 m (508 to 625 ft),
and the water level ranged from 12 to 24 m (40 to 78 ft) below ground surface from October 1981 through September 1982 (SCWRC 1984). From tho' foregomg discussion it appears likely that the piezometnc head in the Tuscaloosa formation is high at NFCS. The nearest wells pumpmg from the Tuscaloosa are 6 km (4 miles) away so that the, drawdown would be trivial. Thus, the piezometric head in the Tuscaloosa is ; probably near that of the overlying terrace aquifers at NFCS, and any transfer of fluid between the terrace and Tuscaloosa aquifers would be mwwnal and subsect to seasonal variation. Whether the
- flow is up or down is indeterminant at this time.
'3.6 GEOLOGY This section describes regional and site physiography, stratigraphy, structure, soils, mineral l resources, and seismicity. These characteristics relate directly to foundation stability and impact on groundwater resources.
_, _ _ _ , - . ,-.- ___m, , -_- ,
ES-6122
,. . I 45 _ ,0 45. po 120 ,,190 ,j i.'
/* #:
Kit.oMETERs ,*/ /e
./ RICHLAND -
'~~ COUNTY, SC
! f *** ,, .
.) . . - . - - - n.. ,/ :in:i::
~,7' i ~ ~,.% ** c ;lilRi:.
,.._.. ..-.. . .t
'. . . - f g
'l / . ,e . *: ;i:: ._ o
EXPLANATION
-../ ..
l
. \,
s'
- e. . .$ .*' . . ~. J!:
g
- ff , , :::lg ----Approximate updip limit 4,** "
~
u
'g % .t Groundwater Withdrawals
* . A.
Pubhc Industrial N
= * ' * *
- 01 to IO mgd j ( ,. . .
'. Y . 'e '
e = IO to 20mgd DL ' 7 'E
.[j!):.
O a 2.0 to 50 mgd over 50 mgd l ,. ',., . $ 5 i \ a u - i .'*
** [ __ _j Aquifers contain less than 1000 mg/L
' * *}
- total dissolved solids
~ '
[!53@ One or more aquifers contain in excess of 1000 mg/L total dissolved solids
\
All or most aquifers contain in excess of 1000 mg/Liotal dissolved solids Fig. 3.10. Hydrogeologic map of the Cretaceous aquifer system in the southeastern United States, including South Carolina. Regional Tuscaloosa water production is indicated by county. Source l Park 1979.
l I 3-28 1 3.8.1 Physiography Southeastem Rchland County lies within the upper Coastal Plain, a subprovince of the Atlantic t Coastal Plain (Davis and Floyd 1982). The topography ranges from very flat and poorly drainert I [ near the Congaree River to the wen-drained sand hills. The topography surroundmg NFCS is generaHy flat with only slight local relief. i l
~ The physiography of the upper Coastal Plain is controlled by unconsondated sands and clays that are- easHy weathered and eroded in compenson to the hard, consohdated Paleoroe and Precambrian rocks north of Columbe, South Carolina. Columbia is located on the fan Line, a zone
_ of river rapids and small waterfalls, which forms the boundary between the Piedmont and Coastal Plain physiographic provoces (Fig. 3.11). i 3.6.2 Stratigraphy and Structure
' The regional geology is iHustrated by two figures. Figure'3.11 is a geologe map of South C$rolina's Coastal Plain and Piedmont, mcluding a structure section through Richland County along line A-A'. Figure 3.12 is a stratigraphic column of formation names whch are keyed to the map symbols in Fig. 3.11.
The NFCS is located in the subcrop of the upper Cretaceous Tuscaloosa formation (Kul). Some geologists prefer the use of the local term "Middendorf" rather than Tuscaloosa. The Tuscaloosa deserves special consideration because it is perhaps the most important regional aquifer in South Carolina (Park 1979). A detailed discussion of groundwater resources is provided in Sect. 3.5.2. The Tuscaloosa and younger strata form a thin veneer [a few tens of meters along the Fall Line near Columbia to more than 180 m (600 ft) in southeastem = Richland County) overlyng . " basement" rock. The depth to basement is estimated to be 75 to 90 m (250 to 300 ft) at NFCS. I The followng discussion descnbos the stratigraphy of the basement and overlying coastal plain-I sediments. The order of discussion is from oldest (basement) to youngest (Pliocene-Pleistocene). Little is known about the basement rock of the area because so few holes have been drilled j into it. .The available data suggest, however, that the buried basement rocks are Rttle different from 3 those exposed in South Carolina's Piedmont province; that is, they are Paleozoic and Precambnen metomorphic rocks and intrusives. The Tuscaloosa formation is arkosic cross-bedded sand and gravel, interbedded with lenses of mixed clay co.Tvus.Ge.. .and kaolin. The depositional environment was mixed continental-marine, characterized by fluvial, deltasc, and Ettoral deposits (SCWRC 1983). I in the vicinity of NFCS, the base of the Tuscaloos 'enation rests on basement rocks believed to be smier to those exposed in the South Carolina Piedmont. The top of the Tuscaloosa is eroded out at the NCFS. Uppermost Tuscaloosa strata are encountered between 15 to 30 m (50 to 100 ft) below land surface (dependmg on topography) in the vensty of the NCFG. The_ stratigraphic units lying directly over the Tuscaloosa are difficult to decipher at NFCS for two reasons. First, the Fall Line is only about 15 km (10 miles) to the northwest, so that most strata overlying the Tuscaloosa are thin or absent. Second, outcrops of strata older than Phocene are rare. They are generally covered by 6 to 12 m (20 to 40 ft) of Pliocene-Pleistocene marine terrace deposits. What httle is known of the stratigraphic interval between the upper Cretaceous
- and PNocene is obtamed from wen cuttings and geophysical wen logs. Interpretations based on such
. data are generaNy tentative. r l
.l
3-29 ES-6131 g g\ [ 4 / h CITY OF COLUM86A.SC
*O 7 WESTINGHOUSE FUEL F ABRICATION 1 og ,, 9 D Te2 PLANT StTE 0 g,,
'940 \
% 6 =
S %
, g >LN Tm I8 g
Te, s -- Kus Te,
- T'2 Kai 0
s N.. g- i A Tm C H A,R LE STON Is 't 1 D7 C 's 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
'#, 07 g g 9 g 9 g g g g T
r .y KILOMETERS 4
?
h FOR utv TO GEOLOGIC $vuBOLS.SEE FIG.312. 04 5 F A6RFIELD RICHLAND sum CLRNDN ORNG BE MEY NMM CO CO .CO CO
,P an ANOP8 3 g WESTINGHOUSE T ATLANTIC COAST N [ PLANT 81TE ( A TLANTsC OCEAN Pig ogONT ME TA .
T
'"D NO #N TRus,ygg K, COASTAL y PLAIN SEDIMENTS GEOLOGICSECTION A - A' Fig. 3.11. Regional geology of the Westinghouse NFCS, indicating features of South Caroline's Piedmont and Coastel Plain. A key to geologic symbols is given in Fig. 3.12. Source: See Fig. 3.12.
. Davis and Floyd (1982) assembled an interpretation of the subsurface beneath NFCS (Fig. 3.13) based on well data. These data suggest the presence of several meters (tens of feet) of the Eocene (T,3-T.2) Black Mingo formation beneath the site, based on the findings of shale chips in well cuttings and on characteristic " kicks" in the geophysical logs at shale-sandstone interfaces. This
3-30 ES-6139 GENERALIZED CHART OF TIME AND ROCK UNITS i PIEDMONT - COASTAL PLAIN l a4 sesm. sms omw coa aro. avicocau aesecrea l l.V.!:.::*i44d IU:' NY.M5 ouananan naisvocaw
. l g
1 j
- o. e sn' . .;.;;;;;
i ' *. ; T T A. - --'7 I3, F. . - . .T,.*rr.Ja,5 - v -r-
- ~.== {';* -p-9-tf
,a
*"*~'*
O necem _, v. ,gl . . :: . + .. . g. ,,- .,y g 1 .+ av.\^-r ^ ^ -
.'= Y-I-Y- h -#.,w
^^^
O "oc'* **== - 'a
= = - - . ^ ;; -:-' . - ' . + _ ~ -
z ^S_t "-&- em m y,, asocem v.l'.,.* *.,* ,. .
' ,.^.,., . .
u g .a.= ~ u.. E * - Qn6 ' a sie. __ Q v: . Q r_qy y ,,, ,, eccew oo
,q 1.;, _ .
g
a= = t,-s .~v -r -k<5
- - - ,lg1 ; g M.K-Mar f % ff4
~wc'* **** .-
lth t: V.~.~.W.e.1w -
~ ""}.,_4EQi PT-bLud m.o ;- am .:. :
u CRETACEcus
" h.NIh.ma- @
0 . - =
] W+ ;". kKr~4 y town ~ emo-c i = E-M.ni -c : .:9 - --:-PE,;
lE TalA$$Nll .e=a
- a ==.e."'ma. s
..,ar~
u cassowinou$ ,f. Wsy L, a W_r,> B s mo,..n . i 3i
-. - ww!seR,i
#ro ,
l I: i
- E cm.~ _
- eg
- ....t .nw.s w
.z ..
;x-,~>d l := yw . .. =
- un
- .-. + i: u u :L:.:: m m-numwm
,q
,.~
x,
- :,,'1
- , s-e PRECAMBRIAN ,
ca ,o tIwa i i
)
me,, j,',l
? ,,
p;Q I P; O , 1:i.Sl, E,_ d L::::::I t- ' . LE. .i.S.,] I:+:1_. 1 L~l - L.:..i.l._i! l'e_ .'_i',' el GEE
. . _ . _li!!!il
_ . . .L.U_.'. M l.-
' Fig. 3.12. Generalized stratigraphic chart of time and rock units for South Carolina's Piedmont and Coastal Plain. Source: modified after the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, Geology Highway Map of the Mid-Atlantic Region, Map 4.1970).
l
3-31 e- 1sn 01133dS1W HilM 133d NI NO11VA313 5 !. i. 8 i 4
. 7____ p_ j p___q______
i i _____/h / 6 I J , sir . .1 I: i l^ 5= n g
~ie/
// J. te :b8 f2 c /i ( \i co I l$>
l'y l l" $ 5.= 1@ lI
/ lrf l 2 n l 0. ;
o ,o/ /;' ( g i 5 w
'/
I 8'I [k lT k 73 .e 3 5?o l l w4 .? y f. $ ' R8 m= g h c;9l M;,dle,.! :.. Q: sii j'~~ll
") # Gin /M!-V u ytyping '
R-e /p' fy p$
~
"r i *n -/ /r -
< w .-
(' . - ,.
*" .d g g .?
l . g {- ** n! 7:; 7 hl /' [# Eb 5 j. g a
.c e sa 0 /j s
"l .
.- k n l!
}
l i-I l/
'l/ :
f\ n' lg. R . a t sn a e
~e e
E o g}
<ie j'
l' 1 e g
- .f .f . a d. g.g
.D
# #fil7/el?(d,h ~
i $ "8 e o n - 'h
- 0 SW313W f 3
z a a e n . . . . e e a e W W O e
- - = "
T T ? ? ? 15N 01133dS3W M11M 133d Ni NOl1VA313
t 3 , t mterpretation is plausible because Paleocene-Eocene outcrops have been mapped in Calhoun and
,~
Sumter counties, . which are a4acent ;to Richland County. on . the south and east, respectively. ~ Colquhoun 'et al. (1983) beheve that' remnants of the lower part of the Black Creek formation i 1(upper Cretaceous) may also be present in the site vicinity. The identity of this' stratigraphic unit is largely immatenal because Black Mmgo and Black Creek hthologos are similar. Both consist of gray to black lemmated shale interbedded with send (SCWRC 1983). ' The likely presence'of the Black' Mmgo formation and/or Black Creek formation beneath NFCS.
, is significant. About 10 m of shale between the Tuscaloosa.and surfical aquifers rney prevent 4; _
hydraulic communcation between themc Thus, contamination of one aquifer does not necessanly
. r. lead to contammation of the other.
Phocene-Pleistocene manne t'errace deposits overhe the Black Mmgo formation. These terraces are exposed in scattered dramage ditches'and road cuts in southem Richland County. One such terrace (the Okefenokee terrace) has been identified in the NFCS vicwwty. Other nearby terraces are [
~
the Sunderland (northwest of NFCS) and Wiscomico (southeast of NFCS and along the Congaree River). The ,thekness of these terrace deposits ranges between 6 to 12 m (20 to 40 ft), and coRoctively they form the surfical aquifers of the area. The lithology of.the. terrace sedrnents is complex. Vanable mixtures of clay, silt, and sand thicken and thin appreciably,over short distances, grading both laterally and vertically from one facies into another.'indnndual facies are difficult to recognize from one well to the next. 3.6.3 J Soils -
- The nature of the, soils in the area is unportant in the assessment of NFCS oparations or-l ,
expansion. Problems occur if soils will not support structures or holdmg ponds, if soi' permeability , allows effluents to escape into aquifers, or if the engmeenng limitations of soils (swrJing, shrinking,
- corrossbehty to concrete 'and steel, and floodmg potential) cannot be overcome.
Soils groups for ~ the NFCS region are mapped in Fig. 3.14. The plant' . site occurs on the
- Craven-Leef-Johns association. Craven series soils are moderately well-d.ained, gently slopmg
,' .- Coastal Plain soils. The surface layer is loom, .with a clay subsoil that 'a very firm and slowly permeable.LClayey sedmonts interfinger with sand lenses below. The Lecf association is poorly
~
drained, with a silt-loam surface and silty-clay subsoil (NRC 1977). ( Both soil series'in the assocation have certain limitations. They are highly' corrosive to both ' concrete and steel, and they have severe shrink-sweN potential and severe wetness and flooding i - potential because of seasonal high water tables. The latter characteristic also decreases their
.,. suitabEty for septic tanks.- The wetness of the soils also limits sewage ponds and sanitary landfills (NRC 1977).
'_ ~ 3.6.4 Mineral Resources
. Construction materials (sand and gravel) are the principal mineral resources of southeastern Richland County. These resources are not unique to NFCS. They are found in _a wide variety of l coastal plain sedmonts in South Carolina. Ceramic materials are obtained from localized pure kaolin ,j
- and quartzose sand deposits in the Tuscaloosa formation. j
+
w - 9.- =-w>+r vw--w %w v w--wM--vv-rr-nk--N ev- w w w-wa w-T---> - w-- - - - - - ---- m a- mi
ES-6125 e 5 Columbio\ 7 5 5 N $ 7 4 6 6. 1 7 9 6
's 12 yy
- IO 9 a to 7
+ Uss7e . . S %,, 8 9 7 9 I2 **o,#
I 0 9.. o 7 tI o c - 10 - 5 7 8- R k+g 7 7 , 0,12345678
,, , , iii Q'+rp 10 <
l KILOMETEllS Co IO 7 8
- 'O e w 2
' e %,, ; 8 LEGEND d % , N Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel-Columbia Site 4 Lakelond- Wogrom - Fuquoy Association II n Congoree g;,,, o 5 Gilead - Blane y Associotion 5
-e 6 Voucluse-Gilead- Bloney Assoc not son 9 USGo, m o
j 7 N orf olk -Oi ongeburg Association h* j 8 Magnolio- Marlboro Association 9 Wogrom - Lucy- Orangeburg Association *n l , 10 Cro ven - Leof - Johns Association S l 11 Wehadkee - Chewacto Association j 12 Congoree -Chewacto Association x k Fig. 3.14. Generalized soil associations of southern Richtend County, South Caroline. Source Westinghouse 1983, Fg. 3.2. l
. .3 134 l
3.s.s . seismicity . Most of this ' discussion is based on recent ' work . by Bolknger (1972,1973). Bouinger is
.responsble for much of the curren' tliterature on the sesmology of _ the southoest generally and of
. South Caroline in particular. He suggests that, " broadly viewed, the region is a minor seisme zone, characterized by a low level of seeme energy release" (1972). He also suggests that "eerthquake j s frequency per unit time per unit area in this region is about one-tenth that of the west coast, but
; the seismograph station denssty that exists even today is madequate" (1973). However, he notes from other research that areas affected by shocks east of the Rocky Mountans are greater in size
, then those of equel magnitude' events in the western United States.
<The most intense shock in South Carolina cited by Bollinger (1972) was the August 1886 event at Charleston. Tha quake was felt as far west as. Missouri and as far north as Vermont. The quake L
- intensity in the Charleston area corresponded to a Modified MercaHi intensity (MMI) scale X, while ,
1most of the romander of South Caroline, mcludmg NFCS aree, underwent a quake intenesty of MMI [ .Vll. The expected damage at an MMI value of Vil mcludes cracked masonry, broken chimneys, falling plaster, loose bricks and cornices, damage to concrete irrigation ditches, and caving in along
- sand and gravel banks.' The distribution of earthquakes withm 320 km (200 miles) of Columbes, South Carolina, from 1754 to 1984 is shown in Fig. 3.15.-
Bolknger (1972) suggests that, "up to 1950, the seismic activity within the state is seen to be concentrated in the Charleston-Summerville area, but subsequent to that time has been pnmanly ' outssde that locale...unexplaned is the apparent shift, dunng the past two' decades, of seemic
- activity away from the coastal Charleston-Summerville area to the interior portions of the state.
l' This apparent shift now mcludes three shocks in the central part of the state that has been histoncally free . of earthquake epcenters." Apparently, this ' suggested trend of Coastal Pisin sesmcity is,quite localized, for Bolknger (1973) notes that " appreciable earthquake activity in'the Coastal Plain province appears only in South Caroline." The uncertanty of the suggested trend is - ; L4 magnified by the sparse and often unrehable data upon which it is based. "The southeastern region
- has sesmc monitoring madequate to specrfy completely its sommesty. This in tum rnplies the possbekty of messmg any buildup or dochne in that activity"(Bolknger 1973).
Using determrustic sesmc risk analyms (Krinitzsky and Marcuson 1983) forces one to deel with
' the possibehty of a local earthquake smier in intensity to the 1886 Charleston earthquake. Causes i
N t of . the Charleston earthquake are speculative at best. Thus, it can be argued that .such an fL earthquake could occur at Columbia, and ground motion under these circumstances could cause major damage to structures. rThe probabshty of major damage from an earthquake near Columbia is slight for any reasonably L asmgned NFCS plant life. Algermessen et al. (1982) provide probabihstic estimates for earthquakes of vanous intensstes Table 3.10. lists the estimated recurrence intervals in years per 10" km 2 ;,
' the sesmic source zone that includes both Charleston and Columbe Estimated recurrence intervals
,; . for the New Madnd sesme zone (southeast Missouri) and the San Andress fault zone are provided )
-for compenson. These data show that an earthquake with an MMI of Vil has a recurrence interval
- " of about 250 years (about a 10% probability of occurring in a 25-year interval) in the 104 km2 I
surroundmg Columbe. Hence, it makes good sense to prepare, either through desgn or remedal action, for, the possibility of minor earthquake damage However, the ' probability 'of an MMI X earthquake in the near future is vanishogly small. By comparison, the New Madnd and Son Andreas sesme zones are 3 and 50 times more active, respectively, than the Columbia-Charleston zone.
,_.1_
3-35 ES-6132 SEISMICITY MAP 85U 84U 83U 82U 81U 800 79U 78U 77g
] _ ;-
ob
, .e , ,
36N -- 0 - - 36N-Oa o o. g . a ..
** 2 35h 35N g
5 V 0 x
- 3'* .
Cy 34b -
- O ,
f - 34N G 9
??N - . D -
33N o, O I
> , a 32N -
32N
' ' ' ' ' ' ' 31N 31tt E5U 84U 83U 82U 81'J 80U 79u 78U 77U 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.e I-!!! !U-VI VII-IX X-XII
' v V V o a O O Fig. 3.15. Distribution of earthquakes within 320 km (200 miles) of Columble, South Caroline, 1754-1983. Source Computer search of data on file at the National Oceanographic and Atmosphenc Administration, Boulder, Colo.
Algermissen et al. (1982) also provide estimated probability of ground motion for central South Carolina. These estimates are based on mean values of ground motion as a function of earthquake i intensity. Table 3.11 estimates the horizontal accelerations and velocities having 10% probabilities of exceedance for selected time intervals. Krinitzsky and Marcuson (1983) caution that ground motion as a function of earthquake intensity has a very wide error band, especially for structures sited on unconsolidated foundation materials (soft site) and for near-field earthquakes (epecenters l I
i 3-36 I
. Table 3.10. Earthquake recurrence intervals (years /10* km 23 as a function of Modified Mercelli intoneny (MMI) for selected seismic source zones Seeme source zone MMI Columtxe-Charleston
- New Madnd ~ Sen Andreas V 25- (5) 8 1 VI 79 (17) 23 2 Vil 250 (53) - 65 6 Vill 790* (170) 190. 17 ,
IX ' 25006 (530)* 540" 46 X 79006 (1700)* 16006 130
- Estimated recurrence intervals in parentheses are for the entire Columtma-Charleston sesmc source zone (nearly 5 x 10*
km 23,
*These estimated recurrence intervals represent extrapolation beyond the historical data base.
Source Algermssen et al.1982. Table 3.11. Ten percent probability estimates for horizontal accelerations and horizontal velocities exceeding a given value as a function of time at Columbie, S.C. Tune intervals (years) 10 50 250-Horizontal acceleration
- 5 11' 23
(% of gravitational acceleration) Horizontal velocity 2 7 16 (cm/s)
' Approximate mean horizontal acceleration for a Modified Mercalli intensity Vil earthquake for a near-field earthquake at a hard site, from Krinitzsky and ,
l Mascuson 1983. Source: Algerrrussen et al.1982. 1 less than 5 to 50 km away depending on magnitude). Thus, it is reasonable to design for a safety factor of 2 with respect to Algermissen's estimated ground motion. 3.7 BIOTA j 3.7.1 Terrestrial - J 3.7.1.1 Vegetation ' l General types of vegetation found on the site are indicated in Fig. 3.4 and include bottomland i i forest, upland forest, cultivated field, and lawn. Bottomland forests are extensive along the l l
3-37 Congaree River to the west and south of the site, whereas upland forests are predominant to the north and east and on the other side of the Congaree River bottoms. The primary crop grown onsite is soybeans. The vegetation of the United States has been described according to two different types of classifications: the potential vegetation that would be present if man had not interfered with natural physical and biological processes, and the vegetation types that actually occur at the present time. The potential vegetation in the region includog'the site is classified as southern floodplain forest along the Congaree River, oak-hickory-pine forest on the uplands, and southern mixed forest immediately west of Columbia (Table 3.12). The actual vegetation differs from this mix primarily in that the uplands of the region are-dommated by loblolly pine-shortleaf pine forests and longleaf pine-slash ~ pine forests (Eyre 1980). On relatively wet upland sites, fertile well-drained coves, or on Table 3.12. Potentiel natural vegetation of the Columble, S.C., eroe Southern floodplain forest Physeognomy: Denee, medium tall to tall forest of broadleaf deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and needeleaf deciduous trees Domments: Tupelo (Nyssa squatical Oak (Quercus spp.) Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) Ook-hickory-pine forest Physsognomy: Mortum tall to tall forest of broodioaf deciduous and needleleaf evergreen trees Domments: Hickory (Carya spp.) Shortieaf pine (Pinus echineta) Loblolly pine (P. taeds) White oak (Quercus abe) Post oak (O. steesta) Southern mixed forest Physiognomy: Tall forest of broodieef deciduous and evergreen and needleleaf evergreen trees Domments: Beech (Fagus grandfois) Sweet gum (Liqudember styracrRue) Southern magnoha (Msgnohs grandRora)
. Slash pine (Pinus emiottii)
Lobiolly pine White ook Laurel oak (O. laurifoss) Source: A. W. Kuchier,- Potential Natural Vegetation of the Confermoous United States, Special Publication 36, Amencan Geographical Society, New York,1964.
3-38
, sites a4acent to creeks in the uplands, hardwood speces such as red maple and sweet gum are l more abundant. Various species of oaks and hickories are also assocated with upland forests, as i
- . well as with'most other forest types in the region.- l
= 1 3.7.1.2 Fauna l Wildlife; species that occur in the region containing the site include 'about l'25 breeding bird species (Cook 1969), 55 speces of mammals (Simpson .1964), 44 speces of reptiles (excluding turtles), and 38 speces of amphebens (range maps in Conant 1958). Although all of these species are expected to occur somewhere in the central South Caroline region, the site itself is too small to
' contain all the habitats required by these species. Therefore, only a fraction of the total number of speces would be expected to occur on the site. In addition to the breeding bird speces, more than 100 other bird speces probably occur at the site as migrants or visitors dunng fall, winter, and spring. .
7 L Wetlands, ponds, and forests on the site are the most important habitats because they support the greatest numbers and densities of wildlife speces. As wetlands and bottomland forests are being rapidly drained and cleared for agriculture throughout the United States, the romanng g forests, such as those along the Congaree River, are becoming increasingly important in supporting
- the romanng wildhfe populations (Johnson and McCormick 1978). Cultivated fields and lawns support only low-density populations of relatively few species Because the plant site has extensive i fields and lawns in addition to the facchtes, the site as a whole is expected to have relatively low ,
~
4 wildlife populations. Important game animals that occur at the plant site include the white-tailed deer, raccoon, j oastem cottontail, bobwhite, gray squirrel, and wood duck. Furbearers include the bobcat, red fox, l . and gray fox. L 3.7.2 Aquatic Aquatic resources that occur 'in the NFCS vicinity are the Congaree River, Mill Creek,' and ' Sunset Lake; their hydrology is discussed in Sect. 3.5.1. There is little information available on , biota in tho'Congaree River. Table 3.13 identifies major fish speces found in the Congaree River as listed by the South Carolina. Fish and Wildlife Department and the SC-OHEC. Of these speces,
. bass, crappie, bluegdl, and catfish are popular game speces. This should not be construed to be a 'i comprehensive list of speces present in the Congaree River, but rather as a list of speces of economic importance
' The major invertebrate species in the Congaree River that occur both upstream and downstream of plant discharge, chironomed larvae (medges) and tubificed worms, are ruficative of organic enrichment. The high focal coliform count reported in Sect. 3.5.1 indicates that sewerage enrichment occurs downstream of Columbia The sand and mud substrate typical of Piedmont '
- streams restricts the benthic fauna to burrowmg and filtering species and those species that live in e
assocation with plant material deposited in the river. Of the four phyla of benthic invertebrates [ ' collected with a ponar dredge from the river both above and below the plant discharge,43% were mollusks, 29% were annelids, 27% were arthropods (primarily insects), and 1% were nematodes i (NRC 1977). Fingernail clams, Sphaenum sp., were the most abundant orgerusms collected. )
~ Corbiculia clams occurred only downstream of the discharge at the time of sampling (Westinghouse j
1983, Sect. 3.8.2.3). i 1
I 3-39 ! s ' Table 3.13. Mejor fish species that presently occur in South Caroline's Congeree River, J Scientific name Common name j
"- Lepisoteidse
' Lapssosteus osseus Long-nose gar Amadeo Amis calva Bowfin Clupedse Dorosome cepedsnum Gizzard shed Cyprinidae Cypnnus carpio Carp icteluridae Actadurus natalis Yellow buuheed L nebulosus Brown bullhead L punctatus Channel catfish Serrenidae Morone saxatitis - Striped bass M. onrysops White bass
- Centrarchidae
. Lapomss macrochrus Bluegill Meropterus colomesus Smallmouth bass M. seimoodss Largemouth bass Pomoxis annuisns White croppie '
P. nigromsculstus Black croppie Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 3.15. Phytoplankton collected in the vicinity of the plant discharge were predommately the coloneel
- green algaec Eudbrina edegans. Of the total number of andnnduals of 22 species collected, 73%
were CNorophyta (green algae).14% were Chrysophytos (yellow-green or yellow-brown algae), and 12% were Cyanophyta (blue-green algae). The average number of cells in the river was 500 cells per milr. liter. Because the samples were collected during a high flow penod, some of the species collected were probably transported from the reservoirs upstream on the Saluda River into the Congaree River (NRC 1977). Thirty-three species of zooplankton were identified from tow samples in the vicanity of the
- . plant. The larval stage (l gochidia) of bivalve mollusks comprised 21% of the total number of mdivs 'ais collected. Copepods, rotifers, cladeocerans, and larval stages of oligochaete worms and nematodes were also collected in the tow samplee (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.8.2.3).
Samples from selected substrates (rocks, leaves, and logs) in the river yielded 112 species of penphyton. Of these, 97% were diatoms. The more abundant diatoms collected were Achnenthes-deflexa, Neviculs mama, N. murica, and N. crytocephale Green algae, mostly (Aothrix sp., and blue-green algae, Microcoleius vaginatus a.id Osedatoria sp., were observed infrequently. Because of its shallow nature, high temperature, low flow, and decompoemg organic matter, the dissolved oxygen level of Sunset Lake is low (less than 4 ppm) and the lake fauna is limited.
3-40 Upper Sunset Lake is now a swamp that supports a mixed stand of swamp tupelo, Nyssa aquatica, and Carolina ash, Fraxinus caroirwans. The water surface is covered for the most part by a dense met of duckweed, Spirodode polynhaga and Lemne moor. Emergent vegetation is primarily yellow water lily, Nuphar advens; lizard tails, Soururus cornus; and St. John's wort, Hypencum i sperhudotum. The only benthic invertebrate collected was the phantom-midge, Chaoborus
. punctpenrms, wtuch is tolerant of low oxygen levels (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.8.2.4).
The plankton fauna of Sunset - Lake were abundant. Phytoplankton densities averaged 60,000 plankters per milliliter. Predomment phytoplankters in the lake were the colorwal green algae. Eudonne edegans. In general, green algae constituted the majority of the phytoplankton community, although diatoms, ouglenoids, bluegreens, and di. c,T+7tes were also represented. Zooplankton' species were predommately protozoans (Drf#uge lobostoms and Dif#uge oblongs) and the rotifer Aspdenchne priodonta. Both zooplankton and phytoplankton were more abundant at the inflow end of lower. Sunset Lake, probably as a result of the inflow of swamp water from upper Sunset Lake. Of the fish species collected in 1974 from Sunset Lake and Mill Creek (Westinghouse 1983, Table 3.16), bluegdl and golden shmers (Notenngonus crysoisucas) were the most abundant. Recent sampimgs in 1981 and 1982 have yelded the following species' bowfin, carp, catfish, crappie, and . bluegdi (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.8.2.4). Employee fishing is allowed on both lower Sunset Lake and on Mill Creek on the plant property. 3.7.3 Threatened and Endengered Species
. The Region 4 Endangered Speces Notebook (U.S. Fish and Wildife Service, Endangered Species Office, Atlanta, Georgia,1983, which is updated periodically) lists the threatened 'and endangered plant and arumals species found in the southeastern United States and includes range maps and range descriptions for each species. This publication indicates that, although five i-endangered spaces may occur in the central South Carolina region, only the Amencan alligator (Amiperor m====yyuansis) and the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picosdss boresis) would be expected to occur regularly as breedog residents within 40 km (25 miles) of the site. The other speces are the eastern cougar (Fess cw,cuA, couper), Kirtland's warbler (Dendoics kirtiendii), and the bald eagle (Hanseetus leucocephalus). The alligator may occur in the Congaree River and associated wetlands and swamps, mcludog wetlands such as Sunset Lake on the site. Colonies of red-cockaded woodpeckers are known to have occurred in Richland and Lexington counties, which at the site are separated by the Congaree River. The basic habitat requirement is an open stand of -
~pines that includes trees more than 60 years old. Because such habitat is lacking on the site, it is i
unlikely that red-cockaded woodpeckers occur near the plant facilities. Although' the alligator' and l l woodpecker have.not been observed on the site, systematic surveys for these speces have not l been conducted. No threatened or endangered plant speces is known to occur in the central South ; . Caroline region. The short-nosed sturgeon, Acpenser brevirostrum, is the only threatened and endangered
- aquatic species that might occur in the region of South Carolina near the Columbia' Plant (John Seeley, South Carolina Division of Game and Freshwater Fisheries, personal communication with
- LV. R. Tolbert, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October 16,1984) (Sect. 4.2.4.3). This species migrates upstream from the Atlantic Ocean to fresh water to spawn. Spawning occurs between
, February and May, dependmg on the latitude, in areas of fast flow with gravel or rubble bottoms t l
341 (Muska and Matthews 1983). Because of the rubble and gravel substrate upstream of the site in the vicinity of Columbe, the short-nosed sturgeon could occur and spawn in the area. Because of the mostly sand and mud substrate in the river around the site, little spawrung should occur in the immedete varuty of the site except possibly where small tnbutaries enter the river. 3.8 RADIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS (BACKGROUND) 3.8.1 Total-body Dose Rates Based on Estimates of lonmng Radiistion Doses in the U.S. (EPA 1972), the total-body dose rate from natural background radiation in the vicinity .of Columbe, South Carolina, is about - 135 miHirem/ year (70 millirem / year from external terrestrial radiation, 40 mdirem/ year from cosmic rays, and 25 millirem / year from internal terrestrial radiation). This value compares favorably with an average of 0.32 millirem /d (117 millirem / year) reported by the state for areas in South ' Carolina' where there are no nuclear facilities (E. F. Williams, SC-DHEC, Division of Radiological Health, personal communication to H. C. . Woodsum, Westinghouse Environmental Systems Department, Pittsburgh, October 19, 1973). Total-body dose rates were measur'ed by SC-DHEC at offsite locations in the vanity of the plant during 1981 and 1982. These data indicate average dose rates of 0.21 to 0.23 miHirem/d (77 to 84 millirem / year) from external radiation (Westinghouse 1983). 3.8.2 Environmental Background Background radiological characteristics typical of the air and water in the vicruty of the Westinghouse plant are given in Table 3.14. Typical concentrations of uranium in surrounding vegetation and soil are less than 1 pCi/g (Westinghouse 1975). Table 3.14. Characteristics of background radiation in the vicinity of the Wr' #:rrr NFCS (1981-1982) Average gross alpha (pci/mu Amtnent air 3.9 x 10"8 Surface water Congeree River 2.2 x 10-8 Wen water Offsite 1.0 x 10-8 Drinking water - 1.0 x 10-8 Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 3.8. s 4
,r3.. ,.w. , , , _ , , _ , , , , , , , _ , , . , , , , ., - - . , .,_,7_ ,.,,,-,,,,,,.,wy 7,_, , , _ ,_,,_,,_,,.,,__._, ,_.,,-,.,
. 3-42 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 3 -
9 a, S. . T., D. M. ' Perkins, P. C. Thenhaus, S. L Hanson, and B. L Bender. 1982. A:v .. PrnMhhtsc Estimates of Maxanum Acceleration and Velocrty b Rock k the Contiguous thuted States, U.S. Geologmal Survey, Open-File Report 82-1033, Denver. Bolknger, G. A.1972. " Historical and Recent Seisme Activity in South' Caroline," Buf. Semmol
- Soc. Am. 62, 851-54.
Bolknger, G. A.1973. "* 1.Wy of the Southoestern Urvted States," Sur. Semmof. Soc. Am. 63, , .i 1785-1808. . . . Colquhoun, D. J., I. D. Woolen, D. S. Van Nieuwenhame, and G. G' Padgett.1983. Surface and Subsurface Stratigraphy ' Structure and Aqurtiers of the South CaroEne Constal Pisk, Department of Geology, University of South Caroline, Columbo. I- Conant, R.1958. A Field Guide to Reptiles and Amphdnans, Houghton Mifflin Company, Boston. , Cook, R. E.1969.'" Variation in Spaces Denssty of North Amencen Birds," Syst. Zool. 18,63-84. l Davis' and Floyd, Inc.,' Consultog Engmeers. 1980. Report on Groundwever hvastigstions, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Nucdest Fust Dvn on. Columbe, South Carodine,. Job No. 3067-1, Greenwood, S. C., November. Davis and Floyd, Inc., Consultog Engmeers.1982. Groundwater Hydodogy, Westinghouse Socine i Corporation, Codumbus, South Caroens, Contractor's Report to Westinghouse Electric f Corporation, Greenwood, S.C. l Dennis, J. V.1967. " Woody Plants of the Congeree Forest Swamp, South Caroline," Nature i Conservancy Ecologmal Studes, leaflet 12 Poland. i DOC (U.S.- Department of Commerce).1971. Some Devestating North Atientsc Humcenes of the !. Twentieth Century, National Oceanic and Atmosphenc Admmistration.
- l. DOC (U.S. Department of Commerce).1973. " Climatological Summary, Columbe, South Caroline,"
Cnimatography of the United States. DOC (U.S. Department of Commerce).1983. County and City Dets Book, U.S. Govemment Printmg
- Office, Washmgton, D.C.
j DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior). 1979-1983. " National Register of Historic Places Annual l Listing of Historic Places," Fed. . Regist. 44(26), 7415-649 (Feb. 6, 1979); 46(54), 17446-519 (Mar.18,1980); 46(22),10622-79 (Feb. 3,1981); 47(22), 4932-69 (Feb. 2, 1982); 48(41), 8626-79 (Mar.1,1983). EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).1972. Estimate of Joninng Radisson Doses in the Untred States 1960-2000, Office of Radiaton Programs, Rockville, Md.
' Eyre, F. H. (ed.).1980. Forest Cover Types of the Uhrted States and Cansde, Soc.' Am.' For.,
Washogton, D.C. Holzworth, G. C. 1971. AWxing Heights, Wind Speed, and Potentist for Urban Air Poducon
- j. Throughout the Contiguous United States, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
l Johnson, R. R., and J. F. McCormick (technical coordinators).1978. Strateges fbr Protection and Management of Floo$ den Wetiends and Other Riunen Ecosystems, General Technmal Report l WO-12. U.S. Department of Agnculture Forest Sennce Krinitzsky, E. L, and W. F. Marcuson.1983. " Principles For E:'::t-,v Earthquake Motions in
. Engmeenng Design," Su#. Assoc. Eng. Geol. 20, 30.
i-l
. . - . .- - . . ~ - . - _ , _= .- _-. . .
2 3-43 Muska, C. F., and R. A. Matthews.1983. Bedogmel A==== ament for the Shortnose Sturgeon, Acpenser brevirostrum, Lesueur ~ 1818, The Savannah River Plent, DPST-83-754, E.~1. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory.. NOAA (National Oceanc and Atmosphenc Admwustration).1978. CEmetes of the States, vol.1, j Dele Research Company, Detroit. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co.m. %-.). 1977. Environmental Ampact Appraisal of the Westinghouse Nucieer Fuel Co6umbes Site (NFCS) Commercial Nucteer Fuel Fabncetion Plent, ' Catamtes, South Corodne, Apnf 1977, NRC, Office of Nucleer Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, Washogton, D.C., (NR-FM-013).
' NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).1980. Amendment 4 to Specmf Nucieer Metennis License SNM f107, for Westinghouee Ehnctre Corporation, Nucener Fuel Co6umbee Site, Table 3.~ January 28.
Park A. D.1979. Ground %eter in the Coestel Piens Region, A Status Report and Honeook, ~
- Coastel Plains Regenal Commission, Charleston, S.C.
Purvis, J. C.1964. South CaroAine Humcanos, South Carolina Civil Defense Agency. j SCWRC (South Carolina ~ Water Resources Conmssion). 1983. South Carodina State Water Assessment, Report No.140, Columtma, S.C. I SCWRC (South Caroline Water Resources Conmssion).1984. Open-File Deta, Columbia, S.C. ! Simpson, G. G. 1964. " Spaces Density of North Amencen Recent Mammals," Syst. Zool. <
- 12, 57-83.
l Thom, ; H.C.S. 1968. "New Distnbution of Extreme Winds in the U.S.," J. Structuraf Div.,
- Proceedmgs of the American Socoty of Civil Engmeers, July, pp. 1787-89.
j- Thom, H.C.S.1973. "Tomedo Probabilities," Monthly Weather Rev. 91(4), 730-36. USGS (U.S. Geological Survey). 1981. -Water Resources Data for South CaroAine, Water Data Report SC-81-1, Reston, Va.
. Westinghouse.1972. STAR Program for On-Site Data Drffusen Climatology, Westinghouse Electnc Corporation, Environmental Systems Department, Pittsburgh.
. Westinghouse 1975. Westinghouse Nucisor Fuel Columbe Site Evaluation Report, sutmtted to the
- ' U.S.- Nuclear Regulatory Commesson for renewal of SNM-1107, March 1 (Docket No.
j 70-1151). ? Westinghouse 1983. U>dete for Environmental Ampoet Appramal, Westinghouee EAsetric Corporation, NFD Plant, Columbee, South Caroeine, SNM-1107, Docket No. 70-1151, April. Westinghouse 1984. Letter from R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to' Mark J. . Rhodes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, in response to NRC questions concommg the apphcant's U>dere for Environmentalimpact Appraisal (Docket No. 70-1151), February 20.- i d 4
- ~.- .. , _, . . _ - - _ . _ . ~- _, . _ . . . . . - . . . . . _ , - , --m_. . . _ . - _ _ . . - - . _ . , . . - - .-
., M
- 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED LICENSE RENEWAL -
' rTho' followmg sections ' discuss the direct environmental effects of operations' and actmties'at -
the Westinghouse NFCS and the segrwficance of the effects. The analyses regarding air and water'
- -- quality, land use, and ecologmal and radiologmal unpocts were based pnmenly on data provided by the appleant (Westinghouse 1975, 1983, 1984) on an actual production capacity of 700 metnc tons (t)'per year of uraruum and an estimated production' capacity of 1600.t/ year of uraruum. For the letter capacity, the sunultaneous use of ammonsum diuranate (ADU) and integrated dry route
- (IDR) processmg was assumed ,
' The current iconse renewal appication requests authorization for operations covered under the existing Icense and for new operations involvmg the-IDR process (Westinghouse 1981). A preirrunary environmental review of the amendment to utilize the IDR process production line was
~
conducted by the staff and reported in's memorandum (Shum .1981). This review is printed in Appendix C of this EA. l 4.'1 MONITORING PROGRAMS AND MITIGATORY MEASURES
'A comprehensive effluent and environmental monitoring program is conducted by the appleant
~
$ to demonstrate comphance with appropriate environmental protection standards and to provide,
,a where possable, site-specific data to assist in the predction of environmental impacts. ,
?
-4.1.1 Effluent Monitoring Program
~
4.1.1.1 Radiological , Stack emessions s're monitored in four facility areas isee Fig. 2.4). Each release stack is equipped with an isokinetic probe device that continuously draws a sample through a fiberglass filter paper. The filter paper is removed daily and analyzed for gross alpha activity as a moosure of urarnum content. Results are compiled semannuaIy and reported to the. Nucieer Regulatory
%,.. t-. (NRC). A summary of emmasons measured at a production rate of 700 t/ year of urarnum is presented in Table 2.1.
A d composste sample of liquid effluent Oged to .the Congeree River is analyzed , monthly for gross alpha, gross beta, and isotopic uranium. The appicant also analyzes a daily composite sample for gross alpha actmty. Typical discharge concentrations and annual release rates i of radioactivity at a production rate of 700 t/ year are given in Table 2.4.
- 4.1.1.2 Nonrediological Stack emessions in the four faciEty areas are monitored with an isokinetic probe devce that !
continuously draws a sample of 224 m3 /d through a fiberglass filter paper. The filter paper is removed on a daily basis and analyzed for fluondes. The results of this monitoring program for i 1981-1983 have been reported in pg of fluonde collected daily on the paper (Westinghouse 1984). The staff has calculated fluoride armssion rates (pg/s) for a 700-t/ year production rate
~
l (Table'2.3) on the basis of an average gas flow from the combmed stacks of 13.3 m3 /s. The
' stack emesssons are also analyzed at least quarterly for ammone As stated in Sect. 2.2.2.1, the
, average'and maximum ammone reloose rates dunng normal operation at about 700 t/ year of
- uransum have been 1.8 and 2.3 g/s, respectively (Westinghouse 1983).
- 4-1 l
4-2 Plant liquki effluent is monitored in accordance with the requirements of the facility's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) pornwt. The dotads of parameter monitoring, sampling methods and frequency, and effluent limitations of the permit are included in Appendix B. The average annual nonradiological quality of the NFCS combined liquid effluent is presented in Table 2.5. Westinghouse *s compliance with the plant NPDES permit is discussed in Sect. 4.2.3.1. j l 4.1.2 Environmental Monitoring Program i 4.1.2.1 Radiological
.The current environmental monitoring program for radioactivity at the Westinghouse NFCS includes the monitoring of air, vegetation, groundwater, surface water, and soil (Westinghouse 1983). A summary of the program is given in Table 4.1, and onsite sampling locations are indicated in Fig. 4.1. Offsite surface water monitoring stations are shown in Fig. 3.7 - and groundwater monitoring sites are identified in Fig. 3.8. The program is ir.- d to ensure compliance with state and federal regulations and to provide data input to a statistical data base for environmental impact assessment of plant operation. In the event of an accidental release of radioactivity from the plant, more frequent sampling of physical and biotic environmental components would be conducted. A summary of the results of the monitoring program that has been reported to NRC (Westinghouse 1984) is presented below.
Onsite Air. Air sampling stations for particulate monitoring (Fig. 4.1) are: No.1, located at the nearest site boundary in a prevailing wind direction 914 m (3000 ft) northeast of the plant: No. 2, north of the employee parking lot where concentrations are expected to be maximum: No. 3, near the meteorologn.ad tower 594 m (1950 ft) west-northwest: No. 4, located at the nearest site Table 4.1. A summary of environmental radiological monitoring at the W G.g:re NFCS Sample size Parameter measured Frequency Air particulates 571 m3 4 Fwoss alpha Continuous Vegetation 100 g 4 Gross alpha and beta; SemennuaNy j isotopic uranium i Groundwater 1L 15 Gross alpha and beta MontNy and j quarterly i Surface water ' 1L 6 Gross alpha and beta Monthly Soil 100 g 4 Gross alpha and beta; l Semennually isotopic uranium Sediment 100 g 1 Gross alpha and beta; AnnueBy , isotopic uranium l Fish 30 g 1 Gross alpha and beta; Annually 1 isotopic uranium ) Source: Westinghouse 1983. ! l
.. q es4w TO COLUMagg,g_g-g
/
f/ .' k
,' , %" wtSTINGHOUSE
/ o ,
'O FUtt FAeRICATION i ( .' g PLANT FActLittts
\ q1 g p
\ E
*[gY '
,-%-v y fk -/
ency 1 PLANT g ENTRANCE g#p - js * , - *q' ' Y9 A.
' 003 - 2 SO C '.
r$ -
.e fl 'g'rhQ'h
- E* b; p*T *'t ..
. ' " P* C -
4 ff5f-SW7h'j f V9iiM # U C2 2 " %p a
-l J o,, .
{,)' 'k s ,%?${}- (L=
*- kCH '%
/ $
'
- hIr , if #
/,O[".Ah.
' Y hh
h-ip;ghPM , ' -hQ t W'.(cn c B
'?*f$~ , ?& .
' +
,v
' ' ' - Z ,' f CTaic Ro p. POND .,
# C SWAMP
^
A-J UNTOF yp4p $f* , IY ' *
- 9 'Ip6[f Op{f N O AIR PARTICULATE SAMPLINC ST ATION LIFE,#UN % i QF '
'*
- 4%V PR [ g A VECETATtON SAMPLING ,
O SOIL SAMPLING g
*(';M
- wpfET FEET [
STATION , TO
- SURFACE WATER CONGAREE 363 m l
SAMPLING LOCAT40NS . RIVE R Fig. 4.1. Locations of onsite ambient air, vegetation, soil, and surface water monitoring stations et the Westinghouse NFCS. Source: Modified after Westinghouse 1983. Fig. 6.1,
4-4 e boundary east-southeast of _ the plant. Air monitors continuously accumulate air particulates by pumping air through filters. The filters are changed weekly and analyzed monthly for gross alpha activity. Monitoring results for 1981-1983 are given in Table 4.2. ; Table'4.2 indicates that the highest annual average for the period was 6.2x 10"5 pCi/mL l (Station 4 in 1981). Assuming that all the activity is from a single insoluble urarnum isotope (i.e., l 23sU, 2N, or *U), this concentration is less than 1% of the maximum pornssible concentration for release to unrestricted areas as defined by 10 CFR Pt. 20. Because the activity is actually from low enriched uranium, which consists of a combination of the aforementioned isotopes, this 1 comparison is conservative. Table 4.2. Radiological monitoring data from onsite air particulate monitors at the Westinghouse NFCS,1981-1983 Gross alpha' Station" 1981 1982 1983 # average 1 3.8 1.5 2.4 2.6 2 4.1 2.8 2.4 ~ 3.1 3 4.4 - 4.4 2.8 3.9 4 6.2 3.4 2.7 4.1
- Annual average concentrations from . monthly analysis of gross alpha activity. Values are given as 10~"'pCi/mL -
%x:ations shown in Fig. 4.1.
Source: Westinghouse 1984. Groundwater. Until recently, four onsite wells (V"-1-W-4; see Figs. 3.8 and 3.9) were monitored routinely in accordance with NRC license requirements. These wells were sampled monthly and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity. Well _W-1 is an upgradient Tuscaloosa well. [The open-hole portion of this well collapsed below the bottom of the casing at 22 m (71 ft).] Wells W-2 and W-3 are located upgradient and downgradient, respectively, of the sludge ponds (see Fig. 3.9). Both of these wells are completed in the Black Mingo Formation. Well W-4 is located adpecent to W-3 and is completed in the shallow terrace aquifer. Water quakty samples, which are obtained by bailing, are collected in a two-step procedure. First, the well is boiled dry or 38 L (10 gal) are withdrawn (whichever comes first), and the boiled water is' discarded. Then, the well is allowed to recover for 24 hours before water quakty samples are taken. Recent monitoring results from wells W-1-W-4 show insignificant gross alphe contamination or none at all (Westinghouse 1984). The highest concentration reported is 12 pCi/L - gross alpha (Well W-4 in February 1982), which is below the EPA drinking water standard of 15 pCi/L Other sample results from these wells are typically much lower or have been below the Westinghouse mensmum detectable level for radioactivity (2.2 pCi/L gross alphe). For Wells W-1-W-3, the deeper wells, insignificant gross beta concentrations were also found. The 1 F F l
4 r mexwnum concentration observed in these wells for the period 1982-1984 was 19 pCi/L gross beta, which is well below the EPA drinking water standard of 50 pCi/L Well W-4, like the other i' shallow wells (Sect. 3.5.2.2), has shown gross beta contamination with a maxunum concentration
-(in 1982) of 330 pCi/L (R. Fischer, Westinghouse, telephone commurucation with S. Wyngarden, NRC, March 25, 1985).
A . modification to the plant's NPDES permet (Appendix 8), effective September 1,1984, requires that 11 additional onsite wells (W-7,10,13,15,16,18, 22, 24, 29, 30, ar.d 32 in Figs. 3.8 and 3.9) be monitored quarterly for gross alpha and gross beta activities Most of these wells are completed in the shallow terrace aquifer down the groundwater gradient from the sludge ponds toward Sunset Lake (Davis and Floyd 1982).
! As discussed in' Sect. 3.5.2.2, contamination in the shallow aqusfer was discovered in 1980, and considerable groundwater monitoring has been conducted since that time. This monitoring has included occasional radiological monitoring of several other wells in addition to those currently
- tested as required by either NRC or the state.
The most recent radiological monitoring results from these wells (April 1983) were presented in Table 3.9. Results from pre-1983 samphng (January '1981, May 1981, and July 1982) are smier to those shown in Table 3.9 (Westinghouse 1984). Wells immediately adjacent to the liquid waste treatment plant and holding ponds, which were originally identified as the sources of contamination, I have ' generally maintained levels of radioactivity in excess of federal drinking water standards (15 pCi/L gross alpha and 50 pCi/L gross beta). There are no identifiable trends, and the results have varied sharply from'one samphng time to the next. This venetion is also true of the remseneng wells further downgradient, which oce=ermally show elevated levels of radioactivity as contamination moves through the groundwater flow p'ath outhned in Section 3.5.2.1. Surface . water. As part of the routine environmental monitoring program at NFCS, three onsite surface water samples (Fig. ~ 4.1) are analyzed monthly for gross alpha and gross beta activity. Samples are taken at the spillway of Lower Sunset Lake, at the point where Mill Creek exits the NFCS property and meets the canal, and from a storm drain that receives runoff from the paved plant areas (sample locations 4, 5, and 6 in Fig. 3.7). Monitoring data from these locations for the period 1981-1983 are presented in Table 4.3. i Table 4.3. Radiological monitoring date from onsite surface j water monitoring stations at the W: ^.: f:x: NFCS, , 1981-1983* > Gross alphe (pCi/mL) i Station
- 1981 1982 1983
< average 4 0.0043 0.0012 0.0015 0.0023 5 0.0066 0.0006 0.0012 0.0026 6 0.0277 0.0071 0.0216 0.0188
' Annual average values based on monthly sampling j
- Locations shown in Figs. 3.7 and 4.1.
Source: Westinghouse 1984.
4-6 The annual average gross alpha concentrations at Stations 4 and 5 are, at most,0.02% of the 10 CFR Pt. 20 limit for discharge of aqueous wastes containing uranium impurities (30 pCi/mL). l The annual average gross alpha concentrations at Station 6 (storm drain) are, at most 0.09% of the 10 CFR Pt. 20 limit. The highest monthly measurements during the period were 0.011, 0.071, and 0.087 'pCi/mL for Stations 4, 5, and 6, respectively. The highest value, 0.087 pCi/mL, is just 0.29% of the 10 CFR Pt. 20 limit. In addition to samphng at the stations listed in Table 4.3, Westinghouse analyzes a sample taken where Mill Creek enters Upper Sunset Lake, which is presumed to be representative of the background. Data from 1981-1983 indicate that the gross alpha concentrations at Station 6 have i been 5 to 10 times greater than background levels, presumably because of deposition of airborne radioactive particulates. However, as mentioned earher, by the time onsite surface water exits the NFCS property (Station 5), gross alpha activity has decreased to less than half the actively measured at the storm drain. Likewise, for the period 1982-1984, gross beta concentrations measured at the point where Mill Creek exits the NFCS property were roughly equal to concentrations at the background sampieng station (R. Fischer, Westinghouse, telephone e communication with S. Wyngarden, NRC, March 25, 1985). Vegetation. Samples of grass (hay) or an agricultural crop appropriate to the growing season are required to be collected semeannually and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity. Most recently, Westinghouse has measured gross alpha and gross beta activity and isotopic uranium. Samples are usually obtained at locations near the air monitors (see Fig. 4.1). Table 4.4 reports
' monitoring data as annual averages of combined uranium isotopes in onsite vegetation for the period 1981-1983.
The annual and 3-year averages of uranium concentrations at each of the four vegetation sampling stations (Table 4.4) are comparable to the reported background uranium concentration in onsite vegetation, <1 pCi/g (Sect. 3.8.2). The highest individual measurement of total uranium in onsite vegetation was 0.96 pCi/g in a sample obtained at Station 1 in May 1983. This value is still within the range of the background uraneum concentration in onsite vegetation. A subsequent sample taken at Station 1 in September 1983 indicated a uranium concentration of 0.50 pCi/mL Table 4.4. Radiological monitoring data from analysis of onsite vegetation at the Westinghouse NFCS, 1981-1983 Total uranium (pCi/g)* 1981 1982 ***' 1983 average 1 0.08 0.08 0.75 0.30 2 0.08 ~ 0.08 0.64 0.27 3 0.20 0.08 0.15 0.14 4 0.17 0.08 0.17 0.14 l ' Annual average of two samples.
Locations shown in Fig. 4.1.
Source: Westinghouse 1984. l
- . - - m -..,.m - -. - . - . .
4-7 On the basis of these results, the staff concludes that no segraficant change in the total uraruum
~
concentration of onsite vegetation has resulted from NFCS operations. Because of this, any human ingestion of milk or beef produced by cattle that have ingested hay harvested onsite at NFCS would not likely result in indnndual doses above background levels. Soil. Samples are required to be collected semiennually and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity. Most recently,' Westinghouse has measured isotopic uraruum in addition to gross alpha and gross beta activity. Samples are usueuy obtained at locations near the air monitors (see Fig. 4.1). Table 4.5 reports monitoring data as annual averages of combmed uranium isotopes in onsite soil for the penod 1981-1983. Table 4.5. Radiological monitoring date from analysis of onsite soit et ths Westinghouse NFCS, 1981-1983 Total uranium (pCi/g)" Station
- 1982 1983 1981 average 1 0.24 0.18 0.38 0.27 2 0.18 0.17 0.72 0.36 3 0.37 1.18 0.40 0.65 4 0.13 0.17 0.40 0.23
- Annual average of two samples.
i.ocations shown in Fig. 4.1. Source: Westinghouse 1984. The annual and 3-year-everage uranium concentrations for each of the four soil sampling stations (Table 4.5) are, at most, 4% of the limit of 30 pCi of enriched uraruum per gram of soil allowed for disposal with no restriction on the method of burial (NRC 1981). The highest indnndual measurements of total uranium in onsite soil were 2.14 pCi/g (Station 3 in September 1982) and 1.30 pCi/g (Station 2 in May 1983). Both of these exceeded the background uranium concentration in onsite soil, <1 pCi/g (Sect. 3.8.2); however, the values are stig well below the 30-pCi/g limit mentioned earher. Subsequent samples from Station 2 (September 1983) and Station 3 (May and September.1983) indicated total uratuum concentrations less then 1 pCi/g. On the basis of these results, the staff concludes that no signsficant changes in the total urarnum concentration of onsite soil has resulted from NFCS operations. Direct radiation. In addition to the applicant's monitoring program described in Table 4.1, the South Caroline State Department of Health and Environmental Control . (SC-DHEC) maintains thermoluminescent dosanenters (TLDs) near the NFCS boundaries. The TLDs in the followmg locations provide a measure of direct radiation: 4
- 685 m (2250 ft) east, i
- 915 m (3000 ft) northeast, and
- 685 m (2250 ft) northwest, f
1
. . - - . . - - -- . . - -- - . __ .~
e
~4-8 Quarterly data from 1981'and eerfy 1982 (Westinghouse 1983) indicated that the direct (gamme?
. radiation near the site boundenes was equivalent to a total body does of 77-84 miuirem/ year. This
- range is the same as that . measured by -TLDs located offsite (Sect. 3.8), indicatmg that the I
~ Westinghouse facsisty was not contributmg measurable gamme radiation to locations beyond the l site boundaries. The state has indicated that it wig continue this monitoring using.TLDs. l l
4 Surface water. In accordance with merumum requirements of the NRC license, the Congeree River is sampled quarterly at three locations and analyzed for goes alpha and gross beta activity. The sample locations are: No.1, the Blossom Street Bridge located 16 km (10 miles) above the D NFCS outfaN; No.. 2, 0.5 km (500 yd) upstroom of the outfall; and No. 3, 0.5 km (500 yd) 2 downstroom of the outfaN .(see Fig. 3.7). Supplemental river samples are taken at the plant
~
, dischargo, at the confluence of Mid Creek and .the Congeree River, and at _ a point 40 km (25 miles) downstroom of the NFCS outfaN Data from river sampling, which has been conducted monthly rather than quarterly, have been reported for the penod 1981-1983 (WnJsm 1984). AN samplee from the period had gross alpha and groes beta concentrations less then the i muumum detectable level (2.2 pCi/L gross alpha and 25' pCi/L gross beta). Therefore, there has
- - .been no observeblo effect of NFCS radiological discharges on the Congeree River. Section 4.2.5 provides a more detailed discussson of radiological wnpoets to the Congeree River from poet plant I
Ws and those expected to result from expensson of the plant up to 1600.t/ year. of uranion. l , Sediment.- A sediment sample from the Congerne River is taken at least annueHy and analyzed for gross alpha, gross beta, and total urarwum. In 1981 and 1982,' gross alphe concentrations in '
- samples collected at the plant outfall were 1.08 pCi/g and 1.94 pCi/g, respectively. In 1982, a j sample was taken 16 km (10 miles) upstream from the outfaI to indicate background levels of p gross alpha activity. The semple had a groes alpha concentration of 1.30 pCi/g, which is
, comparable to those of semples taken at the outfaN. Total uransum concentrations in background e
'and outfaN sedwnents also compared favorably and demonstrated no buildup caused by the plant' l
effluent.' i Fish. Samples' of fish are taken annuaNy from the Congeree River downstroom of the plant , discharge and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity and isotopic uranium. For the penod l 1980-1983, the uraruum concentrations ranged from 0.0 to 0.4 pCi/g.~ The average l
~
l concentration (0.16 pCi/g) was segneficantly greater then the staff would expect on the bases of l (1) the calculeted annual average urarwum in the river due to NFCS operation (Sect. 4.2.5.1) and (2) the normal concentration factor for the assimiletion of uranium by fish (NRC Regulatory Guide 1 1.109). In addition, the isotopic ratio of 234U/23eV measured was =1, wheroes the staff would i expect the ratio to be =6 if the NFCS effluent contaenmg low-ennched uraruum were the source of I the uratwum in the fish. Because of the above, the staff does not believe that the urarnum detected
.l in the fish from the Congaree River can be attnbuted to the effluent discharged by the NFCS.
l r (. ' 4.1.2.2 Nonradiological FoNowmg - is. a description of the nonradiological monitoring program and recent data (. (Westinghouse 1984). l; [.
e p ' ' u . 4-9 ,-
, _s, r Onsite 9
, Air. The principal nonradiological contamirmt(that may be reloosed to the a ,
e ,from NFCS operations ere fluondes and ammonia. Sourco monitoring and atmosnheric dispersion a ' calculations have shown that ambient air concentrations of fluonde at the NFCS are well below
~ standards established by the state of South Carolina (Sect. 4.2.1.2). Although there are no state or
[ federal air standards for ammonia, calculated aminent atmospheric. concentrations of ammonsa are
~ ~
below levels that could result in harmful wnpocts to vege5 tion and wildirfe (Sect. 4.2.2.2). As discussed in Sect. 4.2.1, the atmosphenc concentrations of these contaminants are also expected to be insignificant after expansion of the plant up to 1600 t/ year of uranium Consequently, ambient air monitoring for fluoride and ammonia is not required. ' Soils and vegetation. Samples of soil and vegetation that are analyzed on a semiannual basis * ] for radiological parameters are also analyzed for total fluondes. The vegetation selected for analysis usually consists of Bermuda grass and a variable mixture of native plant species [ telephone conversation, R. Kroodsme, Ook Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), with R. . E. Fischer, Westinghouse, October 19, 1984). This monitoring provides a relative estimate of e+5iospheric fluonde levels as wet as an estimate of potential impacts to foraging arwmais Monitoring data for i 1981-1983 and an impact analysis are presented in Sect. 4.2.2.1. } Surface water. There is no direct discharge from the Westinghouse plant to onsite swfai:e - l waters. Three onente locations (Fig. 4.1) are monitored quarterly for ammonsa, fluoride, and pH. The applicant also routinely monitors pH, ammorwa, and fluoridos at two other onsite locations-the dem causeway between Upper and Lower Sunset Lake-and the entrance of Mill Creek to Sunset I' Lake. Data from onsite surface water monitoring are presented in Table 4.6.
~
b ' A comperison of the deta'in the table indicates little, if any, change in concentrations of ammorua and fluoridos in onsite surface waters as a result of NFCS ' operations. & ow3nce sample, which has low levels of ammorua and fluondes, is representative of ~beckground concentrations in Mill Creek and Upper Sunset Lake. As expected, the road (drain) sample, wluch is obtained at a point where runoff is received from paved areas of the plant,' has the highest concentration of contaminants and the widest range of pH values The drain, which has a low volume and flow except in penods of hoevy precipitation, ultimately discharges into a ditch that drains into Sunset Lake. The lake, with' a volume of 1.6 x 10s m3 (4.3 . x . 107 gol) and a 3 flow from 0.003 to 0.2 m /s (0.1 to 0.6 ft /s)3 readily dilutes the drainage entering it. As a result, semples taken from the lake show only a rrunor increase in ammorus and fluondes over 4 background (entrance sample) levels, and samples taken downstroom of the spdiway at the exit of min Creek from the NFCS are at or below background levels. Thus, it is apparent from the dsta
- l. - that no segrwficant impacts to onsite surface waters result from NFCS operations. For further docussion of surface water impacts, refer to Sect. 4.2.3.
Groundwater. SC-DHEC requires that Westinghouse monitor onsite groundwater as a
- condmon of the plant's NPDES permit (see Appendix B). Accordingly, the 11. monitor wells being analyzed for radioactivity (see Sect. 4.1.2.1) must also be analyzed for nonradiological contaminents and have water level elevations measured quarterly. Nonradiological parameters to be morwtored include total dissolved solids (or specific conductance), pH (field), ammonie, nitrate, and fluonde in addition, water samples from the wells must be analyzed on a one-time basis for dissolved organic. carbon, chloride, and sulfate-soluble metals to include calcium, magnesium,
}; sodium, potassium, cadmium, chromium, leed, and nickel. Additional quarterly analyses may be
. required if the one-time analysis indicates that any new groundwater problems exist.
l 1 I 4
-. ._ _ . _ , __ . s_. _ _ _ -._-- . , . . _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . . - - . _ _ _ _ _ _ __ - -
-i$
i ' 4
~
= .
i 1.<
. d Table 4.6. Annual everage and maimium w-_ __ _ _ _ - (mg/L) of ammonie and fluoridos and everage and ronge of pH tt one6te surface water semping eestione et NFCS 1981 1982- ' 1983 NH)Nf F' pH" F' pH NH)NP F pH Av Max Av Max Av Range Av _ . PeH)Nf Max '-Av Men - Av Range . Av . Men .Av Men Av Range
, Entrance of ' ,
e, , MA Creek to (1 (1 (0.4 (1 - ~ND NC 41 41 (1 c 1.5 6.2 :58-6.7 41 41 (2 (10 6.1 5.7-7.0 Sunset Lake Road-storm dram 49 150 44 23 6.9 5.6-10.2 44 23' 44 32 6.8 2.2 - 7.8 44 21 44 , 12.2 6.7 5.0-7.7 Dem causawey (1 ,2 (1 -410 ND Nt* ; <1 - 1.3 <1 3 6.4 6.0- 7.1 (1 1.4 43 (10 6.3 6.0-7.6 p Sun.e take , Spaway of Lower Sunset taka so (1.5 2 (1' (10 ND ND .<1 ' t.7 <1 3 6.6 6.0- 7.6 41 ' t.2 43 (10 65 6.1 - 8.6 Ma Creek Ent of Me Creek from HFCS 41 1.2 ( 0.5 ' 1.5 ' ND ND. <1 1 <1' 1.4 . 6.3 6.2 - 6.4 ' (1 -(1 -(2 410 6.2 6.06.6 property at canal -
*/wwn on Fig. 3.7: spaway = No. 4. enn = No. 5. and road = No. 6.
' 'Ammorea values n Westmghouse (1984) were occaesonney reported as <10 mg/L for NH)N). wtuch represented the seneeway of the method of analyse. These values were
%p __ _ , applied as 10 mg/L in calculations of annual averegos. They were not, however, consulated as representative of rnommum NHp0 concentrations; therefore, mexenum
. , , . 7. values yven in the table are for specdic mesoured values ordy.
TIuorkles. i
% = No data. C' Source: Westinghuume 1983 and 1984.
.,e
4-11 l 1
- )
This comprehenseve groundwater monitoring' becarce a requirement in September 1984; thus, dote for aR the required parameters are not yet available. However, data for 13 sampling dates dunng 1981-1984 have been reported (Westinghouse 1984). Typical values observed over this penod are' shown in Tables 3.6, 3.7, and 3.8. The maximum values of contaminants were 165 mg/L fluonde (Well W-28 on September 25.- 1983) and 900 mg/L' ammonia (wen W-7 on - - January 23,- 1981), although most measured concentrations were much less than these values Even though results have often varied from one semple time to the next, over the longer term since 1981, concentrations have generally decreased. This is particularly true for the wells closest to-the storage ponds. Data for wells' farther downgradient have either remained constant or have decreased only slightly. WeR W-20, which is across Sunset Lake from the NFCS fac6 ties, showed an elevated ammonia concentration (115 mg/L) the last time it was sampled (May 27, 1984). This is believed to be an anomaly because the piezometric gradient is near zero beyond the lake. Nevertheless, this matter win be pursued by_the staff to determine whether or not the contaminant plume has extended beyond south of Sunset Lake. (A discussion of the unpacts of the shallow
)-
j< groundwater. contamination is presented in Sect. 4.2.3.2.) wen W-3 is the only wen completed in
- s the deeper Black Mongo Formation that has been routinely monitored for nonradiological parameters. No contamination in this wen has been observed.
).
- Westinghouse analyzes monthly samples from the Congaree River for pH, ammonia, and
!; fluonde. The sampling stations include three requirad by NRC for radiological analyses (Nos.1, 2, and 3 shown in Fig. 3.7) and three supplemental stations located at the plant outfaN, the confluence of Min Creek and Congaree River, and a point 40 km (25. miles) downstream of the plant outfau. Data from 1981-1983 (Westinghouse 1984) indicate a range in the parameters measured as foNows-pH . 6.0-7.5, NH3 (N) 0.2-1.2 rng/L, and F 0.2-0.6 mg/L The variation in data for these parameters over the 3-year period was not noticeably different from the expected seasonal fluctuations. A comparison of data from samples taken at 450 m (500 yd) upstream and downstream of the plant outfaN shows no discernible effect attributable to effluent discharge. Because the effluent released to the river must meet the water quality limits set forth in the plant NPDES permit, no effect would be expected.
4.2 DIRECT EFFECTS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE 4.2.1 Air Quality - , 4.2.1.1 Criterie 'pollutents At the Westinghouse NFCS, atmospheric emissions of nonradiological criteria pollutants (SO2,
, NO , CO,' and particulates), for which ' national air quality standards have been promulgated (40 CFR Pt. 50), are insagraficant. Space heating is accomplished by combustion of relatively clean-burning
' natural gas and by electric heaters. Gases and particulates from combustion in the incinerator t
./
.d , -
12 Y
-(Sect. 2.2.2) are ' passed through a scrubtxng system before they are released to the atmosphere.
The incmerator is pernutted by the state of South Carolina (SC-DHEC 1983a). Nitrogen oxides are - reisesed as a result of natural gas combustion for space and process heetmg The staff does not expect that emmasons of criteria pollutants from the plant will violate either notenal or South
' Caroline ambient air quehty standards. Four small cooling towers at the plant emit inagnificant quantities of ' drift, vapors, corrosion inhibitors, and biocedes These emissions will not significantly
- affect offsite air quahty.
4.2.1.2 ' Ammonie and fluoridee , ~ ' Other ' nonradiological atmospheric emmasons from the Westinghouse facihty are ammonie (gaseous) and fluonde (particulate and -ym) For operation of only the ADU process at the proposed maxwnum production rate of 1600 t/ year of uransum, Westinghouse co. dd; o ~ estimated that the ammone emessons rate would average about 4.9 g/s, with a meumum of a ~
. 6.2 g/s. However, the staff expects that the ammone emeessons will actually be about 30% less E . . (or.3.4 and 4.3 g/s, respectively) because of the combmed proceemng of urarnum using the IDR .
process, wtuch has no ammone emessons, and the existing car =haty of the ADU process. Since there are no- f xteral or South Caroline air quality standards for ammone, ambient concentrations at the site were not considered with regard to potentiel impacts to air quality. Rather, the paamhaa wnpacts of ammones emmasons on vegetation, land use, and wihSife are discussed in Sect. 4.2.2 using the staff's estimate for the 1600 t/ year of uraruum processing. Enussions of fluondes at a maximum production rate of 1600 t/ year of urarnum were estimated . by the staff for:the combmed operation of ADU and IDR production lines. The recent average of measured fluonde emissions from the existing ADU processmg lines at a nommel 700 t/ year of uraruum processing was 81.6 pg/s (Sect. 2.2.2.1). Operating the existing lines at the proposed expanded capacity would result in an average ememon rate of about 130 pg/s. Westmghouse (1981) has conservatively estimated fluonde emesions from the proposed IDR process to be about 2125 pg/s. [In reality, the fluoride scrubbers and HEPA filters should remove most of the fluondes
"(Sect. 2.2.2.1).] The combmed processes operating at the maxwnum propoemd producten rate of 1600 t/ year, if unmitigated, could result in total fluonde ememons of 2255 pg/s. The applicant has not proposed expandmg the ADU process capotzhty to 1600 t/ year of urarwum, so no estimate of fluoride emismons has been made for this case.
Using annual average X/Q values based on those provided in Table 3.2 and a fluonde emesions rate of 81.6 pg/s, the staff estimates that the annual average aerbome concentration at the nearest site boundary for operation at 700 t/ year is 0.0013 pg/m8. p' For operation at 1600 t/ year with the cc,TA,;r d processes, the estimated annual average amtwent fluonde concentrations are:
- At the nearest boundary 0.035 pg/m 8
-(550 m (0.3 mile) NNW)
- At the nearest neighbor 0.017 pg/m8
] - [1000 m (0.6 mile) NE)
' These' concentrations, wtuch are based on X/Q values in Table 3.2 and a fluoride emesions rate cf -
2255'pg/s, are less than the South Carolina one-month-average standard of 0.8 pg/m3 for t a - .-
, .,. , , . , . - _ - . - - - . . , _ , .-, +
- . = .
m -
. C-13 ambient fluonde concentrations (Table 3.3). Furtheri bar anaa the Westinghouse fluonde emissions
~
- are a mixture of perticulates-(NH 4F) and gas (HF) and because the South Carolina air quehty standards apply only to gaseous fluondes, the ismact of NFCS emissions relative to the standards will be even less.
4.2.2 Land Use
~
Land uses at the plant site (refer to Sect. 3.4.1) should not change significantly, because no new buildings or major extemel modifications to existing facilities are proposed as part of this hcense-renewal apphcation. : Thus, the project will have no construction-related effects on floodpleins, wetlands, historic or archaeological sites, or natural landmarks. Agncultural and postoral uses of nonrby land could potentially be affected by fluonde and - ammones emessions on crops, posture grasses,' and cattle. However, analysis-of past projected
. fluoride and ammonia emissions ==ananted with the prcposed plant expensson (up to 1600 t/ year of uransum) indicates that there will be no significant or observable unpacts. The basis for this determination is provided in the following discussion.
4.2.2.1 Effects of fluoride emissions Accumulation of fluorioes in vegetation has been known to cause reduced productivity or death of plants and to cause fluorosis in grazing arwnels (NAS 1971). Uptake of airborne fluorides by fohege is the primary pathway to elevated fk.onde levels in vegetation, whereas plant-root uptake of fluorides from soils is of litt'e unportance where fluoride levels in soils are not extremely high (NAS 1971), such as at the Westinghouse site. Emissions of fluonde from the NFCS elevate ambeent levels of fluoride in air, soils, and biota in the vicruty. Projected annual average emessions
. of fluonde from the plant operating at a' level of 1600 t/ year of uranium a.xf the estimated fluonde concentrations in the air at the nearest site boundary'and the nearest nesghbor were naamaad in
- Sect. 4.2.1.
Although the ampacts of airborne fluorides on vegetation cannot- be reliably predicted (NAS 1971), air quahty criterio to protect particularly senestive plant species have been suggested:
~
8 1.2 pg/m3for a 24-h period and 0.4 pg/m for
~
a 100-d period (see Fig. 7-13 in NAS 1971), pnmarily for gaseous forms of fluorides with which vanous plant species were fumsgated in field or laboratory studies reviewed by the NAS report. Estimates of annual average ambient atmospheric fluoride concentrations at the NFCS at the nearest boundary and nearest neighbor (0.035 and 0.017 pg/m ,8respectively) are below these values. ' Morenver,.the fluonde concentrations do not consist entirely of the relatively toxic gaseous fluondes, but also include fluorides in relatively
- nontoxic particulate forms, thus reducing the potential for impacts. Therefore, fluondes emitted as a ,
' result of.the operation of the Westinghouse plant at 1600 t/ year of uranium should have no
- j. detectable effect on the appearance, and no segrwficant effect on the productivity of plants.
Onsite soil and vegetation have also been analyzed for fluoride. Fluoride concentrations in soil ranged from 5 to 280 ppm, with an average of about 100 ppm during the years 1981-1983. This level is not consadored important for the uptake of fluoride by vegetation (NAS 1971). A
- summary of fluoride concentrations in vegetation (principally Bermuda grass) collected from four onsite samphng locations (Westinghouse 1984) during 1981,1982, and 1983 is presented in Table 4.7. The vegetation samples averaged 26 ppm, although 5 of 23 samples exceeded 40 ppm 1 of fluoride, the tolerance level for mature dairy cattle (Table 4.8). Although the three tons of hay 4
e ,- ,n., ,-v,.-- - . - - ,-,, . . , - . - ,,,_,__.n._,,, , - _ _ _ , - , - - - - w_ -,-.. .__ . . - , - - - , . . . - , - , .
4-14 Table 4.7 Annual average fluoride concentrations in onsite vegetation at NFCS for the period 1981-1983 Fluoride (mg/O Year Station 1 6 Station 2* Station 3* Station 4 6 1981 12 22 28 10 1982 25 38 20 21 1983 36 30 34 31
' Reported values are the average of two samples taken e in May and September of each year, except for Station 1 in 1981, which was only one sample
- Sample locations shown in Fig. 4.1.
Source: Westinghouse 1984. Table 4.8. Fluoride tolerance levels (ppm) in feed and water for domestic animals based on clinical signs and lesions
- Feed
- Water' (mg/kg) (mg/L)
- Cattle Dairy and beef heifers 30 2.5-4.0 Dairy, mature 40 3-6 8eef, mature 50 4-8 Finishing 100 12-15 Sheep, breedog 60 5-8 Lambs, feeder 150 12-15 Horses 60 4-8 Swine, growing 70 5-8 Turkeys, growing 100 10-12 Chickens, growing 150 10-13 Dogs,' growing 50 3-8
- Values should be reduced propu.&idy when both water and feed contain appreciable amounts of fluorides.
*A suggested guide when fluoride in the feed is essentially the sole source of fluoride; tolerances based on sodium fluonde or other fluorides of similar toxicity.
'The average ambient air temperatures and the physical and biological activity of the animals influence the amount of water consumed and hence the wide range of tolerance levels suggested. For active animals in a warm climate, the lower values should be used as critical level indicators.
Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 1980. Reviews of the environmental effects of pollutants: IX. Fluoride. EPA-600/1-78-050. Cincinnati, Ohio.
4-15 harvested annually from the site is fed to a dairy herd of 150 head (Westinghouse 1984), this amount of hay would supply only a very smau portion of the winter season food requirement; , therefore, fluorosis should not be a major problem for these cattle. Concentrations in offsite vegetation should be lower than in onsite vegetation. Domestic arumals grazing on the offsite vegetaten should not be affected by fluorides, provided the fluonde concentration in their drinking ! water is not particularly high (Table 4.8). The concentration of fluondes in soybeans grown on the site, wtuch are sold to a commercial mig and processed for both livestock feed meal and soybeen oil for human consumption, has not been monitored, but might be expected - to be . smlar to that in the onsite vegetation. Concentrations of fluonde consistently greater than 40 ppm in the human diet have been projected to cause loss of body weight (NAS 1971, p. 239). Because the commercial mill mixes the soybeans from the NFCS with the soybeans harvested from other regional farms, the fluoride level in the final soybean products would be significantly less than in the NFCS soybeans alone and I would not be of concem. Expansion of the plant facilites from 700 to 1600 t/ year of uranium with the additional use of the IDR process wiu result in increased emissions of fluorides (Sect. 4.2.1), which may result in increased fluoride content of vegetation on and near the site. The applicant's program of monitoring fluondes in onsite grasses should be continued to detect any such increases. However, the staff
' does not believe the current tmng of sampling onsite grass (May and September; Westinghouse 1984) is adequate for an ===aamment of fluoride impacts on a dairy herd. Therefore, the staff wi:1 require that grass samples for fluoride analysis be taken at leest twice a year when the grass is being cut for hay. In addition, the current grass monitoring program does not enable an assessment i
.of whether the measured fluoride concentrations are the result of the plant operation, because there are no offsite basenne data. Therefore, the staff will require that grass samples from farms or randadma (sufficently removed from NFCS to not be influenced by NFCS emissions) be taken on ,
the same day as the onsite samples Smiarly, the staff wiu require that samples of soybeans from I onsite fields and from distant offsite fields be taken at harvest time so that an assessment of the impact of fluoride emissions on the soybean crop and on the ultimate user can be provided.
- The samphng program for the grasses and for the soybeans should be continued until a
, complete assessment can be performed after the IDR process has been operating in comtunation l with the existing ADU systems through at least two growing seasons. i. 4.2.2.2 Effects of ammonia emissions , f Although ammone is a plant nutnent and is used in fertilizers, a very high atmospheric l concentration of ammonia can adversely affect vegetation. Calculated from the staff's estimate of ammorus emissions (3.4 g/s average and 4.3 g/s maximum: Sect. 4.2.1) and an annual average [ X/Q value derived from the values in T,able 3.2, the ammone concentrations for the operating level I-of 1600 t/ year of uranium are projected to be 52 pg/m3 average and 66 pg/m 8maximum at the g neerest site boundary (550 m or 1800 ft NNW). Information on the effects of high concentrations l of ammone is meager, but avadable data indicate that short-term (e.g., up to 30 days) p concentrations over 1 to 2 mg/m 8may cause reduced productivity in plant species that are l 'particularly sensitive to ammorna (e.g., mustard; National Research Council 1979). Although annual j average concentrations wiR be well below 1 to 2 mg/m 8, combination of a maximum emission rate l " and short-term adverse meteorological conditions could result in ambient ammonia concentrations l f I [ \
- s.- , p . . . . . s s. a - , + --x v - . - .
^
4-16
~
4 d within this range and could cause sught loss of productuty for ammorna-senestive plant specess at the site. However, the staff conseders this combmonon of circumstances unNkely. Ammonse emessions from the plant should not present a hazard to domestic or wild animals or
' to public health. Although chronic exposure limits for the general pubhc in populated areas have not
--been set or recommended for the western world, the USSR has defined 0.3 ppm (0.2 mg/m8 ) as the mexwnel agowable long-term concentration in populated aroes. The USSR value is conservenve I
' and is intended to prevent avra==es that produce slight changes in human centrol nervous system
= reflex actmty, such as eye sensitmty to light and electroencephalogram-evoked response (National Roeeerch Council 1979). The maximum annual average ammone concentration at the nearest NFCS boundary (66 pg/m*) is less then the USSR standard of 0.2 mg/m8 (200 pg/m 8).-
For signrficant impacts to occur on domosec animals and on land uses involving these animals, concentrations of ammorna would have to be much higher then the suggested guidennes for the protection of human health. Because the predicted ammorus concentrations at and beyond the
- nearest site boundary are below the conservative USSR limit, no impact should occur.
I-4 4.2.3 Water 4.2.3.1 Surface water Congeree River Quality. Liquid waste strooms from NFCS operations include sanitary wastes and process 7 wastes. Process westewaters are primanly contameneted by ammonia and fluondes. Both waste streams are treated onsite prior to their combined discharge into the Congeree River (see Sect. 2.2.2.2). The decharge of the plant effluent to the Congeres River must comply -with limitations set forth in an NPDES pornut issued by the SC-OHEC (see Appendix B). Because of this requirement, nonradiological environmental impacts to the water quahty of the Congeree River should bE insagraficant at any level of production capacity. Likewme, as docussed in Sect. 4.2.5, radiological impacts to the Congaree River are not expected to be sigraficant. Table 4.9 indicates the daily. average decharge of chemical and biological constituents in the
' NFCS effluent during 1982. The NPDES limitations for the daily average decharge are provided as
~a comparison From the table, it is otmous that the effluent discharged from the plant was wel below the permit limitations. No reported instances of noncompliance with the NPDES pommt have .
been reported since November 25,1982, when the 5-day BOD level [22.6 kg (50.2 lbs) per day) exceeded the daily maxwnum limit in effect at that time (18 kg (40 lb) per day) (Westinghouse C 1982). ' Previous noncomplance instances (1981-1982) included four total suspended solids
- exceedences, three BODS exceedences and - one ammorne exceedence (Westinghouse 1983, Table 5.4). AR but the ammorua violation were'less than twice the maximum daily limit (the ]
ammorna violation exceeded the limit by five, times). In aR cases, however, diludon upon mixing in the river (Sect. 3.5.1.1) probably precluded any adverse impacts to downstream water quality.
-Daily average decharge concentrations of chemical constituents in the NFCS plant effluent are
- not expected to increase sagnsficantly with an increase in NFCS production capacity to 1600 t/ year
- - of uraruum. At this capacity, the final effluent discharged to the Congeree River would also be required to meet NPDES limitations; therefore, no segruficant water quanty impacts would result.
Consumption of water. The present water consumption at the NFCS for processing 3 3 700 t/ year of uranium is 0.008 m /s (0.3 ft /s). %e water obtained from the Columtxa Murucepal I l 4
17i Table 4.9 Comperison of current NPDES permit limits and the daily everage discharge (1982) from the NFCS to the Congeree River.
, , Ib/d (unless listed)***
NPDES NFCS Parameter daily average daily average discharge limitation (1982)
- . Beologeal oxygen demand 25 14.6 (BOO3)
- Total suspended solids 32 17.2 (TSS)
Fluoride 40 14.9 . Ammorna (NHaN) 60 14.8.
. Oil and grease 10 mg/L ' 3.5 mg/L '
Fecal coliform 200 MPN/100 ml 51 colornes/100 mi pH. units 6.9 (minimum) 8.7
'Ib/ day x 0.45 = kg/ day
%iPDES permit reprinted in its entirety in Appendix B.
' Data from Westinghouse 1983, Table 5.5.
Water System is used for potable and process coolog requirements. Approxanetely 45% of this
' water is reanad to the atmosphere in the form of water vapor from the lagoons and cooling towers, and the rememder is decharged to the Congaree River as treated liquid 'weste (see Sect. 2.2.2.2). Half of the discharge is from the process stroom and half from the sonstory treatment plant (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 5.2.2.2). '
The projected maximum water consumption at the expanded capacity of 1600 t/ year of uranium is 0.014 m 8/s (0.5 ft /s). 3 This consumption represents 1% of'the Columbia Municipal ,- Water System's water use (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 5.2.2.1); therefore, the effect on the city water availability should be negligible. This level of water use should also have a neghgible effect on the quantity of water available for downstream water use. Onsite surface water Surface' waters'onsite at the NFCS melude Mill Creek, Sunset Lake, and a small pond (see Fig. 4.1). The small pond south of the plant has previously received contammated input from groundwater (see Sect. 4.2.3.2), but it has been isolated so that there is no interchenge with Sunset Lake. . Concentrations of ammorna and fiuoride in samples taken weekly since the contammated groundwater plume was discovered have been as much as 300 times background levels.' Recent (1983) levels have ddcreased'to 50 to 100 times background (Westinghouse .1984). The volume of the pond is periodcolly reduced by pumping water back to the facility's west legoon
. and then into the south lagoon for treatment to help prevent contammation of the lake (R. Fischer, Westinghouse, personal commun' cation with V. R. Tolbert, ORNL, September 19, 1984). Because 5
of the large volume of Sunset Lake [1.6 x 10 m3 (4.3 x 107 gal)] and a flow- rangmg from 3 0.003 tc 0.02.m /s (0.1 to d.6 ft /s) (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 5.2.2.5), any small volume leakage to Sunset Lake should be insi,J, cant.
.r 5
+
4-18 Westinghouse. routinely monitors onsite surface waters for radological and nonradologmal
. parameters (Sect.:4.1). Semphng stations (Table 4.6) were selected to indicate background water quality (entrance sample), to reflect the quehty of dramage and runoff from the plant's poved areas j l
(rood), and to detect any contammation of Sunset Lake or Mill Creek that might result from oneite dramage(causeway, speway, and exit).
- - , MlH Creek is cineesfied by the state as . Class A, freshwater surtable for primary . contact j recreation and, as such,.-is protected 1 from degradetion by ' state water quality . standards F (SC-DHEC 1983b).- The standards are pnmanly used as the basis for limitations set forth in NPDES ,
- permits issued for point discharges to a Class A receivmg stream. Although no point decharges to .
MiH Creek occur from the NFCS, the standards were used for compenson'in an a .mont of
. onsite surface water quehty. Data presented in Table 4.6, Sect. 4.1.2.2, clearly indicate that the quehty of MiH Creek and Sunset Lake water is not signsficantly affected by contammated runoff and
- j. dramage at the NFCS. In addition, pH and concentrations of ammones at au stations along the creek and lake have been below EPA guidance limits for protecton of aquete life (EPA 1976).
= 4.2.3.2 Groundwater contamination SheHow groundwater contammation was discovered in mid-1980 and has since that time been
- the subgect of considerable investigation. Although it is difficult to pinpoint, the orignal leakage that I caused the contammation may have . tarted as early as 1972. The pnmary suspected sources were 1 the concentrated waste treatment tank area and the ammonie storage tank ares. Westinghouse has since constructed improved concrete dikes and intomment pods for storage of process waste and ,
? J raw metenels. The waste treatment lagoons were also ==fwted of ~ being a source of contammation, so dunng 1981-1982, au lagoons were relined with 36-mil hypelon and underdrain- '
. systems were instaued to detect lagoon leakage. The improvements have apparently been effective in elmnetmg leakage from those sources. Although there appears to be conssderable reesdual l ' groundwater contammation wnmedetely a4ecent to .the waste treatment tank ares, recent groundwater monitoring indicates that leakage from this source no longer exists (Sect. 4.1.2.2).
Currently, groundwater contamments appear to be contained withm the shallow terrace aquifer inside the NFCS boundary. No contammation of the deeper T=casaaan aquifer has been observed. Because the pierometric head in the Tuscaloosa aquifer is probably equal to or greater then in the sheHow aquifer (Sect. 3.5.2.3) and because the intervenmg Black Mmgo formation (Fig. 3.13) has a i low permeabihty (Sect. 3.5.2.1), contammation is not expected to move from the shallow into the deeper aquifer. However, poorly completed or abandoned wells that penetrate through the
' confinmg Black Mmgo strata, as identified in Sect. 3.5.2.1, could permit . flow of contammated water 'from the surface aquifer into the Tuscaloosa aquifer. Mitigating action for this potential problem is discussed in Sect. 4.2.6. l In.10 years, the groundwater contamments (concentrated enough to produce a fish kiH) have migrated south approximately 200 m (650 ft) from the plant area to Sunset Lake. Further migration south of Sunset Lake is nil because the piezometric gradient is near zero beyond the lake.
Assummg that the pierone ;c gradient to the southeast is half that for the area between the plant and Sunset Lake, it is estimated that contammants win reach the southoestern site boundary in
~
l- about 60 years. The concentration of contamments at the site boundary win be diluted by perhaps tenfold by depersion. Now that the sitige ponds have been relined, one source of contamments and high pierometric head has been removed Thus, the estimated time of arrival of contamments at the site boundary is considered to be conservative. I s l l l
r-4-19 There are no downgredient offsite wells vnttun 5 km (3 miles) of the site boundary. The ukeEhood of developeng groundwater resources in nearby downgradient areas is remote haemu== the Congeree Swamp and attacarit marshlands are not ' suitable for' agncultural development. ; Furthermore, mdustry is not likely to be sited on the 100-year floodplom of the Congeree River. As a consequence, mstigation of groundwater contammation is not currently required. However, the staff wiH require continued morntonng of appropriate downgradient webs in the shallow aquifer in order to study the behavior of the contaminent plume This monitoring will also provide an early wommg of changes that may require metigetmg action.
~ if the need for nwtigation should over aries, there is sufficsont time to develop and implement an appropriate methodology because the buffer zone between the contammated zone and the NFCS boundary is approximately 600 m (2000 ft) wide, and the nearest downgredient offsite weg is i about 5 km (3 miles) to the southeast.~ Of the sental methodologies available, the semplest is a '
l pumo-bock system in which contammated groundwater is retrieved and placed in an evaporation l pond. Unfortunately, evaporation ponds are not very efficient in humid climates such as that of 7 South Carolina, and consumptive use of groundwater is a problem. These problems can be ratheart ; by pumpeg the contammated groundwater through a water treatment plant. Contamments can be removed by , reverse osmoses, electrodialyses, or ion exchange These processes produce two l l streams: (1) punfied water, which is returned to the aqusfer, and (2) a concentrated brine, which is ! discharged to an evaporation pond. The above treatments reduce consumptive water use by as much as 80%, with a corresponding reduction in evaporation pond requirements. Another approach to decontammation of groundwater is in situ treatment. Ammonium may require in situ treatment haean== it becomes fixed on clay minerals by cation exchange and, thus, is not easily withdrawn with the groundwater. Several in situ ammornum-removal methodologies are currently being , investigated, includmg. (1) chemical oxidation, (2) biological oxidation, and (3) cation slution. Results ! from in situ methodology have only been margmally effective because of geochemical side reactions - and a tendency to plug the aquifer. Deutsch et al. (1984) provides a comprehensive summary of
- surface and in situ treatment methodologsos 4.2.4 Ecology 4.2.4.1 Terrestrial l
. Because expension of the existing Westinghouse facilities is not proposed, there will be no loss i of terrestrial habitat or reductions in wildlife populations resulting from construction-related activities or from conversion of wildEfe habitat to industrial uses. Noticeable impacts to the appearance or productivity of onsite vegetation have not been observed as a result of fluoride and ammorna emessions from the' NFCS at the present production capacity. With the proposed increase in l' capacity using the IDR process (Sect. 2.1), fluoride emissions wiu increase (Sects. 4.2.1 and 4.2.2). However, because the increased emessions will likely be in the form of particulate fluorides (Sect. 4.2.2), which are less damagmg than gaseous, no significant impacts to onsite vegetation or herbevorous arumals are expected. Impacts to offsite vegetation and terrestrial biota are unlikely. i ! 4.2.4.2 Aquetic A comparison of the water quality of the Congaree River upstream and downstroom ! (Sect. 4.1.2.2) of the NFCS indicated only minor differences between the locations. After dilution I i
4-20 of the effluent decharge there should be rmrumel effect on water quakty outade the muang zone (Sect. 4.2.3.1), and resuleng concentracons should be within the range of values establiehod for protection of aquenc Efe (EPA 1976). Ammorne concentrations upstroom of the site --v--d; exceed the EPA limitanon of 0.9 mg/L estabEshed for protection of aquatic life; however, the decharge from the NFCS plent (9.4 mg/L), upon dlunon, would contnbute less then 0.002 mg/L to the ammonio concentration in the river. Resuleng impacts tn emotic Efe would be neghgible. After the sorwtery stream mates with the process neste stream, the residual cNorine concentration of the effluer ould be as high as 1 mg/L doung of the discharge with the river j 3 8 at a minanum flow of 45 m /s (1590 ft /s) would cause a mumum rise of 0.0002 mg/L residual chionne which is 7% of the recommended maximum concer tration of 0.003 mg/L (EPA 1973). At 8 8 the microcos in chionne concentration would an average river flow rate of 266 m /s (9388 ft /s),
- be 0.00003 mg/L, or 1% of the recommended maximur concentration. Rac==a Complete moung wiB not occur instantaneously and hae=== toxic leve6 of ra=d=1 chlorine could occur at the outfall, relenvoly immobile aquenc Efe that could r et avoid the chlonne, such as benthic irwortebrates and penphyton, would be kiBed. Most fi a would be able to avoid the high chlonne concentracons at the outfeu Therefore, hae=== of t's Emetod extent of the discharge plume, the f j limited likethood of low flow (7-d,10-year), and
- se hmeted number of aquenc orgensoms that would be drectly affected, the impact of the residi J chionne in the NFCS offluent on aquenc biota j would be neghgible. Rae=== the effluent dischr Jed from the NFCS must comply with NPDES hmetanons (Appendix B: Sect. 4.2.3.1), the staff .mncludes that there should be no adverse 'rnpoct j to aquatic biota in the Congeree River.
! Ammonie- and fluonde-contaminated wate in the pond south of the plant is pumped to the west lagoon to prevent transport of toxic lov As of these conettuents in Sunset Lake, the discharge I and treatment legoons have been Ened to prevent leakage, and the wous have been forefied to prevent rupture. Rac=== there is no dire t discharge to Sunset Lake from the NFCS plant, there should be no adverse impacts to the Lxe from normal plant operation. In the event of lagoon leakage or rupture, there could potentisNy be a fish kiH in Sunset Lake; however, because the lagoons conteen treeted rather than raw liquids and only employees fish in the lake (Sect. 3.7.2), ! any impacts should be mrumal 4.2.4.3 Threatened and endangered species (' No endangered or throetened terrestrial or somaquatic species should be jeopardized by operation of the Westinghouse plant at 1600 t/ year of uranium Any alEgotors that may inhabit Sunset Lake on the site should not be affected, because no effluents are or wiR be discharged to this lake. Liquid discharges to the Congereo River do not significantly affect the quelty of the river i (Sect. 4.2.3) and should, therefore, not affect suigators or their important prey specess Because ! there are apperently no colonies of reda:ockaded woodpeckers on or neer the site (Sect. 3.7.3), this specsos should also be unaffected. Ermessons of fluoride and ammonie to the atmosphere would l not be likely to affect any vegetation important to these woodpeckers off the site. Because no habitat on the site appears to be paraculerfy important to migrating species or speceos that c-- =1--2; visit the ares (Sect. 3.7.3), such species simid also not be affected. There are no known threatened or endangered aquatic species in Sunset Lake. The short-nosed sturgeon could occur in the Congeree River in the Columbia vicinity (Sect. 3.7.3.2); however, hac=== there is no thermal discharge and the levels of chemical decharge to the river is low and
b d l 4-21 l weg wittun EPA Hmitations (Sect. 4.2.3), there should be no adverse impacts from the NFCS Equid effluent on endangered apar . 1 4.2.s nadiosogioolimpacto The radiologmal wnpoets of the Westinghouse facity were assessed by calculating the maximum does to the individual adult Eving at the nearest resedence and to the local Wu . Ewing vnthm an 80-km (50-mile) radius of the plant site. Where site-specific mformation was not available, assumpeons that would tend to maxwnare the does were used in the calculations. It is i only when such conservative assumptions yield a does near or ave ==reng the appacahla Hmit that Westinghouse would be required to obtain appropriate data for a more reeEste evaluotson. Except where specified, the term " dose" as referred to in this EA is actueNy a 50-year does commitment for ad exposures; that is, the total dose to the reference orgen that wig accrue from 1 year of intake of radionsel=4== dunng the remerung lifetune (50 years) of the individual. Estimates were i also made of the does to an infant younger then 1 year old Hving at the nearest residence and to both an adult and infant assumed to reside at the nearest site boundary. The doses were calculated using radioactive effluent reloose rates measured dunng recent j operation at the NFCS and those estimated for the proposed higher production rate. Measured arbome urarnum releases at 700 t/ year processing have averaged at 27 gCi/ week j (Sect. 2.2.2.1). Westinghouse (1983) estimated that operation of the plant at 1600 t/ year of
- uranium with additional ADU process lines would triple the emisesons to about 81 pCi/ week, which is 12% greater then the projected emissions rate (71.9 pCi/ week) used in the previous environmental assessment for license renewal (NRC (1977a). Because the appicent has not proposed additional ADU process lines to obtain the higher production capahaty, the staff i estimated the fogowmg uranium emisesons for operation of the combened ADU and IDR facines at a capacity of 1600 t/ year of uranium. Operation of the ADU process would result in omisosons of about 42.4 pCi/ week at the expended operating level. The appiment estimated the uranium
! emisesons rate to be about 3.5 pg/s or 2.1 g/ week for the IDR process (Westinghouse 1981). This is equivalent to about 5 pCi/ week, on the basis of a specific activity of 2.4 pCi/g for urarnum ennched to 5% "U. The total emissions at the 1600-t/ year capaharty with the combined processes would therefore be 47.4 pCi/ week. For the airbome emissions, source terms are coupled with atmosphonc dispersion factors (Table 3.2) generated by the use of the Gaussion Plume Model and dffusion coefficients for PasquiN-type turbulence as in Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC 1977b). Doses vie significant pathways acre determmed on the basis of models presented in Reguietory Guide 1.109 (NRC 1977c), with the exception that, for the inhalation and ingestion pathways, does conversion factors for various orgens were used (Dunning 1981). The inhalation does factors were prrw6eart by the ICRP Task Group Lung Model and depend on the pertcle size and solub6ty of reisesed compounds. Racan== the particle size and solubility of arbome emissions have not been determmed, conserveuve assumptions for these parameters have been mode. Namely, the portmies poseng through HEPA fWters are assumed to have an Activity Medan Aerodynamic Diemeter (AMAD) of 0.3 pm. The j reloosed particles are further assumed, first, to be completely in an insoluble form (Class Y) to provide a maximum calculeted lung dose for the inhalation pathway and, then, completely in a soluble form (rla==== D and W) to provide a maximum calculated bone does for the ingestion pathway. See Appendix A for additional discussion and tables of dose conversion factors. t
+ -, v n . - , - , , , - . . , , - ,,r - ,,+,+,,_r--,,.,.e- .m,-m-n-- .,----n--- ~ . , ~ , ,--,----,--e-e - _ . - - - - - - -
4-22 For the Equid effluents discharged into the Congeree River, it was coneesvetively assumed that the urarnum is in a =ahMa form. 4.2.5.1 Desee to the = " Z; exposed individual The nearest reesdence to the Westinghouse plant is located about 1000 m (3300 ft) to the northeast. For arbome emmasons, the pathways considered in the indvidual does cosmotse were: (a) droct irradecon from ground -f+,--:12-,; (b) immeroson in the arbome plume; (c) droct
^
Inhalecon; and (d) ingesson of vegetetson, meet, and mik that are conservenwely assumed to be '! prar6-=d at the nearest reesdence For liquid effluents, the pathways include- (a) ingestion of aquatic food (fish) and (b) submeroson by swimming in the Congeree fliver. The river is not used
- . as a dnnlung water supply downstroom of the NFCS; so potable water was eveh=4.re as a pa==N=
==f-e pathway. The models'and vanous assumpeons involved in the ahore pathways con be referred to in greater detail in Regulatory Guide 1.109 (NRC 1977c). Table 4.10 summarizes the
- calculated maximum doses from arbome and liquid effluents to the nearest adult resident when the facety is procesemg 700 t/ year of uranium.
When the dosee are compared to the EPA standards for uranium fuel cycle fecartes (40 CFR Pt.190), the total body does of 6.2 x 10-2 migirem/ year is only about 0.25% of the Emit of 25 migirem/ year. The highest orgen does of 2.0 mitirem to the lung is about 8% of the myync ham EPA standerd, the bone does of 3.1 x 10-2 malirem is about 0.12% of the standard, and the ludney dose of 7.5 x 10-8 migirem is about 0.03% of the stenderd. i As shown in Table 4.10, the cnecal pathway is through inhaletion reculeng in a maximum does
- to the lung of 2.0 mitirem/ year. The above calculations assume a normel adult, but the staff has Table 4.10. Estimated maximum annual does from airborne and liquid effluents to the neerest adult resident Organ Dose (mimrom/yeer)
Pathway Total body Lung Bone Kidney Air effluents ' Direct irredation 2.8 x 10-s 2.4 x 10-' 3.6 x 10-8 2.2 x 10-s immersion in air 7.4 x 10-8 6.7 x 10-' 1.0 x 10-8 6.3 x 10-s ' Direct inholetion' 6.2 x 10-2 2.0 2.8 x 10-2 6.0 x 10-8 Ingestion
- 3.5 x 10-* 1.0 x 10-8 4.7 x 10-8 1.0 x 10-8 <
t Liquid effluents j 1
, i j Submersion 6.7 x 10-7 6.2 x 10-7 9.3 x 10-7 5.7 x 10-7 Aquatic food' 1.6 x 10-* 4.7 x 10-' 2.2 x 10-8 4.7 x 10-*
Total 6.2 x 10-2 2.0 3.1 x 10-2 7.5 x 10-a l
- Assumes 80% residence time.
"Since site-e_.ecific information is not available, it is assumed that 100% of the vegetables consumed ere grown et the neerest reesdence ,
Tish.
., .- . - - . , -. . - - . - - - - , - - - - . ---.- ,- _ n ,___,___.__,.,,,.,,.-n. - , _ , -
s 4-23 1
- also considered a crecal indhndual (an infant of 0-1 years of age) at the neerest reesdence. The
- lung does to an infant would be 1.9 times the adult does (Hoenos and Soldot 1977), equivalent to 3.8 migrem/ year. This does is about 15% of the EPA standerd. Thorofore, normal operston of the plant over the past 5 years has resulted in maximum annual doses at the nearest residence
~
l that are weg below'40 CFP Pt.190 limits. At the proposed maximum operating level of 1600 t/ year of uraruum using the combination of ADU and IDR process lines with an emisesons rate (47.4 pCi/ week) about 75% greater then for 700 t/ year, the estimated maximum doses would be 3.5 migrem/ year for the lungs of an adult and 6.6 migirem/ year for the infant. These doses are 14% and 27%, respectively, of the i EPA standard. ! The maximum impact on an unrestncted ares reeuleng from emmasons at the NFCS might be at the nearest site boundary (550 m (1800 ft) north-northwest of the fuel manufactunne building] rather then at the nearest ramdance. The X/O at this boundary is about a factor of 2 higher then l j the X/O at the nearest reesdence The reculang maximum annual doses to an infant at the boundary would be 7.6 migirem and 13.3 magirem, at the procesemg rates of 700 and 1600 t/ year of uranium, respectively. These doses are stiu well below the EPA limit. Addinonal staff analyses indicates that emmasons of over 9000 pCi/ year would be necessary l to exceed the 25-migirem/ year limit to the crincel indvidual at the nearest reesdence. In order that the requirements of ALARA are met, License SNM-1107 currently requires Westinghouse to report to NRC if plant gessous effluents exceed 1500 p0/ quarter (6000 pCi/ year). This rolesse rete { } results in an annual lung dose to an infant at the nearest reesdence of about 16 miNirem/ year; however, such an annual rolesse may cause a lung does to an infant at the nearest boundary that f exceeds the 25-millirem limit. Accordingly, the license also requires Westinghouse to notify NRC of any changes in parameters important to a does assessment (e.g., a family movmg to the nearest boundary) and to estimate the resultant change in dose commitment. In the event that the ll calculated does to any member of the public is about to exceed 25 miNirem/ year, Westinghouse is required to take immedete steps to reduce en== mans and ensure compience Even though i Westmghouse's average annual emiseson over the lost 5 years has been about 1300 pCi/ year, , these requirements win be continued in the renewed license as added assurance that the requirements of 40 CFR Pt.190 are met. The staff analyse of the radiological does to the neerest reesdent (Table 4.10) did not include
- the use of potable water from the Congeree River. Also, no downstroom consumers of potable I water from the Congeree River were identified. However, in case there are downstroom consumers, the staff hos calculated the dose to an individual obtemme 100% of his requirements from the river immodately downstroom of the plant discherge. The radioactivity concentrations in the river due to l
plant operation, shown in Table 4.11, are beeed on the effluent concentrations shown in Table 2.4. l The maximum individual doses in malirem/ year are shown in Table 4.12. AN the doess are less i then 1 millirem / year, which is a smell percentage of the EPA standards. 4.2.5.2 Booes to the population within so km (50 miles) of the plant site The 1980 population withm a 50mie reeus of the plant is shown in Table 3.4. About 783,000 people live withm this area. Population doses were calculated on the beeis of the does estimates at the nearest resedence for operation of the plant at 700 t/ year of urarnum, the ratio l ! of X/O at the neerset reesdence and at various segments within the 80-km (50-mile) radius, and I 1
4-24
~ Table 4.11. Annuel everage and daily maximum concentrations of r:?n: Nip in the Congeree River'below the NFCS discherge*for plant operation'et 700 and 1800 t/ year of uranium Operation at 700 t/ year Operation at 1600 t/ yeard Pantaetivity Annual Deily Annual Daily average maximum everage maximum (pci/mt) (pci/mL) (pCl/mL) l (pCi/mW l Alphe 1.4 x 10-8 1.9 x 10-* 5.7 x 10-s 7.9 x 10-*
Bets 6.7 x 10-a 9.2 x IO 2.7 x 10-5 3.7 x 10-*
' Annual average river flow is 266 m8 /s (9388 ft /s), 8 and the daily muumum flow 8 3 has been 19 m /s (662 ft /s).
~
- Average discharge rate of the combined effluent is 5.7x 10-8 m 3 /s (0.2 ft8/s) at 700 t/ year and 8.5 x 10-8m8 /s (0.3 ft 3/s) at 1600 t/ year.
' Concentration of radioactivity in the discharge is given in Table 2.4.
Tatimated values. Table 4.12. Estimated maximum individuel doses in millirem / year from drinking Congeree River water downstroom of the NFC8 discharge, for operation at both 700 and 1600 t/ year of uranium
- Operation at Operation at 8*"
700 t/ year 1600 t/ year Total body 3.0 x 10-8 1.2 x 10~8 Lung 8.7 x 10-s 3.5 x 10-s Bone 4.0 x 10-2 1.6 x 10-' Kidney 8.7 x 10'3 3.5 x 10-2
' Annual average concentrations of plant-induced radioactmty in the ri (Table 4.11) were used.
i the population in the corresponding segments. The population dose estimates considered the exposure pathways via airborne effluents. The population dose commitments from routine releases from the NFCS are shown in Table 4.13. The natural background dose rate to the total body is 117 millirem / year near Columbia, S.C. (Sect. 3.8), which results in a populatico dose within
)
80 km (50 miles) of the NFCS of 9.2 x 10* man-rem. The total body dose rate of 0.28 man-rom shown in Table 4.13 is negligible compared to this background value. Operation at 1600 t/ year of ureneum would not alter this conclusion. 4.2.6 Mitigatory Measures. The effluent and environmental monitoring programs that have been established for the Westinghouse facility are needed to measure the impacts of plant emissions on the environment during normal operations or following an accident situation. The monitoring programs, as well as recent results for plant operations at 700 t/ year of uranium, were outlined in Sect. 4.1. A brief analysis of the results was also provided. A discussion of the impacts observed from post plant l
4-25 Table 4.13. Does commitments from airborne discherges to the population within SO km (50 miles) of the NFCS f_ Does (men-rom)* Pathway f Kulney Total body Lung Bone l Direct irradletion 7.7 x 10-* 6.6 x 10-* 6.5 x 10-* 6.2 x 10-* Immermon in air 2.1 x 10-8 1.4 x 10-s 1.8 x 10-8 1.8 x 10-s Direct inhalation 2.8 x 10-' 1.5 x 10' 1.1 x 10-' 2.0 x 10-2 Ingestion" 1.5 x 10-* 6.4 x 10-7 2.0 x 10-8 3.4 x 10'"* Total 2.8 x 10-' 1.5 x 10' 1.1 x 10-' 2.1 x 10-2
'Amoumes as adults.
alngestion of vegetables, meet, and mik with the same rarEnactivity concentrations as postulated food produced at the nearest readence operations, and those expected to result from expended operations up to 1600 t/ year of
- - uraruum, was presented in Sects. 4.2.1 through 4.2.5. On the beeis of these analyses, operations of the Westinghouse NFCS since the lost hcense renewal have not resulted in any significent environmental impacts. Further, no s6gruficant impacts are expected to result from plant operations 4
at the expended level. The staff will require that the existing monitoring programs be contmuod in order to confirm this conclueson. The frequency of surface water monitoring will be decreened from monthly to quarterly, and soil monitoring will be pernutted annually rather then semiennually. This decreased monitoring, which is considered adequete, is bened on the existing data base provided by Westinghouse, wtuch demonstrates no significant impact to either surrounding surface water or soil. In areas of potential concern, particularly with the expended plant operations, the staff will require expended, modified, or both expended and modshed environmental monitoring. As discussed in Sect. 4.2.3.2, the shallow aquifer at the NFCS site has been contammsted as a result of post operations. The apphcant has taken corrective action that has effectively ahminated the leakage that was the source of the contammation. Although there appears to be considerable reminhas groundwater contamination in the shallow ' aquifer near the operations ares, the I contamment plume hos remamed on the NFCS property. No contammetion of the deeper T = alaa== aquifer has been observed, and contammation is generally not considered likely (Sects. 3.5.2.1 and 4.2.3.2). Given these conditions and the fact that there are not downgredient offsite wells that are likely to be impacted by the plume, no mitigatory measures are currently neccesary. However, the staff wiu require Westinghouse to expend its routine groundwater morwtonng to include appropriate shallow wells and at least one well completed in the deeper aquifer (e.g., Well W-3). The purpose of this monitoring wiH be to study the plume and to provide an oorly warning of any changes that may warrent mitigating action. The quehty of monitor well co.npletions is variable (Devis and Floyd 1982). Existing wens W-6 through W-17 (Figs. 3.8 and 3.9) were originally installed as temporary observation wells and contain neither bentonite seels nor cemented casings [(Fig. 4.2(a)]. Although these weEs are suitable for measuring water levels, they are not satisfactory for determinmg water quehty, because of potentiel dilution from rainwater infiltration through the well annulus. Figure 4.2(b) shows a property completed well for monitoring groundwater quality. Wells W-18 through W-33 are aN
4-26 ES-6140 CAP
. VENT g [ -
g i s VENT
= xl oROuT h -
h GROUT SEAL h - 2-in. PVC RISER
.. r, (MIN 1.0 ft) -
~
~
.c
~. . l 4 - SANDY BACKFN L .~ ~
~
I. I Z Z
.~r
[. . 2 2 Z Z h . 2-in. SLOTTED 2 2
~
,'- SCREEN 2.. 2. . - BENTONITE E ..i
.'~ WASHED SAND
* ** o
'd **
* 'r*,'
= p y; _
't ,
2-in. SLOTTED
- =9 -
- y. --
j *,
/ == ,;. .
PVC SCREEN
.c g,) I' 1 * ~J..'
(b)
,j * "
., CAP
. Fig. 4.2. won sempieteen suitebse for (e) water level meneurement only and (6) semptine water quality.
property completed. wen completion methodo'onpos . for wells W-1 through W-5 are not weg i kr.own aruj appear to be open-hole complocons below venable lengths of steel surface caemos. The staff wNl require routme semping of property completed wells to more accurately monitor behevoor of the contannent plume in additen, the stoff wNl require wed W-3, which is completed in the deeper aquifer, to be upgraded to' the state-of-the-art desegn This wiu provide greater protecten for the deep aqusfer (by alumnating pa==hl= contomment seepage down the wed caemg) as wed as improved monitoring capability. As discussed in Sects. 4.1.2.2 and 4.2.1, operation of the Westinghouse plant at about 700 t/ year of uranium has resulted in estimated air concentrations of fluoride that are below air quality standards set by the state of South Carow. This is also expected to be true for plant l operatens at 1600 t/ year of uramum, even though the prW IDR lines win result in incrossed fluonde enseens. However, accW vegetaten semples taken onsite (5 out of 23 semples from i 1981 through 1983) have exceeded 40 ppm, wtuch is about the maximum safe level in the total ration fed to deiry cows. Some areas of the Westinghouse site are cut for hay for dairy cow food, but the hay denved from NFCS property wHI constitute only a smed portion of the herd's total i 3 ration. Therefore, it is very unlikely that these cows would develop fluorosis as a result of either the existing or expanded plant operations. The staff wiu nevertheless require the applicant to modify its existing monitoring program to provide a better assessment of fluoride impacts. Specificany, Westinghouse will take grass semples for fluoride analyses at least twice a year, when the grass is being cut for hoy. Soybeen crops, if grown onsite win also be monitored for fluonde at
4-27 hervest. Appropriate background samples of grass and soybeans will be taken at harvest time for fiuoride analyses. 4.3 INDIRECT EFFECTS AND THElR SIGNIFICANCE 4.3.1 N Effects As discussed in Sect. 3.3, employment at the Westinghouse NFCS is not a major factor in the economy of Richland County, South Carolina. Neither continued operation nor discontinuance would have a segneficant impact on socioeconomic caiGans. 4.3.2 Potentiel Effects of Accidents Accidents that could occur at the Westinghouse NFCS are both radiological and nonradiologscal in nature. The fabrication of fuel for nuclear roectors involves the chemical processing of low-onnched uratwum. Sogneficant radioactive materials present at the fuel fabncation facility are the UO2 pellets for fuel rod fabrication and the UFe stored in cyhnders. The 45% enriched uraruum that is used has a low specific activity of 2.4 pCi/g. Thus, with the exception of a criticality accident and the potential rupture of UFe cyhnders, the environmental impacts which would result from postulated accidents at the Westinghouse fuel fabrication plant should be sarnsler to the impacts of a manufacturing plant in which nonradioactive chemica.ls are stored. The radiological environmental impacts of the more probable postulated accidents are insigrvficant at this facility. A spectrum of posasble accidents related to the operation of the NFCS and their potential consequences are presented in Table 4.14. Accident severity is classified into three categories. Category 1 accidents are those most likely to occur dunng normal plant operations, and have the loest environmental impacts of the three. Category 2 events, which would occur infrequently dunng the plent's operating life, could reloose concentrations of radiological and nonradiological pollutants to the onsite (and pussibly offsite) enviro.went that would exceed normel effluent releases and cos.id cause significant impacts, if not controlled or metagated. Category 3 accidents are those not expected to occur during the Efe of the plant but which could result in segrwficant releases of radioactive or toxic pollutants to the onsite and offsite environment. Westinghouse (1975 and 1983) has analyzed the radiological and nonradiological consequences of several occident scenarios, both inside the manufacturing plant and outside the plant (i.e., storage areas, lagoons, etc.). f I 4.3.2.1 Radiological accidents I Although several minor accidents are likely to happen during the life of the plant (e.g., a small leek in a pipehne or a small spill), most will not result in a significant reloese of uranium to the j l environment. Therefore, the accident analysis in support of this assessment is limited to the consideration of severe, low-probability accidents that could potentially result in the release of large quantities of radioectivity-a UFe release or a criticality accident. The radiological consequences of a mejor fire and a transportation accident are also evaluated. UFe release Shipping cyhnders of UFe (2 1/2 tons) are stored inside the manufacturing building or in a secured outdoor area. The UFe is a solid at ambient temperatures (sublimes at 132 F) and is only l
4-28 l 1 Table 4.14. A spectrum of accidents that couhl occur et the Westinghouse NFCS Area and metenal swolved Typical accidents Severity cleos Pogutant(s) of concern Tank farm Ammoruum hydroxide ~ Pipeline or tank look or ' 1,2 Ammone Anhydrous ammone rupture, spius, fire Nitrate Sodium hydroxide Caustic and Nitric acid acid solutions Lagoons Ammoruum nitrate Leek, messsve dike / liner 1,2 Ammone Calcium fluoride failure, flooding Nitrate Uranium Fluonde Uranium Outside storage /inside vaporization aree Uranium hexafluonde Ruptured cylmder, vapor 1,2 Uranium, hydrogen fluoride (solid) Oguid/ vapor) release Uranyl nitrate Ruptured drum 2 Uranium Nitrate Chermcal and manufactunng areas Uranium Pipeline or container Uranium Uranium diczide rupture, spale, explo- 1,2,3 Ammone Ammorwum diuranate siens, fires, filter Fluondo Hydrogen fluonde failure, criticality Hydrogen Explosion 3 Uranium Transportation Container rupture, spals 1,2 Uranium Maceanneous chemscals heeted and vaportred inside, Therefore, the posednisty of an outdoor reisees of liquid UFe is extremely remote. If a cylmder of solid UF, were to fail outside, for any reason, the UFe would vaporize very slowly. Because UFe reacts with atmosphenc moistwo to form uranyl fluoride (UO F ), which is a nonvolatile solid, such a leek would tend to be self-seeling Therefore, the , quantity of meterial roleseed from such an accident involving a cylinder of solid UFe would not contribute sogneficantly to the plant's normel emisesons, and the potentiel offeite consequences would not be a concom. Although very unlikely, an accident resultog in a mesesve outdoor release of UFs was postulated as the mexemum credible UFe accident. Such an =weant would involve a fire in the UFe outside storage area when a truck crashes there and ruptures two of the UFe cylmders. A fire results when the truck's fuel tank is ruptured by the crash. The resultog reissee of UFe is estimated to be about 1260 kg over a one-hour period, assumog no remodel action is taken. This
- equates to a total release of 860 kg of low-enriched MS% assU) uransum.
f
.~, _ _ . _ _ _ _ . - _ _ , _ , _ _ . . . . . _ _ _ - . , - - , _ . _ , , _ . , _ _ . . , , _ , , - - - - - _,-,,m.m.m_._-. .-. . , _ _ _
- . ~ - . . - -- .. . .--. . . -. . ..
i f 4-29 The UFe gas volatilized by the fire would react with water vapor in the air to form hydrogen \ l fluonde (HF) gas, and wanyl fluonde (UO F2 ) particulates. The resultant cloud would rios at least 30 m (100 ft) above the site, pnmenly driven by the thermal expension of heated air and combustion products from the bummg truck fuel (Klett and Galeeki 1975). The acodont is soeumed
, to occur under adverse meteorological constions includng an F type of atmosphenc statmhty and a j'
light wind blowmg at 1 m/s._ With a groun& level rolesse and a diution effect couesd by buildng wake turbulence, the X/Q at the nearest reesdence (1000 m to the northeast) is
- 2.33 x 10-4 s/m 8. Under these atmosphenc conditions, UO F and HF could move downwmd in ,
j a narrow, unwavenng plume The plume would be a dense white cloud which would be highly i viesble at the nearest reesdence dunng the day. The average concentration of waneum and HF as the 8 8
- plume passes through this location would be about 60 mg/m and 20 mg/m , respectively.
' 8 Hydrogen fluonde is a corrosive vapor, and a=&re to concentrations of 25 mg/m for several rrunutes is known to cause respiratory discomfort (NAS 1971). Brief exposure to 8
40 mg/m 8of HF is dangerous to life (Sex 1963); exposure to 100 mg/m of HF for 1 minute is consedered opedomiologically segnificant (Sunehme 1972). Therefore, the calculated HF concentration i at the nearest reesdence may cause some respiratory discomfort (promptmg a person to flee), but would not be life-throetenmg l
- if an adult at the nearest reendence stood in the plume and endured this discomfort for an entire hour, there would be an intake of =am= uransum of approximately 50 mg. The chemical toxicity of this intake would likely cause kidney injury (Eve l964) but would be weH below the potentisNy fatal uraruum intake of 160 mg (C --J.ap et al.1958). The radiation does ===aa=ted with this intake would be ineagrvficant.
i Critleelity socident The effects of a postulated enticahty mer*iant have been considered, although the pa==enty of such an accedent is remote. Histoncety, no accident of this kind has ever occurred in a low-L ennchment fuel fabncation facility. Achievement of criticahty with low-ennchment uransum requires
! carefully controlled conditions and is not likely to happen accidentally, in addtion, at the NFCS, programs of desegn, review, procedural control, engmeered safeguards, and audts are implemented j routinely to prevent a 0;m :if ace imot of this kind.
The postulated v;in :.iy ace-tant has the followmg charactonetics (NRC Reguletory Guide 3.34, Rev,1): i
- The accident results in 10" fisesons prarkari in a series of pulses withm a supercntical liquid I system over an 8-h penod. ,
- The accident reiseees only the volatile fiesson products produced by the above number of fisesons. At this time, radioactive decay begos.
in addition, it was assumed that 25% of the hologens and 100% of the noble gases were reloosed from the manufacturing buildmg No credit for removal of radionuchdos was given for the existing filteris, scrubber, or other instated controls. Furthermore, the accident was assumed to i occur under adverse meteorological conditions (an F-type atmosphene stabihty and a wind speed of !- 1 m/s). Given these conditions, and consedering a building wake effect, the X/O at the neerest 8
- i. reesdence would be 2.33 x 10-4 s/m . The offsite consequences from this nee-lant at the neerest reesdence are shown in Table 4.15. The doses also are wen below recommended protective action I
- _ _ - _ . . _ _ . . _ _ . . _ _ _ _ _ . , . _ , . . _ _ . . , _ . . , . . . _ _ . - - . . _ _ - . _ , . _ - - , - - , , - - - ~ - _ .--
. . ~ _ _ _ ._ _ _. . . - . _ - - - - __ ._.
t3 4
' 4-30 1
l Table 4.15. Maximum 50-year does commitment to the neerest resident from a criticality accident'* Does (minirem) - Exposure type Total body Thyroid i Airbome radioactivity 102 '960 Prompt gemme 3.8 3.8 i Prompt neutron 1.6 1.6 Total 107.4 965.4
' Nearest resident is 1000 m from the ace-8=nt site.
" Accident parameters and calculations are bened on information in NRC Regihtory Guide 3.34, Rev.1.
guules (1-5 rem for total body and 5-25 rem for thyroid) given by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1980). 1 Trenoportation accidents Tronoportation of specul nuclear materials is strictly regulated by the U.S. Department of Transportaten (NRC 1977d and 10 CFR Pts. 50 and 71), and package design and specifications ] must be approved by NRC. Containers must be doesgned to withstand hypothetical accident ' conditions applied sequentially in an order specified in the regulations to determine the cumulative effect on the container being tested. Critorie include free drops, punctures, thermal strees, and water immersion tests. These tests, whch are more severe then any expected tronoportaten r aceir%ts, make the probability of reloose of contents or acci,%tal critcality very smell. In addition, to ensure that all packages are properly propered for shipment, the appicant must establish, maintain, and execute a quality assurance program (10 CFR Pt. 71) that satisfies arylienham cnterie (10 CFR Pt. 50). The apar=1 nuclear materials are transported in dedicated vehicles specifically doesgned for the purpose of assuring nucleer safety and meterial accountability and security. The environmental effects of transportation accidents invohnng properly packaged radoective j materiale have been thoroughly analyzed and documented (AEC 1972 and 1974; NRC 1975 and 1977e). These analyses show that the radiologmal risk from tronoportation accidents involving radmactive meterials does not contribute appreciably to the accident consequences. The few . shipments required would add very little to pubic injunes or fatalities in case of accidents. Mejor fire A mejor fire would involve complete buming of operational HEPA filters servemg exhaust from conversion and scrap recovery processes. The filters are housed in wooden boxes and located on the roof of the manufacturing building. Westinghouse (1975) stated that at the expanded operating j level of 1600 t/ year of uransum, conversion process exhausts are expected to contribute the largest single portion (35%) of the plent's total radoectivity emesions. This protecton considered plant expension using only the ADU conversion process, which emits greater activity to the l
F. 4-31 atmosphere then an equivalent level of operation using the IDR process. However, when the IDR lines become operational, conversion process exhausts might actually constitute a slightly lower percentage of the plent's total release Nevertheless, on the basis of the estimated release rate of 47.4 pCi/ week (Sect. 4.2.5), a l ' filtenng efficiency of 39.97%, and a maximum time between filter changes of 26 weeks, the maxwnum uranium activity accumulated in these filters would be 1.4 Cl. NRC provides a rolesse fraction of venous radioactive materials in unsealed form for accidental source terms in case of a major fire (NRC 1984). The assigned release fractions for different materials are bened on studies conducted by Battelle Northwest Laboratory (Mishwne et al.1968; Sutter and Miehwne 1981; Mishima and Schwendenen 1973). For uraruum in an uneseled form, the assigned rolesse fraction is 0.001 (NRC 1984). The general rationale for this assigned fraction is that the meterial is not a volatile powder; a sman fraction of the powder (a few percent) is of respirable-size, and experiments conducted usueHy found releases of respirable size particles of about 0.001 or less. Therefore, the total quantity reisesed during a fire lasting one hour would be 3.9 x 10-' pCi/s. 8 Using a conservative X/O of 2.3 x 10" s/m for acodont situations (NRC 1979), the average 3 f uraruum concentration at the nearest residence would be 9.1 x 10-s pCi/m . An adult at this location exposed to the plume for one hour would receive, through the inhalation pathway, an effectwo whole body dose commitment of about 9 x 10-3 rem. This value is well below the EPA's Protective Action Guide of 1-5 rem for emergency preparedness (EPA 1980). No evaluation of this same accident on the basis of chemical toxicity was performed, because the fire would 4 convert any soluble uranium to the insoluble, biologically nontransportable form. 4.3.2.2 Nonrediological accidents Environmental impacts that may occur at a low-level-ennchment nuclear fuel fabrication plant would most likely result from possible accidents associated with potentially harmful chemicals rather
- than from radioactive materials. Thus, the Westinghouse NFCS can be considered in the same class as any other manufacturing plant where segrwficant quantitites of nonredioactive chemicals are processed. The location and quantity of chemicals stored onsite are listed in Table 4.16.
Category-1. Category 1 accidents within the manufacturing buildmg in the chemical processing area would be typified by minor liquid spills (i.e., 0.04 m3 (10 gol) er less) of acids, ammoruum diuranate, uranyl nitrate, and oil. Operators can quickly detect these spiHe and take corrective action (such as isoletion of the looking section). The spilled liquids would be quickly cleened up and transferred to appropriate waste containers or, if appropriate, returned to the process for recovery. No floor drains are present in the processmg area of the main plant buildmg; therefore, there would t' be no release to the environment through either airborne ce liquid pathways. Category 1 accidents external to the manufacturing b;ilding that are likely to happen during the 3 life of the plant include minor process-equipment leeks or sman spills (0.2 m (50 gol) or less). A leek of this type would be located rapidly by ope stors, and corrective action would be implemented. Another Category 1 accident could result from the release of chemicals by a leek in 1 the liner of a waste-holdmg lagoon. Such a reloose, as in the post (Sect. 3.5.2.2), would contammete underlying soil and groundwater. The contammated groundwater would discharge into Sunset Lake and the small onsite pond. Dependog on the magnitude of the release and the contamments present, concentrations could rise to levels that are hazardous to squatic life. 4
L i I TeMe 4.16. Leeseien and guenetaies of huk gas and Equid ehendeel eserego et the Womeinghouse NFCS < f Ouenney sensed at 1800 kmf/ veer em cepemey Searage incomon 8 Tank aime Toemi fe lb ! Ism 8 ige 4 l Anunenman hydrande glome Tank fann 5.700 20,700
- Anhydrous anunone Tank fann 18.000 e0.000 j Sodwn hydrande Tankfann 20.000 t
IGeic add 100%) Tank form 5.000 10.000 I Hydrogen Gems Tank fann 18.000 36.000 2.044.000 l Nieregon Ngust Tank form 6.000 12.000 541.000 ) Argon local Tank form 800 1.200 116.000 1 Hatum Equus Tank form 276.000 . Uransurn W=ulo Ouende pod 1,100.000 l Hydrolksonc acid Ouende pod 20.000; ! 7.500 j Uranyl suorate Equut Ouende plant b 30.000 ! Lane (CaOl Weses wesenent hopper 200.000 1 Zinc steermee kioide plant 5.000 l Acetone 55-gel drums foil housel 825 ! Sullunc acid South pad 700 1 tes newn. + 451 i Maric acid 168%) 55 1pel drums increh pad 275 3 Munnec acid (22% HC4 55 1pel drums inerth pod 800
- Sodium carbonese Ploeng room 800
? r== sode (50% NaOH North pod (1004 drums) 500 { "H
- Nides suNote Plemng room 500 WTU = meenc cons of urannsm.
, Sowce: Wesenghouse 1983 Table 7.3; R. Fischer. Wesenghouse, personal commumcoman with S. Wyngerden. ! DetC. March 25,1985. i 1
i 4-33 Category 2. Category ' 2 = car 4=nts occwring in the chemical storage areas outside the l i, ic_ti-ing buikkng could result in complete or partial emptymg of a buk chemmal storage tank. Such a rolesse is considered very unlikely hac==== storage veneels are desig.,ed using good engmeenne practices and are fined according to safe operating procedures. To exponence a ruptwo l or failure, some unforeseen catastrophic disaster would have to occur, or all current safety systems 4 would have to deteriorate simultaneously. Nevertheless, the most conceivable release scenarios involve (1) exposure of the storage vessels to an intenee, prolonged fire with =*=ary=nt release of l vapors through preeewe relief valves and (2) tank rupture c=amari by a propectile from an adecent i explosion. As part of the 1975 plant improvement program, protective dikes that could contain 8 ! approxanel,136 m (36,000 gol) of a liquid rolesse in the event of complete tank failure were 4 pieced around the chemmel tank farm. The largest bulk storego tank is for hydrofluoric acid and has a capacity of 76 m 3(20,000 gol). The dikes were further upgraded in 1982 to aneure that leeks do not reach the groundwater. Any overflow would run through the storm dramage ditch to Upper Sunset Lake, where it would mix and flow into Lower Sunset Lake vie a causeway. Lower
- Sunset Lake drains into Mill Creek, whch eventually enters the Congeree River vie a meendenng 4
route of about 11 km (7 miles). In the event of a major spill, the upper lake can be closed off at i the causeway and then diluted by increening the diverted flow of incommg Mill Creek water. The continuous chemmal monitoring and prompt dilution of these waters can prevent significant liquid rolesses to the offeite environment.
- Airborne concentrations of vapors in the release aree could be excessive, but after dispersion in i the atmosphere, concentrations at the site boundary would not likely require isoletion of offeite areas or temporary evacuation of residents. Some of the poter.tial vapors, such as ammonia and hydrogen fluonde, have pungent suffocating odors whch would force capable people away and ed l in limitmg offsite exposures.
Category 3. These accidents are catastophic in magnitude and are not expected in the plent's lifetime. All are extremely unlikely; they would involve either container rupture, failure, explosion, fire, natural disaster, or an extremely improbable cntcelity-type accident. The potentiel coca=ry=nces of such accidents have been discussed previously, i ! 4.3.3 Possible Conflicts Between the Proposed Action and the Objectives of Federal, flegionel, State, and Local Plens and Policies ! At this time, the staff is not aware of any conflict between the proposed action and the ! objectives of federal, regional, state, or local piens, poimies, or controls for the action proposed as long as proper agencies are contacted, proper appimations are sutmtted, and proper monitoring ( and trutigatory measures are taken to protect the environment and pubic health and safety. 4.3.4 Effects on Urban Quality, Historical and Culturel Resources, and Society i The environmental effects of the proposed license renewal action as discussed above are ! considered to be insignifmant. There may be adverse effects on urban quality if reactor fuel were not available The facility has not affected historical or cultural resources. The short-term societal effects , during operation are and will be mmemal, and there will be mmemal effects after decommissioning I and reclamation because the site then will be required to meet federal standards for unrestricted use. . i [
._ e . . - . . _ _ - . ~ . . . ..,,-._m _-._..x__ . _ _ , _ _ . _ , . _ _ _ _ _m.. . _ _ _ , _ . - _ _ _
4-34 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 4 ACGlH (Amencen Conference of Govemmental Industrial Hygernets).' 1982. Threshodd Umit Values
- fior Chemmel Substances in Work Air Adapted by ACGM W f 982, ACG1H, Cmcinneti.
AEC (U.S. Atomic Energy Cc.... ' ,).1972. Directorate of Reguistory Standards, Environmensef
- Survey of Transporteeion of Radoectin Metenein to and kom Nucient Power Plants WASH-1238, December.
AEC (U.S. Atomic Energy Co,,-,- ' ,).1974. Directorate of Lloenomy, Environmentaf Survey of the Maruum Fuel CH:ds, WASH-1248, Sect. E, Washington, D.C., April. Devis and Floyd, Inc., Consulong Engmeers.1982. Groundwever Hpkodogy,' Westinghouse Elecanic i Corpuretion, Columbus, South - Caroins, Contractor's Report to Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Greenwood, S.C.' Deutsch, W. J., N. E. Bell, 8. W. Mercer, R. J. Some, J. W. Shade, and D. R. Tweeton.1984. I Aguder Mestoration Techniques fior h-situ Lasch Urarnum Aenes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commesson, NUREG/CR-3104, Washington, D.C. Dunrung D. E., et al.1981. Estimates of hiemel Dose Equhelent to 22 Target Organs for nochonucsdes occumne in Routme nonsenes kom Nucaser ruel-Cyces Facmaise, vol.111, ORNL/NUREG/TM-190/V3, Ook Ridge National Laboratory, October. (Also published as NUREG/CR-0150.) EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).1973. Water Gun #ty Cnterie 1972, Report of the l' Committee on Water Quelty Criterie, National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of Engmeenng, EPA-R 3-73-033, March. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection " Agency). 1976. Gun #ty Cntens For Water, EPA } 440/9-76-023, Washmgton, D.C. ^ EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).1977. 'Tetle 40-Protection of the Environment, Part 190, Environmental Radiation Protecten Standards for Nuclear Power Operatens," Fed. j #epist. 42(9) 2558-2561, January 13. i EPA. (U.S. Environmental Protecten Agency). 1980. Manuel of Protscrive Action Guides and 3 Protectiw Actions for Nuedser beidents. Revnion, 520/1-75-001, June. Eve, l. S.1964. "Some Suggested Maximum Perrmaadda Single intakes of Uransum," Heefth Phys. 10(11). FWPCA (Federal Water Pollution Control Administration).1968. Water Ous#ty Critons, Report of - i i' the National Technical Advisory Commettee to the Secretary of the Interior, Weehmgton, D.C., April 1. Hoenes, G. R., and J. K. Soldet.1977. Age-Speerfic Radietion Dose Commitment Factors for a J One-Yeer Chronic htake, NUREG-0172, Bettelle Pacific Northwest Laboratories, November.
]
lCRP (International Co,,..! : :-, on Radmiogical Protection).1959. Naport of Committee # on l , Perrrussede Dose for hiemnI 8adiation, ICRP Publication 2, Pergemon, New York. 1 Klett, M. G., and J. 8. Galeeki. 1975. FAere Systems Study, Task No. 3, LMSC-HREC TR D390190, Lockheed Moedes and Space Company, Inc., Huntsville, Ala., prepared for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Research Triangle Park, N.C., Mey. ! Lt::::2,ap, A. J., et al.1958. "The Toxicity of Hexavelent Uranium Following Intravenous Admistration," Am. J. Mosntgenot 79, 83. l Mohime, J., L Schwendimen, and Redesch.1968. Piutorwum Medesse Stuchos N: Modesse kom Hosted Piutornum Saaring Powers, BNWL-786, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, ' Weehmgton.
- m 4_-as,r_d4 ,
--<o - e. 4 4 & - -a 2 A- +m*JLA-4 -. -h-ma m a*a+--b 4-35 4
1 ! Miehme, J., and L Schwendwnen.1973. Fractional Airbome Redoene of (kanann (Represoneing ! PAstonnan) Dunng the Summg of Contammeted Wastes,~ BNWL-1730, Pacific Northwest ! j Laboratory, thchiend, Washmgton. NAS (Notional Academy of Sciences). -1971. Fluondee, Commettee on Beological Effects of l l Atmosphenc Pollutants, Washmgton, D.C. National Research Council.1979. Ammons, University Park Press, Baltwnore. NRC (U.S. Nucieer Reguistory Commesson). 1975. Environmental Survey of Transportation of Rah 1rwe Metensis to and from Nuedser Power Plants, NUREG-75/038, Suppl. 1, l Washmgton, D.C.', April. I NRC- (U.S. Nucieer Reguietory Comn===an). 1977a. Environmental impact Apprainel of the Weetinghoune Nucener Fuel Caiumban Site (NFCS) Commercial Nucieer Fuel Fahncetion Plent. Columbe, South Corodne, NHC, Office of Nuclear Metenal Safety and Safeguards, Devieson of l Fuel Cycle and Metenal Safety, Washmgton, D.C. (NR-FM-013). NRC (U.S. Nuclear Reguistory Co.v v :f -n).1977b. Methods for Estimating Atmosphenc Transport and Depersen of Geneous Etnuents in Routme Re6enees From Light-Water-Coceed Reactors, 4 Reguistory Guide 1.111, July. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commession).1977c. Cadcudetion of Annuel Doses to Men kom i Routine Roemenes of Reactor Etnuents for the Purpose of Evaluating Comphence with 10 CFR 1 Part 50, Appendr 1, Reguietory Guide 1.109, Merch 1976 and Reveen 1, October 1977, i NRC (U.S. Nuclear Reguistory Commmason). 1977d. Repudetory and Other Responsidnes As Redeled to Transportation Accidents, NUREG-0179, Washogton, D.C., June. j NRC (U.S. Nuclear Reguietory Co.... " =,). 1977e. Final Environmental Statement on the
- Transportation of Madoective Meterief by Air and Other Modes, NUREG-0170, vols.1 and 2, l Washmgton, D.C., December,
! - NRC (U.S. Nuclear Reguietory Co...i f ->).1979. Assumptions Used for Evaduating the Potentaal Radoiogacel Coneequences of Accndental Nucieer Cntscenty in a Urannum Fuel Fabncation Plant, { Reguietory Guide 3.34, Reveson July 1. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Reguietory Co.T rf- ':-n). 1980. Radodogscal Assessr,ent of bdviduel Dose - Reeulang kom Routme Operation-Demonstration of Compennce with 40 CFR 190,
===ar=ted with Amendment 4 to License No. SNM-1107, January 22.
' NRC (U.S. Nucteer Regulatory Commesson). 1981. " Uranium Fuel Licensing Branch Techneel + Position, Deposal or Onsite Storage of Thorium or Uranium Wastes from Past Operations,"
- - Fed. Regist.,144, p. 52061, October 23.
NRC (U.S. Nuclear Reguietory Commesson). 1984. A Repudetory Analyse & Emergency Preparedsees & Fuel Cycle and Other Redonctin Meterial Lk--::: Draft Report, NRC, Office of Nuclear Reguietory Research, November. l Sex, N. I.1963. Dengerous Proportes of bdustriel Meteriods, Reinhold. SC-DHEC (South Caroline Department of Health and Environmental Control).1983a. Letter from - J. F. White, SC-HDEC, to M. J. Rhodes, Nuclear Regulatory Commesson, November 28 (Docket No. 70-1151).
- SC-OHEC (South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control). 1983b. Water i Clone $ cation Standards System (Reguistion 6168) and Streem Close$ cations (Reguietion 61-69) for the State of South Caronne, Office of Environmental Quality Control, Columbe, S.C.
1 Shum. E.1981. Environmental Review of Westmghouse Ucense Amendnent (SNM-1107) to
' Upgrade Dry Conversion Line to Their CNFP in Codumbe, South Caronina, U.S. Nucieer Reguietory Co.. .- ::':- staff memorandum, March 9. :
l I
~.-n--n,,,-,--- - - ~ , . - . , .-m.-,n,em.,,....,.-.----,-- - - , - . - , , . . . , . , , - . _ - - - ~ . - . --,+.-,,,n.-~.-- ~ , - - . - - - - , -
4-36 Sunehme, I., (ei).1972. Handock of Analyncal Tomcology, The Chemmal Rubber Company. Sutter, S., and J. Mishwne 1981. Aerosais Generated by Free Fadf Spigs of Powders and Soducons in Static Air, NUREG/CR-3093, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission USGS (U.S. Geologmal Survey).1981. Water Nosources Dets for South Corodins Water Dets Naport SC-8 T- f, Reston, Va. Westmghouse.1975. Wesehphouse Nuodeer Fusi Codumine Site Evaduselon Neport, aulmutted to the U.S. Nuclear Pegulatory Commemon for renewal of SNM-1107, March 1 (Docket No. 70-1151). Westinghouse 1981. I;conee Amendnent Appecation to U> grade FacAty (letter from A[ T. Sabo, l Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to R. G. Page, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co.... January 9, Docket No. 70-1151). Westinghouse.1982. Letter from M. D'Amore, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to H. Gibeori, South Caroline Department of Health and Environmental Control, December 7. Westinghouse. 1983. Westinghouse Eisctric Corporrtion, Ohdete for ' Envirorwnental knpact Appraisal, NFD Pient, Codumbes, S.C. (Docket No. 70-1151) April. Westinghouse.1984. Letter from R. W. Fischer, Westinghouse Electnc Corporation, .to Mark J. Rhodes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co.T.. -'2--., in response to NRC questions concerning the appleant's f.5dste for Environmental Anpact Appraisal (Docket No. 70-1151), Feb. 20. 4
)
i 4 l l l
r
^;:-.c.:n A l i
METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR CALCULATING f RADIATION DOSE COMMITMENTS FROM THE RELEASE OF RADIONUCLIOES l
+
My a t' l h J s e l
.)
i
- -- _ - . - . _ . -. _ - _ . . _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ___ _ _ __ l
Appendix A METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR CALCULATING RADIATION DOSE COMMITMENTS FROM THE RELEASE OF RADIONUCLIDES A.1 METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR AIRBORNE RELEASES A.1.1 Methodology The radiation dose commitments resu: ting f*om the atmospheric releases of radionuclides sre calculated using the AIRDOS-EPA computer code (Moore et al.1979). The methodology is designed to estimate the radionuclide concentrations in air; rates of deposition on ground surfaces; ground-surface concentrations; intake rates via inhalation of air and ingestion of meat, milk, and fresh vegetables; and radiation doses to man from the airborne releases of radionuclides. With the code, the highest estimated dose to an mdnndual at the nearest residence and the doses to the population living within an 80-km (50-mile) radius of the plant site can be calculated. The doses may be summarized by radionuclide, exposura mode, or significant organ of the body. In addition, site-specific concentrations of radionuclides in the air obtained at ar near the nearest resident property can be used to calculate the highest dose to an individual for comparison with the . dose calculated from the atmosphere releases. Many of the basic incremental parameters used in AIRDOS-EPA are conservative; that is, values are chosen to maximize intake by man. Many factors that would reduce the radiation dose, such as shielding provided by dwellings and time spent away from the reference location, are not considered. The residence time and portion of food produced and consumed at the nearest residence are specifie<j in Sect. 4.2.5. Meteorological dispersion factors, X/0, were estimated using the Gaussian plume model and diffusion coefficients for Pasquill-type turbulence (Stade 1968; Sangendorf and Etnier 1974). Radionuclide concentrations in meat, milk, and vegetables consumed by man are estimated by coupling the output of the atmospheric transport models with the terrestrial food chain model in NRC Regulatory Guida 1.109 (NRC 1977al. A.1.2 Radiation exposure pathways and dose conversion factors Environmental transpcrt links the source of release to the receptor by numerous exposure pathways. Figure A.1 is a diagram of the most important pathways that result in the exposure of man to radioactivity released to the environment. The resulting radiation exposures may be either external or intemal. External exposures occur when the radiation source is outside the irradiated body, and internal exposures are those from radioactive materials within the irradiated body. Factors for converting the radiation exposures to estimates of dose are calculated using the t latest dosimetric criteria of the Briternational Commission on Radiological Protection (ICRP) and other recognized authorities. External dose conversion factors. Releases of radioactive gases and particulates to the atmosphere may result in external doses by exposure to and/or immersion in the plume and by expoaure to contaminated land surfaces. The dose conversion factors are summarized by Kocher (1981), and those used in this report are shown in Table A.1. A-3 _. .., , , x .
r E5 0044 -g DIRECT ATMOSPHERC AQUATC -- IRRADIATK)N RELEASES RELEASES 5
/
1 - 8 ir 1r O A IMMERSION e SUBMERSION 1r 7 MAN EXTERNAL -; m" ATMOSPHERC AQUATC _ RELEASES RELEASES
- f f :
5 - f SOIL S _ 5 ,<_ - h t 1r
\ 1r TERRESTRIAL POTABLE FISH AND VEGETATION
^ WATER SEAFOODS l"
% I' 4 '
. / =
q 8
/ .
,r w MAN INTERNAL -
=
Fig. A.1. Pathways for exposure to man from releases of radioactive effluents. lM, =2
=ii A-5 %
ni Table A.1. Dose conversion factors for external d-exposure pathways j ! Organ Radionuclide g Total body Bone Kidney Lung : Exposure to ground surfaces (millirem / year per pCl/cm') q 234 2 2 U 7.1 X 10 3.0 X 10 1.0 X 102 3,7 x jo , assU 1.5 X 105 2.1 X 105 1.3 X 105 1.4 X 105 23e u 6.4 X 102 2.4 X 10 7.0 X 10' 2.4 X 102 ass 5.9 X 10' u 5.7 X 102 2.1 X 10 2 1.2 X 102 4 E immersion in air (millirem / year per pCi/cm8) 234 0 6.8 X 105 7.1 X 10 5 3.7 X 105 4.1 X 105 _ 23sU 6.8 X 10s 9.4 X 10e 5.9 X 10 5 6.3 X 10 5 assU 5.3 X 10 5 5.4 X 105 2.6 X 105 3.0 X 10 5 N - 23s u 4.6 X 10 5 4.5 X 105 2.2 X 105 2.5 X 10 5 Submersion in water (millirem / year per pCl/cm8) #
-E 234 -w
- U 1.7 X 103 1.7 X 10 3 8.9 X 10 9.8 X 102 5
assU 1.5 X 10 2.1 X 105 1.3 X 10 5 1.4 X 105 i ase 23s u 1.3 X 108 1.3 X to' 6.3 X 102 7.3 X 10 2 ( u 1.1 X 103 1.1 X 10 3 5.3 X to 6.1 X 102 = l Source: D. C. Kocher, Dose-Rate Conversoon Factors for Extemal l Exposure to Photons and Electrorw, ORNL/NUREG-79. Oak Ridge _ l National Laboratory, August 1981. i 2 ! d -
- internal dose conversion factors. Factors for converting internal radiation exposure to estimates of dose have been computed based on recent models (ICRP 1966; Eve 1966) and are summarized by Dunning et al. (1981). The dose conversion factors used in this report are presented in '5 Tables A.2 and A.3. These factors are input data into the AIRDOS-EPA computer code, which is a used to calculate the dose from inhaled and ingested radionuclides. 5
'd 3
A.1.3 Radiation dose to the individual j intemal exposure cnntinues as long as radioactive material remains in the body, which may be longer than the duration of the individual's resedence in the contaminated environment. The best __3 estimates of the internal dose resulting from an intake are obtained by integrating over the e remaining Efetime of the exposed individual; such estimates are called " dose commitments." The _ remaining Efetime is assumed to be 50 years for an adult. i External doses are assumed to be annual doses. The dose rate above the contaminated land , surface is estimated for a height of 1 m. Following the initial deposition of radionuclides, the y potential for exposure of man may persist, depending on the influence of environmental 3 E
. y a
s
A-6 Table A.2. Dose conversion factors for Inhalation exposure pathways---AMAD* = 0.3 pm Committed dose equivalent (rem /gCi) Radionuclide Total body Bone Kidney Lung - - Class D 234 0 6.4 8.7 X 10' 1.9 X 10' 1.6 23sU 5.8 7.9 X 10' 1.7 X 10' 1.4 23sU 6.1 8.2 X 10' 1.8 X 10' 1.5 238 U 5.7 7.8 X 10' 1.7 X 10' 1.4 Class Y 23*U 2.9 X 10' 1.3 X 10' 2.8 9.3 X 102 assU 2.6 X 10' 1.2 X 10' 2.5 8.4 X 102 23e u 2.7 X 10' 1.2 X 10' 2.6 8.S X 10 2 23e u 2.5 X 10' 1.1 X 10' 2.5 8.3 X 10 2
*AMAD = Activity median aerodynamic diameter Source: D. E. Dunning, Jr., G. G. Killough, S. R. Bernard, J. G.
Pleasant, and P. J. Walsh, Estimates of Intemal Dose Equivalent to 22 Target Organs for RadionucEdes Occurring in Routine Releases from Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities, Vol. III, ORNL/NUREG/TM-190/V3, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October 1981. Table A.3. Dose conversion factors for ingestion exposure pathways Committed dose equivalent (rem /gCi) Radionuclide Total body Bone Kidney Lung Soluble 24 U 5.8 X 10-' 7.8 1.7 1.7 X 10-2
'35 0 5.2 X 10-' 7.1 1.5 1.6 X 10-2 23e u 5.4 X 10-' 7.4 1.6 1.6 X 10-2 23sU 5.1 X 10-' 7.0 1.5 1.5 X 10-2 Insoluble 23*U 2.4 X 10-2 3.1 X 10-' 6.7 X 10-2 6.9 X 10-*
23s u 2.2 X 10-2 2.8 X 10-' 6.1 X 10-2 7.4 X 10-* 23eV 2.2 X 10-2 3.0 X 10-' 6.3 X 10-2 6.5 X 10-* 23s l u 2.1 X 10-2 2.8 X 10-' 6.0 X 10-2 6.1 X 10-* l Source: D. E. Dunning, Jr., G. G. Killough, S. A. Bemard, J. G. Pleasant, and P. J. Walsh, Estimates of intemal Dose Equivalent to 22 Target Organs for Radionuclides Occurring in Routine Releases from Nuclear Fuel Cycle Facilities, Vol. //l, ORNL/NUREG/TM-190/V3, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October 1981, )
A-7 redistribution, long after the plume leaves the area. Concentrations of radionuclides at the point of deposition normally are reduced t:y infiltration of radionuclides into the soil, by loss of soil particles because of erosion, and by transport in surface water and in groundwater. When the effects of these processes cannot be quantified, a conservative estimate of the dose resulting from external exposure to a contaminated surface is obtained by assuming that the radionuclide concentrations are diminished by radioactive decay only. The dose is estimated for individuals at the nearest site boundary or at the nearest residence. The intake parameters used for individual dose determination are shown in Table A.4 and then modified by site-specific estimates of food consumption in Sect. 4.2.5. Table A.4. Intake parameters (adult)* used in lieu of site-specific data Maximum exposed Average exposed Pathway , g g Vegetables. kg/ year 281' 190 Milk, L/ year 310 110 Meat, kg/ year 110 95 Drinking water, L/ year 730 370 Fish, kg/ year 21 6.9 inhalation, m 3/ year 8000 8000
*From NRC Regulatory Guide 1.109.
6 Used for calculating population doses.
'This value includes leafy vegetables.
A.1.4 Radiation dose to the population The total dose received by the exposed population is estimated by the summation of individual dose estimates within the population. The area within the 80-km (50-mile) radius of the site is divided into 16 sectors (22.5* each) and into a number of annuti. The average dose for an individual in each division is estimated, that estimate multiplied by the number of persons in the division, and the resulting products are summed across the entire area. The unit used to express the population dose is man-rem. For this report, the population dose estimates are calculated for a population composed entirely of adults. The dose conversion factors and intake parameters used for calculating population doses are the same as those used for the individual doses. A.2 METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR AQUEOUS RELEASES The methodology used for calculating the 50-year dose commitments to man from the release of radionuclides to an aquatic environment is described in detail by Dunning et al. (1981). Sample problems and bioaccumulation factors for radionuclides in freshwater fish are also given by Dunning et al. (1981). AQUAMAN is a computer code (Shaeffer and Etnier 1979) that can also be used for calculating similar dose commitments from exposures to aquatic pathways.
A-8 Three exposure pathways are considered in dose determination: water ingestion, fish ingestion, and submersion in water (swimming). The internal dose conversion factors for converting exposure to dose are discussed in Sect. A.1.2, and the factors are shown in Table A.3. The external dose conversion factors are shown in Table A.1. Intake paramete's are shown in Table A.4. A.3 ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION The atmospheric dispersion model used in estimating the atmospheric transport to the terrestrial environment is discussed in detail in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.111, Rev.1, (NRC 1977b). For particulate release, the meteorological X/O values are used in conjunction with dry deposition velocities and scavenging coefficients to estimate air concentrations and steady state ground concentrations. The atmospheric dispersion model estimates the concentration of radionuclides in air at ground surfaces as a function of distance and direction from the point of release. Averages of annual meteorological data from the site or f om the nearest weather station, if suitable, are supplied as input for the model. Radioactive decay during the plume travel is taken into account in the AIRDOS-EPA code (Moore et al.1979). Daughters produced during plume travel are calculated and added to the source term. The area surrounding the plant site is divided into 16 sectors by compass direction (Sect. 3.3). The meteorological X/O values (shown in Table 3.2) are csiculated for the midpoint of each sector. Concentrations in the air for each sector are used to calculate dose via inhalation and submersion in the air. The ground deposits result in external dose and, in addition, are assimilated into food and contribute dose upon ingestion via the food chain. The meteorological data required for the calculations are joint frequency distributions of wind velocity and direction summarized by stability class. Meteorological data from the nearest weather station are used to calculate the concentrations of radionuclides at a reference point per unit of source strength. Depletion of the airborne plume as it is blown downwind is accounted for in the AIRDOS-EPA code by taking into account the deposition on surfaces by dry deposition, scavenging, and radioactive decay. REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX A Dunning. D. E., Jr., et al.1981. Estimates of Intemal Dose Equivalent to 22 Target Organs for Radionuclides Occurring in Routine Releases from Nuclear Fuel-Cycle Facaities, Vol. Ill, ORNL/NUREG/TM-190/V3, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October. (Also published as NUREG/CR-0150.) Eve, I. G.1966. "A Review of the Physiology of the Gastrointestinal Tract in Relation to Radiation Doses from Radioactive Materials," Health Phys. 12,131-62 ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection) Task Group on Lung Dynamics.1966.
" Deposition and Retentico Models for Internal Dosimetry of the Human Respiratory Tract" Health Phys. 12,173-207.
Killough, G. G., and L R. McKay, eds.1976. A Methodo,Ugy for Calculating Radiation Doses from Radioactivity Released to the Environment, ORNL-4992, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, March. Kocher, D. C. 1981. Dose-Rate Conversion Factors for Extemal Exposure to Photons and Electrons, ORNL/NUREG-79, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, August.
A-9 Moore, R. E., et al. 1979. AIRDOS-EPA. A Computerized Methodology for Estimating Environmental Concentrations and Dose to Man from Airborne Releases of Radionuclides, ORNL-5532, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, June. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1977a. " Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 1," Regulatory Guide 1.109, Office of Standards Development, Washington, D.C. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1977b. " Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases From Light-Water-Cooled Reactors," Regulatory Guide 1.111, July. Sangendorf, J. F.1974. A Program Evaluating Atmospheric Dispersion from a Nuclear Power Station, NOAA Technical Memo ERL-ARL-42. Shaeffer, D. L, and E. L Etnier. 1979. AQUAMAN-A Computer Code for Calculating Dose Commitments to Man from Aqueous Releases of Radionuclides, ort.L/TM-6618. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, February. Stade, D. H., ed. 1968. Meteorology and Atomic Energy, pp. 97-104, U.S. Atomic Energy Commission, July.
Appendix B NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT FOR WESTINGHOUSE COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR FUEL FABRICATION PLANT
e
==
=
b --
- G B-3 ;
[ i 1
- South Carolina Department of Health 2
! and Environmental Contr'ol 1 Seerd Menes H. Clerkson, Jr, Chairense = 2600 Bud $ireet Columba. s C. 29201 /h, , '
- g. \
i* Wurd W. Dngles. M.D., vice<hastman sneurs P. Neesis, secretary 7- = ' h Gers:d A.Kaynard oves L Drady.Jr. 4 Commmeiseer y,,,,' A. sprudt. Jr. ~ p .wrt s. Jad ea. M D % who K He.ser. M.D. ti M August 29, 1984 C _e
' =
CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED ] [ Mr. M. D' Amore, Plant Manager N Westinghouse Electric Company 2 P.O. Drawer R Re: NPDES Permit #SC0001848 " Columbia, SC 29250 Westinghouse Elec/ Columbia Plant Richland County y E t
Dear Permittee:
=,,
y Enclosed is the modification to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination' System :
~. (NPCES) Permit for the above-referenced facility.
j This modification will become issued and effective on the effective date specified ( in the modification, provided that no request for as adjudicatory hearing and/or i legal decision is subsequently filed with the Department. In the event that such q y a request is filed, the contested provisions of the modification will be stayed 1 l6 and will not become effective until the administrative review process is complete. -d I All uncontested provisions of the modification will be considered issued and d effective on the effective date set out in the modification and must be complied a with by the facility. y I
, if you wish to request an administrative adjudicatory hearing, such request must a be made in accordance witn Regulation 61-72 Volume 25, S.C. Code of Laws,1976, as amended. As required by this regulation, two (2) copies of the request must a be served on the South Carolina Board of Health and Environmental Control. 2600 A
~
Bull Street, Columbia, South Carolina 29201, within fifteen (15) days following " receipt of this Permit. Service may be effected by personal delivery or by first class mail. 2 The following elements must, at a minimum, be included with the request:
- 1. A title indicating the nature of the proceedings and the parties I involved; ;
- 2. The complete name and address of the party filing the pleading and, if applicable, the organization (s) or interests which he represents; EN-
- 3. If the requesting partv is to be represented by counsel, the name and address of the attorney; =
- 4. A clear and concise statement of the requesting party's affected Q interest; _
O 7
=
S
=
2
l B-4 l s- rl' GOARO Wdliam M. Wdson, Chairman
,b J. Lorin Mason, Jr. M.O.. Vice<haerman h I. DeCuencey Newman Secretary y l Leonard W. Dougf as. M.D.
George G. Granam. D.O.S. h a i h] Michael W. Mims Barbara P. Nuessle [ CCMMISSIONER Rocert S. Jackson, M.D. C
- 2600 8uft Street Columeia. S. C. 29201 Permit No. SC0001848 AUTHORIZATION TO DISCPJutGE UNDER IHE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTDi In cocpliance with the provisions of the Pollution Control Act of South Carolina (S.C. Sections 48-1-10 g m.,1976) and with the provisions of the Federal Clean Water Act (PL 92-500, as amended by PL 95-217 Titles III, I7 and 7) 33 U.S.C.
1251 g m ., the "Act," Westinghouse ElectricCorporation is authorized to discharge from a facility located at S.C. Highway 48 Columbia, Richland County, South Carolina to receiving waters named Congaree River in accordance with effluent limitations, monitoring requitecents and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, and III hereof. This permit shall become effective on JAN 1 1982 This permit and the authorization to discharge shall expire at midnight, DEC 311986
**** DEC 4 1981 .
Bureau of Wastavater and Stream Quality Control
%dificat ion Date: SEP 1 084 f _ g hjyy pg.,
Bur u of dater' Pollut rol A. EFFLUENT LlHITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS
/
During the period beginning on the ef fective date and lasting through the expiration date, the permittee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number (s)001: sanitary & chemical process wastewater Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below: Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements 4 Effluent Characteristics Other Units (Specify) kg/ day (Ibs/ day) Measurement Sample Daily Avg. Daily Max. Daily Avg. Daily Max. Frequency Type Daily continuous Recorder Flow-m3/ day (HGD)
- 10 mg/l 15 mg/l 1/ week 24Hr. Composite Oil & Crease -
03 11(25) 23(50) - - 1/ week 24Hr. CWosi te b B00 5 15/32 29/64 . . 1/ week 24Hr. Conposite Total Suspended Sollds
- Daily 24Hr. Composite Fluoride 18(40) 36(80) -
- Dally 24Hr. Composite NH3 -N 27(60) 54(120) -
200/100 int 400/100 ml 1/ month Grab Fecal Collform N3 il% 4 Ne l The pH shall not be less than 6.9 standard units nor greater than 10.5 standard units and shall be monitored : daily by continuous recorder. There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. M 8 Samples taken in com liance with the monitoring requirements specified above shall be taken at the 2
=
following location (s : At or near the outfall =
B-6 i PART I Page 3 of 10 Par =it No. SC0001848 , B. SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE l
- 1. The per:1ctee shall achieve cocpliance vtch the effluent limitatices specified for discharges in accordance with the folloving schedule:
IUA
- 2. No later than 14 calandar dars followi=g a data identified is the ateve schedule of ccmpliance, the per=1ttee shall sub it either a report of pro-gress or, in the case of specific actions being required by identified dates, a written notice of ecopliance or noncompliance. In the latter case, the no-tice shall include the cause cf concompliance, any remedial actions taken, and the pro'o ability of nesting the next scheduled requirement.
B-7 PART I Page 4 of 10 Permit No. SC0001848 C. MONITORING AND REPORTING
- 1. Reptes tM:1tive Septing Samples and measurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge.
- 2. Reportira)
Monitoring results obtained during the previous 3 months shall be su:marized Tor each month and reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report Form postmarked no later than the 28th day of the month following the com-plated reporting period. The first report is due on APR 28 M' Duplicate signed copies of these, and all other reports required nerein shall be submitted to the state at the following address: South Carolina Department of Health and Enviornmental Control ATTN: NPDES Permits Section 2600 Bull Street Columbia, S.C. 29201
- 3. Defuti4Wne
- a. The " daily average" discharge means the total discharge by weight during a calendar month divided by the number of days in the month that the pro-duction or coimnercial facility was operating. Where less than daily sam-pling is required by this permit, the daily average discharge shall be deter ined by the su=astion of all the measured daily discharges by weight divided by the nu=ber of days during the calendar month when the measure-ments were made.
- b. The " daily maximum" discharge means :he total discharge by weight during any calendar day.
- 4. Test P4.ccc h tta Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to regulations pc lished pursuant to Section 304(g) of the Act, under which such procedures may be required.
- 5. Reco.tding of Rzaalts For each measurement or sa=ple taken pursuant to the requirements of this porn the pernittes shall record the fellowing information:
- a. The exact place, date, and time of sampling;
- b. The dates the analyses were performed;
- c. The person (s) who performed the analyses;
=
i B-8 1
=
PART I . Page 5 of 10 m Per=it No.SC0001848 - 1s-
- d. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
- e. The result's of all required analyses. 2
- 6. Mditannt MortLtoring by Pvtn.t. tee &
E If the permittee monitors any pollutant at the location (s) designated herein = more frequently than required by this permit, using approved analytical meth- ; ods are specified above, the reedts of such monitoring shall be included in = the calculation and reporting of the values required in the Discharge Moni- I toring Report Form l. Such increased frequency shall also be ] indicated. .. 2
- 7. Records Rt.tention -
All records and information resulting from the mocitoring activities required " by this permit including n11 records of analyses performed and calibration and - maintenance of instrumentation and recordings from continuous monitoring in-strumentation shall be retained for a* minimum of three (3) years, or longer if " requested by the Department of Health and Environmental Control.
- -g E
m M n k M
-E E
^
E 6
~
3 2
- - ~ .. - . .. . .. . .., _. .. . . . . , , , , _ . - . . . . , . . . . . . _. , , . . . . - ., . .. ..
s B-9 7 PARTII
=
Page 6 of 10 - Permit No. SC0001848 a A. F#EEfi MIEE 9
- 1. Change / in Dischange q All discharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and [i conditions of this permit. The discharge of any pollutant identified in -
g [ this permit more frequently than or at a level in excess of that author-1:ed shall constitute a violation of the permit. Any anticipated facility j expansions, production increases, or process modifications which will result g in new, different, or increased discharges of pollutants must be reported ** 3 by submission of a new NPDES application or, if such changes will not violate ] the affluent limitations specified in this permit, by notice to the permit 4 issuing authority of such changes. Following such notice, the permit may be d modified to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited. j
- 2. Moncompflar.cc Notification If, for any reason, the permittee does not comply with or will be unable ;;
to comply with any daily maximum effluent, limitation specified in this permit, the permittee shall provide the Department of Health and Environmental - Control with the following information, in writing, within five (5) days of
?
becoming aware of such condition: l
- a. A description of the discharge and cause of noncompliance; and h $
E 2 '~ b. The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and timest or, if cot - corrected, the anticipated time the noncompliance is expected to continue, and steps being taken to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the nonccmplying P - discharge. [ -
?
V 3. Facild.ies OpeAatwn Q - 4 The permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and operate m [ as efficiently as possible all treatment or control facilities or systems _ installed or used by the permittee.
- 4. Adveue Impact j' The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize any adverse impact b
to navigable waters resulting frem noncompliance with any effluent limitations q* (; specified in this permit, including such accelerated or additional monitoring - V as necessary to determine the nature and impact of the noncomplying discharge. h - p 5. Bypassing - r 1 Any diversion from or bypass.of facilities necessary to maintain compliance 1 C with the terms and conditions of this permit is prohibited, except (1) where unavoidable to prevent loss of life or severe property damage, or (ii) where , [ he excessive storm drainage or runoff would damage any facilities necessary for a F compliance with the effluent limitations and prohibitions of this permit. The E permittee shall promptly notify the Department of Health and Environmental Control in writing of each such diversion or bypass, [ " h-O M I M M __E M M N S
B-10 PART II Page 7 of 10 Permit No. SC0001848
- 6. Rescued Subst:nces Solids, sludges, filter backvash, or other pollutants removed in the course of trearment or control of vastevaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant frem such materials from entering navigable waters.
- 7. Pourt.t Failutes In order to maintain compliance with the affluent limitations and prohibi-tions of this per=1t, the permittee shall either:
a.
~
In accordance with the Schedule of Compliance contained in Part I, pro-vide an alternative power source sufficient to operate the vastavater control facilities; or, if such alternative power source is not in existence, and no date for its imple=entation appears in Part I,
- b. Halt, reduce or otherwise control production and/or all discharges upon the reduction, loss, or failure of the primary source of power to the vastavater control facilities.
B. RESP 0i1SIBILITIES
- 1. R,igh.: of Estuj The permittee shall allow the Commissioner of the Department of 3ealth and Environmental Control, the Regional Administrator, and/or their authorized representatives, upon.the presentation of credencials:
- a. To enter upon the permittee's premises where an affluent source is lo-cated or in stich any records are required to be kept under the terms and conditions of this permit; and
- b. At reasonable times to have access to and copy any records required to be kept under the ter=s and conditions of this permit; to inspect any monitoring equipment or monitoring method required in this permit; and to sample any discharge of pollutants.
- 2. Tn.ansfer of Wmersitip or Conttal In the event of any change in control or ownership of facilities from which the authorized discharges emanate, the permittee shall notify the succeeding owner or controller of the existence of this per=it by letter, a copy of which shall be forwarded to the Depart =ent of Health and Environmental Con-trol.
- 3. AucH~bi'ity of Repcres Except for data deter =ined to be confidential under Section 308 of the Act, all reports prepared in a:cordance with the terms of this per=it shall be l
t
B-11 PART !! Page 8 of 30 Permit No. SCOOO1848 . . inspection at the offices of the Department of Health and Environmen'tal Control and the Regional Administrator. As required by the Act, effluent data shall not be considered confidential. Knowingly making any false statement on, any s 2ch report may result .in the imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in Section 309 of the Act. 6 PotsLC Mcdific1ticn Af ter notice and opportunity for a hearing, this permit may be modified, suspended, or revoked in whole or in part during its term for cause including, but not limited to, the follow.ng:
- a. Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit; Obtaining this permit by misrepresentation or f ailure to disclose fully all b.
relevant facts; or ..
- c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or elimination of the authorized discharge.
- 5. Totic. Poltatanta Notwithstanding Part II B-4 above, if a toxic effluent standard or prohibition . . .
(including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) of the Act for a toxic pollutant which is present in the discharge and such standard or p o51bition is more stringent thaa any' limitation for such pollutant in this permit, this .pe rmit shall be revtsed or modified in accordance with the toxic effluent standard or prohibition and the pe rmittee so notified.
- 6. Civit and C%unotal Lisbxtib)
Except as provided in per=1c conditions on "sypassing" (Part II, A-5) and
" Power Failures" (Part II, A-7), nothing in this permit shall be construed to re lie ve the per=ittee from civil or criminal penalties for nonceepliance.
- 7. Cit and Mats.tdoua Substanct LiabiLLilj Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee f rom any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which th; permittee is or may be subject under Section 311 of the Act.
- 8. Stitt Lace .
Nothing in this permit shall be constru. ' to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee f. ny r e s p ons ib ili tia s , 11 ab ili tie,s , or penalties established pursuant to any gpticable State law or regulation under authority preserved by Section 510 of the Act.
se 1EE I ; B-12 _j l
=
PART II. PART III ,== MODIFICATION DATE: FEB 1 1983 Page 9 of 10 Permit No. : SC0001848 Eq= 3 5
- 9. Property Rights ]
The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in either Y__m real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorize any injury to privath. property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any --m-infringement of Tederal. State or local laws or regulations. J3
- 10. Severability --"
2
'L._
The provisions of this permit are severable and if any provisions of this permit or the application of any provision of this permit to any circumstances. myj is held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances :EE and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected thereby. - PART III A. OTHER REQUIREMENTS 3
- 1. This permit shall be modified, or alternatively, revoked and reissued to km comply with any applicable effluent standard or limitation issued or approved O under sections 301(b)(2)(c) and (D). 304(bf(2) and 307(a)(2) of the Clean S$O Water Act. as amended. if the effluent standard or limitation so issued or 1RE approved: ---
(a) Contains different conditions or is more stringent than any effluent -@f limitation in the permit; or 45 7 (b) Controls any pollutant not limited in the permit. ,; The permit as modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain -3 any other requirements of the Act, then applicable. ]-- _
- 2. The permittee shall develop and implement a Best Management Practices (BMP) ==j Plan to identify and control the discharge of significant amounts of oils and iEi the hazardous and toxic substances listed in 40CFR Part 117 and Tables II and III of Appendix D to 40CFR Part 122. The plan shall include a listing of all -;
potential sources of spills or leaks of these materials, a method of contain- LEE ment, a description of training, inspection and security procedures and }]l emergency response measures to be taken in the event of a discharge to surface _= " waters or plans and/or procedures which constitute an equivalent BMP. Sources - of such discharges may include materials storage areas; in-plant transfer. process and material handling areas; loading and unloading operations; plant === site run-off; and slud ei and waste disposal areas. The BMP plan shall be 'EE - developed in accordarce with good engineering practices, shall be documented in narrative form, and shall include any necessary plot plans. drawings or __- maps. The BMI pl.a shall be developed no later than six months af ter issuance j= of the final permit (or modification) and shall be implemented no later than ;; one year after issuance of the tinal permit (or modification). The BMP plan - shall be maintained at the plant site and shall be available for inspection AH by EPA and SCDHEC personnel. =q 4
-mm
==
2 mm s m um qu "i imu
B-13 PART lli Page 10 of 10 Permit No. SC0001848
- 3. 'If this permit requires continuous measuring of the pH of the ef fluent, the permittee shall maintain the pH of such ef fluent within the range set in the pennit, except excursions from the range are ;ermitted subject to the following limitations:
'(a) The total time during which the pH values are outside the required range shall not exceed 7 hours and 26 minuts In any calendar month; and, (b) No individual excursion from the range of pH values exceed 60 minutes.
- 4. The sanitary polishing lagoon Is allowed to be used on an as-needed basis.
- 5. Algae control is the polishing lagoon by means of copper sulfate addition is to be permitted on an as-needed basis only with prior written notification to OHEC as to the time and amount of copper sulfate addition.
- 6. A ground-water moni toring program Is to be Implemented wIth the following requirements:
(a) Sample wells 7,10,13,15,16,18,22,24,29,30,32 quarterly for total - - - dissolved solids (or specific conductance) pH(fleld), ammonla,' nitrate, fluoride, ground-water elevations, gross alpha and gross beta activltles. ! (b) On a one time basis sample the above wells for dissolved organic carbon chloride, sulfate dissolved metals to include calcium, magnesium sodlum, potassium, cadmlum, chromium, lead and nickel. Should this one time analysis indicate ground-water quality problems other than those already Identified additional analysis may be required. l MODIFICATION DATE: N ,
- /' reau of Waghhdkill'ution Control p
r
Appendix C ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF , WESTINGHOUSE LICENSE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE AN INTEGRATED DRY ROUTE (IDR) LINE
C-3 MAR E S?1 DOCKET NO.: 70-1151 LICENSEE: Westinghouse Electric Corporation FACILITY: Comnercial Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant (CNFP), Columbia, South Carolina
SUBJECT:
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF WESTINGHOUSE LICENSE AMENDPENT (SNM-1107) TO UPGRADE DRY CONVERSION LINE TO THEIR CHFP IN COLUMBIA, SOUTH CAROLINA I Background By letter dated .lanuary 9,1981, Westinghouse Electric Corporation (WEC) requested a license amendment of their Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-1107 to a;thorize the installation of a new dry conversion line to replace thei: existing Dry Conversion Fluidized Bed (DCFB) at their Commercial Nuclear Fuel Plant (CNFP) at Columbia, South Carolina. At the same time Westinghouse (the licensee) submitted environmental informa-tion in support of the license amendment application. II Discussion A. General Description of the Proposed Upgraded Dry Conversion Line The proposed upgraded dry conversion line will include an Integrated Dry Route (IDR) line developed and connercially utilized by British Nuclear Fuels Limited (BNFL) and will supplement the plant's existing ADU (wet conversion) process production lines. The proposed IDR process line will replace the DCFB experimental dry process line. According to the licensee, the IDR process line will provide improve-ment in lowering the quantity of liquid wastes generated per kilogram of uranium produced. The IDR process will utilize dry methods to convert solid uranium
- hexafluoride (UF6 ) to uranium dioxide (U02 ). UF6 feed material, received in type 30A/30B cylinders, is vaporized within the cylinders by heating with hot spray. The resulting UF6~ vapor is reacted with superheated steam to form uranyl fluoride (U02 2)
F powder and hydrogen fluoride (HF) gas. The UO F22 is further contacted with a countercurrent flow of hydrogen, nitrogen, and superheated steam--to strip residual fluoride, and to reduce the uranium powder to uranium dioxide. The UO2
- e e um -
e . C-4 i MAR 9 1931 i i is discharged into check hoppers, and is then pneumatically conveyed ! (or othenvise transported) to the powder processing area. Process i off-gases [ hydrogen (H 2 ), hydmgen fluoride (HF) nitrogen (N2 ), and t steam (H2 O)] are removed continuously through off-gas filters which E are periodically reverse-purged to remove uranium-bearing solids prior
- to recceery of hydrofluoric acid. The conversion process is shown i schematically in Figure 1. The proposed IDR system and plant changes to accomodate the installation of the total manufacturing automation
[ project (MAP) are shown in Figure 2.
; B. Effluents Released from the Proposed Action k The proposed installation and operation of an IDR process line requires
' minor modifications to the existing licensed facility and will result in minor incremental releases of radioactivity and chemicals to the -
- environment. For gaseous effluents, the licensee projects the overall
} release of radioactivity and fluorides as shown in Table 1. s Table 1 Estimated Air Effluents Released from Overall Plant Operation f i Uranium Fluoride (uC1/yr)' (kg/yr) p l Existing ADU 1,960 21 2. . / (700MTU/yr) . ' n .f g e.e ? Estimated IDR 221 68 M, ~ (500 MTU/yr) ~. . c 4,742 % E Previous Estimated in 757 sc. [ Environmental Repop in J' ' [ 1975 (1600 MTU/yr) . r i'f. c... 39 E 1 The projected release of effluents up to 1600 MTU/yr would not
? . fc .-
I result in significant impact to the environment as assessed W , p. k by NRC in the Environmental Impact Appraisal issued in .
* ,~~ ; April 1977. '
The radioactivity released in liquid effluents does not constitute j' a significant pathway for cbse to man compared with the air effluents pathway, and the licensee projects only a minor incremental release .3... of radioactivity and chemicals with the addition of the IDR process > .. c ( line. Hydrofluoric acid is a usable byproduct which will be generated 7.1 'J x [pp Oh~ . ' f . . . ' 5. - U i ?M L e M u; , b%2.7F i eip e ' U * +Y ' ., e -q
.,) '
. .. s
,g b
' ~ p -
- _ y1 -
M 2 l MAR 9 199 -y C-5 j 2 i by the process. At the present time, the licensee has no definite _[ plan for the use of the hydrofluoric acid; therefore, the licensee will -- be required to submit a detailed plan to NRC for review and approval -- prior to disporing of this material. -- C. Environmental Impact of the Proposed Action _] The proposed action will require minor modification of the existing -
- licensed facility such as the removal of the DCFB equipment, building j;
, modification and relocation of some of the existing plant services. ll There will be no significant construction impact sir.ce the floor ja area affected by the IDR systems installation will consist of about g ? 22,000 square feet, or only about 6% of the existing manufacturing building floor area, and the roof superstructure udll include about in f y 22,000 square feet, or about 6% of the existing roof area. Therefore. -a [ the incremental impact temporarily effected by the dismantling, construction, , and installation activities is expected to be relatively minor. u 7 s ( The proposed action will result in minor incremental releases of radio- jF ( activity and chemicals to the environ:ent (see Table 1). The overall~ qg releases are less than the projected release of effluents up to 1600 - MTU/yr, and no significant environmental impact was anticipated even with the projected releases based on 1600 MTU/yr capacity as discussed f] in HRC's EIA issued April 1977. In addition, the applicant's license 3. - amendment No. 4 was conditioned that if the radioactivity in plant gaseous .- effluents exceeds 1,500 uti per calendar quarter, the licensee shall,
- within 30 days, prepare and submit to the Commission a report which i identifies the cause for exceeding the limit and the corrective actions ":
to be taken by the licensee to reduce release rate. This condition is __ to provide reasonable assurance that the licensee is in compliance with " the environmental radiation standards as specified in Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations, Part 190. As shown in Table 1, the projected 2 overall release, including the proposed action, will not exceed the _=! limit conditioned in license amendment No. 4. For accidental releases, the licensee's proposed action does not change the potential and effects := of the spectruns of potential accidents identified and evaluated in __ HRC's EIA issued in April 1977.
't III Conclusion _
~~
The staff has evaluated the environmental impact associated with the proposed plant modifications, effluent releases and accident potentials that may result dE from the licensee's proposed action. Based on the above evaluation, it is d concluded that this proposed action would be ron-substantive and insignificant i
=
M E"
=
5 4
C-6 fdAP, 9 1931 froa an environmental imapet standpoint. Thus, pursuant to 10 CFR 51. Section 51.5(d)(3), an environmental impact appraisal need not be prepared. Approval of the license amendment is reco rnended subject to the following condition:
- 1. The licensee shall conduct air effluent monitoring on radioactivity and total fluorides as specified in the < -
itcensee's application dated January 9, 1981. c or1::1: M C's: R ;; - E.Y.shaz < Edward Y. Shum Uranium Process Licensing Section Uranium Fuel Licensing Branch . d 4 i
- s. i
- U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICES 1985 461-721s20099
'O
, U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET NUREG-ill8 l
- 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE (Add Volume No. if eprannate) 2 (Leave bimk)
Environmental Assespment for Renewal of Special Nuclear Material License i . SNM-1107 3. RECIPIENT"S ESSION NO.
- 7. AUTHOR (S) 5. DATE REP [T COMPLETED
\ Fa"y'"/ I 'fff5
- 9. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION N .E AND MAILING ADDRESS (Include 2,p Codel DAT[ REPORT ISSUED Division of Fuel Cycle a Material Safety "gy'" Ivf885 Office of Nuclear Materia Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co. ission f
/ L '*"' *'** * '
Washington, DC 20555 j , , , , , , , , , 12 SPONSORING ORGANIZATION N AME AND htLING ADDRESS (Include Zep Codel p
- 11. FIN NO.
- 13. TYPE OF REPORT P [l00 COVE RED (lactusive darest Technical .
- 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES / 14 (Leave almk1 Pertains to Docket No. 70-1151 \s /
f
- 16. ABSTR ACT 000 words or less)
This Environmental Assessment is issued by the 4 5. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) in response to an application by the Westfnghous 4 Electric Corporation for the renewal of Special Nuclear Material License No. NM-1107 ich covers the operations of the Columbia plant. .
\
TS
\
4
- 17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT AN ALYS1 17a DESCRIPTORS environmental c.ssessment special nuclear material li nse
/
/
t 17tx IDENTIFIERS.'OPEN ENDE D TE RMS
- 18. AVAILABILITY STATEVENT 19 SE CURITY CL ASS ITh,s recorr; 21 NO OF PAGES Unclassified Unlimited zo gglagg ffffd'Tu o,,, 22 Price NRC FORM 335 tit et)
I
- UNITED STAYES rouRrw ctass unit -
. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION POSTAGE 6 FEES PAW D g .M
' WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 USNRC [' '3 wass. o c. q ,.
PERMIT No. G 67 . e-, OFFICIAL BUSINESS # ##4 PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE, $300 p, 'P 7 --7,.
*a h
< s
. 4>~l E
.?N{,.'ZL ~ -
,y. ; qy. ,
s'*'t 3 '
.,-[.'
. j,: ,; ; 6'
'l'
%r3.g.-
.Y
$. f ,.O "phif x:; w g, .s . a
.w v. .
.i f . ' . s .[
> . I.
- q'
'.,f. .,"
h
.c . :d .3,
; _.1
[ pyd 4
,e.. ,
~
f
- ( -
'-' , e.,
. ',y
- l. . .
g -
't- y,N
. . ..f ..,.* '
e 7 g, .. .
? q-k, M;,-.
T_,' - 4 ' .; s-' *g Ia' h,',. .,~- ). . __ - ~ ~ . '
=
'd,.
- 2 (
,, i Y,,, f ' -
, .M.,v( k.,(
J:,'),71 ' E J __. ..}}