ML20129D173
| ML20129D173 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Westinghouse |
| Issue date: | 05/16/1985 |
| From: | Crow W NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20129D160 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8506060051 | |
| Download: ML20129D173 (2) | |
Text
{{#Wiki_filter:- , J f -
, * .n_ yg
.o wg Sagg? Ai,,@gj igg / .Q 7590-01 H.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY C0fNISSION FINDING OF NO SIGNIFICANT It! PACT RENEWAL OF SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL LICENSE fl0. Sfite-1107 WESTINGHOUSE ELECTRIC CORPORATION NilCLEAR FUEL DIVISION COLUMRIA, SOUTH CAROLINA DOCKET NO. 70-1151 The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmission (the Connission) is considering the renewal of Special Nuclear Paterial License flo. SNM-1107 for the continued operation of the Westinghouse Electric Corporation Commercial Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant at Columbia, South Carolina. '
The Commission's Division of Fuel Cycle and Paterial Safety has prepared an Environmental Assessment related to the renewal of Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-1107. On the basis of this assessment, the Comission has concluded that the environmental impact created by the proposed license renewal action would not be significant and does not warrant the preparation of an Environmental Impact . Statement. Accordingly, it has been determined that a Finding of No Significant Impact is appropriate. The Environrental Assessment (NUREG-1118) is available for public inspection and copying at the Commission's P.ublic Document Room,1717 H Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. Copies of f:UREG-1118 may be purchased by calling (301)497-9530 or by writing to the Publication 8506060051 850520 PDR ADOCK 07001151
.. c P DR , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,,,, ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
""^"'I .................. ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... .................... DATEk .................. ..................... ..................... ..................... ..................... . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .wac ronw as noiso wacu o24o OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- u.s. opo 1,sa--4ao-247 n,-
r
? ,
. %-%:5
. : Chi 5yn e4i;r Atik r x ;2y i>' S Services Section, Division of Technical Information and Document Control, II.S.
?!uclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, D.C. 20555, or purchased from the National Technical Information Service, Department of Connerce, 52R5 Port Royal Road, Springfield, Virginia 22161, Dated at Silver Spring, Maryland this 16th day of May 19RS.
4 FOR TiiE N'! CLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Origizals'igned bis W.T. % W. T. Crow, Acting Chief Uranium Fuel Licensing Pranch Division of Fuel Cycle and Haterial Sa fety WSS omc3 FCUPh.. F UF FCUF. h MT, Crow,f.. . K. g.,ud.s.R. .. . ..... .......... ....... ............ ...... ............
~~+P.W.n.aa.rd.ene S.V.LT,,g ar,p,e, , ,,,,,,,,
, , , ,, , , g 9. g .,,,,,, ,,, ,,,,,,
wr > .......1......... 5/ l'I /85 ........*2........ 5/[# /85 . . 5. . /. . /. s/ . . 8. 5. . .. ..W sg. . .... . ................. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . NRC FliiM 318 st O 240 OFFICIAL RECORD COPY W us. m ass-4ao.247
. . - . . e
NUREG-1118 , c /. l Environmental Assessment ' for renewal of Special Nuclear Material
- License <No. SNM-1107:
, i
- Docket No. 70-1151
. ; Westinghouse Electric Corporation
- Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant 1 .
t-U.S. -Nuclear Regulatory
- Commission 1 Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards
[ t
.-Mayl1985
[ ; i
. p. muq
- t l ,;' B i
/kl,
\; ..v f
$()c "1 N ig v
l @('
.~ -- - .. . ,
---w n- .. - ,. ...
jYk -aw = c, -n ,iff ' f:vl<f> a:D W f b & f . .. ?. LyNk-- s >%l^ ~N
<w&,wAd w %g;'B k;w!? em f l+9n%-
Wh ew. xm u ~
-- 4 ..
a- o,4 ;
+ s s[M;pn. .
s t
,t _
a .c =
- 3 y,w' n, 2 9ys, ap g . %: cew
.-9,, - ~p - p nv s
r - w;p ,r s - y s zy: - 4 y ._ 4 n.m .p s ,. ~ m
"
- 4. . # 1 W.%@.% N.p,' h % $^Q' W{ > .f f , # ' v .'3
.) ~ o~ _ ' .
y WhelP ;Q h _ R,m 6% G J.; v. 1
^
vv <
^ +R$n . ;^ m 2
a.J %i3 2 , u
~
yrgg%m27~y Je y % wp y -a , w -y'
;v -
% u Qw r;m v. s ,c Ay-
% ': c'a :W '
# n - P %' %. W '
;d' Sd.% ' % y* ~, .(WQ, ' ' *
- g ,,_ s .g n
. t s y 3--
I_Nb N # uJwY. NhAb'i a '
+ ,
w -~ .. es . .y < . . iNOTICE ig -
- . . . . _. s 6 %xy
$w@m.a w"
'f . ,'-
, ~ My + w<
+,N,f , .h M. J Availability of Reference Materials Cited in NRC Publications 1
,,\_ .,W. . & ,e ,-u _,
"fNc.-
9 ,y ,,h
\ ,. - , y'
,. ,- . , , , f C'
f ye W_ ?S"W) ' AM'o'st documents cited'in NRC publications wil'l be available from' one of the following sourcesi '~_ "E, w p? m e , - .1 w_ ~~ e;:r g,. A . g 1_...., 1 6 m1.a The NRC Public' Document Roomil717 H2 Street lN.Wll
' ~
- ~ ~ ,
MQS e<cma & F .- a . jWdshington DC 20655 -
.m .s m
= ,
~ .
(- s - /w. 4.. . m o. .m .. .
':Q M. . . , . . 4 -24 Ths Superintendent of Documents lU.S. Government Printing Office, Post Offihe' Box' 37082,; '
jgg&
@r 1.
'y Udfashington;DC 20013 79823 '
p.;,__1.. 2 i ; i ' *, - (' - re s . mm a :,5_ z., .3 ,, . e - y ; QM, ~-
' ' t,3SThe Netional Technical information Service, SpringfieldiVA 22161 :: ( ~
.x, p. . .. w_. r -
x.. 1
~
g' ' J Q,,,f;*
' , .. . m m . .m t . . . ,
lR '; f Although the listing that follows represents the majority of documents cited in NRC publications.) ~ gg 4 6 (
~
@p@g sn
>J
. ,fg
, f_it is not intended to be exhaustive [
. . sq L , - . _
.~g
' 1
+
--.~
_M
! Referenced documents available for irapection and copying for a fee from the.NRC Public Docu, ;
M ynf ? I% T C._9 i-
~
/me'nt Room include NRC correspendence and internal NRC memoranda; NRC OfficeIof Inspection l w,
% YL Tand Enforcement bulletins, circularsJinformation notices; inspection and;investigatiori noticesr r '%
ljp& _-$9 Mi
~
[Licensie Event Reports; vendor reports and correspondencej Commission popers; and applicant and 'C I
% +> " licemee documents and correspondence; ; - W > i 1
+
c'x g n . .
.. . . .m .. . w. .-
.- n .- , . a.,_.m - - _. 4 f
',fW y The following documents in'the NUREG series are available for purchase from the NRC/GPO Salesl N." *
- G W : Programhformal NRC staff and contractor reports',- NRC sponsored conference proceedings;a'nd: ( C, g%Mi~ $ N RC bookleAs~ and brochures.- Also available are Regulatory Guides, NRC refutationiin the Code ofc '
d .s Q $N <, , l Fec(erst Regulations, and NucAmer Regulatory Commission issuances / '
,m -c. ~. . ~
' ~ f.W m Mg y',
.a -
. T '
~Wm :
A C Dccuments iavailable from 'the ' National Technical information' Servic. e include. NUREG1 series- , ,.
% ' / -
) reports and tichnical reports prepared by other federal agencies'and reports prepared by the Atomic - -
M44W - 5 Energy Commission, forerunner agenc'y.t'o the Nuclear Regulatory l Commission. - -
=
..y [,jg; m2 ~-. x.. g. : .- w - *
.t
*W e
a Documents available from 'public and special technical libraries insidde' all open' Nter'sture items',1 P. s j
,((]'N puch as books;joumal and periodical akticles, and transactionk Feders/ Registerjnotices, federal and .
[NW 4
-vNa,r .; ,
pyg.At
- c. state legislation; and congressional reports can usually be obtained from these libraries >
;. .,.a. . . . ._ _ _ . , . . _ _ . . .. __
o _c ; :g
*a,,',
. y +
p Documents .such as theses, dissertations, foreign reports and translations, and non-NRC conference " W "Q
; proceeder*gs are available for purchase from the organization sponsoring the publication cited.' S $Mf;.
m, rr e- ,-m A. - *
,- .3.o y.- ~ . .
+
6. m- _. r - N. ,u y . . . - .
. u , .. x. - - _ .. . .. . , , - ,, , p . Single copies of NR. C draft reports are. available free, to th.e extent of supply,upon written request - 5 '6 gg , y V.
M : to th<s Division lof, Technical.Information and Document Controlf U.S. Nuclear Regulatory'Com- G, @q.q;w Ad M i mission, Washington,' DC 20555, ^ ' .; y g ., .. ._ .
. , , , , . .. r , .;y
;g h %},- 1Gi_ G, g
e : Copies'of. ind. u. stry co, des and standards used in a substantive manner in the NRC regulatory process.
< l. C, . '
~ ,
Pe-ima . m -- a L are maintained at the NRC' Library,.7920 Norfolk Avenuet Bethesda, Maryland, and are'aveilable ; ~ s lT '3 S D'nf ?@ityN tf Jn .. (V, j L there for reference use by the pub.lic. Codes a,nd standards are usually copyrighted and may bel g .s
-L.;
m ;JV i purchased from the originatmg organization or, if they"are American National Standards, from the i 3 _$ , Q M 1 3 American National Standards .institutei 1430 Broadway, New Yorli, NY .10018. <9~l
- _ , h. -
ne;3 * " ' a
~.. a g , ,- WIM -
9) w* gf n y. s 4 , qu- c, g q- ,,
- Of[
.,.,w M ~9
,5 1
7 1 -.
.r 4
g '- ,; i6 .
~
x' ^% \ L
?..
J, l--- n R $ b y
" . .h' , .~ # 7 4 P g D'
e$h- -s [ L .ms p st.~ ,
,c.
yv, b- > - . 3 ' . - ' ' ',#
,p Y. We @ / ,'
L_g
.. }
, , s e t , z
'.m r F - s m
4 cr, x. 9 +y T
, -7 r 1 ;
h-- db 'M . q:yng e[ i
, l y% w ;g ' '
}
, w . ; .4 % ._ 3' .
9 fj jgh - M * ,(' y .!
- p-
,t se
^
. .. r : .r*
n '. s.N-{ . -' p % Dy'_ t . , u.:, - w', . , m a 4 -'
- 1 _..___.-____c- _ _ _ _ . _ _.;
NUREG-1118 Environmental Assessment for renewal of Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-1107 Docket No. 70-1151 Westinghouse Electric Corporation Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards May 1985 p* ~=s., I i + 4
v CONTENTS UST OF FIGURES . . . . . . . ... . . .. . . ... .... .. ... ...... . ... vii LIST OF TABLES . .. ........ .. ........................ . .......... . .. ix UST OF AB8REVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS . ....... . .... . . ... .. ..... xi UST OF FACTORS FOR CONVERSION OF ENGUSH TO INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM OF UNITS .... xiii
- 1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION ... .. .. . . ... .. .. 1-1
1.1 INTRODUCTION
. ... .. .. .. . . .. .... .. .. .... ... . 1-1 1.2
SUMMARY
OF THE PROPOSED ACTION .. . ....... .... ...... .. ... 1-2 1.3 NEED FOR ACTION ....... .. ..... . ....... .. .. . . .. 1-2 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 2.2 THE ALTERNATIVE OF LICENSE RENEWAL . .. . ..... .... . ........ .. 2-1 2.2.1 Descnption of Current Operations . . ..... . ..... ... ......... 2-1 2.2.1.1 Introducten . ... .. . . .... . .. . .. ...... .. 2-1 2.2.1.2 Plant facaities ...... . .. ...... .... .. .... .... 2-1 2.2.1.3 Chemmal processes ..... ... .. ... ... .......... . 2-5 2.2.1.4 Mechancal operations . .. ........ ...... ...... ....... 2-6 2.2.1.5 Shipping ... ' . . ...... .. . ... ..... ...... . .. 2-6 2.2.2 Waste Confinement and Effluent Control . .. ....... . .. ............ 2-7 2.2.2.1 Geneous/partculete emissions .. .............. . ... 2-7 2.2.2.2 Liquid wastes ...... . ... ... .. .. .. ..... ..... 2-10 2.2.2.3 Solid wastes .. ..... .... .. .......... ... .... 2-12 2.3 DECOMMISSIONING . ............ ... ... ... .... ...... ... ... 2-14 2.4 NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFEGUARDS .......... .......... .. ... .... .. 2-14 2.5 STAFF EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES ...... .... 2-15 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2 .... ....... . ... . ...... .. .. . ........... 2-15
- 3. THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT . . ....... . . ..... .. .. ............. 3-1 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION . .. .... ...... . . . ............... ......... 3-1 3.2 CUMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOG( . ... . .... ................. .... 3-1 3.2.1 Climatology . .. . ... . .. . .. ....... ..... .... .... 3-1 3.2.2 Winds. Tornados. and Storms ... ... ................ ... .. ... . 3-2 3.2.3 Meteorology .. ..... ... .. . . . . .. . ... ...... .... 3-6 3.2.4 Air Quality .... . . . . . . .. ... ......... . . ... .... 3-6 3.3 DEMOGRAPHY AND SOClOECONOMIC PROFILE .. . ... . ............. ... 3-6 3.4 LAND .. .. ... . . . .. .. . . . .. .. ... . . .. . ... 3-8 3.4.1 Site Aree . .. ..... . .... . ... ... . .......... 3-6 3.4.2 Adjacent Area . .... . . ... . .. .. ....... ............ 3-11 3.4.2.1 Manufacturing ... .. .. . .... ....... .. . 3-13 3.4.2.2 Agriculture . ... .. .. . .. ..... . ... .. 3-13 3.4.2.3 U, d...';, d nonogricultural land .... . ... . .... ..... 3-13 3.4.3 Historic Segrwficance . ... . . . . . . ............ ..... 3-13 3.4.4 Floodpleens and Wetlands ........ . . .... . . .... .. . .. 3-14 iii
?
t L iv
- 3.5 HYDROLOGY .................. ..... .. .................. ... ....... 3-15 -
3.5.1 Surface Water ....... .. ..... ....... ...... ........... ... . 3-15 3.5.1.1 Congeree River hydrology . . . . . . . . . . . . ................ 3-15 3.5.1.2 Congeres River water quality .. ............ ............... 3-15 i 3.5.1.3 Local aurface water use ....... . .... .................... 3-18 3.5.2 Groundwater . . . . . ..... ... ..... ...... ............... ... 3-18 3.5.2.1 Groundweter regime . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-18 3.5.2.2 Groundwater quaisty ... . ............ .................. 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 Resourcee . . . ...... ... ..... .................. ..... 3-32 i r 3.6.5 Seemicity .. ............... . ............................. 3-34 3.7 BIOTA .. .... .. .... ........... ... .. ........................ 3-36 t 3.7.1 Terrestnel ........ ................... . .................... .. 3-36 3.7.1.1 Vegetation .. .. ........... ......................... 3-36 3.7.1.2 Faune ........ . ..... . ... ............ ..... ..... 3-38 3.7.2 Aquetic . . . . . . . . . . .. ... ... ..... ................ .... 3-38 3.7.3 Throetened and Endangered Species ......... .... ................. 3-40 3.8 RADIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS (SACKGROUND) ........................ . 3-41 3.9.1 Totehbody Dose Rates ......... ........ . ..... ................ 3-41 i 3.8.2 Environmental Backpound .. ....... ................... ........ 3 41 t REFERENCES FOR SECTION 3 .................. .. ....... .................. 3-42
- 4. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED LICENSE RENEWAL . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.1 MONITORING PROGRAMS AND MITIGATORY MEASURES ........... .......... 4-1 4.1.1 Effluent Monitoring Program ............ . .... ........ ....... .. 4-1 4.1.1.1 Radiolopcel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-1 4.1.1.2 Nonradlolopcal ..... .. .. .............. .... ..... 4-1 4.1.2 Enwronmental Monitonng Program . . . . ................... . .... 4-2
- i. 4.1.2.1 p.,aalagral ... ............................. ........... 4-2 .
4.1.2.2 Nonradiolopeal ... .. ............................... 4-8 4.2 DIRECT EFFECTS AND THEIR SIGNFICANCE .... ............. .............. 4-11 4.2.1 Air Quetty .. .. ........ ............. .... ...... ..... .... 4-11 4.2.1.1 Critene posutants ...... ........ .... ..... ... ...... 4-11 4.2.1.2 Ammone and fluorides . ....... ... ...... .............. 4-12 , 4.2.2 Land Use ..... . ..... .... ......... .. .. ...... .......... . 4-13 4.2.2.1 Effects of fluonde emessons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-13 4.2.2.2 Effects of ammonm emessons ...... ............... ..... 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 Aquenc ... . .. .... .... ... ........ .. . .. ... 4-19 4.2.4.3. Throetened and endangered age == .. . .................... 4-20 4.2.5 Radiolopcel impacts .... . .......... . ......... .... .. ....... 4-21
! 4.2.5.1 Dooes to the maximally exposed indhndual . . . .... ........ . 4-22 . 4.2.5.2 Dooes to the population within 80 km (50 miles) I i of the plant site . ....... ....... .............. . .... 4-23 4.2.6 Mitigatory Measures .. ...... ... . . ......... .... .... .. 4-24
_ . . . ._. _ . . . . . _ . -_ . -_ - _ _ _ _ _ -_ ____ _- _.- .. . - . . _ .._~ _. v J 4.3 INDIRECT EFFECTS AND THEIR SKiNIFICANCE . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-27 4.3.1 h*==mmic Effects .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . .. .. 4-27 4.3.2 Potentel Effects of Acculents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-27 4.3.2.1 Redlaiopcel accidents . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-27 4.3.2.2 Nonredlolopcal accidents . . .. . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-31 4.3.3 Poseble Confilets Between the Proposed Acten and the Otgoctwes of Federal, Reponal. State and Local Plans and Policios . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-33 4.3.4 Effects on Urban Quelley. Hatoncel and Cultural Resources. and Socoty . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4-33
' REFERENCES FOR SECTION 4 ...... .... . .... .. ...... . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . 4-34 ; APPENDIX A. METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR CALCULATING RADIATION DOSE COMMITMENTS FROM THE RELEASE OF RADIONUCUDES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-1 APPENDIX B. NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE EUMINATION SYSTEM (NPDEM PERMIT FOR WESTINGHOUSE COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR FUEL FABRICATION PLANT . . ...... .......... .... ....... .... . . . B-1 APPENDIX C. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF WESTINGHOUSE UCENSE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE AN INTEGRATED DRY ROUTE (IDR) UNE . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . C-1 t
J i i 4 l t I. h f 4
-n,- - , _ ,
,,,n.---- -,,_-_n,,--,-.-,,,----,,--,__a -
a-,n- , - , , .-..- -,~. , -, ------ -,-------n- .. --.
. - - . - _ - - - - ~ . - . __------- . ~ . ~ _ . .
l 7 I i 1 LIST OF FIGURES 2.1 An mustration of the nucieer fuel cycle. indicating the role of the Westmghouse NFCS . . 2-2 2.2 Detoded site plan of the Westmghouse NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-3 2.3 The interior layout of the Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-4 2.4 Process stock decharge locatens from the top view of the roof of the Westinghouse 6 NFCS... .........................................................2-8 2.5 Budding and liquid weste treatment flow sheet for the Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . ... 2-11 < 2.6 Projected solid contenunsted weste flow sheet for 1600 t/ year of uranium production capacsty at the Westmghouse NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2-14 3.1 An exterior view of the Westinghouse NFCS near Columtne. South Caroline. loolung west from Bluff Rood (Route 48) . . . . . . . . ................................3-1 l 3.2 Regenel locanon of the Westmghouse NFCS near Columine. South Caroline . . . . . . . . . . 3-2 3.3 Specdic lococon of the Westinghouse NFCS plant site near Columine. South Caroline . . . 3-3 > 3.4 Site layout of the Weeanghouse NFCS near Columine. South Carogne, showng the l plant boundary. adlocent propermes. dramage. elevations. and present land use ........ 3-4 3.5 Annual wind roes for the Westinghouse NFCS bened on 2: g+ r-: dets conected S Aug.1,1972. through July 31, 19 7 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-7 3.6 Average annual wind rose for the Columine Metropotten Arport bened on Notonal
! Oceanc and Atmosphenc Administration data. 1948 - 1981 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-8 t l 3.7 Locatens of ourface water morwtonne statens at the 'J NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . 3-16 -
1 3.8 Location of morntonng woes at the Wesenghouse plant site . ........ .... ........ 3-19 s
' 3.9 Water table eleveten. terrace unit, on Nov. 15,1981. at the Wesenghouse
, plant site . . . . . ... .................. . ............ ....... .. ... 3-21 3.10 Hydrogeologe mop of the Cre*= car == equWer system in the southeastem Uruted States, meluding South Carcane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-27 !> 3.11 Regonal geology of the Wes;e - NFCS, indcoang features of South Caroline's 4 Piedmont and Coastel Plain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-29 , i ! 3.12 Generahed stratigraphic chart of time and rock units for South Carogne's Piedmont i t' and Coastel Plain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ....... ........ ..... 3-30 3.13 A representenon of the subourface et the W_u r NFCS bened on wet data . . . . . 3-31 f 3.14 Generetted sod associatens of southem Rechland County. South Caroline. . . . . . . . . . . . 3-33 3.15 Distnbuaon of eartbar=ar== within 320 km (200 meos) of Columtne, South Caroline. 17 54 - 1983 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3-35 4.1 Locanons of onsite amtnent air. vegetaten, soil and surface water morutonne stocons et the Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ........ 4-3
)
' 4.2 Weg completen suitable for (a) water level measurement only and (b) sempimg water queirty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ......................................4-26 A.1 Pathways for exposure to men from roleseos of rarsaartive effluents ........... .... A-4 1 f 4 5 i< VM
r LIST OF TABLES 2.1 Measured semennual airborne releases of poss alpha activity from the
.... ... ... . . . .. 2-9 Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . . . ... . .
2.2 Identificaten of process gas scrubbers at the Westinghouse NFCS. includng their officsoncies . . . .. . .. ... ... . .... . .. . . . . 2-9 2.3 Fluonde emession rates from the Westinghouse NFCS at a nommel 700 t/ year of uranium producten cepecity during the period 1981-1983.. ... ,. .. . 2-9 2.4 Ducherge concentrations and total annual rolesse of redoectivity in Westinghouse NFCS liquid westes . . . . . . .. . . . . . . .... . . ... . . 2-12 2.5 Annuel average nonradeloycal water quality of Westinghouse NFCS liquid effluent discharge at 700 t/ year of uranium .... .. .. . .. ... . .... .. ........ 2-13 3.1 Climatoloycal data from Columbia Metropohtan Airport . . . .. .. .. ..... 3-5 3.2 Annual average atmospheric dispersion factors by distance and direction from the 3-9 Westinghouse NFCS . . . . . . . .. .. ... .. . .. . .. 3.3 Ambient air quehty 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 downstroom of
- the NFCS discharge (outfeill . .... . ... . .. . .. . .. . ... .. 3-17 3.8 Analyes of youndwater in the near-surface aquefer northoest of the Westinghouse
. . ..... . . . 3-22 NFCS (Well W-24) . .... .. .. ... . .
3.7 Analyse of youndwater in the near-surface aquifer southeast of the Westinghouse
.. . .. ... . ... 3-23.
NFCS (Wes W-7) . . . . . . . . ... . ... . .. .. 3.8 Special water quehty analysis report for monitoring wells at the Westinghouse NFCS, May 27,1984....... . . .. . .. . .. .. . . . . 3-24
. 3.9 Special radeloycal water quality analyses report for monitoring wess at the 3-25 Westinghouse NFCS. April 15.1983.. .. .. . . . .. ... .. . .. .
3.10 Earthquake recurrence intervals as a functon of Modrfied MercalliIntensity for
.. . .. . . 3-36 selected seemc source zones . . . . . . . . .... .....
3.11 Ten percent prahahaty estimates for horizontal accelerations and horizontal velocities exceeding a given value as a function of time at Columbe S.C. . . . . ... ...... 3-38 3.12 Potentisi natural vegetation of the Columbe. S.C., aree . . . . . . . .... . . . .. 3-37 3.13 Major fish speces that presently occur in South Caroline's Congeree River . . .. .. . 3-39 3.14 Chorectoristics of beckpound radiation in the vicinity of the Westinghouse NFCS
. . . . , .. ....... .. 3-41 (1981-1982) . . . . . . . .... .....
4-2 4.1 A summary of environmental redoloycal monitoring at the Westinghouse NFCS . . 4.2 Redmiogical monitoring data from onsite air particulate monitors at the
. . 4-4 Westinghouse NFCS. 1981-1983. . ......... . .... . .... . .
4.3 Radlolopcel monitoring data from onsite surface water monitoring stations at the
. . .......... 4-5 Westinghouse NFCS, 1981-1983. ... .... . .. .
4.4 Redholoycal monitoring data from analysis of onsite vegetation at the Westinghouse
. ........ .. .... . . .. 4-6 NFCS.1981-1983... . .. .. . ...
4.5 Radeloycal monitority data from analysis of onsite soil at the Westinghouse
. .. 4-7
-NFCS 1981-1983. . . ..... .. ., . .... .
< ix
X 4.6 Annual average and meaumum concentrations of ammame and fluondes and average and range of pH et oneite surface water samphng atecons 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 food and water for domestic ammals hamad on chnscal signs and leemns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4- 14 4.9 Compenson of current NPDES pernut limits and the daily average decharge (1982) from the NFCS to the Congeree River ........ ......... ....... .. .
.... 4-17 4.10 Estimated mammum annual does from arbome and liquid effluents to the neerest adult reesdent . . . . . . . . ...........................................4-22 4.11 Annual average and daily meaumum concentrations of radoectnnty in the Congeree River below the NFCS decharge for plant operation at 700 and 1600 t/ year of uranium. 4-24 4.12 Estimated mammum indhndual doses from dnnlung Congereo River water downstroom of the NFCS discherge. for operation at both 700 and 1600 t/ year of uranium . . . . . . . 4-24 4.13 Does commitments from arbome discharges to tic a~ _'_ - , within 80 km (50 miles) of the NFCS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .......... ...... ........ 4-25 4.14 A spectrum of acendents that could occur at the Westinghouse NFCS . . . . .... . .. 4-28 4.15 Maximum 50-year does commitment to the nearest reendent from a enecahty accedent . . 4-30 4.16 Lococon and quantites of bulk ges and liquid chemical storage et the Westinghouse NFCS. ............................. ... ..... . ......... .. ... .... 4-32 A.1 Does conversson factors for extemel exposure pathways . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . A-5 A.2 Does conversson factors for inhelston e=pasare pothways . . ............ . . . . . . . A-6 A.3 Does conversion factors for ingestion exposure pathways . . . . . . . ...... . . . . . A-6 A.4 Intake parameters (adult) used in lieu of site-specdic data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. A-7 I
ASSREVIATIONS AND ACRONYMS ADU ammoruum diuranate AOCR sir quakty control region 900 tuologcol oxygen demand CaF calceum fluonde CEO Counca on Environmental Quality cfs cubic feet por second (ft3 /s) DCFB Dry Conversion Fludred Bed DOT U.S. Department of Tronoportet;on EA environmental assosoment EIA environmental unpoct appraisal EIS environmental impact statement F- fluonde G.M. geometnc mean HAPP high air potution potential HEPA ll.vt .Ta(f partculate air HF hydrogen fluoride IDR integrated dry route JTU Jackson turtudity unit LWR light-water-moderated r=rimar reactor MBAS methylene blue active m6 stance MMI modified Mercati intenoty MPC maximum %, u concentration MPN most prahahan number MSL mean see level NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NFCS Nuclear Fuel Columbia Site NH3 ammorne NH.F ammoruum fluonde NRC U.S. Nuclear Reguletory Commesion NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System I SC-DHEC South Caroline Department of Health and Environmental Control SCWRC South Caroline Water Resources Commesion SNM apecial nuclear meterial TDS total dissolved solide UFs uranium hexanuondo UO uranium dioxide UOzF uranyl fluoride USGS U.S. Geologmal Survey X/O atmospheric dispersion factor xi _ - _ _ _ . _ . . ____ . _ , . _ _ _ . _ , _ _ _ _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ . . , . . _ . , _~ . . _ . . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ , _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
LIST Or FACTORS FOR CONVERSION OF ENGLISH TO INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM OF UNITS (SI) The followng table gives the factors used in this document for the conversion of conventional Engish units to the equivalent international System of Units (SI) now being adopted worldwide or conventional metric units. The conversion factors have been obtained from the ASTM publication Standard for Metric Practics' 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 sufficent for the requirements of this document. Most of the values will be presented in SI units with the equivalent English unit following within parentheses Conversion of English to SI Units To Convert From To Multgdy By acre hectare (ho) 0.4047 feet (ft) meters (m) 0.3048 8 3 cubic feet (ft ) cubic meters (m ) 0.02832 3 geson (ge0 cubic meters (m ) 0.003785 gallon (ge0 Eters (L) 3.79 gol/ min Etars/s (L/s) 0.06309 irech (in.) centimeters (cm) 2.54 inch Gn.) meter (m) 0.0254 mile (statute) kilometer (km) 1.609 2 2 square mile (mile ) square kiometer (km ) 2.590 pound Ob) kilograms (kg) 0.4536 i
*Amencan Society for Testing and Meterials. Standard E-380, Standsed for Metric Practice, February 1980.
l i I I I I xiii
- 1. PURPOSE OF AND NEED FOR ACTION
1.1 INTRODUCTION
The Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Nuclear Fuel Division, Fuel Fabrication Plant near Columbia, South Carolina [ Nuclear Fuel Columbia Site (NFCS)), manufactures low-enriched uranium 235 U) for use in light-water commercial nuclear reactors in response to oxide fuel assemblies (45% an application by Westinghouse for renewal of Special Nuclear Material (SNM) License No. SNM-1107, which covers operations of the Columbia plant, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), with technical assistance from Oak Ridge National Laboratory, prepart.d this environmental assessment. The document was prepared pursuant to NRC regulations (10 CFR Pt. 51) which implement 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 implementing NEPA. Sections 51.14 and 51.30 of the NRC regulations define " environmental assessment" as follows:
- 1. An environmental assessment is a concise public document, for which the NRC is responsible, that serves to
- briefly provide sufficient evidence and analysis for determining whether to prepare an Environmental impact Statement (EIS) or a finding of no significant impact,
- aid the NRC's compliance with NEPA when no EIS is necessary, and
- facilitate preparation 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 attematives. It shall also include 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 impacts of operations at 400 metric tons (t) of uranium per year and projected impacts of future expansion of up to 1600 t/ year of uranium. The 1977 EIA was based on an analysis of the effects of the ammonium diuranate (ADU) production process and an experimental Dry Conversion Fluidized Bed (DCFB) system for converting uranium hexafluoride (UFe) to uranium dioxide (UO 2)- Subsequent to the 1977 license renewal, several environmentally related changes were made to the Westinghouse plant and its operations, including the following:
- 1. Uranium-contaminated calcium fluoride sludge generated from liquid waste treatment prior to 1981 was fixed with a cement-like binder and buried offsite at a radioactive waste burial facility.
- 2. An advanced waste treatment system was installed to increase uranium recovery from liquid process wastes. Calcium fluoride sludge generated after the installation of this system was allowed to be dispcsed of offsite without continuing incense controls.
- 3. An incinerator system was installed for the recovery of uranium from combustible waste materials.
1-1
. . ~_ . . _ _ - -. - - .. .
1-2
- 4. The production capacity 'of the ADU conversion process and the plant throughput were expanded from 400 to over 700 t/ year of uranium.
- 5. A new dry conversion process called the Integrated Dry Route (IDR) was installed to replace the '
'DCFB experimental dry process line. The IDR lines are presently undergoing preoperational testing using uraruum i-:::-- -j under an Agreement State bconse !
l 1 This environmental aaaa== ment considers the ernpacts of the use of both the ADU and IDR ' conversson procanaa=, andevidually or in a worst-case combmetion of the two, up to a maxwnum ' g production capacity of 1600 t/ year of uranium. 3 .- 1.2 ~
SUMMARY
OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ' The proposed action is the renewal of the SNM Incense (SNM-1107), which is necessary for Westinghouse to continue an existing fuel fabrication operation at its Columbe facility. Principal operations at Columbe melude (1) conversion of UFe to UO2 powder, (2) presemg the powder into fuel pellets, (3) encapsulation of the peNets into 3.6-m (12-ft) fuel rods, and (4) stacking of the fuel rods into fuel assembles for subsequent stupment to customers' nuclear reactor sites. The current application for renewal of the SNM license covers operations authorized previously and includes a request for an amendment to the existing license to upgrade the facshty by the incorporation of the
. IDR conversion process. Although Westinghouse was prowously authonzed to receive and possess 4
mixed oxide plutorwurn 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 hcense, and s
the pa======w of mixed oxide plutonsum fuelis not part of the proposed acten. 1.3 NEED FOR ACTION T e Westinghouse NFCS is one of several industrial facilrtes dedicated to the fabrication of fuel i-elements for light-water-moderated nuclear reactors (LWRs). As long as the current demand for nucieer energy continues, the fuel production rate must keep pace. Because Westmghouse is a - major suppler of fuel for LWRs, denial of the license renewal for the Columba plant would l p= state ,expension of smlar activities at another existing fuel fabncation , facihty or the construction'and operation of a new plant. Although denyng the renewal of the SNM hcense for ' Westinghouse *s NFCS is an alternative available to the NRC, it would be considered only if 'esues
-of pubhc health and safety cannot be resolved to the satisfaction of the regulatory agences involved 1.4 THE SCOPfNG PROCESS The environmental wnpacts 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 uratwum were predicted, based on - the use of the ADU process for conversion of UFe to UO2 - Along with its current apphcation to the NRC for license renewal, Westinghouse submitted an j environmental report (Westinghouse 1983) that includes (1) an updated desenption of the Columbe 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 L i
- y. .,
1-3 effluents / emissions, 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 appiscant to discuss data and information provided earlier and to obtain rupplementalinformation. 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 scoping 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 accidents. 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. 10-1151), Feb. 20.
- 2. ALTERNATIVES INCLUDING THE PROPOSED ACTION 2.1 THE ALTERNATIVE OF NO LICENSE RENEWAL Not granting a license renewal for the Westinghouse NFCS would result in the cessation of commercial fuel fabncation at the site. This alternative would be considered only if issues of public health and safety could not be resolved if license renewal is derned, the minor environmental wnpacts desenbed in Sect. 4 would not occur.
f- 2.2 THE ALTERNATIVE OF LICENSE RENEWAL This alternative, which is the proposed action, would result in the continued operation of the Westinghouse 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 chemmal conversion process used under the current license The following sections describe present
~
operations, waste confinement, and effluent control for the ADU and IDR processes and point out i the differences between them. , 2.2.1 Description of Current Operations The following information regarding current operations at the Westinghouse NFCS was excerpted from Westinghouse (1983). Supplemental data and information were provided dunng 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 uranium Plans were subsequently made to expand capacity up to 1600 t/ year of uranium initially, Westinghouse had planned to accompish this expansson by installing additional :1
- l. '
- ADU process lines. As an alternative, Westinghouse instaged and expenmented with the DCFB dry process, whch 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 i offer an even greater environmental benefit while yielding a more supenor fuel product ! (Westinghouse 1981). Therefore, in 1981 plans for plant expansion were changed in favor of the - IDR conversion process The IDR lines have been constructed and are undergoing preoperational l (- testing. The Westinghouse NFCS fabricates nuclear fuel assembhos containing low-ennched (45% 23sU) . UO2 fuel for use in commercial reactors. The role that the NFCS plays in the nuclear fuel cycle is
- . illustrated in Fig. 2.1. *
- As mentioned in Sect.1.2, Westinghouse was previously authorized to possess mixed oxide
- plutonoom fuel; however, no onsite operations were conducted using the fuel, and none are ;
. planned. Under the license renewal, no plutotuum fuel may be possessed at the NFCS. i 2.2.1.2 Plant facilities i Major site facchties consist of the main plant building, the chemmal storage area; the waste treatment area, whch has four chemical settling ponds; one reserve settling pond; and one sanitary 4 ! 2-1 l
r i 2-2 E5 6117R MINING MILLING F LuoRINATION 1r ENRICHMENT l 1I l
---- I l ROLE OF THE Conversion To WESTINGHOUSE NFCS Il uranium osoxiof l ColuusiA. s C.
II Il II , Il I I I l g i FAaRsCAfioN I g lII ' I lll l ASSEMBLY IL L_________.__________lJ RE ACTOR CORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANT 1r iNTE RIM 8TORAGE OF tRR ADIATE D FUEL Fig. 2.1. An illustration of the nuclear fuel cycle, Indicating the role of the Ween.#-m NFCS. stabilization pond. A detailed site plan for the NFCS is shown in Fig. 2.2, and the interior layout of the main building is illustrated in Fig. 2.3. The building, which covers 32,515 m2 (350,000 ft'), is divided into two functional areas: a chemical manufacturing area and a mechanical manufactunng area. In the chemical manufacturing area, UFe is converted to UO2 using the ADU process. This is followed by milling, pressing, sintering, and machining of the UO 2 to form fuel pellets about 0.6 cm (0.25 in.) in diameter and 1.2 cm (0.5 in.) in length. These pellets 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 area are various recovery operations that support the conversion process in the recycle of material. These recovery operations include
2-3 ES-6113R ELECTRIC SUBSTATION TANK FARM CALCIUM FLUORIDE CALCIUM FLUORIDE LAGOON NO.2 LAGOON NO.1 WATER TAN K STORM RUN0FF TO PUMP HOUSE UF6STORAGF PAD UPPER SUNSET LAKE ] " SANITARY LAGOON
\ . .. OIL HOUSE
\ SHIP? LNG CONTAINE R BUTLER BUILDING m ,
W e'% STORAGE AREA DITCH NORTH AND SOUTH h ~ Ie REFURBISHING BLOG. PROCESSWASTE LAGOONS : p- _ F R AME HOUSE-Ql [ ? ' l a/ EAST LAGOON \ EXPANSION < EQUIPMENTSHED# df j ' M COOLING { UNH STORAGE TANKS TOWERS WASTE TREATMENT BUILDING j[ Th - - C-HF STO R AGE TANK
// Q d j>>
UF WASHING AND RECERTIFICATION PLANT 6 2
,e WASTE STO RAGE BUILulNG /_y-CONTRACTOR CHANGE ROOM 3 CAFE 4 l _
f
-" ~ Q DANIEL CONST. BLOG.
FFICE g ADVANCED WASTE 4 TREATMENT BLOG. ' VISITOR -d s PARKING PARKING IFP BLOG. DEIONIZED WATER BLOG. 4 HOT 0lL R00M f "* 0FFICES f"~ HF/UNH MIXING BLOG.
\ PLANT ENTRANCE
/. O imMMMM 45 to 1m 100 1 I SCALE IN METERS 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 ecvievinici4y recover uranium contained in combustible wastes. In the med.66;c6l 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. l i L____
T 3, ..s.cavs.m., . osvatore.sm: l , maw marsneAt stomacs g s' *
. ~ r .
L.. A C e'- 'N I-~5 b' ;' 4-m 5, . _ . _ . _ . _
, . -o .
L g l l l 2 mana.ans mura==s A, , maC a e m.o. w e
,3 AmtA. 5,oORAGE O v'. g r-4 -
00 = i n.r ' . = M*"
-. R==
s-SECO DFL00A , , ca= = $ ~ ..
""" cweuicat
_--]- j manuragunimo
- - r---
macwamicat _,
*-1t . ._,.._._,
uamuguaias r--]O b- nj, 4 irn r RECOwER. E 2" AAEA j _ se .
='s '"O'" - - - y
^"""
b -. __ [*C' _! . J ~ 2~' l
= gq^ ._._m. e-8,ORAGE AAEA m ...
I LT T ' rCG] l ' ' - - - L1_ m nL_l!E-
~1r:
I ..,_.
..-A--. mu,A g
r- _ , FIRS, FtOOR CAFE,fRSA SECOND FLOOA OC -J a ty y12 ll r 4 '~~' ' g . HT C.t...h.
=
.l r
..,,t-.C.
i 3 _ i t Fig. 2.3. The interior layout of the Westinghouse NFCS. Source: Westinghouse 1983. Fig. 2.5. i l l
._ ~_ _ _ __. . _. _ . _. _ . . . _ _ _ - ._
e f 4 2-5 + Serutary and industriel waste treatment processes are conducted external to the main facihty. These processes are desenbod in Sect. 2.2.2. . 2.2.1.3 Chemical processes Five ADU conversion lines are currently available to process five different isotopic ennchments sunuttaneously. For ther ADU (or future IDR process), UFe will be received at a maximum enrichment of 5% 2asU in standard 2.5-ton cylmders and shippmg packages.' As needed, a UFe cylmder is rernoved from the'UFe ylmder c storage area and connected to one of the conversion lines. The UFe is vaponzed by heating the cylinder in one of the steam chambers located in the UF6 vaporization area a4ecent to the conversion lines. Ammonium diurenete process in the ADU process, the vaporized UFs is hydrolyzed to uranyl fluoride (UO22F ) by mixing with water. The UO F22 is subsequently converted to an ADU slurry [(NH4 )2U07 2 + 4NH4F + 3H 2O) , t by addog ammorwum hydroxide solution. The ADU slurry is dowatered by centnfugation and the o ADU is converted to the solid UO2 product by heat and the introduction of hydrogen. The ammonia, fluondes, and steam in the calemer off-gases are scrubbed by a water scrubber and the f gases are then passed through a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter assembly before discharge to the atmosphere. The dry UO2 powder is conveyed from the calciner through a milhng operation and into storage containers which are sampled, ciosed, and identified.
- I integrated dry route process i
The IDR process will utilize dry methods to convert solid UFe to UO2. The UFe feed meterial, which is vaponzed by heating 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 -
r countercurrent flow of hydrogen, nitrogen, and superheated steem to strip residual fluonde and to rath em the uranium powder to UO2 . The UO2 is discharged into check hoppers and is then pneumatically conveyed (or.otherwise transported) to the powder processmg ares. Process off-f I. gases (H2 , HF, nitrogen (N2), and steam (H 2O)] are removed contmuously through off-ges filters that are penadramy reverse-purged to remove urarnum-bearing solids prior to the recovery . of hydrofluonc acid. Hydrofluonc acid is recovered by condensation of the HF and steem before the remommg gases are released. The location of the proposed IDR system is shown in Fig. 2.3. Scrap recovery L Scrap recovery is accomphshed by batch operations mvolvmg a variety of input meterials. The prehmmary operations concentrate the material and convert it to forms readily processed as .UaOs , powder and uranyl nitrate. Not all materials require processmg through. the entire sequence of
- operations. The basic processing sequence ecludes dissolution of solid forms in nitric acid,
[ conversion to slurry form by precipitating ADU from the solution, dewetering the slurry form by _ wet mecharwcal separation, calcining the resulting sludge in regular or controlled-atmosphere f fumeces, and packaging and storing the resulting product.
=-,..-v. .+-.---,-,,-,.------o--- w-w,----m-e--,,*%-,-rmm--.-,m -.we,--ry--~~. mew.-o-. -- - ---y---www---- - , - - - .rw, - --
"4
, 2-6
.Before, being released through the HEPA-filtered exhaust system to the atmosphere, off-gases q
- from the' uranyl nitrate dissolvers are routed through a reflux condenser and a scrubber to remove
-^
entrained particles and condensible vapors. The reflux condenser is . mounted vertically and is
~
- directly above the dissolution tank so that any condensation formed can drain back into the tank.
-An incineration. process is conducted to menemize the burial of low-level combustible contameneted waste and to' economecally recycle product-grade material. A solvent extraction process recovers
- and purifies various contaminated uraneum materials.
Pellet and rod manufacturing processes
~
. The' product UO2 powder from the chemical conversion area is brought to a feed preparation hood in the pellet area where it is mixed with U 0s 3 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 zinc steerate bender-lubricant. The granules of uranium are next fed into high-speed pellet presses where the fuel is cc.iy-.ted into a green pellet. The green pellets are loaded into molybdenum boats and are sintered in an electncally heated fumace in a hydrogen
- atmosphere. This process produces a denser, more compact peNet. To obtain precise dimensions,
~
.aN peNets are processed through a grinding operation and are dimensionally checked.
Pending quality control release, the pellets are loaded onto trays for interim storage. Upon
- quality control' approval, the pellets are loaded into empty fuel rods, a spnng is inserted into the plenum section, and and plugs 'are inserted and girth welded to the rod. Next the rod is pressunrod with helium and seal welded. Finished fuel rods are transferred to quahty assurance operations.
2.2.1.4 Mechanical operations i AN uraruum material that - is transferred to the med, 0.id manufacturing area has been encapsulated and sealed A smaN additional room is proposed for the south end of the facility for manufacturing posson ' rods for nuclear fuel assembhos (Fig. 2.2). Vanous quakty control-and quality assurance operations are performed in the manufacturing
' area on sealed rods, including X-ray testing, hehum leak testing, gamma scanrung, visual checks, and dwnenseonal checks. Machwung operations are performed to fabricate vanous intamal ports of the nuclear fuel assemblyskeiston". structure, including grid straps, bottom nozzle, top nozzle, and guide tubes.- Individual, rods are loaded into the skeleton assembly. Final weighing and testing ,
operations are performed on completed assembhos Other macherung operations are performed in fabricating the boron carbide bumable posson assembhos and silver cadmiurn control rod "spyder" assembhes. A nickel plating shop is maintained to assist with brazing the inconel grid straps. Zirconium grid strap fabncation using laser welding techniques has been introduced for certain fuel assembhes
- As'a final step, the. assembly is given a complete wash in soap and water and a desonized water rinse. The assembbes can either be stored for shipment or shipped wnmediately in approved containers. A substantial quantity of assemblies are stored in the fuel assembly storage area prior to shipment to the utility.
2.2.1.5 Shippeng AN shipments of nuclear materials and wastes from the Columbia plant are camed out in conformance with NRC, DOT, and state of South Carolina requirements. Completed fuel assemises
-. . - - - . - . _ . - - . .- . - ~.. . . .- - - - - - , - - . . - - -
..y +a fQ
.,y f (lN 2-7 p:, .,,
;p: y are shipped to utility customers in approved containers licensed by the NRC. Low-level waste 171 shipments are appropriately packaged and analyzed for uranium content prior to shipment to the . f,"
low-level waste burial grounds. ^%y
#r
- w. ,
2.2.2 Waste Confinement and Effluent Control m 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 L 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 Gaseous / particulate emissions Thirty-seven exhaust stacks currently discharge airborne emissions from the main plant facility. M 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 3 material being processed; however, in all cases, the bulk of the material will be 23sU (95 wt %), 234 U (up to 86% of the total activity). Stack locations and whereas the predominant activity will be sources of exhaust are shown in Fig. 2.4. All release points are either short stacks or roof vents, rather than elevated stacks. Operations invohnng the use of radioactive materials in unsealed physical forms are limited to low-enrichment (G5 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
>0.3 -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 yCi/ 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 thout 700 t/ year of uranium are 1.8 and 2.3 g/s, respectively (Wettinghouse 1983). The fluoride emisHons measured at a nominal 700 t/ year of uranium production capacity for the I years 1981-1983 are summarized in Table 2.3. The three-year averat,e 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). l In its application to NRC for approval to operate the IDR dry conversion system, West;nghouse (1981) estimated the fluoride emissions to be 2125 pg/s. Uranium emissions were estimated to be 3.5 pg/s. Assuming uraniura enrichment to 5% 23sU (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.
-- . . ._ w
.. m.,,,. .. . . . .. . ,_
N ES-6138
=
}/
m
\ - THt$ SECTION KEY:
. O 35 43 FEET A OVE COOLING GROUND 33 1 - FURNACE EX. LINE 1 3200034 TOWER 2 - ruRNACE EX. LINE 2 O
9 eO 3 - FURN ACE EX. LINE 3 4 - FURNACE EX. LINE 4 5 - FURNACE EX. LINE fr$ 5 - FURNACE EX. LINE S N
. T - MET. LAS EXNAUST 8 - INCINERATOR EX.
THIS SECTION OF A00F is SS FEET A30VE GROUND [--
.OO , PL AT'*G 9 - SUPPLEMENTAL INC. EX.
18 - CONVER$104 5 A SYSTEM EX.
' ti- CONvERs0N I 8 SYSTEM EX.
O l g"XMAust 12 - SCRAP REC 0vtRY 2 A SYSTEM EX. O 36 i 13 - SCRAP RECOVERY 2 8 SYSTEM EX. e e O: 14 - A0u tlNE sCRuS8ER 3A gg OO to 7O k/ --
-""""C""'"3' 88 - " dint VENT SYSTEM SA O 27 tr - MaiNT vtNT SYSTEM *3 18 - CONVER$10N ENCLO$URE EX. NO. 4 13 OO t2 50 06 TMis siti:04 0F ROOF l$ 33 FEET A80VE GROUNO 19 - CONVERSION ENCLOSURE EX. 40. 3 y
-*""'""'"*'""***~* 0 i5 OO M Og3 21 - CHEM. LA8 FILTERE0 EX.
22 - DECON ROOM EX. 22 16 O O q COOLING TOWER 23 - CALCiNER COM8uST cas LINE t g 24 - CALCiNER COM80ST GAS LINE 2 O 24
'7 OC 20 O 25 O2 25 - CsLCiNER COM8usT cAs LINE 3 Zs - CALCiNER C M8usi sAs tine 4 O O E' D3 27 - CALCINER COM8UST GAS tl4E 5 29 aE3 18 C4 28 - AIR COMPRESSOR ROOM EX.
29 - S0ILER ROOM EX. THIS SECTION OF ROOF IS O 43 FEET ABOVE sROUNO 38 - CutM. LAS EX. NO. 2 20 31 - H.P. L A 8 E X. 0 30 0 3t 32 - DevEt0PME T LAS Ex. : 33 - DEVELOPMENT LA8 EX. 2 34 - OEVELOPMENT LAS EX. 3 35 - SOLVENT EXTRACTION AREA EX. 36 - PROPOSED BOR EX. 37 - CHEMICAL LAS EX. 40. 3 38 - SCRAP RECOVERY ORY EXHAUST NOTE: TWO STACXS kOT SHOWN ARE NO. 37. CHEMICAL LA8 EXHAUST No. 3. AND NO. 38. SCRAP RECOVERY ORY EXMAUST. Fig. 2.4. Process stock discharge locations from the top view of the roof of the Westinghouse NFCS, Sowee: Westinghouse 1983. Fig. 4.1.
7 t l l I 2-9 i Table 2.1, Measured semiannual airborne releases of gross alpha activity from the Westinghouse NFCS Period ending Discharged (pC0 12-31-79 1008 06-30-80 537 12-31-80 659 06-30-81 462 12-31-81 485 06-30-82 502 12-31-82 574 ' 06-30-83 701 y 12-31-83 756 06-30-84 804 Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 4.1; and S. D. Wyngarden, NRC, personal commuruca-tion to A. W. Reed, ORNI., Dec. 6,1984. Table 2.2. Identification of process gas scrubbers at the Westinghouse NFCS, including their efficiencies Effeiency Scrubber Location Type and Chemcal Particulate number (%) (wt %) Plant air H'gh-energy 70-85 (r4H 3, HF) 90 S-2A.S-2B 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 gas Calciners Venturi,10 75-80 (NH3) 90 effluent 75-90 (HF) Incmerator effluent incoerator Packed tower,1 90 (Acids) 95 Scrap recovery Scrap recovery Spray tower,1 95 90 (S-1056) Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 4.4. Table 2.3. Fluoride emission rates (pg/s) from the Westinghouse NFCS at a nominal 700 t/ year of uranium production capacity during the period 1981-1983 Daily average 1981 1982 1983 Maximum 309 879 766 Annual 69.8 77.7 97.3 Minimum 6.5 4.1 6.5 Soured: Westinghouse 1984. t
L p - } 2-10 J I L 2.2.2.2 Liquid wastes f y Liquid waste streams at the Westinghouse NFCS include sanitary wastes and process q wastewaters. Process wastewaters are primarily contaminated by ammonia and fluorides. Both [ ]L ( waste streams are treated onsite prior to their combined, discharge into the Congaree River. A [ 10-cm (4-in.) pipeline releases the plant effluent to the river at a point about 5.6 km (3.5 miles) - I south of the facility (Fig. 3.3). The pipe submerges into the river, discharging directly into the ; current near the bottom approximately 6 m (20 ft) from shore. l The flow rates from the process and sanitary waste streams are about equal and, at the 1 $ present level of operation (approximately 700 t/ year of uranium), the combined liquid effluent U stream flows at about 475 m 3/d (125,00 gal /d). At the expanded 1,600 t/ year of uranium i capacity, it is estimated that the total waste stream flow rate will be approximately 720 m8 /d (190,000 gal /d)(Westinghouse 1983). ) Waste treatment i Figure 2.5 indicates the treatment and flow of liquid wastes at the Westinghouse NFCS. Six - onsite lagoon storage basins are illustrated in the figure; the locations of these lagoons are shown 1 { in Fig. 2.2. The north, south, and west (I and 11) lagoons are used for settling solids from treated ; j process wastewaters prior to discharge. The sanitary lagoon is used for polishing sanitary wastes 5
- after onsite treatment. The east lagoon provides extra capacity for overflow from other lagoons or
- a for containment in the event of a spill or emergency. All process waste storage lagoons were
; relined with 36-mil Hypalon liners during 1981-1982. Each lagoon is also equipped with French ] ! Drain systems beneath the liners to detect lagoon leakage. Westinghouse states that no additional - lagoons are planned during the next five-year period; however, three additional 11Nn 3 f j (30,000-gal) aboveground liquid waste storage tanks are planned.
3 Radiological control. Compliance with 10 CFR Pt. 20 activity limits regarding the discharge of 5 f radioactive liquid wastes to an unrestricted area is assured by a continuous on-line gamma ray spectroscopy system within the main plant's controlled access area. Quarantine tanks and diversion
} ; tanks are available to increase settling times and allow sufficient filtration if the liquid activity is 1 above release limits (30 pCi/mL, which is the 10 CFR Pt. 20 limit for release of 234 U to j unrestricted waters). When the liquid has been successfully scanned and approved for discharge, it is sent to the advanced wastewater treatment facility for uranium removal external to the main
{ plant. This polishing operation assures that all recoverable uranium is removed from the liquid stream and recycled through scrap recovery. The liquid stream is then discharged to the chemical waste treatment system. Typical discharge concentrations and total annual release of radioactivity at the NFCS are given in Table 2.4 (Westinghouse 1983). ,
; Nonradiological control. The aqueous process waste solution, primarily filtrate from the ADU =
h process lines, is circulated through filters before being pumped to tanks in the waste treatment h facility. The main constituents of the process liquid wastes are ammonium fluoride (NH4F) and ! uranium. Through the addition of lime and caustic, the fluoride is converted to insoluble calcium - fluoride (CaF 2 ), which is removed by centrifugation or by settling in a series of holding lagoons rI (Sect. 2.2.2.3). Most of the ammonia is recovered by distillation and returned (as ammonium 5 .g hydroxide) to the ADU process following pH adjustment with caustic. After addition of time and removal of the ammonia in the stripping still, the CaF2 slurry is . l discharged to the west lagoon to permit settling of the solids. The liquid is decanted from the top F 1 7 I
2-11 E E .. .. 9
*ESI I GEST H
$Ah8 ? AR Y LAGOOle
** LAGOOle LAGOOle is t t l' %
'* a fA4EFAAM Comt&#hulmf PAD P f SOUT se NOATw (AaOOh LAaOOh 4- '\ PROC h
\
$$ leal 9 9
'\ SAlest M ,
AE na tioso y gg,,, e
"E' COmf nAstE Io c AAEE [ L8 FILT#Af m --
nova n
- i' 16 I sAA.a LEn ,,Os
,o g
M + kn isfiLL _ l a M AIN E A&T L AcOose g .
'888"' C Q *. PLANT i \ 3 5,1, .E.u,A' 0
. F I_ sak k' a
I { MOLD
*A$TE STOAAGE Cvt
~ntCE n f 63 0 Samef anv 08 A+M nel SO*LE A GLOeOOe4 gggggg 4 ALLO tt 4ALC0 7t t hALCO 356 %A CD PS2 teeE 88- NAS DEiO%4E A f Lusa AND GACamasm SvtFVRsC ACso la a W.I CAATC he0W
$$ Rwil AS WA$f t C A Aih $QA E R AT f sLU DE wlLOPWE %f CaEU*C ALS maf E A UC Gav taaf Seitte A%D LE WELOPE R il LSE D 14 Ai>TOMaf 6C OEVE LOP +%G hp* Nm O, E QuifwE %f 3 GROv%Ce A T E # CO%f Aa%8 ea$f $$ 8pOU CAPE TE n,A A40 a sfCpte, 3 #008 OA A*4 TO STOmu ttet 8 9 PaOC555 WA5f t if AE ATEDB eATE A 8tM.F . he*.%0, 4 $A4sf AAf 0 maim
""eOH Ce8, Co0H 5 CLO5EO COOLt%G foeE R LOOP Owl # FLOW A%Q SLOWDOe% OF Sv5f t u TO lf omw tieE e 40f e t Lih8 40 E lf at au CE LE TE D GECAvh5 Of EPA le STORY lE #E R G AOuhDea f E a DEQuenE wt%f t AND 40e f Loe5 TO Lime %Q es tt TRE A TE D 04CL AS$aFaE 0 eanfE
't" " C. , . , :^2
%ALCO 7373
". n cEo a DeAnaam%aAfe~
"2M* **U" '"8 * *'" I 4ALPAC $240 13 YE5f watEA CVLi%CEn #ECEnfifiCAfiO4 e CO8eT AM+h&T E 0 e A&f t maf E4 U0, P06 0E 4 H ea$f t l'OA AGE PA0 0aa+4 7 #005 04 Aim f 0 lf Onw gE eE n 16 f LOe peou CAmeONAft #Euovat susite Fig. 2.5. Building and liquid waste 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 place. After a 1- to 3-d settling time, the supernate is pumped to the Congaree River, usually together with overflow from the sanitary stabilization pond. Westinghouse discharges the combined liquid effluent in accordance with the requirements set forth by SC-DHEC in a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. The permit, which was modified in September 1984, is presented in Appendix B.
m 2-12 l Table 2.4. Discharge concentrations and total annual <alease of radioactivity in Westinghouse NFCS liquid wastes At 700 t/ year of uranium Estimated at 1600 t/ year of uranium l Total Total Radiation Concentration release Concentration release MPC, PC, component (pCi/mL) rate (pCi/mL) rate (rnCi/ year) (mci / year) Alpha 0.64 2.2 6 97 1.77 5.9 6 262 Beta 0.305 0.9* 45.2 0.823 2.A* 122
*MPC = Maximum permissit4e concentration.
- Based on 2340,10 CFR Pt. 20.
- Based on calculated 10 CFR Pt. 20 limits for combined daughter products:
234 Th 231 7,, ,
= 33 pCi/mL 234p, Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 4.6.
'em All domestic-type wastes, shower water, cafeteria water, and several miscellaneous streams are routed to the sanitary system. Contaminated laundry cleaning is performed outside the NFCS by an approved vendor.
Site sanitary sewage is treated in an extended aeration package plant and discharged into a biological oxidation / settling-polishing lagoon. The lagoon effluent is then chlorinated and mixed with treated liquid process waste at the facility lift station. The average annual nonradiological quality of the NFCS combined (process plus sanitary) liquid effluent is presented in Table 2.5. Westinghouse's compliance with its NPDES permit is discussed in Sect. 4. IDR process The IDR process produces a lesser volume of liquid wastes than the ADU process because no liquids are involved in the chemical conversion reactions. Hydrofluoric acid is a usable byproduct (liquid waste) that will be generated by the use of this process. The applicant presently has no definite plan for the use/ disposal of the acid (Westinghouse 1981). 2.2.2.3 Solid wastes Manufacturing Materials such as used packaging, worn-out clothing, paper, wood-floor sweepings, discarded tools, etc., are collected and stored prior to disposal, which is made according to two primary - classification,s: uranium contaminated or contamination free. The contaminated material is further segregated into combustible and noncombustible classifications. Noncombustible waste is examined to determine the feasibility of recovery and is then either processd chemically or colected in boxes for ultimate disposal at a government-licensed waste disposal site. Combustible items are reduced to ash in a specially designed incinerator, and the ash is dissolved in a mixer-settler dissolver system. Solvent extraction will recover and purify the uranium for recycle back to the product
-eimm-mis-
2-13 Table 2.5. Annual average nonrediological water quality of INestmghouse NFCS liquid effluent discharge at 700 t/ year of uranium Parameter * (mg/L)3 Ob/d) pH, units 8.6 18.9 16.2 BODS Fecal coliform. MPN/100 mL 50 Total suspended solids 23.3 20.0 Chemical oxygen demand 89 76.4 08 and grosse 3.5 3.0 Phenol,pg/L <1 <0.001 Surfactants 0.17 0.15 Nitrate 160 137 Sulfate 140 120 Sulfide <0.05 0.04 Ammones (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 Iron 5.0 4.3 Manganese 0.04 0.03 Magnesun 6.1 5.2 Zinc 2.2 1.9 Aluminum 0.41 0 35 ' Cobalt <0.01 <0.01 Molybdenum 0.04 0.03 Sodium 194 166 Boron 0.267 0.23 Bromide <0.1 <0.09
'800 = Biologeal oxygen demand MPN = Most probable number.
"Unless othenmse specified.
Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 4.7. material stream. A flow sheet for projected solid contaminated wastes at 1600 t/ year of uranium production capacity is given in Fig. 2.6. Wastewater treatment solids fn previous years, after fixation with a cement-like bender, tr.e calcium fluoride contaminated with uraneum was buried at the low-level radioactive waste burial site in Barnwen, South Carolina. 3 AN calcium fluoride generated prior to 1981, approximately 1.6 x 10' m3 (575,000 ft ) of 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 NRC (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 chsposal in a chemical or sanitary landfill.
2-14 ES-6128 RATE: 40 to 60 BALES /DAf COMBUSTIBLE APPR04: 4 BALES / DAY NON-CCMBUSTIBLE COMBUST-IBLE # COUN NG ' INCINERATOR SCRUBBER pft n ---> ST ACK PACKAGING _ a i FITTERS SCRUBBER WASH NON-COMBUSTIBLE h 9 y GAPNA URANIUM F RTERS COUNTING RECOVERY t URANYL NITRATE 1r CHECK AND SHIPPING DISCHARGE TO WASTE CONVERSION TRE ATHENT AREA
'f y 4
. BURIAL 00 R!vtR 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 rnaterial 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 unres:icted use. The plan identifies and discusses the major factors that influence the cost of decontaminating the facilities and grounds and provides a cost estimate for these activities. The decommisssoning 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 regulations in Pt. 70 provide for material accounting and control requirements with respect to facility nrganization, 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
- - ~ _ - - . . .. -. .. -
2-15 SNM of low strategic seywficance (includmg low-ennched uranium) include provision for the estabbehment of controlled access - areas, monitoring of those aroes to detect unauthorized penetration, provieson of a response capetzhty for unauthorized penetrations and actiwties, and o - estabhshment of procedures for threats of theft and for actual thefts. The reguistions in 10 CFR Pts. 70 and 73, descnbod briefly above, are apphed in the reviews of individual heense appbcations. Ucense condicons then are developed and imposed to translate the regulations into specific requirements and limitations that are tailored to fit the particular type of > plant or facshty involved. The hconese has an approved metenal control and accounting plan and an approved physical security plan that meet the current requirements for the low-enriched uranium that would be V::mi at the site. It is concluded, therefore, that the safeguards-related environmental impact of the prar-ad action is inengrwficant.
. 2.5 STAFF EVALUATION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION AND ALTERNATIVES The staff behoves that the fuel manufacturing operations at the Westinghouse NFCS are performed in a menner that protects both the public and the environment from unusual or adverse I
impacts. However, as discussed in the indicated sections, the staff recommends addition of the follovnng requirements.
; 1. ~ The appbcant will be required to take onsite pass samples for fluoride analysis at least twice a 1 year when_ the pass is being cut for hoy. Onsite soybean crops, when harvested, will also be monitored for fluoride. In addition, the apphcant will be required to analyze appropriate I
background semples of vegetation for fluoride (Sects. 4.2.2.1 and 4.2.6).
- 2. The applicant will be required to expand its onsite groundwater monitoring program to study changes in the contaminent plume Appropriate existing wells (both in the shallow and deeper aquifers) will be sampled at least quarterly and analyzed for pose alpha, poss beta, and ammonio concentrations (Sects. 4.2.3.2 and 4.2.6).
- 3. The appbcant will be required to redrill certain youndwater monitoring wells so that the wells can be completed with state-of-the-art designs This requirement includes Morwtor Well W-3,
- which is completed in the Black Mmgo Formation underneath the shallow youndwater
- contammation (Sect. 4.2.6).
The environmental impact of continued operation is expected to be insignsficant providing that these requirements are added to the leense REFERENCES FOR SECTION 2 1,. , NRC (U.S. Nuclear Reguletory Commission). 1977. Environmental impact Appraisal of the Westmphouse Nucener Fuel Coeumhe Site (NFCS) Commercial Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant, Apr# 1977, NRC, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, Washington, D.C. (NR-FM-013). NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1981. " Uranium Fuel Ucensing Branch Technical t Position, Disposal or Onsite Storage of Thorium or Uranium Wastes from Past Operations," Fed. Nepist.144, p. 52061, October 23. 1 I
l 1
?
2-16 I Westinghouse.1975.' Westinghouse Nucioer fuel Cofumbes Site Evaluation Naport, submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Co .i.-- ' -, for renewal of SNM-1107, March 1 (Docket No. 70-1151). t Westinghouse.:.1981. License Amendment Appecation to 0> grade Facility (letter from A. T. Sabo, ! Westinghouse, to R. G. Page, NRC, dated Jan. 9,1981). Docket No. 70-1161. Westinghouse. : 1983. Update for Environments / krqpect Appnmesi. Westeghoues Eisctric Corporation, NFO Plant, Codumbas, South Cercene, SNM-1107, Docket No. 70-1151. April. Westinghouse.1984. Letter from R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to Merk J. Rhodes. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmssion, in response to NRC questions concerning the apphcent's U>dete for Environmental knpoet AppraisaI(Docket No. 70-1151), February 20. I I
.,,,-e.---,,- - - , . - . , _ - . , . , , - . ,n ,. . . , - ..-.n.,.-n _,- - ~ _- - - _ _ - _ _ - _ _
j I l
- 3. THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT
- 3.1 SITE DESCRIPTION I I 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 Soutn 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 l Manning property to the west (Fig. 3.4). The manufacturing plant and associated facilities are centrally located on the site. The developments, including the fuel fabrication facilities, holding ponds, parking lot, and landscaped I grounds, occupy approximately 24 ha (60 acres) or 5% of the total site area. Figure 3.4 shows the plant boundary, adjacent properties, drainagos, and elevations of the site. The plant floor is 142 ft above mean sea level (MSL). Plant site drainage flow follows original drainage patterns 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 c~. the site (approximately 444 ha or 1098 acres) in its natural state. 3.2 CLIMATOLOGY AND METEOROLOGY i 3.2,1 Climatology j 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 y- o w - - ~ y nyr. n > 9
. % , g, > - ,, m
;yl .: . -
- .. .. . . , . . . . , , , , ,fy _ ,, , . _
?i;; 1 , f 3
'(
.- -- .~ . ,
O l l l l Fig. 3.1. An exterior view of the Westinghouse NFCS neer Columbia, South Carolina, looking west from Bluff Road (Route 48). 3-1
3-2 ES 4t18 is ,- KENTUCKY .. VIRGINIA ,, - p
- - . . . a.: .
- m,;;,,, sALiu 8s i_t ENNESSEE j.f .l R N O X VILLE n.-
75 NORTH CAROLINA
. CHARLOTTE 7:
U.0,G, A , , , , , , , . . , 95 85 SOUTH AROLINA O/ 59 (
\ COLUMSIA zo N FLORENCE 4
~
ATLANTA LAN $ TE t AUGUSTA /. D 26 . . . ,, , CHARLESTON g3 i GEORGIA , SAVANNAH 75 95 Fig. 3.2. Regionel location of the W2...g.:r NFCS neer Columble, South Coreline. site, is given in Table 3.1. Temperature, relative humidity, wind, and the frequency of certain climatological 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 [0"C (32*F)] 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 tomadoes 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 tomadoes were reported from 1950 to 1973 and six tornadoes were reported from 1974 to 1982 (Jane Parvin, National Severe Storms Data Center, Kansas City, Missouri, personal communication with Andrea Reed, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October 18, 1984). Thom (1973) developed an empirical formula to compute the rnean recurrence interval for a l l l
3-3 ES-6111 EMsassij ,iRs&i.) $Vyu,g,3((
. Ysbhf gg' jig WESTINGHOUSE NUCLEAR FUEL l
' usuTAny nestavATIONN"' FABRICATION PLANT COLUMelA t$ lit AND VICINITV)
- 4f
,( p , 9 ,'~M '
g esansasas.s.vate.. O cn D m .... .c . . .. . .arnver . Q .....
.e4 ,
- - .. . ..v.o n s,
'**.r g, % aan s.
,.,s
/ o
-O- = . av's
_ o .........
.e aes ..
mm. p . WESTINGHOUSE '**
""$jj".' PLANT SITE $ *o,,
N $: n .- ,:.,~ .. \ s 4p: 4 ..=... _. ::e i.... "
-)
~~.
, N
- / ........ he -
.:.::: r.ts. Q ... ..
.~\pe . .
c
/N,, '
. \
.u....
\
;r e}* c ".i,, { J...<lj %
~
J f g'. ^* I \
. . ,, s w -
1,
'# eg ONGARit SWAMP NATIONAL MONUMENT ,
g s
,* / ..
It .
. , A. . ,
- . a X -
, '~....'
*~..
'#, .sL,
\ '
Fig. 3.3. Specific location of the Westinghouse N/C8 neer Columble, South Caroline. 3
(.- - . _7 3-4 { l-o - un I 5 a
$k A" {A8' ill lii 1
, 5 BD L t- . {A 3 .
s i s- i g1
'ss;~e!j 't
.. . 3 3
1 _s .., n. sh
,R:
's b i $ q:pi,. _p
/ f+ I?.!]$ 'e:,r:
., s
)*
~
hi
' t I.f..a.I.. **lO m/. / $,a$j$... :
'g gf
? 'f t%i 1,s..?-
E . t .a t
\
m -- g
=
n., g si g y.
'j wer &
E v4 ' !
'l,P% )',' 6 ,$y'3 e , . ., . Ii *
- 1.g
{s
.E.;s j
3-5
- Table 3.1. Climatological date from Columble Metropoliten Airport
- Temperature (*C)
Annual average 17.5 Moon daily high 24.1 Mean daily low 10.8 Decord high 41.7 Record low - 18.9 Dogew deys 2598 Relative humidity (%) Annual avocage 73 Wind Annual average speed (rnph) 7.0 Provanng direction SW Fasteet rnile Speed (mph) 60 , Direction W Precipitation (in.) Annual average 46.36 Monthly monimum 16.72 Monthly mwumum Trace 24-hr memimum 7.66 Snowfall (in.) Annual average 1.9 Monthly memimum 16.0 24-br maximum 15.7 Moon ennuel(no. of deys) Precipitation of 0.1 in. 110 Snow, sleet, heil of 1.0 in. 1 Thunderstorme 53 Heavy fog 27 Temperature of 32*C (907) or higher 65
'Dets bened on 7 to 30 years of record.
Source: Westinghouse 1975, Table 2.6-1. tornado striking any location by approximating the location with a geometrical point, Besed on the mean path stee of a tornado, the number of tornadoes per year, and the area over whch tornadoes may occur (Richland County), the probability of a tornado striking any location within Richtend County, whch 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 Caroline. There was no severe damage from weds, although flash floods caused damage to farmiends and pubic utilities in the Columbee region (Purvis
3-6 2 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). 3.2.3 Meteorology Atmospheric 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 Columbia region experienced no HAPP cases of low mixing heights and light winds. Diffusion climatology The annual and seasonal summaries 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 , (Westmghouse 1972). The data indicate that stable conditions exist 47% of the time, neutral ] conditions occur about 43% of the time, and unstable atmospheric conditions prevail about 10% of the time. The seasonal distribution of the various stability classes indicates that the greeteet 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 moet 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. 4 Estimates of atmosphwic dispwsion factors (X/0) on an annual basis at downwmd 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 phme model and diffusion coefficients for Pasquill-type turbulence. Because the NFCS effluent release points are generally lower then 2.5 times the height of adacent i solid structures, the release was conservatively assumed to occur at
- ground level, with credit for building wake effects. Using these assumptbne, the annual average x/O at the nearest residence (1000 m or 3300 ft northeast) is 7.67 x 10-es /m3 and, at the neerest site boundery (550 m or 1800 ft north-northwest), is 1.54 x 10-8 s/m3 .
3.2.4 Air Quality Richland County lies in the Columbia intrastate Air Quality Control Region (AOCR). Air quality in this AOCR is generally good and does not violate the National Ambient Air Quality Stenderds (Table 3.3) for total suspended particulates, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, and nitregon oxides (40 CFR Pt. 81, revised July 1,1983). However, concentrations of ozone in the Columbia ares, including Richland and Lexington counties, do not meet the national prtrpary standerd (40 CFR Pt. 81, revised July 1,1983). 3.3 DEMOORAPHY AND SOClOECONOMIC PROFil.E The plant site is located in a predominantly forested area of low population density southeost of the city of Columbia in Richland County, South Carolina. Richland County, which lies close to the geographical conter of South Carolina (Fig. 3.2), cuvors 2 x 10e m3 (762 m.les') and has a
3-7 ES-6129 N NNW NNE PERCENT IS% NW ig NE 9 WNW s ENE 3 15 W . I a.es - E WSW ESE SE SW SSW SSE S o-3 4-6 7-io n-is i7-ri 32, 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: Westirghouse 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 sadial (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 (deytime) 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 (110,637) (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
*** ,, *=e ,,
4 % sa
*a g &
#,* ., s. 8 ++
- 4
,, % a e 48%I*a 9, 9., U 8 # *
** .3%
o ,* g S t *; ; # Ga
*g **,, y h a- .*.
y g eh a.r s.s 19% w aa o.a jo. se ..e na ao to na o.o a go
$% a.o 4n
- wie f.s Si j S3* **
- o^ g o, o.,
. or a ..s
# * + a ..\ % ** *! **%
4 o.o e, # ** l l
. .e
+' . e ,a
.e e e9 441, (
Fig. 3.8. Average annuel wind rose for the Columinie Metropoliten Airport beoed on National Oooenic and Ar f.uic Adminletration date, 1948-1981. Ursts are mph. Convert to km/h by - multiplying 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 desenbe characteristics of local land use that are important in the environmental assessment of the NFCS operation and/or expansson Here, the staff describns 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. L 3.4.1 Site Area The location of the Westinghouse facuities and various land uses on the 469-ha (1158-acre) site are shown in Fig. 3.4. The facilities are centrally located on the site and lie about 550 m (1800 ft)'from Bluff Road'(South Carolina Route 48). The developed area (buddings, parking lots, and associated facilities) occupies about 24 he (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 butween the facdities 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 __ . _ _ _ _ ~ _ _ _ . __. _ _ ___ _ ______ _ _ ______
- n. - . . . ..
Table 3.2. Annual average atmospheric diepersion factors IX/0) 8 by diesence and direction from the Westinghouse NFCS (s/m ) Distence (mies) 0.5 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 N 0.693X 10' O.212X 10' O.704X 10' O.380X 10' O.247 X 10' O.178X 10' NNE 0.749X 10-* ' O.228X 10' O.759 X 10' O.410X 10' O.267 X 10' O.193 X 10' NE 0.113 X 10" 0.345X 10' O.115 X 10' O.626 X 10' O.409X to-* 0.296X 10
- ENE 0.881 X 10" 0.270X 10-* 0.901X 10' O.489X 10' O.319X 10-* 0.231 X 10" 0.123 X 10" O.379 X 10' O.127 X 10' O.692X 10' O.452 X 10-* 0.327 X 10' Y E
- ESE 0.962 X 10' O.295X 10' O.988 X 10" 0.536 X 10' O.350X 10' O.253X 10' SE O.725X 10-* O.223 X 10' O.745X 10' O.404X 10-* 0.263 X 10' O.190X 10" 0.641 X 10' O.197 X 10' O.661 X 10' O.359 X 10' O.234 X 10-* 0.169 X 10-*
SSE S 0.584 X 10' O.179 X 10' O.602 X 10" 0.327 X 10' O.214 X 10' O.155X 10' SSW 0.750 X 10' O.230X 10-5 0.771 X 10' O.418X 10' O.273X 10-* 0.197 X 10' SW 0.104X 10" 0.320X 10' O.107 X 10' O.583 X 10' O.381 X 10-* 0.275 X 10" WSW 0.110X 10" 0.337 X 10' O.114 X 10' O.419X 10-* 0.406X 10' O.294X 10' - W 0.126 X 10" 0.387X 10-* 0.130X 10-* 0.711 X 10' O.466 X 10-* 0.339X 10' WNW 0.102X 10" 0.313X 10" 0.106 X 10-* 0.575 X 10' O.377 X 10' O.274X 10-* NW 0.959X to-* 0.295X 10' O.989X 10' O.537X 10' O.350X 10' O.253X 10' NNW 0.785 X 10-* 0.241 X 10' O.808X 10' O.437X 10' O.286X 10' O.206X 10'
n _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ ___ __ . _ _ _ ._ _ __ _. __ s 3-10 r oooooooooo: t' r t ;tt oooooo r t :-r j
'o XXXxXXxXXXXXxXXX S
I2"*882223*2GERA.R 6666666666666666
.m3-----
- ;ttttt -ttttt o
oooooooooooooo-t oo i xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx-
% 222803
----n-------n--- 85282233R d6d6666666d66d6d
- ?? : :: : : : :
o o o o o o o o o o o :o o::ooo : g o xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ERR R
--nin:n-:5233N2W22R -unnun-
$66$ $66$8 1
a ooooooooooooo ooo
;;tt ; t.:
d o xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2 unin".Sagg;I2.*35"" R anun 3 an 6666666666666666 rt : t~ r : r: : oooooooooooo oooo o xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 2 ~2"RMEN SS8 --mm em-a-mmI"mm-"R822 6666666666666ddd N al j
.i _m.aolal.1: 1
3-11
' Table 3.3. Amtdent air quality stenderde for South Caroline Measuring S-.e f
- p interval (pg/m8)
Sulfur dioxide 3h 1,300* 24 h 365* Annual 80 Suspended partculates 24 h 250 Annual G.M.# ' 60 Carbon monoxide 1h 40,000 8h 10.000 Ozone 1h 236*' Non-mothene hydrocarbons 3h' 160 Geseous fluondes 12-h av. 3.7 (as HF) 24-h ev. 2.9 1-week av. 1.6 1-month av. 0.8 Nitrogen dioxide Annual 100 Leed Calender quarterly 1.5 mean l ~
*Anthmenc average except in the case of suspended partculetes.
' 8 At 25*C and 760 mm Hg.
*Not to be exceeded more than once a year.
Geometric meen.
*Not to be exceeded more then one day per year.
Source " State Air Laws," Environ. Rep. 506,1004, June 29, 1984. 1984). At the time of the staff site viait (September 19, 1984), the cultivated lands consisted of soybeens and recently plowed fields. Soybeens, the principal crop, are grown on about 182 ha (450 acres) on the site and are transported to Cameron, South Carolina, where they are processed into soya oil and feed moel (Westinghouse 1984). 3.4.2 Adjooent Area The nature, extent, and distribution of local land uses are important in the environmental assessment of NFCS operations and/or expansion. Tim primary interaction to evaluate is that of NFCS radiological and chemmal atmospheric effluents with local human and biologmal populations,
' and with farming and manufacturing activities. Interactions involving' water suppies to these W s 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 then 1%
- (exclusive of NFCS) is industrial, and about 20% is agricultural. Seventy percent of the land is unmhebited forest or swamp forest (Westinghouse 1983).
_ . . _ . .- . _.,.--,.,.._--.-__m -, .--.r ,. -,m._ , _ , - , , , - . . . . . - , , - - . , - - - , . ~ . ..4,-..,_ - . - - . ... __..m -
Table 3.4. Incrementet 1930 population h h m, 6 80 ksn (60 miles) of the Westinghouse NFCS Mil **** 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 4,371 5.442 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 -160 141 530 913 1,783 5,273 9,886 SE O O 27 34 5'4 426 1,572 3,355 5,022 13,905 SSE g O O O O 4 281 1.648 22,571 4.587 13,621 2. S O O 4 0 8 1,153 " 315 17,759 4.511 5,893 SSW 0 0 0 0 0 674 1,159 4,158 7,410 15,291 SW O O O O O 680 2.722 3.727 3,631 8,259 WSW 0 0 0 0 0 1,550 1,794 3,383 1,955 39,096 W 0 0 0 0 0 2,788 2,918 3.565 13,445 11.580 WNW 0 0 0 8 4 2.464 6,488 9,862 5,228 8,230 . NW O O 8 11 2,386 6,268 65,703 7,194 5,239 20,759' WNW 0 76 57 8 47 17,673 111,972 4.010 5,396 3,543 Total 19 239 712 1,147 3,538 5,2803 277,544 113,388 142,646 191,141 Total,0-50 miles = 783,181
' Estimates for 0-5 miles based on data given in Westinghouse (1983); estimates for 5-50 miles based on 1980 U.S. Bureau of Census data.
*Knometers = miles x 1.6.
j
m 3-13
= 3.4.2.1 Manufacturing
~
Except for the Caroline Eastman plent, wtuch lies 7.6 km (4.75 miles) directly west of NFCS, au firms with five or more employees are wittun the 180* sector north of the plant site. Those facibnes with potentially significant atmospheric or aquatic effluent loads with which the NFCS effluents could interact include the Caroline Eastman plant (men-made production fibers), Wagece Concreto Products (menhole production). - and Square D Company (industrial motor control production).
'3.4.2.2 Agriculture Agncultwal land amg=== abnut 20% of the land area within an 8-km (5-mile) radius of NFCS, pnmanly in the northom and eastem portions of the study ares. Crops include soybeans, com, hoy, cotton, wheet, and oats. Pecan groves are present to the east.
Only one dairy farm is operating wittun the study ares: McGregor's Deiry, 7.7 km (4.8 miles) north-northeast of NFCS. According to Westinghouse (1983), this dairy has about 150 rnik cows. No other important crop or livestock production appears to occur in the study area. Subsequent to
.the previous NRC review for hcense renewal (NRC 1977), the Power's Deiry ceased operations, it was located 3.5 km (2.2 miles) northwest of NFCS. The light agricultural production in the aree is an advantage of the Columbes site.
3.4.2.3 Uni ? ; M nonogricultural land
. The appbcant has reported that 70% of the land in the study area is covered by forest or swamp forest (Westinghouse 1983). Extensive forests and' swamps lie along the Congeree River west and south of the plant. Water tupelo-sweet gum forests occur in swamps and on wet alluviel
'substrates along the Congeree River.~ A more mesic ook forest dominates the better-drained eitos, wheroes the driest sites in the ares may be dominated by loblolly pine and hardwoods (ook species, red maple, yellow popier, etc.). Presently, there are no r' nportant 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 Congeree River about 6.5 km (4 miles) southeast of the site (Fig. 3.3), is listed as a natural landmark (DOI 1983). This ares has been largely undisturbed for 200 years and contains several of i the largest trees of certain species (Dennis 1967; Westinghouse 1983). It is a rare remnant of ! ~ previously extensive southem river floodplain forests. b 3.4.3 Historic Significance
- Several known' archaeological sites are located within 8 km (5 miles) of the NFCS, although none are located onsite (N. Brock, South Caroline Department of Archives and History, personal communication with R. L Kroodsme, ORNL, January 17, 1985). Undiscovered, undisturbed sites probably do not exist in the expansion area at the plant facilities, because the development substrate was disturbed during original construction.
i- Other historical and cultural sites occur within the 8-km radius, although none are recognized by i the National Register of Historic Places (DOI 1979-1983). According to correspondence from the South Carohna Department of Archives and' History (Westinghouse 1983), the following historical i a
3-14 sites, listed in the Central IWhdlands Suivey of 1974, are potentiaNy elgpble for the National Register
. but are not presently of high priority for nommation. AN sites are within an 8-km (5-mile) radius of
- the plant.
j'
- 1. Raiford's Mill Creek (Min Creek)-18th century
- l. h first settlements in the county were made along Mill Creek in the 1740s. Hopewell Ferry, I across the Congaree River below the creek's mouth, was used in 1756 and throughout the I-Revolution. The creek was named for Philip Raiford, who settled on the creek below Adams'
( Min Pond. h creek was later called Hays' Creek for Wdliam Hays, who built a min there in 1748 1750. It was known by 1800 swnply as min Creek.
- 2. Cabin Branch (John Hopkins, Jr., Plantation House)-1796 This buddog is off County Road 1159, 0.4 km (0.25 mile) south of intersection with County Road 223, near Congaree Community, h 18th century house had two large front rooms, a y center haN, and an open loggia. About 1835, two large rooms were added at the rear, and the loggia was extended into a hall. It is still owned by the Hopkins.
- 3. Claytor House-1887 l
l Located on Highway 37 at Hopkins, this wooden cottage built by Dr. Hubert Claytor has a porch and fish-scale geble and is architecturally distinctive.
- 4. ChappeN Cabin Branch (Hicks Plantation House and Garden)-1781 j This two-story rectangular frame house with a sogle-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 romans, and the house is still occupied by the ChappeN family.
- 5. Hopkins Overseers Dweihng-19th century The dweihng 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 secten is a pedimented ;
!- frame cottage. h Hopkins family cemetery is nearby. 3.4.4 F' :';"_i.s and Wetiends Extensive floodplams and wetlands lie along the Congeroe 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 Engmeers maps, is 39.6 m (130 ft) above MSL Slightly more than half of the site lies below this elevation in the bottomiends of the Congaree River, but the plant facilities lie mostly above 41.8 m (137 ft) l (Fig. 3.4). Most wetlands in the area consist of bottomiend forests and forested swamps. Several ditches drain the cultivated fields in the bottomiends on the site, but these have little signeficance as natural ' wetlands. Sunset Lake is a shallow artificial impoundment on MIN Creek on the site. N upper 85% :
.of 'the original lake is now a wooded swamp, whereas the lower port has some open water, A l smeN pond and a canal also lie in the southern half of the site. No construction of facilities is 6 planned in the site's floodplain or wetland areas.
l t Y l
c-3-15 3.5 HYDROLOGY 3.5.1 Surface Water 3.5.1.1 Congeree River hydrology The closest offsite surface water body to the NFCS is the Congaree River (Fig. 3.7), which is formed by the confluence of the Broad and Saluda rivers 16 km (10 miles) upstream at Columbia, South Carolina. Tributaries to the river ir. the plant vicinity are Gills Creek at Colurrbia Mill Creek, adjacent to the Westinghouse site; and Beaver and Cedar creeks near Hopkins. Mill Creek flows through an impoundment, Sunset Lake, on the NFCS property before reaching the Congaree River (Figs. 3.4 and 3.7). In the NFCS vicinity, the Congaree River, which is a typical South Atlantic Piedmont stream, is characterized by sandy bottoms and beaches and high levels of suspended solids. The flow of the river is regulated by Lake Murray and Lake Greenwood on the Saluda River, and to some extent by power plants along the Broad River (USGS 1981). At the point of the NFCS discharge, the Congaree River is approximately 150 m (500 ft) wide and no more than 3 m (9 ft) deep (Westinghouse 1983). The average flow of the Congaree River at the USGS gaging 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 3/s (1590 cfs) (NRC 1977, Sect. 2.5.2.1); the minimum 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, the5 highest 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 Saluda River with Lake 8 Greenwood and Lake Murray, the maximum stage of 10 m (33 ft) and discharge of 6500 m /s (2.3 x 10s ef,3 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 Mdl Creek and its associated impoundment, 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 riam into upper and lower lakes. The uppellake covers an area of 1.9 x 105 m2 (44 acres) and is primarily a swamp because part of the flow from Mdl Creek is diverted into a canal (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.5.2.2). The lower part of Sunset Lake 2 covers approximately 3.2 x 10* m (8 acres) and has an open-water area (see Sect. 3.7.2). The flow from Mdl 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 Congaree River. 3.5.1.2 Congeree River water quality Water quality data for the Congaree River in the vicinity of the Westingtmuse plant were compded from SC-OHEC data for 1981 (Table 3.5). Discussions with the SC-DHEC staff confirmed i 1 l j
3-16 ES-6130
- ronT JACKSON's . WESTINGHOUSE NUCLEAR FUEL
. MiuTAny asstavAfioN :
cotuuslA - FABRICATION PLANT
, (SITE AND VICINITV)
[ e s ( . O cer, uitlTAAV RE$$RwafeOne antava70 4 .....u.....
, g snay, 4.o
- - P&Ae 80U40&Av 8 P (fg,
#A st RO AD j e, o
/ [ Wy i=riaseare nouve Q," u s novse
/
+.......
4 4.ansro=e
. i e i
/ '
was (*# e'.eos, C t* 1 - to uit as urstn smiouir Ati
' 3. soa vanos ues,e ns au am rnonso, se ter rousa r ouvr e.t
]** y#% *<
s - soo vanos oowmstas Au or e anuser os rr Att WESTINGHOUSE * - SP'L La o'su=ss t tas s
'#'N.****.' PLANT SITE $y@ * ,, g ' - *'o'L ca'5" '"'f o' as stimoi.ouss enors a ry nou=o s*** g e ,
+
$ 1 e . st nu omaiN saueta mean et A=Y racitaries No's soLiao tocations O Ans Not to scAls om uar
~
un llL*r' -
* '( k k
!;* **. g, m /),'""' y,
*O,,,,r.,
^
/ 1
. - f G,
**"* * *e e e #
'I"
...a s t')
N ' ' a utao u .c. b.,, / /
. ,k '[o*'
( O. , 9
\
..... .. ......s
'o)'N
\ ,
,5 / 's/ ' ', I '~g
/
x).u. ., e. / ; w g'+g v / ^l %
/
k-gi[* ,5 V
/^
- Q
, 'c# r
- og.,CONG Ant t SWA'MP NATION AL MONUMEY8T s
i s,. ; .u s- ,e
^9 q s
%q-w s
/ /
h
=m Q.
} -
// D E N g t, \
/ N g ' q f .s '3t
( j ,7**- ,
~
,1
'
- j.
- a ,,,
* * %, ,, l y
6 ' ,, { w/ ~/
\ ~., ;A/
/
N ,
/.
Fig. 3.7. Locations of surface water monitoring stations at the Westinghouse NFCS. Source: Westinghouse 1983. Fig 6.2.
y a
-' 3-17, Table 3.5. Congeree River annuel (1981) water quality everages upstroom and downetreem of the NFCS diocherge (outfeNP
, Blossom St. Bridge' U.S. 601 Bridge d (upstroom) (downstroem)
Temperature, 'C 16 16.8 Turbidity, JTU . 14 14.1 Conductivity, ymhos 68 70 Dissolved oxygen, mg/L 10.1 8.1 BOOS. mg/L 3.4 3.9 pH, units 7.1 6.8 Total alkalinity, mgA 16 17 NH3 + NH ,4 mg/L , 0.53 0.095 NO + NOs, mg/L , 0.34 0.042 Phosphates, mg/L i 0.13 0.32 Total organic carbon, mg/L 4.3 5.1 Cadmium, pg/L ,<10 <10 Chrcmum, pg/L 50 <50 Coppw, pg/L - <50 <50 Iron, pg/L 787 1300 Nickel, pg/L .
<50 <50 Leed, pg/L 'h. 55 <50 Mercury, poit :
O.2 0.3 Focal coliform, per 100 mL 249 1490
*Compded from South Caroline Department of Health and Environmen-tal Control Data and reported in Westinghouse 1983, Tables 3.11 and 3.12.
"JTU = Jackson turbidity units.
800 = tnological oxygen demand
' Sampling location is 16 km (10 maes) upstream of Westinghouse outfall, d Sampling station is 40 kni (25 miles) downstream of Westinghouse A outfall.
s that these values are typical of prevent wates quaiety (Russell Sherer, SC-OHEC, personal communication writh V. R. Tolbwt, Ook Oidge National Laboratory, October 15, 1984). Comperison of the upstream and downsvaem stations (Table 3.5) shows that, except for concentrations of iron and focal coliform bacteria,' there are no appreciable differences in water quality pwametere.Jteressed focal coleform counts and phosphate and decreased desolved oxygen at the downstream station are indcative of agricultural runoff and of sewage discharges to the river from the communities of Columbia, West Columbia, and Cayce. The Congaree River receives decharges directly from Columbia, West Columbia, Cayce, and the Westinghouse plant. Municipal wastewater from Columtna is treated by trickle filtration and activated-sludge processing at a metropo!itan area wistewater treatment plant before dscharging 8 at an avwage of 1.2 m 3/s (42 cis). Peak sewage dscharge from the city of Columbia is 2.6 m /s (93 cis) (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.5.3.11, The combined sewage dscharge from Cayce and
d-' 3-18 y 8 West Columbia to the Congaree' River is 0.08 m /s (3 cfs). The NFCS currently discharges > 3 0.006 m /s (0.2 cfs) of - treated process and sanitary westes to the river (R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse, personal communication with V. R. Tolbert, Ook Ridge National Laboratory, September 19, 1984). The only other industrial discharge to the Congeroe River in the NFCS 3 vicinity is from Carolina Eastman, which discharges 1.4 m /s (49 cfs) of cooling tower water into
- j. the Congeree River upstroom of the NFCS via Hale's Branch (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.5.3.2).
i 3.5.1.3 Local surface water use-3
. The city of Columbia diverts 1.5 m /s (54 cfs) of water from the Broad River upstroom of Columbia for munscopal use (USGS 1981). There are no industriel or municipal users along the i
Congaree River from the confluence of the Salude and Broad rivers to the Congeree's confluence with the Wateree River to form the Sentee River approximately 97 km (60 miles) downstroom of the NFCS. Water used by the Westinghouse plant is obtamed from the Columbia Municipal Water System. Water use by the plant during the period of January to August .1984 was 0.000 m3/s (0.3 cfs) (R. E. Fischer, Westinghouse, personal communication with V. R. Tolbert. Ook Ridge . National Laboratory, September 19, 1984). ' 3.5.2 Groundwater i 3.5.2.1 Groundwater regime The aquifer system in the vicinity of the NFCS has two components: (1) a shallow, unconfined l aquifer that is capable of producing relatively small quantities of water from indmdual wolle for > rural, domestic use; and (2) deeper, confined aquifers that are capaNa of providing large quantities of water for industrial and municapel supplies (SCWRC 1983). The unconfined aquifer consists of surficiel marine terrace deposits of Phocene-Pleistocene age, wheroes the upper
. Cretaceous Tuscaloosa formation is the principal confined aquifer at NFCS. The stratiyaphy of those and other units is discussed in detail in Sect. 3.6.1.
Presently, groundwater in the shallow squifer is contammated by weste streams from plant discharge (Devis 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) aquetard identified as the Block Mingo formation by Davis and Floyd (1982). This aquitard appears to be thick enough and sufficiently low in permeebelity (<10~7 cm/s) to prevent more then ineigraficant natural hydraulic communication between the surficiel and confined aquifers. Several meters of send are believed to be present in the lowermost (besal) part of the Black Mingo (Devis and Floyd 1982). Although this send is doecnbod by Devis and Floyd as a seperate artesian aquifer,-it is uncieer whether there is a hydraulic boundary between this send and the uppermost Tuscaloosa aquifer. Tt.e two units may beheve as a single combined equifer. It is possible to have hydraulic communication between doop confined aquifers and shallow terrace aquifers through poorly completed or abandoned wolle that fully penettete the confining , strata. Devis 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 an artesien I aquifer. ; These are older wells with uncertain completion records. Well W 1 is definitely a : Tuscaloosa well. A third well (desegneted 300-6 by the South Caroline Water Resources ! 4 I
,-- y 9m_ , . , - - , ,.-~.-,,,,--._.,,.---,__m,-.,~mm,--e,,-,--mpy-,-o,w e g- - f.wme,n.,,,,-._ -,,wy ,-v f.--
~
i 4 (
+
' - ES6124 ee' 1
.'laYn ,
_ .j 0' anAnn PLANT g,
/
euntosua l '
'N _.~% , x
_\.~-
.m
"{~~.._,
8 ! 7
~% %
o *=*
** . % { /
3 g,# u
\ 3 g7 ' '" .
\- *J .= ...
'N .
N %/ 1p ,'<... a ... EEPL ANAf tou N. e
/
l x Q*' q[%
. ... ..u. . ...... .
N (,+%
. .......u.
' ( [\
s
\
o 4s so iss -iso r= .
====
1 sN y y-t \ Fig. 3.8. Location of monitoring wells at the Wn-,t: r: plent site. Source: Davis and Floyd + 1980.
. ~ - - . -- _ . - - - - - - - . - _
3-20 Conmssion (SCWRC)] was drilled in 1963 in the vicwwty of NFCS. This well probably also , penetrated the Tuscaloosa (Davis and Floyd 1982). If these wells were properly completed and/or plugged, there should be no hydraulic commurwcation between shallow and deeper aquifers. The uncertain completion status of these wells, however, prevents a definitive answer to the question
- of existing hydraulic communication between deeper artesian and shallow terrace aquifers.
Piezometric head data for the Tuscaloosa aquifer adds another element of uncertainty in the vicwwty of NFCS. Davis and Floyd (1982) state that the piezometric heed in Wells W-1, W-2, and W-3 (another deep well in the overlying Black Mongo formation) rises 5 to 6 m (15 to 20 ft) above the top of the basal Black Mingo sand, and that the piezometric surface for this unit slopes to the southeast. It is likely, however, that the piezometric heads in the basal sand of the Black inngo are strongly influenced at NFCS by the underlying Tuscaloosa aquifer. According to Davis i and Floyd (1982), Tuscaloosa aquifers have higher artesian pressures than Black Mingo aquifers. Considerable upward vertical leakage probably occurs through thin confining strata (it is not certain that confining strata lie between the Black Mingo and Tuscaloosa aquifers at NFCS) and through Well W-1, which is an open-hole completion in the Tuscaloosa Hydraulic commurwcation between shallow terrace and deeper cu,,T-,v aquifers would be + ^ immaterial if the piezometric head of the latter were greater than that of the former. A high _ peizometric head in the Tuscaloosa would create an upward flow toward the shallow aquifer, thus preventing the downward flow of contaminants. The piezometric surface of the shallow aquifer is well known Figure 3.9 is a contour map of the piezometric surface (Davis and Floyd 1982). This surface slopes southward through the main plant area toward Sunset Lake where it intersects the surface. It is evident from these data that shallow groundwater discharges into Sunset Lake. 3.5.2.2 Groundwater quality Table 3.6 is an analysis of water quality from the surficial aquifer northeast of the plant (up the i groundwater gradient at Well W-24, located near the intersection of the plant entrance and Bluff Road). As expected, there is no evidence of NFCS contaminants from the Westinghouse facility, , Ammorna and fluoride were below detectable limits, total dissolved solids (TDS) was 50 mg/L, and the pH (6.0) was slightly acidic. In mid-April 1980, a fish kill occurred in the small man-made pond located onsite south of the Westinghouse facilities (Fig. 3.8).'It was detemuned that the kill probably resulted from elevated concentrations of fluonde and ammorna nitrogen present in the pond, and that these contaminants were _ being discharged to the pond from a nearby spnng located downgredient from the
- Westinghouse wastewater treatment plant. Since the kill, several groundwater quality investigations were conducted at NFCS, and two sources of contamination were identified: the concentrated waste treatment tanks and the ammonia storage tank area. In addition, the waste treatment ponds may have been a source of groundwater contamination in previous years (Davis and Floyd 1982).
' Table 3.7. presents water quality data from the surficial aquifer immediately downgradient from.
the sludge ponds toward Sunset Lake (Well W-7). This well generally has the greatest amount of contamination of all wells monitored at the site. High levels of NFCS source contaminants 49 and 602 mg/L of fluoride and ammonia, respectively, were reported. Fwthwwe, the TDS was an order of magnitude greater concentration (642 mg/L) than at the upgradient well location (Well
-W-24), and the pH (9.4) was strongly alkaline. Apparently, the above e,.;/1 es, were obtained in 1981 or 1982 (Westinghouse 1983).
i e q ' r
-- .--e>e,,- -++, ,-,--o- -- -
ES-6123 N.N (l
\
MAIN PLANT ,, s##
's##
\ '
g g ,,, BUILDING Y N
/
" ~ ' '~,
w- .... s y, '
- g. .o ,.__' /
= x x ,%,M ... :gw.::.- ,.6--2
,r-
, 'v-y / :
\ ..
q'+Q h (,,-",. x s
,sa - .**
i
,o S .t*
N 3 *
. /
\ ,,,
N s si-si N s' S/
/'
N N
~
EXPLANATION t'\ q ,*. sp\. ,,:'~
. 's watt muu.en aseo tocarson '
"* q
\~~ < k . N
. . . . . waren-tsvet confoun su rser amove ust oasweo wuene emernaso \pt h N, N O 45 90 135 180 notas: ,,,,,,,,,,,,, ,.n. .... ..,
N,g \!r,N -- . N SCALE IN METERS to..i. a re se. iseen. 'T \ 3,
.ro \ \
\. T Fig. 3.9. Water table elevation, terrace unit, on Nov. 15,1981, et the Westinghouse plant site. Source: Davis and Floyd 1980.
3-22 Table 3.6. Analysis of groundwater in the near-surface equifer northeast of the Westinghouse NFCS (Well W-24)* Parameter *9 Arsenic <0.005 Barium <0.1
- Cadmium <0.005 Chromium <0.01 Fluoride < 1.0
' Lead <0.05 Mercury, pg/L <0.2 Nitrate nitrogen 0.7 Ammorua nitrogen <1 Selenium <0.01 Silver <0.01 Turbidity 1.7 Chloride 2.0 Hydrogen sulfkle <0.01 Copper <0.01 fron 0.04 Manganese 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, near the intersection of the plant entrance and I
- Bluff fload.
*MBAS = Methylene blue active substances (detergents).
Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 3.9. l
- Because~. 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 nonradiological contaminants (Westinghouse 1984). These data, which are typical of other sampling times, indicate that conditions remain much as they were in 1981-82. Furthermore, nearly all shallow wells located downgradient 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 pCi/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 generally had much
3-23 Table 3.7. Analysis of groundwater in the neer-surface equifer southoest of the Westinghouse NFCS (Well W-7)* Parameter Arsenic <0.005 Barium 0.1 Cadnvum <0.005 Chromium <0.01
. Fluoride 49 Lead <0.05 Mercury, pg/L <0.2 .
Nitrate nitrogen 310-Ammone nitrogen 602 Seieruum <0.01 Silver <0.01 Turbidity 1.2 Chloride 20 Hydrogen sulfide <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 radioactivity. As shown in Tables 3.8 and 3.9, upgradient wells were
- generally free of contaminants (both radiologmal and nonrWimpel) except when immediately adjacent 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 ' nit
- ate 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 l
5 1
.c 3-24 Table 3.8.I Special water quality analysis report
~
for monitoring wells at the Westiraghouse NFCS, m May 27,1984* Wou. pH F- NH3 Conductivity number ' (units) - - (mg/L) (mg/L) (mhos) 3 6.6 - 1.8 1.8 7 03 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 16 7.0 2.3 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 - 2.4 1 121 26 6.3 2.4 29' 620
^
27 6.3 2.1 2.5 390 28 . 6.0 34 4.2 - 350 29 8.9 23 116 1420 30 7.8 ' 22 1.2 - 2100 31 6.7 2.3 5.4 190 32 8.8 38 188 1600 33 5.2 1.3 1 180 34 6.0 1.4 2.1 340 i
*WeR 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. NFCS) were completed in the Tuscaloosa. Since these are the oldest onsite wells, they would probably_ require reconditioning or replacement before reliable Tuscaloosa piezometric or water -
' quality data could be obtained. A third deep we5 (W-3) was completed in the overlying Black Mngo
. formation. No Tuscaloosa wells are known to .have been drilled through the contaminated zone of
[ ,
- the shaNow aquifer.
Water quality data are avadable from two Tusca'cosa wells located about 8 km (5 miles) south of the NFCS on the Richland-Calhoun county line. These wells were completed in November 1975 1
3-25 Table 3.9. Speciel radiological water quality onelysis report for monitoring wells at the Westinghouse NFCS, April 15,1983* Wel . Gross alphe Gross beta number (pci/mu (pci/mu 6 0.033 0.020 7- 0.088 0.914 8 'O.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 - 0.005 15 0.017 0.240 16 0.009 0.053 17 0.000 0.027 0.212 18 0.033 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 I 33 0.016 0.013
*Weg locations are shown in Fig. 3.8, except for W-24 which is located upgradient, near the intersecten of the plant entrance and Bluff Road (Route 48).
+ Sowce: Westinghouse 1584. f b-F. and in November 1976 for Tee Pac, Inc., of Sandy Run, South Carolina. These weHs (29R-f1 and i 29R-f2) (SCWRC 1984) were multiply screened in the Tuscaloosa forrnation. Several chemmal I analyses were obtained between November 1975 and December 1976. At that time water quakty ! was good,' fluonde 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).
- l. Another Tuscaloosa weR [WeR 29P-v2, owned by Launngton Dairy Farm (SCWRC 1984)] was --
completed in Richland County about 6 km (4 miles) north of NFCS. Water samples were drawn l from this weR-shortly after completion (November 1956). Water quakty (TDS 17 mg/L, pH 5.2, fluoride not detectable) was simaar to that of the Tee Pac wells. l l I
. __ _. . ~ _ -
4 3-26 d 3.5.2.3 Groundwater use
- The surfical terrace aquifer is primarily used for rural, domestic water supplies (SCWRC 1983).
Wells . completed in the terrace aquifer . generally produce small quantities of water (<1 L/s , . (<20 gpm)] of marginal quality. Hence, they are ' seldom c' .ig,1 for muncpol or industrial use. Terrace aquifers are a primary source of water for rural inhabitants who cannot afford to drill and maintain deeper wells. More than 700 privately owned shallow wells lie within 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 nearest wells to the south are across the Congaree River near Sandy Run Community, about 8 km (5 miles) frorn NFCS. None of the downgradient wells is likely to be effected by NFCS contaminated groundwater because of distance and the large intervening groundwater decharge area encompassing 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 munopel groundwater resource (Park 1979). Figure 3.10 illustrates regional Tuscaloosa water production by county. The Tuscaloosa in 5 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 individual wells in Richland and surrounding counties. Tuscaloosa wells nearest NFCS are capahle of producang 14 to 25 L/s j (225 to 400 gpm). Tee Pac, inc. [8 km (5 miles) south of NFCS), uses Tuscaloosa water for industrial purposes and Laurington Dairy Farm [6 km (4 miles) north of NFCS] uses it for livestock
- and irrigation (SCWRC 1984).'
, Long-term production from the Tuscaloosa can evidently be sustained without substantial loss
- . in piezometric head. The Laurington Dairy Farm well has been producing water since 1956 from screened intervals ranging from 64 to 90 m (210 to 294 ft). The shut-in water level at a nearby L 'Tuscaloosa well was 12 m (39 ft) below ground level in November 1982 (SCWRC 1984). An
- observation-well in southern Richland County was dniled in July 1980 and screened at vanous intervals from 127 to 165 m (425 to 542 ft). The water level in this nonproducing well ranged from 6 to 11 m (21 to 37 ft) below ground surface from October 1980 through September j; 1982. The pierometric head in an observation'well 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 the foregoing discussion it appears likely that the piezometric head in the Tuscaloosa i formation is high at NFCS. The nearest wells pumping from the Tuscaloosa are 6 km (4 miles) f away so that the drawdown would be trivial. Thuc. the piezometric head in the Tuscaloosa is probably near that of the overlying terrace aquifers et NFCS, and ,wy transfer of fluid between the L terrace and Tuscaloosa aquifers would be mamal and subsect to seasonal variation. Whether the f ; flow is up or down is indeterminant at this time. l r L 3.6 GEOLOGY l l This section describes regional and site physiography, stratigraphy, structure, soils, mineral resources, and seismicity. These characteristics relate directly to foundation stability and impact on groundwater resources. b i
4 ES-6122
,. . I .
m 120 iso ,A.'
/ *-
- g;ly!;
45 _ 0 45.,. KILOMETEsgs ,./ RICHLAND -
'~'
f' COUNTY, SC ,*,.. .. ..
..g.. / :*2
,j . , . . _ -
p
... _ . , _ . . _ . .L . . .7 :g ..$.sy-I=. .i,.e
- ia
. g ---- ,c :.:
1
's -
gi i s .es',e . + ;.- [:
- m. /
g
; ( ,,,/
=N . ;: EXPLANATION
- z. . e . ,. ,..
s '
** ----Approximate updip limit
'- g ', .
, . jg.y d[
b N w
- ** '
- Groundwater Withdrawals Pubhc Industrial b i ' *
* = 01 to 10 mgd il
- b -
e a t o to 20mgd
- .a e a 2.0 to 50 mgd
, j.
s:: e a over 50 mod s , e. -
=
[ _ j Aquifers conta:n less than 1000 mg/L
~ . *} . / total dissolved solids
$!!!57!] One or more aquifers contain in excess of 1000 mg/L total dissolved solids
- N g~?i E All or most aquifers contain in excess of 1000 mg/L total dissolved solids Fig. 3.10. Hydrogeologic map cf the Cretaceous aquifer system in the southeastern United States, including South Carolina. Regional Tuscalocce water production is indicated by county. Source-Park 1979.
3-28 4 . . . . _~ 3.6.1 Physiography
. Southeastem Richland County lies within the upper Coastal Plain, a subprovince of the Atlantic 2
-Coastal Plain (Davis and Floyd 1982). The topography ranges from very flat and poorly drained j near the Congaree River to the well-drained sand hills. The topography surroundmg NFCS is generauy flat with only slight local relief. .
f The physegraphy of the upper Coastal Plain is controlled by unconsohdated sands and clays l , that are easily woothered and eroded in compenson to the hard, consolidated Paleozoic and i Precambnan rocks north of Columbia, South Caroline. Columbe is located on the Fall Line, a zone
- of river rapids and small waterfalls, whch ' forms the boundary between the Piedmont and Coastal Plain physiographic provmces (Fig. 3.11).
3.6.2 Stratigraphy and Structure The regonal geology is illustrated by two figures. Figure 3.11 is a geologe map of South
~
Carolina's Coastal Plain and Piedmont, includmg a structure section through Richland County along line A-A'. Figure 3.12 is a stratigraphic column of formation names which are keyed to the map l 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 soecel consideration because it is perhaps the most important regional aquifer in South [ Carolina (Park 1979). A dotaded 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 fan Line near Columbe to more than 180 m -(600 ft) in southeastern Richland County) overlymg
" basement" rock. The depth to basement is estimated to be 75 to 90 m (250 to 300 ft) at NFCS.
The following docussion desenbos the stratigraphy of the basement and overlymg coastal plain sediments. The order of docussaon 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 . into it. The avadable data suggest, however, that the buried basement rocks are little different from f those exposed in South Carolina's Piedmont province; that is, they are Paleozoic and Precambnen l metc.Tn,.@, rocks and intrusives.
- f. The Tuscaloosa formation is arkosic cross-bedded sand and gravel, interbedded with lenses of L mixed clay cc.r.,,06dion and kaolin. The deposetsonal environment was mixed continental-marine, characterized by fluvial, deltaic, and littoral deposits (SCWRC 1983).
'n i the venty of NFCS, the base of the Tuscaloosa formation rests on basement rocks beneved
- to be samdar to those exposed in the South Carolina Piedmont. The top of the Tuscaloosa is eroded j out at the NCFS. Uppermost 'uscaloosa strata are encountered between 15 to 30 m (50 to
,' 100 ft) below land surface (deperCng on topography)in the venty of the NCFS.
.The stratigraphic units lying directly over the Tuscaloosa are difficult to decipher at NFCS for Ltwo reasons. First, the Fall Line is only about 15 km (10 miles) to the northwest, so that most
. strata overlymg 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 manne l
[ terrace deposets. .What little is known of the stratigraphic interval between the upper Cretaceous l and Phocene is obtamed from well cuttmgs and geophysical well logs. Interpretations based on such ! 7
- data are generally tentative. '
t. I t 1 .
3-29 ES-6131 4% % \\ [ ' 4 ( h CITY OF COLUws:A.SC gO k WESTINGMOUSE FUEL F ASRICATION 9 . o '8 '2 PL ANT Sif E 0 9 / 7 4D
=
k \ T ai IP
, 9 kk Te, s ,
Eva IN
- Tey E at
- Os -
. y .
\. f A y, LMARLESTON
'O $
'o# s
- 4 os 2 3 e se T a
#j Tc , h I f f f f f 't f I
'r' .y .
4, KILOMETERS
$ fp pk FOR REY TO GEOLOGIC $vwsOLS.SEE FIG.31L Q4 F AsRF 4E LD RICHLANO sE RntEy MARLE ON SUM CLRNDN ORNG CO CO CO CO P,, ANO Pe3 WESTINGHOLI t i ATLANTIC COAST K
/ _
"\ l 9LANT SLTE Q A TL ANTIC OCEAM
E ov0NT wE rAwOR,MfCS ANo N
7 A lNTRus VES Ei COASTAL p PLAIN GEOLOGIC SECTION A - A' Fig. 3.11. Regional geology of the Westinghouse NFCS, indicating features of South Caroline's Piedmont and Coestal Plain. A key to geologic symbols is given in Fig. 3.12. Source: See Fig. 3.12. Davis and Floyd (1982) assembled an interpretation of the subsurface beneath NFCS (Fig. 3.13) based on well data. These data suggest the presence of several meters (tens of feet) of the Eocene (T,3-T.2) Black Mingo formation beneath the site, based on the findings of shale chips in well cuttings and on characteristic " kicks" in the geophysical logs at shale-sandstone interfaces. This
3-30 ES-6139 GENERALIZED CHART OF TIME AND ROCK UNITS PIEDMONT - COASTAL PLAIN m s s's= seees oaour sonaaroe ourceoe cau=.as secos amoca'* l . *.." .".$ ~.1-.*S. $-6o. - ouAri.~A., 5h 'i}&
* "%. ; T -; .w:;.r
,u.sioce,a
. . . -n-y-.
._.,_.:.-.. '-.m-q.
u .
- '**"'a* *=* * 'py?-$ ,1*/_ _,i O nect*
v.
. . c. . . . . g. n r
.. j j y j. ,.
w a.= ^ _. A +A', ,^. 2^-2 w %- _, ,p.;4 . O Z a'ec'* aa.==* a'*'-=
~
'=l_-{f-[:
?_^
Qj
" iteriAar
" * " " "" '*.-".*.' N -f-^.*
^ "^
D . t,as esae . _ , soc'** aaa=== i ,g-% . s-:. . ;.g. :::= g 5 ~ f ~f -&;.f
,,s<~.z ,.: .% .rhr V gta.- m
'=ecce* ===a j[].
(- - 1.g .-6(7_ -- g pWv.P.' *.Vgd
,, _ ==.= . == ~
}. *** ..;QLQ- ==m ' :,j.y
- a. :-_~
*~~~"-
u carrActous __
** 22 5.,= . m O 1 .,,;-E; ;'#4rArZ y 6owse amo-.c .= I as _ _ _ _ _- ._ _:P,y0
. ,--, mu ,. ..
w
- E v . - ' = *"""*
rmassic -. - i
""* ~ ~ ~ "
- _ l l w ,s ;- ,
u cAnson*ERous 7' $) 6
- R'Ith O
"i e, ,.,
= .ano. : 3.
. 1, j+gi; ',/y /
DEVoM AN - # I I """ i 8'#Ef1*R8 M- f I cuasmAN j e seems
..b
.s. ... .*
k;- r!
,;.df.*g, Y,;
l **** ~
* *IkM l'W
- t m M f:M.,.
o ==a a.l m t:9::;;2 t,,',
~ ===== ;'t um7tH+HW"Y -
.. e ,
~~"*
,_ lTl-1
- w PRECAMBRIAN ,
19 sr m%. y, , m
- .: n;:s ,
u.; , n,,' f,&
- a; -
- I u'l' ,
_1:; .3 a L::::1 P- '
~
1:'.-
- .I I: :I l ' .i ['d. d I't'e'e'el 3b _kd..
. . - . ~
(l'Ml - 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).
I. .
~
w 3-31 3 13M 01133dS3M HilM 133J Nl NO11VA313 s E
= i = . . . i I C 4
, p_ r--- , --------- r.-- ]
i _q___ l _------ / / /juE < (6 ss s
-:/[
,s '.
l -
. }
8 s f 'e,
- l. I 4.. s:: seE aa wn-
.I -'
I g
.) I C / j/ \
3 c0 E l . l.. 2 l A o f f 5 J m' l -Oo o /
- lh O % 15 l- '.
EI k / E [k Sk I
$ it t 8 IT ?3 3 lt I # > r /G-e a :p y -
esa &* T; o I JL 1 A [c 83 n e
. r---n I$l or
/* * .-
, es S
.Q r '
/p .
66 Oh g
?,'
JO -:
- o-f.
,o j-
{;,,, l ,"o ) Adt/4/421:Y- 2 // 7
-j f ! .
nf l. I:* ,- f: g .:. y _g, aa 3 T o sl ,/ n g s- E e 0 3-Oi l / *
.,' y Z IN I
~
t n l?T.
) la ./
/ .
o = I l/ k.Q t :
~
~W EE B E
; ./ !
- . r.@'
I/,t - a. - a <]. l . *!!- t . e p .g
- ~~ o a .
^
D MN!f5lE?(b),$ k b "$+ o 8 - L
" O S83131N 3
z a e
- i i e . , e n .
O e e O e o o e
' ' 8 a a T T ? 7 1SM 01133dS3M M11M 133J NI NO11VA313 l
I-I 1 I
~
L
3-32 interpretation is plausible because Paleocene-Eocene outcrops have been mapped in Calhoun and Sumter counties, which are adjacent to Richland County on the south and east, respectively. Colquhoun et al. (1983) believe that remnants of the lower part of the Black Creek formation (upper Cretaceous) may also be present in the site vicinity. The identity of this stratigraphic unit is largely immaterial because Black Mingo and Black Creek lithologies are similar. Both consist of gray to black laminated shale interbedded with sand (SCWRC 1983). The likely presence of the Black Mingo formation and/or Black Creek formation beneath NFCS is significant. About 10 m of shale between the Tuscaloosa and surficial aquifers may prevent hydraulic communication between them. Thus, contamination of one aquifer does not necessarily lead to contaminaten of the other. Pliocene-Pleistocene marine terrace deposits overlie the Black Mingo formation. These terraces l are exposed in scattered drainage ditches and road cuts in southern Richland County, One such ; terrace (the Okefenokee terrace) has been identified in the NFCS vicinity. Other nearby terraces are j the Sunderland (northwest of NFCS) and Wiscomico (southeast of NFCS and along the Congaree River). The thickness of these terrace deposits ranges between 6 to 12 m (20 to 40 ft), and collectively thay form the surficial aquifers of the area. The lithology of the terrace sediments is complex. Variable mixtures of clay, sitt, and sand thicken and thin appreciably over short distances, grading both laterally and vertically from one facies into another. Individual facies are difficult to recognize from one well to the next. 3.6.3 Soils The nature cf the soils in the area is important in the assessment of NFCS operations or expansion. Problems occur if soils will not support structures or holding ponds, if soil permeability allows effluents to escape into aquifers, or if the engineering limitations of soils (swelling, shrinking, corrosibility to concrete and steel, and flooding potential) cannot be overcome. Soils groups for the NFCS repion are mapped in Fig. 3.14. The plant site occurs on the Craven-Leaf-Johns association. Craven series soils are moderately well-drained, gently sloping Coastal Plain soils. The surface layer is loam, with a clay subsoil that is very firm and slovAy permeable. Clayey sediments interfinger with sand lenses below. The Leaf association is poorly drained, with a silt-loam surface and silty-clay subsoil (NRC 1977). Both soil series in the association have certain limitations. They are highly corrosive to both concrete and steel, and they have severe shrink-swell potential and severe wetness and flooding ^ potential because of seasonal high water tables. The latter characteristic also decreases their suitability 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 coastal plain sediments in South Carolina. Ceramic materials are obtained from localized pure kaolin and quartzose sand deposits in the Tuscaloosa formation.
ES-6125
<* Columbio 7 5 5 6 4 6
", 7 9 6 1 12 ,,
- 10 9 +Uss7s a to __
-- S ,#'+,, 8 9 7 9 iz +.
l I" o / 8 c IO 5 7 8 %
'" k4 7 7 ,
012345678 9/4 C'8 8 "I ie ie iie ii 7p 10 , C4 KILOMETERS IO 7 y8 10 8 ,
'o g 12 11 ;
8 LEGEND d % N Wes!!nghouse Nuclear Fuel-Columbia Site 4 Lokelond - Wagrom - Fuquoy Association II n
- Congoree q, o 5 Gilead - Blone y Association 5 4
6 Voucluse-Gileod- Bloney Association m ussos a 7 Norf olk -Os ongeburg Association 8 Mognolio- Moriboro Association
*n 9 Wogrom - Lucy- Orangeburg Association -
10 Gro ven - Leof - Johns Association I 11 Wehodkee - Chewoclo Association < 12 Congoree -Chewacio Association E Fig. 3.14. Generalized soil associations of southern Richiend County, South Caroline. Source Westinghouse 1983, Fig. 3.2.
? O
i 3-34 l i 3.6.5 1E.24 L Most of this chacussion is based on recent work by Bolhnger (1972,1973). Bolhnger is responsable for much of the current literature on the : M-gy of the southeast generally and of , South Carolina in particular. He suggests that, " broadly viewed, the region is a minor seenc zone, charactenzed by a low level of seenc energy release" (1972). He also suggests that " earthquake frequency per unit time per unit area in this region is about one-tenth that of the west coast, but , the seismograph station densaty that exists even today is inadequate" (1973). However, he notes l from other research that areas affected by shocks east of the Rocky Mountains are greater in size ! l " then those of equal magr.itude events in the western Unsted States. L The most intense shock in South Caroline cited by Bolknger (1972) was the August 1886 event at Charleston. The quake was felt as far west as. Missouri and es for north as Vermont. The quake { intensety in the Charleston area corresponded to a Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) scale X, while ! most of the rememder of South Carolina, includog NFCS ares, underwent a quake intenesty of hmll
- . Vll..The expected damage at an MMI value of Vil includes cracked masonry, broken chimneys, falling plaster, loose bricks and cornices, damage to concrete irrigation ditches, and covmg in along
, sand and gravel banks. The distribution of earthquakes withm 320 km (200 miles) of Columbe, [ South Carolina, from 1754 to 1984 is shown in Fig. 3.15. Bolhnger (1972) suggests that, "up to 1950, the seenc activity within the state is soon to be concentrated in the Charleston-Summerville ares, but snhaagent to that time has been pnmenly I , outside that locale...unexplemed is the apparent shift, during the post two decades, of sessac activity away from the coastal Charleston-Summerville ares to the interior portions of the state.
- This apparent shift now mcludes three shocks in the central part of the state that has been historically free of earthquake specenters." Apparently, this suggested trend of Coastal Plain
- seencity is quite localized, for Bolhnger (1973) notes that "approcsable earthquake activity in the Constal Plain provmce appsers only in South Carolina." The uncertamty of the suggested trend is
[ magnified by the sparse and often unrehable data upon which it is bened "The southeastern region ! has senac monitoring madequate to.specify completely its seencity. This in turn unphes the , t pa==M ty of mesmg any buildup or dochne in that activity"(Bolknger 1973). j Using determinatic seesmic risk analysis (Krinstzsky and Mercuson 1983) forces one to deel with
- j. the possibehty of a local earthquake swnilar in intensity to the 1886 Charleston earthquake. Causes ;
of the Charleston sorthquake are speculative at. best. Thus, it can be ' argued that such an oorthquake could occur at Columbia, and ground motion under these circumstances could cause l major demage to structures. _ The probabehty of major damage from an earthquake near Columbia is slight for any reasonably assigned NFCS plant life. Algermissen et al. (1982) provide probabshstic estimates for earthquakes of various intensities. Table 3.10 lists the estimated recurrence intervals in years per 10' km2 in the seemic source zone that includes both Charleston and Columbe Estimated recurrence intervals for the New Madrid seismic zone (southeast Missouri) and the San Andress fault zone are provided for comparison. 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 10' km2
- surroundmg Columbia Hence, it makes good sense to prepare, either through doesgn or remodel action, for the possibility of minor oorthquake damage However, the probability of an MMI X oorthquake in -the near future is vanishingly small. By comparison, the New Madnd and Sen Andreas seemic zones are 3 and 50 times more active, respectively, then the-i i
.Columbe-Charleston zone.
3-35 ES-6132 SEISMICITY MAP 83U 82U Blu 800 79U 78U 7 85U E 41. N 37N - i i i e i i (38 0 0 ,* 36N - o *a D 36N o o . 9 e. ", '
** 2 35N 35N g
. a -
a V -o y .. ..- . o y 34b - ' D - - 34N o 9 8 o - 33N 32N - . O o, P
> . o 32N - -
32N 3tN 3tto 78U 77U ESU 34U 23U S2U 81'J 80u 79u 4.0 5.e 6.0 7.e I-III !V-VI VII-Ix X-XII
' V V V o o 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 Atmosphone Administration. Boulder, Colo.
l l 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 intensity. Table 3.11 estimates the hor'.tontal 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 (epicenters
3-36 Table 3.10. Earthquake recurrence intervels (years /10* km2 ) as a function of Modified Mercalli Intensity (MMI) for selected meismic source zones Seamc source zone MMI I Columbe-Charleston
- New Madrid San Andreas I
i V 25 (5) ~8 1 l VI 79 (17) 23 2 Vil 250 l (53) 65 6 Vill 790* (170) 190 17 IX 2500* (530)* 540* 46 X 79006 (1700)* 16006 130
- Estimated recurrence intervals in parentheses are for tre entire Columbe-Charlesten sessmec source zone (nearly 5 x 10" 2
km ).
*These estimated recurrence intervals represent extrapolation beyond the historical data base.
i Source: AWwn 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 Columbia, S.C. Time 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 Marcuson 1983.
Source: Algermosen et al.1982. 9 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. l
. 3.7 BIOTA
, 3.7.1 Terrestrial 3.7.1.1 Vegetation
- General types of vegetation found on the site are indicated in Fig. 3.4 and include bottomland l forest, upland forest, cultivated field, and lawn. Bottomland forosts are extensive along the i
e (
p 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 including the site is classified as southern foodplain 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' dominated by loblolly pine-shcrtleaf pine forests and longleaf pine-slash pine forests (Eyre 1980). On relatively wet upland sites, fertile well-drained coves, or on Table 3.12. Potential natural vegetation of the Columbia, S.C., area Southern floodplain forest Physsognomy: Dense, medium tall to tall forest of broadeaf deciduous and evergreen trees and shrubs and needleieaf deciduous trees Dominants: Tupelo (Nyssa aquatics) oak (Quercus spp.) Bald cypress (Taxodium distichum) Oak-hickory-pine forest Physiognomy: Medium tag to tall forest of broadeaf deciduous and needleleaf evergreen trees Domenants: Hickory (Carya spp.) Shortleaf pine (Pinus achmata) Loblony pine (P. taeds) White oak (Quercus alba) Post oak (O. stoista) Southern mixed forest Physiognomy: tan forest of broadleaf deciduous and evergreen and needleleaf evergreen trees i Domments: Beech (Fagus grandfo6a) ? Sweet gum (Liquedember styraciRus) Southem magnolia iMagnoha grand # ora) l h Slash pine (Pinus enottii) I Loblony pine White oak Laurel oak (O. laurifons) j Source: A. W. Kuchler, Potential Natural Vegetation of the l Contermmous United States, Special Publication 36, American Geographical Society, New York,1964. l l w-- - -- -
3-38 sites adgecent to creeks in the uplands, hardwood species such as red maple and sweet gum are - ' more abundant. Vanous species of oaks and hickories are also assocated whh upland forests, as well as with most other forest types in the region. 3.7.1.2 Fauna Wildlife species that occur in the region contanng the site include about 125 breeding bird species (Cook 1969), 55 speces of mammals (Simpson 1964), 44 species of reptiles (excluding
. turtles), and 38 speces of amphsbens (range maps in Conant 1958). Although all of these species are expected to occur somewhere in the central South Carolina-region, the site itself is too small to contain all the habitats required by these species. Therefore, only a fraction of the total r' umber of species would be expected to occur on the site. In addition to the breeding bird species, more than 100 other bird species probably occur at the site as migrants or visitors during fall, winter, and '
spring. Wetlands, ponds, and forests on the site are the most important habitats because they support the greatest numbers and densities of wildhfe species. As wetlands and bottomland forests are being rapidly drained and cleared for agriculture throughout the United States, the romanng forests, such as those along the Congaree River, are becoming increasingly important in supporting
' the romanng wildlife populations (Johnson and McCormick 1978). Cultivated fields and lawns support only low-density populations of relatively few speces Because the plant site has extensive fields and lawns in addition to the facilities, the site as a whole is expected to have relatively low wildhfe populations.
Important game animals that occur at the plant site include the white-tailed deer, raccoon, eastern cottontail, bobwhite, gray squirrel, and wood duck. Furbearers include the bobcat, red fox, and gray fox. 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 the Congaree River. Table 3.13 identifies maior fish speces found in the Congaree River as listed by the-South Carolina Fish and Wildlife Department and the SC-DHEC. Of these species,
-bass, crappie, bluegill, and catfish are popular game speces. This should not be construed to be a comprehensive list of speces present in the Congaree River, but rather as a list of species of economic importance.-
The major invertebrate species in the Congaree River that occur both upstream and downstream of plant discharge, chironomed larvae (medges) and tubtficed worms, are indicative 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 burrowing and filtering speces and those specsos that live in 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 annehds, 27% were arthropods (pnmari'y insects), and 1% were nematodes (NRC 1977). Fingemail clams, Sphaerium sp., were the most abundant orgerusms collected. Corbiculia clams occurred only downstream of the discharge at the time of sampling (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.8.2.3).
y . . _ 3-39 Table 3.13. Major fish species that presently occur in South Carolina's Congeree River Scientific name Common name Lepisoteidae Lepisosteus osseus Long-rose gar Amndae Amia calva Bowfin Clupendae Dorosoma cepedanum Gizzard shed . Cyprinidae Cyprinus carpic Carp ictaluridae Ictadurus natalis YeNow buuhead L nebudosus Brown buNhead L punctatus Channel catfish Serranedae Morone saxatilis Striped bass M. onrysops White bass Centrarchidae Lepomos macrocheus Bluegill y _ e Meropterus codomevar SmeNmouth bass M. sairrades Largemouth bass Pomoxis annuisas White crapsk P. nigromacuistus Black crappie < Source: Westinghouse 1983, Table 3.15. Phytoplankton collected in the vicinity of the plant discharge were predominately the colonial green algae, Eudorina elegans. Of the total number of indnnduals of 22 species collected, 73% _ were Chlorophyta (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 SOO . cells per milliliter. Because the samples were collected during a high flow period, some of the species
- collected were probably transported from the reservoirs upstream on the Saluda River into the Congaree River (NRC 1977).
Therty-three species of zooplankton were identified from tow samples in the vicinity of the
- plant. The _ larval stage (glochidial of bivalve mollusks comprised 21% of the total number of individuals collected. Copepods, rotifers, cladeocerans, and larval stages of olegochaete worms and
. nematedes were also collected in the tow samples (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.8.2.3).
4 Samples from selected substrates (rocks, leaves, and logs) in the river yeided 112 species of periphyton. Of these, 97% were diatoms. The more abundant diatoms collected were Achnanthes deflexa, Navicula minima, N. ~mutica, and N. crytocephala Green algae. mostfy Ulothrix sp., and blue-green algae, Microcoleius vaginatus and Oscillatoria sp., were observed infrequently. Because of its shallow nature, high temperature,' low flow, and decomposing organic matter, the dissolved oxygen level of Sunset Lake is low (less than 4 ppm) and the lake fauna is limited.
n --- 3-40 Upper Sunset Lake is now a swamp that supports a mixed stand of swamp tupelo, Nyssa aquatica,
- and Carolina ash,' Framnus carodnnene. The water surface is covered for the most part by a dense met of duckweed, Spirodsie polynhips and Lemns trwnor. Emergent vegetation is primarily yellow waterE lity, . Nipher advena; lizard tails, Saururus comus; and St. John's wort, Hypencum spethuietum. . The only benthic invertebrate collected was the phantom-medge, Chaoborus punctqpenrus, wtuch is tolerant of low oxygen levels (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.8.2.4).
The plankton fauna of Sunset Lake . were abundant. Phytoplankton densstes averaged 60,000 plankters per milliliter. Predominant phytoplanktors'in the lake-were the colonel green algae, Eudonne eispens In general, green algae constituted the malonty of the phytoplankton commurwty, although diatoms, ouglenceds, bluegreens, and dir.c,7=. " tes were also represented. Zooplankton speces were predom.netely protazoens (Df#uge lobostome and Df#uge oblonga) and the rotifer Aspienchne priodonta. Both zooplankton and phytoplankton were more abundant at the aflow and of lower Sunset Lake, probably as a result of the inflow of swamp water from upper Sunset Lake. Of the fish speces collected in 1974 from Sunset Lake and Mill Creek (Westinghouse 1'983 Table 3.16), bluegdl and gciden shmers (Notomigonus crysoleucas) were the most abundant. Recent sampimgs in 1981 and 1982 have ymided the following species: bowfin, carp, catfish, crappie, and bluegill (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 3.8.2.4). Employee fishmg is allowed on both lower Sunset Lake and on Mill Creek on the plant property 3.7.3 Threatened and Endangered Species The Region 4 Endangered Speces Notebook (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Endangered Species Office, Atlanta, Georgia,1983, wtuch is updated penodically) lists the threatened and endungered plant and arumals speces found in the southeastern United States and includes range maps and range descriptions for each species This publication indicates that, although five endangered speces may occur in the central South Carolina region, only the American alligator (Ampstor tr=====yywansis) and the red-cockaded woodpecker (Picosdss borealis) would be expected to occur regularly as breeding ressdents withm 40 km (25 miles) of the site. The other speces are the eastem cougar (Fedis concodor couper), Kirtland's warbler (Dendoica Jurtiendii), and the bold
~
eagle (Hsiesetus isucocephalus) The alligator may occur'in the Congeree River and associated ' wettends and swamps, mcludmg wetlands such as Sunset Lake on the site. Colorwes of red - cockaded woodpeckers are known to have occurred in Richland and Lexington counties, which at the site are separated by the Congeree River. The basic habitat requirement is an open stand of pines that mcludes trees more than 60 years old. Because such habstat is lacking on the site, it is unlikely that red-cockaded woodpeckers occur near the plant facilites Although the alligator and woodpecker have not been observed on the site, systematic surveys for these species have not - been conducted. No threatened or endangered plant species is known to occur in the central South Carolina region. The short-nosed sturgeon, Acpenser brevirostrum, is the o lny threatened and endangered Maquatic species that might occur in the region of South Carolina near the Columina Plant (John Seeley, South Carolina Division of Game and Freshwater Fisheries, personal communication with
-V. R. Tolbert Ook Ridge National Laboratory, October' 16,1984) (Sect. 4.2.4.3). This speces migrates upstroom from the Atlantic Ocean to fresh water to spawn. Spawnmg occurs between February and May, depending on the latitude, in aroos of fast flow with gravel or rubble bottoms s
-' i- t '-- r wa *we- -- e*-ewm-*w--eeeme+w--e=+---w--g-us-- -s --w*N>e4+mr-**e--e-w-a-w---- w'-wed"-eo=---e4-e m _-ei-'
.. .- . . . - _ - = - . -- . - ~.
3-41 (Muska and Matthews 1983). Because of the rubble and gravel substrate upstream of the site in the vicinity of Columbia, 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 spawning should occur in the . wnmediate vicinity of,the site except possibly where small tributaries enter the river, t 3.8 RADIOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS (BACKGROUND)
~
3.8.1 Totel-body Dose Rates - Based on Estimates of lonmng Radiation Doses in the U.S. (EPA 1972), the total-body dose rate fron: natural background radiation in the vicinity of Columom, South Carolina, is about 135 millirem / year (70 millirem / year _ from external terrestrial radiation, 40 merem/ year from cosmic rays, and 25 millirem / year from internal terrestrial radiation). This value compares favorably [ with an averege_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. Wdliams, SC-DHEC, Dnnsoon of Radiological Health, personal communication' to H. C. Woodsum, Westinghouse Environmental Systems Department, Pittsburgh, October 19, 1973). Total 4xxfy dose rates were measured by SC-DHEC at offsite locations in the vicwwty of the
~
plant during 1981 and 1982. These data indicate average dose rates of 0.21 to 0.23 millirem /d .i (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 vicinity of the Westinghouse plant are given in Table 3.14. Typical concentrations of uraruum in surrounding vegetation and soil are less than 1 pCi/g (Westinghouse 1975). 4 Table 3.14. Characteristics' of background radiation in the vicinity of the Westinghouse NFCS (1981-1982) Average gross alphe Sci /mu Ambent air 3.9 x 10~'5 4 Surface water I Congerse River 2.2 x 10-s Well water i Offsite 1.0 x 10-' Drinking water 1.0 x 10-' Source: Westinghouse 1983. Table 3.8. I f f I
_ . - . .- .- _ . _ = . . _ - - - - . - . - - _- 3-42 REFERENCES FOR SECTION 3 a J Algerrruseen, S. T., D. M. Perkins, P. C. Thenhous, S. L Hanson, and B. L Bender. 1982. Prnhah&= tic Estimates of Maximum Acce6 erat % and Veiocoty in Rock in the Contiguous Uhrted , States, U.S. Geologmal Survey, Open-File Report 82-1033, Denver. { Bolhnger, G. A.1972. " Historical and Recent Seisme Activity in South Caroline," Suf. Seismol ' ] . Soc. Am. 62, 851-54.
, Bolhnger, G. A.1973. " Seismicity of the Southeastern Uruted States," Sur. Sesmol. Soc. Am. 63,
' j 1785-1808. ' j Colquhoun,' D. J.,1. D. Woolen, D. S. Van Nieuwenheise, and G. G. Padgett.1983. Surface and Subourface Stratigraphy Structure and Aqurfers of the South Coronne Constel Plein. Department of Geology, Urwversity of South Caroline, Columbia Conant, R.1958. A Fie6d Gumie to Reptiins and Amphdmens, Houghton Miffhn Company, Boston. Cook, R.' E.1969. " Variation in Species Density of North Amencen Birds," Syst. Zoof. 18,63-84. Devis and Floyd, Inc., Consulting Engineers. 1980. Report on Groundwerer hvostigetions, Westinghouse E6ectric Corporation, Nucieer Fuel Ovieson, Caiumbo, South Carchne, Job No. 3067-1, Greenwood, S. C., November. Davis and Floyd. Inc., Consulting Engineers.1982. Groundwater Hydoiogy, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Co6umbus, South Carodine, Contractor's Report to Westinghouse Electnc j Corporation, Greenwood, S.C. Denne, J. V.1967. " Woody Plants of the Congeree Forest Swamp, South Caroline," Nature Conservancy Ecologmal Studes, leaflet 12. Poland. DOC (U.S. Department of Commerce).1971. Some Devestering North Ardenec Humicones of the Twentieth Century, National Oceanc and Atmosphenc Administration. DOC (U.S. Department of Commerce).1973. "Climatologmal Summary, Columbia, South Caroline," Cnimetography of the United States. ' DOC (U.S. Department of Commerce).1983. County and City Dets Book, U.S. Govemment Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 2 DOI (U.S. Department of the Interior). 1979-1983. " Notional Register of Historic Places Annual 4-Listing' of Historic Places," Fed. Regist. 44(26), 7415-649 (Feb. 6, 1979); 48(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). t EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).1972. Estimate of baneng Radietion Dooes in the Untfod States 1960-2000, Office of Radiation Programs, Rockville, Md. Eyre, F. H. (ed.).1980. Forest Cover Types of the Unrted States and Canede, Soc. Am. For., Washington, D.C. Huhku,th, G. C. 1971. Mixing Heights, Wind Speed, and Potential for I.kben Air Poeunon Throughout the Contiguous Uhited States, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. l Johnson, R. R., and J. F. McCormick (technmal coordinators).1978. Strategies for Protection and Menegement of Floo#denn Wettends and Other Rennen Ecosystems, General Technical Report WO-12, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Servce , Krinitreky, E. L, and W. F. Mercuson.1983. "Principios For Selecting Earthquake Motions in
- Engineering Design," Suf. Assoc. Eng. Geol. 20, 30.
I
3-43 Muska, C. F., and R. A. Matthews.1983. Biolog# cal Assessment for the Shortnose Sturgeon, Acqpenser brevirostrum, Lesueur 1818, The Savannah River Plant. DPST-83-154 E.1. du Pont de Nemours & Co., Savannah River Laboratory. NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration).1978. Climates of the States, vol.1, Dale Research Company, Detroit. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1977. Environmental impact Appraisal of the Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel Columbia Site (NFCS) Cummerda: Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant. CoAsnba, South Caro #na, April 1977, NRC, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, Washington, D.C., (NR-FM-013). NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1980. Amerx*nent 4 to Specal Nuclear Matenals Locense SNM-1107, for Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Nuclear Fuel Columba Site. Table 3. January 28. Park, A. D.1979. Groundwater in the Coastal Plains Region, A Status Report and Handbook, Coastal Plains Regonal Commission, Charleston, S.C. Purvis, J. C.1964. South Carolina Hurricanes, South Carolir.a Civil Defense Agency. SCWRC (South Carolina Water Resources Commission). 1983. South Carolina State Water Assessment, Report No.140, Columbia, S.C. SCWRC (South Carolina Water Resources Commission).1984. Open-File Data, Columbia, S.C. Simpson, G. G. 1964. " Species Density of North American Recent Mammals," Syst. Zool. 12, 57-83. Thom, H.C.S. 1968. "New Distribution of Extreme Winds in the U.S.," J. Structural Div., Proceedogs of the American Society of Civil Engineers, July, pp. 1787-89. Thom, H.C.S.1973. " Tornado Probabilities," Monthly Weather Rev. 91(4),730-36. USGS (U.S. Geologeal Survey).1981. Water Resources Data for South Caro #na, Water Data Report SC-81-1, Reston, Va. Westinghouse 1972. STAR Program for On-Site Data Diffusion Climatology, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, Environmental Systems Department, Pittsburgh. Westinghouse.1975. Westmghouse Nuclear Fuel Columba Site Evaluation Report, submitted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission for renewal of SNM-1107, March 1 (Docket No. 70-1151). 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 appkcant's Update fer EnvironmentalImpact Appraisal (Docket No. 70-1151), February 20. l l r
6 s *
,j k ;
- 4. ENVNIONMENTAL CONSEQUENCES OF PROPOSED LICENSE RENEW' AL tThe foNowmg sectens discuss the direct environmental effects of operations and activitme at l
-the' Westinghouse NFCS and the sagnsficance of the effects. The analyses regarding air and water l quality, land use, and ecologmal and radiologmal impacts were based primanly on data prowded by
- the appiment (Westinghouse .1975,1983,1984) on an actual production capacity of 700 metnc tons (t) per year of uranium and an estimated producten capacity of 1600 t/ year of uraruum. For the letter capecsty, the simultaneous use of ammorwum diuranate (ADU) and integrated dry route (IOR) procesemg was assumed The current Imenee renewal appimation requests authonration for operations covered under the
- existing Imense and for new operations involvmg the IDR process (Westa v t- r 1981).' A prairrunary environmental review of the amendment to utilire the IDR process producten line was conducted by the staff and reported in a memorandum (Shum 1981). This review is pnnted in Appendix C of this EA.
4.1 MONITORING PROGRAMS AND MITIGATORY MEASURES
, A comprehenenve effluent and' environmental monitoring program is conducted by the appiment to demonstrate compliance with appropriate esivironmental protection standards and to provide, 9 where possible, este-specsfic data to assist in the predeten of environmental impacts.
. 4.1.1'Efnuent Monitoring Program ,
- 4.1.1.1 Radiological Stack emmasons are monitored in four fac4ty areas (see Fig. 2.4). Each rolesse stack is equipped with an isokinetic probe devme that continuously draws a semple through a fibergises filter paper. The filter paper is removed daily and analyzed for goes alpha activity as a meneure of
- l waruum content Results are compiled semannuety and reported to the Nuclear Regulatory Commiseen (NRC). A summary of emisesons measured at a producten rate of 700 t/ year of werwum is presented in Table 2.1.
A 30-d compoeste semple of liquid effluent discharged to the Congeree River is analyzed monthly for goes alphe. yoes beta, and isotopic wenium The applicant also analyzes a daily ! compoeste sample for goes alpha activity. Typical discharge concentratens and annual reisees rates I of radmactivity at a producten rate of 700 t/ year are given in Table 2.4. l- 4.1.1.2 Nontedlelogloel , l ~- Stack emmasons in the four fac4ty areas are monitored with an isokinetic probe devme that continuously draws a semple of 224 m3 /d through a fibergiess filter paper. The filter paper is. ; removed on a daily beeis and analyzed for fluorides. The results of this monitoring program for f f 1981-1983 have been reported in pg of fluoride couected daily on the paper (Westinghouse L 1984).' The staff has Cated fluonde emmeion rates ( g/s) for a 700-t/ year production rate l f 8 l (Table 2.3) on the beeis of an average gas flow from the combined stacks of 13.3 m /s. The ; stack emosens are also analyzed at least quarterly for ammone As stated in Sect. 2.2.2.1, the , average' and mammum ammonie reloose rates during normal operation at about 700 t/ year of- F waruum have been 1.8 and 2.3 g/s, respectively (Westinghouse 1983). 4-1 v- ,m. #- ,~+m-te-t -,~v-.-r- c+-y--s- r--+--ve--w,,,-r--m+,,m. e-, -----3 -+ee-,---,, -----~---e tw--- n,1- -+1 - , .= e- ---r- m--
')
- i O.~2 ' N u ,
s: Plant liquid effluent is morstored in accordance with tM requirements of the facility's National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) perrait. The details of parameter monitoring, samphng methods and frequency, and effluent ..~ limitations of the permit are included in Appendix B.
.The average annual nonradiological quanty of the NFCS combened liquid effluent is presented in .
i 3 .' Table 2.6. Westinghouse's comphance with the plant NPDES permit is discussed in Sect. 4.2.3.1.
' 1 4.1.2 EnviroewnentalIbc!toring Program ,
l 4.1.2.1 Redefogical i The current oavironmental mornering program for radicactivity 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. dfisite surface water monitoring stations are shown in Fig. 3.7 and groundwater monitoring sites are identified in Fig. 3.8. The program is doesgned to ensure comphence with state and federal regulations and to provide data input to a statistical data base for environmentel impact assessment of plant operation. In the event of an accidental release of radioactivity from the plant, more frequent samphng of physical and biotic environmental components would be conducted. A summary of the results of the monitoring program that has been reported to NRCpVoisghouse 1984) is presented below.
- Oneite i
Air. Air samphng stations for particulate monitoring (Fig. 4.1) are: No.1, located at the nearest site boundary in a prevailing wind direction 914 m (0000 ft) northeast of the plant: No. 2, north of tha employee parking lot where concentrations are expected to be maximum: No. 3, near the meteomiogudl toww; 594 m (1960 ft) west-northwest: No. 4, located at the nearest site t. Tehte 4.1. A summary of emntonmental rodfSogical monitoring at the < Westinghoeme NFC8 Sample size N
, Parameter measured Frequency Air perticuletes' 571 m8 4 Cross alpha Continuous
.Vcgelytion 100 g 4 Gross alpha and beta: Semennually isotopic uranium j Groundwater 1L 15 Gross siphe and beta Monthly and quarterly j 9urfees'weter iL 6 . Gross siphe and beta Monthly
$od 100 J .
4 Gross alphe and beta: Semennually isotopic urarsam I Sediment 16')g i 1 Gross alpha and beta: Annually l } isotopic urcnium l Fish 30 g Gross espin and beta: 1 Annually isotopic uranium Source: Westinghouse 1983. b l i , , L _j- ----- . - - , - - - - - - -
--,L---- ----~ ~""' - ~ ~
' ' ' ' * ~'
Esaias To COLUMBIA, S.C.
\
/
/
/ ,'
s ~ .s -
/ k 4
# WESTINGHOUSE
/
( V ?Og ruftFAoR CATION PLANT FACILITIES g N gl'f
,e#ded % .A
^"" o.;,!h 05.'.M D IN1RANCE
,,3
* ,' OO3
~
, +0
- j@,t c 9l*h Akh ,6 yyl ;
l wATEk LEVEL
4 e . ,,
P , .. ,rg%ECEM - '
,k y hf? ?"'i '^ ~ ~ '
/
J~N? s A, y site % s ,:cece 112 0- 4, .z se ~ . g <..- * :-y_ ; . . rot , o N !Tcor W3 hh k?:p*:,, . &
*'R TROla'& " n , # ~~
,;'e
.t
..~~.
~'
- ?{cTercyoge,0,,N ,
9 o
~
NN *+If o AIR PARTICULATE IF lfIf #N 9 Y P% h ' I . +W . ,
-
- UN4%CE copp,N SAMPUNG ST ATION NOTE:
a vfGET ATION SAMPUNG
, ROpgg7y l @ NUMBERS INDICATE ELEV ATION
. ., I STATION IN FEET O SOIL SAMPUNG
- l g
(';"' FEET [ STATION TO ' 363 m
- SURF ACE WATER CONGAREE SAMPUNG LOCATIONS RIV E R Fig. 4.1. Locations of onsite ambient air, vegetation, soil, and surface water monitoring stations at the Westinghouse NFCS. Source: Modified after Westinghouse 1983, Fig. 6.1.
4-4 -I 4 45 a 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. 1 Table 4.2 indicates that the highest annual average for the period was 6.2x10-15 pCi/mL 1 (Station 4 in 1981). Assuming that au the activity is from a single insoluble uranium isotope (i.e., ; i 23sU,233U, or 234U), this concentration is less than 1% of the maximum permissible concentration y for release to unrestricted areas as defined by 10 CFR Pt. 20. Becausc the activity is actuauy from 1 low enriched uranium, which . consists of a combination of the aforementioned isotopes, this [ comparison is conservative. Table 4.2. Radiological monitoring data from ot ,ite air particulate monitors at the Westinghouse 2 NFCS,1981-1983 Gross alpha * -- 6 Station 1981 ***' g 1982 1983 - average g W 1 3.8 1.5 2.4 2.6 4 4 2 4.1 2.8 2.4 3.1 4.4 ] 3 4 6.2 4.4 3.4 2.8 2.7 3.9 g 4.1 g
-5
' Annual average concentrations from monthly -
analysis of gross alpha activity. Wlues are given as 10'"5pCi/mL 3 i.ocations shown in Fig. 4.1. g Source: Westinghouse 1984. y"" e Groundwater. Until recently, four onsite wells (W-1-W-4; see Figs. 3.8 and 3.9) were d 4 monitored routinely in accordance with NRC license requirements. These wens were sampled m
;g monthly .and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity. Well W-1 is an upgradient I 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 downgredient, 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 adjacent to W-3 and is completed in the shallow terrace aquifer.
l Water quality samples, which are obtained by bailing, are collected in a two-step procedure. 3 First, the well is bailed dry or 38 L (10 gal) are withdrawn (whichever comes first), and the bailed j water is discarded. Then, the well is allowed to recover for 24 hours before water quality samples l] are taken. Recent monitoring results from wells W-1-W-4 show insignificant gross alpha N contamination or none at all (Westinghouse 1984). The highest concentration reported is 12 pCi/L I I gross alpha (WeX 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 minimum detectable level for radioactivity (2.2 pCi/L gross alpha). For Wells W-1-W-3, the deeper wells, insignificant gross beta concentrations were also found. The l w 1l h 4 k e p p ,,. dn- ahi u uIsuu me "" "' ' -
4-5 maximum 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 shallow wells (Sect. 3.5.2.2), has shown gross beta contamination with a maximum concentration (in 1982) of 330 pCi/L (R. Fischer, Westinghouse, telephone communication with S. Wyngarden, h NRC, March 25, 1985). A modification to the plant's NPDES permit (Appendix B), effective September 1, 1984, t f requires that 11 additional onsite wells (W-7,10,13,15,16,18, 22, 24, 29, 30, and 32 in l 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, contammation in the shaHow aquifer 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 samping (January '1981, May 1981, and July 1982) are similar to those shown in Table 3.9 (Westinghouse 1984). Wells immediately adiacent to the liquid waste treatment plant and holdog ponds, which were origmally identified as the sources of contamination, 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 samping time to the next. This variation is also true of the remaning wells further downgradient, which occasionally show ' elevated levels of radioactivity as contammation moves through the groundwater flow p'ath outimed in Section 3.5.2.1. Surface water. As part of the routine environmental monitoring program at NFCS, three e 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 water monitoring stations et the Westinghouse NFCS, 1981-1983* i Gross alpha (pCi/mL) l 6 l Station 1981 1982 1983 average 4 0.0043 0.0012 0.0015 0.0023 5 0.0065 0.0008 0.0012 0.0026 6 0.0277 0.0071 0.0216 0.0188 { I ' Annual average values based on monthly sampling.
't.ocations shown in Figs. 3.7 and 4.1.
Source: Westinghouse 1984. i l
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 contarung uranium unpurities (30 pCi/ral).
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. I in additen 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 been 5 to 10 times greater than background levels, presumably because of deposition of airborne redoactive 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 samphng station (R. Fischer, Westinghouse, telephone commurucation 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 semiannually and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity. Most recently, Westinghouse has measured gross alpha and gross beta activity and isotopic urarwum 4 Samples are usually obtained at locations near the air monitors (see Fig. 4.1). Table 4.4 reports monitoring data as annual averages of con.Uned 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 endnndual 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 uraruum 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 et the Westinghouse NFCS, i 1981-1983 Total uranium (pCi/g)* Station
- 1981 1982 1983 #
t - 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
' Annual average of two samples.
,
- Locations shown in Fig. 4.1.
Source: Westinghouse 1984.
. , . - - , - , - - - - . , . ,---n -, , , - - . . . . - - , . - - - - n,---.- ..n. w- . - - , - . . n-~-.,- w-- n-,-,a . . - , , , . ,, ----e-,
4-7 On the basis of these results, the staff concludes that no s;wJceat change in the total uranium concentration of onsite vegetation has resulted from NFCS operations. Because of this, any human ingestion of mik or beef produced by cattle that have ingested hay harvested onsite at NFCS would not likely result in individual doses above background levels. Soil. Samples are required to be collected semennually and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity. Most recently,' Westinghouse has measured isotopic uranium in addition to gross alpha and gross beta activity. Samples are usually obtained at locations near the air monitors (see Fig. 4.1). Table 4.5 reports monitoring data as annual averages of combined uranium isotopes in onsite soil for the period 1981-1983. Table 4.5. Radiological monitoring data from analysis of onsite soil at the Westinghouse NFCS, 1981-1983 Total uranium (pCi/g)* Station
- 1983 1981 1982 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
- Locations shown in Fig. 4.1.
Source: Westinghouse 1984 The annual and 3-year-average 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 uranium per gram of soil allowed for disposal with no restriction on the method of burial (NRC 1981). The highest individual 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 still well below the 30-pCi/g limit mentioned earlier. Subsequent samples from Station 2 (September 1983) and Station 3 (May and September 1983) indicated total uranium concentrations less than 1 pCi/g. On the basis of these < results, the staff concludes that no significant changes in the total uranium 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 Carolina State Department of Health and Environmental Control (SC-DMEC) maintains thermoluminescent dosamenters (TLDs) near the NFCS boundaries. The TLDs in the following ( locations provide a measure of direct radiation:
- 685 m (2250 ft) east,
[
- 915 m (3000 ft) northeast, and i
- 685 m (2250 ft) northwest.
_. _ .-_ _.._ _ _. . ~ _ . . . . . _ _ ._ ,_ _ E q 4-8
- Quarterly data from 1981 and early 1982 (Westinghouse 1983) indicated that the direct (gamme) radiation near the site boundaries was equivalent to a total body dose of 77-84 r..iuirem/ year. This .
, range is the same as that measured by TLDs located offsite (Sect. 3.8), indicating that the
' Westinghouse facility was not contnbutmg measurable gamma radiation to locatens beyond the site boundenes. The state has indicated that it will continue *.h's monitoring using TLDs. 1 I
oefeit. l
- ' Surface water. In accordance with mammum requirements of the NRC liconee, the Congereo River is sampled quarterly at three locations and analyzed for gross alpha and groes beta actnnty.
I The sample locations are: No.1, the Blossom Street Bridge located 16 km (10 miles) above the NFCS outfaN; No. 2, 0.5 km (500 yd) upstroom of the outfaN, and No.- 3, 0.5 km (500 yd) downstream of the .outfaN (see Fig. 3.7). Supplemental river samples are taken at the plant discharge, at the confluence of min Creek and the Congeree River, and at a point 40 km
- j. (25 miles) downstroom of the NFCS outfaN Data from river sampling, wtuch has been conducted
,. montNy rather than quarterly, have been reported for the period 1981-1983 (Westinghouse { 1984). AN samples from the period had gross alpha and gross beta concentrations less then the
- minimum detectable level (2.2 pCi/L gross alpha and 25 pCi/L gross beta). Therefore, there'hos been no observable effect of NFCS radiological decharges on the Congeree River. Secten 4.2.5 7 provides a more detailed docussson of radelogcol wnpocts to the Congeree River from post plant
- operations and those -expected to result from expensen of the plant up to '1600 t/ year of uraneum
\ Sediment. A sedwnent sample from the Congaree River is taken at least annuouy and analyzed , for gross alpha, gross beta, and total uransum. In 1981 and 1982, gross alpha concentretens in . samples. collected at the plant outfaN were 1.08 pCi/g and 1.94 pCi/g, respectively, in 1982, a i sample was taken 16 km (10 miles) upstream from the outfall to indicate backpound levels of i. gross alpha activity. The sample had a gross alpha concentration of 1.30 pCi/g, which is comparable to those of samples taken at the outfall. Total uranium concentrations in background and outfaN sediments also compared favorably and demonstrated no buildup caused by the plant (. effluent. Fish. Samples of fish are taken annually from the Congaree River downstroom of the plant
- - decharge and analyzed for gross alpha and gross beta activity and isotopic urerwum. For the penod
,1980-1983, the uraneum concentrations ranged from 0.0 to 0.4 pCi/g. The average concentration (0.16 pCi/g) was segrvficantly greater than the staff would expect on the bases of 4
(1) the calculated annual average uranium in the river due to NFCS operation (Sect. 4.2.5.1) and (2) the normal concentration factor for the assmiotion of urarwum by fish (NRC Regulatory Guide 4: 1.109). In addition, the isotopic ratio of 234U/23eV measured was =1, wheroes tho' staff would l expect the ratio to be =6 if the NFCS effluent contatung low-enriched uratuum were the source of ' l the urarnum in the fish. Because of the above, the staff does not believe that the ' uranium detected
. in the fish from the Congaree River can be attributed to the effluent discharged by the NFCS.
4.1.2.2 Nonrediological i Following is a description of the nonradologscal monitoring program and recent data j (Westinghoust 1984). i 1-1
. . - ,...-- - - -.--. -- - -,-. --.- . - , - - . _ . - . - . . - - - - - ,.-.--.._n,--- . , - ~
~
c 4-9 i Oneite
- Air.' The pnncipal nonradiological contamments that may be released to the atmosphere from
- NFCS ' operations are fluondes and ammorna Source monitoring and atmospheric dispersion calculations have shown that ambient air concentrations of fluoride at the NFCS are well below standards established by the state of South Caroline (Sect. 4.2.1.2). Although there are no state or
( federal air standards for ammonia, calculated ambient atmosphenc concentrations of ammorna are [. below levels that could result in harmful impacts to vegetation and wildlife (Sect. 4.2.2.2). As { d-===i in Sect. 4.2.1, the atmospheric concentrations of these contamments are also expected ( . to be insignificant after expansion of the plant up to 1600 t/ year of uranium. Consequently, ambient air monitoring for fluonde and ammorua is not required. i Soils and vegetation. Samples of soil and vegetation that are analyzed on a semiannual basis i - for radiological parameters are also analyzed for total fluorides. The vegetation selected for analysis usua5y consists of Bermuda grass and ' a variable mixture of native plant species [ telephone
- conversation, . R. Kroodsma, Ook Ridge . National Laboratory (ORNL), with R. E. Fischer,
' Westinghouse . October 19,1984]. This monitoring provides a relative estimate of atmospheric 7
fluoride levels as well as an' estimate of potential impacts to foraging ammals Monitoring data fc,r 1981-1983 and an impact analysis are presented in Sect. 4.2.2.1. Surfeos water. There is no direct discharge from the Westinghouse plant to onsite surface waters. Three onsete locations (Fig. 4.1) are monitored quarterly for ammorua, fluonde, and pH. The ! applicant also routmely monitors gH, ammorua, and fluondes at two other onsite locations-the ! . dem causeway between Upper and Lower Sunset Lake and the entrance of Mill Creek to Sunset Lake. Data from oneste surface water monitoring are presented in Table 4.6. l A comparison of the data in the table indicates little, if any, change in concentrations of ammorus and fluondes in onsite surface waters as a result of NFCS operations. The entrance sample, which has low levels of ammorua and fluorides, is representative of background concentrations in Mill Creek and Upper Sunset Lake. As expected, the road (drain) sample, which is { obtamed at a point where runoff is received from paved areas of the plant, has the highest concentration of contamments and the widest range of pH values. The drain, wtuch has a low volume and flow except in periods of heavy 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 10' ' gol) and a flow from 0.003 to 0.2 m /s 3 (0.1 to 0.6 ft /s)3 readily dilutes the dramage entenng it. As a . result, samples taken from the lake show only a minor increase in ammorus and fluondes over [ I background (entrance sample) levels, and samples taken downstroom of the spillway at the exit of Mill Creek from the NFCS are at or below background levels. Thus, it is apparent from the data [ [- that no segrwficant impacts to onsite surface waters result from NFCS operations. For further discussion of surface water impacts, refer to Sect. 4.2.3.
- j. Groundwater. SC-DHEC requires that Westinghouse monitor onsite groundwater as a i s condition of the plent's NPDES permit (see Appendix B). Accordogly, the 11 monitor ' wells being
- i. analyzed for~ radioactivity (see Sect. 4.1.2.1) must also be analyzed for nonradiological l contamments and have water level elevations measured quarterly. Nonradiological parameters to be monitored mciude total dissolved solids (or specific conductance), pH (field), ammonia, nitrate, and
~
l 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, mey.::9n, sodium, potassium, cadnuum, chrormum, leed, and nickel. Additional quarterly analyses may be required if the one-time analysis indicates that any new groundwater problems exist.
n s g gi
, 1
.f s
Tabee 4.8. Annual everage and monimum concentratione (mg/L) of . : and fhsorhies and everage and range of pH et oneite surface water semphne statione et PCCS 1961., 1962,- 1963 NHgNf F* pH* NHgNf F* pH - NHpNf F* 'pH Av Men Av Mas Av Range Av Max Av Mas Av. . Range Av Men Av Max : Av Range Entrance of Me Creek to 41 41 40.4- _41 ND ND 41 41 41 1.5 6.2 5.8-6.7 41 41 .' 42 ' 410 6.1 = 5.7-7.0 Sunset Lake Road-storm dran 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 causeway 41 2 41 410 ND ND <1 1.3 <1 3 6.4 6.0-7.1 41 1.4 43 410 : 6.3 6.0-7.6 i and Lower T Sunset Lake , 8 Spaway of Lower . .
Sunset Lake to 41.5 2 41 410 ND ND <1 1.7 <1 3 6.6 6.0- 7.6 41 1.2 43 410 6.5 - 6.1-8.6 l Me Creek End of ME Creek from MFCS - 41 1.2 40.5 1.5 ND ND <1 1 <1 1.4 6.3 6.2 - 6.4 41 41' ' 42 4 10 ' 6.2 60-6.6 property at canal "Shown on Fig. 3.7: opeway = No. 4. est = No. 5. and road = No. 6.
'Ammores values ei Westeghouse (1964) were accesensey reported as <10 mg/L for NHgN). whch represented the sonstraty of the method of analyase. These values were we .: - 2; applied as 10 eng/L in r**tsone of annual averages. They were not. however cone.dered as representatrwe of monimum NHgN) concentremons; therefore maximum values yven in the table are for specrhc measured vehaos only.
'Fhaandes.
$dD = No data.
Sowcet Wesanghouse 1963 and 1964. 9
.i
- - . . -. . . - . ~. - - - . .
b Y a I 4-11
- This comprehenssve groundwater monitoring became a requirement in September 1984; thus, data for a5 the required parameters are not yet available However, data'for 13 samping dates dunng 1981-1984 have been ' reported (Westinghouse 1984). Typical values observed over this pened are shown in Tables 3.6,' 3.7, and 3.8. The maxwnum values of contamments were '
- 165 mg/L fluonde (Well W-28 on September 25,1983) and 900 mg/L ammorna (Well W-7 on
- January 23,1981), although most measured concentrations were much less than these values.
Even though results have often varied from one sample 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 downgredient have either remamed constant or have decreased only slightly. Well W-20, wtuch is across Sunset Lake from the NFCS facilities, showed an elevated ammone 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 will be pursued by the staff to determine whether or not the contammant L plume has extended beyond south of Sunset Lake. (A discussion of the impacts of the shallow groundwater contammation is presented in Sect. 4.2.3.2.) Well W-3 is the only well completed in the' deeper Black Mongo Formation that has been routinely monitored for - nonradiological parameters. No contammation in this well has been observed Offeite Westinghouse analyzes monthly samples from the Congaree River for pH, ammonia, and fluoride. The samping stations include three required by NRC for radiological analyses (Nos.1, 2, and ' 3 shown in Fig. 3.7) and three supplemental stations located at the plant outfall, the confluence of Mill Creek and Congaree River, and a point 40 km (25 miles) downstream of the
.. plant outfall.' Data from 1981-1983 (Westinghouse 1984) indicate a range in the, parameters measured as follows.
pH 6.0 - 7. 5, NH3 (N) 0.2-1.2 mg/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 outfall shows no discemible 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 b 4.2.1 Air Quality I 4.2.1.1 Criterie pollutants
- 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 maagnsficant. Space heating is accomplished by. combustion of relatively clean-buming 3-natural gas and by electric heaters. Gases and particulates from combustion in the incinerator l. l l F
+-. -
.ar-e- =- - = .- - , - = --m--- ---e----w.-r-- -.s-- - . =- -. -,- e e.,< - - - -eer--e e = w - -- -m---*- --
. . ~ = . _ - - .~ ~ . - . - . . . _ .
p, 4-12
' (Sect. 2.2.2) are passed through a scrubbing system before they are released to the atmosphere.
The incinerator is permitted by the state of South Carolina (SC-DHEC 1983a). Nitrogen oxides are raiaamad as a result of natural ges combustion for space and process heetmg The staff does not expect that emissions of.criterie potutants from the plant will violate either netonal or South ; Carolina ambient air. quality standards. Four smeB coohng towers at the plant emit insignificant I , quantities of drift, vapors, corrosion mhibitors, and beocidos. These emoeions wiu not asgnolicantly -i affect offsite air quality , i
' 4.2.1.2 Ammonie and fluorides ~
Other nonradiologmel atmosphonc emessions from the Westinghouse facility are ammone i (gaseous) and fluoride (partculate and gaseous). For operation of only the ADU process at the + proposed maxwnum production rate of 1600 t/ year of uranium, Westinghouse conservatively [. - estimated that the ammorne emmasons rate would average about 4.9 g/s, with a maximum of r 6.2 g/s. However, the staff expects that the ammorua emissions wie actueuy be about 30% less
'(or 3.4 and 4.3 g/s, respectively) because of the combined processing of uransum using the IDR process, which has no ammonia emmasons, and the existing capahlity of the ADU process.
Since there are no federal or South Caroline air quakty standards for ammonie, ambient concentrations at the site were not consadored with regard te potentiel unpocts to air quatty. Rather, the pnaaMa wnpocts of ammorne emmasons on vegetetton, land use, and wiktlfe are discussed in Sect. 4.2.2 using the staff's estimate for the 1600 t/ year of uraruum proceeemg.
~
Emmasons of fluorides at a maximum production rate of 1600 t/ year of uransum were ' estimated l by the staff for the combmed operation of ADU and IDR production lines. -The recent average of-4 measured fluonde emessons from.the existing ADU procesemg lines at a nommel 700 t/ year of
- uransum processmg was 81.6 pg/s (Sect. 2.2.2.1). Operating the existing lines at the proposed I expanded capacity would result in an average emmason rate of about 130 p0/s..Westmghouse
! (1981) has conservatively estimated fluonde emmsions from the proposed IDR process to be about {. 2125 pg/s. [in reality, the fluonde scrubbers and HEPA filters should remove most of the fluondes (Sect. 2.2.2.1).] The combmed prora==== operating at the mexwnum proposed production rate of L
- 1600 t/ year, if unmitigated, could result in total fluonde emessions of 2255 pg/s. The appbcont
- has not proposed expandmg the ADU process capability to 1600 t/ year of urarnum, so no estimate of fluoride emessons has been made for this case.
Using annual average X/O values based on those provided in Table 3.2 and a fluonde emissions f' rate of-81.6 pg/s, thei staff estimates that the annual average airbome concentration at the nearest site boundary for operation at 700 t/ year is 0.0013 pg/m8.
- For operation at 1600 t/ year with the combmed processes, the estimated annual average ambient fluoride concentrations are:
- At the nearest boundary 0.035 pg/m 8
[550 m (0.3 mile) NNW)
- At the nearest neighbor 0.017 pg/m3
[1000 m (0.6 mile) NE) l These concentrations, which are based on X/O values in Table 3.2 and a fluoride omoseons rate of
~
2255 pg/s, are less than the South Carolina one-month-average standard of 0.8 pg/m8 for i.
. _ _ _ _ _ _ . . ~ _ _ _ - . _ . . . - _ . _ _ _ _ . . _ _ _ _ . _ . . . _ . . _
, . . - - - ~ - - ~ ~ . - . . - - . .- . . - . ~ -. - .. ~
, ..m t ,
d' 4 '
- o
' ambient fluonde concentrations (Table 3.3).' Further, because the Westinghouse fluonde emessens
!are's mxture of .pertmulates (NH.F) and gas-(HF) and because 'the South Caroline air quehty b~ .. standards apply only to gessous fluondes, the impact of NFCS enssions reistive to the standards I V wiH be even lees.'
b ' T 4.2.21.and Use
~
b , Land uses at the plant site (refer to Sect. 3.4.1) should not change segrwficantly, because no I new buildmgs or. major _extemal modficatens to existmg facehties are proposed as port of this , " hcense-renewal appimation. Thus, the project' wiH have no. construction-related effects on . floodplems, wetlands, hatoric or archaeologmal sites, or natural landmarks. Agncultural and postoral uses of.. nearby 'lond could potentieHy be affected by fluoride and i' ammone errummans on crops, posture graseos, and ' cattle.. However, analyses of past projected . fluonde and ammorne ensanons m.annated with the proposed plant expensson (up to 1600 t/ year - of uraruum) mdcates that there win be no.segneficant or observable impacts. The basis for this deteranation is provided in the foHowing discussson. 4.2.2.1 Effects of fluoride emiselons t i , Accumuleton of.fluondes in vegetation has been known to cause reduced productivity or death
'of plants and to cause fluorosis in grazing animals (NAS 1971). Uptake of arborne fluondes by
- . foliage is'the pnmary pathway to elevated fluonde levels in vegetation, wheroes plant-root uptake
- ; of fluondes from soils'is.of little importance where fluonde levels in soils are not extremely high
- (NAS 1971), such as at the Westinghouse site. Emmeions of'fluonde from the NFCS elevate
~
L ambent levels of fluoride in air, soils, and biota in the vmwnty. Projected annual average emessons
. of fluonde from the plant operating at a level of 1600 t/ year of uratuum sxt the estimated fluonde I! concentrations in the air at the nearest site boundary and the nearest neighbor were docussed in b Sect. 4.2.1. ~
b Although the. impacts' of arbome fluondes on vegetation cannot be reimbly predicted (NAS ' t, 1971), air quakty criteria to protect pertcularfy senestive plant speces have been suggested: 8 ! ~1 2'pg/m 3for a 24-h period 'and 0.4' g/m . for a 100<l penod (see Fig. 7-13 in NAS 1971), 4-i prwnerily for geoeous forms of fluoridos with which vanous plant speceos were fumgeted in field or
; laboratory studes reviewed by the NAS report. Estimates of annual average ambient atmosphenc 7
fluoride concentrations 'at the NFCS at the nearest boundary and nearest neighbor (0.035 and
~
h 0.017 'pg/m ,8 respectively) are below these values ~ Moreover, the fluonde concentrations do not k
~
consist entirely of the relatively toxic gessous fluondes, but also include fluondes in relatively
. nontoxic porticulate forms, thus reducmg the potential for impacts. Therefore, fluorides emitted as a .
t i- ' result of the operation of the Westinghouse plent at 1600 t/ year of uratuum should have no ' i detectable effect on the appearance, and no segrwficant effect on the productnnty of plants. g
'Oneite 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 1981-1SS3.
H This' level is not conssdered important for the uptake' of fluonde by vegetation (NAS 1971). A I summary of fluoride' concentrations in vegetation'(principally Bermude grass) collected from four onsite semphng locations.(Westinghouse.1984) dunno 1981, .1982,-and 1983 is presented in } , Table.4.7. The vegetation semples averaged 26 ppm, although 5 of 23 semples exceeded 40 ppm of fluonde,-the tolerance level for mature deiry cattle (Table 4.8). Although the three tons of hay i
~.c,- f. ,-,. ,-i...._ +. ~ .n , ,,-,-,.nr,_.,,---..- .,--,._..,,-,,,,.-u-a ..u,,.,-..,,--._
4-14 Table 4.7 Annual average fluoride concentrations in onsite vegetation et NFCS for the period 1981-1983 Fluoride (mg/L) Year , Station 1 6 Station 2 8 l Station 3* Station 4* 1981 12 22 28 10 j i 1982 25 38 20 21 i l 1983 36 30 34 31 l
' 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.
*Sampo 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 les6ons* 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, breeding 60 5-8 Lambs, feeder 150 12-15 Horses 60 43 Swine, growing 70 5-d Turkeys, growing 100 10-12 Chickens, growing 150 10-13 Dogs, growing 50 3-8
' Values should be reduced proportionally when both water and feed contain apprecable amounts of fluorides.
"A suggested guide when fluoride in the feed is essentially the sole' source of fluoride; tolerances based on sodium fluoride or other fluorides of senilar 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 I active animals in a warm climate, the lower values I should be used as critical level indicators. I Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency.
4 1980. Reviews of the environmental effects of pollutants: IX. Fluoride. EPA-600/1-78-050. Cmcinnati, Ohio. 3
. ~ , , . ., , _ _ _ . . ,_
- - - . - . _ .- ._,4-
vmi .- %e + .-.4 L 4- 4 - mE. f.a.-+ . -+-La m d- 4----- m-___ e,-- -.-.._m m- - - i- aihnai4Ju w .2m.am t 4-15
, .- harvested annueNy from the site is fed to a dairy herd of j50 heed (Westinghouse 1984), this amount of hoy would supply only'a very smeN portion of the winter season food requirement: -
therefore, fluorosis should not be a major problem for thase cattle. Concentrations in offsite vegetation.should be lower than in onsite vegetation. Domestic anwnels grazing on the offsite vegetation should not be affected by fluorides, provided the fluonde concentration in their drinking water is not particulerfy high (Table 4.8). The concentration of fluorides in soyboens grown on the site, which are sold to a commercial mill and processed for both livestock feed meal and soybeen oil for human consumption, has not
- been monitored, but might be expected to be similar to that in the onsite vegetation.
Concentrations of fluonde consistently greater then 40 ppm in the human diet have been projected I to cause loss of body weight (NAS 1971, p. 239). Because the commercial min mixes the l soybeans from the NFCS with the soybeens harvested from other regional farms, the fluoride level in the final soybean products would be segruficantly less then in the NFCS soybeans alone and would not be of concem. I Expension of the plant facilities from 700 to 1600 t/ year of uraruum with the additional use of the IDR process win result in incrossed emissions of fluondes (Sect. 4.2.1), which may result in i increased fluoride content of vegetation on and near the site. The applicant's program of monitoring ! fluoridos in onsste grasses should be continued to detect any such incrosses. However, the staff does not believe the current tmng of sampling onsite grass (May and September; Westinghouse 1984) is adequate for an assessment of fluoride impacts on a dairy herd. Therefore, the staff win
~ require that grass samples for fluoride analysis be taken at loest twice a year when the grass is being cut for hay, in addition, the current grass monitoring program does not enable an assessment of whether the measured fluonde concentrations are the result of the plant operation, because i there are no offsite beseline data. Therefore, the staff wiu require that grass samples from forms or roadsides (sufficiently removed from NFCS to not be influenced by NFCS emessons) be taken on the some day as the onsite samples. Swnilarly, the staff win require that samples of soybeans from onente fields and from distant offsite fields be taken at harvest time so that an assessment of the impact of fluoride emesions on the soyboon crop and on the ultimate user can be provided.
The sampling program for the grasses and for the soyboens should be continued until a complete amamaament can be performed after the IDR process has been operating in combination with the existing ADU systems through at loest two growing seasons. l* i ( 4.2.2.2 Effects of ammonia emissions Although ammones is a plant nutnent and is used in fertilizers, a very high atmospheric concentration of ammonia can adversely affect vegetation. Calculated from the staff's estimate of ammonia 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 ammonia concentrations for the operating level 3 of 1600 t/ year of urarwom are projected to be 52 pg/m3 average and 66 pg/m maximum at the neerest site boundary (550 m or 1800 ft NNW). Information on the effects of high concentrations of ammonie is meager, but available data indicate that short-term (e.g., up to 30 days) concentrations over 1 to 2 mg/m 3may cause reduced productivity in plant species that are particulerfy sensitive to ammonia (e.g., mustard; National Research Council 1979). Although annual 3 average concentrations wiH be well below 1 to 2 mg/m , combination of a maximum emission rate and short-term adverse meteorological conditions could result in ambient ammonia concentrations i-l' i- . _.- -- , _ -_,_
.__ _ _ .___~ -_. - --. -.-- -. - . - _ - , _ - . ..- . . _ _ _ .
4-16 l vnthwi this range and could cause slight loss of productmty for ammorwo-senestnm plant species at - y the site. However, the staff conaders this comtznetion of crcumstances unlikely. Ammonia emesasons from the plant should not present a hazard to domestic or wild ansnels or
- to public health. Although chronic exposure limits for the general pubhc in populated areas have not i: - been set or recommended for the western world, the USSR has defined 0.3 ppm (0.2 mg/m8)'as
- . the mexwnel allowable long-term concentration in populated areas. The USSR value is conservetsve i
- ' ' and is intended to prevent exposures that produce elight changes in human central nervous system l
!. reflex actmty, such as eye sensituty to light and .:.A. i p.W-.. =aked response (Notional l 1 Research Council 1979). The maximum annual average ammorwe concentration at the nearest NFCS boundary (66 g/m 8)is less then the USSR stonderd of 0.2 mg/m 3 (200 pg/m8). ,
; 'For segruficant impacts to occur on domestic arumels and on land uses involvmg these animals, concentrations of ammorve would have to be much higher then the suggested guidelines for the
! ~ protection of human health. Racanaa the predicted ammones concentrations at and beyond the neerest site boundary are below the conservative USSR limit, no impact should occur. 4 1 4.2.3 Water 4.2.3.1 Surface water - Congeree River - 4 Quality. Liquid waste streams from NFCS operations include serutary wastes and process f - wastes. Process wastewaters are pnmanly contammated by ammonie and fluondes. Both weste
- streams are treeted onsite prior to their combened discharge into the Congeree River (see Sect. 2.2.2.2). The discherge of the plant ' effluent to the Congeree River must comply with 4
limitations set forth in an NPDES pernut issued by the SC-DHEC (see Appendix- B). Because of this
- requirement, nonradiological environmental impacts to the water quahty of the Congeree River I
should be meagruficant at any level of production capacity, Likewise, as discussed in Sect. 4.2.5, 4 radiological impacts,to the Congeree River are not expected to be segrvficant. , Table 4.9 indicates the daily average discharge of chemscal and twological constituents in the NFCS effluent dunng 1982. The NPDES Irrutations for the daily everage discharge are pro'.ided as
- a comparison. From the table, it is otmous that the effluent discharged from the plant was well g
- below the pernwt limitations. No reported instances of noncomphance with the NPDES permit have r been reported since November 25,1982, when the 5-day BOD level (22.6 kg (50.2 lbs) per day) j exceeded the daily maxunum limit in effect at that time [18 kg (40 lb) per day) (Westinghouse
[ 1982). Previous noncomphence . instances (1981-1982) included four total - suspended solids c exceedences, three BODS exceedences - and one ammonie exceedence (Westinghouse 1983, Table 5.4). All but the ammorwe violation were less then twice the maximum daily limit (the ammone violation excaad=d the limit by five times). In all cases, however, dilution upon moung in the river (Sect. 3.5.1.1) probably pracaudad any adverse impacts to downstream water quahty. i , Daily average decharge concentrations of chemical constituents in the NFCS plant effluent are l {: not expected to incrosse segrwficantfy with an increses in NFCS production capacity to 1600 t/ year of urarnum. At this capacity, the final offkent decharged to the Congeree River would also be f required to meet NPDES limitations; therefore, no significant water quakty impacts would result.
- Consumption of water. The present water consumption at the NFCS for processing 700 t/ year 'of urarnum is 0.008 m 3/s (0.3 ft /s).
3 The water obtamed from the Columtza Munecipal i w
k 4 17 i h Table 4.9 Comparison of current NPDES permit limits and the daily everage discharge (1982) from the NFCS to the Congeree River. lb/d (untees listed)*** NPDES NFCS r Parameter - daily average daily average discharge - limitation (1982) Biological oxygen demand 25 14.6
- .~ '
(B00) 5 .
' Total suspended solids - 32
'17.2 (TSS) -
40 14.9 ( Fluonde 60 14.8 Ammorus (NHaN) c Oil and grosse 10 mg/L 3.5 mg/L Focal coliform , 200 MPN/100 ml 51 colorwes/100 ml pH, units 6.9 (mnumurn) 8.7
'Ib/ day x 0.45 = kg/ day
-- 4ePDES permit reprinted in its entirety in Appendix B.
I. *Deta from Westinghouse 1983, Table 5.5. y Water System is used for potable and process coolmg requirements.' Approximately 45% of.this water is rolessed to. the atmosphere in the form of water vapor from the lagoons and coolmg towers, and the rememder is discharged 'to the Congeree River as treeted liquid weste (see
' Sect. 2.2.2.2).' Half of the dscharge is from the process stroom and half from the sanitary
- treatment plant (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 5.2.2.2).
The projected maximum water consumption at. the expended capacity of 1600 t/ year of
' uranium-is 0.014 m8/s (0.5 ft /s).' 3 This consumption represents 1% of the Columtxe Municipal Water System's water use (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 5.2.2.1); therefore,= the effect on the city water avadability should be negligible. This level of water use should also have a negligible effect on I the quantrty of water avadable for downstroom water use.
Oneite surface water Surface waters onsite at the NFCS include Mill Creek, Sunset Lake, and a small pond (see Fig.' 4.1). The small pond south of the plant ' has previously' received contaminated input from youndwater (see Sect. 4.2.3.2), but it has been isolated so that there is no interchenge with Sunset . Lake. Concentrations of ammonsa and fluonde in samples taken . weekly since the contammated youndwater plume was discovered have been as much as 300 times'backpound levels. Recent (1983) levels have decreased to 50 to 100 times backpound (Westmghouse 1984). The volume of the pond is periodically reduced by pumpeg water back to the focalty's west lagoon and then into the south lagoon for treatment to help prevent contammation of the lake (R. Fischer, 1 l Westinghouse, personal communication with V. R. Tolbert, ORNL, September 19,1984). Am mme 7 of the large volume of Sunset Lake [1.6 x 10s m 8 (4.3 x 10 gel)) and a flow ranging from 8 8 (0.1 to' O.6 ft /s) (Westinghouse 1983, Sect. 5.2.2.5), any small volume 0.003' to 0.02 m /s leakage to Sunset Lake should be insignificant. I J 4 r--... --,ww-,- - -- ,, ~ - - ~, w w.,
4-18 t
' ~
Westinghouse routmely rnonitors onsite surface waters for radolorcal and nonradiological parameters (Sect. 4.1). Semping stations (Table 4.6) were selected to indicate badground water quakty (entrance sample), to reflect the quakty of draruge and runoff from the plant's paved areas (road), and to detect any contamination of Sunset Lake or Mill Creek that might result from onsite j dramage (causeway, spillway, and exit). l Mill Creek is cleessfied by the state as Class A, frothwater suitable for pnmary contact recreation and, as such, is protected from degradotion by state water quakty standards l
- (SC-DHEC 1983b). The standards are pnmenly used as the beeis for limitations set forth in NPDES permits issued for point discharges to a Class A receivmg stream. Although no point discharges to Mill Creek occur from the NFCS, the standards were used for componeon in an assessment of
} onsite surface water quakty. Data presented in Table 4.6, Sect. 4.1.2.2, clearly indicate that the . quakty of Mill Creek and Sunset Lake water is not significantly affected by contammeted runoff and dramage at the NFCS. In addition, pH and concentrations of ammonis at all stations along the creek and lake have been below EPA guidance limits for protection of aquatic life (EPA 1976). 1 4.2.3.2 Groundweter contamination Shallow youndwater contammation was discovered in mid-1980 and has since that time been
; the subgect of considerable investigation. Although it is difficult to popomt, the ongmal leakage that caused the contammation rney have started as early as 1972. The primary suspected sources were
, the concentrated waste treatment tank aree and the ammonie storage tank area. Westinghouse has 1 since constructed improved concrete dikes and internment pods for storage of process waste and i raw materials. The waste treatment lagoons were also suspected of being a source of contammation, so dunng 1981-1982, all lagoons were re, lined with 36-mil hypelon and underdrain i systems were installed to detect lagoon leakage. The improvements have apparently been effective in elmnating leakage from *hese sources. Although there appoors to be considerable reesdual
! groundwater contammation immediately a4ecent to the weste treatment tank ares, recent f groundwater monitoring indicates that leakage from this source no longer exists (Sect. 4.1.2.2).
Currently, groundwater contamments appear to be contamed within the shallow terrace aquifer inside the NFCS boundary. No contammation of the deeper Tuscaloosa aquifer has been observed-Because the pierometric head in the Tuscaloose aquifer is probably equel to or greater then in the shallow aquifer (Sect. 3.5.2.3) and because the intervenmg Block Mingo formation (Fig. 3.13) has a l' low permeability (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 confining Black Mogo 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 potentiel problem is discussed in Sect. 4.2.6. i in 10 years, the groundwater contaminants (concentrated enough to produce a fish kill) have migrated south approximately 200 m (650 ft) from the plant ares to Sunset Lake. Further migration south of Sunset Lake is nil because the pierometric gradient is near zero beyond the lake. 1 Assumeg that the pierometric gradient to the southeast is half that for the aree between the plant and Sunset Lake, it is estimated that contamments will reach the southoestern site boundary in l about 60 years. The concentration of contaminants at the site boundary will be diluted by
- perhaps tenfold by dispersion. Now that the sludge 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 f i
- - . ,-w--, ,- , ,-.v----- -n--~,,n --- - n,w,, - - ~w-vn-.-w,---- -,-,e,-y - - v---- ,-v w-me~=v,,n,w,-,-- -
m 4-19 There are no downyadient offeite wells withm 5 km (3 miles) of the site boundary. The likelihood of developing groundwater resources in nearby downgredient areas is remote w== the Congereo Swamp and a4ecent marshlands are not suitable for agncultural development. Furthermore, industry is not likely to be sited on the 100-year flaati=n of the Congeree River. As a consequence, trutigsten of youndwater contammation is not currently required. However, the staff wig require contmuod monitoring of appropnete downgredient wells in the shallow aquifer in order to study the behavior of the contamment plume This monitoring win also provide an early womme of changes that may require rmtsgeting action. If the need for trutigation should ever aries, there is sufficsont time to develop and implement en appropriate methodology W== the buffer zone betwoon the contammated zone and the NFCS boundary is approximately 600 m (2000 ft) wide, and the neerest downgredient offsete well is about 5 km (3 miles) to the southeast. Of the several methodologies avesleblo, the swnpleet is a pump-bock system in which contammeted youndweter is retrieved and pieced in an evaporation pond. Unfortunately, evaporation ponds are not very efficient in humid climetes such as that of South Caroline, and consumptive use of groundwater is a problem. These problems can be rmead by pumpeg the contammeted groundwater through a water treatment plant. Contamments can be removed by reverse osmose, electrodialysis, or ion exchange These processes produce two streams: (1) purified water, which is returned to the aquifer, and (2) a concentrated brine, wtuch is discharged to an evaporation pond. The above treatments reduce consumptive water use by as much as 80%, with a correspondmg reduction in evaporation pond requirements. Another approach to decontammation of groundwater is in situ treatment. Ammonium may require in situ treatment because it becomes fixed on clay minerals by cation exchange and, thus, is not seeily withdrawn with the youndwater. Several in situ ammorwum-removal methodologos are currently being investigated, includmg* (1) cherrucal oxidetion, (2) biological oxidetion, and (3) cation slution. Results from in situ methodology have only been margmelly 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 methodologies 4.2.4 Ecology 4.2.4.1 Terrestriel Because expension of the existing Westinghouse facilities is not proposed, there will be no loss of terrestrial habitat or reductions in wildlife populations resulting from construction-related activities or from conversion of wildlife habitat to industrial uses. Noticeable impacts to the appearance or productivity of onsite vegetation have not been observed as a result of fluoride and ammones emissions from the NFCS at the present production capacity. With the propoeod incrocee in capacity using the IDR process (Sect. 2.1), fluoride emissions will incrosse (Sects. 4.2.1 and 4.2.2). However, because the increased emisesons will likely be in the form of particulate fluorides (Sect. 4.2.2), which are less demagog then geoeous, no significant impacts to onsite vegetation or herbivorous enemals are expected. Impacts to offsite vegetation and terrestrial biota are unlikely. 4.2.4.2 Aquetic A comparison of the water quality of the Congaree River upstroom and downstream (Sect. 4.1.2.2) of the NFCS indicated only minor differences between the locations. After dilution
. - . - . = - - - - - . - - __ - . _ . - - - _ - . - . . _ _ _ - . - -
l , 4-20 of the efnuent ciecharge there should be trurumel effect on water quellty outside the moung zone , (Sect. 4.2.3.1), and resuhmg concentratons should be vnthm the range of values estelsehod for protecton of aquenc life (EPA 1976). Ammonio concentranons upstream of the site c+~- --r; exceed the EPA Hmnation of 0.9 mg/L estattehod for protecnon of aquenc life; how3ver, the I l ciecharge from the NFCS plant (9.4 mg/L), upon dNunon, would contnbute less then 0.002 mg/L
- to the ammone concentration in the river. Resuleng impacts to aquatic life would be negugible.
After the sanitary stream masse with the process weste stream, the reesdual chionne l concentraton of the effluent could be as high as 1 mg/L Minbg of the discharge with the river f i 3 8 et a trurumum flow of 46 m /s (1590 ft /s) would cause a mammum rise of 0.0002 mg/L resuluel j chlonne wfuch is 7% of the recommended mammum concentration of 0.003 mg/L (EPA 1973). At an overage river flow rete of 266 m 3/s (9388 ft /s),8 the increase in chionne concentration would be 0.00003 mg/L, or 1% of the recommended maximum concentration. Rac== complete moung wul not occur instantaneously and because toxic levels of reesdual chlorine could occur at the l outfag, reisevely immotnis aquenc life that could not avoid the chionne, such as benthic invertebrates and penphyton, would be kiBed. Most floh would be able to avoid the high chionne concentrations at the outfoN. Therefore, har== of the ilmsted extent of the discharge plume, the Umsted likellhood of low flow (7-d,10-year), and the limsted number of equatic orgenome that j would be strectly offected, the impact of the raairw hlonne c in the NFCS effluent on aquenc biota j would be negEgible. Because the effluent discherged from the NFCS must comply with NPDES umitations (Appendix 8: Sect. 4.2.3.1), the staff concludes that there should be no adverse impact to aquatic biota in the Congeree River. Ammone- and fluonde-contemeneted water in the pond south of the plant is pumped to the j west lagoon to prevent transport of tonic levels of these consatuents in Sunset Lake, the ilocharge and treetment lagoons have been lined to prevent leakage, and the wees have been i stifled to prevent rupture n=e== there is no direct discharge to Sunset Lake from the NFCS pient, there should be no adverse impacts to the lake from normel plant operation. In the event of legoon leakage or rupture, there could potentisNy be a floh kin in Sunset Lake; however, haeanaa the lagoons contam treeted rather then row liquede and only employees fish in the lake (Sect. 3.7.2), any impacts should be trurumel. l , 4.2.4.3 Threatened end endangered opeoise i No endangered or threatened terrestrial or somequatic species should be jeopardized by operation of the Westinghouse plant at 1600 t/ year of uranium. Any alugstors that may inhabit i Sunset Lake on the site should not be affected, because no effluents are or wHl be discharged to this lake. Liquid discharges to the Congeree River do not esgruficantly affect the quelty of the river (Sect. 4.2.3) and should, there.Se, not effect salgators or their important prey species. Rae== , there are apparently no colones of red-cockaded woaripar+ers on or neer the site (Sect. 3.7.3), tNo spacess should sino be unaffected. Emineions of fluoride and amnenio to the atmosphere would not be likely to affect any vegetation important to these woodpeckers off the site. Barmana no
; hetntet on the site appears to be perticulerty important to migrating species or apael== that i c=-rd visit ithe aree (Sect. 3.7.3), such specise should also not be effected.
There are no known threatened or endangered squetic species in Sunset Lei te. The short-nosed j sturgeon could occur in the Congeree River in the Columine viciruty (Sect. 3.7.3.2): however, because there is no thermal discharge and the levels of chemical discharge to the river is low and i i i I
4-21 well within EPA limitations (Sect. 4.2.3), there should be no adverse impacts from the NFCS liquid effluent on endangered specess. 4.2.5 Radiological Impacts l l The radiological impacts of the Westinghouse facility were assessed by calculating the maximum dose to the endnndual adult hving at the nearest resedence and to the local population l l living within an 80-km (50-mile) radius of the plant site. Where site-speerfic information was not available, assumptions that would tend to maximize the dose were used in the calculations. It is only when such conservative assumptions yield a dose near or exceeding the applicable limit that Westinghouse would be required to obtain appropriate data for a more realistic evaluation. Except where specified, the term " dose" as referred to in this EA is actually a 50-year dose commitment for all exposures; that is, the total dose to the reference organ that will accrue from 1 year of intake of radionuclides during the remaining lifetime (50 years) of the indnndual Estimates were also made of the dose to an infant younger than 1 year old living 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 release rates measured during recent operation at the NFCS and those estimated for the proposed higher production rate. Meesured airborne uraneum releases at 700 t/ year processing have averaged at 27 pCi/ week (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 emissions to about 81 pCi/ week, which is 12% greater than the projected emissions rate (71.9 pCi/ week) used in the previous environmental assessment for license renewal (NRC (1977a). Because the appicant has not proposed additional ADU process lines to obtain the higher production capability, the staff
- estimated the following uraniem emissions for operation of the combined ADU and IDR facilities at a capacity of 1600 t/ year of uranium. Operation of the ADU process would result in emissions of about 42.4 pCi/ week at the expanded operating level. The applicant estimated the uranium emissions 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 uranium enriched to 5% 23sU. The total emissions at the 1600-t/ year capability with the combined processes would therefore be 47.4 pCi/ week. For the airborne emissions, source terms are coupled with atmospheric dispersion factors (Table 3.2) generated by the use of the Gaussian Plume Model and diffusion coefficients for Pasquill-type turbulence as in Regulatory Guide 1.111 (NRC 1977b). Doses via segnrficant pathways are determined on the basis of models presented in Regulatory Guide 1.109 (NRC 1977c), with the exception that, for the inhalation and ingestion pathways, dose conversion factors for various organs were used (Dunning 1981). The inhalation dose factors were produced by the ICRP Task Group Lung Model and depend on the particle size and solubility of released compounds. Because the particle size and solubility of airbome emissions have not been determined, conservative assumptions for these parameters have been made. Namely, the particles posseng through HEPA filters are assumed to have an Activity Median Aerodynamic Diameter (AMAD) of 0.3 pm. The released particles are further assumed, first, to be completely in an insoluble form (Class Y) to provide a maximum calculated lung dose for the inhalation pathway and, then, completely in a soluble form (Classes D and W) to provide a maximum calculated bone dose for the ingestion pathway. See Appendix A for additional discussion and tables of dose conversion factors. i
4-22 For the liquid effluents discherged into the Congeree River, it was ww.d.d; assumed that the uramum is in a wMdm form. 4.2.5.1 Dooes to the maximelly exposed individuel l The neerest readence to the Westinghouse plant is located about 1000 m (3300 ft) to the northeast. For arbome emismons, the pathways conodored in the induduel dose estrnetos were: l (a) direct irradiation frcm ground depostion; (b) rnmermon in the arborne plume; (c) direct inhaletion; and (d) ingestion of vegetation, meet, and mist that are ww.d.d; assumed to be I prMM at the nearent rendence For liquid effluents, the pathways include. (a) mgestion of aquatic food (fish) and (b) submersion by swimmmg in the Congeree River. The river is not used as a drinking water supply downstroom of tin NFCS; so potable water was excluded as a poemble exposure pathway. The models~and various assumptions swolved in the above pathways can be referred to in greater detail in Regulatory Guide 1.109 (NRC 1977c). Table 4.10 eummarizes the calculated maxrnum doses from arbome and liquid effluents to the nearest adult rendent when the fac4ty is processing 700 t/ year of uraruum. When the doses are compared to the EPA standards for urarwum fuel cycle facities (40 CFR Pt. 190), the total body dose of 6.2 x 10-2 minirem/yeer is only about 0.25% of the limit of 25 millirem / year. The highest orgen dose of 2.0 millirem to the lung is about 8% of the applicable EPA standard, the bone dose of 3.1 x 10-2 mitirem is about 0.12% of the standerd, and the kidney dose of 7.5 x 10-8 mitirem is about 0.03% of the standerd. As shown in Table 4.10, the critical pathway is through inhalation resultmg in a mexrnum does to the lung of 2.0 minirem/ year. The above calculations assume a normel adult, but the staff has Table 4.10. Estimetod maximum ennuel does from airborne and liquid effluents to the neerest adult resident Organ Dose (milirem/yeer) Pathway Total body Lung Bone Kidney Air effluents Direct irradiation 2.8 x 10-s 2.4 x 10-8 3.6 x 10-s 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-' Direct inhaletion' 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 l
Liquid effluents Submersion 6.7 x 10-# 6.2 x 10-' 9.3 x 10-' 5.7 x 10-7 Aquatic food
- 1.6 x 10-* 4.7 x 10-e 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 10-8 l l
' Assumes 80% ressdence time.
'Since site-spoofic information is not available, it is assumed that 100% of the vegetables consumed ,
are grown at the neerset rosedence. l Tish. l 2 i
- - - - - , , ,_ .-.-..--._,,_.,v.--..-,_ ,-_ ,._--__. .------ w-~ . - . . - - - - - - - - - - .- ---- __
4-23 also considered a entcal mdnndual (an infant of 0-1 years of age) at the nearest raedance. The lung dose to an infant would be 1.9 times the adult dose (Hoenes and Soldot 1977), equivalent to 3.8 miBirem/ year. This dose is about 15% of the EPA standerd. Therefore, normal operation of the plant over the past 5 years has resulted in maxrnum annual doses at the neerest residence that are weH below 40 CFR Pt.190 limits. l At the proposed maximum operating level of 1600 t/ year of urarnum using the combmetion f of ADU and 10R process lines with an errussions rate (47.4 pCi/ week) about 75% greater then for 700 t/ year, the estimated maximum doses would be 3.5 miHirem/ year for the lungs of an adult and 6.6 miHirem/ year for the infant. These doses are 14% and 27%, respectively, of the EPA standerd. The maximum impact on an unrestricted area resultmg from emissions at the NFCS might be at
! the neerest site boundary [550 m (1800 ft) north-northwest of the fuel manufactunng buildmg]
rather than at the nearest residence. The X/O at this boundary is about a factor of 2 higher then the X/O at the nearest residence. The resultog maximum annual doses to an infant at the boundary would be 7.6 miuirem and 13.3 miNirem, at the processmg rates of 700 and 1600 t/ year of urarwum, respectively. These doses are stiN wen below the EPA limit. Additional staff analysis indicates that emesssons of over 9000 pCi/ year would be necessary to exceed the 25-millirem / year limit to the entcal indnndual at the nearest rosadence in order that the requirements of ALARA are met, Ucense SNM-1107 currently requires Westinghouse to report to NRC if plant gaseous effluents exceed 1500 pCi/ quarter (6000 pCi/ year). This release rate results in an annual lung dose to an infant at the nearest residence of about 16 minirem/ year; however, such an annual release may cause a lung dose to an infant at the nearest boundary that exceeds the 25-minirem limit. Accordogly, the license also requires Westinghouse to notify NRC of any changes in parameters unportant to a dose assessment (e.g., a family moving to the neerest boundary) and to estimate the resultant change in dose commitment. In the event that the calculated dose to any member of the pubic is about to exceed 25 millirem / year, Westinghouse is required to take vnmediate steps to reduce emesseons and ensure ceviiAme. Even though Westinghouse's average annual emission over the last 5 years has been about 1300 pCi/ year, these requirements wiR be continued in the renewed imense as added assurance that the ! requirements of 40 CFR Pt.190 are met. The staff analysm of the radiologeal dose to the nearest resident (Table 4.10) did not 'mclude the use of potable water from the Congaree River. Also, no downstream consumers of potable water from the Congaree River were identified. However, in case there are downstream consumers, the staff has calculated the dose to an individual obtarung 100% of his requirements from the river immedetely downstroom of the plant discharge. The radioactivity concentrations in the river due to plant operation, shown in Table 4.11, are based on the effluent concentrations shown in Table 2.4. l The maximum individual doses in millirem / year are shown in Table 4.12. AR the doses are less then 1 millirem / year, which is a small percentage of the EPA standards. 4.2.5.2 Doses to the population within 80 km (50 miles) of the plant site The 1980 population within a 50-mile radius of the plant is shown in Table 3.4. About 783.000 people live within this area. Population doses were calculated on the basis of the dose estimates at the nearest residence for operation of the plant at 700 t/ year of uranium, the ratio f ! of X/Q at the nearest residence and at various segments within the 80-km (50-mile) radius, and l t 1 J
, , - - , - - , . . ,, , ~ - - - , , . ,,,-e, ,ne---n-
4-24 Table 4.11. Annuet everage end daily maximum concentrations of r--r 1:^p - en the Congeree River *below the NFCS discherge6 for j plant operation *et 700 and 1900 t/ year of uranium ; 1 Operation at 700 t/ year Operation at 1600 t/ yeard Rade:tmty Annual Deily Annual Daily everage maximum everage maximum i (pCi/mW - (pCl/mL) (pCi/mL) (pCi/mL) ) Alphe 1.4 x 10-8 1.9 x 10~* 5.7 x IO-' 7.9 x 10~* Beta 6.7 x 10-e 9.2 x 10-a 2.7 x 10-s 3.7 x 10-*
'Annuel average river flow is 266 m8/s (9388 ft /s), 8 and the daily minimum flow 8 3 has been 19 m /s (662 ft /s).
' Average discharge rate of the combined effluent is 5.7x10-3 m8 /s (0 2 ft 8/s) at 700 t/ year and 8.5x 10~8m8 /s (0.3 ft 8/s) at 1600 t/ year.
' Concentration of radioactivity in the discharge is given in Table 2.4.
Tetimated values. Table 4.12. Estimated maximum individuel doses in millirem / year from drinking Congeree River water downetream of the NFCS discharge, for operation et both 700 and 1600 t/ year of uranium
- Operation at Operation at 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
Bone 4.0 x 10-2 1.6 x 10-' Kidney 8.7 x 10-8 3.5 x 10~8
' Annual average concentrations of plant-induced radioactivity in the river (Table 4.11) were used.
f the population in the correspondog segments. The population dose estimates concedered the exposure pathways via airbome effluents. The population dose comnwtments from routine releases from the NFCS are shown in Table 4.13. The natural background does rate to the total body is t 117 millirem / year near Columbia, S.C. (Sect. 3.8), which results in a population dose withm 4 80 km (50 miles) of the NFCS of 9.2 x 10 men-rem. The total body does rate of I 0.28 men-rom shown in Table 4.13 is neghgeble compared to this background value. Operation at 1600 t/ year of urarnum would not alter this conclusion. 4.2.6 Mitigatory Meesures ! The effluent and environmental monitoring programs that have been established for the Westinghouse facility are needed to measure the impacts of plant ermssions on the environment during normal operations or followng an accident situation. The monitoring programs, as well as recent results for plant operations at 700 t/ year of uransum, were outlined in Sect. 4.1. A brief analysis of the results was also provided. A discussion of the impacts observed from past plant 1
-e-----.- n~-< n--- , - - . . - - - ,.-- -w.~.,,,-. e,-- -.,-------.-,---w- - . . - - - . -.
. _ _ . _ _ _ . _ .__ ._m _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ . . ___
l 4-25 Table 4.13. Does commitmente from airborno discharges to the popuistion within 30 km (50 miteel of the NFCS Does (men-rom)* Pathway Total body Lung Bone Kidriey Direct irredation 7.7 x 10-* 6.6 x 10-* 6.5 x 10-* 6.2 x 10-* Immersion in air 2.1 x 10-8 1.4 x 10-8 1.8 x 10-8 1.8 x 10-8 2.8 x 10-' 1.5 x 10' 1.1 x 10-' 2.0 x 10-8 Direct inhalation Ingestion
- 1.5 x 10-* 6.4 x 10-7 2.0 x 10-8 3.4 x 10-*
i Total 2.8 x 10-' 1.5 x 10' 1.1 x 10-' 2.1 x 10-8
*Ameumes al adults. -
- Ingestion of vegetables, meet, and milk with the some ratsaartivity concentrations as ; xif food prarheart at the nearest reesdence operations, and those expected to result from expended operations up to 1600 t/ year of wanium, was presented in Sects. 4.2.1 through 4.2.5 On the beeis of these analyses, operations l
i of the Westinghouse NFCS since the lost license renewal have not resulted in any significant environmental impacts. Further, no segnificant impacts are expected to result from plant operations l at the expanded level. The staff wiu require that the existing monitoring programs be continued in i order to confirm this conclusion. The frequency of surface water morwtonng wiu be decrossed from monthly to quarterly. and soil monitoring wiu be permitted annually rather then semiennually. This decrossed monitorinc which is considered adequate, is bened on the existing data bene provided j by Westinghouse, wtuch demonstrates no significant impact to either sun'ounding surface water or soil. In areas of potential concom, particularly with the expended plant operations, the staff win require expanded. modified, or both expended and modified environmental monitoring. i As discuseec in Sect. 4.2.3.2, the shallow aquifer at the NFCS site hos been contommated as a result of post operations. The applicant has taken corrective action that has effectswely eliminated the leakage that was the source of the contammation. Although there appears to be considerable l l residual groundwater contammation in the sheNow equsfer neer the operations ares, the
- contaminent plume has rememed on the NFCS property. No contamination of the deeper '
l T = =lan== aquifer hos been observed, and contammation is generauy not considered likely (Sects. 3.5.2.1 and 4.2.3.2). Given these conditions and the fact that there are not downgredlent l offsite wells that are likely to be impacted by the plume, no mitigotory meseures are currently necessary. However, the staff win require Westinghouse to expend its routmo youndwater monitoring to include appropriate shallow wells and at leest one wou completed in the deeper aqusfer (e.g., Wed W-3). The purpose of this monitoring wiR be to study the plume and to provide an early woming of any changes that may warrent mitigetmg action. The quality of monitor well completions is venable (Devis and Floyd 1982). Existing wens W-6 through W-17 (Figs. 3.8 and 3.9) were origmelly installed as temporary ObesMs. wens and contain neither bentonite seels nor cemented caemes [(Fig. 4.2(a)]. Although these wens are ' suitable for meneuring water levels, they are not satisfactory for determining water quality, because of potentiel dNution from reinwater infiltration through the wen annulus. Figure 4.2(b) shows a I property completed wou for monitoring groundwater quality, WeNo W-18 through W-33 are aN f
. - . _ .. _ ._ _ _ _ _ .__ ,. _ i
- - . - - . . - -..~ . .
. - ~ - - . . - . - - - - - . - -
l l 4-26 c l ES-6140 i
' VENT g CAP ~-
CAP l 4
~
N _ .___ GROUT 1 h GROUT SEAL - 2-in. PVC RISER
.- r. { MIN 1.0 f6 - -
; T C .-'-
g .,., .
.- ~
y 4..- SANDY BACKFILL. .'
.~s '
I C
.h .'s.' 2-in. SLOTTED C ~
.. SCREEN
. 3.*.
E.. 2. . . , BENTONITE i f.. .'.. WASHED SAND l, y; .*
.! > :* .g
_ p M Y. 2-in. SLOTTED E_ f,- */ '. j ', PVC SCREEN r.
.I -
.C ,
g,y I */. }.
- d..' '- #
(b) - i pie. 4.2. Wen sempleelen esleeMe for tel weser level meenwoment only and (6) esmpling ; weeer quelley. 4 f properh completed. Wes completion .T : " .' for wese W-1 through W-5 are not wou j known and appear to be open-hole completions below variable innethe of steel swfece casings. The . staff wiu require roueno sempung of property completed weto to more scowately monitor behavior ; of the contaminent plume. In addition, the statt wul require wet W-3, which is completed in the ' deeper equifer, to be upgraded to the state-of-the-art design. This wel provide yester protection , for the deep equwer (by suminating possado contaminent esopogo down the was assing) es was se improved monitoring capsbulty. As docussed in Sects. 4.1.2.2 and 4.2.1, operadon of the ".'W- _r plant et about 700 t/ year of wenium has resuhod in seemeted air concentrations of fluoride that are below air i quatty etenderde est by the state of South Carouns. This le also espected to be true for plant ' ' ' operatione et 1600 t/ year of wenium, even though the proposed 10ft unos wel result in inoreesed fluoride emissions. However, aremaianel vegetation semples tahan onehe (6 out of 23 semples from
- 1981 through 1983) have ==e=='e=s8 40 ppm, which is about the meelmum safe level in the total ration fed to dairy cows. Some stees of the Weetinghouse site are cut for hoy for dairy cow feed, but the hoy derived from NpCS property wig constitute only a amen portion of the herd's total ration. Therefore, it is very unukely that these cows wondd develop fluorosis se a result of either the emioting or empended plant operations. The stoff wul nevertheises require the opptoont to modWy its existing monitoring program to provide a better seeeeement of fluoride impacts.
Specificety, Westinghouse wul take yees semples for fluoride snelyse et least twice a year, when [ the grees le being cut for hoy. Soybeen crope, it grown onehe wel eleo be monitored for fluorido at i i )'
4-27 harvest. Appropriate background samples of grass and soybeens win be taken at harvest time for fluoride analyses. , 4.3 INDIRECT EFFECTS AND THEIR SIGNIFICANCE 4.3.1 Soolosoonomic Effects As discussed in Sect. 3.3, employment at the Westinghouse NFCS is not a major factor in the economy of Richiend County, South Carolina. Neither continued operation nor discontinuance would have a significant impact on sw.io=,o6ois conditions. 4.3.2 Potentiel Effects of Accidents Accidents that could occur et the Westinghouse NFCS are both redological and nonradiological in netwo. The fabrication of fuel for nuclear reactors involves the chemical processing of low-enriched urarwum. Significant radoective materials present at the fuel fabrication facility are the UO 2 potets for fuel rod fabrication and the UFe stored in cylinders. The 45% enriched uranium that is used hee a low specific activity of 2.4 pCl/g. Thus, with the exception of a criticality accident and the potential rupture of UFe cylinders, the environmental impacts which would result from postulated accidents at the Westinghouse fuel fabrication plant should be similer to the impacts of a manufacturing plent in which nonradioactive chemicale are stored. The radioloycol environmental impacts of the more probable postulated accidents are insignificant at this facility. A spectrum of poseable accidente related to the operation of the NFCS and their potential consequences are presented in Table 4.14. Accident severity is closesfied into tivoo categories. Category 1 accidents are those most likely to occur during normel plant operations, and have the least environmental impacts of the three. Category 2 events, which would occur infrequently during the plent's operating life, could rolesee concentrations of radiological and nonradiological poNutants I to the oneite (and posesbly (,ffsite) environment that would encoed normal effluent reloeces and could cause significant impacts, if not controlled or mitigated. Category 3 occidents are those not expected to occur during the life of the plant but which could result in significant reloeces of radioactive or toxic poNutants to the oneite and offsite environment. Weetinghouse (1975 and 1983) hee analyred the radiolopcal and nonradiological consequences of seywel accident scenerlos, both inside the manufacturing plant and outside the plant (i.e., storage arees, legoons, etc.). 4.3.2.1 Radiologloel scoidente Although several minor accidents are likely to t.appen during the life of the plant (e.g., a smed leek in a papeline or a smou spin), moet wWl not iewult in a significant release of uranium to the l environment. Therefore, the occident snelysis in support of this assosoment le limited to the consideration of severe. Iow-probability accidents that could potentially result in the reloose of large quantities of redoectivity-a UFe elease r or a criticality accident. The radiological consequences of a mejor fire and a transportation accident are also evaluated. UFe release SNppmg cylinders of UFa (2 1/2 tons) are stored inside the manufacturing buildog or in a secured outdoor eroa. The UFe is a solid at arabient temperatures (sublimes et 132T) and is only
4-28 TeMe 4.14. A spectrum of eseWente that eeuW eseur et the Weseinghouse NPCS Area and meterialinvolved Typical accidents Severity ciese Pomutant(e)of concern Tank form I Ammoruum hydroaldo Pgmene or tank leek or 1.2 Ammonie 4 Anhydrous ammone rupture, spies, fire Nitrate Sedum hydromde Caustic and feiric acid acid solutione Lagoone Ammonium nitrate Leek, messive dke/hner 1,2 Ammone Calcium fluoride failure, floodng Nitrate Uranium Fluondo Uranium Outside storage /maide vaporiaamon eres Uranium homolksoride fluptured cytnder, vapor 1,2 Uranium, hydrogen fluoride (sond) Glquid/weper) rolesse Uranyl nitrate Muptured drum 2 Uranium Nltrete Chemmel and manufacturing stees
- l' Uranium Pipeline or contemer Urenium Uranium diomde rupture, epius, empio- 1,2,3 Ammonie Ammeruum diurenete aions, fires, filter Fluoride Hydrogen fluoride fesure, crincenty i
Hydrogen E=rW 3 Uranium Transportadon Contamer rupture, epius 1,2 Uranium Mleosseneous chemmele hosted and weporteed inside. Therefore, the paaahmty of an outdoor reisees of Nguki We le estremely remote. If a cyander of solid We were to fen outside, for any reason, the We would vaporise very slowly. Because We reacts w6th atmospheric moisture to form wenyt fluoride l (UO Fa), which is a nonvolette soRd, such a leek would tend to be self-seeIng Therefore, the quantity of meterial reiseeed from such an accident involving a cylinder of notd We would not contribute signilleently to the plant's normel emissions, and the potential offeito consequences would not be a conoem. Although very unthely, an accident resulting in a meeelve outdoor reisees of UFe wee ; postuinted as the moeimum credible UFeaccidern. Such an socident would Invo6ve a fire in the We I outside storage area when a truck crashes there and ruptwee two of the UFe cylinders. A fire resuhe when the truck's fuel tank is ruptwed by the creeh. The resuhing reisees of UFe le estimated to be about 1200 kg over a orehour period, soeuming no remedial action le taken. Thie ; equetes to a total release of 800 kg of low-enriched (46% 88'U) wenium. I i
, - . - , , , -_,..-._.--_.-...--,_-,---,.n--, - , - - , - .- , - n -.~--_ n.' -
I 4-29 1 j The UFe ses voiseased by the fire would react with water vapor in the air to form hydrogen fluonde (HF) gee, and wenyt fluoride (UO F ) pereculates. The resultant cloud would rise at least i 30 m (100 ft) above the site, pnmerily dnven by the thermal exponeson of heated air and combustion products from the bumme truck fuel (Klett and Gelseki 1976). The accedent is soeumed , l to occur under adverse meteorological conscione including an F type of atmospheric statutty and a l light wind blovnne at 1 m/s. With a yound-level roleses and a ddution effect caused by buildng i l wake turbulence, the x/O at the nearest reesdence (1000 m to the northeast) le [ 2.33 x 10-* e/m . Under 8 these atmospheric condloons, UOsF and HF could move downwind in l; [ ! a narrow, unwevering plume. The plume would be a dense white cloud which would be highly L vietdo et the nearest residence during the day. The everage concentration of wenium and HF as the l 8 3 i plume posses through this location would be about 60 mg/m and 20 mg/m , respectively. 3 j Hydrogen fluoride is a corroeive wepor, and exposure to concentrations of 25 mg/m for several mmutes is known to cause respiratory discomfort (NAS 1971). Brief exposure to ; a s i 40 mg/m 8of HF is dangerous to life (Sea 1963); exposure to 100 mg/m of HF for 1 minute le conomiered opedomsologicesy signdcant (Sunehme 1972). Therefore, the calculated HF concentration l ? st the nearest reesdence may cause some respiratory discomfort (prompting a person to flee), but [ would not be hie-threateneng-If an adult at the nearest reendence stood in the plume and endured this discomfort for an entire l ) hour, there would be en intake of solubio uranium of approximately 50 mg. The chemical tonicity , ; I of this intake would hkely cause kidney iriury (Eve 1964) but would be wed below the ;--;- .=; ;
- fetal waneum intake of 160 mg (Lc --4 et al.1968). The redletion does assoasted with this j
! intake would be V:( T st. i t i ) Critteelity eseldent l The effects of a ;-:t;j criticatty acMant have been considered, although the paaaedty of l t such an accident le remote. HistoriceNy, no accident of this kind has ever occwred in a low- I enrichment fuel fabrication facshty. Achievement of critscehty w6th low-enrichment uranium requires , carefully contrated constions and h not hkely to happen - "_^ .di, in addtion, at the NFCS, programs of doeign, review, procedural control, engmeered sofeguards, and audte are impiamented l I routinely to prevent a criticatty accident of this kind. l The postulated criticanty accident has the fotowing chorectoristice (NHC Reguietary Guide 3.34, Rev.1): {
- The accident resulte in 10'8 fiessons produced in a series of pulsee withm a supercritical liquid ,
I system over an 8-h period.
- The accident roleseos only the volease hesion products produced by the above number of j fissions. At tNo time, radioactive decay beqpne.
I j in addit 6cn, it wee soeumed that 25% of the heiogene and 100% of the noble geoes were i reisseed from the manufacturing buddmg No credt for removal of redonucedes wee given for the . I } emioting filtele, scrubber, or other instened controle. Fwthermore, the accident wee soeumed to ! occw under adverse meteorologpcal constions (an F type atmospheric statnhty and a wind speed of 1 m/s). Given these constione, and coneedering a budeng wake effect, the x/O at the neerest , l residence would be 2.33 x 10 e/m , The 3 offeite consequences from this accident at the nearest I residence are shown in Table 4.15. The doses also are wou below recommended protective action i j l
et'
. ,- l
-F . r ..
4-30 ! t ae Tohts 4.15. Remihmy 50-year dass sommP ment to the neerest reendeM trem e'erhieelity econdent**
+
Does lmithrenQ
,f- ,
Esposure type - - - {
'ioes' body -
Thyroid i
~-
Airtsone rndloa.;tiw6ty 102 360
- , Prompt gemme 3.8 .
3.8 q_ PronW rieveron , 1.6 1.6 Total .107.4 965.4
'No est resident le 1000 m fio n the accident site.
- Accident paramotore and catuintione are beoed on information in NRC Reguistory Guide 3.34, Plev.1.
guides (1-6 rem for total body and 6-26 rem for thyrok0 given by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 1980). ' l Tronoportetten eeeldente Transportation of special nuciew meteriale is strictly reguieted by the U.s. t_ :..-., of Transportation WIRC 1977d and 10 CFR Pte. 60 and 71), and package design and speellications must be approved by NRC. Contamers must be designed to withetend hypothe*ical accident conditions appiled esquentuty in an order specified in the reguiscone to determine the cumulative effect ori the container being tested. Cthwie include free drope, punctwa, thermal strees, and water immersion teste. These tute, which we er. ore severe then any espected transportetion accidente, make the probabety of reisese of contente or accidental criticanty vwy emes. In addhion, to enewe that es packages are property prepared for ehement, the apphoent must estabgeh, maintain, and esecute a quatty seawance program (10 CFR Pt. 71) that setiefles vr e=6d= a crherie (10 CFR Pt. Sol. The special nucteer meteriale are transported in dedioeted vehicles specillossy ' designed for the pwpose of aneuring nueteer omfety and metwiel accointebety and esowhy. The environmental effects of trenoportetton accidents involving property packaged radioactive meteriale have been thoroughly analysed and documented (AEC 1972 and 1974: NRC 1976 and 1977el. These snelyses show that the redlological risk from tr +e:_J_-, accidente involving radioactive meteriale does not contribute appreciably to the accident consequences. The few , , shipmente requhed would add very httle to pubic injuries or fe'enties in case of accidente. I flester th= 4 A mejor fire would involve complete buming of operatio1el HEPA filtere servicing enheust from j convweien and swap terovery processes.1ho tRws are housed in wooden bones and located on the roof of the manutecturing building. West *wtoouse (1910) stated that at the empended operating I level of 1600 t/ year of uranium, converskri proo6se enheuete are espected to contribute the i largest eingle portion (3t:96) of the plant's total redloectMty emissions. This projection considered l plant eepension using only the ADU conversion procoes, which emite yester activity to the 4 1
- - , - , ,,n - _ . . , --.n , - ..~ -- -.- -- ~,_.-. ,_-.- --,._-.n.- n---_,.-_,-.,__ . _ - , . , -
i , t 4-31 atmosphere then an equivalent level of operation using the IDM process. However, when the IDR l
- lines become operatenel, conversion process exhausts might actually constrtute a shghtly lower i
percentage of the plant's total reisese Nevertheless, on the beeis of the estimated rolesse rete of 47.4 pCi/ week (Sect. 4.2.5), a f fihenng efficiency of 99.97% and a mammum time between filter changes of 26 weeks, the mammum waruum activity accumulated in these filters would be 1.4 Cl. NRC provides a reisese j fraction of venous radmective meterials in unsealed form for accedental source terms in case of a major fire (NRC 1984). The semened reisese fractions for different metennis are bened on studies j conducted by Bettelle Northwest Laboratory (Miehwns et al.1968; Sutter and Mishime 1981: j hhotume and Schwendlmen 1973). For waruum in an uneealed form, the seeigned rolesse fraction is 0.001 (NRC 1984). The general rationale for this sougned fraction is that the metenal is not a j volatile powder; a small fraction of the powder (a few percent) is of r_ .A '- , and experiments conducted ususily found rolesses of toepirable side portmies of about 0.001 or lees. Therefore, the total quantity roleseed dunne a fire lasting one hour would be 3.9 x 10-' pCi/s. 3 Using a conservativ* X/O of 2.3 x 10-* s/m for accident estustions (NRC 1979), the average 8 j uranium concentration at the nearest rendence would be 9.1 x 10-8 pCi/m . An adult at this i location expoemd to the plume for one hour would receve, through the inholeton pathway, an ! effective whole body does comnutment of about 9 x 10-8 rem. This value is well below the j EPA's Protective Action Guide of 1-5 rem for emergency properedness (EPA 1980). No evolustion of this name accident on the beeis of chommel toxicity was performed, because the fire would convert any soluble uratuum to the ineoluble, biologmally nontransportable form. 4.3.2.2 Nonredleloglood eeeidente Environmental impacts that may occur at a low-level-enrichment nuclear fuel fabricetion plant would most likely result from paaaM= accidents associated with potentially harmful chemicals rather l' then from redloective motorials. Thus, the Westinghouse NFCS can be conodored in the some cleos i as any other manufactwing pient where agraficant quantitites of nonradioactive chemicals are processed. The location and quantity of chemmels stored oneste are listed in Table 4.16. { < Category 1. Category 1 accidents withm the manufactwing budding in the chemmel proceeemo 8 I area would be typefied by minor liquid spills (i.e., 0.04 m (10 ge0 or loos] of acide, emmonum diurenete, uranyl nitrate, and oil. Operators can quickly detect these spills and take corrective action (such as isoletion of the leaking section). The opdied hquids would be quickly cleaned up and transferred to appropriate weste containers or, if appropriate, retwned to the process for recovery. l l No floor drains are present in the procesemg stee of the mein plant building: therefore, there would , l ; be no reisees to the environment through either airbome or liquid pathways. l i Category 1 accidents external to the manufactwing building that are likely to happen during the s hfe of the plant include minor process-equipment leeks or emell spills (0.2 m (50 ge0 or lose]. A ! i
. leek of this type would be located rapidly by operators, and corrective action would be
! implemented Another Category 1 accident could result from the reisese of chemicals by a leek in I the liner of a weste-holdmg legoon. Such a rolesee, as in the post (Sect. 3.5.2.2), would contammete underlyng soil and groundwater. The contammetod groundwater would discharge into , Sunset Lake and the emell' onsite pond. Dependmg on the magnitude of the rolesse and the contamments present, concentrations could rise to levels that are hasardous to aquatic life. ( l 4 i
I Table 4.14. Loostion and guantities of bulk gas and Equid ehemiset meerage et the Weseinghouse IWCS Quenety stored at 1000 MTif/ year prd* cepeony Soorage locaton Tank sine Toesi ft3 b-l IDES 1980 l
? x ,, =; hydroxide Gigust Tank form 5,700 20,700 Anhydrous ammens Tank form 18,000 80,000 j Sodum hydrosede Tank farm 20,000 Nitric acid (68%) Tank form 5,000 10,000 Hydrogen Equx4 Tank farm 36,000 18,000 2,044,000 Nitrogen Iliquut Tank form 6,000 12,000 541,000 Argon Igne) Tonk farm 800 1,200 116,000 l Helium Equut Tank farm 276,000 i Uranium hexanuonde Outende pod 1.100,000 Hydro #uonc acid Outado pod 20,000; 7,500 Uranyt nitrate Equut Outado plant 30,000 b
Lime (CeOI- Waste treatment hopper 200,000 Zinc steerses inside plant 5,000 Acetone SS gal drums (oil house) 825 i Sullunc acid - South pod 700 (66 Baume + 451 Nitric acid (68%) 55-gel drume (north pod 275 Muneac acid (22% HC0 55-gal drums (north pod 800 i M=n carbonete Ploeng room 800 Cauenc sode (50% NaOH North pod (100-b drums) 500 soluton) - Nickel s Afste Ploeng room
- 500
'MTU = metnc tone of uraruum.
Source: W- ..,;-: _r 1983, Table 7.3: R. Fischer,7f-_ . .,/ _r, personal commurucoman with S. Wyngarden. NRC, March 25,1985. I
4-33 Category 2. Category 2 accdonts occwring in the chancel storage areas outside the manufactwing building could result in complete or partial emptying of a bulk chemical storage tank. Such a rolesee is considered very unlikely because storage vessels are designed using good engineenng practices and are filled according to safe operating procedures. To exponence a rupture ! or failure, some unforeseen catastrophic disaster would have to occur, or all current safety systems l i would have to deteriorate simultaneously. Nevertheless, the most conceivable release scenenos involve (1) exposure of the storage vessels to an intense, prolonged fire with subsequent reisese of vapors through pressure relief valves and (2) tank ruptwo caused by a protectile from an adecent explosion As part of the 1975 plant improvement program, protective dikes that could contain approximately 136'm3 (36,000 gol) of a liquid release in the event of complete tank failure were placed around the chemical tank farm. The largest bulk storage tank is for hydrofluoric acid and has a cepecsty of.76 m3 (20,000 gal). The dikes were further upgraded in 1982 to assure that leeks do not reach the groundwater. Any overflow would run through the storm drainage ditch to Upper Sunset Lake, where it would mix and flow into Lower Sunset Lake via a causeway. Lower Sunset Lake drains into Mill Creek, which eventually enters the Congeree River via a meendenng route of about 11 km (7 miles). In the event of a mejor spill, the upper lake can be closed off at the causeway and then diluted by increasing the diverted flow of inconng Mill Creek water. The continuous chemcal monitoring and prompt dilution of those waters can prevent signsficant liquid rolesses to the offsite environment. Airbome concentrations of vapors in the release area could be excessive, but after dispersion in the atmosphere, conceritrations at the site boundary would not likely require isolation of offsite areas or temporary evacuation of residents. Some of the potential vapors, such as ammonia and hydrogen fluoride, have pungent suffocating odors which would force capable people away and aid in limiting offsite exposures. . Category 3. These accidents are catastophic in magnitude and are not expected in the plant's lifetime. All are extremely unlikely; they would involve either container rupture, failure, explosion,
~ fire, natural disaster, or an extremely improt;able enticality-type accdont. The potential consequences of such accidents have been docussed previously.
4.3.3 Poselble Conflicts Between the Proposed Action and the Objectives of Federal, Regional, State, and Local Plans 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 plans, policies, or controls for the action proposed as long as proper agencies are contacted, proper applications are submitted, and proper monitoring and mitigatory measures are taken to protect the environment and public health and safety. 4.3.4 Effects on Urban Quality, Historical and Cultural Resources, and Society The environmental effects of the poposed license renewal action as discussed above are considered to be insegruficant. There may be adverse effects on urban quality if reactor fuel were not available l The facility has not affected historical or cultural resources. The short-term societal effects dunng operation are and will be minimal, and there will be merumal effects after decommesseorung and reclamation because the site then will be required to meet federal standards for unrestricted use. f
. . ._ _ ~ - .- - --
t 4-34 f REFERENCES FOR SECTION 4 ACGlH (American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hyperusts).1982. Thresho4f Limit Values fior Chemcel Substances in Work Air Adqpted by ACGN4 for 1982, ACGlH, Cmcmnati. AEC (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission).1972. Director:re of Reguistory Standards, Environmentaf Survey of Transportation of Radoscrive Metennis to and kom Nucieer Power Pner:ts. WASH-1238, December i AEC (U.S. Atomic Energy Commission).1974. Directorate of Licensmg, Environmentaf Survey of . the Uranun Fuel Cp:le, WASH-1248, Sect. E. Washmgton, D.C., April. ! Devis and Floyd, Inc., Consulting Engmoers.1982. Groundwater Hptology, Westinghouse EAscaric Corporation,f Columbus, South Corodine, Contractor's Report to Westinghouse Electnc Corporation, Greenwood, S.C. s Deutsch, W. J., N. E. Bell, B. W. Mercer, R. J. Serne, J. W. Shade, end D. R. Tweeton.1984. Agurfer Restoration Technsques for An-situ Leech Uransum A4nes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commiss.on, NUREG/CR-3104, Washmgton, D.C.
- Dunnmg, D. E., et al.1981. Estimeros of bremel Dose Equrvahmt to 22 Target Organs for RadorvMme Occumng in Routine Reineses kom Nucieer Fuel-Cp
- le FacRane, vol.111, ORNL/NUREG/TM-190/V3, Oak Ridge ' National Laboratory, October. (Also published as NUREG/CR-0150.)
EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency).1973. Water Quality Cntens 1972, Report of the Committee on Water Quality Criteria, National Academy of Sciences and National Academy of i Engmeering, EPA-R 3-73-033, March. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1976. Quality Cntene For Water, CPA 440/9-76-023, Washmgton, D.C. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1977. " Title 40-Protection of the Environment.
' Part 190,- Environmental Radiation Protection Standards for Nuclear Power Operations," Fed.
. Regist. 42(9)2558-2561, January 13.
EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1980. Manuel of Protective Action Gusdss and Protective Actions for Nucienr Ancedents. Revision, 520/1-75-001, June. Eve, l. S.1964. "Some Suggested Maximum Permissible Segle intakes of Urarwum," Heefth Phys. 10(11). FWPCA (Federal Water Pollution Control Admwustration).1968. Water Quatty Cntens, Report of l the National Technical Advisory Committee to the Secretary of the Interior, Washmgton, D.C., April _1. Hoenes, G. R., and J. K. Soldat. 1977. Age-Specific Radiation Dose Commrtment Factors fior a l Che-Year Chronic intake, NUREG-0172, Battelle Pacife �.;.xt Laboratories, Novernber. ICRP (International Commission on Radiological Protection). 1959. Report- of Committee # on Pern===N= Dose for Antemal R.distion, ICRP Publication 2 Pergamon, New York. Klett, M. G., and J. B. Galeski. 1975. Fisre Systems Study, Task No. 3, LMSC-HREC TR D390190, Lockheed f4ssiles and Space Company, Inc., Huntsville, Ala., prepared for~ U.S. l Environmental Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, N.C., May. i- Luossenhop, A. J., et al. 1958. "The Toxicity of Hexavalent Urarwum Followmg intravenous ( Admistration," Am. J. Roentgenoi 79, 83. Mishwna, J., L Schwendwnan, and Radesch.1968. PAitorwum Reiense Studes #ft Reiesse kom Hested PAstorwum Bearing Powers, ' BNWL-786, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washogton. t
4-35 Mishima, J., and L Schwendanan.1973. Fractional Airbome Release of Uranium (Representing Plutonium) During the Buming of Contaminated Wastes, BNWL-1730, Pacific Northwest Laboratory, Richland, Washington. NAS (National Academy of Sciences). 1971. Fluorides, Committee on Biological Effects of Atmosphonc Pollutants, Washington, D.C. National Research Council.1979. Ammorus, University Park Press, Baltimore. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1975. Eevironmental Survey of Transportation of Rad >oactive Materials to and from Nuclear Power Plants, NUREG-75l038. Suppl. 1, Washington, D.C., April. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1977a. Environmental Impact Appraisal of the Westinghouse Nuclear Fuel Columbia Site (NFCS) Commercial Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant, Columbsa, South CaroAina, NRC, Office of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards, Division of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety, Washint,:on, D.C. (NR-FM-013). NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).19776. Methods for Estimating Atmospheric Transport and Dispersion of Gaseous Effluents in Routine Releases From Light-Water-Cooled Reactors, Regulatory Guide 1.111, July. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1977c. Calcu!stion of Annual Doses to Man from Routine Releases of Reactor Eftfuents for the Purpose of Evaluating Compliance with 10 CFR Part 50, Appendix 1, Regulatory Guide 1.109, March 1976 and Revision 1 October 1977. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1977d. Regulatory anc' Other Responsibilities As l Related to Transportation Accidents. NUREG-0179, Washington, D.C., June. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1977e. Final Environmental Statement on the Transportation of Rad >oactive Material by Air and Other Modes, NUREG-0170, vols.1 and 2 Washington, D.C., December. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission).1979. Assumptions Used for Evaluating the Potential Rad >ologocal Consequences of Accodental Nuclear Criticality in a Uranium Fuel Fabrication Plant, Regulatory Guide 3.34, Revision July 1. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1980. Radiological Assessment of Individual Dose Resulting from Routine Operation-Demonstration of Compliance with 40 CFR 190, associated with Amendment 4 to License No. SNM-1107, January 22. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1981. " Uranium Fuel Licensing Branch Technical Position, Disposal or Onsite Storage of Thorium or Uranium Wastes from Past Operations," Fed. Regist.,146, p. 52061, October 23. NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission). 1984. A Regulatory Analysis for Emergency Preparedness for Fuel Cycle and Other Radioactive Material Licenses-Draft Report, NRC, ! Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research, November. Sax, N. l.1963. Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, Reinhold. SC-DHEC (South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control).1983a. Letter from J. F. White, SC-HDEC, to M. J. Rhodes, Nuclear Regulatory Commission, November 28 (Docket No. 70-1151). ! SC-DHEC (South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control). 1983b. Water Classification Standards System (Regulation 61-68) and Stream Classifications (Regulation 61-69) for the State of South Carolina, Office of Environmental Quality Control, Columbia, S.C. Shum E. 1981. Environmental Review of Westinghouse License Amendment (SNM-1107) to Upgrade Dry Conversion Line to Their CNFP in Columbia, South Carolina, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff memorandum, March 9.
2 4-36 Sunehne, I., (ed.).1972. Hanchook of Analytest Toxicology, The Chemcal Rubber Company. Sutter, S., and J. Mehma.1981. Aerosols Generated by Free fan Spins of Powders and Soluaans in Static Air, NUREG/CR-3093, U.S. Nuclear Reguietory Conmssen. , USGS (U.S. Geologmal Survey).1981. Water Resources Dets for South Carodine Werer Data Report SC-81-1, Reston, Va. Westinghouse 1975. Westinghouse Nucieer Fuel Colum6ss Site Evaeustion Report, sulmtted to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commesson for renewal of SNM-1107, March 1 (Docket No. 70-1151).
- Westinghouse 1981. License Amendnent Appication to Upgrade Faci #ty (letter from A. T. Sabo, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to R. G. Page U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commesson, January 9, Docket No. 70-1151).
Westinghouse.1982. Letter from M. D'Amore, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, to H. Gibson, South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control, December 7. Westinghouse 1983. Weeninghouse Eisctric Corporation, U>dete for Environmental knpact Appraisal, NFD Plant, Colum6se, S.C. (Docket No. 70-1151) April.
. Westinghouse 1984. Letter from R. W. Fischer, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, .to Mark J.
Rhodes, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commesson, in response to NRC questions concerning the applicant's Update for EnvironmentafImpact Appraisal (Docket No. 70-1151), Feb. 20.- l l l r
- _. . . _. .- - - ____ - . _ _ .- \
( Appendix A METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR CALCULATING RADIATION DOSE COMMITMENTS FROM THE RELEASE OF RADIONUCLIDES 4 l I 1 l 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 resulting from the atmospheric releases of radionuclides are 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 individual 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, exposure mode, or significant organ of the body. In addition, site-specific concentrations of radionuclides in the air obtained at or 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 specified 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 Guide 1.109 (NRC 1977a). A.1.2 Radiation exposure pathways and dose conversion factors Environmental transport 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 internal. 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 latest dosimetric criteria of the International 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 exposure 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
A-4 ES6044 DIRECT ATMOSPHERC AQUATC 1RRADIAT10N RELEASES RELEASES
!8 o
/ o IMMERSION e + SUBMERSION 1r
/
- MAN EXTERNAL ATMOSPHERC AQUATC RELEASES RELEASES
%; /
i
!p!
5 l v ir <r TERRESTRIAL POTABLE FISH AFA) VEGETATION g WATER
)
*4AFOLES L
<"+3 L /
l
*Qp ,,.
E/ MAN INTERNAL
- Fig. A.1. Pathways for exposure to men from releases of radioactive effluents.
A-5 Table A.1. Does conversion factors for external expoewe pathways Orgen RadionucEde Total body Bone Kxiney Lung Expoewe to ground surfaces (mimran/ year por pCl/cm2 ) 2 *U 7.1 X 10 2 3.0 X 102 1.0 X 102 1.7 X 102
- ss u 1.5 X 105 2.1 X 10 5 1.3 X 105 1.4 X 105 288 U 6.4 X 102 2.4 X 10 7.0 X 10' 2.4 X 102 228 U 5.7 X 10" 2.1 X 102 5.9 X 10' 1.2 X 102 i immersion in air (mieran/ year per pci/cm8) 28*U 6.8 X 105 7.1 X to' 3.7 X to' 4.1 X 105 l
- ss u 6.8 X 10' 9.4 X 10' 5.9 X '10' 6.3 X 10' 23s u 5.3 X 105 5.4 X to' 2.6 X 10 5 3.0 X 105 288 U 4.6 X to' 4.5 X 105 2.2 X 10 5 2.5 X 105 l
i l submersion in water (mierem/ year per sci /cm8)
- 28*U 1.7 X 10' 1.7 X 108 8.9 X 102 9.8 X 10 2 23s u 1.5 X to' 2.1 X 10' 1.3 X 108 1.4 X 108 23s u 1.3 X 108 1.3 X 108 6.3 X 10 7.3 X 102 23s u 1.1 X to' 1.1 X 10' 5.3 X 108 6.1 X 102 Source
- D. C. Kocher, Dose-Rete Comwmon Factors for Extemof Exposure to Photons and Ehetrons, ORNL/NUREG-79, Ook Ridge National Laboratory, August 1981.
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 i= by Durnng et al. (1981). The dose conversion factors used in this report are presented in >' Tables A.2 and A.3. These factors are input data into the AIRDOS-EPA computer code, which is used to calculate the dose from inhaled and ingested radionuckles A.1.3 Radiation does to the individual
~
l Intemel exposure continues as long as radioective meterial remains in the body, which may be
- l. longer than the duration of the cdnndual's reesdence in the contammeted environment. The best
! estimates of the intemel dose resultog from an intake are obtened by integrating over the ! romenng Efetime of the exposed indnndual; such estimates are called " dose commitments." The L romenng lifetime is assumed to be 50 years for an adult. j Extemal doses are assumed to be annual rea===. The dose rate above the contammated land l' surface is estimated for a height of 1 m. Followng the initial deposition of radionuchdes, the l ' potentiel for exposure of man may persist, dependmg on the mfluence of environmental l
~
r 4 r- - ,a ne , - , , , - - - , - _ _ .
A-6
~
Table A.2. Dose conversion factors for inhalation exposure pathways-AMAD* = 0.3 gm Committed dose equivalent (rem /pO) i Radionuclide ' Tota' body Bone . Kidney Lung Class D - l 23*U 6.4 8.7 X 10' 1.9 X 10' 1.6 I 23s0 5.8 7.9 X 10' 1.7 X 10' 1.4 I 23sU 6.1 8.2 X 10' 1.8 X 10' 1.5 23e 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 35 U 2.6 X 10' 1.2 X 10' 2.5 8.4 X 102 23eV ~ 2.7 X 10' 1.2 X 10' 2.6 8.8 X 102 23e u 2.5 X 10' 1.1 X 10' 2.5 8.3 X 102
*AMAD = Activity median aerodynamm diameter
.. Source: D. E. Dunrung, Jr., G. G. Killough, S. R. Bemord, J. G.
Pleasant, and P. J. Walsh, Estimates of Intemal Dcse Equivalent to 22 Target Organs for RadonucMes Occumng in Routine Redenses from Nuclear Fuel Cycie Facilities, Vol.111, ORNL/NUPEG/TM-190/V3, Oak Ridge Nationid Laboratory October 1981. Te We A.3. Dose conversion factors for ingestion exposure pathways Committed dose equivalent (rem / 01 Radonuchde Total body Bone Kidney Lung Soluble 234 U 5.8 X 10-' 7.8 1.7 1.7 X 10-2 23sU - 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 23eV 5.1 X 10-' 7.0 1.5 1.5 X 10-2 r . Insoluble ! 1 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-* 23sU 2.2 X 10-2 3.0 X 10-' 6.3 X 10- 6.5 X 10-*
. 23eV ' 2.1 X 10-2 2.8 X 10-' 6.0 X 10-2 6.1 X 10-*
l Source: D. E. Dunrung, Jr., G. G. Killough, S. R. 8emard, J. G. Pleasant, and P. J. Weish, Estimates of Intemal Dose Equivalent to 22 Target Organs for RedonucMes Occumng in Routine Releases from Nucleer Fuel Cycle Faciiities. l Vol. l#, ORNL/NUREG/TM-190/V3, Ook Ridge National Laboratory, October E 1981. l l l
A-7 redistribution, long after the plurne leaves the area. Concentrations of radonucides at the point of deposmon normally are reduced by 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 resultmg from external exposure to a contammated surface is obtamed by assuming that the radionuclide concentrations are denished by radoective decay only. The dose is estimated for indmduals at the neerest site boundary or at the nearest residence. ! The intake parameters used for mdmdual dose determination are shown in Table A.4 and then modfied by site-specific estimates of food consumption in Sect. 4.2.5. Table A.4. Intake parameters (edult)* used in lieu of site-specific date Maximum exposed Average exposed Pathway Vegetables, kg/ year 281* 190 Milk, Uyear 310 110 Meet, kg/ year 110 95 Drinking water, Uyear 730 370 Fish, kg/ year 21 6.9 inhalation, m 8/ year 8000 8000
*From NRC Regulatory Guide 1.109.
"Used for calculating population dases
*This value 'exaudes leefy 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 withm the population. The area withm the 80-km (50-mile) radius of the site is dmded into 16 sectors (22.5* each) and into a number of annuli. The average dose for an 'mdividual in each dmsson is estimated, that estimate multiplied by the number of persons in the dmsson, and the resultog products are summed across the entire area. The unit used to express the population dose is man-rom. 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 indmdual doses. A.2 METHODOLOGY AND ASSUMPTIONS FOR AQUEOUS RELEASES The methodology used for calculating the 50-year dose commitments to man from the rolesse of radonuchdes to an aquatic environment is described in detail by Dunnmg et al. (1981). Sample problems and beoeccumulation factors for radonuclides 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 smier dose commitments from exposures to aquatic pathways. l-I
c- . __ - _
- .. ~~ . . . - - - . - -
t 4 i
.A .
Three exposure pathways are considered in dose determnation: water ingestion, fish ingestion, and submersion in water (swunming). The internal dose conversion factors for converting exposure
- to dose are 'docussed 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 parameters are shown in Table A.4.
. A.3 ATMOSPHERIC DISPERSION i The atmosphenc depersion model used in estimating the atmosphenc transport to the terrestrial environment is docussed in detail in NRC Regulatory Guide 1.111, Rev. 1, (NRC 1977b). For particulate release, the meteorological X/O. values are used in congunction with dry ( ?--;-12 velocates and scavenging coefficients to estimate air concentrations and steady state i- ground concentrations. The atmosphonc depersion model estimates the concentration' of radionuclules in air at ground surfaces as a function of distance and direction from the point of s release. Averages of annual meteorological data from the site or from the nearest weather station, if suitable, are suppled as input for the model. Radioactive decay during the plume travel is taken into account in the AIRDOS-EPA code (Moore et al.1979). Doughters produced dunng 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 calculated for the midpoint i -. ' . 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
.. assamleted into food and contribute dose upon ingestion via the food chain. ! The meteorological data required for the calculations are joint frequency distributions of wind i velocity and direction summarized by stability class. Meteorological data from the noorest weather station are used to calculate the concentrations of radionuchdes at a reference point por 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, j ' and radioactive decay.
i
- REFERENCES FOR APPENDIX A i
Dunning. D. E., Jr., et al.1981. Estimates of ksternal Dose Equrvalent to 22 Target Organs for Radiors=*M Occurring in Routine Releases from Nuclear; Fuel-Cycle Facilities, Vol. III, < ORNL/NUREG/TM-190/V3, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, October. (Also pubhshed as ( ; NUREG/CR-0150.) Eve, l. G.1966. "A Revew of the Physiology of the Gastrointestinal Tract in Relation to Radiation (l - Doses from Radioactive Materials " Health Phys. 12,131-62. ICRP (Internationa' Commesion on Radiological Protection) Task Group on Lung Dynamics.1966.
" Deposition and Retention Models for Internal Dosametry of the Human Respiratory Tract" Health Phys. 12,173-207.
Killough, G. G., and L R. McKay, eds.1976. A Methodology for Calculating Radiation Doses from Radoscrivity Redessed to the Environment, ORNL-4992, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, March. Kocher, D. C. 1981. Dose-Rate Conversion Factors for External Exposure to Photons and Electrons, ORNL/NUREG-79, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, August.
l s A-9 Moore,' R. E., et al. 1979. AIRDOS-EPA. A Computerized Methodology for Estimating
- Environmental Concentrations and Dose to Man from Arborne Releases of Radonuchides.
ORNL-5532 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, June.
.NRC (U.S. Nelaar Regulatory Conmssen). '1977a. " Calculation of Annual Doses to Man from l I
i Routme Releases of Reactor Effluents for the Purpose of Evaluating Comphance with 10 CFR 1 Part 50, Appendix 1," Regulatory Guide 1.109, Office of Standards Development, Washogton,. D.C. j ( NRC (U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Conmssion). 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 Atmosphenc Depersen 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 Commrtments to Man from Aqueous Releases of Redonuchdes ORNL/TM-6618. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, February. Slade, D. H., ed. 1968. Meteorology and Atomic Energy, pp. 97-104, U.S. Ate nic Energy Conmsson, July. 0 4 f l l 4 , 1 i l
4 5 9 L 4 Appendix B NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) PERMIT FOR WESTINGHOUSE COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR FUEL FABRICATION PLANT d _m-_ _ - __ - _ _ _ . _ _ _ i-_ _ - -- - _ _ __ _-+
B-3 South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Contr'ol Beerd Mees.H Clert.en.Jr Chairman 2000 Swil sirect Columba. 5 C. 2920 [ I benard W. Doeslea. M.D Vene Cheermee torbera P. Nomeia. Seasosary
' Gers:d A.Eayesed OrsetL Drady.Jr.
r Comm wener James A.spreen.Jr. '- p .Nei s. Jackson, M D. Wilham H. Haeer M.D. August 29, 1984 CERTIFIED Pall RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED Mr. M. D'Amore, Plant Manager Westinghouse Electric Company P.O. Drawer R Re: NPDES Permit #SC0001848 Columbia, SC 29250 Westinghouse Elec/ Columbia Plant Richland County
Dear Permittee:
Enclosed is the modification to the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
- System (NPDES) Permit for the above-referenced facility.
This modification will become issued and effective on the effective date specified in the modification, provided that no request for an adjudicatory hearing and/or legal decision is subsequently filed with the Departnent. In the event that such a request is filed, the contested provisions of the modification will be stayed and will not become effective until the administrative review process is complete. All uncontested provisions of the modification will be considered issued and effective on the effective date set out in the modification and must be complied with by the facility. If you wish to request an administrative adjudicatory hearing, such request must be made in accordance with 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 be served on the South Carolina Board of Health and Environmental Control. 2600 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. The following elements must, at a minimum, be included with the request:
- 1. A title indicating the nature of the proceedings and the parties involved;
- 2. The complete name and address of the party filing the pleading and, if applicable, the organization (s) or interests which he represents;
- 3. If the requesting party 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 irtterest; .
{'. . B-4 s-80AA0 w.niam M. Wilson, Chairman J. Lonn Mason Jr.. M.D..Vice(hairman
. I. DeCuincey Newman. Secretary Leonarc W. Doutras. M.D.
George G. Graham. 0.0.S. N/=
]8 Michael W. Mims Barbera P. Nuessie l CCMMIS$tCNER Rocert S. Jackson. M,0. l 2000 Bull Street l Columcia. S. C. 29201 Permit No. SC0001848 AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEH In compliance 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, IV and V) 33 U.S.C. 1251 g ,s,ee,.,e 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 requirements and other conditions set forth in Parts I, II, and III hereof. This permit shall become effective on JAN 11982 Ihis permit and the authoriaation to discharge shall expire at midnight, DEC 31986
***"*d DEC 4 1981 t, . E.
Sureau of Wastewater and "Jeresa Quality Control l
3 . _ . a wilfication Date: SEP 1 !)B4 .f ; g y jg pg ,
^
Bur of V'ater Pollu't /ol A. EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS , f During the period beginning on the effective date and lasting through the expiration date, the perialttee is authorized to discharge from outfall(s) serial number (s)o01: sanitary & chemical process wastewater Such discharge shall be limited and monitored by the permittee as specified below: Effluent Characteristles Discharge Limitations Monitoring Requirements kg/ day (Ibs/ day) Other Units (Specify) Measurement Sample Daily Avg. Daily Max. . Daily Avg. Daily Max. Frequency Type 3 Flow-m / day (MGD) - - - - Daily Continuous Recorder
- 10 mg/l 15 mg/l 1/ week 24Hr. C m posite Oil & Grease -
24Hr. C aposite i s00 ii(25) 23(50) - - i/wuk in 3 15/32 29/64 . - 1/ week 24Hr. Caposite Total Suspended Solids
- Daily 24Hr. Caposite Fluoride 18(40) 36(80) -
54(120) - - Dally 24Hr . Compos i te ) NHpN 27(60) 200/100 int 400/100 ml 1/ month. Grab Fecal Collform - T
??E 3'il 5 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, ,g l
There shall be no discharge of floating solids or visible foam in other than trace amounts. M 8 ! Samples taken in c 11ance with the monitoring requirements specified above shall be taken at the S
=
following location (s : At or near the outfall as 1
? . : s-a -
PART I Page 3 . of 10 Permit No.SC0001848 B .' - SCHEDULE OF COMPLIANCE
- 1. The permittee shall achieve cocpliance with the affluent limitations specified' for discharges in accordance with the following schedules N/A
'2. ,No later than 14 calendar days following a date identified in the above schedule of compliance the permittee shall submit either a report of pro-grass or ir. the case of specific actions being required by ider.tified dates, a written notice of compliance or noncompliance. Is the latter case, the no-tice shall include the cause of noncompliance, any remedial actions taiten, and the pro'eability of meeting the next scheduled requirement.
l _ _ _ _. . J
Y B-7 PART I Page 4 - of 10 ] Permit-No. SC0001848 1 C. MONITORING AND REPORTING Repttsenottivi Sampf.ing 1. I Samples and seasurements taken as required herein shall be representative of the volume and nature of the monitored discharge. ) i
- 2. Reporting-
~ Monitoring results obtained during the previous 3 months shall be summarized l
Tor each month and reported on a Discharge Monitoring Report Foru ! - postmarked no later' than the 28th day of the south following the com-l plated reporting period. The first report is due on ApR 2 8 EM' I Duplicate signed copies of these, and all other reports required % rein shall be submitted to the state at the following address: South Carolina Department of Health and Enviernmental Control ATTN: NPDES Permits Section 2600 Bull Street Columbia, S.C. 29201
- 3. Otfi.niticrts
- 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 coemercial facility was operating. Where less than daily sen-p11ng is required by this permit, the daily average discharge shall be determined by the su:mmation of all' the seasured daily discharges by weight divided by the number of days during the calendar month when the seasure-ments were made,
- b. The " daily maximum" discharge means the total discharge by weight during any calendar day.
- 4. Tut P.teceduAts Test procedures for the analysis of pollutants shall conform to regulations pu'-
lished pursuant to Section 304(g) of the Act, under which such procedures may be required. ,
-5. Recording of Rtsalts For each measurement or sample taken pursuant to the requi aments of this pern the per=ittee shall record the following information:
- a. The exact place, date, and time of sampling; I b. The dates the analyses were performed;
- c. The person (s) who perfor=ed the analyses; i
1 1
h B-8 PART I Page 5 of 10 Permit No.SC0001048
- d. The analytical techniques or methods used; and
- e. The result's of all required analyses.
l
. ' 6. AMinnn.1L Mord.toring by Penmittee l 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 rernles of such monitoring shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the values required in the Discharge Moni-toring Report Form . l. Such increased frequency shall also_be indicated.
- 1. Records Re,tention
- All records and information resulting from the monitoring activities required by this permit including all-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.
i l l i l l i-l 1 i i
y
- s i
8-9 PARTII Page,6 of 10 Permit No, SC0001848 A. MEEff ml.TETS
- 1. Change. in DiscJnwtge All discharges authorized herein shall be consistent with the terms and conditions of this permit. The discharge of any pollutant identified in 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 facflity expansions, production increases, or process modifications _which will result in new, different, or increased discharges of pollutants must be reported '*i 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 issuing authority of such changes. Following such notice, the permit may be modified to specify and limit any pollutants not previously limited.
- 2. : Noncomptlaru:e NatificAllcn 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:avare of such condition:
- a. A description of the discharge and cause of noncompliances and
- 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 discharge.
- 1. FacdA.fles Cpention The' permittee shall at all times maintain in good working order and operste as efficiently as possible all treatment or control facilities or systems installed or used by the permittee.
- 4. MutMe impact The permittee shall take all reasonable steps to minimize any adverse impact to navigable waters resulting from noncompliance with any effluent limitations specified in this permit, including such accelerated or additional monitoring as necessary to determine the nature and impact of the noncomplying discharge.
- 5. Bypassing Any diversion from or bypass of facilities necessary to maintain compliance with the terms and conditions of this permit is prohibited, except (i) where unavoidable to prevent loss of lif e or severe property damage, or _(11) where excessive storm drainage or runoff would damage any-f acilities necessary for The compliance with the effluent limitations and prohibitions of this permit.
permittee. shall promptly notify the Department of Health and Environmental Control in writing of each such diversion or bypass.
--m,
P q B-10 PART 11 Page 7 of 10 Permit No. SC0001848
- 6. Removed Sufattnces Solids, sludges. filter backwash, or other pollutants removed in the course of treatment or control of vastevaters shall be disposed of in a manner such as to prevent any pollutant from such materials from entering navigable waters.
- 7. Power Fa4furea
- In order to maintain compliance with the effluent limitations and prohibi- -
tions of this permit, the petuittee 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 sourts is not in existence, and no date for . its implementation 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 vestewater control facilities.
B.. RESPONSIBILITIES
- 1. .,Rigit: of Enttj The permittes'shall allow the Commissioner of the Department of Realth and Environmental Control, the Regional Administrator, and/or their authorized representatives, upon.the presentation of credentials
- a. To enter upon the per=1ttee's premises where an affluent source is lo-cated or in ubich 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 terms 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. Tun 4fer of Ocntuitip or Conttot 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 persit by letter, a copy of which shall be forwarded to the Department of IIsalth and Environmental Con-trol.
- 3. Avelf @ 191h] of Repct.CS Except for data determined to be confidential under Section ~308 of the Act. -
all reports prepa ed in accordance with the terms of this petmit shall be L
, B-11 PART U Page 8 of *10 Permit No. SC0001848
' inspection at the of fices 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 statament on,any such report may result .in the imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in Section 309 of the Act.
- 4. PermLC Mcdification 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 followings Violation of any terms or conditions of this permit; a.
- b. Obtaining this permit by misrepresentation or f ailure to disclose fully all relevant facts; or
- c. A change in any condition that requires either a temporary or permanent reduction or elimination of the authorised discharge.
- 5. Tazic. Pollatusta Notwithstanding Part 11. B-4 above, if a toxic ef fluent standard of prohibition (including any schedule of compliance specified in such effluent standard or prohibition) is established under Section 307(a) of the Act for a tonic pollutant which is present in the discharge and such standard or prohibition i.e more stringent than any' limitation for such pollutant in this permit, this . permit shall be revised or modified in accordance with the toxic effluent standard or prohibition and the permittee so notified.
- 6. Civil. and Cri.mistat. Liabill.bj Except as provided in permit conditions on " Bypassing" (Part II, A-5) and -
"Pover Pailures" (Part II. A-7), nothing in this permit shall be construed to
- relieve the permittee from civil or criminal penalties for noncompliance.
- 7. Cil and Hatsufoue Sub4tance. Liabil. lit /
Nothing in this permit shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities, liabilities, or penalties to which the permittee is or may be subject under Section 311 of the Act.
- s. ' SLtft Law 4 Nothing in this permit' shall be construed to preclude the institution of any legal action or relieve the permittee from any responsibilities,11&bilities, or penalties established pursuant to any applicable State law or regulation' under authority preserved by section 510 of the Act.'
+
F
' B-12~
PART II, PART III FEB: 1 1983 Page 9 of 10 - NODIFICATION DATE: Permit No.: SC0001848
- 9. . Property Righ's t The issuance of this permit does not convey any property rights in' either real or personal property, or any exclusive privileges, nor does it authorise '
j any injury to privath property or any invasion of personal rights, nor any j infringement of Federal, State or local laws or regulations.
'10. Severability i
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, is held invalid, the application of such provision to other circumstances and the remainder of this permit shall not be affected thereby. PART III A. OTHER REQUIREMENTS
- 1. This parmit shall be modified, or alternatively, revoked and reissued, to comply with any applicable effluent standard or limitation issued cr approved
'under. Sections 301(b)(2)(c) and (D), 304(b7(2)'and 307(a)(2) of the Clean Water Act, as amended, if the effluent standard or limitation so issued or approved (a) Contains different conditions or is more stringent than any effluent
' limitation in the permit; or (b) Controls any pollutant not limited in the permit.
The permit as modified or reissued under this paragraph shall also contain any other requirements of the Act, then applicable.
- 2. The permittee shall develop and implement a Best Management Practices (BMP)
Plan to identify and control the discharge of significant amounts of oils and 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-ment, a description of training, inspection and security procedures and emergency response measures to be taken in the event of a discharge to surface waters or plans and/or procedures which constitute an equivalent BNP. 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 sludge and waste disposal areas. The BMP plan shall be developed in accordance with good engineering practices, shall be documented in narrative form, and shall include any necessary plot plans, drawings or maps. The BMP plan shall be developed no later than six months af ter issuance of the final permit (or modification) and shall be implemented no later than one year af ter issuance of the final permit (or modification). The BMP plan shall be maintained at the plant site and shall be available for inspection by EPA and SCDHEC personnel.
4 I
B-13 PART III Page 10 of 10 Permit No. SC0001848 I 'If this permit regulres continuous measuring of the pH of the af fluent, the 3. permittee shall maintain the pH of such effluent within the range set in the permit, except excursions frcun the range are permitted 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 monthI and, (b) No Individual excurston f rom 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 DHEC as to the time and amount of copper sulfate addition.
- 6. A ground-wter monitoring 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(fleid), annonia. nitrate, fluoride, ground-water elevations, gross alpha and gross beta activities. (b) On a one time basis sample the above wells for dissolved organic carbon chloride, sulfate dissolved metals to include calclum, magneslum sodle, potassium, cadmlum, chromium, lead and nickel. $hould this one time analysis Indicate ground-water quality problems other than those already ident1 fled additional analysis may be required. b g reauofWa((11'utionControl
l l l l i Appendix C I ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF WESTINGHOUSE LICENSE AMENDMENT TO INCLUDE AN INTEGRATED DRY ROUTE (IDR) LINE i i 2 f b i L I
JC-3 47 I MAR 9 491 4 DOCKFT NO.: 70-1151 LICENSEE: . Westinghouse Electric Corporation FACILITY: Commercial Nuclear Fuel Fabrication Plant (CNFP). Columbia, South Carolina -
SUBJECT:
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW OF WESTINGHOUSE LICENSE AF_NDMENT (SNM-1107) TO UPGRADE ORY CONVERSION LINE TO THEIR CidFP 1N COLUM3IA, SCUTH CAROLINA -
~ s I Background By letter dated January 9,1981, Westinghouse Electr'ic Corporation (WEC) requested a license amendment of their Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-1107 to replace to authorize their existing the installation Dry Conversion Fluidized of a Bed new DCFB) dry (conversion at their line Commerc.a1 Huclear Fuel Plant (CNFP) at Columbia, South Carolina. At the same* time Westinghouse (the licensee) subnitted environmental informa-tion in-support of the license amendment application.
II Discussion - A. General Description'of the Proposed Uporaded Dry Conversion Line
, x The proposed u? grade 3 dty conversion line will include an Integrated Dry Route (IDR) line developed and consercially utilized by British Nuclear Fuels Limited (3NFL) and will supplement the plant's existing ADU (wet conversion) process production lines. The proposed IDR sprocess line will replace the DCFB experimental dry process line.
According to the licensee, tt.e 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/3CB cylinders, is vaporized within the cylinders by heating with hot spray. The resulting UF6 vapor is reacted with superheated steam to form uranyl fluor,ide (UO2F2) powder and hydrogen fluoride (HF) sas. The UO F22 is further contacted with a . countercurrent flow of hydrogen, nitroger, and superheated steam--to stri) residual fluoride, and to reduce the uranium powder to uranium dioxide. The UO2
. 1
+
C-4 MAR 9 1921 is discharged into check hoppers, and is then pneumatically conveyed
'(or othenvise transported) to the powder processing area. Process j off-gases [ hydrogen (H 2 ), hydrogen fluoride (HF). nitrogen (N2), and ;
steam (H2 O)] are removed continuously through off-gas filters which are periodically revgrse-purged to remove uranium-bearing solids prior to recovery of hydrdgluoric acid. The conversion process is shown 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.l Effluents Released from the Proposed Action '
l 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. Table 1 Estimated Air Effluents Released from Overall Plant Operation Uranium Fluoride (uC1/yr)' (kg/yr) Existing ADU 1,960 21 (700MTU/yr) Estimated IDR 221 68 (500MTU/yr) Previous Estimated in 4,742 757 Environmental Repo 1975 (1600 MTU/yr)rtin' 1 The projected release of effluents up to 1600 MTU/yr would not result in significant impact to the environment as assessed by NRC in the Environmental Impact Appraisal issued in April 1977. The radioactivity released in liquid effluents does not constitute a significant pathway for cbse to man compared with the air effluents pathway, and tre licensee projects only a minor incremental release of radioactivity and chemicals with the addition of the IDR process line. Hydrofluoric acid is a usable byproduct which will be generated l 1 l 1
f4AR 9 1931 C-5 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 disposing 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 modification and relocation of some of the existing plant services. There will be no significant construction impact since the floor area affected by the IDR systems installation will consist of about 22,000 square feet, or only about 6% of the existing manufacturing building floor area, and the roof superstructure will include about 22,000 square feet, or about 6% of the existing roof area. Therefore, the incremental impact temporarily effected by the dismantling, construction, and installation activities is expected to be relatively minor. The proposed action will result in minor incremental releases of radio-activity and chemicals to the environment (see Table 1). The overall' 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 in fiRC's EIA issued April 1977. In addition, the applicant's license amendment lio. 4 was conditioned that if the radioactivity in plant gaseous effluents exceeds 1,500 pCi per calendar quarter, the licensee shall, within 30 days, prepare and submit to the Comission a report which 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 overall release, including the proposed action, will not exceed the limit conditioned in license a nendnent tio. 4. For accidental releases, the licensee's proposed action does not change the potential and effects of the spectrums of potential accidents identified and evaluated in liRC's EIA issued in April 1977. III Conclusion The staff has evaluated the environmental impact associated with the proposed ! plant modifications, effluent releases and accident potentials that may result from the licensee's proposed action. Based on the above evaluation, it is conclt,ded that this proposed action would be r.on-substantive and insignificant i p hMWHEH4M m m ml5EdamE W W M 'g g gge mm u -ge_ g ggg - - . g
e C F.AR 91931 ' from an erivironmental imapct 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 reconnended subject to the following
- condition:
- 1. ~ The licensee shall conduct air ' effluent monitoring on radioactivity and total fluorides as specified in the
' licensee's application dated January 9. 1981., l
- orici:21;is . . p;;
I. Y. Ihm I Edward Y. Shum
. Uranium Process Licensing Section Uranium Fuel Licensing Branch s
g A e J
- U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICBs 1985 661-721:20099 4
f
+ ~ -
p _ _- -
> ,a
- y. - -
I U.S. NUCLTAR REGULATORY COMMISSION NUREG-lll8 BIBLIOGRAPHIC DATA SHEET . 1 TITLE AND SUSTITLE (Add Vokme Na. // opicprimerf 2. (Leave blas41 Environmental Assessment for. Renewal of Special Nuclear
- 3. RECIPIENT'S ACCESSION NO.
-Material' License No. S W-1107'
- 5. DATE REPORT COMPLETED
- 7. AUTHORtS) py TH
. I vfg DATE REPORT ISSUED
- 9. PEIFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (lactude Eia Codel Division'of Fuel Cycle and Material Safety gT" ivfdE5 Office of Nuclear Material. Safety and Safeguards 8 /L "* 6'*" *>
U.S. Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Washington, DC- 20555 ,, , , ,, ,,,,,
- 12. SPONSORING ORGANIZATION NAME AND MAILING ADDRESS (/nclude lip Codel PR M M M M E M E
-Same as 9. above.
- 11. FIN NO.
PE RIOD COVE REO (/nclusive dates / .
- 13. TYPE OF REPORT' Technical
- 14. (Leave clanAl
- 15. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES Pertains to Docket No. 70-1151
- 16. A88 TRACT Q00 words or less) ^
This Environmental. Assessment is issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission (NRC) in response to'an application by the Westinghouse Electric Corporation for the renewal of Special Nuclear Material License No. SNM-1107 which covers the operations of the Columbia plant. 17a. DESCRIPTORS
- 17. KEY WORDS AND DOCUMENT ANALYSIS environmental assessment special nuclear material license 17tx IDENTIFIERS /OPEN-ENDED TERMS
- 19. SECURITY CLASS (Th,s report) 21. NO. OF P AGES
- 18. AVAILASILITY STATEMENT Unclassified 20 t9gggggfyfgg rrms a,,i 22. Price Unlimited s
, NT.C P ORM 335 til su
,; s in p .5.... ,4 ---yy . w m:a w e . .. "rT</W%
s ,. .-. W.',-- ,
- s. ' -y.': 4R , , %, ". l,.m. % n; ; . . - ,
. - w~
w n,w,.g.gm..,.',.,,.g,.
~n a ,y
<mn1 ns +
rge -. , + -+ s %m_ t = & sz. j ,js , > ,z,y2 t ,pl..~ <* ; a , e%. g c * - . -
--r:w , ,.. >
s e . n..-.', .. . :. , t , 4, n. y,p &. n.. y 74 g+u ~n<. om x8m,mx.;4 ,
; .=- ,,a*
a,
+ .f..
n .- ~ a r n ,. .r 4. ,, . _s
'- ,: , rs, . ..~
s.74
. .I.c. .
.v . ?
. ~ , , .w. x + -- t b I 5 , ' m'-,,.f J +.. - +
N ,#
~. -
..M ' . , ~ w S ; Af& ~ + ,
- i*
$$'g',h' 1 .' d W p'U'N'u.I'TED S TA" 3TE' M S" f3. 4 w? M.,NUCLEA3 REIULATTRY COMMIS! ION w W 4 - rouaructassaast; Ns 9-sv NM
- ' x
~ USNRC. %
"-sWASHINGTON, D,Cl20065 T
> u' . L wam o.cX Q, W:M ge s
- -x r_s, -
- 3. :.u- - m, . %A m.
2
' w~.
- nnams ne. o so h,%1 N.C I O$HCIA18USiNESb . i y
, . , ~.
w? 1 4 u [1 ( n p. . 3-n cm- % my. Q_
%~Wa ~,' #, , PENALTY 4 m,n.b c.
g e FORt PRNATE -
~
w i . USE;$300y '., J
# -g7 ,; - .
. pJ.
r - J - 4 ' r
'r
.t.p v
1 c. .-v_Q.:.. e s
... . a
. , , > ~ ' s < . - " i b) 4, 6*$/ % 2f lq', $ ,[_-
.g,
.I['
-"g . . ' 5f" f y
' - a
[
, b
- s. ;g),1'.s
' ,.e ,. " %.
r a ps,@) f Z---(, [ N ' . .e-- H , W t'- 4 - 2," ,-+
- gy m!'4-A * ~ v'
> - - . 'h .!
-,M'="
M' ,'E g.g s
- g-
,.j ,_
e .
;*s ,
, s> ' , -k.
^
..s_ a
,J4 '.h- .'
W . y:, - pr7
?-^')^' % _j _% 4 -
-, s-- > s.sy'[ W
-.*\'
1 .: - g i'd
' -Q , "
- t r t ., '* . Y. .i r (,' I g l * ..e
^
g im
~s 4., 1
, e '.ga - ,
- ;g
;- *'-, I
.(','-
a
. s 4_ s5 s+
y n, J * . i, g-e q. - *
- r e
, ,s s.. n :_
e ss f. s . ., h g
'a=lI.z 'y
_;ni. ? ^ J.*
^['**1"?-l
.-_-l;*-
+
-% f a,. $ E f p
- u
,y o
' v.-
{
"ymV u
': r m'f !' ,. .+
w u. e a .C es y ? - e - x. *;h :.L T.,, O ^ ,,%^,,_+._c e cwY 1 ~ , =, . 1
, u ,
-- .i
.- . . - . . , - .i! , ,
_1 f p p\ c w "2...j W["c. =, *
",,,..' , , '-,i '. ub' ,. (,.
)
s e s ,. ~y'~?y
, . . . - ' 5, 3 J,.
+, ,- ky 3 ,; y 's-t.,.
< ,c' l
-..a_..,
m
,,es ,
1 i n m'.c ) :,
$ . J ,,_ ** ._'1 g,
s _* 4
, a _- y <_ .---
4 J ' jh ,.9
#% ._Q'-F . '
'%' 2-' .
y %
,s
k.['
6 ' , at ' ' 4 g' ,1," A
- y. cV 'G. ,%
p.
', g' 5'r,-,, ...'-Q-'s..
, / R.- f ; s ; ? ' i.' t,4 .
- y%S ,
3
- /* '#
d 9;r ;_f a' _{^A h' f -, _ , g- .
\ ., "
h- 2l J,. 3 y-
. y , _ _ . _ ~ ,- , _
,y-s mu 5 > . ,
--f3 a t.,,,,,,s a
.u,,.,r "J _
sy4.h 1 r , . 4.
*-.a ,-f ,a
,a -
/ .--t .3 E.'y ,+ 4'.l' .; .y!-* ' e W , 6--y+ , -' -} y *,j,s"
- y. -c
,,= 3 v
- i_ , -. t , , '
- 4. , ' .
3 - + :j.: .-m 4+ n . f, e c- j {',. g s b k
- e >
r N}}' .%.g.
- 9 se - .%,C *'.c- _,
s _3 ',e 4::g.. , ' s 1 +> s t (,
,,c t l,,
,,= x , ,1, 4 b t. e w s ? ,- r . a
.+;e-x fu'f , N r 4 IV ,
'* I
<J( , /J .S " '
g <r t mq s i
.y'
.'f
4-* -__'.-~
9 f -g.. - q
? ' y JQ>
~
, + ,
+
.m
~ } $ - >: j: J_/., .
s_ . 1 % ,t... 1 " .
, f I 5
r p_, '- l t - e
~."'1 pk * , 1 f kl.I.
cy. .N . -_'
$ '"[
; w'.' f. g
< ,..~.
4 f r
, ,.. .' ', . J ,.. .
J~l?~->% s Q:Q* tv 3 , m ', 4, -
& - , g ' . '__ w '{.. i s z
' , ' * 'pj
(' aH # j
~ .
' .,p' , +
f
? ,, , ,
q /3,,g/:., A a r, ..
._v
--t-'--%
g _ i-' # % * > >> .> < <.x... m. < ,J ,-~ , r ~ F'
+
k *"
< w.
.e r
.m -
p ' -
, e
. , ;y
, +
~
y 7-. ,. . i y y
*, . A lI' !'-
~J 4
j p-7 i.,s f O ' 7
, 's, .
b Y g, %, r > k. g
- w c n, s
, j s gy , t .
t
--,1',#
~ , _ , - , , a,
.r. }
-o
- j_ }
- Q' _ t
/,,. Q _r;. .' '$ :3 ', y 9..E'!' -. E 19p < l v , +
~~ --'
u47 , e
~
i.-4*
% 7 c'-'y,.2 7 1
+
i +
"bD a j A q '.' ,,,
4f.-,), f 4_ E 'g y+'> +
'M l 1' s, c +, -
, e,
, v'l s y , .I'n N 6
* . *c.e~ p g
ga
- e e c, e
~_I
.~
1- , .-_- a '4
'.:p (p., <-
.@..p.
, s, 4 m F t
.l p- ,
v
' ==
4 V N en
,---( ,%'- ,
;t-I,6*,. .- }
b
'.4' '
h 1," )
- r.,-.S,<~ ~
\ >
t
, a 1n
- E y
[ , - r ~Y.*', ' S Lq<-. ,-
, J P
, s F f "'I 8
.- , , e .-
UY& } f-f _'4 y 7 t 1 5
, ~. -) 37. .,.'"4
;v;,;,s y
F 5 3 "- .'r' ) 4r. ( "T j
..,6
- -m . %, -. ) ,1 ; - .
-L ( 'y'
- k*
p.
- s38 p ;- < e . ,t- 1 b f ,-e j ar 4- N
> m . "a .;
1' a w,.. > '
,x,_ ;L W ' -
, + @m ._g.< , _' 4 '2 [' ' s
- - y )
~ , , , t
[ ' 4 't t &' [4 " Li', ; ) :,,, - M. _=<y 3 (^ _' -(r p w , O . + , i t i Y
$r
- t. '. ?+ s-
,5)5 f +=3 h y . gE [ k zu ;
- y .. w w -
/y . I*
, (- 4 N 4 I J
_.[ '
$> g' #
{ q 4% T- 'a 8 l', 3
+'
t
,f.,
b B+ N F3 kr.5b1'-W*r-
- d '1
- d. . ,II5-T er 'YP 7 -<u. kS
, 7e .
O NFW- d.!#r-s w9W' A 8P q' FPPNS'"9-W S'-9 Ir W 4 --- e 4.y--9-e<r
,e -'s "w aib r. TVe it' & r- gwha'*"' W4h E t+ -fi'1P <e r*W W 9=4 =W = et 'r'? v 4 9-d
-}}