ML20136F346
Text
.
M Qi C
EC CQ DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File 50-424 OCT jj g Docket File 50-425 (w/o encl)
METB Docket Files METB Reading File CAWillis Docket Nos. 50-424/425 MEMORANDUM FOR:
R. Jachowski, Acting Leader Hydrological Engineering Section Environmental and Hydrologic Engineering Branch, DE FROM:
Charles A. Willis, Leader Effluent Treatment Systems Section Meteorology and Effluent Treatment' Branch, DSI
SUBJECT:
LIQUID RADWASTE TANK FAILURE EVALUATION FOR V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 We are evaluating the liquid radwaste tank failure for Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2, using the METB-RATAFR Code.
In our evaluation, we considered the tank most likely to result in unacceptable concentrations to be the Waste Evaporator Concentrate Holdup Tank. This tank has a nominal volume of 2,500 gallons and is located inside the auxiliary building at elevation 196' - 0", as shown in FSAR Figure 1.2.2-23.
The bottom floor of the auxiliary building is at
~
elevation 119' - 3".
A listing of the accident source term for this tank is enclosed for your information. You should identify the location (s) of the nearest potable or surface water supply in an unrestricted area and provide the concentration in this body of water for each radionuclide for which the transit time and available dilution are both less than those listed for the individual radionuclide in the enclosed listings.
Questions concerning this data should be addressed to C. Nichols (x27634), cognizant engineer assigned to this facility.
Drisina!sidhowi.
Chr.rles A. iiillis Charles A. Willis, Leader Effluent Treatment Systems Section Meteorology & Effluent Treatment Branch Division of Systems Integration
Enclosure:
As stated cc: See next page T
l O f ic o y q n rw a n,a > DS I.;RP.:.Mei.B...p.S I..:.R6.h.e.T.B..
~+
9.N,i cho1 s,: d,j,,,,,Q AW i,1,,1,1,s,,,,,,
cm
- * " > 1.0uo.l84.......1.9L1.(.IR4...
pe row me no eemacu ovo OFFICIAL RECORD COPY
- "'""'.""*'I
I 11 Z334 R. Jachowski.
m cc:
W. Gammill R. Ballard
- 6. Staley I. Spickler d.rNichols a m.
O e
.M
.J
~
~
LIQUlD TANK FAILURE V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT, UNIT N05. 1 AND 2 Name of Tank:
Waste Evaporator Concentrate Holdup Tank Volume of Tank:
2,000 Gal.(80%ofCap.)
Primary Failed Minimum Coolant 10 CFR 20 Tank Transft Half-Life Conc.
Limits Conc.
Required Time a
~Nuclide (Days)
(uCi/ml)
(uCi/ml)
(uCi/ml)
Dilution (Days)
Corrosion and Activation Products H-3 4.493) 1.00(0) 3.00(-3) 1.3 -1) 4.2(1) 2.44)
Cr-51 2.78 1) 1.90(-3) 2.00(-3) 3.3 -3) 1.7(0) 2.2 1)
Mn-54 3.03 2) 3.10(-4) 1.00(-4) 1.7 -3) 1.7(1) 1.2 3)
Fe-55 9.50(2 1.60-3) 8.00(-4) 9.7(-3) 1.2(1) 3.3(3)
Fe-59 4.50(1 1.00 -3) 5.00(-5) 2.6(-3) 5.2(1) 2.6(2)
Co-58 7.13 1 1.60-2) 9.00(-5) 5.5(-2) 6.2(2) 6.6(2)
Co-60 1.92 3) 2.00(-3) 3.00(-5) 1.2(-2) 4.1(2) 1.7(4)
Np-239 2.35 0) 1.00(-2) 1.00(-4) 1.5(-3) 1.5(1) 9.2(0)
Pu-239 8.91(6) 0 5.00(-6) 1.7(-8) 3.3(-3) 0 i
Fission Products Rb-86 1.87 1) 7.08(-4) 2.00(-5) 8.6(-4) 4.3(1) 1.0(2)
Rb-88 1.24 -2) 1.67 0) 1.00(0) 1.3-3) 1.3(-3) 0 Sr-89--
5.20 1) 2.92-3) 3.00(-6) 8.4 -3) 2.8(3) 5.9(2)
Sr-90 1.03 4) 8.33 -5) 3.00(-7) 3.4 -4) 1.8(3) 1.1(5)
Y-90 2.67(0) 1.00(-5) 2.00(-5) 5.3 -4) 2.6(1) 1.3(1)
Sr-91 4.03(-1) 5.42(-3) 5.00 -5) 1.4 -4) 2.9(0) 6.0(-1)
Y-91m 3.47 -2) 3.00(-3) 3.00 -3) 9.1 -5) 3.0(-2) 0 Y-91 5.88 1) 5.33(-4) 3.00 -5) 1.8 -3) 5.9(1) 3.5(2)
Y-93 4.25 -1) 2.83(-4) 3.00(-5) 7.9(-6) 2.6(-1) 0 Zr-95 6.50(1 5.00(-4) 6.00(-5) 1.6(-3) 2.7(1) 3.1(2)
Nb-95 3.50(1 4.17(-4) 1.00(-4) 2.1(-3) 2.1 1) 1.5(2)
Mo-99 2.79(0 7.00(-1) 4.00(-5) 1.3(-1) 3.2 3) 3.2(1)
~
Tc-99m 2.50(-1) 4.00-1) 3.00(-3) 1.2(-1) 3.9 1) 1.3(0)
Ru-103 3.96 1) 3.75 -4) 8.00(-5) 8.9(-4) 1.1(1) 1.4(2)
J Rh-103m 3.96 -2) 3.75 -4) 1.00(-2) 8.9(-4) 8.9(-2) 0 l
Ru-106 3.67 2) 8.33 -5) 1.00(-5) 4.6(-4) 4.6(1) 2.1(3) l aDilution neglecting decay.
Transit time neglecting dilution.
9
.n
,_,w,_.--_-,,,,s.
LIQUID TANK FAILURE V0GTLE ELECTRIC GENERATING PLANT, UNIT NOS. 1 AND 2 (Continued)
Primary Failed Minimum Coolant 10 CFR 20 Tank Transft Half-Life Conc.
Limits Conc.
Required Time a
Nuclide (Days)
(uCi/ml)
(uCi/ml)
(uCi/ml)
Dilution (Days)
Fission Products (continued)
Te-125m 5.80(1) 2.42-4) 1.00-4) 7.4(-4 7.4(0) 1.7(2)
Te-127m 1.09(2) 2.33 -3) 5.00-5) 9.8(-3 2.0(2' 8.4(2)
Te-127 3.92 -1) 7.08 -3) 2.00 -4) 9.8(-3 4.9(1l 2.2(0)
Te-129m 3.40 1) 1.17 -2) 2.00 -5) 2.4(-2 1.2(3) 3.5(2)
Te-129 4.79 -2) 1.33(-2) 8.00(-4) 1.6(-2) 2.0(1) 2.1(-1)
I-129 6.21(9) 0 6.00(-8) 2.7(-10) 4.5( 3) 0 Te-131m 1.25(0) 2.08(-2) 4.00(-5)
,1.7(-3) 4.3 6.8 0)
I-131 8.05(0)
'2.25(0) 3.00 -
1.2 0) 3.9 1.8 2)
Te-132 3.25(0) 2.25 -1) 2.00 -
4.8 -2) 2.4 3.6 1 I-132 9.58(-2 8.33 -1) 8.00 -
5.3 -2) 6.6 1.2(0 I-133 8.75 -1 3.17 0) 1.0( 6) 1.8 - )
1.8 2.2(1 I-134 3.67 -2 3.92 -1) 2.00 -
9.4 - )
4.7 2.1(-1)
Cs-134 7.49 2) 2.08(-1) 9.00 -
1.2 0 1.4 1.3(4)
I-135 2.79 -1) 1.58(0) 4.00 -
2.9(-2) 7.2 3.6(0)
Cs-136 1.30(1) 1.08(-1 6.00-5) 9.2(-2) 1.5(3 1.4(2)
Cs-137 1.10(4) 1.50(-1 2.00 -5) 9.5(-1) 4.7(4 1.7(5)
Ba-137n.
1.77(-3) 1.33(-1 1.00(0) 8.9(-1) 8.9(-1) 0 Ba-140 -
1.28(1) 1.83(-3 2.00(-5 1.5(-3) 7.7(1) 8.1(1)
La-140 1.68(0) 1.25(-3) 2.00(-5 1.7(-3) 8.3 1) 1.1(1)
Ce-141 3.24 1) 5.83 -4) 9.00(-5 1.2(-3) 1.3 1) 1.2(2)
Ce-143 1.38 3.33 -4 4.00 -5) 3.0 -5) 7.5 -1) 0 Pr-143 1.37 4.17 -4 5.00 -5) 4.0-4) 8.1(0) 4.2(1)
Ce-144 2.84 2.75(-4 1.00 -5) 1.5 -3j 1.5(2) 2.3(3)
Pr-44 1.20
)
2.75(-4) 1.000) 1.5-3) 1.5(2) 0 1.7(-3) 9.09(-2)
All Others
' Dilution neglecting decay.
Transit time neglecting dilution.
es e
(.
- 3.
- 5 o.
t 7
DISTRIBtlTION:
hb Docket File sn_apa Docket File 50-425 (w/o encl)
DEC 2 31983 METB Docket Files METB Reading File WPGammil1 Docket Nos. 50-424/425 MEMORANDllM FOR: Elinore G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch No. 4. DL FROM:
William P. Ganmill, Chief Meteorology and Effluent Treat:nent Branch, DSI SilBJECT:
NETB 00ESTIONS FOR V0GTLE, llNIT NOS.1 AND 2 FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT PLANT MME: Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, 'llnit Nos. I and 2 LICENSING STAGE: OL DOCKET NuttBER(S): 50-424/425 RESDONSIBLE BRANCH: LB?A PROJECT MANAGER:
M. Miller RE00ESTED COMPLETION DATE: January 31, 1984 DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSE: 0 Ne have reviewed Sections 6.5.1, 10.4 2, 10.4.3, 15.7.3 and Chapter 11 of 2
the Vogtle FSAP., and find that we need additional information to conplete our evaluation.
A list of questions is enclosed.
If there are quest' ions concerning this infornation, please contact the review engineer, C. Nichols (x27634).
Origiunt r.,1dL::d by:
William P. Gaamill William P. Gannill, Chief Meteorology and Effluent Treatment Branch Division of Systems Integration
Enclosure:
METB Questions cc:
R. Mattson
- 0. Muller M. Miller
't.illis C. W
_.Michols W some W H
g v.
a V *'
.................E..T.B.
...D. S.. -..E.T..B DS
- RP:M emer>...OSI : RP :METB f,),,,,.C,4,1 ),},,s,,,,,,,H?.C m.m.i.1,1...
........... 1...
1
- >..C.R.N.1.ch,0,},s.:
cer)...1. 2./.1., /.3 3y.... 1. 2./. 4o../.8. 3..
....12../.../.83...................................................-
8 Q
ec r cu m no.si.4Edu ono OFFICIAL RECORD COPY j
METB QUESTIONS FOR V0GTLE, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 Docket Nos. 50-424/425 460.01 Standard Review Plan 6.5.1, ESF Atmosphere Cleanup Systems, (6.5.1) provides that relevant requirements of the Commission's regulations are met by using the regulatory positions contained in Regulatory Guide 1.52 as it relates to the design, testing and maintenance of ESF atmosphere cleanup system air filtra-
- ,...,..,..,.,. n,.,...u..g,,....._,..,.,. _,.,,,,.g.y.,,,,,
., g,y e.n r,. w.w
- .. a.. :.i
....a.+n g:;.....
w tion and adsorption units.
Regulato'ry Guide 1.52, Revision 2, March 1978, provides regulatory positions for which additional
...,... informatioWshould 'be/provideii for.j.ustification. of '.givi.ng. full. -
... ~.
or partial credit to ESF atmosphere cleanup filters for nitigating accident doses in accordance with the G.uide.. In.
general, for regulatory positions wher.e full.canformance-is not demonstrated,- justification should be provided.. Further, specific information should be given as described below:
Position 2.g - ESF atmosphere cleanup systems should be instru-mented to signal, alarm, and record pertinen pressure drops J
r and flow rates in the control room.
(Standard Review Plan Section 6.5.1 states that the design of instrumentation for the ESF atmosphere cleanup system should conform to the guide-lines of Regulatory Guide 1.52 and to the recommendations of ANSI N509. Minimum instrumentation, read out, recording, and alarm provision for ESF atmosphere cleanup systems are given in Table 6.5.1-1 of this SRP section.)
L L
g y
,,,.,-4c
--p_.
,3..,.,,.,._..,7..-.--.7,.7-
.y
-' Table 6.5.1-2 of the FSAR provides information on the ESF filter system instrumentation sensor locations and response types and locations.
Non-conformities with Table 6.5.1-1 of the SRP are as follows:
(1) no local indication is provid:a of unit inlet or outlet c uw.mv.c.9.Moy.i6w.o.%wem-f.l'owjipp.m4%w.w.p.o-:m..v,mmsc ew<e Au.4,w.gm. e..ve. do.w(: 9W (2) no local high alarn signal is provided of the pressure drop across the.prefil.ter..(demister in the Vogtle design);
,, e.i..
s.
- s.
.,,;.....,,,,...s...
..,2.,._,.,,
no ' local s' atus indicaf. ion is'provfded for.the electri~c
'{3) t heater;
.. "' Y e
-n N.
(4) no l'ocal indication, h'i~gh alarm, and low alarm s'ignals 6.:
... s.:..........
are provided and no high alarm, low alam, and trip-alar.m signal s 'are' prov'ided i n 'the 'boritrol ' room' for.a.'tempe rature sensor located between the heater and the first HEPA filter; (5) no local.. high alarm signal is provided and no recorded indication is provided in the control room of the pressure drop across the first HEPA filter; (6) no local two-stage high alarm signal is provided for a temperature sensor located between the adsorber and the second HEPA filter;
(?) no local high alarm signal is provided for the pressure drop across the second HEPA filter; and
. (8) no hand switch is provided at the control room for the deluge valves and no local hand switch and status indica-tion is provided for the deluge valves.
Table 6.5.1-2 of the FSAR does provide, however, certain instrumentation which exceed the minimum instrumentation pro-s,ow.+.a+r.w.pg :wr:Mr%en+4n+aiv.v;Ghr.1-E. ':i.M4bewx mc. ut.rutamMwacppn:wupms%n vided in Table 6.5.1-1 of the SRP, e.g., indication and high alarm are p.rovided in,the control r.oon of the, moistyre, content i.n:the space. between the : heater and 'the fi.rstnHEPA..f.ilter.
Provide a description of equipment.to be included;in the design to fully conform to Table 6.5.1-1 of the SRP or provide '
justification for each nonconfornity.
Explain how the noisture sensing, indicating, and alarm instrumentation, alora with other design features, ensure that,the r, elative humisity.,i.s adequately controlled to assure that the ESF filter systems perform their safety functions.
Explain how the ES: filter system instrumentation and other design features ensare that the second HEPA filter adequately removes, at all ti es during system operation, charcoal particles that may be dislodged from the adsorber bed and present in the air stream, and that may contain adsorbed radioactive materials.
Position 3.k - The design of the adsorber should cor. sider possible autoignition fron radioactivity-induced hea-ing of
. the adsorbent.
Acceptable designs include low-flow air bleed system, cooling coils, water sprays, or other cooling mecha-nisms.
Any cooling mechanism should satisfy the single-failure criterion. A low-flow air bleed system should satisfy the single-failure criterion for providing low-humidity cooling w:..u o.c.y<,.;.,-m:wa.c.:r4K.))?*Au:.:.s :a.~u.iu.ws.u+ dam.w wt.xw.+ w 4 %w.e:- m ~. ::.,. ~
The FSAR states that the anticipated charcoal bed lo~ading for the. design'.' basis".acci~ den'. is ilot. su.ffi-ci ent to raise the' bed, t
n temperature to. the' dssorption and adsorbent ' automatic ' ignition (."
~
~
range, and that a water' spray system is 'provided to prevent
' ~
~
excessive heating, if required.
?.n..,..,1.,..
Provide justification that a. cooling mechanism is not.needed,
and is not relied on for cooling-for each ESF filter systen x
using assumptions and analyses', or' demonstrate how 'the 'c'ooli'n~g' nechanism for each ESF filter system satisfies the single-failure criterion.
460.02 Standard Review Plans 10.4.2, " Main Condenser Evacuation (10.4.2, 10.4.3)
System," and 10.4.3, " Turbine Gland Sealing System," provide that the relevant requirements of the Commission's regulations are met by using the regulatory positions contained in Regulatory Guide 1.26, as it relates to the equipment quality group classifications of these systems, and in Regulatory
5-Guides 1.33 and 1.123, as they relate to the quality assurance programs. for the system's components.
Regulatory Guide 1.26 describes a quality classification systen related to specified national standards for determining acceptable quality standards for components.
u.w... %.m.ver3.s.n >ps-phu.ku;.:w.,,;;atv.y:av.,-s>rmand;,s.i.ye.7y.vp.r:eaa.ym.v.v;izw.+yi+.v..,.;.,.n s..; n.d u The FSAR states that the main condenser evacuation system piping s
is designed to.ANS.I B31,,1.
Provide tl}e Quality Gr,cao for.each,
system.. -Provide ~ the quality standards ;for the. components in each system in accordance with Table'1 of Regulatory Guide 1.26.
Justify any nonconformity with Tabl,e 1 quality standards,.. The FSAR contains no information regarding the conformance of quality assurance prograns for these' system's compo ents to the regulatory positions of Regulatory Guides 1.33 and.1.123.
Provide this information and' jus'tify 'any non'confdrmitiy.
460.03 Standard Review Plan 11.2, " Liquid Waste Management Systems,"
(11.2) provides that relevant requirenents of the Commission's regulations are met by using the regulatory positions contain-ed in Regulatory Guide 1.143, as it relates to the design of outdoor tanks containing radioactive materials in liquids to prevent uncontrolled releases of radioactive mateials due to s pilla ge.
r L The FSAR states that outdoor tank dikes have a capacity of 5 percent of tank volume for Category 1 tanks and 10 percent of tank volume for Category 2 tanks'.
Provide a description of equipment and facilities to be included in the design to fully conform to Regulatory Guide 1.143 or provide justifica-n :...ms.wa.w:m c:we.t]Dhl9& $b4).d.eki.99 AMS.EWd&Me:.:..nem.m:4.w.,~;cn.p!+g.w;. g.a.u 460.0a Standard 'Revi ew 'Pla n ('SRP)' 11. 3', '"Gise'o'us' Oas't flanipenen't
'(11' 3)
(.
Systens...". provides. that relevant. requi rements.of the Conmission's regulations are net by using the regulatory positions contained in Regulatory Guide 1.140, as it relates to the design, testing and maintenance of normal ventilation exhaust systems.
The FSAR states that the Voatle Electric Generating Plant desion conforms to the regulatory positions of Regulatory Guide 1.140, nith certair, c:.ce;': O -
Provide a description of equipnent to be includec i-the design to fully conforn to the regulatory positifons of Reg latory Guide 1.140, or provide justification for the exceptions, as follows.
Provide justification for the exceptions taken with respect to the turbine building condenser vacuun exhaust and steam packing exhauster filtration systems and with respect 4
9 4
7-i 1
I to the off-gas filters in the volume reduction system.
Provide justification specific to each of the four parts of Regulatory Position C.S.
460.05 SRP 11.4, " Solid Waste Processing Systems," refers to Branch (11.4)
Technical Position ETSB 11-3, which provides that, where v.
>.w,.s v;s.; am c.. s. sac ~m.,. c.xy.,a ;sa..wm.,,,.e.,p.,.a.
.,,,fe r ofs z_,:g..q..,,_.y..., h;o._ N.. pu,.,,p.e, ;
u compressed gases are used for trans resins, tanks. s u be vented directly to the plant ' ventilation exhaust sy' stem.
The'FS'A'R pr' ovide's that~the solid waste manageme d system has been designed to meet the design criteria of Branch Technical Position ETSB 11-3 with the exception that the spent resin transfer tanks in the transfer building are vented directly into the tank roon throuch the process overflow.
Exhaust ventilation from the tank roon is directed to the auxiliary building ventilation systen upstream of the filtration units.
Provice a descriotion of quipment to r+ Mr.i une t '. vent the transfer tanks directly to a plant ventilation exhaust systen which includes HEPA filters as a minimum, or provide justifica-tion for venting the transfer tanks directly into the tank room.
.460.06 SRP 11.5, " Process and Effluent Radiological Monitoring Instru-(11.5) mentation and Sanpling Systems," provides, as specific criteria necessary to meet the relevant requirenents of the Commission's
., c u Y,yc.ei..i. ) - 4m ?
..v ?..a O..a
~'
.a. -..
. ~ w.
-.., ~ -. -. -._,-...- -.
~.
regulations, that provisions should be made for the instru-mented monitoring or sampling and analysis (including administrative and procedural control) of radioactive waste process streams and all normal and potential radiological effluent pathways and for the instrumented nonitoring or p.a..-;.s...ee wn.we. mwyrvisasp1169 ahd 4hal;ys&6f$dett i fi.ed"gaseo.usf arid 3.i t q61diathsf*VW-E *T-V in the event of postulated accident releases.. The designeof sys'tems'$hould meet the p'rovisions of NUREG-0737'(Ite'n II.F'.1/
Attachments 1 and 2), 'Rdguiatory Guide l'.97 (Position C and
~
Table 2), Regulatory Guide 1.21-(Position C), Regulatory Guide 4.15.(Position C), Tables 1 and 2 of SRP 11.5,'and Appendix 11.5-A of SRP 11.5.
Nt! REG-0737 (Item II.F.1, Attacnnent 1) provices, ir. able II.F.1, that all potential accident release paths shall be monitored.
Tha &R secondary containment exhaust air. PIC ster safety valve discaarp, and PUR.rc. aspheric stean duop c?' i discherge are identified in this table.
Sinilarly, Iten II.F. '.,, provides, in Table II.F.1-2, that the capability is required to collect and analyze or measure representative samples of radioactive iodines and particulates in plant gaseous effluents during and following an accident.
This requirement does not apply to PWR secondary nain stean safety valve and dunp valve discharge lines.
l
. J...,.
p
.c.....
......,,~...i..u..a
9 m
+e
/
v e'
w y
9
,1
~
s_.
' Regulatory Guide 1.97, Table 2 for PWRs, provides that noble s
f gases and vent flow rate variables are required to be monitored for the condensh, air renoval systen exhaust (unless discharge i
is through a common plant vent), for common plant vents dis.
charging condenser air removal system exhaust, and for all
,.~...r..s.p,.,:s
...v.
pyother3 ident.if3cJ r.rele,asey poj nts [(unles.s monitored att. vents)2.+n.:,+ w 3,p.;,
Par.ticulates and halogens. are. required to be.monito. red..
\\
(sampling fnith'onsite ah'al'ysis capability) st 'al'1'ide~ntifie'd plant reliase" points (except steam generator safety ' relief valves or atmospheric steam dump valves and condenser air removal.,rd stem,exhau st).
!c.
The only accident-range gaseous effluent monitoring equipment and sanpling and analysis capability descri'ied in t e FSAP, pertain to th$ plant vents and the discharges from the con-1-
denser air ejector header and steam exhauster.
Provide additional information, if.anpiicaria, on t i s equi p. e*
and capability"and flow rate monitoring equipnent with reference to all other potential gaseous, accident release paths, including
/
-r c,,,
the radwaste~ building ventilation exhaust and safety valve and atmospheric dumh' valve discharges, or provide justif.ication for not providing the equipment and capability in accordance 1
'M 4
j
-p
. with NUREG-0737 and Regulatory Guide 1.97.
Provide information on equipment for monitoring flow rates for all potential accident release pathways.
The final design description of all accident-range noble gas ef fluent monitors and iodine and particulate samplers should c
y.:.w. y,g... 7,.g p v g,. g,y y g v.g c~..,; y :.. g.,n.yg. p.s.r m. y..:%::>.n
.:.g gyy..., y.c.x.. y be provided in accordance with the documentation requirements
,.,,.,:.. Of N,UR.EG-07U. Pr.ovi,de thi p f,i nal. des.1 gn i nf prna.ti o n,o,r prdvide a commitmentL to. provide it.. do latef ~th'an. Vodr @on'ths'
l prior to issuance of a fuel-loading license.
Regulatory Guide 1.21 (Position C) provides that all major and potentially significant paths for release of radioactive raterial durinn normal reacter operation should be -anitored; and that measurements of ef fluent volune, rates of release, and specific radionuclides.should be made, insof ar. as is practicable, at the point (s) whi:n would provide da:S that are the most representative of ef fluent releases 'to the 31 ant environs.
The FSAR provides no information on nonitoring nornal gaseous releases for the condenser air ejector exhaust header and steam exhauster for gaseous, iodine, and particulate activity.
Pro-vide the information on this equipnent or provide justification for not providing the equipment in accordance with Oegulatory Guide 1.21.
a The FSAR provides no information on equipment for monitoring liquid and gaseous normal release flow rates.
Provide this information for each release pathwdy.
Provide information on means for measuring flow rates 'through iodine and particulate a
samplers.
...ide'c4:15 addpess'es'.qualit'y assurance :foryr,ad'io,., tj p'.'
i V.'
..s...... -..
Regulatory.:Gu logical effluent monitoring.'. No,information is provided in the
..,,..Jw
- i........ c.
FSAR on this subjectk Describe conforriance to each;of the' d< ~. -
...A
~
nine regulatory positions of Regulatory' Gtiide 4:1'5, fu'stifying' s
W
~
any nonconformance.
,s.p..
Tables 1 and 2 of SRP 11.5 contain provisions for automat'ic i
control features for monitoring gaseousdnd 1.iquid effluent t
streams.
Table 1 provides for automatic control features for monitors of noble gases in effluents from waste gas holdup systems.
Table 2 provides for automztic control features for
. component cooling water system nonitors and continuous sampling
.c of ef.fluents from each process system, except from batch liquid radwaste systems.
(
\\
NUREG-0472, " Standard Radiological Effluent Technical Specif1 '
e cations for PWRs," clarifies these requirements of SRP 11.5 by providing, that alarm and automatic termination of release f
+
are required for noble gas activity monitors for effluents from s
e V
s s
J
\\.
,..o
, waste gas holdup systems and an alarm is required for radiation monitors.for liquid effluents from component cooling water systems (or for service water systems in lieu of cc ponent cooling water systems).
The FSAR provides no information regardirg the aute atic con-t ' c :..:.. y ':;.;.,{,J...r...;,::n.,y)3.W.';@.7.q; 4.p. ;s,;:.:d y,.*. ;j';;;. ;;li_'ng a dd _a__n,.;ihkis 35'sEFib_..
.l:... g. -
trol features and equipment for samp.. K. ;:c y
_..-1~.v:
g._..
~
a ed
...ab,qve,
.Provi,,d,e, jnf,ornat, ion on this. equi.pment, or. provide
..a
... ~....
r
- m ; ~
justification for not providing the. equipment in accordance with Tables 1 and 2 of SRP 11.5 and with NUREG-0472.
Appendix 11.5-A of SRP 11.5 provides in Table 1, design and quality assurance criteria for radiological effluent monitors providing a signal for the actuation of a system used to reduce releases of radioactive materials.
Describe criteria employed, justifying any nonconformances with Appendix 11.5 t of SRP 11.5.
460.07 40P.EG 07 7.~ ;'riivi c.c. i n e.t c.;Tlicar ir le
- c rr. rc w t.
(NUREG-
- 0737, reduce leakane from systems outside containnent tha; would or Item 111.3.1.1) could contain highly radioactive fluids during a serious transient or accident to as~-low-as-practical levels.
It is also provided that applicants submit specified information on the proposed progran no later than four months prior to issuance of a fuel-loading license.
Provide this information or provide a connitnent to subnit it as required by NilREG-0737
.*h.e
3 DISTRIBUTION:
Docket File 50-424 Docket File 50-425 (w/o enc 1)
MAY 14 W METB Docket Files METB Reading File Docket Nos. 50-424/425 WPGammill MEMORANDUM FOR: Elinore G. Adensam, Chief Licensing Branch No. 4, DL FROM:
William P. Gammill, Chief Meteorology and Effluent Treatment Branch, DSI
SUBJECT:
METB OVESTIONS FOR V0GTLE, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2, FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 3
PLANT NAME: Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Unit Nos. I and 2 LICENSING STAGE:
OL DOCKET NUMBER (S): 50-424/425 RESPONSIBLE BRANCH: LBf4 PROJECT MANAGER:
M. Miller REQUESTED COMPLETION DATE:
April 15,1984 DESCRIPTION OF RESPONSE: Q We have reviewed Sections 6.5.1, 10.4.2, 10.4.3, 15.7.3 and Chapter 11 of the Vogtle FSAR, and find that we need additional information to complete our evaluation. A list of questions was provided on December 23, 1983 covering all of the above sections, but with only minor attention given to Section 11.4, wherein the FSAR refers to a topical report for detailed information. The topical report had not been reviewed at that time. The topical report has now been reviewed in sufficient detail to prepare the enclosed list of questions.
~
If there are questions concerning this information, please contact the review engineer, C. Nichols (x27634).
o:isi::a1 vienedWt vinia:3P M in.
,s.e William P. Gammill, Chief Meteorology and Effluent Treatment Branch Division of Systems Integration
Enclosure:
METB Questions i
cc:
R. Mattson i
D. Muller M. Miller C. Willis
[' M n r - i,C,.41chq _
~ vt vw l, y
.9.S.i.;.g.g.E.TB..p.S.i.:.y.fiM.eTB..p.Sp.RkMm
,,,y,Pp,a, m,i,,1,,,,
2Q,.,,,,.,,
H~~>.ca.ic.hols:g,,,,,CW j,1,,,j,s,,,,,
1 m
......./.. [/../. 84...... /../.Y../. 8 4 05 05
.. c,'02/,84 I cur) 05
- e. g....
- "3""'"
m ooou mo ns,noi Nacw ouo OFFnCIAL RECORD COPY
. mm ume..
~ i;;.
METB QUESTIONS FOR V0GTLE, UNIT NOS.1 AND 2 FINAL SAFETY ANALYSIS REPORT 460.08 Standard Review Plan (SRP) 11.4, " Solid Waste Processing Systems,"
(11.4) provides, as a specific criterion necessary to meet the relevant requirements of the Commission's regulations, that all wet wastes will be solidified or dewatered in accordance with a process i-control program or there will be-provisions to verify the absence of free liquid in each container and to reprocess containers in which excess water is detected in accordance with Branch Technical Position (BTP) ETSB 11-3.
10 CFR Part 20.311 requires
-that a licensee shall prepare all wastes so that the waste is classified according to Part 61.55'and meets the waste characteristics requirements in Part 61.56. An NRC letter to Commission Licenses, May 11, 1983, from Leo B. Higginbotham, Chief, Low-Level Waste Licensing Branch, Division of Waste Management, provides a waste classification technical position paper which describes overall procedures acceptable ^ to the NRC
~
staff which may be used by licensees to determine the presence and concentrations of radionuclides' listed in Pard 61.55. Also provided by the May-11, 1983 letter is a technical position paper on waste form which provides guidance to waste generators on test methods and results acceptable to the NRC staff for implementing the requirements of Part 61.56. The guidance in the above technical positions should be implemented through the qualification of the licensee's process control program.
-r I
.,-,.w.
..e
.w-,y A
y,_
.g.
,.n,.,,
,g
_.-,y,
,.,.,,c.,.m.
9
,,_,y g,
- In the FSAR, the process control program (PCP) is mentioned only in connection with controlling the quantity of dry product measured into the drum, as being available to ensure complete solidification of the dry product and to provide limits on the radiation levels of the dry product. Provide a statement and appropriate description of how all wet wastes will be solidified or dewatered in accordance with a process control program or how there will' be provisions to verify the absence of free liquid in each container and to reprocess containers in which excess water is detected in accordance with BTP ETSB 11-3.
Describe how the guidance in the technical positions on waste classification and on waste form, or characteristics, will be implemented through a process control program. Describe how the quality cf the polymer, catalyst and promoter used in solidification will be assured, considering possible degradation during storage prior to use.
~
~'
460.09 SRP 11.4, " Solid Waste Processing Systems," provides as a specific (11.4) criterion necessary to meet the relevant requirements of the Commission's regulations, that processing equipment is sized to handle the design solid waste system inputs.
The FSAR, Table 11.4.2-4, indicates that the estimated annual quantity of radwaste influent to the volume reduction
.. solidification system that is to be incinerated (spent secondary resins, dry waste, and condensate demineralizer powdex resins) is 22,098 ft. The FSAR also states that more detailed information about thh incinerator can be found in the referenced
" Topical Report Radioactive Waste Volume Reduction System Combined Incinerator / Dryer," Topical Report No. AECC-3-NP,,
December 1981. The report AECC-3-NP states that for a typical twin-unit PWR, the volume reduction system will operate 77% of the total available time, based on the maximum expected wastes from a twin-unit PWR. Table 5 indicates that, for the worst case, the total dry active wastes and spent resins that would be 3
generated from a twin-unit PWR are 19,740 ft /yr. This implies that if the volume reduction system were to be operated 100% of 3
the time, it would be able to ir.cinerate about 25,640 ft /yr of dry active wastes and spent resins.
It further implies that the volume reduction system must be operated approximately 86% of the time,. (as opposed to 77% of the, time) to incine, rate the dry active wastes and spent' resins to be generated afthe Vogtle Electric Generating Plant.
Describe how the 80 cu. ft. product holdup capacity from the volume reduction system provided by the product stora'ge hopper is sufficient considering nonnal and anticipated operating situations and BTP ETSB 11-3 position 111.1 for storage of wastes
~
prior to solidification.
- r.
Provide the design capacities of the liquid / slurry waste solidification system, dry products solidification system, filter handling system, and dry waste compactor and the percentage of the time that each must be operating to handle the expected annual inputs.
Provide information needed to provide assurance that processing equipment is sized to handle the design solid waste system inputs based on the above, considering further the time needed to inspect, maintain, repair and replace the processing equipment.
460,10 SRP 11.1, " Source Terms," provides, as a specific criterion (11.1, 11.3)-
necessary to meet the relevant requirements of the Commisson's regulations, that decontamination factors for inplant control measures to reduce gaseous effluent releases to the environment are consistent with those given in Regulatory Guide 1.140.
SRP 11.3, " Gaseous Waste Management Systems," provides that requirements of the Commission's,r.egulations are met by using
- o..
the regulatory positions contained in Regulatory Guide 1.140 as it relates to the design, testing and maintenance of normal ventilation exhaust systems.
FSAR Section 11.3.3.3 states that the potential ef fluent releases from the radwaste solidification building vent were determined using the decontamination factors for the system outlined in Section 11.4, which refers to Topical Report No. AECC-3-NP for more detailed information about the volume reduction system.
The iodine decontamination factor provided in the topical report is based on an iodine decontamination factor of 6700 for the gas filter / charcoal assembly of the volume reduction system. The particulate decontamination factor used in the topical report to calculate releases of radioactive particulates from the volume 6
reduction system is 1x10, which includes a factor for the gas filters (HEPAs).
Regulatory Guide 1.140 provides activated carbon (charcoal) decontamination ef ficiencies that should be assigned for radioiodine and HEPA decontamination efficiencies that should
~
be assigned for particulates for normal ventilation exhaust system filter units. The value assignabio for particulates is 99%, which o,
corresponds to a decontamination factor of 100. This value for particulates is for HEPA filter banks for which DOP penetration tests confirm a penetration of less than 0.05% at rated flow and which are demonstrated to be in compliance with the regulatory positions of Regulatory Guide 1.140.
r
--w
The largest value assignable for radioicdine is 99%
(decontamination factor of 100). This value for radiciodine is for an aggregate bed thickness of at least 6 inches of activated carbon with an average atmosphere residence time of at least 0.25 seconds per 2 inches of adsorbent bed, for a design where the relative humidity is controlled to 70% or less and for adsorbers which are demonstrated to be in compliance with the regulatory positions of Regulatory Guide 1.140.
Justify the use of the decontamination factors from Topical Report AECC-3-NP pertaining to the gas filter / charcoal assembly i
or justify and use decontamination factors based on Regulatory Guide 1.140. Provide a commitment to comply with the Regulatory Guide 1.140 regulatory positions in regard to the gas filter / charcoal assembly of the volume reduction system or
~
justify any noncompliance.
If decontamination factors other,than those provided by Topical Report No. AECC-3-NP for the gas filter / charcoal assembly are justified, provide revised estimated gaseous releases of radioactive materials to the environment from the volune reduction system.
Identify or clarify the point of release of gaseous effluents from the volune reduction system.
. 460.11 SRP 11.1, " Source Terms," in the specific criteria necessary to (11.1) meet the relevant requirements of the Commission's regulations, addresses decontamination factors for inplant control measures used to reduce effluent releases to the environment.
The FSAR, Section 11.3.3.3 states that the potential effluent releases from the radwaste solidification building vent were determined using the decontamination factors for the system outlined in Section 11.4, which refers to Topical Report No. AECC-3-NP for more detailed information about the volume reduction system.
Based on our preliminary evaluation of Topical Report No. AECC-3-NP, the use of the reported decontamination factors corresponding to the portions of the volume reduction system other than the gas filter / charcoal assembly may not be justified.
Justify the use of the above decontamination factors or justify the use rof alternative decontamination factors.,-
~.
,e o.
If decontamination factors other than those above provided by Topical Report No. AECC-3-NP are justified, provide revised estimated gaseous releases of radioactive materials to the environment from the volume reduction system.
460,12 SRP 11.4, " Solid Waste Processing Systems," provides under (11.4)
" Review Procedures" the following: if the solid waste system
,, contains any storage or makes use of flammable materials, a review should be conducted under Section 16.0 of the SRP.
The FSAR states that fire protection provisions for the flammable polymer are discussed in Subsection 9.5.1.
The FSAR states that for the dry product solidification system, which uses polymer as a binder, temperature rises are monitored (to ensure the exotherm associated with solidification takes place) and then the drum is transferred to the storage area.
Provide fire protection provisions specific to the receipt and storage of flammable materials used or processed in the radwaste solidification building (e.g., polymer materials, contaminated oil, dry wastes, spent resins) and specific to the, storage of waste solidified using the polymer.
Provide additional detail on the means for monitoring the go.lymer temperature rise and how
~.
.8r the temperature rise is limited or controlled.
460.13 SRP 11.2,11.3 and 11.4 provide, as a specific criterion necessary (11.2, 11.3, to meet the relevant req 0irements of the Commission's regulations, 11.4) that the regulatory positions of Regulatory Guide 1.143 be used as it relates to the seismic design and quality group classifica-tion of components used in the liquid, gaseous and solid waste
systems and structures housing these systems, and the providsions to control leakage. Regulatory 1.143 provides that the liquid, gaseous and solid radwaste systems be designed and tested to requirements set forth in codes and standards listed in Table 1 of the guide. Table 1 provides codes for the design and fabrication, materials, welder qualification and procedures, and inspection and testing for six categories of equipment in the radwaste systems.
The FSAR states that the Vogtle design conforms to Regulatory Guide 1.143 with the clarification that radioactive waste management systems, structures and components are classified in Table 3.2.2-1.
Provide further clarification to indicate that the Vogtle design is in accordance with Table 1 of Regulatory Guide 1.143 or indicate nonconformities and provide justifications 460.14 SRP 11.1, " Source Terms," provides as a specific criterion (11.1) necessary to meet the relevant requirements of the Commisson's o.
e 6.9
- regulations, that all of the specified normal and potential sources of radioactive effluent are. considered; liquids from equipment drains from buildings housing equipment and components that may contain radioactive fluids are specified.
The FSAR refers to Topical Report No. AECC-3-NP for more detailed information about the volume reduction system. The Topical E
~.
Report No. AECC-3-NP references Topical Report No. AECC-1-A,
" Fluid Bed Dryer," February 25, 1975. Topical Report AECC-1-A indicates that, in tests of the fluid bed dryer (of the volume reduction system), about 50% of the I-131 feed over a 45 hour5.208333e-4 days <br />0.0125 hours <br />7.440476e-5 weeks <br />1.71225e-5 months <br /> period was removed through the condensate.
FSAR Figure 11.4.2-1 indicates that condensate and other liquids from the volume reduction system are sent to the equipment drain sump of the solidification building. FSAR Figure 11.2.1-1 indicates that liquids from the solidification building equipment drain tank are collected in the waste holdup tank and processed by the liquid waste management system. The FSAR states that more detailed information about the volume reduction system is given in Topical Report No. AECC-3-NP. The Topical Report indicates that 60 lb/hr of water is produced as condensate by the volume reduction system. FSAR Table 11.2.1-1 indicates the parameters used in calculating the estimated activity in liquid wastes.
In Table 11.2.1-1 the expected iiput rate to the,maste holdup tank from equipment drains is 156 gal / day (about 50 lb/hr). FSAR Table 11.1-8 indicates the parameters used in calculating the estimated release of radioactive materials in liquid effluents.
In Table 11.1-8, the equipment drains flow rate is 300 gal / day (about 100 lb/hr). The FSAR provides no information other than the above concerning the processing of condensate from the volume l
i
, reduction system by the liquid waste management system.
It is not clear, based on the above, that the effects have been considered of processing the condensate from the volume reduction system and the radiciodine it contains. The effects should be considered in calculating the estimated activity in liquid wastes and in calculating the estimated release of radioactive materials in liquid efluents.
FSAR Table 11.1-8 indicates that the decontamination f actor used 5
for processing equipment drains is 10, for calculation of liquid ef fluents from the liquid waste management system. FSAR Figure 11.2.2-1 indicates that the decontamination is removed by the waste evaporator and the waste evaporator condensate demineralizer. FSAR Table 11.4.2-4 indicates that radwaste from these sources is processed in the volume reduction system. Thus,
~
the effects of processing the condensate from the volume reduction system and the radiciodine it contains should be considered in calculating inputs to the volume reduction system:
It then follows that the effects on outputs from the volume reduction system should be considered (e.g., condensate and gaseous ef fluents).
It appears 'that, if not already considered, the potential effects of processing the condensate and its radioiodine (approximately 50% of the feed to the volume reduction system)
-w g
- 3, i.
4.
are threefold: (1) to more than double the calculated radiciodine activity in liquid waste from equipment drains and in radwaste transferred to the volune reduction system from processing these liquid wastes; (2) to more than double the calculated release of radiciodines in liquid ef fluents from processing equipment drains; and (3) to douole the calculated releases of radioiodines in gaseous effluents from processing correspopding radwaste in the volume reduction system.
Clarify that the above effects have been considered and describe how thay have been considered, or provide a description of the effects on the radwaste management systems and provide revised estimates of activity in the radwaste management systems and revised estimated releases of radioactive materials to the env i ronment.
l
~
9
~
~
- I*19 e
o e
..