ML20147E499
| ML20147E499 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Rancho Seco |
| Issue date: | 02/29/1988 |
| From: | SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20147E485 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8803070082 | |
| Download: ML20147E499 (27) | |
Text
v,.
f',_ ; _ '
/
4 a:
g>
W,
[$$
'I?'
3
[, ;
4 1
"METHODOLOGY FOR THE - REVISED CONTROL ROOM X/Q DETERMINATION:
' i,.
FOR RANCHO SECO NUCLEAR STATION s
i l
February, 1988 I
l I
~8803070'082 880225 IE-PDR. ADOCK;05000312 P~ '
- DCD 1;
)
m _.
~
s s.
d TABLE'OF CONTENT Page
41.0 BACKGROUND
1-2 '. 0 ~
BASIS FOR THE REVISED X/O MODEL 1
i 2.1 - Applicability.of the Murphy-Campe Model 1
-2.2 Site Specific Data in Lieu of-Murphy-Campe K. Coefficient 4
2.3 Representativeness of the Rancho Seco Tracer Study Data 4'
i 3.0 T!fE REVISEDLCONTROL ROOM X/O 2.
6 3.1: Determination of the Site Specific K/A Value 6
3.2 Deduction of the Accident Meteorology 7
5
- 3. 3-The' Control Room X/Q' Values 8
-9'
4.0 REFERENCES
P s
P rw me e,
---v..
,-,,-.-..,w-e
,- -.,-ym..
mra
+
w e
D l'
l.0 BACKGROUND As a result of the TMI accident the Nuclear Regulatory Commission-(NRC), in NUREG-0737 Section III.D.3.4, asked all nuclear power plants to review their post-LOCA control room habitability designs using the guidance of Standard Review Plan 6.4 and the 1974 Murphy-Campe paper (Ref. 1).
During their review of the Rancho Seco restart, the NRC has expressed reservations concerning the methodology used in the existing USAR control room dose analysis, especially the application of a dispersion (X/Q) model which is different from the current NRC recommended working model, the. Murphy-Campe model.
In response to the NRC review comments, the appropriateness of the USAR control room X/Q model has been re-evaluated.
This re-evaluation has shown that the model result, the site specific normalized concentration XU/Q (i.e., K/A), can be improved by using the Rancho Seco tracer study data collected by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in 1975 (Ref. 2).
The Rancho Seco tracer study, which was jointly sponsored by the USNRC and by the NOAA, was designed to (1) investigate the diffusion characteristics of the atmosphere experienced during periods with low windspeeds and temperature inversions, i.e.,
stable atmospheric stability conditions and (2) evaluate the effects of flow around buildings on dilution of the effluent release.
The following describes the basis and the determination of the revised Rancho Seco control room X/Q value.
2.0 BASIS FOR THE REVISED X/O MODEL 2.1 Applicability of the Murphy-Campe Model The 1974 Murphy and Campe (M-C) control room X/Q model for activity leaking from many points on the surface of the containment in conjunction with a single point receptor is described below (Ref. 1):
r
~
~
-l U (noycrz+
A)
X/O =
K+2 (1) where:
K=
3
= nondimensional concentration (s/d)l 4 coefficient s = distance between containment surface and receptor location (m) d = diameter of containment (m) 2 A = projected area of containment building (m )
r U = wind speed at an elevation of 10 meters (m/sec)
, L e
.-m_
Equation (1) has the correct properties to predict dispersion from a point source leak at any location in the cavity.
It predicts X/O = oc at the leak, and transfers control of diffusion from wake turbulence to atmospheric turbulence
. gradually with distance downwind, generally starting at a distance of ten building heights downwind.
At that downwind-distance, as K -> C, the wake turbulence
-t 0.5A, i.e.,
wake turbulence credit is limited to no more than 0.5A.
The K expression of the M-C model was deduced from early wind tunnel data (Halitsky et al.,
1963) (Ref. 3) on a model of the EBR-II rounded containment building of diameter "d".
- However, the measurement produced for "s" is somewhat unspecified.
Also, the wind tunnel data on which the M-C "K"
expression is based were obtained over a fairly narrow range 0.5 4 s/d 4 3.
The use of K+2 within this range gives an overly conservative estimate of the X/Q value.
In Halitsky's EBR-II model tests, the mean wind velocity, U, of the approaching flow was measured at an elevation of 0.77d above the top of the containment dome.
Therefore, the value of U to be used in conjunction with the K data of the EBR-II model tests should be the wind speed at an equivalent height of the tests.
This correction does not appear to be accounted for in the M-C model.
Near the ground surface, wind takes a logarithmic profile due to surface roughness.
Under stable atmospheric conditions, wind at 50 meter level can be twice as high as wind speeds at the 10 meter level.
Consequently, using wind speed at 10 meter level in the M-C model will give j
a X/0 value twice as high as Halitsky's X/O value, i
The determination of accident X/O values involves using the five percentile X/0 for the first time interval in the calculation (normally 0 to 8 hours9.259259e-5 days <br />0.00222 hours <br />1.322751e-5 weeks <br />3.044e-6 months <br /> after accident occurrence).
For subsequent time intervals, the X/Q is reduced to account 1
for long term variations in meteorological conditions.
j Reduction factors, which account for the effects of changes in wind speed and direction over progressively longer periods of time, are given in Table 1.
l When determining wind speed from site meteorological data, i
only the wind direction sectors that result in receptor exposure are used.
Figure 1 defines the number of 22.5 degree 2
sectors that are considered in obtaining the short term and long term wind speeds.
The s/d ratio in the figure is the distance from the building surface to the receptor divided by the diameter or width of the building normal to the direction of the wind.
t
r Figure 1 also is used to determine the fraction of time the wind is blowing from the sectors in question.
The average wind direction frequency F is obtained by summing the annual average wind direction frequency of the sectors in question.
Table 1 is then used to evaluate the appropriate wind direction factors.
The applicability of the M-C model to the Rancho Seco Nuclear Station X/Q determination is discussed below:
Based on the plant arrangement as shown in Figure 2, the Control Room and TSC are within the auxiliary building and it is within one building height (downwind) fo the containment building.
In this region, wake turbulence dominations, i.e.,
atmospheric turbulence is negligible.
Therefore, the use of K+2 in this obvious wake region is an ultra conservative approach.
In this revised control room X/Q calculation, the value of K instead of K+2 was used.
This approach is the same as that which appears in the USAR control room dose analysis.
As discussed in the M-C model, the K expression was deduced from early wind tunnel data on a model of EBR-II over a fairly narrow data range, 0.5 <s/d <3.
Since the Rancho Seco s/d =
0.09 ratio is less than 0.5 and lies outside the data range of the M-C model, extrapolation of data increases the uncertainty of the model result.
Consequently, the site specific K value in this calculation was deduced from the Rancho Seco tracer study data with releases having similar source configuration and receptor location as those analyzed in this calculation.
Following a hypothetical LOCA, the possible release pathway (s) of the radioactivity (discussed in the USAR control room dose ana.1.ysis) are located at the bottom of the containment base and the roof of the auxiliary building.
Without leak tests in the field to verify the pathway (s), an uniform leaking containment assumption is used by the NRC.
The use of wind speeds measured at 10 meter level to represent the average dispersion wind speed within the building wake, which is associated with the tallest structure onsite (the containment vessel building 43 m high), is a reasonable but conservative model assumption.
In the M-C model, the assumption that the wind direction is constant for the first 8 consecutive hours following a LOCA is unrealistic due to the inherent variability of wind direction under low wind conditions.
However, to be conservative, the M-C methodology for estimating the X/Q values for the longer time periods, i.e.,
0-8, 9-24, 24-96 and 96-720 hours is followed without modification in this calculation.
y t --
0 2.2 Site-Specific Data in Lieu of Murphy-Campe K Coefficient K,-the nondimensional concentration coefficient, is a function of nondimensional space coordinates X/L, Y/L, and. Z/L, building configuration, wind direction, and source configuration.
The K
field for a
given building configuration, source configuration, and wind direction is considered to be invariant.
Accordingly, the. K value determined by wind tunnel tests with a model structure are expected to be the same as those that would be obtained with a geometrically similar building in the full-scale atmosphere using the same wind direction, with a similar leak.
In 1983, the Grand Gulf Nuclear Station revised its control room X/Q analysis using K/A values deduced from a site specific wind tunnel test.
The reason for revising the control room X/Q analysis was that the K expression of the M-C model, based on data from a circular dome reactor building, was inappropriate for making the Grand Gulf control room X/Q estimates associated with its block-like containment enclosure building.
In addition, the Grand Gulf control room emergency nir intake was located at the mid-point of an U-shape bui; ding arrangement between two containment enclosure buildings which is decidedly different from the building arrangement of the EBR-II building complex (see figures 3 and 4).
The NRC acccpted the practice of using site specific data An lieu of che M-C model K coefficient.
Consequently the K/A values deduced from the Grand Gulf wind tunnel test were used in the current Grand Gulf control room dose analysis.
Tabla 2 summaries the results of the Grand Gulf control room X/Q calculation based en the M-C model K expression and the site specific wind tunnel data.
As shown from the table, the use of M-C model K expression predicts maximum X/Q values 10 times highet than the maximum X/Q values determined by using the site specific wind tunnel data.
2.3 Representativeness of the Rancho Seco Tracer Study Data A series of 23 gaseous tracer releases at the Rancho Seco Nuclear Power Station in 1975 (Ref. 2) was designed to (i) study atmospheric diffusion under a variety of thermal lapse rates and (ii) evaluate the effects of flow around building upon dilution of effluent releases.
The representativeness of the Rancho Seco tracer study for determining the site specific K/A values for the revised control room X/Q analysis is discussed below:
2.3.1 Release and Receptor Locations There were four release points.on or._near.the surface of.the containment vessel and three. samplers (No. 401, 402, and 403) located on top ~of the
' auxiliary building as shown in Figure 5.
. Release
-position:C.is located:at the top center ~of the reactor containment vessel, 43 m above the plant grade.
Release position A-is on the auxiliary building roof, 16.5 m above plant grade.
The-release-was~made frcm the roof on the south side of the containment vessel at the juncture of the roof and containment structure.
There were two ground level releases near the base of the containment vessel.
The first, G5, was against the southeast face of the containment vessel in the niche formed by the connection of the containment vessel and the auxiliary building.
The second location, G17, was on the northwest side of the containment vessel complex as shown in Figure 5.
These release.
locations closely approximate the expected release pathway (s) of the radiological effluent following a LOCA as described in the USAR LOCA control. room dose analysis.
One of the existing Rancho Seco control room emergency air intakes is located 12 feet away.
from the south face of the containment vessel on the roof of the auxiliary building.
The. location of sampler No. 402 was located in approximately the same location as this existing control room emergency air intake.
Based on the source and receptor arrangement of the tracer study as described above, the normal 3 zed concentrations, XU/Q, i.e.,
K/A, measured I
at theu, samplers provided good approximations of the LOCA control room X/Q at the existing emergency air intake.
2.3.2 Meteorological Conditions of the Tracer Tests s
Twenty-three tests were conducted in the series.
The' tests, conducted under each NRC stability class with the exception of unstable classed B and C, are listed by number in Table 3.
Table 4 is a wind data summary for the test series.
Winds are averaged for the duration of each test (approximately 1 hour1.157407e-5 days <br />2.777778e-4 hours <br />1.653439e-6 weeks <br />3.805e-7 months <br />).
As indicated in Tables 3, 4,
and 17 tests were conducted during stable atmospheric conditions with wind speeds equal to or less than 3.0 m/sec except for one case.
Since effluent concentrations often peak under low windspeed/ temperature inversion i
l conditions, these test results provided a suitable data base for the determination of the Rancho Seco site specific K/A values.
j l i i
3.0 THE REVISED CONTROL ROOM 'X/O 3.1 Determination of the Site Specific K/A Value As discussed in Section 2.1, the dispersion equation for a ground level release within a building wake region is given by:
U (neyez + 3)
-l K
(2)
X/Q
=
~
When.the receptor is among building complex and is located close to the-release, dilution will mainly be provided by the mechanical turbulence.
The dilution contributed by the atmospheric turbulence will be negligible.
Hence, the dispersion model becomes the following:
X/Q =
K AU and the normalized' concentration with respect to wind speed can be written as below:
XU/O = E.
A In the Rancho Seco tracer study, concentrations were measured at the samplers en the roof of the auxiliary building.
Normalized concentrations, XU/O (i.e., E. ) at samplers A
No. 401, 402, and 403 for each test case are tabulated ir.
Table 5.
In general, sampler 401 measured higher concentra':Lons than samplers 402 and 403.
As described in Section 2.3, the existing emergency air intake is positioned in approximately the same location as sampler 402.
Since predicting the precise concentration distribution on the roof of auxiliary building is not possible, the concentration at the existing air intake was approximated by the average concentration of the three sampler measurements.
This approach is conservative for it produces an average concentration which is higher than the concentration measured at sampler 402 alone.
The maximum average concentration due to each type of release was also identified in Table 5.
The site specific K/A value for the revised Rancho Seco control room dose analysis as presented in Table 6 was determined by averaging the maximum average concentration of each release type.
Note that the maximum average concentration of each release type did not occur simultaneously, i.e.,
under the same meteorological conditions.
Therefore, the approach used in obtaining the site specific K/A value is ultra conservative.
o 3.2 Deduction of the Accident Meteorology 3.2.1 Wind Direction Sectors Considered When determining wind speed from site meteorological data, only the wind direction sectors that result in receptor exposure are used.
Figure 1, originally part of the Murphy-Campe model, was used to define the number of 22.5 degree sectors that were
~
considered in obtaining the short term and long term wind speeds.
Figure 1 also was used to determine the fraction of time and wind wau blowing from the sectors in question.
The average wind direction frequency F was obtained by summing the annual average wind direction frequency of the sectors in question.
Based on the Rancho Seco s/d ratio, the number of wind sector indicated from Figure 1 that needs to be considered was 10.
In this calculation, wind directions used to conservatively determine the-accident meteorology included ESE, E, ENE, NE, NNE, I
N, NNW, NW, WNW, W and WSW - a total of 11 sectors.
3.2.2 Determination of Wind Speed / Wind Direction Factors The 5, 10, 20 and 40 percentile wind speeds for the Rancho Seco site as presented in Table 7 was deduced from the meteorological data collected at the 10 meter level of the onsite meteorological tower during 1985, through 1987.
The cumulative vind speed distribution is displayed graphically in Figure 5.
The annual average wind direction frequency of the 11 sectors considered is 62%.
q t
3.3 The 30-days Control Room X/Q Values The five percentile X/Q was used for the first time interval in the calculation, i.e.,
0-8 hours.
For subsequent time intervals, the X/O value was reduced to account for long term variations in meteo-rological conditions.
Following the time averaging methodology of the Murphy-Campe model, the 30-day Rancho seco control room X/Q values as presented in Table 8 were determined using the accident meteo-rology developed in Section 3.2.
For comparison purposes, the current USAR control room X/Q values are also presented in Table 8.
As shown in this table, the revised control room X/O values are higher in all averaging periods.
Due to the application of the site specific representative tracer study data in determining the Rancho Saco normalized concentration at the emergency air intake, the revised control X/O values are considered to be more representative / realistic dispersion factors for use in the Rancho Seco control room dose analysis.
{-s Ti-t
/
'4
. y,
)
4.0 REFERENCES
1.
Murphy,1K. G.,(Campe, K. M., (1974) :
"Nuclear Power Plant Control Room Ventilation System Design for Meeting General Criterion 19",
13th AEC' Air Cleaning Conference.
2.
E.
G.
Start, J.
H. Cate, C.
R. Dickson, !!. R.
Ricks, G.
R. Ackermann, J.
F.
Sagendorf, (1977):
"Rancho Seco Building Wake Effects on Atmospheric Diffusion", NOAA' Tech. Memo ERL-ARL-69.
s 1,3.
'Halitsky, J.,
- Golden, J.,
- Halpern, P.,
(1963):
"Wind.
' Tunnel Tests of Gas Diffusion From a Leak in the Shell of a Nuclear Powerr Reactor and From a Nearby - Stack", New York / niversity, Department of Met, & Ocean, GSL Rep. 63-U 2 under USWB Contract Cwb-10321.
te i
i 1
/
J
(
t-r l
9
! ~
Y
/
9
/
7 i
q
ul: Mf-.:
i
.33 -
l}f.
f, N:
s i
a
!q:.:; n. ;ly; ;,u,3
a h i 5
'(
, %, g:y.,-
y S a,a -
l.. kf'_ MG
?? ' lj
- e-a
- g. e ;
- ' s Wi
?( 'I t
- i y'
{
7\\ *.(
,)yQ
- (j
. g;., ~
- k. 3
., g-3 y., y...., ; jy
- s r.
p s
.y g, 77, - o.
[
3)
-s -
7 V _..
s m
- y(lJ.
s' i
't
- .s
- t
%ljp.. TABLE'l REDUCTION FACTORS
.r.
e' v
)-
-l..
(
'4 s
1
,1 4
N c,i
-'s gr acci' den't
/ k o,gs-Factor' Percentili!
p' d Time ~after X
Wind Direction
.' Wind Speed F
.g
. 0 '- P hik / ' '
((.1
- i., ' I J 5
7
~#
i i
4 4s s
'O.- 24ihrs b,o t 0.7(,M,FI4 10<
,w,
.1 - 4: days-
...[
.i.
h~
i w
L 0.509+-Q2 20.
1L r
s, 1
'(
6 n
4 ---30 da/s.i 5
~F 1
'/'
( ' %. c '
40.
. 1 1' Y-i r
i.
1
\\.
s g,
- w L{
.j Jw,.
there F defines as the fraction ofItime the' wind is blowing activity toward.the receptor.
L W
,b 1
3 6
k e
l l
t f
t s.:
Nc
(Qf &;{- W..G#$n hMM9 -
~'
hs t
'%y y~
rg a5. N;!-
4
- 1y
^
.c
,., t <
NNY;W,
~ ' ' '
i
.,;c.y,
4-
+-
c
- c 9;
- 3 t
9, GRAND _ GULF-CONTROL ROOM X/Q' TABLE'2. :
p
. +,
...?W y8 % %
j.'
&^<-A - ~, vk;..f'
hay
,, y~. % ;-
-1..
l yT 7
't-
',.111.'.
t a <
~
. n'; -
- J rcident Analysis (Wind Tunnel Data)
TimecAfter NRC GG.X/Q.
- E h
/
(sec/m3)-
(sec/m3) 0
.'8 hrs 3.2 x 10 3.29 x 10 4 I ".
I.
0-24rs-1.9 x 10-3
'1.'96'x 10-4' h
T-1-4' days 1.1 x 10-3 1.08.x 10-4'
_ i, 4 - 3.0, d a y s -
5.0 x 10-4 6.98 x 10-6 y ty. ;^
^% -
i
.7%.-p.(;
4 a
t E
i,.,.
.(
"4 4l,
.i y
_,T g '
r y,
3
.r b'.
T(
M l
\\
(
h k
0
- Q L
- s. :
(
4 a
. t,. ~
- t/m r
l
. t s,. '
f
.q~
i u.
e
. 3
.s
~
Table 3 List of Rancho Seco Tests by NRC Stability Class Stability Number
, Test Class Occurring Number (s) y...
~
A 2
1,7 i~
D 4
6,9,15,22 E
5 N
11,12,13,16,19 F
3 10,18,23 G
^ ~
9 2,3,4,5,8,14,17,20,21 b
6 e
....r
'.e
, ~.
,e
g,
.; in r
,,L c-l-
l i.'
TABLE 4
- RanchoLSeco-Summary of-Winds 10 m Height Test Dir Stab
.U l
.1.
-296.1 A-1.0 2
161.4 G
1.8 3
100.3 G
1.7-4 26.4 G
2.3 5
57.8 G-1.7 6
226.3 D-3.1 7
322.1
- A 5.1 8
109.8 G
2.5 9
239.2 D
1.7 10
~
.11 320.0
'E 4.8 12 345.2 E
- 1. 7 -
13 255.8 E
0.8 14 121.1 G
2.3 15 356.5 D
1.3 16 206.5 E
0.8 17 51.7 G
3.0 18 148.9 F
0.4 19 239.4 E
'1.3 20 21 259.9 G
2.9 22 23
l TABLE 5 TRACER STUDY TEST RESULTS 1
i IAurHary Budding Release t
l l
Test i Wlnd Wind 5 peed 5tatwitty Normalized Corwentrations No. I Olrection (m/sec)
Cass 401 6 402 l 4C3 Averase il 296 1
A 1.Jei.C6i 6.411-05i 4.Jst 05 4.44 tU 61 226 5.08 D
1.55E 02t 9.20E 04l _2.87E 04 5.70E 03 Maximm 76 322 51 A
9.07E 0313 54.E 031 5.89E-06 4.21E 03 loi 999 4.9 t
1.83E L 1.30E 031 1.67E 03 1.60E 03 114 320 4.8 E
7.6.tE.03i 2.99E 03l 219E 03 4.2TE 03 12, 345 1.7 E
4.64 E-031 125E-03: 5.21E 04 2.15E 03 131 25.6 0.8 E
8 26! 04l l 1.93 E.05 4.23 E-04 15e 357 1.3 0
1.43E-0316.99E 04:
1.06E 03 Average 5.15 E 034 1.55 E 036 6 45t 04 2.46E 5T Maximum 1.5sf 02) 3.54E 03 2.19E 03 _ 7.21E 03:
Minimum 1.3sE 06i 4.81E 05: 5.89E.06 3.16E 05 1
i i
e I
containment swimg Releases t
I i
Test Wind i Wind 5 peed I 5:abtilty Normailzed Concerstracons f
No.
Direction )
(m/ sect i Class 401 l 402 l 403 Average i
li J21 0.7 A
3.7 pi 06: 1.52t 06i 5.16t 6 4!
29 1.8 G
8.071041 1.41E451 1.23E 05 2.78E 04j I, Maximum i
Average -
4.04t 04 1.51E-06: 1.231 05 1.43t 04 ;
6 Maximum 8.07t 04 1.41E 05i 1.23t 05 2.75t 04 t
Minimum 8 75E-06 1.52[ 06i 1.23[.05 7.54E 06 j
\\
i i.
I I
IGround 5 Releasas 1
Test wind Wind 5 peed 5tability Normanzed Concentra Jons No.
Direction (m/sec)
Class 401 1 402 1 403 Awrage di 38 1J G
6.45t 04 6.65 t.05 L 4.55 t44 3.97E-E 3i 71 0.9 G
4.54E 0411.48E 041 J.51E-04 6.51 E-04 !
Si 71 0.9 G
2.17E 03 8.23E 04 4.2EE 04 1.14E 03 1.01E 04 1.01 E-04 8!
999 0.9 G^
1.02E 04 1.02E 04 Si 240 1.5 D
to.
999 2.9 F
7.25E 04 7.25E 04 3.01E 04 3.01E 04 1 21 349 1.5 g
u 13!
243 0.8 E
1.65E 03 i
1.60E 04 6.17E-04 14i 109 0.9 G
4J1E-05l 3.26E-05 1.03E-05 2.87t M 15!
357 1.3 D
1.43E 03 6.99E 04 1.06t 03 15) 339 0.8 D
1.59E 03 2.52E-04 9.36 E-04 1 71 50 2
G 5.04E 04 2.60E 04 1.23t 04 2.96E 04 19 239 1.1 E
6.58E 04 8.22E 057N 21 262 2.2 G
1.60 E-04 2.47E-06 3.29E 05 6.51E 05 Maximum 22 999 1.5 D
1.51E 03 154E 03 8.72E44 1.31EE <
23 329 0.8 f
o 4.63E 04 3.58E 04 - 4.13 54 Anrage 5.46t.04 4.49t 04 3.081 04 5.6Et 04 Maximum 2.17E 03 1.54E 03 8.72E 04 1.53E 03 Mirumum 4.31E 05 2.47E 06 1.03E 05 1.86E 05 l
l-i As 1
^
I
}
TABLE'S TRACER STUDY TEST R'ESULTS
( Continued )
- Ground 17 Rodasses i
i l
l Iest Wind Wmd 3peva 15tathirty Normalized Concentrations No.
Direction (m/sec) cans 401 402 403 Average o
16! 227 1
1 2.56t 03 5.81E-04 _1.371 03 1.5030I (
17l 50 2
G 2.78E.05l 1.00fd 2.472 05 1.78E.35 156 251 0.7 r
1.99t-03 1.37[.04 1.11E 03 1.08 t.03 19 239 1.1 E
3.04t 04 3.47 E.04 1.46l.04 2.66E.34 21i 262 2J G
1.92E 05 1.79E 06 2.09E.06 7.69 E.06 22!
999 1.9 D
1.38E-04 6.49g.03 3.37 t-05 7.59E45.
231 329 0.5 F
6.09E 05 3.65t.05 4.87I.05 Average 5.40E 041 1.71[.04 3.591 04 4.66t.04 Maximum 2.562 03i 5.61E-04 1.371 03 1.50E-03:
l M!n! mum 1.92E 0511.00E 06! 2.09E 06 T.43E66l l
l l
I s
i l
n --
- ~
s
u s
P x.
fr.
-s TABLE 6
. SITE SPECIFIC K/A'VALUE Release Location:
Maximum XU/Q* (m-2)
- Aux' Bldg roof
~5.7 x 10' -
Top of containment.
2.78 x 10 -4
~
Ground level G5 1.31 x 10 -3
= Ground level G17 1.50 x 10 ~ Average maximum XU/Q (i.e., K/A) 2.2 x.:UD -3 Notet
- All maximum XU/Q did not occur simultaneously.
f
.j*
i TABLE 7 RANCl!O SECO ACCIDENT METEOROLOGY Time Win-aed Wind after at Direction accident 10 m level factor (m/sec)
(percentile) 0 - 8 hrs 0.61 5
1 8 - 24 hrs 0.78 10 0.905 1 - 4 days 1.25 20 0.81 4 - 30 days 2.33 40 0.62 Notes (1) Data collected at the onsite meteorological tower during 1985 through 1987.
b r,
.6.
L t-1 l.
-TABLE'8 RANCHO SECO' X/Q.
Time After'
.USAR Revised X/Q Accident ~
X/O
-Based on Tracer Data
. sec/m'3)
(sec/m3)
(
0-'8 hrs 1.63'x 10 3 3.61 x 10-3.
i 8-24 hrs 1.63 x 10-3.
2.55 x 10-3 1-4 days
'3.75 x 10-4 1.43 x 10 3.
4-30 days 3.75 x 10-4 5.85 x 10-4
?
?
e l
5 i
t h
h
.____-.-..____I
m-3 1s -
14 12 Sn
[ 10 8r.
s W
=
I}
s i
li m
s 4
f f
I e
1 2
3 s/d Ratio
~
Figure 1 Number of Wind Direction Sectors to be Used in Determining Wind Direction Frequency and Wind Speed'
[
f.h ij rnwuc t II k.,.
EMPEQYEd'S
- ** * * *'#* h%l AOpg n
PARK /HG *
' "~* %
'ot o s..
7i, p
me gay,g
's ARGA
. exuosues.--
.e use e x2. '
l l
i State 6 esI6-E6W
~~
~=~
,7gg T
c' r
+
p l
ia veru l
mrs-.
s,g.;;
,'[>,._l"
..J i
,i l'
'.. ' J..
rr i
u
. _ u-m s,
. Y 7
w
,. s t
>& _q'k,.4'K 1) l,rs...
l' c_
~,!a['.. M.~,'
A iGI Nhk'N'% ! 7, 1
e
' Gc Ll'I'
/,//- /
u kg, u
, WP*
masts;;
ma
/ 4 t _L
'Q' cu Ft sN-.[r ao
. 1
- G
'//
\\ y,i I
\\\\ use diUf"-
\\
~
} h-
/ '2 /
t
/s
%ba i
s e
,\\*
- y=
OZ.,.
a l
I
.f
)
U CT!?" O j
, i f,-.p,f I
4 1'.'. m @
<* c. 3 c -
3-N
,s y
. ar.ua eme f}'-.
.. :........,.)
h
,, W ' /. r[ + g hk u-i'2 s/m-msuDc M T
.\\
//
I
>\\
ll s
,./ -
h:a, 78, p
Y
' k/..,
// -
..~
. \\.. -
///,
//_ _,
. _.. ~.. '
)
woowd M'r'
'gh'.
.,gsun om,o,, c.
- s ta 1
FIGURE 2 Rancho Seco Site Plot Plan a
n
~
=
e e
4 9
e d
N 2
a*
j 5?
M W-(&.
i N%
\\.;-
e 4
s
-l 4----.--
g 2
=
E Q.
w l
M W
o 8
C u
O l
E
\\
I i
O l
[
l
[
m.
t-e e-1 4
s
~
j.
a CIRC. WATER
. PUMP HOUSE l
i 1-l ' TUR8tNE BL'DG. UNIT 1 TUR81NE BLDG. UNIT 2 l
RADWASE 8LDG.
L UNIT 2 UNIT 1 y.
,1 CONTROL BUILDING ENCLCSURE N
ENCLOSURE B LDG.
8LDO.
AUX 1LIAaY AUXILIARY B LD'3.
BLDG.
DIESEL DIESEL GENERATOR GENERATOR BLDG.
BLDG.
l k
FIGURE 4 GRAND GULF PLANT LAYOUT e
e6 -
{
f
~$
)
N
&'k b C.
Q
.A
\\
s
\\p.
Njg I
FIGURE 5 Source Location l
i 1
s
"N"'~=~,,,
r-3 so f]d E
l W-3 2
]
hy2 I
11 gaa ii di ma is l
s
\\l I
\\i i
K I
l 4
l\\
l l\\
i
\\
\\!
l x
l
\\
l 5
5 l
NI l\\
l l
g g
'f N
\\
l f
I N
\\
i y
N
.\\
l s
3 3
N_
h, I
l N
i x
o I
\\\\
l N=
1 0
e a
e.
e e.
030333X3 033ds ONIM 3111N3383d I
g
(
i ATTACHMENT 3 Dose Consequences i
I l
l l
\\
l
_.