ML20154F824
| ML20154F824 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 08/16/1988 |
| From: | Schiefer E, Sieglef R GENERAL PUBLIC UTILITIES CORP. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20154F802 | List: |
| References | |
| 3230-008, 3230-8, NUDOCS 8809200143 | |
| Download: ML20154F824 (24) | |
Text
~
l Nu; lear TER 3230 008 asy 8 September 1988 ISSUE DATE C 178 D NGR O NITS DIVISION TECHNICAL EVALUATION REPORT FOR INTERIli 50i.!D WASTE STAGIf;G FACIIITY S.*(#'
b i
COG ENG E
w DATE DATE Bb SB RTR M ff COG ENG MGR.
A D TE I
6 eso92co343 goo 933
[
$DR ADOCK 05000320 PNV l
DOCUMENT PAGE 1
OF 24 i
No,
~
.(Uti38r 3230-008 Title Pa ge 2 of 24 INTFRIM SOLID WASTE STAGING FACILITY TECHflICAL EVALUATION REPORT Rev.
SUMMARY
OF CHANGE Approval Da te
- ^'
O No History Available.
g?' n 1
No History Available.
2 No History Available.
Ale#
3 Reissue per GPU Nuclear letter 4410-82-L-0009.
.. #, '.s
1/82 4
Reissue per GPU Nuclear letter 4410-03-L-0020.
,-rf '. a r ' '
7/83 5
Revise and reissued per ECA 3184-8L 0030.
.;f * 'M 6
Revised and reissued incorporating comments on Revision 5 d
5/85 7
Revised and reissued to include transuranics in the waste
>, I ' '
6/86 jrgpv 9/88 8
Revised Sections 1.1, 2.1, 2.2.4, and added new Section 2.2.4.6 to clarify that t.he ISWSF consists o f the building and yard area. Revised Sections 1.1,1.3a, 2.1, 2.4.1, 2.4.2, 5.1, and 5.2 to indicate that the ISWSF area may be utilized for temporary storage of radioactive material under certain conditions.
Revised 2.2.4.5 to clarify that the Personnel Monitoring / Analysis Area nay contain equipment for persont, morttoring or may be used for swipe sample analysis,
?.evisei Section 3.2.1.1 to delete d.istance references since distances may vary depending on whether radioactive material is located in the yard area.
Revised Sections 2.2.4.1, 2.2.4.2, 2.2.4.4, 2.4.1, and 2.4.2 to reflect current ISWSF operations / conditions.
R 0
7 E.
2 R
s b
Y.
~
3230-008 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page
1.0 INTRODUCTION
4.0 1.2 Organization of Report 4.0 1.3 Conclusion 4.0 2.0 FACILI1Y DESCRIPTION 5.0 2.1 Purpose of the Facility 5.0 2.2 Summary Description 5.0 2.3 Major Systems 7.0 l
2.4 Material Handling Operations 7.0 t
3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
10.0 3.1 Licensing Issues 10.0 3.2 Dose Assessment 10.0 3.3 Occupational Exposures 15.0 4.0 COMPARISON WITH PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT 19.0 STATEMENT (PEIS) 5.0 SAFETY EVALUATION 21.0 5.1 Technical Speelfications 21.0 5.2 Unreviewed Safety Question 21.0 3.0 Rev. 8/0091P
r 3230-008
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 General The cleanup effort at Three Mlle Island Unit 2 is expected to result in the-generation of-a significant quantity of low level-(Note 1) solid or solidified radioactive waste.
In addition, low i
levol solid or solidified radioactive waste is also being generated it. Unit 1.
Due to limitations on low level radioactive waste a
disrasal sites and limited on-site staging capacity, an additional i
factl'ty for the collection and temporary staging of low level
[
wita or solidified radioactive material is needed.
l 1
The facility proposed to fulfill the need identified above is the Interie Solid Waste Staging Facility (ISHSF) which is described in Sections 2.2.3 and 2.2.4.
This Technical Evaluation Report (TERi demonstrates that the ISHSF 4
has been designed and will be operated in such a manner as to provide assurance that:
1 a.
The health and safety of the public will be protected, b.
Occupationalexposureswillbeaslowasreasonablyachievab1$
(ALARA).
c.
There will be no adverse impact on the environment.
1.2 Organization of Report This report is organized in the format of a combined safety analysis and environmental report.
Following this introduction, a description of the design and operational considerations is presented.
This is followed by a discussion of the safety and environmental issues associated with the facility. A comparison of the ISHSF design with the Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement is presented next.
The report concludes with the safety evaluatten required by 10 CFR 50, paragraph 50.59, "Changes, Tests, and Experiments."
1.3 Conclusion The information provided in this report results in the following conclusions:
a.
The ISHSF fulfills the need for a facility to temporarily stage low level solid or solidified radioactive material.
Note 1.
As used herein the term "low-level" refers to the dose rate on contact with the waste packages as defined in Table 2-1.
The term gives no indication as to the isotopic or elemental content of the package.
4.0 Rev. 8/0091P
3230-008 I
b.
The operation of the facility is not an unreviewed safety question a4 defined in 10 CFR Part 50, paragraph 50.59.
2.0 FACILITY DESCRIPTIOj 2.1 Purpose of the Facility The ISHSF may be used for the staging of low level solid or f
solidified radioactive waste packages from both Units I and 2 prior to shipment off-site. Additionally, the ISWSF area may be utilized 3
for storage of radioactive material pursuant to Section 2.4.1.
The packages shall not be staged in the facility for a period greater i
than 5 years.
2.2 Summary Description 2.2.1 Location As shown on Figure 2-1, the ISWSF is located east of the Unit i
2 turbine building and between the off-site transmission lines for Unit 2.
It is surrounded by an outer fence which aids in restricting access to the area immediately surrounding the facility. One section of the outer fence is common to the switchyard fence, and another section is part of the site t
i fence located on the island along the east channel of the l
river. Access to the area enclosed by the outer fence will be controlled by established plant procedures.
The only 4
I activities occurring within this area will be those associated with the ISWSF.
1
(
2.2.2 Design Basis The ISHSF has no safety design basis.
I i
i j
The facility is designed to provide a controlled but ready I
i access for material handling operations to ensure that
[
t operator exposures are maintained ALARA.
The facility is sized to accommodate the wastes generated in 6 months from l
j Units 1 and 2.
The monthly waste generation rates used in the r
i design are given in Table 2-1.
j l
The ISWSF is designed to conform with 10 CFR Part 20, paragraph 105(b)(2).
This is accompIlshed by establishing a f
i restricted area around the facility, composed of the area l
l Inside the outer fence and a section of the adjacent j
j switchyard enclosure.
The facility is also designea to meet t
i the requirements of 40 CFR Part 190 at the site boundary and f
j beyond.
f t
f I
I t
)
5.0 Rev. 8/0091P I
r
~
~.
3230-008 2.2.3 Building Description The ISHSF building, shown in Figure 2-2, is a pre-engineered l
metal building on a non-seismic Category I coqcrete floor slab.
Shielding partitions of grout-filled concrete masonry f'~
units-(CMU) are used to satisfy the dose rate criteria
.s specified in Section 2.2.2.
A roof is provided over the truck bay to allow unloading and loading of trucks during adverse weather conditions.
A curb to elevation 302'-8" is provided around the perimeter of the floor slab to contain any rainwater that may enter the
- building, The floor slab is sloped so that any water entering the facility will be directed toward one of the six sumps provided.
With the use of portable pumps, water collected in these sumps will be disposed of in accordance with established plant operation procedures.
The sumps are provided with manually actuated heaters to facilitate disposal of collected
!4 water during the winter.
The floor slab, sumps, and curb are epoty coated for ease of decontamination, should the need arise.
The steel columns, siding and the roof framing have a protective finish.
The shielding partition surfaces are painted with a sealer.
With the exception of small quantitles of electrical cable associated with electrical power and the in-plant paging i
system, all materials used in the consh uction of the facility are non-combustible.
2.2.4 General Arrangement The ISHSF consists of seven (7) basic areas:
(1) l i
loading / unloading, (2) survey, (3) open staging. (4) large shielded staging, (5) small shielded staging. (6) personnel i
monitoring / analysis, and (7) yard area. A discussion of l
f these areas follows.
The general arrangement of the facility is shown in Figure 2-2.
y 2.2.4.1 t.oading/ Unloading Area The loading / unloading area consists of a truck bay, an asphalt i
pad, ramps into the facility, and areas for the loading and unloading of vehicles.
l 2.2.4.2 Survey Area
[
A survey area is provided to allow for radiation surveys of l
radioactive material packages.
This area is separated from the truck bay and the open staging area by shleid partitions.
r i
6.0 Rev. 8/0091P f
~
3230-008 t
2.2.4.3 Open Staging Area The open staging area is separated from the survey area by a l
l' shleid partition. Access routes, or aisles, with gates at the entrance, allow for the movement of the containers by a forkilft to the-appropriate area. A unique number that identifles each container and its unit of origin will be assigned to each waste container stored in the area.
2.2.4.4 Shielded Staging Areas i
Shielded staging areas are provided in order to meet the dose rate limits specified in the design basis, Section 2.I.2.
l' Separate shleided areas are provided in order to allow l
separation of containers. Access to these areas is through sliding gates by means of the aisles identified in Section l
2.2.4.3.
Access will be controlled by administrative procedures.
2.2.4.5 Personnel Monitoring / Analysis Area The personn61 monitoring / analysis area is a small cubicle at
.the end of the loading / unloading area.
This area may contain equipment for personnel monitoring or may be used for swipe sample analysis.
2.2.4.6 Yard Area The yard area surrounds the ISHSF building and is enclosed by the outer fence as described in Section 2.2.1.
2.3 Major Systems The only systems provided for the operation of the ISHSF are electrical power for lighting, receptacles, sump heaters, roll up door and the in-plant paging system.- None of these systems serve any safety-related function.
No fixed radiation monitors are provided in the facility.
Radiation monitoring will be performed by Radiological Controls Personnel accorcing to approved procedures. Access is controlled to the area inside the outer fence and to the switchyard, where dose rates could exceed allowable limits for an unrestricted area.
2.4 Material Handling Operations 2.4.1 Description of Packages The packages to be staged in the ISHSF are of several types.
Examples of these are described below.
7.0 Rev. 8/0091P
^
3230-008 1
55-gallon drums of compacted trash and/or solidified radioactive waste placed on 4-foot by 4-foot pallets.
Depending on the weight of each drum, they may be banded together.
50-cubic-foot liners of radioactive waste placed.on 4-foot by 4-foot pallets.
The dimensions of the liner are approximately 4 feet in diameter and 4 feet high.
There will also be metal low specific activity (i.SA) boxes l
containing compacted or non-compacted trash.
The dimensions of the LSA boxes are approximately 4 feet x 4 feet x 7 feet.
l These boxes will arrive at the facility with a spacer as necessary to allow a forklift to readily lift the box.
l All waste packages received in the ISWSF will be properly i
prepared for shipment or storage as appropriate.
Packaging of l
these items will meet 49 CFR Criteria. Counting, swiping.
l decontamination, and weighing will be done prior to the i
transfer of the packages to the ISHSF. Provisions have been j
included in the design of the ISHSF to allow additional 3
counting and swiping in the ISHSF.
i Radioactive waste received for shipment or temporary storage I
may be placed inside or outside the ISHSF building.
The placement should consider dose rate, handling, storage duration, and the container's ability to withstand i -
environmental conditions.
No container shall be opened for I
repackaging or inspection in this area.
Storage of items to be reused within the plant will be 4
4 considered on a case-by-case basis and will be approved in writing by the Unit 2 Waste Management Department and Radiological Controls Director. Packaging of these will meet i
49 CFR criteria and will satisfy the criteria of this TER.
Storage of these items within the ISHSF should not exceed one j
(1) year past the entry into Post-Defueling Monitored Storage (PDMS).
\\
2.4.2 Unloading and Stacking of the Packages j
1 Upon arriving at the facility, the vehicle containing the I
i package (s) will normally be placed either in the Truck Bay located in the loading / unloading area or on the asphalt pad 7
l located on the south $1de of the facility. At this point, a j
forkilft will normally unload the packages and transport them to the proper area of the facility.
i l
I 8.0 Rev. 8/0091P
F 3230-008 For packages which are to be stored in the ISHSF yard area, the vehicle will be parked in an appropriate location to facilitate unloading.
Upon arriving at the proper location within the ISHSF building, the packages may be stacked, as necessary.
The
+
pallets and boxes will be stacked no more than three high, which is consistent with current GPU practice.
In general, the pallets will be stacked in a staggered manner.
The LSA boxes will be stacked one on another with spacers.
These spacers are normally an integral part of the LSA box.
.he required lift height of approximately 10 feet is well within the 16-foot lifting height of the forklift.
The capability of the pallets to carry the load has been checked for the design basis arrangement and has been found acceptable.
The pallets are of four stringer design, with solid planking top and bottom.
Items / packages that may be stored in the ISHSF ytrd area shall be stacked one high and will be handled in accordance with proper accepted rigging and handling practices.
2.4.3 Removal of Packages When a package is removed for shipment, the reverse of the procedure described in the previous section will be followed.
9,0 Rev. 8/0091P 1
3230-008 TABLE 2-1 DESIGN STORAGE REQUIREMENTS Quantity Canister /
Unit (per month)
Trash Type Radiation Level 1
37 55 gal drum / compacted trash up to 50 mrem /hr 1
19 55 gal drum / compacted trash 50 to 100 mrem /hr 1
15 55 gal drum / compacted trash 100 to 200 mrem /hr 1
4 55 gal drum / compacted trash 200 - 400 mren/hr 1
1 4'x4'x7' box / compacted trash up to 200 mrem /hr 1
10 50 ft3 liners / solidified 4
evaporator bottoms 200 - 500 mrem /hr 2
9 SS gal drum / solidified radiac waste up to 100 mrem /hr 2
16 55 gal drum / compacted trash 0 to I mrem /hr i
2 6
55 gal drum / compacted trash 1 to 2 mrem /hr 2
11 55 gal drum / compacted trash 2 to 5 mrem /hr 2
9 55 gal drum / compacted trash 5 - 20 mrem /hr 2
5 55 gal drum / compacted trash 20 - 100 mrem /hr 2
2 55 gal drum / compacted trash 100 - 500 mrem /hr 2
1 55 gal drum / compacted trash 500 - 1000 mrem /hr 2
1 55 gal drum / compacted trash 1000 - 2000 mrem /hr 2
2 4'x4'x7' LSA boxes 0 - I mrem /hr 2
2 4'x4'x7' LSA bores 1 - 2 mrem /hr i
i 2
3 4'x4'x7' LSA boxes 2 - 10 mrem /hr 2
3 4'x4'r7' LSA boxes 10 - 20 mrem /hr 2
3 4'm4'x7' LSA boxes 20 - 100 mrem /hr 2
1 a'x4'x7' LSA boxes 100 - 200 mrem /hr j
i 10.0 Rev. 8/0091P
j 3230-008
)
3.0 TECHNICAL EVALUATION
This section summarizes the licensing issues which were considered in the l
^
design of the ISHSF.
These issues deal with the expected performance of the facility during normal operation and various design basis events.
3.1 Licensing Issues i
The Itcensing issues associated with the operation of the ISHSF are:
a.
Demonstrating compliance with 40 CFR Part 190 with respect to off-site doses, j
Demonstratingcompliancewith10CFRPart20withrespeckto b.
on-site dose limits.
i c.
Demonstrating that the design basis events for the facility I
have been properly considered.
The design basis events for f
this facility are high w;nds, operating basis earthquake, l
fire, and flooding.
j d.
Demonstrating compliance with the principles of ALARA.
l Each of these issues is addressed in the foilowing secslons.
3.2 Dose Assessment The ISWSF is designed so that during normal cperation (1) the I
requirements of 40 CFR Part 190 are met at the site boundary and i
beyond, and (2) the dose rates at the boundary of the restricted l
areas conform to 10 CFR, Part 20, paragraph 105 (b)(2).
This paragraph requires that the radiation levels in unrestricted areas be such that if an 'ndividual were continuously prasent in the area
[
for seven consecutive days, he would not receive a dose in excess of 100 millirem (0.6 mrem /hr).
The consequences of design basis events have been evaluated to assure that public use of areas I
beyond the exclusion areas is not interrupted or restricted.
j i
This section presents the analyses that demonstrate the above f
objectives are met.
l 3.2.1 Off-Site 3.2.1.1 Normal Operation l
t' The total annual off-$1te dose from the site to any Individual is limited to 25 mrem by 40 CFR Part 190.
The nearest site f
boundary for the ISWSF is the normal high water mark on the I
l east bank of the Island, f
I,
!t I
i l
11.0 Rev. 8/0091P I
I i
r h
3230-008 l
As applied to the site boundary, the 40 CFR Part 190 limits equate to a 0.3 mrem /hr dose rate based on a 67 hr/yr occupancy (Note 2) with an 80 percent contribution factor (80 percent of the total 25 mrem). -As explained in Section 3.2.2,
- i the dose rate at the fence inside the site boundary is below I
i 0.6-mrem /hr.
The-dose rate'at the site-boundary at the-normal.
-.-...a high water line of the river will be much less than the 0.3 mrem /hr allowable, due to the shleiding effect of the flood i
protection dike.
l In addition. to satisfylag 40 CFR art 190 at the site boundary 1
an analysis was performed to determine the dose resulting from the ISWSF at the nearest residence.
The dose at the nearest residence, located ENE of the facility, was determined to be 13 mrem /yr.
l A general purpose gamma ray scattering code was used to
{
determine the annual dose from direct and scattered radiation at thf nearest residence.
The code used was the G-33 version of "GJ: A General Purpose Gamma-Ray Scattering Program,"
j described in Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory pubitcation LA i
5176, dated June 1973.
W ll The calculation of the dose rate at the nearest residence included the fotlowing considerations:
[
t a.
The ISWSF was assumed to contain the wu te generated in six months at the monthly generation rates given in Table 2-1.
(
b.
The predominant radionuclide encountered in the Unit 2 containment Cesium-137, was assumed to be the source of
[
radiation in all waste packages.
c.
The factor of 0.7 specified in Regulatory Guide 1.109, Revision 1, was used to account for shielding and occupancy characteristics at the nearest residence.
i In the future, the waste from Unit I to be staged in the facility is likely to contain Co-60. An assessment of the I
effect of Co-60 on the off-site dose calculation 1$ summarized below.
(
The skyshine dose calculation was performed using a I
point-kernel theory computer code which accounts for the scattr', in air.
The degradation of the scattered photon's
(
energy is determined from the incident ensrgy and angle of
[
scatter of the uncollided photons.
The Klein-Nishina r
I differential scattering cross section formulation is used to assess the probability of scattering from the differential scattering volume (alr). Multiple scattering in air is also accounted for by applying a buildup factor.
[
t l
12.0 Rev. 8/0091P
i 3230-008 i
The actual skyshine analysis uas performed assuming the source j
was Cs-137 (.662 MeV).
To assess the impact of this assumption the effect of changing the source to Co-60 (1.2
$ n '^
MeV) was evaluated; This evaluation was performed recognizing that there are two major energy dependent parameters used in f
the' analysts which must be addressed to evaluate the effect of changing the incident photon energy:
1.
Impact on total source strength, and 2.
Impact on the scattering cross secticns.
The incident energy used in the actual analysis was 0.662 MeV to represent Cs-137.
The total source strength (particles /second) used in the Analysis was determined from 6
the contact dose rate for the waste containers along with the flux-to-dose rate conversion factor (DCF) obtained using ANSI /ANS 6.1.1-1977 (N666), "Neutron and Gamma-Ray Flux-To-Dose Rate Factors," March 17, 1977.
To assess the i
impact on the total source strength caused by changing the source energy to that of Co-60, a new source strength is again l
deduced assuming the same contact dose rate along with the
,sappropriate energy dependent DCf,from ANSI /ANS 6.1.1-1977.
[
Rased on the above, the total source strength would be reduced L
by 50 percent if the source is assumed to be 1.2 MeV photons.
The resulting change to the scattering probability is indicated by the magnitude of the bulldup factor.
For a given number of mean-free paths the buildup factor will be higher
(
for the lower energy.
Hence, if Co-60 is assumed to be in the waste packages, the total source strength and the degree of scattering would t
decrease.
Therefore, considering Co-60 in place of Cs-137 for part of the Unit I waste would not increase the resultant off-site dose, i
3.2.1.2 Design Basis Events l
6 Design basis events considered were high winds, an operating i
basis earthquake, a fire, and flooding.
l Note 2.
Regulatory Guide 1.109, Rev. 1 Table E-5 Page 40--Recommended j
values for the maximum exposed individual in lieu of $lte-specific
}
data.
j
[
t l
13.0 Rev. 8/0091P t
~
3230-008 1
3.2.1.2.1 High Winds
'l From the THI-2 FSAR the design wind velocity, based on the 100-year recurrence interval, 1s 80 miles per hour at 30 feet above grade. The ISHSF building is enclosed by a combination I
of-CHU= walls and galvanized steel siding and-is designed to withstand a wind loading of 20 pounds per square foot, which corresponds to a wind speed of more than 80 miles per hour.
Therefore enclosure of the ISHSF building protects the radioactive waste containers within the ISHSF building from the effects of the design basis wind loading.
3.2.1.2.2 Operating Basis Earthquake (OBE) l In the event of an OBE, the ISHSF building may collapse; however, the radioactive waste packages would remain in the general area of the facility.
The resulting maximum dose to the public from a postulated airborne release would be less than 3.8 mrem for the inhalation pathway.
The following j
considerations were made in this analysis:
o A six month accumulation of waste, based on the 2
requirements listed in Table 2-1, was considered as a o
potential source of an airborne release.
o The estimated activity of the waste was 100 curies.
It was conservatively assumed that the isotopic distribution for this waste is Cs-137 (78%), Sr-90 (18%) and Pu-239 (4%).
Thes0 1sotopes have high dose conversion factors, therefore this assumption will maximize the estimated dose.
o The assumed percentage of transuranics was determined from the ratto of the transuranics to Sr-90 activities calculated from an estimate of the core inventory for TMI-2 using the ORIGEN-2 computer code, o
A release fraction of 10-6 of the contents of the drums and boxes was assumed, based on the data presented in "Environmental Survey of Transportation of Radioactive Materials to and from Nuclear Power Plants," December 1972.
o The atmospheric dilution factor of 8.1 x 10-4 sec/m3 was used, based on a Stability Class F, 1 m/sec wind speed, and 1150 feet to the nearest toundary of the exclusion area. No credit was taken for the building wake effect.
14.0 Rev. 8/0091P i
3230-008 3.2.1.2.3 Fire A fire in the ISHSF will not result in the release of f.
significant quantitles of radioactive material.
This is based on having the stored radioactive material in sealed metal containers and the surface activity within limits for unrestricted use.
In addition, the amount of combustible material, the wooden pallets and small amounts of electrical cable, exposed to an Ignition source is insufficient to burn l
through a container. Also, based on available information l
regarding the contents of the waste packages, spontaneous l
combustion within a container will not occur.
Based on the i
above the off-site dose resulting from a fire is bounded by the evaluation presented in section 3.2.1.2.2.
3.2,1.2.4 Flooding The Three Mile Island site is protected against a design flood of 1.100,000 cfs flow in the Susquehanna River.
This l
protection is furnished by the site dike, which has a minimum elevation of 304 feet along the southern end of the island.
In the event of a design flood, which is equivalent to a river level of-approximately 300.5 feet, the drainage culvert gate -
l at the southeast dike will close, isolating the site storm drain system from the river. Consequently, the TMI site design flood will have no adverse impact on the ISHSF.
In the event of a probable maximum flood (PMF), the river flow rate will slowly increase to the calculated maximum of 1,625,000 cfs. As the river level increases it will overtop the south dike.
The water level on the island will then rise to a maximum PFM flood height of 308.5 feet. As noted in Figure 2,4-7 of the THI-2 FSAR, an advance warning of at least 36 hours4.166667e-4 days <br />0.01 hours <br />5.952381e-5 weeks <br />1.3698e-5 months <br /> will precede the arrival of PAF.
The ISHSF is not protected against the PMF; therefore the ISHSF will be inundated in the very unlikely event a PMF occurs.
The following discussion addresses the possible off-site releases of radioactive materials that could result I
from submergence of radioactive waste drums and bones.
Since the waste packages are sealed and ready for off-site shipment, they will resist water intrusion.
Should the waste packages leak, releases would be minimal due to the absence of a driving force for release except for diffusion of radionuclides in water.
Therefore, in light of the extremely low probability of occurrence of the PMF (recurrence interval greater than 100 years) and the expected minimal leakage into the waste packages, the design of the ISHSF regarding flooding is considered to be adequate.
15.0 Rev. 8/0091P
3230-008 3.2.2 Or-Site i
The dose rates outside the restricted areas surrounding the ISHSF were calculated'to ensure that the values are less than the 0.6 mrem /hr in accordance with 10 CFR Part 20.
This was done by calculating the gamma dose rates from a planar source to a point at a given distance from the source.
The major assumptions made in the performance of.this analysis were:
a.
The only contributing isotope was Ceslum-137.
b.
All waste packages were at the maximum contact dose rate j
given in Table 2-1.
j t
c.
The facility was assumed to conta1H the waste generated l
in six months, based on the generation rates given in
)
Table 2-1.
i The resulting dose at th9 outer fence surrounding the ISWSF l
and outside the switchyard enclosure is calculated to be less than 0.6 mrem /hr.
These dose rates have been determined to be less than 0.6 mrem /hr based on the information presented in Table 2-1 In order to allow for deviations from this itst, a radiation survey w'11 be performed whenever the quantity or
[
arrangement of packages in the ISHSF is significantly altered to ensure that the dose rate at any given point outside the l
restricted area does not exceed 0.6 mrem /hr.
l 3.3 Occupational Exposures
(
Use of the ISWSF will result in occupational radiation exposure to l
personnel.
The operational and maintenance activities to be
[
performed in the facility have been evaluated to determine the length of time workers will be exposed to a radiation environment.
This information has been combined with expected radiation fleids in the ISWSF to arrive at a projected annual exposure of from 17 to j
22 person-rem for this factitty. Of this exposure, approximately 80 percent is attributable to radioactive waste originating in Unit i
(
1.
3.3.1 Design Features I
i Several design provisions have been included in the ISWSF to minimize occupational exposures.
These provisions include segregation of waste with higher radiation levels from those with lower radiation levels, use of shielding, and other 6
provisions as noted below.
(
i i
[
16.0 Rev. 8/0091P
(
(
e k
3230-008 The arrangement of the ISWSF allows containers to be stored in the low radiation (unshielded) sections of the facility without entering the higher radiation (shielded) sections.
The shield wall between the truck loading / unloading area reduces the dose rate in this area from the material in storage.
A roof and siding have been provided for the facility.
Siding on the north, south and west sides enclose areas not constructed of CMU walls to minimize the intrusion of rain water which must be collected and sampled prior to disposal.
The sumps have been designed so that the shielded areas need not be entered to pump the sumps.
Location of the forklift truck aisles on the outside of the facility rather thar,using a single central aisle results in a lower radiation field at the aisle.
3.3.2 Person-Rem Estimate The duration of activities occurring in the ISHSF was estimated by considering the number of radioactive waste packages to be placed in the facility.
Factors const(ered in-the analysts of time spent in the radiation a.rea included the following:
a.
55-gallon drums are/ handled by an unshielded forkilft in grouos of four drums on a single pallet.
The drums are stored on the pallet, f
b.
LSA boxes and the 50 ft3 containers are handled one at a time by the forklift.
c.
The speed of the forklift was assumed to be three miles i
per hour except when maneuvering to pick up or store a load j{
d.
Approximately one-half the time the forklift is in operation it is not carrying a load.
This accounts for I
the return trip to or from the loading / unloading area to the staging areas to pick up another load.
e.
Two forklift breakdowns ner year in the radiation areas were assumed.
f.
Allowances for time spent in the radiation area by other than the forklift operator were made to account for the shipment vehicle driver, health physics technician, and a
]
laberer to assist the forklift operator.
g.
An allowance has been made for relocating containers j
within the facilJty.
i i
17.0 Rev. W OO91P
.l 3230-008 The radiation fleids in which the activities in the ISNSF occurred were estimated using the number of ra/,loactive waste packages in the facility, and the dose rate of each package.
Factors considered ~1n'the determination of the radiation fields included the following:
a.
The LSA boxes were assumed to be planar sources, with the dose calculated on a perpendicular to the plane at the desired distance, b.
For cylindrical containers, the source was modeled as an infinite cylinder and only cylindrical spreeding was assumed.
c.
No credit was assumed for the shielding effect of the content of one container on an adjacent qontainer except in the case of solidified waste in 50 ftJ liners, d.
The ISNSF was assumed to contain a six-month inventory of containers at all times.
The area radiation levels calculated for the various areas in the ISWSF'are given in Table 3-1.
The person-rem assessment combined the re.dlation fields described above with each of the handling, maintenance, and vehicle survey activities.
The evolutions evaluated included transit of a loaded vehicle from Unit 1 or Unit 2 to the ISWSF, placing the containers in storage, removing the containers from storage to the shipment vehicle at a later point in time, and a health physics survey of the shipment vehicle.
Assuming that the person-rem exposures from the ISHSF activities control the number of workers required to conduct material handling operations, the following approximate number of personnel would be required for the operation of this facility during the year:
Number of Total Function Workers Dose Health Physics
.1
.5 rem Technicians Forkilft Operators 4
16 rem (max.)
All other functions I equivalent 5 ren total (laborer 5, truck worker drivers, maintenance personnel) 18.0 Rev. 8/0091P
3230-008 TABLE 3-1 AREA RADIATION LEVELS HITH SIX HONTHS DESIGN' BASIS INVENTORY Radiation Area level (mrem /hr)
Survey Area 0.5 Open Staging Area Unit 2 LSA boxes 60 Unit 2 drums 180 Unit I urums 180 Shielded Staging Area Unit 1 1600 Unit 2 1170 19.0 Rev. 8/0091P
7-3230-008 4.0 COMPARISON WITH PROGRAMMATIC ENVIRONMENTAL. IMPACT STATEMENT (PEIS)
Section 9.2.1.1 of the PEIS describes a facility for the temporary storage of certain low level radioactive wastes.
The contents of the facility are given in Table 4-1.
The radiation levels at the fence surrounding the facility will be less than 0.6 mrem /hr.
This facility is i
judged in Section 9.5.1.2 of the PEIS to have negligible environmental exposures to the general population.
There are some minor differences between the ISHSF described in this report and the facility described in the PEIS.
These differences are primarily in the number of containers to be stored in the ISHSF.
Table 4-1 contains the design basis contents of the PEl$ facility compared to the ISHSF.
However, as shown in this report, the ISHSF will result in negligible environmental exposures to the general population.
20.0 Rev. 8/0091P
1 3230-008 TABLE 4-1 CONTENTS OF STAGING FACILITY l
PE!S Facility ISWSF 55-Gallon Drums 600 810 LSA Boxes 150 90 (4 ft x 3 ft x 6 1/2 ft)
(4 "t x 4 ft x 7 ft) wooden metal 50-ft3 Liners 60 60 l
21,0 Rev. 8/0091P
3230-008 5.0 SAFETY EVALUATION 10 CFR 50, paragraph 50.59, "Changes Tests, and Experteents," permits the holder of an operating license to make changes to the facility provided the change does not involve a modification of the plant technical specifications and the change is determined not to be an unreviewed safety question. As summarized below, the operation of the ISHSF neither requires a modification to the plant technical specifications nor is it deemed to be an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50, paragraph 50.59.
5.1 Technical Spectftcations There are no Recovery Technical Specifications regarding the storage of solid or solicified radioactive material.
The proposed change does not require any additionai technical specifications in order to satisfy the licensing basis of the plant.
Therefore, the l
operation of the ISHSF does not require changes to the existing technical specifications.
t 5.2 Unreviewed Safety Question The operation of the ISHSF will not increase the probability of occurrence or the consequences of an accident or malfunction of equipment important to safety previously evaluated in the safety i
analysts report.
This is based on the location of the facility being such that there is no interface with existing safety-related equipment or structures.
I The possibility of an accident or malfunction of a different type I
than any evaluated previously in the safety analysis report will not be created by the operation of the ISHSF.
This is due to the j
passive ncture of the factitty and the fact that all the radioactive material is in either a solid /soltulfied or fixed form, l
As stated in Section 5.1, the operation of the ISHSF will not result in a reduction in the margin of safety as defined in the basis for any technical spectftcation.
Sased on the above, the operation of the ISHSF 15 deemed not to be an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50, paragr#ph i
50.59.
Y s
i i
i 1
l 1
i l
22.0 Rev. 8/0091P l
l
og -- - - - -- - -
-~
\\
j'[p'i.Qhh]J'i;;jl!, j'!
1 ti ll i
I
\\
r 'i t
g"
! llli,l 1 s: l
![
l I
'l.
il l
[.
!g
.I.l..... l.l.l.i'
.i.m......i.s.s.i.o...I E lgli.l..l
{lt.l.;.I,.,.......
,...I u
g P,
i ii.
i
"..,,,f l
T t
m. y.ne s
-- -l,'
4.'
,,[
3 t.^
c.j g
Lt'
'i e
I i
i 2.2
.I ' Ild
' j}
l l
l e
1
)-
1 l i,1, f'
n'!
).'
Il F.
f
}
i
,f L.
l!
j t
)
,iirO T
~
- '.iL. w.i m.ePk.. J M a I,y i
l,.b. g 73, < : - ?.L.L.L' k4 v g
.t I.
g 7/'""~"""* y
' 8
!!r N'.
f 5
!!I'
.y V
g 1
.t_..3,.-....t w 7
.y
+
t
.j b,t .
V,. $.N l.
lm d.g}
4$! k g % i,..i[,g?
,[j a
ji
~ ' '
.., ~
UR
_.= i,4' 5. ' 2 io:,f.
-l &; f '+.
T-1,
..i
-o p
Il.
Q ',
k i . [, k j ';l t ; E 2.'
7j'"ils'iL:,jl
-,f -
/l'$,cy,tl,-
i m
--t l
g q
',..i. ;
I y'h.n
'Ty, i
/
'N
'M< iQ?k1p '
' '7/
.t "
l M
i i
X.
l.i
.. b y O r___.
t'i,l i,3
,f ll
.i
,t l :'],
(bT' D '
j' If l
j
~~
1, i.
i
.g
- ti f
- 1'.,
i 4
-i p.j ]i s c-T.
i l
1 j
e I
- .y,,
l 23.0 Rev. 8/0091P i
l
3230 008 N~
Personnel Monit oriM er 9
- . 4
~
b TY7." ',
,y aw- ;tw,#.w
,A "I#
g' rwe</,.
- :: r==.
wL
?
r e r me ene
_.....- _, e ir, T
1.
ij.j
- q..
Survey Area 2
i t
i L..e y
I m
aT.eD L,
ap =,,
s
)
I open Staging Area Asphalt Pad I
.;[
Leading /L'alosding
- I Ares y'
e
=
.I I
5 A
,P
=
4 3
g.,;=... e,...
..4 t
s a_
x v.
4
,0
$.$ e$'s e d bk 5 tat" 3,,,,,
g a...:..a = v
^"a it.iin.
4re.
)
e l
f R
q
=
- w. m.,
=.
g Tigure 2 2 g
15V$T Ceneral Arrange =ent F L W p 4 N 9 O.1*'*~ ""
24.0 Rev. 8/0091P
>