ML20210T314

Forwards Radiation Protection Section SER Input Re PSAR, Through Amend 16.Overall Preliminary Radiation Protection Program Acceptable

ML20210T314
Person / Time
Site:	Satsop
Issue date:	05/15/1975
From:	Harold Denton Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
To:	Deyoung R Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
References
CON-WNP-1774 NUDOCS 8605300043
Download: ML20210T314 (13)

Text

_

'.. A y.

. v. _ &:

..p~-

=,

< ; py

-n

r

~

• /,

e:

p-

.,, y

'i

+

e n

a

~

4 g

. DISTRIBUTION:

Z ocket F4la

'a

- MAY 15,1975 RR-Rdg.

', c

~

RAB-Rdg.

,.e

~

s

..., n, i.,~..,

rn.,

c.,

w Bishmed DaToues, Assistant Direeter.for Light Water Reesters Group 1, ERR y y ;.:.yy.r.W.y p % yy, ;.gt.$.; ;:. *. 9 s.e

., < 4 y., (

- 1 31 4

. +.o. grygg uni. EAR PEDJECT 3 4 5V SAFETT ITAL 5.%

" ~

&TIGE RENRT IEPUT -

9"

.. r.

7 4

"4 W 1&BIATICE PECTECIIDE SECTICK a.r.; M s 6

,76 N Qi%'

'd y p % ; m m p;g, w gly y y;4 sinensing stegei* cpf +.7 c g4;, ;g.~.3.y;..m b, A @,3.. M...-.

~ ^ q m g ;.

y 3

. H, OFlaat Menos WrFSS 3 4 5 W # B C W,JP

?

S.L. V-3.;

t.-

9,,

u

~, ';-

;g g 7.y,,Q y

.}

, i.

O-M, 54 J - M.7 +.

Decket ummamer 50-504, 509 W.-

^

^

s

' m.Beepensikla Brenska /IBE 1-3 1,; C.j.f m /' ~ >c>-?.

3 "4 i{'

E;9 N.

Freject Managers P. O'Emilly " " K. K Q '.q:,Q e3.c

~

~ ;

Bote Esquest Enesived by EAB 'Per 31mm Book Esquested completion Date: 5/16/75 Descripties of Esopenset Safety Evaluatica Emport Input

]

Eeview Status: Ceeplete

.. >F p-

' The Washington Public Pouer Supply System's Esclear Project 3 & 5-

+

FSAE has been regiesed threesh h* 16 by the Bediation

.,Proemettan Seccian.1 L Ae' a result of this review which fachlad a c

site visit' and di-4== with the appliment senserning questions and positions em r=Je=*4= protection design, we have for omlated ear enfaty evaluaties of the Eadiation Preemmef an secties of the WrFS3 application. Our impet to the Safety Bralmaties Esport is enclosed.

,d.

.e ;

a

, e..

l This review was performed 'by T. D. Morphy, EPS/EAB.

l

,.,)

Ort @elsigned 67 "i

w.

J E R.Destem We

. J c %;: %

1.j ' O Mereld R. Destem, Assistant Director y.;. ~,p

. y, y,,9 g,ggg,g,g,,,

., y,, :

n.

$',( g,., ; y a.v..Q QRD Rivisien of Technical Bevi m p ~ Q

,F...Mb.. h. y /g,.

c u.=

,', ss u:,.~.o.. y,.. '., wmm.,

.n. i, v.

v

.e

,. f a.-

.y p,ep',.>c, i 0; 7

,: =

..c 3,,3,,,,,

,. @. :.~ '

c-M As steesd. ' '..MM); c p + g', ;y,h.M '.ib,n y,) * @v,.;.Rfl h6 Mi

., 9.y y.2%..s ~9 9;g

r. y v

n-

~

n se w/o ensla

%y-. m 1

.y%.....,.; W,. s a-y m.. 4 y.

.-m

.A. 01ambeseo m;..g"_*.. n

... J(, A <

/

4

3. maamm1A

.',o n - y ' lj; g

J. P=amarella es w/emalz S. Eman==r P. O'Emilly T. hrphy F. Schroeder J. Easteer M. Persent 8605300043 750515 5

O. Ferr W. Exeger PDR ADOCK 05000508

\\

l E

PDR r

erwie. *,

,TR..:. RA..

T. R.. : RA TR:SS euaaaE h

e....WKreger

. JKas tn.e..

HDent.on

.g 4

i

.L

.5//475 5//fh5

. 5/II/75 51 I'I.5 N

DAT=

• t Fene ABC 3Is (Rev. MS) ABCM 0240

( l. J ' w f, i. m i.ty*h *. e-.. ww :n..u,

.s,. 4,; p W u. s. oovenmasswr enenvine orrics: ter4.aos. nee 7e ir.;s.J :. m...

,'..J.1 s h i, M M

• • I >3 4aL&.4WEauh M,A e b d1 i

d

7

'v e-n 7

i WPPSS 3 & 5 SAFETY EVALUATION REPORT 12.0 RADIATION PROTECTION The applicant has provided descriptions of methods for radiation

-~ i protection and has included an estimate of occupational radiation dose to plant personnel. The Preliminary Safety Analysis Report l

presents information on facility layout and equipment design, operating procedures and techniques and practices proposed for the protection of personnel against radiation. Shielding is provided to. reduce levels of radiation. Ventilation is arranged to control the flow of potentially contaminated air.

Radiation monitoring systems are employed to measure levels of radiation in potentially occupied arecs and to measure airborne radioactivity throughout

.x the plant. A health ^ physics program is provided for plant personnel and visitors during reactor operation, maintenance, refueling, radwaste handling and inservice inspection. We reviewed and evaluated the applicant's description and analysis of his radiation protection program included in the PSAR Chapter 12.

The criterion used to determine acceptability of the applicant's program is that doses to personnel will be maintained less than

~

those established limits in 10 CFR Part 20, " Standards for Protection Against Radiation" and design and program features are consistant with the guidelines of Regulatory Guide 8.8, "Information Relevant to Maintaining Occupational Radiation Exposures 4

As Low As Practicable (Nuclear Reactors) USNRC July 1973.

,,,. we een-= = =

~

- o..

1 Y

/

O.

7 7

On the basis of our review we have concluded that the radiation i

l protection program will provide assurance that doses to personnel

~j-i will be less than those established by 10 CFR Part 20 and that design features and program features are consistant with the guidelines of

'l

-l

-l Regulatory Guide 8.8.

The applicant's overall preliminary radiation i

protection program is acceptable. Details are discussed in the t

following sections.

12'.1 SHIELDING The design ~ objectives for the facility shielding are to ensure that radiation exposure to operating personnel will be within the required limits of 10 CFR Part 20 and that these exposures will also be maintained as low as practicable during reactor operations and surveillance, maintenance, inservice inspections, refuelings and radwaste handling.

Calculations of source terms to be used for shielding design are based on (1) a core power of 4100 megawatts thermal (Mut); (2) a

)

failed fuel rate of one percent; and (3) a worst case choice of normal operating conditions or shutdown conditions depending on the

+

piece of equipment. Based on a comparison of the applicants assumptions and calculations with guidance available in Regulatory Guide 1.42 and the use of recocnnendations in Regulatory Guide 8.8 we find these I

source terms to be acceptable.

k t

i

---:,- ~-.

,?

n 3

i-,

Shield wall thickness calculations are based on accepted shielding data and equations obtained from such references as " Reactor

(

Shielding Design Manual" edited by T. Rockwell III.

In most cases I

a point-kernal computer shielding code (ISOSHLD) was used. Where source geometry is sufficiently complex to preclude the use of the ISOSHLD program, a point-kernal integration KAP-V was utilized.

The applicant has divided the plant into radiatiort access zones which are specif.d.cally defined and described on layout drawings in the PSAR. During our review the applicant. at our request, changed one cubicle in the fuel building to a higher radiation zone.

We also requested the applicant to reconsider his shielding

a.

u

~

analysis in the area where the spent fuel transfer tube penetrates the Fuel Building and the Reactor Building.. As a result, the applicant added additional shielding on the 360' level of the Auxiliary Building to assure that radiation levels would not exceed the zone criteria for that area.

We questioned the relative location of the applicant's radiat. ion monitoring instrument calibration facility and the low level monitoring areas for personnel and samples.

The applicant rearranged the layout of his Administration Building to preclude any interference with low level counting or personnel monitoring from the use of high radiation level sources in the calibration facility.

I

.I

,_g,_.

'I

y 7

3 The applicant has considered many of the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 8.8 in the design 'and layout of his equipment and facility shielding. Among these the location of major sources in individually shielded cubicles, the use of shielded valve stations, and the provision for remote flushing and/or chemical cleaning should contribute significantly to maintaining radiation exposures to i

operating personnel as low as practicable, :The -

~J applicant has an acceptable system to control field run piping.

He'has committed to a continuing review of the detailed design and to field inspections during construction to assure compliance with the design. criteria discussed. above The applicant has made an estimata of the 513 man-rem which would -

"~

accrue annually to plant personnel due to the operations of WPPSS Units 3Jand.S. - The ' basis for-this estimate was an examination of the -

annualexposure for routina reactor operations.and surveillance, g

x pariedic maintenanca jobs, refueling radwaste handling and an estimats-of major maintenance work. The applicant included calculated.

^

doses based on occupancy times, frequency of each activity, and estimated radiation levels for the jobs expected to be performed - '

I C

e

,h

- ~ ~ - -

[

a MO f

Wi[O g

g*-9g, p,

.,y.-_.m..

V

/3

/

The applicant also committed to use these dose estimates in a continuing review of the detailed design as it is developed.

This review will be performed by the applicant's Architect / Engineer l

and also by the WPPSS Chief Health Physicist. As a result of these 1

11 l

reviews, methods for minimidng the projected doses to plant i

personnt.1 will be considered. The methods and thoroughness of i

I the applicant's dose assessment is acceptable to us.

We'have concluded based on information presented in the PSAR that-the applicant has designed a facility to keep radiation exposures within the. applicable limits of-10 CFR Pare 20.c. In his design and "

arrangement.he has considere the. recommendations of Regulatory Guide-

~

g y,

8.8 to reduce unnecessary exposure-during operations. Based on our,

review we find that the shielding and arrangement of the plant is accep table..

~

~

i

~

12.1.4 ' AREA MONITORING l

.The applicant described several design objectives of the area l

radiation monitoring system including the objective of warning plant:

1 j

operators of unauthorized or inadvertent movement of radioactive l

l material in the plant, and the indication of a substantial increase in radiation levels at all points where such an increase might be of t

immediate importance to personnel frequenting or working in the area..

i l

0

Y f-7 These design objectives lead to three criteria for selection of areas for placement of area radiation monitors:

(1) areas where personnel i

perform regular duties in radiation fields; (2) areas where there is l

a potential for increase in radiation levels that should be known; i

and (3) areas where surveillance is desired in infrequently occupied areas. We find these design objectives and placement criteria to be acceptable. Area radiation monitors will be provided in 21 locations within each unit as shown in Section 12.1 of the PSAR.

Desiga features of the=above monitoring system include ease of access for maintenance and. calibration,. audible. local alarms for

.A:

.l. ;.-.g,f,..

detector failure'and high' radiation,' variable alarm setpoints,

. g.r..

and five decade. dose rate range coverage. We have determined that

~

~

~,

2.s the objectives and-criteria are met by the proposed radiction

-),.

+ -

+jl$

monitoring system,iand the necessary monitort-are located in 'conformance

~.. e..

with 10 CPR Part'50=and.10 CFR Part 70.

We,. therafore, find the '.'fi.

~

.r.f:r,.n.

.y ^

location of the area radiatica monitors to _be acceptable..

..4..

s 12.2 VENTILATION --

The. plant ventilation system will be designed to maintain a suitable :

. W. -

environment for personnel and equipment. Among the design objectives -

l of this system are the protection of operating personnel from possiblei airborne radioactivity and the assurance that maxi.- um expected airborne l

l i

l

.~

4-.

. ~.

i N

.r

.l

.. \\

y 2

4 l.

radioactivity concentrations will be maintained within, the limits of 10 CFR Part 20 and as low as practicable. These design objectives 7

are acceptable. To meet these objectives, several design criteria i'

are use'd including:

(1) air-flow frca areas of least radioactive

~

contamination to areas of progressively greater radioactive a

' l contamination followed by exhaust to ventilation ducts; (2) maintenance 1l l

of slight negative pressures in selected areas; and (3) careful j

selection of airflow rates to the various cubicles to maintain as low as. practicable-airborne. concentrations of radioactive material- 'These design criteria are in accordance with

. nc:. _.

sm the recommendations of Ragulatory Guide 8.8 and, therefore, are

,g ::

2 acceptable. The containment airborne radioactivity removal system

-.c

.- c and conenin==ntc purge system-will provide-a means of reducing the-airborne conemmination to allow personnel access.into the reactor. y buiT ding. Also air.avhmust. points will be located at three footi intervals around-the refueling pool cavity for use during r' fueling e

The Anw4114ary Buildine ventilation system provides flow to various cubicles to maintain potential airborne radioactivity levels from

~

i flowing into non-contaminated areas. In. the fuel building, ventilation will be exhausted from the perimeter of the spent fuel pool to

.,. m.,

reduce airborne radioactivity concentrations in that area.

J i

.**e-

.=ws-ess e mana me*wo-en--gie--a..A emine,em goes en w% amese y pg

,.gg,-

Y

/

.r m

3 i

~

l The bases and methods of estimating sources of airborne radioactivity in the plant and expected levels of airborne concentracions in i

various operations of the plant are described in Sectian 12.2 of the PSAR. These bases, including rates of leakage and partition I

factors are also in accordance with Regulatory Guide 1.42.

I The applicant uses these source terms to calculate expected doses i

i in section 12.2 to personnel as a result of inhalation of radioactive material. These doses represent a conservative estimate of inhalation doses since the calculations also include submersion in noble gases.

The applicant estimates that personnel doses from airborne radioactive material would be 4

MAN-REM (whole. body)' and 51 RDi collectively to the thyroid of all plane personnele The average exposure to plant personnel would be approximately 20 millirem per year whole body and -

31 millirem per year additional to the thyroid. These doses are a small fraction of those permitted by 10 CFIL Part 20. We consider the applicant's method of calculating these doses and the doms t

estimated to be acceptable.

i The estimate of constructionJforce dose is presented in Section 12.2 and is based on several assumptions:

(1) the main contributions to i

dose will be direct radiation from Unit 3 Reactor Building and exposure

~

f to the gaseous effluents from Unit 3; (2) workers will be located i

near the Turbine Building for Unit 5 unshielded except for the Unit 3 i

.l 4

f e

e

=

s,

.e we e,,

e

(-

9-

.I t

6 3.aactor Building; and (3) 6.4 x 10 man-hours of work will be t

-l expanded in the constructi'on of Unit 5 af ter the startup of Unit 3

'I (42 months). The applicant estimates 12.5 man-rem to the construction work force. We consider the applicants method of calculating these-doses and the doses estimated to be acceptable..

Ia d

34 sed on our review we have determined that the ventilation system, as described in detail in section 9.4 of the Preliminary Safety f

Analysis Report, meets the radiation protection design objectives, considers the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 0.8, and will i

maintain doses from airborna radioactive materials below the limits I

of 10 CFR Part 20. - We conclude that the ventilation system is a..

i acceptable.

R l

12.2.4 AIRBORNE RADIOACTIVITY MONITORING

'De design objective of the airborne radioactivity monitoring system i

is to provide a continuous indication and regard of airborne radio-t i

activity, to assure compliance with the standards of 10 CFR Part 20 and to initiate isolation functions in the Control Room and Spent Tori Pool ventilation systems. The applicant has provided seven fixed continuous air monitors including a sequential progransned feature. Supplementing these fixed monitors will be four mobile centinuous air monitors and a fixed Qi tube monitoring system in the 4

i 9,.-e.g pa*we-e-r------r

--y 7---g-

- i wwt,w-%--

v-

--yy----+-

r--v-pr--------T---yw

--Twwwr-em-*

-rw

l

.A

.l

?

6 Spent Fuel Pool air exhause duct.

The location of these. monitors is i

shown iit Saction 12.2 of the PSAh. These monitors will provida

'I sufficient seastti rity to meet the objectives of the air monitoring 1

l 1.rogram and will be espable of detectfug et least 1 MPC-hour in t

any compartatant; emtituted.

Therefore we ce;isider tne airborna radioactivity monitor!.ng progran is acceptable.

i I

12 3 HEETH PliYSIC$ l'ROGRV The objectives of the hea1Q pnysics orogram are t.o restrice exposgre of plcat persennel to the riquiramints of 10 CFR F.srt ;!O and to meintain occupationel cxpcauras as. low as practicable.

To mo4t these objectives the program wi.11 ingitria f. raining Of personnel, surveying and posting of. radiation areas, controlling access to radiation areas, monit.oring of persennel for e3posure, providing personnel protective equipment and maintaining reegrds of radiation levels and radiation exposure.

The applicant committed ta following Regulatory Guide 8.8.

He ~]

i described numerous practices to be used in operating tha plant 1n l

such a manner as to maintain occupational radiation exposure as low as practicable.

He indicates that these practicas will be included l

in the plant radiation protection manual and and will be updated to reflect operating experience.

l

}

.{

1 I

. ~...... _ _..,.

..y.

%d

/

r:

-m 6

)

h h

i

_11 Several practices which complasant the ventilation and fixed monitoring j

systems arid help maintain exposures to airborne contamination as low I

as practicable are described in Section 12.2 of the Preliminary Safety i

Analysis Report.

Some of these practicas are training of plant j

personnel in respiratory hazarcs sad protection, routine airborne i

radioactivity surveys, access control of areas susceptible to airborne j

contamination, periodic internal dosimetry and the use cf respiratory

)

protective equipsent. Thesa practices are in accordanca with the i

reconsnandations of Regulatory Guide 8.8 and, therefore, are acceptable.

e 1

The r,viiation procaction faciMeies will include an entry control checkpoint, change rooms, personnel decontamination areas, radiochemical laboratory, instrument calibration room, and counting room. Vrovisions.are made for a laundry facility although present.-

plana-crs to send used protective. clothing offsite for laundering..

We evasider these fa:111 ties to be acceptable for the maintenance '-

j of au as low as practicable radiation protection program.

l The radiation protection equipment will include protective clothing, l

respiratory equipment, portable radiation measuring instruments, calibration sources, counting room instrumentation, laboratory equipment, and special shielding. We consider this equipment to be acceptable i

for the maintenance of an as low as practicable radiation -

f

~!

4 b

e4 p4

.e se y e ee.w

-. y geem e. em,

se eume se.agm..e 4,+ +.* * *

.*6*e.0==

• -em *-

m-V A,

q i

protection program. Also, to be included are several types of personnel i

-j dosimeters.

Either thermoluminescent dosimeters or film badges will i

be used.

Neutron film badges, and extremity dosimeters will also be

^

used. Bioassay in the form of whole-bydy counting and/or urinanalysis will be performed on a periodic basis. All radiation exposure information will be processed and recorded in compliance with 10 CFR Part 20.

We have determined that the radiation protection related equipment and facilities are in accordance with the recommendations of Regulatory Guide 8.8 and are acceptable.

O e.*e i

I t

t I

4 n# " ** ".,.

.J*****WEP9

• • =q>,

e-e.. -,

____._