ML20213D800
| ML20213D800 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Columbia  |
| Issue date: | 09/09/1981 |
| From: | Staley G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| To: | Lear G Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation |
| References | |
| CON-WNP-0383, CON-WNP-383 NUDOCS 8109210223 | |
| Download: ML20213D800 (8) | |
Text
(
l lkhf th SEP P 1981 Docket !!o. 50-397
!!EMORNIDUf1 FOR: George Lear, Chief 1(ydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering TilRU:
Myron Fliegel, Leader, Ifydrologic Engineering Section lydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering
, 4V]p (f FROM:
Gary Staley, Hydrologic Engineering Section 4
ifydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch
[U,%
p'op Division of Engineering O \\%*
A s
SUBJECT:
TELEPH0ilE CALL FR0:1 JIM DELAfiTE, TRI CITY !!ERALD.\\ Y'
/
KENf!EWICK, I!ASI1INGT0fl
\\
d' g
I was called about 11:20 am, Septeaber 1,1981 by Jin Delante of the Tr h
licrald. lie wanted to discuss the situation with the on-site wells at the 1lf1P-2 plant. Mr. Delante was alerted to the wells through infomation that was presented in the I!flP-2 DES. The potential problem is in regard to the location of the DOE I!YE burial ground about 3000 feet from the !!fiP-2 on-site wells which are used for construction (including domestic) water use.
Mr. Delante was interested in the following items or areas of concern:
1.
lie said the state had requested information fran the t!flP-2 applicant on the on-site wells and that the applicant would not or did not furnish anything.
2.
The applicant was forced to quiteusing the wells in the unconfined aquifer in 1978. He wanted to know why and who required closing the wells.
3.
lie was interested in knowing levels of radioactivity in the wells and past and present monitoring requirenents. !!e also asked about water quality data available on the wells.
4.
lie also wanted information on who had the authority over the applicant with respect to use of the wells and radioactivity.
Attached is a copy of the DES input, with respect to the !!NP-2 on site wells.
In response to Mr. Delante's discussion and questions, I gave him the following information.
r+4 yd.cs=gq;ggg$.......'.y.....
x
,g;g g,....
o w....
o-co> mcu om OFFICIAL RECORD COPY usom an-mwo
g George Lear d I381 j
l.
A brief description of the on site wells, WYE burial ground and our concerns with the on site wells; i
... the on-site wells are located about 3000 feet from the Department i
of Energy (DOE) WYE burial ground.
I do not currently have any infomation on the burial ground with respect to type of construction, naterial buried or DOE monitoring.
I am currently trying to obtain infomation from DOE and it should be available by September 4,1981. The j
WYE burial facility is about 60 feet above the water table (unsaturated flow) in a semi arid region and even if leakage did occur, it would take a long time to reach the site.
I also explained that potential radio-nuclide migrations from the llYE burial ground were not so much an irrediate concern (assuming DOE would detect any leaching and leakage from i
the site) but rather something that should be controlled for the long tem j
duration of plant operation.
In this regard, I reiterated our DES position that would require an Environmental Technical Specification or assurances frou the applicant that it would be handled through DOE monitoring and coruiunication comitments.
2.
I told fir. Delante that I had no infomation with regard to the State vs. Applicant communications on the on site wells.
3.
I told ltr. Delante that we also had infomation from the applicant that the wells in the unoonfined aquifer had not been used since 1978, but that I knew nothing about required closing of the wells.
4.
I gave 11r. Delante the infomation I had on monitoring of tt.e wells, which was that wells 1 and 2 (unconfined aquifer) were monitored initially for tritita and gross beta and subsequently monthly for tritium. Well number 8 i
(confined aquifer) was only monitored for tritium.
I also explained that tritita was widespread on the Hanford Reservation as a result of earlier DOE disposal and seepage fraa holding ponds and that there is extensive monitoring programs by DOE. Additionally, I also explained that potential contamination of the well in the confined aquifer due to possible seepage from the llYE burial facility or other sources was not probable since it is sealed from the unconfined aquifer and although monitoring would be required for any potable grcundwater use, our main concern is with the wells in the unconfined aquifer.
I did not give lir. Delante any infomation on monitoring requirements, other than our position in the DES.
I did refer him to Frank Congel and Ron Ballard for additional infomation on monitoring requirements and water quality.
OFFICE )
j cORNAMEh ocre )
nac ronu sis tio-so> nacu o24o OFFIClAL RECORD COPY usam im_m.
(
(
y, George Lear $Fp g igg; 5.
In response to Mr. Delante's question on who had authority over the applicant on use of wells and radioactivity, I told him that I was not the person to talk to but suggested he talk to Frank Congel and that if Frank could not supply the answers, he might be able to direct him to someone that could.
Original Signed by cary B. staloy Gary B. Staley, !!ydraulic Engineer liydrologic Engineering Section Ilydrologic and Geotechnical Engineering Branch Division of Engineering
Enclosure:
As stated cc:
R. Vollmer J. Knight F. Congol R. Ballard M. Fliegel G. Staley R. Auluck R. Gotchy DISTRIBUTION Docket File liGEB Reading
,c (
,5:,4~-,//( f
.HGEB,:DE Hf$B:DE o,,1ce, suo, c >...G,S,t.a,1,9ylmc,,M,F,]d e,g e,1,,
i
---s
/.81 9/ 9../81 9/
DATE)
NRC,ORM318 (10-80) NRCM 024o I
OFF1CIAL RECORD COPY uscro. mi-m*o
(
/. t AV.
k L, u ln
.b
~
Section
.3.2 (CP FES Section VB) Water Use A list of water usage downstream of WNP-2, obtained by the applicant from records of the Department of Ecology, State of Washington, for water rights as of February 1980, is presented in table 2.2-(New Table).
The first is Regional use of the unconfined aquifer is at three locations.
4 at the DOE's Fast Flux Text Facil~ity construction site, located about 4.8 kilometers southwest. of the WNP-2 site as shcwn in Figure 2.3-1 (New Figure).
Groundwater to this construction site is supplied from two wells and is used The maximum expected usaae rate is between for sanitary and operation purposes.
.0029 and.0036 m /sec. No data are available on drawdown tests performed on 3
the FFTF water supply wells 699-50-7 and S0-8.
o k
The secorid location of ground water use is the WNP-1/4 site about one mile i
east of WNP-2. Water is drawn from two wells for construction, sanitary, and 3
potable water requirements. The usage rate is approximately.00037 m /sec.
The third location is the WNP-2 site. The two wells which draw from the unconfinedaquifer(699-13-1Aand1B)are71.3.and74.4methrsdeep.
Drawdown tests for each well showed 6.7 and 27.7 meters of drawdown res)ectively, at N
The third pumping rates of.016 m /sec and test duratinns of about 25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br />.
well (242 meters deep) is sealed from the unconfined aquifer and draws from confined water in the basalt. Drawdown on this well was 57 meters at a pumping 3
rate of.017 m /sec with a test duration of 25 hours2.893519e-4 days <br />0.00694 hours <br />4.133598e-5 weeks <br />9.5125e-6 months <br />.
k
/
)
(
t
. (
Water use changes are expected to result from water use for service water, t
condenser cooling makeup, and for potable and sanitary purposes. The primary source of water for the closed cycle condenser cooling water system and for service water is the Columbia River. In an emergency, service water required to shutdown and cooldown the plant is to be taken from the spray ponds with makeup from the river t,hrough the makeup water pump and pumphouse Water for potable and sanitary purposes is to be provided from the City of Richland. When service from this source is interrupted, or requires augmentation, onsite wells are to be the water source. The river withdrawal rate during normal operation is expected to average about.98 m /sec (IS,500 gpm).
3 Groundwater withdrawals are expected to average.001 m /sec (20 gpm) with peak 3
rates of.016 m /sec (250 gpm). We conclude these rates are all small compared to the available supply and should result in little or no igipact.
g The changes to local drainage patterns due to plant facilities are not expected to increase the flood potential to any neighboring property owners.
5.2.2 Water Use Imoacts (New Section) g Discharges from the plant will take two routes. ' Cooling tower Alowdown, service water and radwaste system releases will be routed directlylo the river via a buried pipeline and riverbank discharge structure. Sanitary wastes, originally thought to be routed to the City of Richland for treatment for both construction and operation during the CP re f ew, are to be treated in a three lagoon treatment facility some 610 meters southeast of the reactor.
The. facility is to be used for the 3 UNP reactors bY 'a maximum population of C
/
1
e
(
..,, (
8,000 during construction and 2500 during operation. Since no surface discharges from the facility are contemplated during nonnal operation, the facility should meet applicable state water quSlity standards.
Only abnonnal loadings or heavy rains are expected to result in overflow.
Seepage from the three lagoons is expected to be less than.0016 m /sec (25 gpm) as the 3
result of the use of plastic ifners. The impact of the low seepage rate on groundwater levels is expected to be minimal. The quality of the seepage water when filtered by the glacio-fluvial sediments and diluted by the existing ground water is expected to produce no adverse imp.1 cts.
Construction flow rates from the two ground water wells proposed for construction was originally estimated not to exceed.032 m /sec (500 gpm) from 2 onsite wells.
s Three onsite wells were constructed with a maximum 3
withdrawal rate of about.63 m /sec (10,000 gpm). During operation, the applicant proposes to use the wells at a peak rate of.013 m /sec (200 gpml 3
3 and an average rate of abnat.001 m /sec (20 gpm) for potable and service water purposes during outages of supplies from the' City of Richland.
These
\\
use rates should not adversely impact other groundwater users, no r deplete the groundwater resources.
N Three wells have been installed in the northwest portion of the WNP-2 site, two in the upper aquifer and one in the lower confined aquifer.
The applicant has indicated water from all three wells was used for a variety of construction i
purposes, including drinking through August 1978. Since August 1978, only water 'from the deeper aquifer has been used. Background levels of tritium (1
1 l
e 1
(
(
-10,
~-
have been found in the deeper well water, But levels as fiigli as 906 pCi/ml have been found in the upper well water through August 1978. Tfie 90!i pc/ml concentration level is about a factor of three 6elow 10 CFR Part 20 limits for unresticted drinking water. The source of the tritium is apparently the DOE 200 area to..the east of WNP 2.
Pumping from the surficial aquifer could result in increased concentration levels of tritium from tfta 231 area and, potentially other nuclides from tiie DOE WYE disposal site.
Measurements to indicate the presence of other nuclides have apparently not 6een made for well water from the surficfal aquifer. The staff concludes that some precautionary measures are necessary to demonstrate that water taken from any of the th~ree wells can not be contaminated, that the wells are frequently monitored for radioactivity, or that the wells Ee precluded from use.
6.3 Hydrolooic (Monitorino) (New Sectinn)_
)
The applicant has identified no hydrologically related impacts tfiat will require nonradiological monitoring on his part except those related to water quality. We concur.
Intake and blowdown temperatures will be continuously monitored in the intake and discharge structures. Total residual chlorine will
\\
be measured every 15 minutes during chlorination periods and for at least two s
hours after blowdown has Segun. Measurements are to cease after rqsidual chlorine levels become undetectable. The data are to tie used to determine.
minimum chlorin'e requirements for operation. The applicant has noted a number.
of Stata ar.d Federal water level, discharge and we er quality monitoring programs related to 60th surface and groundwater of a continuing nature. These data J
/
l l\\
J
(.~
may be used in the future to identify unexpected operational impacts.
Aquatic radiological monitoring will be conducted, based on a need to determine the WNP-2 impact on the aquatic environs separately from other The int _ke will be sampled.to facilities on the Hanford Reservation.
a identify isotopes and concentrations present prior to use by WMP-2. Similar samples will be taken from the WNP-1/4 i.ntake and discharge when those units begin operation. The water will also be sampled at the first downstream user, Depa,rtment of Energy (DOE) 300 Area and at the City of Richland Municipal Water Treatment Plant. The details of the radiological monitoring program are discussed in Section The applicant has not provided an assessment of the contamination potential to on-site wells due to possible radionuclida migrations from the DOE WYE (r,
shallow burial facility. The facility is less than a kilometer from three on-site wells that are to be used as supplemental potable and service water supply during operation.
The staff would accept documentation and assura'nces from the applicant that the burial facility is adequately monitored to detect any rel. ease from the
~
\\
WYE facility, that monitoring will continue for the life of the WMP-2 plant and that communications will be established and maintained betweensthe monitoring organization and the Applicant. In lieu of the above we will require an Environmental Technical Specification that will insure frequent monitoring of all three wells to detect radiation associated with the material buried at the WYE facility.
/
\\
i i
l
[
>