ML20234C333
Text
e
, m ienaseona no.so UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT
~
. Memorandum
~
To
- Eber R. Price, Assistant Director og7g:
APR 3 1963 DivisionofLicenging& Regulation FROM :
Walter G. Belter, Chief, Environmental
& Sanitary Engineering Branch, RD sunJEcT:
U.S. WBATHER BUREAU COMMElffS ON HAZARDS
SUMMARY
REPORT l
RD:DNS:WGB l
Reference is made to your letter of March 22, 1963 to the U.S. Weather Bureau requesting coments on the following:
PG & E Proposed Reactor - Bodega Bay, California i
Amandmant No.1 dated March 4,1963 to license l
application.
Die coments of the Weather Bureau's Environmental Meteorological Research Project are attached.
Attachments Coments (orig. & 1 cy.)
1 l
l 1
i e
1 c
I l
V 97 APR4 - 1963* d1
~
g3,ktatittBUDDM '
,J27 % =a y,
1
., I* lt 8 8709210249 B51217 j:
s t
i Comments on PG & E Proposed Reactor - Bodega Bay, California Amendment No. 1 dated March 4, 1963 to license application Prepared by Environmental Meteorological Research Project Office of Meteorological Research U.S. Weather Bureau March 28, 1963 l
Meteorology appears to be involved in the answers to questions 1(a), 37, 38, 39, 46, 47 and 48.
These will be commented upon individually.
1(a) - While it is indicated, both in this document and on page V-10 of the Preliminary Hazards Summary Report,' that a meteorological facility is plan-
]
ned, no information is given relating to the nature of the study or the method by which such quantities as diffusion coefficients and wind variabil-ity will be determined. Thus we cannot comment on the adequacy of the pro-i I
gram to acquire the desired meteorological information.
- 37. - While we cannot estimate the peak runoff rates, the maximum precipi-tation intensities for various time periods given in the PHSR, Appendix III, page 15 appear reasonable.
- 38. - The " local meteorological conditions" referred to in the third para-graph of this answer are those that will, presumably, be determined from the proposed study. Since the study is not yet available no conclusions can now be drawn on the administrative and engineering adjustments required to meet concentration limits.
- 39. - Again, the proposed meteorological study will be necessary to estimate the gaseous waste disposal limits.
- 46. - The cloud rise was apparently determined from the "Machta" curve in fig. 6.5 of Meteorology and Atomic Energy since reference was made to the temperature of 6000F. This formulation really applies to very large clouds.
However, a rough check of the cloud rise by the Sutton formulation gives a height of rise that i,s a sizeable fraction of a kilometer. There are cases, such as during an intense low level marine inversion relatively common to this area, when the cloud rise could be limited to perhaps 500 feet.
- 47. - Meteorological conditions could possibly influence the results of the calculations based on these differing assumptions on halogen release frac-tions only if a time variable meteorology were incorporated. Since it appears that only the very conservative case of constant wind and stability 1
4 2
O
_______-_______E
~
s i
l l
conditions was used doses would be directly proportional to the integrated release.
- 48. - The statement is made that air concentrations on a hillside three miles from the source may be estimated from calculations of ground level concentrations, during moderately stable conditions at 1.75 miles from a i
200-foot high source. This has been checked and found reasonable.
The conditions of moderate stability was chosen for use in another calculation which required maximum dosage values at the surface within a few miles of the source. The Sutton values for greater stability were not 3
computed.
If it is assumed that the plume from the stack was to be emitted j
under very stable conditions and was to travel and impinge on the hills j
three miles away, then it is not unlikely to expect plume concentrations averaged over a few minu value of X/Q = 9.4 x 10"ggs to be an order of magnitude higher than the
)
However, the natural variability of wind direc-(
tion could significantly reduce this maximum when periods longer than a few I
minutes are considered. Turbulence induced about these hills may further lower such peak concentrations. The meteorological study, if properly designed, could furnish information to scope these problems.
l Summarizing, it is felt that the short term average concentrations on the hillside could easily be greater than those estimated but that orographic j
turbulence and wind direccion variability over periods of many hours or
~
i days would result in longer term average concentrations of the magnitude postulated or lower.
l 1
i i
l e
i el
=m
8 e
k f.g FROMs DATE OF DOCUMENT DATE RECE!YED
, NO.
!,e hh/63 4/4/63 ztte LTR.
MDEOs REPORTS OTHDis
- g 1
K l
TOs ORIG.
CCs OTHERs Xo. rice K
ACTION NECESSARY CONvUREDICE Q DATE ANSWEREDs NO ACTION NECESSART O CouxtNT srs CLASSIF.s POST Orr!CE FILE CODES So-3of i
, 34 REG. Nos DESCRIPTIONS (Mast Re Unalama18ed)
REFERRED TO DATE RECETVED BY DATE U.9, enther ht.rt us f easeats en Fa-strqs E star; Deport re PCds3 Froyosed F.emce.or-c.
._,s
. g/g e
I+ocer,a Bay,C+11fersia AmerApect Le.1 i
,.._,,-g<rp<............,.....
/
ENe.OsuREss 4.- -----
coe n nts (crire an2 i ec. )
t
, REuAREss l
t 1
P I
v.s. Atoxic enEnor coxxiss' " MAIL CONTROL FORM ronx Atc.32ss 1lt U. S. Government Painting Offleet 1982 537308 (40) 1 1
u
.M-
..' 4
',t 4
..m.
[