ML20234C424

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Forwards Us Weather Bureau Environ Meteorological Research Project Comments on Hazards Summary Rept Re Amend 2 to License Application,Dtd 630405,concerning Util Proposed Reactor at Bodega Bay,Ca
ML20234C424
Person / Time
Site: 05000000, Bodega Bay
Issue date: 04/22/1963
From: Belter W
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
To: Price E
US ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION (AEC)
Shared Package
ML20234A767 List: ... further results
References
FOIA-85-665 NUDOCS 8709210283
Download: ML20234C424 (2)


Text

a oc,ogio= ao io i.

{

/

UNITED STATES COVERNMENT Memorandum To

.: Eber R. Price, Assistant Director.

DATE:

April'22, 1963 Division of Licens ng & Regulation M

FROM :

Walter el,er, Chief.

Environmental. & Sanitary Engineering Br., rid SUDJECT:

U.S. WEATIER BUREAU C0!9ENTS ON HAZAhDS SUWARY REPORT RD:DNS:WGB 1

~

Reference is made to your '4tter of April 11, 1963 to the U.S. Weather Bureau requesting commente on the following:

PG a.E Proposed Reactor - Bodega Bay, California Amendment No. 2 drated April L 1963

.to license application.

'Ibe comments of the Heather Bureau's Environmental-Meteorological Research Project are attached.

Attachments Comments (orig. & 1 cy.)

,f n

/

-' p,c, g2 h

-6 Ap d4ty ! % b '

3

  • Ah
b

~

s

^'

,e l:

2008 8709210283 851217 ~

PDR FOIA

-3 FIRESTD85-665 PDRn

-..y.

.-...,-.s.-

l 1

l

(

Comments on PG & E Proposed Reactor - Bodega Bay, California Amendment No. 2 dated April 5,1963 to license application

(

Prepared by J

I Environmental Meteorological Research Project 4

Office of Meteorological Research U. S. Weather Bureau April 16, 1963 It appears in Amendment No. 2 that meteorology enterc into the questions and responses caly in numbers 24, 25, 26 and 27.

j I

The response to Question 24 indicates that reconcentrr. tion effects in the environs will be considered in determining release rates. Presumab.y. thio would result in iodine release rates below levels where direct inhalation is controlling. The relation to meteorology is to emphasize the cverage longer term dispersion patterns and to indicate-the desirability of analyzing the local tower data by wind direction and dispersion " classes" over time inter-vals commensurate with the monitoring program, i

la Question 25 it is presumed the " permissible annual average discharge rate" will be based on calculations that include consideration of joint wind direc-tion and stability frequencies. It would be informative to determine for what period of time emissions in excess of this value up to bu: not including 10 times the F;nnuni rate could occur under restrictive dilution conditicas without exceeding the 0.5 rem / year limit (see pese VI-4 pp. 3 of Preliminary 5

Hazards Report).

In Question 26, sinca no atmospheric dilution is assumed, the analysis wonic seem quite conservative. Even if the wind speed were reduced to 1 oph thus increasing the inhalation period by a factor of 10 the omission of cloud rise and diffusion should still result in conservative estimetes.

Question 27 involves only changes in source strength possibilities.

Since a constant wind and stability situation is assumed for computational purposes the meteorology is conservative.

I

\\

  • T%

g

  1. .,s gd